scholarly journals TROG 18.01 phase III randomised clinical trial of the Novel Integration of New prostate radiation schedules with adJuvant Androgen deprivation: NINJA study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e030731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarad Martin ◽  
Paul Keall ◽  
Shankar Siva ◽  
Peter Greer ◽  
David Christie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Androgen Deprivation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Initial Portion ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionStereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a non-invasive alternative to surgery for the treatment of non-metastatic prostate cancer (PC). The objectives of the Novel Integration ofNew prostate radiation schedules with adJuvant Androgen deprivation (NINJA) clinical trial are to compare two emerging SBRT regimens for efficacy with technical substudies focussing on MRI only planning and the use of knowledge-based planning (KBP) to assess radiotherapy plan quality.Methods and analysisEligible patients must have biopsy-proven unfavourable intermediate or favourable high-risk PC, have an Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1 and provide written informed consent. All patients will receive 6 months in total of androgen deprivation therapy. Patients will be randomised to one of two SBRT regimens. The first will be 40 Gy in five fractions given on alternating days (SBRT monotherapy). The second will be 20 Gy in two fractions given 1 week apart followed 2 weeks later by 36 Gy in 12 fractions given five times per week (virtual high-dose rate boost (HDRB)). The primary efficacy outcome will be biochemical clinical control at 5 years. Secondary endpoints for the initial portion of NINJA look at the transition of centres towards MRI only planning and the impact of KBP on real-time (RT) plan assessment. The first 150 men will demonstrate accrual feasibility as well as addressing the KBP and MRI planning aims, prior to proceeding with total accrual to 472 patients as a phase III randomised controlled trial.Ethics and disseminationNINJA is a multicentre cooperative clinical trial comparing two SBRT regimens for men with PC. It builds on promising results from several single-armed studies, and explores radiation dose escalation in the Virtual HDRB arm. The initial component includes novel technical elements, and will form an important platform set for a definitive phase III study.Trial registration numberANZCTN 12615000223538.

Update results from ALTER-C-001: Efficacy and safety of anlotinib plus XELOX regimen as first-line treatment followed by maintenance monotherapy of anlotinib for patients with mCRC-A single-arm, multicenter, phase Ⅱ clinical trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15550-e15550
Author(s):  
Jin Yan ◽  
Yunwei Han ◽  
Li Zhang ◽  
Yongdong Jin ◽  
Hao Sun
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Multicenter Phase ◽  
First Line Treatment

e15550 Background: The combination of anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR targeted drugs with chemotherapy is the standard first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and the followed maintenance treatment is an optional approach to balance the efficacy and toxicity. However, studies regarding the maintenance strategies based on antiangiogenic TKIs are limited currently. Anlotinib, a novel oral multi-target TKI which can inhibit both tumor angiogenesis and tumor cell proliferation simultaneously, substantially prolonged the PFS with manageable toxicity for refractory mCRC in the phase III ALTER0703 clinical trial. Here we report an update on the effectiveness and safety of anlotinib plus XELOX as first-line treatment followed by anlotinib monotherapy for mCRC. Methods: In this open label, single-arm, multicenter phase II clinical trial, 53 mCRC patients without prior systemic treated, aged 18-75 and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1 were planned to recruit. Eligible patients received capecitabine (1000 mg/m2, po, d1-14, q3w) and oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2, iv, d1, q3w) plus anlotinib (10mg, po, d1̃14, q3w) treatment for 6 cycles. After 6 cycles of inducing therapy, patients would receive anlotinib (12mg, po, d1̃14, q3w) as maintenance therapy until disease progression or intolerable adverse events (AEs). The primary endpoint was PFS; Secondary endpoints included ORR, DCR, DOR and safety. Results: By the data analysis cutoff date of January 22, 2021, a total of 18 patients were enrolled, of which 12 patients were available for efficacy assessment. In best overall response assessment, there were 50.0% PR (6/12), 33.3% SD (4/12) and 16.7% PD (2/12). The ORR was 50.0% (95% CI, 21.1-78.9%) and DCR was 83.3% (95% CI, 51.5-97.9%). The longest duration of treatment was 8.8 months and the response was still ongoing. The median PFS was not reached. The most common treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade (≥20%) were leukopenia, hypertension, neutropenia, diarrhea, fatigue, hypertriglyceridemia. Grade 3/4 TRAEs included hypertension (22.2%), hypertriglyceridemia (11.1%), lipase elevated (11.1%) and neutropenia (5.6%). No grade 5 AEs occurred. Conclusions: The update results suggested that anlotinib combined with XELOX as first line regimen followed by anlotinib monotherapy showed promising anti-tumor activity and manageable safety for patients with mCRC. And the conclusions needed to be confirmed in trials continued subsequently. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR1900028417.

