A crisis in clinical research.

The clinical research pipeline is critical to ensuring continued development of novel treatments that can offer patients with cancer safe and effective options. Unfortunately, progress has slowed since the COVID-19 pandemic due to uncovered, systemic inefficiencies across critical processes. Towards initiating discussion on how to reinvigorate clinical research, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) hosted a virtual summit that characterized issues and formed potential solutions. This commentary serves to highlight the crisis facing clinical research as well as stimulate field-wide discussion on how to better serve patients into the future.

A phase III randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy based on open state with abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer death in women, The standard treatment recommendation for women with early cervical cancer is radical hysterectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection, however, articles published in recent years have concluded that the treatment outcome of laparoscopic surgery for cervical cancer is inferior to that of open surgery. Thus, we choose a surgically new approach; the laparoscopic cervical cancer surgery in the open state is compared with the traditional open cervical cancer surgery, and we hope that patients can still have a good tumor outcome and survival outcome. This trial will investigate the effectiveness of laparoscopic cervical cancer surgery in the open-state treatment of early-stage cervical cancer. METHOD AND DESIGN: This will be an open-label, 2-armed, randomized, phase-III single-center trial of comparing laparoscopic radical hysterectomy based on open state with abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. A total of 740 participants will be randomly assigned into 2 treatment arms in a 1:1 ratio. Clinical, laboratory, ultrasound, and radiology data will be collected at baseline, and then at the study assessments and procedures performed at baseline and 1 week, 6 weeks, and 3 months, and follow-up visits begin at 3 months following surgery and continue every 3 months thereafter for the first 2 years and every 6 months until year 4.5. The primary aim is the rate of disease-free survival at 4.5 years. The secondary aims include treatment-related morbidity, costs and cost-effectiveness, patterns of recurrence, quality of life, pelvic floor function, and overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective trial aims to show the equivalence of the laparoscopic cervical cancer surgery in the open state versus the transabdominal radical hysterectomy approach for patients with early-stage cervical cancer following a 2-phase protocol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ChiCTR2300075118. Registered on August 25, 2023.

Neoadjuvant radiotherapy combined with fluorouracil-cisplatin plus cetuximab in operable, locally advanced esophageal carcinoma: Results of a phase I-II trial (FFCD-0505/PRODIGE-3).

Background: Radiotherapy combined with fluorouracil (5FU) and cisplatin for locally advanced esophageal cancer is associated with a 20-25% pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Cetuximab increases the efficacy of radiotherapy in patients with head and neck carcinomas. The aim of this phase I/II trial was to determine the optimal doses and the pCR rate with chemoradiotherapy (C-RT) plus cetuximab. Methods: A 45-Gy radiotherapy regimen was delivered over 5 weeks. The phase I study determined the dose-limiting toxicity and the maximum tolerated dose of 5FU-cisplatin plus cetuximab. The phase II trial aimed to exhibit a pCR rate > 20 % (25 % expected), requiring 33 patients (6 from phase I part plus 27 in phase II part). pCR was defined as ypT0Nx. Results: The phase I study established the following recommended doses: weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m2 one week before, and 250 mg/m2 during radiotherapy); 5FU (500 mg/m2/day, d1-d4) plus cisplatin (40 mg/m2, d1) during week 1 and 5. In the phase II part, 32 patients received C-RT before surgery, 31 patients underwent surgery, and resection was achieved in 27 patients. A pCR was achieved in five patients (18.5 %) out of 27. After a median follow-up of 19 months, the median progression-free survival was 13.7 months, and the median overall survival was not reached. Conclusions: Adding cetuximab to preoperative C-RT was toxic and did not achieve a pCR > 20 % as required. The recommended doses, determined during the phase I part, could explain these disappointing results due to a reduction in chemotherapy dose-intensity. Trial registration: This trial was registered with EudraCT number 2006-004770-27.

