A randomized phase III study evaluating dexamethasone-based mouthwash to prevent chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in patients with breast cancer.

Stomatitis, which is a common side effect of chemotherapy, currently lacks a standardized approach for its prevention. Therefore, this multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled phase III trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of a dexamethasone-based mouthwash for preventing chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in patients with early breast cancer. We will randomly assign 230 patients with early breast cancer scheduled to receive chemotherapy in a 1:1 ratio to either the dexamethasone-based mouthwash group (10 ml, 0.1 mg/ml; swish for 2 min and spit 4 times daily for 8 weeks) or the mouthwash-with-tap-water group. The incidence of stomatitis, measured using electronic patient-reported outcomes, is the primary endpoint.

Inclusion of phase III clinical trial costs in health economic evaluations.

INTRODUCTION: Protocol-driven trial activities contribute to the utility gain demonstrated in the phase III clinical trial of a new drug. If this utility gain cannot be distinguished from the effects of the new drug itself, protocol-driven trial costs cannot be easily dismissed for consistency reasons. This study aims to estimate the impact of including per-patient costs of phase III clinical trials on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). METHODS: The analysis utilized a modeling approach with secondary data from an ad-hoc literature review, considering both societal and payer perspectives. While the costs of phase III clinical trials may cancel out during the period of "normal" life-years due to the incremental cost calculation, they do not cancel out when differential early treatment termination occurs (e.g., due to differential mortality). Assuming the presence of differential mortality, per-patient phase III trial costs were calculated for the period of added life-years. These costs were then included in the ICER of a new drug, under the assumption that direct patient-related costs constitute 30-70% of the total trial costs. Capital costs were also incorporated from a societal perspective. RESULTS: Based on assumptions of $40,000 out-of-pocket expenses per patient enrolled in a phase III trial and a life expectancy gain of three months, incremental costs increased by $27,000 from a societal perspective. From a payer perspective, the estimate was $12,000. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of phase III trials are a relevant component of the ICER, and excluding it is generally not appropriate for consistency reasons. Properly considering these trial costs is essential for a comprehensive evaluation of a new drug's cost-effectiveness.

The INSIGHT study: a randomized, Phase III study of ripretinib versus sunitinib for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor with KIT exon 11 + 17/18 mutations.

Somatic KIT activating mutations drive most gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). Disease progression eventually develops with first-line imatinib, commonly due to KIT secondary mutations, and different kinase inhibitors have various levels of treatment efficacy dependent on specific acquired resistance mutations. Ripretinib is a broad-spectrum switch-control KIT/PDGFRA tyrosine kinase inhibitor for patients with advanced GIST who received prior treatment with three or more kinase inhibitors, including imatinib. Exploratory baseline circulating tumor DNA analysis from the second-line INTRIGUE trial determined that patients with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib harboring primary KIT exon 11 mutations and secondary resistance mutations restricted to KIT exons 17/18 had greater clinical benefit with ripretinib versus sunitinib. We describe the rationale and design of INSIGHT (NCT05734105), an ongoing Phase III open-label study of ripretinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced GIST previously treated with imatinib exclusively harboring KIT exon 11 + 17/18 mutations detected by circulating tumor DNA.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05734105 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is rare, but it is the most common mesenchymal tumor (a type of tumor that develops from cells which give rise to soft tissues) of the gastrointestinal tract. The primary treatment for advanced GIST is medication that targets the abnormal mechanisms in cancer cells in order to block tumor growth and spread. Ripretinib is an inhibitor of a protein known as KIT, which is a member of the tyrosine kinase protein family and is involved in the growth of GIST. In a Phase III clinical trial called INTRIGUE, the effects of ripretinib and another receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, sunitinib, were compared in patients with advanced GIST previously treated with the drug imatinib. An exploratory analysis from the INTRIGUE trial that characterized baseline circulating tumor DNA in the blood showed a greater clinical benefit with ripretinib versus sunitinib in patients with gene mutations solely occurring in KIT exon 11 + 17 and/or 18 (exon 11 + 17/18). This article describes the rationale and design for a Phase III clinical trial called INSIGHT that will evaluate the benefit of ripretinib compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced GIST whose tumors have mutations in KIT exon 11 and KIT exon 17 and/or 18. Patients will receive ripretinib or sunitinib in 6-week cycles, and investigators will assess survival without cancer progression as the primary outcome, and overall survival, and response of the tumor to these two drugs as secondary outcomes.

