Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Most statistical design and analysis methods for clinical trials have been developed and evaluated where at least several hundreds of patients could be recruited. These methods may not be suitable to evaluate therapies if the sample size is unavoidably small, which is usually termed by small populations. The specific sample size cut off, where the standard methods fail, needs to be investigated. In this paper, the authors present their view on new developments for design and analysis of clinical trials in small population groups, where conventional statistical methods may be inappropriate, e.g., because of lack of power or poor adherence to asymptotic approximations due to sample size restrictions. Method Following the EMA/CHMP guideline on clinical trials in small populations, we consider directions for new developments in the area of statistical methodology for design and analysis of small population clinical trials. We relate the findings to the research activities of three projects, Asterix, IDeAl, and InSPiRe, which have received funding since 2013 within the FP7-HEALTH-2013-INNOVATION-1 framework of the EU. As not all aspects of the wide research area of small population clinical trials can be addressed, we focus on areas where we feel advances are needed and feasible. Results The general framework of the EMA/CHMP guideline on small population clinical trials stimulates a number of research areas. These serve as the basis for the three projects, Asterix, IDeAl, and InSPiRe, which use various approaches to develop new statistical methodology for design and analysis of small population clinical trials. Small population clinical trials refer to trials with a limited number of patients. Small populations may result form rare diseases or specific subtypes of more common diseases. New statistical methodology needs to be tailored to these specific situations. Conclusion The main results from the three projects will constitute a useful toolbox for improved design and analysis of small population clinical trials. They address various challenges presented by the EMA/CHMP guideline as well as recent discussions about extrapolation. There is a need for involvement of the patients’ perspective in the planning and conduct of small population clinical trials for a successful therapy evaluation.

Background Palmoplantar pustulosis is a rare but painful and debilitating disease. It consistently ranks the highest of all psoriasis phenotypic variants in terms of symptoms and functional impairment. Management of plaque-type psoriasis has been revolutionised in the last 10 years with the advent of biologic therapies, but treatment options for pustular psoriasis remain profoundly limited. On the basis of mechanistic findings which suggest a key pathogenic role for interleukin (IL)-1 in pustular psoriasis, we hypothesise that anakinra (IL-1 blockade) will be an efficacious treatment for pustular psoriasis. Methods/design We will conduct a two-stage, adaptive, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial to test the hypothesis that anakinra, self-administered daily by subcutaneous injection over 8 weeks, will deliver therapeutic benefit in palmoplantar pustular psoriasis, a localised form of pustular psoriasis typically involving the palms and/or soles. Safety outcomes will be collected for 20 weeks. A total of 64 participants will be randomised to anakinra or placebo in a 1:1 ratio. At the end of stage 1, a decision to progress to stage 2 will be made. This decision will take place after 24 participants have been randomised and followed for 8 weeks and will be based on the ordering of the observed mean outcome values in both treatment arms. At the end of stage 1, the reliability of outcome measurements and method to collect the data will also be assessed, and the primary outcome will be confirmed for stage 2. Discussion We have undertaken an adaptive approach in which we will gain proof-of-concept data prior to completing a powered efficacy trial because pustular psoriasis is a rare disease, no validated outcome measures to detect change exist, and limited safety data for anakinra exist in this population. To our knowledge, this will be the first randomised controlled trial that will provide valuable evidence for the efficacy and safety of IL-1 blockade for treatment in pustular psoriasis. Trial registration ISRCTN13127147 . Registered on 1st August 2016. EudraCT, 2015-003600-23 . Registered on 1st April 2016.

Background IDeAl (Integrated designs and analysis of small population clinical trials) is an EU funded project developing new statistical design and analysis methodologies for clinical trials in small population groups. Here we provide an overview of IDeAl findings and give recommendations to applied researchers. Method The description of the findings is broken down by the nine scientific IDeAl work packages and summarizes results from the project’s more than 60 publications to date in peer reviewed journals. In addition, we applied text mining to evaluate the publications and the IDeAl work packages’ output in relation to the design and analysis terms derived from in the IRDiRC task force report on small population clinical trials. Results The results are summarized, describing the developments from an applied viewpoint. The main result presented here are 33 practical recommendations drawn from the work, giving researchers a comprehensive guidance to the improved methodology. In particular, the findings will help design and analyse efficient clinical trials in rare diseases with limited number of patients available. We developed a network representation relating the hot topics developed by the IRDiRC task force on small population clinical trials to IDeAl’s work as well as relating important methodologies by IDeAl’s definition necessary to consider in design and analysis of small-population clinical trials. These network representation establish a new perspective on design and analysis of small-population clinical trials. Conclusion IDeAl has provided a huge number of options to refine the statistical methodology for small-population clinical trials from various perspectives. A total of 33 recommendations developed and related to the work packages help the researcher to design small population clinical trial. The route to improvements is displayed in IDeAl-network representing important statistical methodological skills necessary to design and analysis of small-population clinical trials. The methods are ready for use.