A randomized phase III study of gemcitabine (G) versus GV1001 in sequential combination with G in patients with unresectable and metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4601-4601 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Buanes ◽  
J. Maurel ◽  
W. Liauw ◽  
M. Hebbar ◽  
J. Nemunaitis
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Peptide Vaccine ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Delayed Treatment ◽  
Sequential Combination ◽  
The Impact

4601 Background: A phase I/II study with GV1001, a telomerase peptide vaccine, showed a median overall survival (OS) of 8.6 months in non-resectable PC (Bernhardt SL et al, Br J Cancer. 2006;95:1474–1482). This phase III trial was conducted to determine the impact on overall survival of G monotherapy vs. GV1001 in sequential combination with G in unresectable and metastatic PC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had chemotherapy-naive, advanced PC and ECOG performance status 0–1. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive arm A: G (1,000 mg/m2 30 min i.v.) weekly for 7 weeks (w), 1w off and then 3w during 4-weekly cycles, or arm B: GV1001 0.56 mg s.c. plus GM-CSF as immune adjuvant on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 15, 22, 36, then every 4 weeks. Patients who progressed clinically or radiologically during GV1001 continued on GV1001 and concomitant gemcitabine. CT scans were performed every 8 weeks. The primary end-point was OS. A sample size of 520 patients allowed the detection of a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.73 (B/A), with 2α = 0.05 and 90% power. Results: Between June 2006 and May 2008, 365 pts were enrolled (A / B; 182 / 183). The study was stopped prematurely due to a preliminary analysis with 178 events showing no survival benefit of GV1001. Pts were well balanced for baseline characteristics: male 59.3% / 62.8%; median age 61y / 61y; ECOG PS 0 34.3% / 36.7%; locally advanced 22.4% / 20.7%. As of August 2008, 238 pts (A / B : 114 / 124) had died. Median OS was 7.3 / 5.9 months (HR 0.8; 95% CI 0.6–1.0). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 / 1.9 months (HR 0.5; 95%CI 0.4–0.7). Grade 3–4 AEs: gastrointestinal 6% / 8%, infection 5% / 5%, vascular disorders 2% / 3%, neutropenia 6% / 3%. Conclusions: GV1001 did not show efficacy in sequential combination with G in advanced PC. The advantage of G monotherapy over the sequential combination may be due to the delayed treatment with G in arm B. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III trial of regorafenib in patients (pts) with metastatic and/or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) progressing despite prior treatment with at least imatinib (IM) and sunitinib (SU): GRID trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA10008-LBA10008 ◽  
Author(s):  
George D. Demetri ◽  
Peter Reichardt ◽  
Yoon-Koo Kang ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
Heikki Joensuu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor

LBA10008 Background: Oral multikinase inhibitor regorafenib (REG) demonstrated substantial activity in a phase II trial in pts with GIST after failure of both IM and SU (J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29:606s; abstr 10007). This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of REG for this unmet clinical need. Methods: Eligible pts had metastatic and/or unresectable GIST, objective failure of both prior IM and SU (progressive disease [PD] on, or intolerance to, IM and PD on SU), ≥1 measurable lesion, ECOG performance status 0 or 1. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive best supportive care plus either REG 160 mg po once daily (3 wks on/1 wk off) or placebo (PL). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) (modified RECIST 1.1, independent central review). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR, defined as rate of partial response [PR] plus stable disease [SD] lasting for ≥12 wks), response rate and duration, safety and correlative genotype analyses. At time of PD, pts were eligible for unblinding and crossover to open-label REG. Results: Between Jan and Aug of 2011, 234 pts were screened; 199 were randomized (REG: 133, PL: 66). Pts were stratified at randomization according to number of prior systemic therapies and geographical region. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two arms. The primary endpoint was met: median PFS was 4.8 months for REG vs. 0.9 months for PL. Hazard ratio for PFS was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.18-0.39), p<0.0001. PFS rates at 3 and 6 months were 60% and 38% for REG vs. 11% and 0% for PL. DCR was 53% (REG) vs. 9% (PL).The HR for OS was 0.77 (p=0.20) with 85% PL pts having crossed over to REG. The most common > grade 3 treatment-emergent AEs in the REG arm during double-blind study were hypertension (28%), hand-foot skin reaction (21%), and diarrhea (8%). Conclusions: This randomized trial demonstrated that REG significantly improved PFS and DCR in pts with advanced GIST after failure of at least prior IM and SU. REG was well tolerated, with AEs as expected for this class and manageable with dose modifications.

Nomogram to estimate the activity of second-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4524-4524
Author(s):  
Guru Sonpavde ◽  
Gregory Russell Pond ◽  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Angela Q. Qu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

4524 Background: Prognostic factors may impact on endpoints used in phase II trials of second-line therapy for advanced UC. We aimed to study the impact of prognostic factors (liver metastasis [LM], anemia [Hb<10 g/dl], ECOG-performance status [PS] ≥1, time from prior chemotherapy [TFPC]) on PFS6 and RR. Methods: Twelve phase II trials evaluating second-line chemotherapy and/or biologics (n=748) in patients with progressive disease were pooled. PFS was defined as tumor progression or death from any cause. PFS6 was defined from the date of registration and calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RR was defined using RECIST 1.0. A nomogram predicting PFS6 was constructed using the RMS package in R (www.r-project.org). Results: Data regarding progression, Hb, LM, PS and TFPC were available from 570 patients. The mean age was 65.1 years, 45.3% had ECOG-PS ≥1, 30.2% had LM, 14.6% had anemia and TFPC was <6 months (mo) in 60.2%. The overall median PFS was 2.7 mo, PFS6 was 22.2% (95% CI: 18.8-25.9) and RR was 17.5% (95% CI: 14.5%-20.9%). For every unit increase in risk group, the hazard of progression increased by 41% and the odds of response decreased by 48% (Table). A nomogram was constructed to predict PFS6 on an individual patient level. Conclusions: PFS6 and RR vary as a function of prognostic factors in patients receiving second-line therapy for advanced UC. A nomogram incorporating prognostic factors might facilitate the evaluation of activity across phase II trials enrolling heterogeneous populations and can help to select and stratify patients for phase III evaluation of suitable agents. [Table: see text]

Statistical modeling of CALGB 80405 (Alliance) to identify influential factors in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) dependent on primary (1o) tumor side.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3528-3528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Furchtgott ◽  
David Swanson ◽  
Boris Hayete ◽  
Iya Khalil ◽  
Diane Wuest ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Protein Level ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Influential Factors ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Reference Level ◽  
Learning Approaches ◽  
Urine Protein ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Key Variables

