Position paper on the initiation of clinical
trials of xenotransplantation
The American Society of Transplantation and The American Society of
Transplant Surgeons

2000 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 235--236
2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (33) ◽  
pp. 3961-3967 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Ligibel ◽  
Catherine M. Alfano ◽  
Dawn Hershman ◽  
Rachel M. Ballard ◽  
Suanna S. Bruinooge ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 1596-1605 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Andrew Loblaw ◽  
Katherine S. Virgo ◽  
Robert Nam ◽  
Mark R. Somerfield ◽  
Edgar Ben-Josef ◽  
...  

Purpose To update the 2004 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guideline on initial hormonal management of androgen-sensitive, metastatic, recurrent, or progressive prostate cancer (PCa). Methods The writing committee based its recommendations on an updated systematic literature review. Recommendations were approved by the Expert Panel, the ASCO Health Services Committee, and the ASCO Board of Directors. Results Seven randomized controlled trials (four new), one systematic review, one meta-analysis (new), one Markov model, and one delta-method 95% CI procedure for active controlled trials (new) informed the guideline update. Recommendations Bilateral orchiectomy or luteinizing hormone–releasing hormone agonists are recommended initial androgen-deprivation treatments (ADTs). Nonsteroidal antiandrogen monotherapy merits discussion as an alternative; steroidal antiandrogen monotherapy should not be offered. Combined androgen blockade should be considered. In metastatic or progressive PCa, immediate versus symptom-onset institution of ADT results in a moderate decrease (17%) in relative risk (RR) for PCa-specific mortality, a moderate increase (15%) in RR for non–PCa-specific mortality, and no overall survival advantage. Therefore, the Panel cannot make a strong recommendation for early ADT initiation. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) kinetics and other metrics allow identification of populations at high risk for PCa-specific and overall mortality. Further studies must be completed to assess whether patients with adverse prognostic factors gain a survival advantage from immediate ADT. For patients electing to wait until symptoms for ADT, regular monitoring visits are indicated. For patients with recurrence, clinical trials should be considered if available. Currently, data are insufficient to support use of intermittent androgen blockade outside clinical trials.


2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (9) ◽  
pp. 747-754 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neville Jackson ◽  
Dan Atar ◽  
Maria Borentain ◽  
Günter Breithardt ◽  
Martin van Eickels ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. IJH14
Author(s):  
Stefano Molica

There were a number of important updates and advances presented at the 2018 Annual American Society of Hematology meeting. With respect to the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the American Society of Hematology 2018 was notable for an improved understanding of ibrutinib-based therapies. In fact, three prospective Phase III trials presented at the meeting indicate, in turn, that ibrutinib alone, ibrutinib plus rituximab, or ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab, should be the new standard of care for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. However, additional clinical trials comparing chemo-immunotherapy with ibrutinib alone or in association with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody remain a reasonable avenue to complete results of these large studies.


1994 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 2471-2508 ◽  

PURPOSE Standard practice in protecting against chemotherapy-associated infection has been chemotherapy dose modification or dose delay, administration of progenitor-cell support, or selective use of prophylactic antibiotics. Therapy of chemotherapy-associated neutropenic fever or infection has customarily involved treatment with intravenous antibiotics, usually accompanied by hospitalization. The hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) have been introduced into clinical practice as additional supportive measures that can reduce the likelihood of neutropenic complications due to chemotherapy. Clinical benefit has been shown, but the high cost of CSFs has led to concern about their appropriate use. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) wishes to establish evidence-based, clinical practice guidelines for the use of CSFs in patients who are not enrolled on clinical trials. METHODS An expert multidisciplinary panel reviewed the clinical data documenting the activity of CSFs. For each common clinical situation, the Panel formulated a guideline to encourage reasonable use of CSFs to preserve effectiveness but discourage excess use when little marginal benefit is anticipated. Consensus was reached after critically appraising the available evidence. Guidelines were validated by comparing them with recommendations for CSF use developed in other countries and by several academic institutions. Outcomes considered in evaluating CSF benefit included duration of neutropenia, incidence of febrile neutropenia, incidence and duration of antibiotic use, frequency and duration of hospitalization, infectious mortality, chemotherapy dose-intensity, chemotherapy efficacy, quality of life, CSF toxicity, and economic impact. To the extent that these data were available, the Panel placed greatest value on survival benefit, reduction in rates of febrile neutropenia, decreased hospitalization, and reduced costs. Lesser value was placed on alterations in absolute neutrophil counts (ANC). CONCLUSIONS CSFs are recommended in some situations, eg, to reduce the likelihood of febrile neutropenia when the expected incidence is > or = 40%; after documented febrile neutropenia in a prior chemotherapy cycle to avoid infectious complications and maintain dose-intensity in subsequent treatment cycles when chemotherapy dose-reduction is not appropriate; and after high-dose chemotherapy with autologous progenitor-cell transplantation. CSFs are also effective in the mobilization of peripheral-blood progenitor cells. Therapeutic initiation of CSFs in addition to antibiotics at the onset of febrile neutropenia should be reserved for patients at high risk for septic complications. CSF use in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes may be reasonable if they are experiencing neutropenic infections. Administration of CSFs after initial chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia does not appear to be detrimental, but clinical benefit has been variable and caution is advised. Available data support use of CSFs in pediatric cancer patients similar to that recommended for adult patients. Outside of clinical trials, CSFs should not be used concurrently with chemotherapy and radiation, or to support increasing chemotherapy dose-intensity. Further research is warranted as a means to improve the cost-effective administration of the CSFs and identify clinical predictors of infectious complications that may direct their use.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (22) ◽  
pp. 2109-2117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan D Anker ◽  
Javed Butler ◽  
Muhammad Shahzeb Khan ◽  
William T Abraham ◽  
Johann Bauersachs ◽  
...  

Abstract The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has important implications for the safety of participants in clinical trials and the research staff caring for them and, consequently, for the trials themselves. Patients with heart failure may be at greater risk of infection with COVID-19 and the consequences might also be more serious, but they are also at risk of adverse outcomes if their clinical care is compromised. As physicians and clinical trialists, it is our responsibility to ensure safe and effective care is delivered to trial participants without affecting the integrity of the trial. The social contract with our patients demands no less. Many regulatory authorities from different world regions have issued guidance statements regarding the conduct of clinical trials during this COVID-19 crisis. However, international trials may benefit from expert guidance from a global panel of experts to supplement local advice and regulations, thereby enhancing the safety of participants and the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology on 21 and 22 March 2020 conducted web-based meetings with expert clinical trialists in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Asia. The main objectives of this Expert Position Paper are to highlight the challenges that this pandemic poses for the conduct of clinical trials in heart failure and to offer advice on how they might be overcome, with some practical examples. While this panel of experts are focused on heart failure clinical trials, these discussions and recommendations may apply to clinical trials in other therapeutic areas.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document