Effects of ertugliflozin on uric acid and gout-related outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease: Post hoc analyses from VERTIS CV.

AIM: To conduct post hoc analyses of the VERTIS CV (NCT01986881) trial to explore the effects of ertugliflozin on serum uric acid (UA) and gout-related outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomised (1:1:1) to placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg or ertugliflozin 15 mg. Mean UA over time (260 weeks) was evaluated for pooled ertugliflozin versus placebo overall, and by baseline quintile of UA (≤4.3 mg/dL [≤255.8 µmol/L], >4.3-5.1 mg/dL [>255.8-303.4 µmol/L], >5.1-5.8 mg/dL [>303.4-345.0 µmol/L], >5.8-6.9 mg/dL [>345.0-410.4 µmol/L] and >6.9 mg/dL [>410.4 µmol/L]), glycated haemoglobin level, albuminuria status, estimated glomerular filtration rate and KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease) risk category. The effect of ertugliflozin on a composite of gout onset or initiation of anti-gout medication was assessed. RESULTS: The mean UA levels at baseline were 5.67 and 5.62 mg/dL in the placebo and ertugliflozin groups, respectively. Ertugliflozin reduced UA over Weeks 6-260 compared with placebo, with least squares mean (LSM) changes (95% confidence interval [CI]) from baseline at Week 260 of 0.07 mg/dL (-0.02, 0.15) and -0.19 mg/dL (-0.25, -0.13) in the placebo and pooled ertugliflozin groups, respectively. At Week 260, placebo-adjusted LSM change (95% CI) from baseline in UA was -0.26 mg/dL (-0.36, -0.16) with ertugliflozin. Ertugliflozin was associated with reductions in UA across baseline UA quintiles compared with placebo. The incidence of the composite of gout-related outcomes was 84/2539 (3.3%) for placebo and 133/5091 (2.6%) for ertugliflozin (hazard ratio for the composite 0.76 [95% CI 0.580, 1.002]). CONCLUSIONS: Ertugliflozin was generally associated with lowering UA overall and across subgroups compared with placebo, and numerically reduced rates of gout-related outcome events.

Gemcitabine, carboplatin, and Epstein-Barr virus-specific autologous cytotoxic T lymphocytes for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: VANCE, an international randomized phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Epstein-Barr virus-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (EBV-CTL) is an autologous adoptive T-cell immunotherapy generated from the blood of individuals and manufactured without genetic modification. In a previous phase II trial of locally recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (R/M NPC) patients, first-line gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) and EBV-CTL combination demonstrated objective antitumor EBV-CTL activity and a favorable safety profile. The present study explored whether this combined first-line chemo-immunotherapy strategy would produce superior clinical efficacy and better quality of life compared with conventional chemotherapy treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of GC followed by EBV-CTL versus GC alone as first-line treatment of R/M NPC patients. Thirty clinical sites in Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and the USA were included. Subjects were randomized to first-line GC (four cycles) and EBV-CTL (six cycles) or GC (six cycles) in a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, quality of life, and safety. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT02578641. RESULTS: A total of 330 subjects with NPC were enrolled. Most subjects in both treatment arms received four or more cycles of chemotherapy and most subjects in the GC + EBV-CTL group received two or more infusions of EBV-CTL. The central Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) facility produced sufficient EBV-CTL for 94% of GC + EBV-CTL subjects. The median OS was 25.0 months in the GC + EBV-CTL group and 24.9 months in the GC group (hazard ratio = 1.19; 95% confidence interval 0.91-1.56; P = 0.194). Only one subject experienced a grade 2 serious adverse event related to EBV-CTL. CONCLUSIONS: GC + EBV-CTL in subjects with R/M NPC demonstrated a favorable safety profile but no overall improvement in OS versus chemotherapy. This is the largest adoptive T-cell therapy trial reported in solid tumors to date.

ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21: a randomised, double-blind, phase III study of pembrolizumab or placebo plus adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk endometrial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy provides clinically meaningful benefit as first-line therapy for advanced (locoregional extension and residual disease after surgery)/metastatic/recurrent mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) and mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) endometrial cancer, with greater magnitude of benefit in the dMMR phenotype. We evaluated the addition of pembrolizumab to adjuvant chemotherapy (with/without radiation therapy) among patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk endometrial cancer without any residual macroscopic disease following curative-intent surgery. METHODS: We included patients with histologically confirmed high-risk [International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I/II of non-endometrioid histology or endometrioid histology with p53/TP53 abnormality, or stage III/IVA of any histology] endometrial cancer following surgery with curative intent and no evidence of disease postoperatively, with no prior radiotherapy or systemic therapy. Patients were randomised to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks (Q3W) for six cycles added to carboplatin-paclitaxel followed by pembrolizumab 400 mg or placebo every 6 weeks (Q6W) for six cycles per treatment assignment. Radiotherapy was at the investigator's discretion. The primary endpoints were investigator-assessed disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 1095 patients were randomised (pembrolizumab, n = 545; placebo, n = 550). At this interim analysis (data cut-off, 4 March 2024), 119 (22%) DFS events occurred in the pembrolizumab group and 121 (22%) occurred in the placebo group [hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.32; P = 0.570]. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 2-year DFS rates were 75% and 76% in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. The hazard ratio for DFS was 0.31 (95% CI 0.14-0.69) in the dMMR population (n = 281) and 1.20 (95% CI 0.91-1.57) in the pMMR population (n = 814). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 386 of 543 (71%) and 348 of 549 (63%) patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. No treatment-related grade 5 AEs occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy did not improve DFS in patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk, all-comer endometrial cancer. Preplanned subgroup analyses for stratification factors suggest that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improved DFS in patients with dMMR tumours. Safety was manageable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04634877; EudraCT, 2020-003424-17. RESEARCH SUPPORT: Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.

A Bayesian pharmacokinetics integrated phase I-II design to optimize dose-schedule regimes.

The schedule of administering a drug has profound impact on the toxicity and efficacy profiles of the drug through changing its pharmacokinetics (PK). PK is an innate and indispensable component of the dose-schedule optimization. Motivated by this, we propose a Bayesian PK integrated dose-schedule finding (PKIDS) design to identify the optimal dose-schedule regime by integrating PK, toxicity, and efficacy data. Based on the causal pathway that dose and schedule affect PK, which in turn affects efficacy and toxicity, we jointly model the three endpoints by first specifying a Bayesian hierarchical model for the marginal distribution of the longitudinal dose-concentration process. Conditional on the drug concentration in plasma, we jointly model toxicity and efficacy as a function of the concentration. We quantify the risk-benefit of regimes using utility-continuously updating the estimates of PK, toxicity, and efficacy based on interim data-and make adaptive decisions to assign new patients to appropriate dose-schedule regimes via adaptive randomization. The simulation study shows that the PKIDS design has desirable operating characteristics.

Temazepam or Melatonin Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Insomnia in Advanced Cancer: A Three-Arm, Double-Blind, Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Sleep disturbance has a prevalence of 30-78% in patients with advanced cancer. While pharmacotherapy is common, randomized controlled studies (RCTs) investigating available agents are limited. This study examines the efficacy and safety of temazepam or melatonin versus placebo for sleep in advanced cancer. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of temazepam, melatonin prolonged release (PR) or placebo for insomnia in patients with advanced cancer, and an insomnia severity index (ISI) score of >11. Results: Twenty-one participants were randomized: nine to temazepam, eight to melatonin, and four to placebo. Baseline characteristics between groups were similar. The adjusted mean difference in day 8 ISI score versus placebo was -9.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] -17.5, 0.7, p = 0.04) for temazepam and -9.6 (95% CI -18,-1.2, p = 0.03) for melatonin PR. There was no improvement in global quality of life. Both agents were well tolerated. Conclusion: Temazepam and melatonin PR were associated with a clinically significant improvement in patient-reported insomnia severity compared with placebo. Findings need confirmation with larger patient numbers.

Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab for advanced melanoma: 10-year follow-up of the phase III KEYNOTE-006 study.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus ipilimumab for unresectable advanced melanoma in KEYNOTE-006 (NCT01866319); 10-year follow-up data are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg i.v. every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks for ≤2 years (pooled), or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks for four cycles. After KEYNOTE-006, patients could transition to KEYNOTE-587 (NCT03486873) for long-term follow-up. Eligible patients could receive second-course pembrolizumab. The primary endpoint was OS; modified progression-free survival (PFS; censored at date last known alive), modified PFS on second-course pembrolizumab, and melanoma-specific survival were exploratory. RESULTS: Of 834 patients randomly assigned in KEYNOTE-006 (pembrolizumab, n = 556; ipilimumab, n = 278), 333 (39.9%) were eligible for KEYNOTE-587; 211/333 patients (25.3%) transitioned to KEYNOTE-587 (pembrolizumab, n = 159; ipilimumab, n = 52) and 122 (14.6%) did not. For patients who transitioned to KEYNOTE-587 (n = 211), median time from randomization in KEYNOTE-006 to data cut-off for KEYNOTE-587 (1 May 2024) was 123.7 months (range, 122.0-127.3 months). Median OS was 32.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 24.5-41.6 months] for pembrolizumab and 15.9 months (95% CI 13.3-22.0 months) for ipilimumab [hazard ratio (HR), 0.71 (95% CI 0.60-0.85)]; 10-year OS was 34.0% and 23.6%, respectively. Among patients who completed ≥94 weeks of pembrolizumab, median OS from week 94 was not reached (NR; 95% CI NR-NR); 8-year OS rate was 80.8%. Median modified PFS was 9.4 months (95% CI 6.7-11.6 months) for pembrolizumab and 3.8 months (2.9-4.3 months) for ipilimumab [HR, 0.64 (95% CI 0.54-0.75)]. Among patients who received second-course pembrolizumab, median modified PFS from start of second course was 51.8 months (95% CI 11.0 months-NR); 6-year modified PFS was 49.2%. Median melanoma-specific survival was 51.9 months (95% CI 30.0-114.7 months) for pembrolizumab and 17.2 months (13.9-25.9 months) for ipilimumab [HR, 0.66 (95% CI 0.55-0.81)]. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that pembrolizumab provides long-term survival benefits in advanced melanoma, supporting it as a standard of care in this setting.

Overview of Psychiatric Medications in the Pipeline in Phase III Trials as of June 1, 2024: A Systematic Review.

Objective: This systematic review provides an overview of psychiatric medications in the late stages of development (Phase III clinical trials) as of June 1, 2024. It details the mechanisms of action, efficacy, dosing, and adverse effects of these medications. Methods: We searched the PubMed database for Phase III studies of psychiatric medications published until June 1, 2024, using the keywords "psychiatric" OR "psychopharm*" AND "medic*" OR "pharm*". Our review encompassed medications currently undergoing Phase III clinical trials and those that have completed Phase III but are awaiting approval from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We independently analyzed the identified studies and reached a consensus on the medications to be included in this systematic review. Results: As of June 1, 2024, a total of 89 pipeline drug trials were identified, including nine for schizophrenia, five for bipolar disorders, 25 for depressive disorders, 11 for anxiety disorders, five for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), one for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), two for eating disorders, two for sleep-wake disorders, three for sexual dysfunctions, one for substance-related and addictive disorders, 22 for neurocognitive disorders, and three for neurodevelopmental disorders, specifically attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Conclusion: The psychiatric medications in the pipeline as of June 1, 2024, demonstrate significant promise in treating psychiatric disorders.