The addition of atezolizumab (anti–PD-L1 antibody) to a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen improved progression-free survival among patients who had not previously received chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression and EGFR or ALK genomic alteration status.

Dual blockade of the EGFR and VEGF pathways in EGFR-mutated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is supported by preclinical and clinical data, yet the approach is not widely implemented. RELAY assessed erlotinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) standard of care, plus ramucirumab, a human IgG1 VEGFR2 antagonist, or placebo in patients with untreated EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC. This is a worldwide, double-blind, phase 3 trial done in 100 hospitals, clinics, and medical centres in 13 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older (20 years or older in Japan and Taiwan) at the time of study entry, had stage IV NSCLC, with an EGFR exon 19 deletion (ex19del) or exon 21 substitution (Leu858Arg) mutation, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and no CNS metastases. We randomly assigned eligible patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral erlotinib (150 mg/day) plus either intravenous ramucirumab (10 mg/kg) or matching placebo once every 2 weeks. Randomisation was done by an interactive web response system with a computer-generated sequence and stratified by sex, geographical region, EGFR mutation type, and EGFR testing method. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02411448, and is ongoing for long-term survival follow-up. Between Jan 28, 2016, and Feb 1, 2018, 449 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment with ramucirumab plus erlotinib (n=224) or placebo plus erlotinib (n=225). Median duration of follow-up was 20·7 months (IQR 15·8–27·2). At the time of primary analysis, progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ramucirumab plus erlotinib group (19·4 months [95% CI 15·4–21·6]) than in the placebo plus erlotinib group (12·4 months [11·0–13·5]), with a stratified hazard ratio of 0·59 (95% CI 0·46–0·76; p<0·0001). Grade 3–4 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 159 (72%) of 221 patients in the ramucirumab plus erlotinib group versus 121 (54%) of 225 in the placebo plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3–4 treatment-emergent adverse events in the ramucirumab plus erlotinib group were hypertension (52 [24%]; grade 3 only) and dermatitis acneiform (33 [15%]), and in the placebo plus erlotinib group were dermatitis acneiform (20 [9%]) and increased alanine aminotransferase (17 [8%]). Treatment-emergent serious adverse events were reported in 65 (29%) of 221 patients in the ramucirumab plus erlotinib group and 47 (21%) of 225 in the placebo plus erlotinib group. The most common serious adverse events of any grade in the ramucirumab plus erlotinib group were pneumonia (seven [3%]) and cellulitis and pneumothorax (four [2%], each); the most common in the placebo plus erlotinib group were pyrexia (four [2%]) and pneumothorax (three [1%]). One on-study treatment-related death due to an adverse event occurred (haemothorax after a thoracic drainage procedure for a pleural empyema) in the ramucirumab plus erlotinib group. Ramucirumab plus erlotinib demonstrated superior progression-free survival compared with placebo plus erlotinib in patients with untreated EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC. Safety was consistent with the safety profiles of the individual compounds in advanced lung cancer. The RELAY regimen is a viable new treatment option for the initial treatment of EGFR-mutated metastatic NSCLC. Eli Lilly.