Open-label, dose-escalation FIGHT-101 study of pemigatinib combined with targeted therapy, chemotherapy, or immunotherapy in patients with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Pemigatinib is an oral, potent, selective fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) 1-3 inhibitor. FIGHT-101, a three-part, open-label, first-in-human, phase I/II study (NCT02393248), evaluated pemigatinib in patients with advanced solid tumors. In parts 1 and 2, pemigatinib monotherapy had a manageable safety profile and antitumor activity in FGFR-altered tumors. Part 3 (pemigatinib combination therapies) results are presented here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received 9, 13.5, or 20 mg oral once-daily pemigatinib on continuous or intermittent schedules with gemcitabine and cisplatin (pemi/gem/cis), docetaxel (pemi/doc), trastuzumab (pemi/tras), pembrolizumab (pemi/pembro), or retifanlimab (pemi/reti) irrespective of whether the tumor was confirmed as FGFR altered. Primary endpoints were safety and pharmacodynamics. Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed tumor objective response rates (ORRs) and pharmacokinetics (PK). RESULTS: Of 65 enrolled patients (pemi/gem/cis, n = 8; pemi/doc, n = 7; pemi/tras, n = 6; pemi/pembro, n = 26; pemi/reti, n = 18), all discontinued. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were generally consistent with individual drug AEs. Serious and grade ≥3 TEAEs occurred in 0%-85.7% and 33.3%-100.0% of patients across treatment groups, respectively. All pemigatinib combinations demonstrated steady-state PK comparable to monotherapy. Pharmacodynamic effects in all pemigatinib combinations, except pemi/gem/cis, were consistent with monotherapy. Less inhibition of FGFR2α phosphorylation was observed with this combination. ORRs (95% confidence interval) were 37.5% [8.5% to 75.5% (pemi/gem/cis)], 14.3% [0.4% to 57.9% (pemi/doc)], 0% (pemi/tras), 26.9% [11.6% to 47.8% (pemi/pembro)], and 11.1% [1.4% to 34.7% (pemi/reti)]. All groups had instances of tumor shrinkage. ORRs in assessable patients with FGFR rearrangements and mutations were 50% and 33%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pemigatinib combination therapy showed no unexpected toxicities. PK and pharmacodynamics were mostly consistent with pemigatinib monotherapy. Pemi/gem/cis (37.5%) and pemi/pembro (26.9%) had the highest ORR; most responders had FGFR alterations.

Using the phase III slope of exhaled methane during a single breath DLCO test to assess ventilation heterogeneity.

BACKGROUND: The Phase III slope from a single breath nitrogen washout test provides information about ventilation heterogeneity (VH) in the lungs. PURPOSE: To determine if the Phase III slope from the exhaled tracer gas concentration during a standard, single breath DLCO test using rapid gas analysis provides similar information about VH. BASIC PROCEDURES: Retrospective analysis of clinical pulmonary function laboratory data including spirometry, lung volumes, and DLCO. The normalized Phase III slope from the exhaled CH4 concentration (SnCH4) was compared among different patterns of physiologic abnormality and with VA/TLC as an indicator of VH. MAIN FINDINGS: SnCH4 was the steepest in the group with "Obstruction and Low DLCO", with significant differences between this group and the "Normal", "Obstruction with Normal DLCO", "Mixed Obstruction and Restriction" and "Isolated Low DLCO" groups. SnCH4 was steeper in current and former smokers compared to non-smokers. Among the entire study sample, SnCH4 correlated with VA/TLC (Spearman rho = -0.56, p < 0.01) and remained a significant determinant of VA/TLC by regression modeling. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS: The SnCH4 derived from a standard, single breath DLCO test using rapid gas analysis varied among distinct patterns of physiologic abnormalities and was associated with VA/TLC as a measure of VH.

Efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide monotherapy vs placebo in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes (PIONEER 11): a double-blind, Phase IIIa, randomised trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide monotherapy vs placebo in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled with diet and exercise alone. METHODS: The Peptide Innovation for Early Diabetes Treatment (PIONEER) 11 trial was a double-blind, randomised, Phase IIIa trial conducted across 52 sites in the China region (mainland China and Taiwan), Hungary, Serbia and Ukraine. Eligible participants were ≥18 years (≥20 years in Taiwan), had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes with HbA1c 53-86 mmol/mol (7.0-10.0%) and were not receiving any glucose-lowering drugs. After a 4-week run-in period in which participants were treated with diet and exercise alone, those who fulfilled the randomisation criteria were randomised (1:1:1:1) using a web-based randomisation system to receive once-daily oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg or 14 mg or placebo for 26 weeks (using a 4-week dose-escalation regimen for the higher doses). Randomisation was stratified according to whether participants were from the China region or elsewhere. The primary and confirmatory secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 26 in HbA1c and body weight (kg), respectively. Safety was assessed in all participants exposed to at least one dose of the trial product. RESULTS: Between October 2019 and October 2021, a total of 774 participants were screened and 521 participants were randomised to oral semaglutide 3 mg (n=130), 7 mg (n=130), 14 mg (n=130) or placebo (n=131); most participants (92.5%, n=482) completed the trial, with 39 participants prematurely discontinuing treatment. The number of participants contributing to the trial analyses was based on the total number of participants who were randomised at the beginning of the trial. The majority of participants were male (63.7%), and the mean age of participants was 52 years. At baseline, mean HbA1c and body weight were 63 mmol/mol (8.0%) and 79.6 kg, respectively. Oral semaglutide resulted in significantly greater reductions in HbA1c than placebo at week 26 (p<0.001 for all doses). The estimated treatment differences (ETDs [95% CIs]) for oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg vs placebo were -11 (-13, -9) mmol/mol, -16 (-18, -13) mmol/mol and -17 (-19, -15) mmol/mol, respectively. The corresponding ETDs in percentage points (95% CI) vs placebo were -1.0 (-1.2, -0.8), -1.4 (-1.6, -1.2) and -1.5 (-1.8, -1.3), respectively. Significantly greater reductions in body weight were also observed for oral semaglutide 7 mg and 14 mg than for placebo at week 26 (ETD [95% CI] -1.2 kg [-2.0 kg, -0.4 kg; p<0.01] and -2.0 kg [-2.8 kg, -1.2 kg; p<0.001], respectively), but not for oral semaglutide 3 mg (ETD [95% CI] -0.0 kg [-0.9 kg, 0.8 kg; not significant]). Similar reductions in HbA1c and body weight were observed in the Chinese subpopulation, which represented 74.9% of participants in the overall population. Adverse events (AEs) occurred in between 65.4% and 72.3% of participants receiving oral semaglutide (for all doses) and 57.3% of participants with placebo. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity, with few serious AEs reported; the most commonly reported AEs were gastrointestinal-related and were more frequent with semaglutide (all doses) than with placebo. The proportion of AEs was slightly higher in the Chinese subpopulation. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Oral semaglutide resulted in significantly greater reductions in HbA1c across all doses and in significant body weight reductions for the 7 mg and 14 mg doses when compared with placebo in predominantly Chinese participants with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled by diet and exercise alone. Oral semaglutide was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that seen in the global PIONEER trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04109547. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S.

Efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with metformin: PIONEER 12, a double-blind, Phase IIIa, randomised trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin treatment. METHODS: The Peptide Innovation for Early Diabetes Treatment (PIONEER) 12 trial was a randomised, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-group, Phase IIIa trial conducted over 26 weeks at 90 sites across the China region (including mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong) and five other countries. Adults aged ≥18 years (≥20 years in Taiwan) with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, HbA1c between 53 and 91 mmol/mol (inclusive) and treated with a stable daily dose of metformin were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomised (1:1:1:1) using a web-based randomisation system to either once-daily oral semaglutide (3 mg, 7 mg or 14 mg) or once-daily oral sitagliptin 100 mg. Treatment allocation was masked to both participants and investigators. Randomisation was stratified according to whether participants were from the China region or elsewhere. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26. The confirmatory secondary endpoint was change in body weight (kg) from baseline to week 26. All randomised participants were included in the full analysis set (FAS). All participants exposed to at least one dose of trial product were included in the safety analysis (SAS). RESULTS: Of 1839 participants screened, 1441 were randomly assigned to oral semaglutide 3 mg (n=361), 7 mg (n=360), 14 mg (n=361) or sitagliptin 100 mg (n=359) and included in the FAS. A total of 1438 participants were included in the SAS. In total, 75.2% of participants were from the China region. A total of 1372 (95.2%) participants completed the trial and 130 participants prematurely discontinued treatment (8.3%, 8.6% and 15.0% for oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg, respectively; 4.2% for sitagliptin 100 mg). Significantly greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 were reported for all doses of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin 100 mg. For oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg vs sitagliptin 100 mg, the estimated treatment differences (ETDs [95% CI]) were -2 (-4, -1) mmol/mol, -8 (-9, -6) mmol/mol and -11 (-12, -9) mmol/mol, respectively. The corresponding ETDs (95% CI) in percentage points vs sitagliptin 100 mg were -0.2 (-0.3, -0.1), -0.7 (-0.8, -0.6) and -1.0 (-1.1, -0.8), respectively. Reductions in body weight were significantly greater for all doses of oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin 100 mg (ETD [95% CI] -0.9 [-1.4, -0.4] kg, -2.3 [-2.8, -1.8] kg and -3.3 [-3.8, -2.8] kg for 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg, respectively). In the subpopulation of participants from the China region (75.2% of trial participants), reductions in HbA1c and body weight from baseline to week 26 were similar to those seen in the overall population. The most frequent adverse events in the semaglutide treatment arms were gastrointestinal, although these were mostly transient and mild/moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Significantly greater reductions in both HbA1c and body weight over 26 weeks were seen with oral semaglutide 3 mg, 7 mg and 14 mg than with sitagliptin 100 mg in a predominantly Chinese population with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin treatment. Oral semaglutide was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that seen in the global PIONEER trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04017832. FUNDING: This trial was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

Quality of Informed Consent in Phase III Clinical Trials in Portugal: The Participants' Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Some studies show that participants do not always fully understand the informed consent form (ICF), which is one of the reasons for dropouts. This study aimed to adapt the Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) questionnaire into a valid instrument to be applied to the Portuguese population and to measure its reliability and validity in the Portuguese population, by applying it to a sample of participants in controlled trials. METHODS: The QuIC questionnaire was developed to assess the quality of informed consent in clinical trials and consists of two parts, addressing both the objective (part A) and the subjective (part B) understanding. After being translated and validated into Portuguese, it was implemented in 100 cardiac participants of phase III clinical trials in a University Hospital Center. RESULTS: The QuIC-PT questionnaire showed excellent stability over time and good validity. All patients evaluated their participation and their health positively and recognized the main purpose of the clinical trial. Almost all participants understood their role in helping future patients and the purpose of the trial and realized that, by signing the ICF, they were participating in a clinical trial. However, none of them knew that their experimental treatment was not proven to be the best alternative for their condition. CONCLUSION: The QuIC-PT questionnaire seems to be a valid and useful instrument to evaluate the participants' understanding of the ICF. In this study, we found that some concepts, like 'study protocol' or 'randomization', were not well understood by participants when signing the ICF, especially by participants with lower education levels. They also believed that the experimental intervention would solve their health condition. Greater awareness about the importance of the informed consent process and ICF is necessary so that participants can fully understand the protocol, especially the risks involved, and their rights as participants.

PET-CT-guided, symptom-based, patient-initiated surveillance versus clinical follow-up in head neck cancer patients (PETNECK2): study protocol for a multicentre feasibility study and non-inferiority, randomised, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% of treated head and neck cancer (HNC) patients develop recurrence. The risk of recurrence declines with time from treatment. Current guidelines recommend clinical follow-up every two months for the first two years after treatment, with reducing intensity over the next three years. However, evidence for the effectiveness of these regimes in detecting recurrence is lacking, with calls for more flexible, patient-centred follow-up strategies. METHODS: PETNECK2 is a UK-based multi-centre programme examining a new paradigm of follow-up, using positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT)-guided, symptom-based, patient-initiated surveillance. This paradigm is being tested in a unblinded, non-inferiority, phase III, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Patients with HNC, one year after completing curative intent treatment, with no clinical symptoms or signs of loco-regional or distant metastasis will be randomised using a 1:1 allocation ratio to either regular scheduled follow-up, or to PET-CT guided, patient-initiated follow-up. Patients at a low risk of recurrence (negative PET-CT) will receive a face-to-face education session along with an Information and Support (I&S) resource package to monitor symptoms and be in control of initiating an urgent appointment when required. The primary outcome of the RCT is overall survival. The RCT also has an in-built pilot, a nested QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI), and a nested mixed-methods study on patient experience and fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). An initial, single-arm feasibility study has been completed which determined the acceptability of the patient-initiated surveillance intervention, the completion rates of baseline questionnaires, and optimised the I&S resource prior to implementation in the RCT. DISCUSSION: We hypothesise that combining an additional 12-month post-treatment PET-CT scan and I&S resource will both identify patients with asymptomatic recurrence and identify those at low risk of future recurrence who will be empowered to monitor their symptoms and seek early clinical follow-up when recurrence is suspected. This change to a patient-centred model of care may have effects on both quality of life and fear of cancer recurrence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 13,709,798; 15-Oct-2021.

Precision cancer medicine platform trials: Concepts and design of AcSé-ESMART.

Precision cancer medicine brought the promise of improving outcomes for patients with cancer. High-throughput molecular profiling of tumors at treatment failure aims to direct a patient to a treatment matched to the tumor profile. In this way, improved outcome has been achieved in a small number of patients whose tumors exhibit unique targetable oncogenic drivers. Most cancers, however, contain multiple genetic alterations belonging to and of various hallmarks of cancer; for most of these alterations, there is limited knowledge on the level of evidence, their hierarchical roles in oncogenicity, and utility as biomarkers for response to targeted treatment(s). We developed a proof-of-concept trial that explores new treatment strategies in a molecularly-enriched tumor-agnostic, pediatric population. The evaluation of novel agents, including first-in-child molecules, alone or in combination, is guided by the available understanding of or hypotheses for the mechanisms of action of the diverse cancer events. Main objectives are: to determine 1) recommended phase 2 doses, 2) activity signals to provide the basis for disease specific development, and 3) to define new predictive biomarkers. Here we outline concepts, rationales and designs applied in the European AcSé-ESMART trial and highlight the feasibility but also complexity and challenges of such innovative platform trials.

REDOMA: Bayesian random-effects dose-optimization meta-analysis using spike-and-slab priors.

The rise of cutting-edge precision cancer treatments has led to a growing significance of the optimal biological dose (OBD) in modern oncology trials. These trials now prioritize the consideration of both toxicity and efficacy simultaneously when determining the most desirable dosage for treatment. Traditional approaches in early-phase oncology trials have conventionally relied on the assumption of a monotone relationship between treatment efficacy and dosage. However, this assumption may not hold valid for novel oncology therapies. In reality, the dose-efficacy curve of such treatments may reach a plateau at a specific dose, posing challenges for conventional methods in accurately identifying the OBD. Furthermore, achieving reliable identification of the OBD is typically not possible based on a single small-sample trial. With data from multiple phase I and phase I/II trials, we propose a novel Bayesian random-effects dose-optimization meta-analysis (REDOMA) approach to identify the OBD by synthesizing toxicity and efficacy data from each trial. The REDOMA method can address trials with heterogeneous characteristics. We adopt a curve-free approach based on a Gamma process prior to model the average dose-toxicity relationship. In addition, we utilize a Bayesian model selection framework that uses the spike-and-slab prior as an automatic variable selection technique to eliminate monotonic constraints on the dose-efficacy curve. The good performance of the REDOMA method is confirmed by extensive simulation studies.

Surrogate endpoints in phase III randomized trials of advanced gastroesophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Overall survival (OS) is the most meaningful endpoint in clinical trials. However, owing to their limitations, surrogate endpoints are commonly used and validation studies are required to assess their reliability. Analysis of phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of advanced gastroesophageal cancer (AGC) with > 100 patients, correlation coefficients (r), and determination coefficients (R²) between OS and surrogates were evaluated through meta-analyses. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and objective response rate (ORR) were examined to determine their correlations with OS. Analysis of 65 phase III RCTs (29,766 subjects) showed a moderate correlation between PFS/TTP and OS (r = 0.77, R² = 0.59), while ORR correlation was low (r = 0.56, R² = 0.31). Excluding immunotherapy trials improved the PFS/TTP and OS correlations (r = 0.83, R² = 0.70). These findings suggest the potential use of PFS/TTP in AGC phase III investigations, disregarding the use of ORR as a surrogate endpoint.

