[Gemcitabine long-term maintenance chemotherapy benefits patients with survival: a multicenter, real-world study of advanced breast cancer treatment in China].

Objective: This study collected a real-world data on survival and efficacy of gemcitabine-containing therapy in advanced breast cancer. Aimed to find the main reasons of affecting the duration of gemcitabine-base therapy in advanced breast cancer patients. Methods: Advanced breast cancer patients who received gemcitabine-base therapy from January 2017 to January 2019 were enrolled(10 hospitals). The clinicopathological data, the number of chemotherapy cycles and the reasons for treatment termination were collected and analyzed. To identify the reasons related with continuous treatment for advanced breast cancer and the factors which affect the survival and efficacy. Results: A total of 224 patients with advanced breast cancer were enrolled in this study, with a median age of 52 years (26-77 years), 55.4%(124/224) was postmenopausal. Luminal type were 83 cases, TNBC were 97 cases, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER's-2) overexpression were 44. At the analysis, 224 patients who received the gemcitabine-based regimens were evaluated, included 5 complete reponse (CR), 77 partial response (PR), 112 stable disease (SD) and 27 progressive disease (PD). The objective response rate (ORR) was 36.6%(82/224). Seventy patients had serious adverse diseases, including leukopenia (9), neutrophilia (49), thrombocytopenia (15), and elevated transaminase (2). The median follow-up time was 41 months (26~61 months), and the median PFS was 5.6 months. The reasons of termination treatment were listed: disease progression were 90 patients; personal reasons were 51 patients; adverse drug reactions were 18 patients; completed treatment were 65 patients. It was found that progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer in patients receiving >6 cycles than that in patients with ≤6 cycles (8.2 months vs 5.4 months, HR=2.474, 95% CI: 1.730-3.538, P＜0.001). Conclusions: Gemcitabine-based regimen is generally well tolerated in the Chinese population and has relatively ideal clinical efficacy in the real world. The median PFS is significantly prolonged when the number of treatment cycles are appropriately increased.

Role of Consolidation and Maintenance.

Consolidation therapy consists of short-term therapy after stem cell transplant in multiple myeloma. Key consolidation trials have shown mixed results on whether consolidation should be included after transplant, leading to varied clinical practice. Maintenance therapy consists of long-term, typically fixed-duration or indefinite, therapy. Standard-risk patients typically receive single-agent therapy, whereas high-risk may benefit from doublet therapy and beyond. Adverse events and quality of life concerns should be considered, as optimal duration of maintenance therapy continues to be studied.

Efficacy and safety of olaparib, olaparib plus bevacizumab and niraparib maintenance treatment in Japanese patients with platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether maintenance treatment could be safely and effectively performed with olaparib, olaparib plus bevacizumab and niraparib in platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer at multiple institutions in Japan. METHODS: We investigated progression-free survival and adverse events in 117 patients with platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer treated with maintenance therapy. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival of 117 patients was 20.1 months. Patients with germline BRCA pathogenic variants had a significantly better prognosis than the other groups (P < 0.001). Furthermore, in the multivariate analysis, stage IV (P = 0.016) and germline BRCA wild-type (P ≤ 0.001) were significantly associated with worse progression-free survival in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Regarding adverse events, all three types of maintenance treatment were significantly worse than chemotherapy given before maintenance treatment with respect to renal function (olaparib, P = 0.037; olaparib plus bevacizumab, P < 0.001; and niraparib, P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Maintenance treatment was performed effectively and safely. Renal function deterioration is likely to occur during maintenance treatment, and careful administration is important in platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer.

Continued Treatment With Tirzepatide for Maintenance of Weight Reduction in Adults With Obesity: The SURMOUNT-4 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effect of continued treatment with tirzepatide on maintaining initial weight reduction is unknown. Objective: To assess the effect of tirzepatide, with diet and physical activity, on the maintenance of weight reduction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3, randomized withdrawal clinical trial conducted at 70 sites in 4 countries with a 36-week, open-label tirzepatide lead-in period followed by a 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled period included adults with a body mass index greater than or equal to 30 or greater than or equal to 27 and a weight-related complication, excluding diabetes. Interventions: Participants (n = 783) enrolled in an open-label lead-in period received once-weekly subcutaneous maximum tolerated dose (10 or 15 mg) of tirzepatide for 36 weeks. At week 36, a total of 670 participants were randomized (1:1) to continue receiving tirzepatide (n = 335) or switch to placebo (n = 335) for 52 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the mean percent change in weight from week 36 (randomization) to week 88. Key secondary end points included the proportion of participants at week 88 who maintained at least 80% of the weight loss during the lead-in period. Results: Participants (n = 670; mean age, 48 years; 473 [71%] women; mean weight, 107.3 kg) who completed the 36-week lead-in period experienced a mean weight reduction of 20.9%. The mean percent weight change from week 36 to week 88 was -5.5% with tirzepatide vs 14.0% with placebo (difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -21.2% to -17.7%]; P < .001). Overall, 300 participants (89.5%) receiving tirzepatide at 88 weeks maintained at least 80% of the weight loss during the lead-in period compared with 16.6% receiving placebo (P < .001). The overall mean weight reduction from week 0 to 88 was 25.3% for tirzepatide and 9.9% for placebo. The most common adverse events were mostly mild to moderate gastrointestinal events, which occurred more commonly with tirzepatide vs placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In participants with obesity or overweight, withdrawing tirzepatide led to substantial regain of lost weight, whereas continued treatment maintained and augmented initial weight reduction. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04660643.

Comparison of survival outcomes between olaparib and niraparib maintenance therapy in BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This multicenter retrospective cohort study aimed to compare survival outcomes and adverse events between maintenance therapy with two poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, olaparib and niraparib, in patients with BRCA-mutated, newly diagnosed advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) who responded to platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: We enrolled stage III-IV EOC patients with germline and/or somatic BRCA1/2 mutations that had received maintenance therapy with olaparib or niraparib. A 3:1 propensity score matching was conducted using two variables: residual disease size and the presence of germline variants. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary outcomes were time to first subsequent therapy (TFST), overall survival (OS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: In the propensity score-matched analysis, 80 patients who received olaparib and 31 patients who received niraparib were matched (3:1). In the propensity score-matched cohort, median PFS with olaparib vs. niraparib was not reached vs 31.5 months (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.47-2.52; p = 0.854). The median TFST was not reached vs 31.8 months (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.51-2.81; p = 0.682), and neither olaparib nor niraparib reached the median OS (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.01-17.61; p = 0.649). In terms of the incidence rates of any-grade hematologic or non-hematologic TEAEs, higher rates of thrombocytopenia (p = 0.021) and neutropenia (p = 0.011) were observed in the niraparib group. CONCLUSION: Advanced EOC patients with BRCA1/2 mutations exhibited no significant difference in OS between olaparib and niraparib, indicating the need to consider individualized strategies for selecting PARP inhibitors based on adverse event profiles.

Olaparib maintenance versus placebo in platinum-sensitive non-small cell lung cancer: the Phase 2 randomized PIPSeN trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-sensitivity is a phenotypic biomarker of Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) sensitivity in histotypes where PARPi are approved. Approximately one-third of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) are platinum-sensitive. The double-blind, randomized phase II PIPSeN (NCT02679963) study evaluated olaparib, a PARPi, as maintenance therapy for patients with platinum-sensitive advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Chemonaïve patients with ECOG performance status of 0-1, platinum-sensitive, EGFR- and ALK-wild-type, stage IIIB-IV NSCLC were randomized (R) to receive either olaparib (O) maintenance or a placebo (P). The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) from R. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS) and safety. With an anticipated hazard ratio of 0.65, 144 patients were required to be randomized, and approximately 500 patients enrolled. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely terminated because anti-PD(L)1 therapy was approved during the trial recruitment. A total of 182 patients were enrolled, with 60 patients randomized: 33 and 27 in the O and P arms, respectively. Patient and tumor characteristics were well-balanced between arms, except for alcohol intake (33% vs 11% in the O and P arms, respectively, p = 0.043). The median PFS was 2.9 and 2.0 months in the O and P arms, respectively (logrank p = 0.99). The median OS was 9.4 and 9.5 months in the O and P arms, respectively (p = 0.28). Grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 15 and 8 patients in O and P arms, with no new safety concerns. CONCLUSION: PIPSeN was terminated early after enrollment of only 50% of the pre-planned population, thus being statistically underpowered. Olaparib maintenance did neither improve median PFS nor OS in this patient population.