Most patients with metastatic cancer eventually develop resistance to systemic therapy, with some having limited disease progression (ie, oligoprogression). We aimed to assess whether stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) targeting oligoprogressive sites could improve patient outcomes. We did a phase 2, open-label, randomised controlled trial of SBRT in patients with oligoprogressive metastatic breast cancer or non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after having received at least first-line systemic therapy, with oligoprogression defined as five or less progressive lesions on PET-CT or CT. Patients aged 18 years or older were enrolled from a tertiary cancer centre in New York, NY, USA, and six affiliated regional centres in the states of New York and New Jersey, with a 1:1 randomisation between standard of care (standard-of-care group) and SBRT plus standard of care (SBRT group). Randomisation was done with a computer-based algorithm with stratification by number of progressive sites of metastasis, receptor or driver genetic alteration status, primary site, and type of systemic therapy previously received. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, measured up to 12 months. We did a prespecified subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint by disease site. All analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03808662, and is complete. From Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2021, 106 patients were randomly assigned to standard of care (n=51; 23 patients with breast cancer and 28 patients with NSCLC) or SBRT plus standard of care (n=55; 24 patients with breast cancer and 31 patients with NSCLC). 16 (34%) of 47 patients with breast cancer had triple-negative disease, and 51 (86%) of 59 patients with NSCLC had no actionable driver mutation. The study was closed to accrual before reaching the targeted sample size, after the primary efficacy endpoint was met during a preplanned interim analysis. The median follow-up was 11·6 months for patients in the standard-of-care group and 12·1 months for patients in the SBRT group. The median progression-free survival was 3·2 months (95% CI 2·0–4·5) for patients in the standard-of-care group versus 7·2 months (4·5–10·0) for patients in the SBRT group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·35–0·81; p=0·0035). The median progression-free survival was higher for patients with NSCLC in the SBRT group than for those with NSCLC in the standard-of-care group (10·0 months [7·2–not reached] vs 2·2 months [95% CI 2·0–4·5]; HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22–0·75; p=0·0039), but no difference was found for patients with breast cancer (4·4 months [2·5–8·7] vs 4·2 months [1·8–5·5]; 0·78, 0·43–1·43; p=0·43). Grade 2 or worse adverse events occurred in 21 (41%) patients in the standard-of-care group and 34 (62%) patients in the SBRT group. Nine (16%) patients in the SBRT group had grade 2 or worse toxicities related to SBRT, including gastrointestinal reflux disease, pain exacerbation, radiation pneumonitis, brachial plexopathy, and low blood counts. The trial showed that progression-free survival was increased in the SBRT plus standard-of-care group compared with standard of care only. Oligoprogression in patients with metastatic NSCLC could be effectively treated with SBRT plus standard of care, leading to more than a four-times increase in progression-free survival compared with standard of care only. By contrast, no benefit was observed in patients with oligoprogressive breast cancer. Further studies to validate these findings and understand the differential benefits are warranted. National Cancer Institute.

Ivonescimab is a bispecific antibody against programmed cell death protein 1 and vascular endothelial growth factor, yielding promising clinical outcomes for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer in early-phase studies. We compared the efficacy and safety of ivonescimab with pembrolizumab in patients with programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer. HARMONi-2 is a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial across 55 hospitals in China. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had locally advanced or metastatic PD-L1-positive non-small cell lung cancer without sensitising epidermal growth factor receptor mutations or anaplastic lymphoma kinase translocations and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 20 mg/kg ivonescimab or 200 mg pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by histology, clinical stage, and PD-L1 expression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by a masked independent radiographic review committee per RECIST v1.1 in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05499390; recruitment is complete, with the trial ongoing and final analysis to be reported later. Between Nov 9, 2022, and Aug 26, 2023, 398 (45%) of 879 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive ivonescimab (n=198) or pembrolizumab (n=200). At the preplanned interim analysis, median PFS was significantly longer with ivonescimab than with pembrolizumab (11·1 vs 5·8 months; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·51 [95% CI 0·38–0·69]; one-sided p<0·0001). The PFS benefit of ivonescimab over pembrolizumab was broadly consistent within prespecified subgroups, including patients with PD-L1 tumour proportion score (TPS) 1–49% (HR 0·54 [95% CI 0·37–0·78]) and PD-L1 TPS of 50% of higher (HR 0·48 [0·29–0·79]). Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 58 (29%) patients with ivonescimab and 31 (16%) patients with pembrolizumab. Immune-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 14 (7%) of 197 patients on ivonescimab and 16 (8%) of 199 patients on pembrolizumab. Ivonescimab demonstrated a manageable safety profile in patients with both squamous and non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. In patients with squamous cell carcinoma, grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were comparable between the two groups. Ivonescimab significantly improved PFS compared with pembrolizumab in previously untreated patients with advanced PD-L1 positive non-small cell lung cancer. Therefore, ivonescimab might represent another treatment option in the first-line setting for PD-L1-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Akeso Biopharma.

PurposeTo determine the exposure–response (ER) relationships between atezolizumab exposure and efficacy or safety in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) or urothelial carcinoma (UC) and to identify alternative dosing regimens.MethodsER analyses were conducted using pooled NSCLC and UC data from phase 1 and 3 studies (PCD4989g, OAK, IMvigor211; ClinicalTrials.gov IDs, NCT01375842, NCT02008227, and NCT02302807, respectively). Objective response rate, overall survival, and adverse events were evaluated vs pharmacokinetic (PK) metrics. Population PK-simulated exposures for regimens of 840 mg every 2 weeks (q2w) and 1680 mg every 4 weeks (q4w) were compared with the approved regimen of 1200 mg every 3 weeks (q3w) and the maximum assessed dose (MAD; 20 mg/kg q3w). Phase 3 IMpassion130 (NCT02425891) data were used to validate the PK simulations for 840 mg q2w. Observed safety data were evaluated by exposure and body weight subgroups.ResultsNo significant ER relationships were observed for safety or efficacy. Predicted exposures for 840 mg q2w and 1680 mg q4w were comparable to 1200 mg q3w and the MAD and consistent with observed PK data from IMpassion130. Observed safety was similar between patients with a Cmax above and below the predicted Cmax for 1680 mg q4w and between patients in the lowest and upper 3 body weight quartiles.ConclusionAtezolizumab regimens of 840 mg q2w and 1680 mg q4w are expected to have comparable efficacy and safety as the approved regimen of 1200 mg q3w, supporting their interchangeable use and offering patients greater flexibility.