Accrual and statistical power failure in published adjuvant phase III oncology trials: a comprehensive analysis from 2013 to 2023.

BACKGROUND: In a competitive landscape with many ongoing adjuvant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the prevalence of trials that failed to recruit their targeted sample size and were inadequately powered is unclear. The aims of the study are (i) to determine the percentage of trials with accrual and statistical power failure and (ii) to evaluate their potential impact on the drug development process. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was carried out to identify adjuvant phase III oncology RCTs reported between 2013 and 2023 across all solid tumours. No restrictions were applied regarding the type of intervention or journal of publication. The percentage of trials with accrual failure and power failure was estimated as well as their association with the efficacy endpoints. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: A total of 282 RCTs met the inclusion criteria with a median sample size of 661 patients and a median accrual period of 4.3 years. Most of these studies were superiority trials (83.0%). Accrual failure was observed in 22.0% of the studies, finishing recruitment without achieving the targeted sample size. Overall, 39.7% of the studies experienced power failure, having less power than specified in the protocol at the date of the read-out. Among superiority RCTs evaluating intermediate survival endpoints, only 31.1% presented statistically significant results. Trials with power failure were less likely to present statistically significant results (37.9% versus 21.9%, P = 0.04). The association was consistent across all cancer types. In the subset of non-inferiority trials, 35.0% formally demonstrated non-inferiority of the experimental arm. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 40% of adjuvant phase III RCTs experienced power failure, and the reduction in power significantly impacted the final study results. There is a need for procedural refinements in the design and implementation of future adjuvant RCTs to mitigate these fallacies.

Safety of pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in a pooled analysis of phase 3 clinical trials of melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab was evaluated in a pooled analysis of 4 phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma per American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition, criteria (AJCC-7; KEYNOTE-054); stage IIB or IIC melanoma per AJCC-8 (KEYNOTE-716); stage IB, II, or IIIA non-small cell lung cancer per AJCC-7 (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091); or postnephrectomy/metastasectomy clear cell renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence (KEYNOTE-564). Patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg up to 200 mg for pediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for approximately 1 year. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized for patients who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 4125 patients treated with pembrolizumab (n = 2060) or placebo (n = 2065). Median (range) duration of treatment was 11.1 months (0.0-18.9) with pembrolizumab and 11.2 months (0.0-18.1) with placebo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 78.6 % (1620/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 16.3 % [336/2060]) and 58.7 % (1212/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 3.5 % [72/2065]). Immune-mediated AEs (e.g. adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis, and thyroiditis) occurred in 36.2 % (746/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 8.6 % [177/2060]) and 8.4 % (174/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 1.1 % [23/2065]). Of patients with ≥ 1 immune-mediated AE or infusion reaction, systemic corticosteroids were required for 35.2 % (268/761) and 20.2 % (39/193) of patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile that was comparable to prior reports in advanced disease.

Updates in pharmacotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: a focus on emerging tubulin inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment landscape of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has seen significant advancements in recent years, marked by a shift toward target agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, chemotherapy remains a cornerstone of treatment, alone or in combination. Microtubule-targeting agents, such as taxanes and vinca alkaloids, play a crucial role in clinical practice in both early and advanced settings in NSCLC. AREA COVERED: This review outlines the mechanisms of action, present significance, and prospective advancements of microtubule-targeting agents (MTAs), with a special highlight on new combinations in phase 3 trials. The online databases PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using the terms 'Microtubule-targeting agents' and 'non-small cell lung cancer' or synonyms, with a special focus over the last 5 years of publications. EXPERT OPINION: Despite the emergence of immunotherapy, MTA remains crucial, often used alongside or after immunotherapy, especially in squamous cell lung cancer. Next-generation sequencing expands treatment options, but reliable biomarkers for immunotherapy are lacking. While antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) show promise, managing toxicities remain vital. In the early stages, MTAs, possibly with ICIs, are standard, while ADCs may replace traditional chemotherapy in the advanced stages. Nevertheless, MTAs remain essential in subsequent lines or for patients with contraindications.

Lost in the plot: missing visual elements in Kaplan-Meier plots of phase III oncology trials.

Missing visual elements (MVE) in Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves can misrepresent data, preclude curve reconstruction, and hamper transparency. This study evaluated KM plots of phase III oncology trials. MVE were defined as an incomplete y-axis range or missing number at risk table in a KM curve. Surrogate endpoint KM curves were additionally evaluated for complete interpretability, defined by (1) reporting the number of censored patients and (2) correspondence of the disease assessment interval with the number at risk interval. Among 641 trials enrolling 518 235 patients, 116 trials (18%) had MVE in KM curves. Industry sponsorship, larger trials, and more recently published trials were correlated with lower odds of MVE. Only 3% of trials (15 of 574) published surrogate endpoint KM plots with complete interpretability. Improvements in the quality of KM curves of phase III oncology trials, particularly for surrogate endpoints, are needed for greater interpretability, reproducibility, and transparency in oncology research.

IMbrave152/SKYSCRAPER-14: a Phase III study of atezolizumab, bevacizumab and tiragolumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is a standard of care, first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Myeloid and T regulatory cells are key immunosuppressive cell types within the hepatic tumor microenvironment associated with clinical resistance to atezolizumab and bevacizumab therapy for HCC and overall poor prognosis. Therapeutic targeting of TIGIT, which is highly expressed in these cells, with tiragolumab may overcome the immunosuppressive environment and improve clinical benefit, a hypothesis supported by positive efficacy signals in the Phase Ib/II MORPHEUS-Liver study. This paper describes the rationale and design of IMbrave152/SKYSCRAPER-14, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III study comparing atezolizumab and bevacizumab with tiragolumab or placebo in patients with HCC and no prior systemic treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05904886 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

This research study is designed to test a new treatment combination for liver cancer, specifically for patients whose cancer cannot be removed with surgery or has spread. The treatment involves three medications: atezolizumab, bevacizumab and tiragolumab.Atezolizumab and bevacizumab are already used together as a standard treatment for liver cancer. Tiragolumab is designed to block the TIGIT receptor, which is normally involved in holding back the immune cells that would attack the tumor. Because tiragolumab may restore the immune response against the tumor, adding tiragolumab might make the treatment more effective.The study is being done worldwide and includes patients who have not received any previous systemic treatment for their advanced liver cancer. Patients participating in the study will be randomly placed into two groups. One group will receive the new combination of three medications, while the other group will receive the standard treatment of two medications plus a placebo (a treatment with no active ingredient). The main goal is to see if the new combination helps patients live longer and slows the cancer's growth compared with the standard treatment. Safety and how patients feel during the treatment are also important parts of the study.