The optimal intravesical maintenance chemotherapy scheme for the intermediate-risk group non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Although the current European Association of Urology(EAU) guideline recommends that patients with intermediate-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) should accept intravesical chemotherapy or Calmette-Guerin (BCG) for no more than one year after transurethral resection of bladder tumor(TURBT), there is no consensus on the optimal duration of chemotherapy. Hence, we explored the optimal duration of maintenance intravesical chemotherapy in patients with intermediate-risk NMIBC. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This was a real-world single-center retrospective cohort study. In total 158 patients with pathologically confirmed intermediate-risk NMIBC were included, who were divided into 4 subgroups based on the number of instillations given. We used Cox regression analysis and survival analysis chart to explore the 3-yr recurrence outcomes of tumor.The optimal duration was determined by receive operating characteristic curve (ROC). RESULTS: The median follow-up was 5.2 years. Compared with instillation for 1-2 months, the Hazard Ratios(HR) values of instillation for less than 1 month, maintenance instillation for 3-6 months and > 6 months were 3.57、1.57 and 0.22(95% CI 1.27-12.41;0.26-9.28;0.07-0.80, P = 0.03;0.62;0.02, respectively). We found a significant improvement in 3-yr relapse-free survival in intermediate-risk NMIBC patients who maintained intravesical instillation chemotherapy for longer than 6 months, and the best benefit was achieved with 10.5 months of maintenance chemotherapy by ROC. CONCLUSIONS: In our scheme, the optimal duration of intravesical instillation with pirrubicin is 10.5 months. This new understanding provides valuable experience for the precise medical treatment model of intermediate-risk NMIBC.

Maintenance olaparib rechallenge in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer previously treated with a PARP inhibitor (OReO/ENGOT-ov38): a phase IIIb trial.

BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor maintenance therapy is the standard of care for some patients with advanced ovarian cancer. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor rechallenge. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial (NCT03106987) enrolled patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer who had received one prior PARP inhibitor therapy for ≥18 and ≥12 months in the BRCA-mutated and non-BRCA-mutated cohorts, respectively, following first-line chemotherapy or for ≥12 and ≥6 months, respectively, following a second or subsequent line of chemotherapy. Patients were in response following their last platinum-based chemotherapy regimen and were randomized 2 : 1 to maintenance olaparib tablets 300 mg twice daily or placebo. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Seventy four patients in the BRCA-mutated cohort were randomized to olaparib and 38 to placebo, and 72 patients in the non-BRCA-mutated cohort were randomized to olaparib and 36 to placebo; >85% of patients in both cohorts had received ≥3 prior lines of chemotherapy. In the BRCA-mutated cohort, the median PFS was 4.3 months with olaparib versus 2.8 months with placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37-0.87; P = 0.022]; 1-year PFS rates were 19% versus 0% (Kaplan-Meier estimates). In the non-BRCA-mutated cohort, median PFS was 5.3 months for olaparib versus 2.8 months for placebo (HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.26-0.71; P = 0.0023); 1-year PFS rates were 14% versus 0% (Kaplan-Meier estimates). No new safety signals were identified with olaparib rechallenge. CONCLUSIONS: In ovarian cancer patients previously treated with one prior PARP inhibitor and at least two lines of platinum-based chemotherapy, maintenance olaparib rechallenge provided a statistically significant, albeit modest, PFS improvement over placebo in both the BRCA-mutated and non-BRCA-mutated cohorts, with a proportion of patients in the maintenance olaparib rechallenge arm of both cohorts remaining progression free at 1 year.

Relationship Between Hematological Toxicities During Maintenance Treatment and During Chemotherapy Before Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Platinum-sensitive Relapsed Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To determine if maintenance treatment can be performed effectively and safely in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a multi-center study to investigate progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs) in 229 patients receiving maintenance treatment for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. RESULTS: The median PFS in the 229 patients with maintenance treatment was 14.0 months (95% confidence interval=10.3-17.6 months). The hematological toxicities included ≥grade 3 anemia in 33.2% of cases. Anemia during maintenance treatment was significantly more common than anemia during chemotherapy given before maintenance treatment (p<0.001). Anemia during chemotherapy prior to maintenance treatment significantly increased the risk of anemia during maintenance treatment, compared with other clinical features (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Maintenance treatment can be performed safely and effectively in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer. Anemia during chemotherapy given before maintenance treatment significantly increased the risk of developing anemia during maintenance treatment in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer.

Mirikizumab as Induction and Maintenance Therapy for Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Mirikizumab, a p19-directed antibody against interleukin-23, showed efficacy in the treatment of ulcerative colitis in a phase 2 trial. METHODS: We conducted two phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of mirikizumab in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. In the induction trial, patients were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive mirikizumab (300 mg) or placebo, administered intravenously, every 4 weeks for 12 weeks. In the maintenance trial, patients with a response to mirikizumab induction therapy were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive mirikizumab (200 mg) or placebo, administered subcutaneously, every 4 weeks for 40 weeks. The primary end points were clinical remission at week 12 in the induction trial and at week 40 (at 52 weeks overall) in the maintenance trial. Major secondary end points included clinical response, endoscopic remission, and improvement in bowel-movement urgency. Patients who did not have a response in the induction trial were allowed to receive open-label mirikizumab during the first 12 weeks of the maintenance trial as extended induction. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 1281 patients underwent randomization in the induction trial, and 544 patients with a response to mirikizumab underwent randomization again in the maintenance trial. Significantly higher percentages of patients in the mirikizumab group than in the placebo group had clinical remission at week 12 of the induction trial (24.2% vs. 13.3%, P<0.001) and at week 40 of the maintenance trial (49.9% vs. 25.1%, P<0.001). The criteria for all the major secondary end points were met in both trials. Adverse events of nasopharyngitis and arthralgia were reported more frequently with mirikizumab than with placebo. Among the 1217 patients treated with mirikizumab during the controlled and uncontrolled periods (including the open-label extension and maintenance periods) in the two trials, 15 had an opportunistic infection (including 6 with herpes zoster infection) and 8 had cancer (including 3 with colorectal cancer). Among the patients who received placebo in the induction trial, 1 had herpes zoster infection and none had cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Mirikizumab was more effective than placebo in inducing and maintaining clinical remission in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Opportunistic infection or cancer occurred in a small number of patients treated with mirikizumab. (Funded by Eli Lilly; LUCENT-1 and LUCENT-2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03518086 and NCT03524092, respectively.).

Consensus statements and treatment algorithm to guide clinicians in the selection of maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma: Results of a Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Standard treatment of newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma (OC) consists of cytoreductive surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. Maintenance therapy with PARP inhibitors and olaparib-bevacizumab has recently shown to significantly improve progression-free survival in the first-line setting. Some practical aspects of maintenance therapy, however, are still poorly defined. AIM OF THE STUDY: To provide guidance to clinicians in the selection of maintenance therapy for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian carcinoma. METHODS: A board of six gynecologic oncologists with expertise in the treatment of OC in Italy convened to address issues related to the new options for maintenance treatment. Based on scientific evidences, the board produced practice-oriented statements. Consensus was reached via a modified Delphi study that involved a panel of 22 experts from across Italy. RESULTS: Twenty-seven evidence- and consensus-based statements are presented, covering the following areas of interest: use of biomarkers (BRCA mutations and presence of homologous recombination deficiency); timing and outcomes of surgery; selection of patients eligible for bevacizumab; definition of response to treatment; toxicity and contraindications; evidence of synergy of bevacizumab plus PARP inhibitor. Two treatment algorithms are also included, for selecting maintenance therapy based on timing and outcomes of surgery, response to platinum-based chemotherapy and biomarker status. A score for the assessment of response to chemotherapy is proposed, but its validation is ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: We provide here consensus statements and treatment algorithms to guide clinicians in the selection of appropriate and personalized maintenance therapy in the first-line setting of advanced OC management.

Progression-free survival and safety at 3.5years of follow-up: results from the randomised phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To report updated long-term efficacy and safety from the double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study (NCT02655016). METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with complete or partial response (CR or PR) to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy received niraparib or placebo once daily (2:1 ratio). Stratification factors were best response to first-line chemotherapy regimen (CR/PR), receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (yes/no), and homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) status (deficient [HRd]/proficient [HRp] or not determined). Updated (ad hoc) progression-free survival (PFS) data (as of November 17, 2021) by investigator assessment (INV) are reported. RESULTS: In 733 randomised patients (niraparib, 487; placebo, 246), median PFS follow-up was 3.5years. Median INV-PFS was 24.5 versus 11.2months (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.68) in the HRd population and 13.8 versus 8.2months (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.79) in the overall population for niraparib and placebo, respectively. In the HRp population, median INV-PFS was 8.4 versus 5.4months (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87), respectively. Results were concordant with the primary analysis. Niraparib-treated patients were more likely to be free of progression or death at 4years than placebo-treated patients (HRd, 38% versus 17%; overall, 24% versus 14%). The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in niraparib patients were thrombocytopenia (39.7%), anaemia (31.6%), and neutropenia (21.3%). Myelodysplastic syndromes/acute myeloid leukaemia incidence rate (1.2%) was the same for niraparib- and placebo-treated patients. Overall survival remained immature. CONCLUSIONS: Niraparib maintained clinically significant improvements in PFS with 3.5years of follow-up in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of progression irrespective of HRD status. No new safety signals were identified.

Outcomes of allogeneic or autologous stem cell transplantation followed by maintenance chemotherapy in adult patient with B-ALL in CR1 with no detectable minimal residual disease.

Autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) as a treatment for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (B-ALL) has been rigorously debated in recent years. We retrospectively analysed the outcomes of 355 adult patients with B-ALL in first complete remission who had received auto-HSCT or allogeneic HSCT (allo-HSCT) in our centre. The treatment efficacy was evaluated from a model stratified on the risk classification and minimal residue disease (MRD) status after three chemotherapy cycles. Auto-HSCT demonstrated comparable 3-year overall survival (OS) (72.7% vs. 68.5%, p = 0.441) and leukaemia-free survival rates (62.8% vs. 56.1%, p = 0.383) compared to allo-HSCT for patients with negative MRD, while the advantage of lower non-relapse mortality (1.5% vs. 25.1%, p < 0.001) was offset by a higher cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) rates (35.7% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.018), especially in high-risk patients. For patients at high risk and with positive MRD, there was a lower trend of 3-year OS (50.0% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.078) and significantly higher CIR rates (71.4% vs. 39.1%, p = 0.018) in auto-HSCT. However, no significant interaction was observed in the tests. In conclusion, auto-HSCT appears to be an attractive treatment for patients with negative MRD after three chemotherapy cycles. For MRD-positive patients, allo-HSCT may be a more effective treatment.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Biomarker Testing to Guide First-Line PARP Inhibitor Maintenance for Patients with Advanced Ovarian Cancer After Response to First-Line Platinum Chemotherapy in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor maintenance treatments are available for platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer. Olaparib (O) is available for BRCA mutation patients or in combination with bevacizumab (O+B) for patients with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD+); niraparib (N) is available for all patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of biomarker testing and maintenance treatments (mTx) with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor in platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer in the USA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten strategies were evaluated (S1-S10), representing biomarker testing (none, BRCA or HRD), and mTx (O, O+B, N or B). PAOLA-1 data were used to build a model estimating progression-free survival (PFS), second PFS (PFS2) and overall survival for O+B. PFS was modelled through mixture cure models; PFS2 and overall survival were modelled by standard parametric models. Hazard ratios of PFS for O+B versus B, N and O were obtained from the literature to estimate PFS for B, N and O. PFS2 and OS for B, N and O were informed by PFS benefits. RESULTS: S2 (no testing, B) had the lowest cost while S10 (HRD testing, O+B for HRD+ and B for HRD-) had the highest quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). All niraparib strategies were dominated. S2, S4 (BRCA testing, O for BRCA+ and B for BRCA-), S6 (BRCA testing, olaparib plus bevacizumab for BRCA+ and bevacizumab for BRCA-) and S10 were the non-dominated strategies with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $29,095/QALY, $33,786/QALY and $52,948/QALY for S4 versus S2, S6 versus S4 and S10 versus S6, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Homologous recombination deficiency testing followed by O+B for HRD+ and B for HRD- is a highly cost-effective strategy for patients with platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer. A HRD biomarker-guided approach provides most QALYs with good economic value.

Experiences of Parenting a Child Receiving Dexamethasone During Maintenance Chemotherapy for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.

Background: The purpose of this research was to understand the experience of parenting a child receiving dexamethasone during maintenance chemotherapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Previous research has shown that dexamethasone's high level of toxicity causes many physical, behavioral, and emotional side effects, which reduce the quality of life during ALL treatment. Less is known about the experience of parenting a child receiving dexamethasone and the impact on the parent-child relationship. Methods: In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 parents and data was analyzed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Results: Four superordinate themes emerged: "a child on steroids is not your child": the behavioral and emotional changes in the child and their relationships; "you have to do what you have to do": adapting parenting to manage dexamethasone; "it breaks your heart … it's a horrible medicine": the emotional impact of parenting a child on dexamethasone; and, "it's the worst week ever": finding ways to cope with the challenges of dexamethasone. Discussion A preparatory intervention for parents beginning the dexamethasone journey focused on likely challenges, managing boundary setting and discipline, and their own emotional struggles, could be beneficial. Research into the impact on siblings could further understand the systemic influence of dexamethasone and help develop further interventions.

Upadacitinib Induction and Maintenance Therapy for Crohn's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, is under investigation for the treatment of Crohn's disease. METHODS: In two phase 3 induction trials (U-EXCEL and U-EXCEED), we randomly assigned patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease to receive 45 mg of upadacitinib or placebo (2:1 ratio) once daily for 12 weeks. Patients who had a clinical response to upadacitinib induction therapy were randomly assigned in the U-ENDURE maintenance trial to receive 15 mg of upadacitinib, 30 mg of upadacitinib, or placebo (1:1:1 ratio) once daily for 52 weeks. The primary end points for induction (week 12) and maintenance (week 52) were clinical remission (defined as a Crohn's Disease Activity Index score of <150 [range, 0 to 600, with higher scores indicating more severe disease activity]) and endoscopic response (defined as a decrease in the Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's Disease [SES-CD; range, 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating more severe disease] of >50% from baseline of the induction trial [or for patients with an SES-CD of 4 at baseline, a decrease of ≥2 points from baseline]). RESULTS: A total of 526 patients underwent randomization in U-EXCEL, 495 in U-EXCEED, and 502 in U-ENDURE. A significantly higher percentage of patients who received 45-mg upadacitinib than those who received placebo had clinical remission (in U-EXCEL, 49.5% vs. 29.1%; in U-EXCEED, 38.9% vs. 21.1%) and an endoscopic response (in U-EXCEL, 45.5% vs. 13.1%; in U-EXCEED, 34.6% vs. 3.5%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). At week 52 in U-ENDURE, a higher percentage of patients had clinical remission with 15-mg upadacitinib (37.3%) or 30-mg upadacitinib (47.6%) than with placebo (15.1%), and a higher percentage had an endoscopic response with 15-mg upadacitinib (27.6%) or 30-mg upadacitinib (40.1%) than with placebo (7.3%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Herpes zoster infections occurred more frequently in the 45-mg and 30-mg upadacitinib groups than in the respective placebo groups, and hepatic disorders and neutropenia were more frequent in the 30-mg upadacitinib group than in the other maintenance groups. Gastrointestinal perforations developed in 4 patients who received 45-mg upadacitinib and in 1 patient each who received 30-mg or 15-mg upadacitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib induction and maintenance treatment was superior to placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease. (Funded by AbbVie; U-EXCEL, U-EXCEED, and U-ENDURE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03345849, NCT03345836, and NCT03345823.).

Olaparib plus bevacizumab first-line maintenance in ovarian cancer: final overall survival results from the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 primary analysis, maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab demonstrated a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer patients in clinical response after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, irrespective of surgical status. Prespecified, exploratory analyses by molecular biomarker status showed substantial benefit in patients with a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) or homologous recombination deficiency (HRD; BRCAm and/or genomic instability). We report the prespecified final overall survival (OS) analysis, including analyses by HRD status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to olaparib (300 mg twice daily; up to 24 months) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks; 15 months total) or placebo plus bevacizumab. Analysis of OS, a key secondary endpoint in hierarchical testing, was planned for ∼60% maturity or 3 years after the primary analysis. RESULTS: After median follow-up of 61.7 and 61.9 months in the olaparib and placebo arms, respectively, median OS was 56.5 versus 51.6 months in the intention-to-treat population [hazard ratio (HR) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.12; P = 0.4118]. Subsequent poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor therapy was received by 105 (19.6%) olaparib patients versus 123 (45.7%) placebo patients. In the HRD-positive population, OS was longer with olaparib plus bevacizumab (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.85; 5-year OS rate, 65.5% versus 48.4%); at 5 years, updated PFS also showed a higher proportion of olaparib plus bevacizumab patients without relapse (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.32-0.54; 5-year PFS rate, 46.1% versus 19.2%). Myelodysplastic syndrome, acute myeloid leukemia, aplastic anemia, and new primary malignancy incidence remained low and balanced between arms. CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib plus bevacizumab provided clinically meaningful OS improvement for first-line patients with HRD-positive ovarian cancer. These prespecified exploratory analyses demonstrated improvement despite a high proportion of patients in the placebo arm receiving poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors after progression, confirming the combination as one of the standards of care in this setting with the potential to enhance cure.