Background The current standard of care (SoC) for patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) is chemo-immunotherapy. The efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) for chest consolidation has been established for patients with ED-SCLC who have responded to chemotherapy. There is a lack of data on incorporating RT as chest consolidation and metastasis-directed therapy for ED-SCLC. The RISE (Radiotherapy for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer) study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of different RT strategies for residual lesions for patients with ED-SCLC who receive chemo-immunotherapy. Methods A total of 165 patients with ED-SCLC will be recruited, with 55 patients assigned to each of the three study arms. Patients with stabilization or partial regression, according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, during chemo-immunotherapy will be included. • Arm I will serve as the control group, comprising patients who continue SoC of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed death-1 (PD-1) immunotherapy (durvalumab or atezolizumab) following platinum-based chemo-immunotherapy. • Arm II will receive the SoC with consolidative RT to the chest area and potentially, according to palliative indications to metastatic lesions, delivered in 30 Gy in 3-Gy fractions. • Arm III will receive SoC with RT of 45 Gy in 3-Gy fractions to the chest area and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with 24 Gy in 8-Gy fractions to the metastatic lesions. Blood samples for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) will be collected before RT, during each week of treatment, and at the time of disease progression. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) based on RECIST 1.1 or patient death. 1. Secondary endpoints are OS, treatment toxicity (frequency of G3 toxicity according to CTCAE v.5.0), area of progression (primary tumor localization/new lesions), Overall response rate (ORR), and the response rate in non-irradiated lesions. Discussion The study population of patients with ED-SCLC has a poor prognosis. Dose-escalated chest RT and SBRT (for up to 10 metastases) administered with modern techniques offer the possibility to improve OS and PFS. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT06529081 (Registered 26th Jul 2024).

Extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is associated with poor prognosis and treatment options are scarce. Immunotherapy has shown robust clinical activity in ES-SCLC in previous phase 3 trials. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of adebrelimab (SHR-1316), a novel anti-PD-L1 antibody, with standard chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for ES-SCLC. The CAPSTONE-1 study was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, done in 47 tertiary hospitals in China. Key inclusion criteria were patients aged 18–75 years, with previously untreated histologically or cytologically confirmed ES-SCLC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–1. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive four to six cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve of 5 mg/mL per min, day 1 of each cycle) and etoposide (100 mg/m2 of body-surface area, on days 1–3 of each cycle) with either adebrelimab (20 mg/kg, day 1 of each cycle) or matching placebo, followed by maintenance therapy with adebrelimab or placebo. All treatments were given intravenously in 21-day cycles. Randomisation was done using a centralised interactive web response system with a block size of four, stratified by liver metastases, brain metastases, and lactate dehydrogenase concentration. The primary endpoint was overall survival in patients who received at least one dose of study medication. Safety was analysed in the as-treated population. This study is complete and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03711305. Between Dec 26, 2018, and Sept 4, 2020, 462 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned: 230 (50%) patients received adebrelimab plus chemotherapy (adebrelimab group) and 232 (50%) patients received placebo plus chemotherapy (placebo group). At data cutoff (Oct 8, 2021), median follow-up was 13·5 months (IQR 8·9–20·1). Median overall survival was significantly improved in the adebrelimab group (median 15·3 months [95% CI 13·2–17·5]) compared with the placebo group (12·8 months [11·3–13·7]; hazard ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·58–0·90]; one-sided p=0·0017). The most common treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (174 [76%] patients in the adebrelimab group and 175 [75%] patients in the placebo group), decreased white blood cell count (106 [46%] and 88 [38%]), decreased platelet count (88 [38%] and 78 [34%]), and anaemia (64 [28%] and 66 [28%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 89 (39%) patients in the adebrelimab group and 66 (28%) patients in the placebo group. Four treatment-related deaths were reported: two each in the adebrelimab group (respiratory failure and interstitial lung disease and pneumonia) and placebo group (multiple organ dysfunction and unknown cause of death). Adding adebrelimab to chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival with an acceptable safety profile in patients with ES-SCLC, supporting this combination as a new first-line treatment option for this population. Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals.