Explore the vast range of titles available.

Combined BRAF-MEK inhibitor therapy is the standard of care for BRAFV600-mutant advanced melanoma. We investigated encorafenib, a BRAF inhibitor with unique target-binding properties, alone or in combination with the MEK inhibitor binimetinib, versus vemurafenib in patients with advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. COLUMBUS was conducted as a two-part, randomised, open-label phase 3 study at 162 hospitals in 28 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed locally advanced (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV), unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, or unknown primary melanoma; a BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutation; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; and were treatment naive or had progressed on or after previous first-line immunotherapy. In part 1 of the study, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive either oral encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus oral binimetinib 45 mg twice daily (encorafenib plus binimetinib group), oral encorafenib 300 mg once daily (encorafenib group), or oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily (vemurafenib group). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review for encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib. Efficacy analyses were by intention-to-treat. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug and one postbaseline safety assessment. The results of part 2 will be published separately. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01909453, and EudraCT, number 2013-001176-38. Between Dec 30, 2013, and April 10, 2015, 577 of 1345 screened patients were randomly assigned to either the encorafenib plus binimetinib group (n=192), the encorafenib group (n=194), or the vemurafenib group (n=191). With a median follow-up of 16·6 months (95% CI 14·8–16·9), median progression-free survival was 14·9 months (95% CI 11·0–18·5) in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group and 7·3 months (5·6–8·2) in the vemurafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54, 95% CI 0·41–0·71; two-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (18 [9%] of 192 patients), increased creatine phosphokinase (13 [7%]), and hypertension (11 [6%]); in the encorafenib group they were palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (26 [14%] of 192 patients), myalgia (19 [10%]), and arthralgia (18 [9%]); and in the vemurafenib group it was arthralgia (11 [6%] of 186 patients). There were no treatment-related deaths except for one death in the combination group, which was considered possibly related to treatment by the investigator. Encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib monotherapy showed favourable efficacy compared with vemurafenib. Overall, encorafenib plus binimetinib appears to have an improved tolerability profile compared with encorafenib or vemurafenib. Encorafenib plus binimetinib could represent a new treatment option for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma. Array BioPharma, Novartis.

Encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib alone improved progression-free survival compared with vemurafenib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma in the COLUMBUS trial. Here, we report the results of the secondary endpoint of overall survival. COLUMBUS was a two-part, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done at 162 hospitals in 28 countries. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, or unknown primary melanoma, BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutation, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and were treatment naive or had progressed on or after first-line immunotherapy. In part 1 of the study, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by use of interactive response technology to receive oral encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus oral binimetinib 45 mg twice daily (encorafenib plus binimetinib group), oral encorafenib 300 mg once daily (encorafenib group), or oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily (vemurafenib group). Randomisation was stratified by the American Joint Committee on Cancer stage, ECOG performance status, and BRAF mutation status. The primary outcome of the trial, progression-free survival with encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib, was reported previously. Here we present the prespecified interim overall survival analysis. Efficacy analyses were by intent to treat. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Part 2 of the study was initiated at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration to better understand the contribution of binimetinib to the combination therapy by comparing encorafenib 300 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily with encorafenib 300 mg once daily alone. Results of part 2 will be published separately. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01909453, and EudraCT, number 2013-001176-38. Between Dec 30, 2013, and April 10, 2015, 577 of 1345 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive encorafenib plus binimetinib (n=192), encorafenib (n=194), or vemurafenib (n=191). Median follow-up for overall survival was 36·8 months (95% CI 35·9–37·5). Median overall survival was 33·6 months (95% CI 24·4–39·2) with encorafenib plus binimetinib and 16·9 months (14·0–24·5) with vemurafenib (hazard ratio 0·61 [95% CI 0·47–0·79]; two-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events did not change substantially from the first report; those seen in more than 5% of patients treated with encorafenib plus binimetinib were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (18 [9%] of 192 patients), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (14 [7%]), and hypertension (12 [6%]); those seen with encorafenib alone were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (26 [14%] of 192 patients), myalgia (19 [10%]), and arthralgia (18 [9%]); and with vemurafenib the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was arthralgia (11 [6%] of 186 patients). One death in the combination treatment group was considered by the investigator to be possibly related to treatment. The combination of encorafenib plus binimetinib provided clinically meaningful efficacy with good tolerability as shown by improvements in both progression-free survival and overall survival compared with vemurafenib. These data suggest that the combination of encorafenib plus binimetinib is likely to become an important therapeutic option in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. Array BioPharma, Novartis.

