A phase II, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial of pegfilgrastim for patients with alcohol-associated hepatitis.

Background: In trials conducted in India, recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor (GCSF) improved survival in alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH). The aim of this trial was to determine the safety and efficacy of pegfilgrastim, a long-acting recombinant GCSF, in patients with AH in the United States. Methods: This prospective, randomized, open label trial conducted between March 2017 and March 2020 randomized patients with a clinical diagnosis of AH and a Maddrey discriminant function score ≥32 to standard of care (SOC) or SOC+pegfilgrastim (0.6 mg subcutaneously) on Day 1 and Day 8 (clinicaltrials.gov NCT02776059). SOC was 28 days of either pentoxifylline or prednisolone, as determined by the patient's primary physician. The second injection of pegfilgrastim was not administered if the white blood cell count exceeded 30,000/mm3 on Day 8. Primary outcome was survival at Day 90. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), hepatic encephalopathy, or infections. Findings: The study was terminated early due to COVID19 pandemic. Eighteen patients were randomized to SOC and 16 to SOC+pegfilgrastim. All patients received prednisolone as SOC. Nine patients failed to receive a second dose of pegfilgrastin due to WBC > 30,000/mm3 on Day 8. Survival at 90 days was similar in both groups (SOC: 0.83 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.94] vs. pegfilgrastim: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.44-0.89]; p > 0.05; CI for difference: -0.18-0.38). The incidences of AKI, HRS, hepatic encephalopathy, and infections were similar in both treatment arms and there were no serious adverse events attributed to pegfilgrastim. Interpretation: This phase II trial found no survival benefit at 90 days among subjects with AH who received pegfilgrastim+prednisolone compared with subjects receiving prednisolone alone. Funding: was provided by the United States National Institutes of Health and National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism U01-AA021886 and U01-AA021884.

Impact of early kangaroo mother care versus standard care on survival of mild-moderately unstable neonates <2000 grams: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the effect of early kangaroo mother care on survival of mild-moderately unstable neonates <2000 g is a high-priority evidence gap for small and sick newborn care. METHODS: This non-blinded pragmatic randomised clinical trial was conducted at the only teaching hospital in The Gambia. Eligibility criteria included weight <2000g and age 1-24 h with exclusion if stable or severely unstable. Neonates were randomly assigned to receive either standard care, including KMC once stable at >24 h after admission (control) versus KMC initiated <24 h after admission (intervention). Randomisation was stratified by weight with twins in the same arm. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 28 postnatal days, assessed by intention to treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included: time to death; hypothermia and stability at 24 h; breastfeeding at discharge; infections; weight gain at 28d and admission duration. The trial was prospectively registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03555981). FINDINGS: Recruitment occurred from 23rd May 2018 to 19th March 2020. Among 1,107 neonates screened for participation 279 were randomly assigned, 139 (42% male [n = 59]) to standard care and 138 (43% male [n = 59]) to the intervention with two participants lost to follow up and no withdrawals. The proportion dying within 28d was 24% (34/139, control) vs. 21% (29/138, intervention) (risk ratio 0·84, 95% CI 0·55 - 1·29, p = 0·423). There were no between-arm differences for secondary outcomes or serious adverse events (28/139 (20%) for control and 30/139 (22%) for intervention, none related). One-third of intervention neonates reverted to standard care for clinical reasons. INTERPRETATION: The trial had low power due to halving of baseline neonatal mortality, highlighting the importance of implementing existing small and sick newborn care interventions. Further mortality effect and safety data are needed from varying low and middle-income neonatal unit contexts before changing global guidelines.

Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide for Advanced Prostate Cancer: The PRONOUNCE Trial Study Design.

OBJECTIVES: This study will compare the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) among men with advanced prostate cancer who are being treated with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist versus a GnRH agonist. BACKGROUND: Treatment of advanced prostate cancer with ADT might increase the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events among men with known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), but a recent meta-analysis suggested that this risk might be lower with ADT using a GnRH antagonist versus a GnRH agonist. METHODS: PRONOUNCE is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint trial that will enroll approximately 900 patients with advanced prostate cancer and pre-existing ASCVD who will be treated with ADT. Participants will be randomized to receive the GnRH antagonist degarelix or the GnRH agonist leuprolide as ADT for 12 months. The primary endpoint is time from randomization to first confirmed, adjudicated occurrence of a MACE, which is defined as a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke through 12 months of ADT treatment. Baseline cardiovascular biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, high-sensitivity troponin T, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide), as well as serial inflammatory and immune biomarkers, will be evaluated in exploratory analyses. RESULTS: As of October 1, 2019, a total of 364 patients have been enrolled. The mean age is 74 years, 90% are white, 80% have hypertension or dyslipidemia, 30% diabetes mellitus, 40% have had a previous myocardial infarction, and 65% have had previous revascularization. Regarding prostate cancer features at randomization, 48% of the patients had localized disease, 23% had locally advanced disease, and 18% had metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: PRONOUNCE is the first prospective cardiovascular outcomes trial in advanced prostate cancer that will delineate whether the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events associated with ADT is lower with a GnRH antagonist versus a GnRH agonist for men with pre-existing ASCVD. (A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease [PRONOUNCE]; NCT02663908).

Determining a Bayesian predictive power stopping rule for futility in a non-inferiority trial with binary outcomes.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Non-inferiority trials investigate whether a novel intervention, which typically has other benefits (i.e., cheaper or safer), has similar clinical effectiveness to currently available treatments. In situations where interim evidence in a non-inferiority trial suggests that the novel treatment is truly inferior, ethical concerns with continuing randomisation to the "inferior" intervention are raised. Thus, if interim data indicate that concluding non-inferiority at the end of the trial is unlikely, stopping for futility should be considered. To date, limited examples are available to guide the development of stopping rules for non-inferiority trials. METHODS: We used a Bayesian predictive power approach to develop a stopping rule for futility for a trial collecting binary outcomes. We evaluated the frequentist operating characteristics of the stopping rule to ensure control of the Type I and Type II error. Our case study is the Intranasal Ketamine for Procedural Sedation trial (INK trial), a non-inferiority trial designed to assess the sedative properties of ketamine administered using two alternative routes. RESULTS: We considered implementing our stopping rule after the INK trial enrols 140 patients out of 560. The trial would be stopped if 12 more patients experience a failure on the novel treatment compared to standard care. This trial has a type I error rate of 2.2% and a power of 80%. CONCLUSIONS: Stopping for futility in non-inferiority trials reduces exposure to ineffective treatments and preserves resources for alternative research questions. Futility stopping rules based on Bayesian predictive power are easy to implement and align with trial aims. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02828566 July 11, 2016.

Raloxifene augmentation in men and women with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder: A study protocol.

Although acute psychotic symptoms are often reduced by antipsychotic treatment, many patients with schizophrenia are impaired in daily functioning due to the persistence of negative and cognitive symptoms. Raloxifene, a Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulator (SERM) has been shown to be an effective adjunctive treatment in schizophrenia. Yet, there is a paucity in evidence for raloxifene efficacy in men and premenopausal women. We report the design of a study that aims to replicate earlier findings concerning the efficacy of raloxifene augmentation in reducing persisting symptoms and cognitive impairment in postmenopausal women, and to extend these findings to a male and peri/premenopausal population of patients with schizophrenia. The study is a multisite, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised clinical trial in approximately 110 adult men and women with schizophrenia. Participants are randomised 1:1 to adjunctive raloxifene 120 mg or placebo daily during 12 weeks. The treatment phase includes measurements at three time points (week 0, 6 and 12), followed by a follow-up period of two years. The primary outcome measure is change in symptom severity, as measured with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and cognition, as measured with the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS). Secondary outcome measures include social functioning and quality of life. Genetic, hormonal and inflammatory biomarkers are measured to assess potential associations with treatment effects. If it becomes apparent that raloxifene reduces psychotic symptoms and/or improves cognition, social functioning and/or quality of life as compared to placebo, implementation of raloxifene in clinical psychiatric practice can be considered.

Sharing some interim data in trial monitoring can mislead or unmask trial investigators: A scenario-based survey of trial experts.

BACKGROUND: Sharing masked interim results by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) with non-DSMB members is an important issue that can affect trial integrity. Our survey's objective is to collect evidence to understand how seemingly masked interim results or result extrapolations are interpreted and discuss whether these results should be shared at interim. METHODS: Conducted a 6 scenario-question survey asking trial experts how they interpreted three kinds of seemingly masked interim results or result extrapolation measures (interim combined event rate, adaptive conditional power and "unconditional" conditional power). RESULTS: Thirty-one current Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials group affiliates were invited for survey participation (February 2015). Response rate: 71.0% (22/31). About half, 52.6% (95% CI: 28.9%-74.0%), (10/19), correctly indicated that the interim combined event rate can be interpreted in three ways (drug X doing better than placebo, worse than placebo or the same) if shared at interim. The majority, 72.2% (95% CI: 46.5%-89.7%), (13/18), correctly indicated that the adaptive conditional power suggests relative treatment group effects. The majority, 53.3% (95% CI: 26.6%-77.0%), (8/15), incorrectly indicated that the "unconditional" conditional power suggests relative treatment group effects. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Knowledge of these three results or result extrapolation measures should not be shared outside of the DSMB at interim as they may mislead or unmask interim results, potentially introducing trial bias. For example, the interim combined event rate can be interpreted in one of three ways potentially leading to mistaken guesswork about interim results. Knowledge of the adaptive conditional power by non-DSMB members is telling of relative treatment effects thus unmasking of interim results.

Comparison of efficacy and tolerance between combination therapy and monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The combination of a fluoropyrimidine [5-fluorouracil (5-FU), capecitabine, or S-1] with a platinum analog (cisplatin or oxaliplatin) is the most widely accepted first-line chemotherapy regimen for metastatic or recurrent advanced gastric cancer (AGC), based on the results of clinical trials. However, there is little evidence to guide chemotherapy for elderly patients with AGC because of under-representation of this age group in clinical trials. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the optimal chemotherapy regimen for elderly patients with AGC by comparing the efficacies and safeties of combination therapy versus monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: This study is a randomized, controlled, multicenter, phase III trial. A total of 246 elderly patients (≥70 years old) with metastatic or recurrent AGC who have not received previous palliative chemotherapy will be randomly allocated to a combination therapy group or a monotherapy group. Patients randomized to the combination therapy group will receive fluoropyrimidine plus platinum combination chemotherapy (capecitabine/cisplatin, S-1/cisplatin, capecitabine/oxaliplatin, or 5-FU/oxaliplatin), and those randomized to the monotherapy group will receive fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (capecitabine, S-1, or 5-FU). The primary outcome is the overall survival of patients in each treatment group. The secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, response rate, quality of life, and safety. DISCUSSION: We are conducting this pragmatic trial to determine whether elderly patients with AGC will obtain the same benefit from chemotherapy as younger patients. We expect that this study will help guide decision-making for the optimal treatment of elderly patients with AGC.