Bulevirtide monotherapy in patients with chronic HDV: Efficacy and safety results through week 96 from a phase III randomized trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Bulevirtide (BLV), a first-in-class entry inhibitor, is approved in Europe for the treatment of chronic hepatitis delta (CHD). BLV monotherapy was superior to delayed treatment at week (W) 48, the primary efficacy endpoint, in the MYR301 study (NCT03852719). Here, we assessed if continued BLV therapy until W96 would improve virologic and biochemical response rates, particularly among patients who did not achieve virologic response at W24. METHODS: In this ongoing, open-label, randomized phase III study, patients with CHD (N = 150) were randomized (1:1:1) to treatment with BLV 2 mg/day (n = 49) or 10 mg/day (n = 50), each for 144 weeks, or to delayed treatment for 48 weeks followed by BLV 10 mg/day for 96 weeks (n = 51). Combined response was defined as undetectable hepatitis delta virus (HDV) RNA or a decrease in HDV RNA by ≥2 log10 IU/ml from baseline and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization. Other endpoints included virologic response, ALT normalization, and change in HDV RNA. RESULTS: Of 150 patients, 143 (95%) completed 96 weeks of the study. Efficacy responses were maintained and/or improved between W48 and W96, with similar combined, virologic, and biochemical response rates between BLV 2 and 10 mg. Of the patients with a suboptimal early virologic response at W24, 43% of non-responders and 82% of partial responders achieved virologic response at W96. Biochemical improvement often occurred independently of virologic response. Adverse events were mostly mild, with no serious adverse events related to BLV. CONCLUSIONS: Virologic and biochemical responses were maintained and/or increased with longer term BLV therapy, including in those with suboptimal early virologic response. BLV monotherapy for CHD was safe and well tolerated through W96. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: In July 2023, bulevirtide was fully approved for the treatment of chronic hepatitis delta (CHD) in Europe based on clinical study results from up to 48 weeks of treatment. Understanding the efficacy and safety of bulevirtide over the longer term is important for healthcare providers. In this analysis, we demonstrate that bulevirtide monotherapy for 96 weeks in patients with CHD was associated with continued improvements in combined, virologic, and biochemical responses as well as liver stiffness from week 48 at both the 2 mg and 10 mg doses. Patients with suboptimal virologic responses to bulevirtide at week 24 also benefited from continued therapy, with the majority achieving virologic response or biochemical improvement by week 96. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03852719.

A randomized, double-blind trial assessing the efficacy and safety of two doses of dulaglutide in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (AWARD-JPN).

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted in Japanese participants aged ≥20 years, with T2D for ≥6 months and inadequate glycaemic control, while on a single oral antihyperglycaemic medication (NCT04809220). The primary objective was to evaluate superiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg measured by mean change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to 26 weeks. Other efficacy and safety endpoints were evaluated at 26 and 52 weeks. All statistical analyses were conducted using the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Overall, 591 participants were randomized to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg or 0.75 mg. At Week 26, dulaglutide 1.5 mg was superior to dulaglutide 0.75 mg in HbA1c reduction from baseline (least squares mean [LSM] difference -0.29% [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.43, -0.14]). At Week 52, the dulaglutide 1.5-mg arm had a significantly greater proportion of participants who achieved HbA1c <7.0% (46.3% vs. 38.5%; p = 0.03) and showed significantly greater reduction in fasting serum glucose (LSM difference -9.4 mg/dL [95% CI -14.4, -4.3]; p < 0.001) versus the dulaglutide 0.75-mg arm. No statistically significant change in body weight was observed in either treatment arm. Overall, 442 participants (75.4%) experienced treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Constipation (11.3%), diarrhoea (9.6%) and pyrexia (9.0%) were the most commonly reported TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide 1.5 mg once weekly demonstrated superior glycaemic control versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg once weekly, with comparable safety and tolerability, in Japanese people with T2D.

Health-related quality of life with sacituzumab govitecan in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer in the phase III TROPiCS-02 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TROPiCS-02 study (NCT03901339) demonstrated that sacituzumab govitecan (SG) has superior clinical outcomes over treatment of physician's choice (TPC) chemotherapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Here, we present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) patient-reported outcome (PRO) findings from this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible adults with HR+/HER2- mBC who previously received a taxane, endocrine-based therapy, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, and 2-4 lines of chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive SG or TPC until progression or unacceptable toxicity. PROs were assessed at baseline and on day 1 of each cycle, using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EQ-5D-5L, and PRO Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). RESULTS: Compared to TPC, overall least square mean change from baseline was significantly better for SG for physical functioning and dyspnea, but worse for diarrhea. Time to first clinically meaningful worsening or death was significantly longer for SG in global health status/quality of life, physical functioning, fatigue, emotional functioning, dyspnea, insomnia, and financial difficulties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS, but longer for TPC in diarrhea. Few patients in both arms reported experiencing any worsening to level 3 or 4 treatment-related symptomatic events during treatment, as assessed by 16 PRO-CTCAE items, except for diarrhea frequency and amount of hair loss, which favored TPC. CONCLUSIONS: SG was associated with an HRQoL benefit in most symptoms and functioning, compared with TPC. This supports the favorable profile of SG as a treatment option for patients with pretreated HR+/HER2- mBC.