Explore the vast range of titles available.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer allows individual tumor response to be assessed depending on molecular subtype, and to judge the impact of response to therapy on recurrence-free survival (RFS). The multicenter I-SPY 1 TRIAL evaluated patients with ≥3 cm tumors by using early imaging and molecular signatures, with outcomes of pathologic complete response (pCR) and RFS. The current analysis was performed using data from patients who had molecular profiles and did not receive trastuzumab. The various molecular classifiers tested were highly correlated. Categorization of breast cancer by molecular signatures enhanced the ability of pCR to predict improvement in RFS compared to the population as a whole. In multivariate analysis, the molecular signatures that added to the ability of HR and HER2 receptors, clinical stage, and pCR in predicting RFS included 70-gene signature, wound healing signature, p53 mutation signature, and PAM50 risk of recurrence. The low risk signatures were associated with significantly better prognosis, and also identified additional patients with a good prognosis within the no pCR group, primarily in the hormone receptor positive, HER-2 negative subgroup. The I-SPY 1 population is enriched for tumors with a poor prognosis but is still heterogeneous in terms of rates of pCR and RFS. The ability of pCR to predict RFS is better by subset than it is for the whole group. Molecular markers improve prediction of RFS by identifying additional patients with excellent prognosis within the no pCR group.

Interval cancers (ICs), defined as cancers detected between regular screening mammograms, have been shown to be of higher grade, larger size, and associated with lower survival, compared with screen-detected cancers (SDCs) and comprise 17% of cancers from population-based screening programs. We sought to determine the frequency of ICs in a study of locally advanced breast cancers, the I-SPY 1 TRIAL. Screening was defined as having a mammogram with 2 years, and the proportion of ICs at 1 and 2 years was calculated for screened patients. Differences in clinical characteristics for ICs versus SDCs and screened versus non-screened cancers were assessed. For the 219 evaluable women, mean tumor size was 6.8 cm. Overall, 80% of women were over 40 and eligible for screening; however, only 31% were getting screened. Among women screened, 85% were ICs, with 68% diagnosed within 1 year of a previously normal mammogram. ICs were of higher grade (49% vs. 10%) than SDCs. Among non-screened women, 28% (43/152) were younger than the recommended screening age of 40. Of the entire cohort, 12% of cancers were mammographically occult (MO); the frequency of MO cancers did not differ between screened (11%) and non-screened (15%). ICs were common in the I-SPY 1 TRIAL suggesting the potential need for new approaches beyond traditional screening to reduce mortality in women who present with larger palpable cancers.

Researchers, clinicians, policymakers and patients are increasingly interested in questions about therapeutic interventions that are difficult or costly to answer with traditional, free-standing, parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Examples include scenarios in which there is a desire to compare multiple interventions, to generate separate effect estimates across subgroups of patients with distinct but related conditions or clinical features, or to minimize downtime between trials. In response, researchers have proposed new RCT designs such as adaptive platform trials (APTs), which are able to study multiple interventions in a disease or condition in a perpetual manner, with interventions entering and leaving the platform on the basis of a predefined decision algorithm. APTs offer innovations that could reshape clinical trials, and several APTs are now funded in various disease areas. With the aim of facilitating the use of APTs, here we review common features and issues that arise with such trials, and offer recommendations to promote best practices in their design, conduct, oversight and reporting.

In this trial of simvastatin involving critically ill patients with Covid-19, which was stopped owing to reduced cases, simvastatin did not meet the prespecified criteria for superiority to control treatment.

HER2-targeted therapy dramatically improves outcomes in early breast cancer. Here we report the results of two HER2-targeted combinations in the neoadjuvant I-SPY2 phase 2 adaptive platform trial for early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence: ado-trastuzumab emtansine plus pertuzumab (T-DM1/P) and paclitaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (THP). Eligible women have >2.5 cm clinical stage II/III HER2 + breast cancer, adaptively randomized to T-DM1/P, THP, or a common control arm of paclitaxel/trastuzumab (TH), followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, then surgery. Both T-DM1/P and THP arms ‘graduate’ in all subtypes: predicted pCR rates are 63%, 72% and 33% for T-DM1/P (n = 52), THP (n = 45) and TH (n = 31) respectively. Toxicity burden is similar between arms. Degree of HER2 pathway signaling and phosphorylation in pretreatment biopsy specimens are associated with response to both T-DM1/P and THP and can further identify highly responsive HER2 + tumors to HER2-directed therapy. This may help identify patients who can safely de-escalate cytotoxic chemotherapy without compromising excellent outcome. HER2-targeted therapy improves patient’s outcome in early breast cancer. Here, the authors present the efficacy and biomarker analysis of two HER2-targeted combinations (ado-trastuzumab emtansine plus pertuzumab and paclitaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab) in the context of the neoadjuvant I-SPY2 phase 2 adaptive platform trial for early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence.

IntroductionTocilizumab improves outcomes in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Whether other immune-modulator strategies are equally effective or better is unknown.MethodsWe investigated treatment with tocilizumab, sarilumab, anakinra and no immune modulator in these patients. In this ongoing, adaptive platform trial in 133 sites in 9 countries, we randomly assigned patients with allocation ratios dependent on the number of interventions available at each site. The primary outcome was an ordinal scale combining in-hospital mortality (assigned –1) and days free of organ support to day 21 in survivors. The trial used a Bayesian statistical model with predefined triggers for superiority, inferiority, efficacy, equivalence or futility.ResultsOf 2274 critically ill participants enrolled between 25 March 2020 and 10 April 2021, 972 were assigned to tocilizumab, 485 to sarilumab, 378 to anakinra and 418 to control. Median organ support-free days were 7 (IQR –1, 16), 9 (IQR –1, 17), 0 (IQR –1, 15) and 0 (IQR –1, 15) for tocilizumab, sarilumab, anakinra and control, respectively. Median adjusted ORs were 1.46 (95% credible intervals (CrI) 1.13, 1.87), 1.50 (95% CrI 1.13, 2.00) and 0.99 (95% CrI 0.74, 1.35) for tocilizumab, sarilumab and anakinra relative to control, yielding 99.8%, 99.8% and 46.6% posterior probabilities of superiority, respectively, compared with control. All treatments appeared safe.ConclusionsIn critically ill patients with COVID-19, tocilizumab and sarilumab have equivalent effectiveness at reducing duration of organ support and death. Anakinra is not effective in this population.Trial registration numberNCT02735707.

Background The Randomized Embedded Multifactorial Adaptive Platform for COVID-19 (REMAP-COVID) trial is a global adaptive platform trial of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We describe implementation at the first US site, the UPMC health system, and offer recommendations for implementation at other sites. Methods To implement REMAP-COVID, we focused on six major areas: engaging leadership, trial embedment, remote consent and enrollment, regulatory compliance, modification of traditional trial management procedures, and alignment with other COVID-19 studies. Results We recommend aligning institutional and trial goals and sharing a vision of REMAP-COVID implementation as groundwork for learning health system development. Embedment of trial procedures into routine care processes, existing institutional structures, and the electronic health record promotes efficiency and integration of clinical care and clinical research. Remote consent and enrollment can be facilitated by engaging bedside providers and leveraging institutional videoconferencing tools. Coordination with the central institutional review board will expedite the approval process. Protocol adherence, adverse event monitoring, and data collection and export can be facilitated by building electronic health record processes, though implementation can start using traditional clinical trial tools. Lastly, establishment of a centralized institutional process optimizes coordination of COVID-19 studies. Conclusions Implementation of the REMAP-COVID trial within a large US healthcare system is feasible and facilitated by multidisciplinary collaboration. This investment establishes important groundwork for future learning health system endeavors. Trial registration NCT02735707 . Registered on 13 April 2016.

Veliparib combined with carboplatin (VC) was an experimental regimen evaluated in the biomarker-rich neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 trial for breast cancer. VC showed improved efficacy in the triple negative signature. However, not all triple negative patients achieved pathologic complete response and some HR+HER2− patients responded. Pre-specified analysis of five DNA repair deficiency biomarkers (BRCA1/2 germline mutation; PARPi-7, BRCA1 ness, and CIN70 expression signatures; and PARP1 protein) was performed on 116 HER2− patients (VC: 72 and concurrent controls: 44). We also evaluated the 70-gene ultra-high risk signature (MP1/2), one of the biomarkers used to define subtype in the trial. We used logistic modeling to assess biomarker performance. Successful biomarkers were combined using a simple voting scheme to refine the ‘predicted sensitive’ group and Bayesian modeling used to estimate the pathologic complete response rates. BRCA1/2 germline mutation status associated with VC response, but its low prevalence precluded further evaluation. PARPi-7, BRCA1 ness, and MP1/2 specifically associated with response in the VC arm but not the control arm. Neither CIN70 nor PARP1 protein specifically predicted VC response. When we combined the PARPi-7 and MP1/2 classifications, the 42% of triple negative patients who were PARPi7-high and MP2 had an estimated pCR rate of 75% in the VC arm. Only 11% of HR+/HER2− patients were PARPi7-high and MP2; but these patients were also more responsive to VC with estimated pathologic complete response rates of 41%. PARPi-7, BRCA1 ness and MP1/2 signatures may help refine predictions of VC response, thereby improving patient care. Biomarkers: Gene expression tests predict response to PARP inhibitor combined with carboplatin Several predictive gene signatures can help identify breast cancer patients likely to respond to veliparib, an investigational PARP inhibitor, combined with the chemotherapy agent carboplatin. A team led by Denise Wolf, Christina Yau, and Laura van ‘t Veer from the University of California, San Francisco, used data from the I-SPY 2 trial to assess the predictive value of six different biomarkers in determining which women with early stage and locally advanced, aggressive breast cancer would have no signs of disease after veliparib—carboplatin treatment. They found three biomarkers with predictive value: a 7-gene expression signature that predicts breast cancer cell line sensitivity to another PARP inhibitor called olaparib; a 77-gene expression signature that detects molecular features shared with BRCA1-mutant tumours; and a 70-gene signature of recurrence risk called MammaPrint.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.