Summary Purpose The therapeutic index of proteasome inhibitors may be improved through selective inhibition of a sub-component of the ubiquitin-proteasome system, such as the NEDD8-conjugation pathway. This multicenter, phase I, dose-escalation study assessed safety and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of pevonedistat, an investigational NEDD8-activating enzyme (NAE) inhibitor, in patients with metastatic melanoma. Methods Patients received intravenous pevonedistat on Days 1, 4, 8, 11 (schedule A) or 1, 8, 15 (schedule B) of 21-day cycles. Results 26 patients received pevonedistat 50–278 mg/m 2 on schedule A; 11 patients received pevonedistat 157 mg/m 2 on schedule B. The schedule A MTD was 209 mg/m 2 : dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) included grade 3 hypophosphatemia and grade 3 increased blood creatinine (associated with grade 3 hyperbilirubinemia). Two schedule A patients experienced acute organ failure toxicities, one of whom experienced grade 5 acute renal failure. Dose escalation did not occur in schedule B: DLTs included grade 3 myocarditis, grade 2 acute renal failure, and grade 2 hyperbilirubinemia in a single patient. Pevonedistat pharmacokinetics were approximately dose-proportional across the dose range studied, with a biphasic disposition profile characterized by a short elimination half-life (~10 h). Pharmacodynamic studies showed increases in NAE-regulated transcripts post-treatment; all post-dose biopsy samples were positive for pevonedistat-NEDD8 adduct. One schedule A patient achieved a partial response; 15 patients had stable disease (4 lasting ≥6.5 months). Conclusions Pevonedistat was generally well tolerated at the MTD. Anticipated pharmacodynamic effects of NAE inhibition were observed with single-agent pevonedistat in peripheral blood and tumor tissue.

This article outlines general strategies for the management and evaluation of pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) resulting from perturbation of clearance of investigational anticancer drug candidates by concomitantly administered agents in a drug development setting, with a focus on drug candidates that cannot be evaluated in first-in-human studies in healthy subjects. A risk level classification is proposed, based on quantitative integration of knowledge derived from preclinical drug-metabolism studies evaluating the projected percentage contribution [f i (%)] of individual molecular determinants (e.g. cytochrome P450 isoenzymes) to the overall human clearance of the investigational agent. The following classification is proposed with respect to susceptibility to DDIs with metabolic inhibitors: a projected maximum DDI expected to result in a ≤1.33-fold increase in exposure, representing a low level of risk; a projected maximum DDI expected to result in a >1.33-fold but <2-fold increase in exposure, representing a moderate level of risk; and a projected maximum DDI expected to result in a ≥2-fold increase in exposure, representing a potentially high level of risk. For DDIs with metabolic inducers, the following operational classification is proposed, based on the sum of the percentage contributions of enzymes that are inducible via a common mechanism to the overall clearance of the investigational drug: ≪25%, representing a low level of risk; <50%, representing a moderate level of risk; and ≥50%, representing a potentially high level of risk. To ensure patient safety and to minimize bias in determination of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), it is recommended that strong and moderate inhibitors and inducers of the major contributing enzyme are excluded in phase I dose-escalation studies of high-risk compounds, whereas exclusion of strong inhibitors and inducers of the contributing enzyme (s) is recommended as being sufficient for moderate-risk compounds. For drugs that will be investigated in diseases such as glioblastoma, where there may be relatively frequent use of enzyme-inducing antiepileptic agents (EIAEDs), a separate dose-escalation study in this subpopulation is recommended to define the RP2D. For compounds in the high-risk category, if genetic deficiencies in the activity of the major drug-metabolizing enzyme are known, it is recommended that poor metabolizers be studied separately to define the RP2D for this subpopulation. Whereas concomitant medication exclusion criteria that are utilized in the phase I dose-escalation studies will probably also need to be maintained for high-risk compounds in phase II studies unless the results of a clinical DDI study indicate the absence of a clinically relevant interaction, these exclusion criteria can potentially be relaxed beyond phase I for moderate-risk compounds, if supported by the nature of clinical toxicities and the understanding of the therapeutic index in phase I. Adequately designed clinical DDI studies will not only inform potential relaxation of concomitant medication exclusion criteria in later-phase studies but, importantly, will also inform the development of pharmacokinetically derived dose-modification guidelines for use in clinical practice when coupled with adequate safety monitoring, as illustrated in the prescribing guidance for many recently approved oncology therapeutics.