3528 Background: CALGB 80405 is a phase III clinical trial of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI w/ randomly assigned cetuximab or bevacizumab. Novel machine learning approaches to the study dataset provide valuable insights into CRC prognosis and management of CRC progression. Methods: Using a Monte Carlo Bayesian Generalized Linear Model analytical platform, we built an ensemble of models for overall survival (OS). We used 99 baseline and demographic variables, including 1904 patients w/ 1o side and 949 w/ KRAS wild-type status. Building an ensemble of predictive models reduces risk of overfitting, estimates model uncertainty and identifies key variables by model consensus as measured by ensemble frequency (freq). We fit gender and 1o side (L vs R) stratum-specific models to examine differences in drivers of disease in those strata. Results: 1o side (avg Cox hazard ratio = 0.89, R side reference), ECOG performance status (1.30, reference level 0), AST concentration (1.01), peripheral neutrophil percentage (1.01) and local primary and abdominal site of disease indicators (1.22; 1.26) were key variables predictive of OS ( > 75% freq). In 1o side stratum-specific models, urine protein level (1.61), treatment intent (0.75, nonpalliative as reference) and hemoglobin concentration (0.85) were more associated w/ L side progression (freq > 85% in L stratum model, < 20% in R), while liver and lung sites of disease (2.3; 1.09) were more associated w/ R side progression (freq > 65% in R stratum model, < 20% in L). Predictors of 1o left-sidedness included age (avg log odds ratio = 0.02), hemoglobin (0.41), and abdominal (3.79) and liver (0.68) sites of disease. Modest differences in disease prognostic factors existed between genders: women more influenced by metastatic status, age, liver site of disease and creatinine level; men more influenced by urine protein level and prior diabetes. Conclusions: 1o side plays a central role in potentially explaining both variation in OS and differences in drivers of OS. Availability of these measures at baseline enables better sense of disease course at initiation of treatment. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, Eli Lilly & Co., Genentech, Pfizer Clinical trial information: NCT00265850.

Combined analysis of randomized controlled trial (RCT) and patient-preference trial (PPT) evaluating second-line chemotherapy (SLC) in advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4064-4064 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soonil Lee ◽  
Jung Hun Kang ◽  
Do Hyoung Lim ◽  
Keon-Woo Park ◽  
Sung Yong Oh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Preference ◽  
Patient Population ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Participation Rate ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Achievable Rate ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Prior Chemotherapy

4064 Background: While prolonged overall survival (OS) from SLC compared to best supportive care (BSC) has recently been demonstrated for AGC (Park et al, ASCO 2011), the prognosis of pretreated AGC remains poor. We assessed whether patient preference, willing to participate onto RCT, or other parameters contributed to this OS improvement. Methods: In the phase III trial, pretreated AGC patients (n=372) were first offered RCT. If a patient agreed to participate, randomly assigned 2:1 to SLC or BSC (n=202). If refused RCT, but agreed to receive treatment of their preference, they were offered SLC or BSC (PPT; n=170). OS of RCT participants was compared to that of whole patient population according to prognostic subgroups. In addition, analyses of OS unadjusted for multiple comparisons were conducted across predefined subgroups. Results: Median OS was 6.3 months among 254 patients treated with SLC and 3.3 months among 118 patients treated with BSC (HR, 0.507; 95% CI, 0.405 to 0.637; one-sided p<0.001). Compared to the RCT patients, younger age group, those with an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0, and with one prior chemotherapy were under-represented in the PPT patients. OS was comparable between RCT (5.0 months) and PPT (4.4 months) patients even after controlling for major prognostic factors (log-rank p=0.322). The OS benefit for SLC was preserved when analyzed according to baseline parameters. Parameters that were associated significantly with a prolonged OS included a PS of 0, the chemotherapy-free interval ≥3 months, and one prior chemotherapy. When the analysis was adjusted for these three parameters, patients who received SLC still had improved OS (HR, 0.554; 95% CI, 0.441 to 0.696; p<0.001). Conclusions: The 54% participation rate obtained in the current study represents the best achievable rate for this kind of phase III RCT involving BSC only arm. Even if we consider differences in the baseline characteristics between RCT and PPT patients, it is concluded that the RCT results can be generalized for the patient population and provided additional evidence supporting the use of SLC in patients with pretreated AGC.

Efficacy and safety of gemcitabine in combination with TH-302 compared with gemcitabine in combination with placebo in previously untreated patients with metastatic or locally advanced unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: The MAESTRO trial.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4148-TPS4148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
Robert J. Fram ◽  
Michael Schlichting ◽  
David P. Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Predictive Biomarkers ◽  
Treatment Discontinuation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind

TPS4148 Background: Tumors often consist of highly hypoxic subregions that are resistant to chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The investigational hypoxia-targeted drug TH-302 is reduced at its nitroimidazole group, and under hypoxic conditions releases the DNA alkylator bromo-isophosphoramide mustard (Br-IPM). A randomized Phase IIb trial of TH-302 in pts with metastatic or locally advanced unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) confirmed a significant PFS improvement (p=0.008) in pts treated with TH-302 at 340 mg/m2+ gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone (Borad et al, ESMO 2012). Skin and mucosal toxicities, mainly Grade 1/2, and myelosuppression (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and anemia) were the most common AEs related to TH-302 and did not lead to increases in treatment discontinuation. Grade 3/4 myelosuppression was more frequent in the TH-302 + gemcitabine arm. AEs leading to treatment discontinuation as well as non-hematological serious AEs were balanced across arms. Methods: This is a Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT01746979) of gemcitabine + TH-302 compared with gemcitabine + placebo in pts with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic PDAC. The study is designed to detect a 25% risk reduction of death with 90% power and two-sided alpha of 5%. A total of 660 pts are planned to be randomized 1:1. Key eligibility criteria include histologically or cytologically confirmed disease, no prior chemotherapy or systemic therapy (except as specified in the protocol), ECOG performance status 0 – 1, and bilirubin ≤ 1.5x upper limit of normal. Randomized pts receive TH-302 + gemcitabine or gemcitabine + placebo in 4-week cycles until progressive disease, intolerable toxicity, or pt withdrawal. The primary objective is to evaluate OS. Secondary objectives include PFS, objective response, and disease control; safety and tolerability; pt-reported QoL and pain; CA 19-9 levels and PK of TH-302; exploratory pharmacogenomic markers and potential predictive biomarkers. Enrollment to the study is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01746979.

A multicenter phase III randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial of pravastatin added to first-line standard chemotherapy in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7595-7595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Seckl ◽  
Christian Ottensmeier ◽  
Michael H. Cullen ◽  
Peter Schmid ◽  
Lindsay E. James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Standard Chemotherapy ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
The Uk

7595 Background: Most SCLC patients initially respond to chemotherapy but then relapse and die so new therapies are urgently required. Pre-clinical data shows statins induce growth arrest and apoptosis in SCLC and several other tumour cell types and are additive with chemotherapy. This may in part be due to impaired Ras superfamily function as statins deplete mevalonate, reducing geranylgeranylation and farnesylation of these proteins. We therefore undertook this large pragmatic phase III trial in order to determine if overall survival (OS) was affected by the addition of pravastatin in SCLC. Methods: Patients with limited (LD) or extensive (ED) stage SCLC were randomised to pravastatin 40mg OD or placebo for up to 2 years and given standard chemotherapy according to local practice recommended as either cisplatin 60mg/m2 iv or carboplatin AUC 5 or 6 and etoposide 120 mg/m2iv d1 to 3 or 100 mg BD po d2 & 3; max 6 cycles plus radiotherapy as usually given. Patients were excluded if they had used statins within 12 months prior to randomisation. Stratification was: LD vs ED and ECOG 0,1 vs 2,3. Endpoints were: primary - OS; secondary - progression free survival (PFS), local PFS (local control), response rates (RR) and toxicity. Results: Between 2007 and 2012, 846 patients were randomised, 422 (49.9.%) received pravastatin and 424 (50.1%) placebo in 93 participating sites in the UK. The median age was 64 years (range 54-69); ECOG performance status: 0: 23%; 1: 54%; 2: 17% and 3: 6%; weight 72.6 kg; LD, 357 (42.2%); ED, 479 (56.6%); 211 (24.9%) had ipsilateral effusion and 201 (23.8%) had ipsilateral SCF lymph nodes; Relative Dose intensity of cisplatin/carboplatin and etoposide was 91.6% (range 80.8 to 99.7), and 94.7% (range 85.7 to 100); 83.4% vs 86.3% completed > 4 cycles of chemotherapy on the pravastatin and placebo arms respectively. Most patients completed 6 cycles of chemotherapy: 263 (62.3%) vs 265 (62.5%) in the pravastatin vs. placebo groups. Updated results showing OS, PFS, local PFS and toxicity will be presented. Conclusions: This trial will report on whether pravastatin 40 mg OD added to standard therapy alters the outcome for SCLC patients. Clinical trial information: ISRCTN56306957.