Adaptive designs can improve the efficiency of drug development, but further research is needed before some are more widely implemented. One such design is a treatment-selection design, which begins with k treatment arms, but only a subset is carried forward after an interim analysis. The final analysis of the selected arm(s) is then performed using the data from both stages of the study. One issue with this design is ensuring the Type I error rate is controlled, but there have been a number of proposals that largely address this. A second drawback that has not yet been fully addressed is that the maximum likelihood estimate of the selected arm at the final analysis is often biased upward due to the selection method. Unbiased estimators already exist for this design, but methods with an acceptable balance between bias and mean squared error (MSE) are lacking. In this dissertation, two estimation approaches are proposed. The first is a parametric bootstrap resampling method in which the level of bias adjustment applied is driven by a comparison of the observed results to those expected when all arms have equal true means. The second approach is an empirical Bayes estimator that implements a novel limited translation function. These methods are compared to previously proposed approaches with respect to bias and MSE for studies that have either a normal or binomial endpoint. Both proposed methods are shown to exhibit reduced bias with reasonable MSE in some simulated scenarios, but the resampling method consistently shows similar, or improved, performance compared to previous approaches across the examined scenarios. The utility of this resampling method is further demonstrated by showing that it can be implemented when the arm with the second largest mean is selected for stage 2. It is also shown that the resampling method can be extended to when more than one arm is selected in stage 1, when there is a futility analysis, or when the study has a time-to-event endpoint. Recommendations on confidence intervals are also provided. The results demonstrate that the parametric bootstrap resampling method is a viable estimation approach for treatment-selection designs.

In the past five years [Langley] has spent close to one million dollars on animal control. That's the cost to build our own municipal animal shelter. Instead, to date, Council chooses not to decide this issue.

Prominent theories of consciousness emphasise different aspects of neurobiology, such as the integration and diversity of information processing within the brain. Here, we combine graph theory and dynamic functional connectivity to compare resting-state functional MRI data from awake volunteers, propofol-anaesthetised volunteers, and patients with disorders of consciousness, in order to identify consciousness-specific patterns of brain function. We demonstrate that cortical networks are especially affected by loss of consciousness during temporal states of high integration, exhibiting reduced functional diversity and compromised informational capacity, whereas thalamo-cortical functional disconnections emerge during states of higher segregation. Spatially, posterior regions of the brain’s default mode network exhibit reductions in both functional diversity and integration with the rest of the brain during unconsciousness. These results show that human consciousness relies on spatio-temporal interactions between brain integration and functional diversity, whose breakdown may represent a generalisable biomarker of loss of consciousness, with potential relevance for clinical practice. How do diversity (entropy) and integration of activity across brain regions interact to support consciousness? Here the authors show that anaesthetised individuals and patients with disorders of consciousness exhibit overlapping reductions in both diversity and integration in the brain’s default mode network.

•Relationship between emergent dynamics, functional hierarchy, and controllability.•DOC patients exhibit less hierarchical and emergent neural dynamics.•DOC patients’ structural connectomes exhibit compromised modal controllability.•Whole-brain model based on patient connectomes recapitulates functional alterations. High-level brain functions are widely believed to emerge from the orchestrated activity of multiple neural systems. However, lacking a formal definition and practical quantification of emergence for experimental data, neuroscientists have been unable to empirically test this long-standing conjecture. Here we investigate this fundamental question by leveraging a recently proposed framework known as “Integrated Information Decomposition,” which establishes a principled information-theoretic approach to operationalise and quantify emergence in dynamical systems — including the human brain. By analysing functional MRI data, our results show that the emergent and hierarchical character of neural dynamics is significantly diminished in chronically unresponsive patients suffering from severe brain injury. At a functional level, we demonstrate that emergence capacity is positively correlated with the extent of hierarchical organisation in brain activity. Furthermore, by combining computational approaches from network control theory and whole-brain biophysical modelling, we show that the reduced capacity for emergent and hierarchical dynamics in severely brain-injured patients can be mechanistically explained by disruptions in the patients’ structural connectome. Overall, our results suggest that chronic unresponsiveness resulting from severe brain injury may be related to structural impairment of the fundamental neural infrastructures required for brain dynamics to support emergence.

A central question in neuroscience is how consciousness arises from the dynamic interplay of brain structure and function. Here we decompose functional MRI signals from pathological and pharmacologically-induced perturbations of consciousness into distributed patterns of structure-function dependence across scales: the harmonic modes of the human structural connectome. We show that structure-function coupling is a generalisable indicator of consciousness that is under bi-directional neuromodulatory control. We find increased structure-function coupling across scales during loss of consciousness, whether due to anaesthesia or brain injury, capable of discriminating between behaviourally indistinguishable sub-categories of brain-injured patients, tracking the presence of covert consciousness. The opposite harmonic signature characterises the altered state induced by LSD or ketamine, reflecting psychedelic-induced decoupling of brain function from structure and correlating with physiological and subjective scores. Overall, connectome harmonic decomposition reveals how neuromodulation and the network architecture of the human connectome jointly shape consciousness and distributed functional activation across scales. Connectome harmonic decomposition analysis reveals how neuromodulation and the network architecture of the human connectome jointly shape consciousness and distributed functional activation across scales.

Clinical research into consciousness has long focused on cortical macroscopic networks and their disruption in pathological or pharmacological consciousness perturbation. Despite demonstrating diagnostic utility in disorders of consciousness (DoC) and monitoring anesthetic depth, these cortico-centric approaches have been unable to characterize which neurochemical systems may underpin consciousness alterations. Instead, preclinical experiments have long implicated the dopaminergic ventral tegmental area (VTA) in the brainstem. Despite dopaminergic agonist efficacy in DoC patients equally pointing to dopamine, the VTA has not been studied in human perturbed consciousness. To bridge this translational gap between preclinical subcortical and clinical cortico-centric perspectives, we assessed functional connectivity changes of a histologically characterized VTA using functional MRI recordings of pharmacologically (propofol sedation) and pathologically perturbed consciousness (DoC patients). Both cohorts demonstrated VTA disconnection from the precuneus and posterior cingulate (PCu/PCC), a main default mode network node widely implicated in consciousness. Strikingly, the stronger VTA–PCu/PCC connectivity was, the more the PCu/PCC functional connectome resembled its awake configuration, suggesting a possible neuromodulatory relationship. VTA-PCu/PCC connectivity increased toward healthy control levels only in DoC patients who behaviorally improved at follow-up assessment. To test whether VTA–PCu/PCC connectivity can be affected by a dopaminergic agonist, we demonstrated in a separate set of traumatic brain injury patients without DoC that methylphenidate significantly increased this connectivity. Together, our results characterize an in vivo dopaminergic connectivity deficit common to reversible and chronic consciousness perturbation. This noninvasive assessment of the dopaminergic system bridges preclinical and clinical work, associating dopaminergic VTA function with macroscopic network alterations, thereby elucidating a critical aspect of brainstem–cortical interplay for consciousness.