Implementation and impact of the first two years of a systemwide molecular tumor board at Henry Ford Health System (HFHS).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19266-e19266
Author(s):  
Igor I. Rybkin ◽  
Nadia Z Haque ◽  
Kristen Collins ◽  
Louisa Laidlaw ◽  
Tom Mikkelsen
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Tumor Board ◽  
Molecular Testing ◽  
Precision Oncology ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Off Label ◽  
Molecular Tumor Board ◽  
The Impact

e19266 Background: HFHS implemented clinically-oriented Precision Medicine Program (PMP) in 2016. As part of the program, multidisciplinary molecular tumor board (MTB) was created to review complex molecular cases, providing guidance to treating medical oncologist in selecting targeted therapies and clinical trials. In some cases MTB recommended genetic counseling or recommended against/for additional molecular testing. MTB consists of oncologists, molecular pathologists, clinical trial staff, and genetic counselors. MTB was designed as teaching platform engaging hematology-oncology fellows into cases analysis and presentation. Here we present preliminary analysis of the impact of the MTB on the HFHS oncology practice. Methods: From 09/08/2017 to 12/31/2019 MTB reviewed 120 cases, 116 cases were used for this analysis. Data was abstracted using Syapse precision oncology platform, MTB recommendation note, electronic medical record (EMR), and molecular test results. Results: Out of 116 pts 83 (72%) were Caucasian, 25 (22%) African American, 4 (3%) Asian, 1 (1%) American Indian. Fifty-two % (n = 21) had an ECOG performance status of 1. Most common primary disease sites were lung (39%, n = 45) brain (12%, n = 15), and hematologic cancers (9%; n = 10), followed by breast (5%, n = 6), prostate (4%, n = 5), colon (3%, n = 4), and others (28%, n = 31). The most common genetic abnormalities discussed were atypical EGFR (n = 15), non-V600 BRAF (n = 10), KRAS (n = 8), BRCA2 (n = 5), NF2 (n = 4), PTEN (n = 4), CSF3R (n = 3), IDH1 (n = 3), TP53 (n = 3), and 29 less common mutations. Thirty five (30%) pts out of 116 total were recommended clinical trials, although only 3 patients (10% of recommended) were enrolled into trials. 31 pts (27%) were recommended off-label therapy, although trials were preferred. 18% of pts (n = 21) were recommended genetics referral, although only 3 have seen Geneticist, with two undergoing germline testing. One pt was discovered to have a germline RET V804M mutation which was originally detected in the cancer. Conclusions: The first two years of data demonstrate the utility of the MTB and provide a basis for ongoing analysis. Through multidisciplinary approach, MTB encourages care coordination and collaboration. MTB resulted in genetics referrals, clinical trial recommendations, and identification of targeted therapy options, including off label. In many cases, MTB recommendations prevented futile therapies and/or additional molecular testing.

scholarly journals Multi-Institutional Phase II Study of High-Dose Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy in Patients With Localized, Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 460-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodore S. Hong ◽  
Jennifer Y. Wo ◽  
Beow Y. Yeap ◽  
Edgar Ben-Josef ◽  
Erin I. McDonnell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Proton Beam ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Proton Therapy ◽  
Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Proton Beam Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Ecog Performance Status

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose, hypofractionated proton beam therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Materials and Methods In this single-arm, phase II, multi-institutional study, 92 patients with biopsy-confirmed HCC or ICC, determined to be unresectable by multidisciplinary review, with a Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (CTP) of A or B, ECOG performance status of 0 to 2, no extrahepatic disease, and no prior radiation received 15 fractions of proton therapy to a maximum total dose of 67.5 Gy equivalent. Sample size was calculated to demonstrate > 80% local control (LC) defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.0 criteria at 2 years for HCC patients, with the parallel goal of obtaining acceptable precision for estimating outcomes for ICC. Results Eighty-three patients were evaluable: 44 with HCC, 37 with ICC, and two with mixed HCC/ICC. The CTP score was A for 79.5% of patients and B for 15.7%; 4.8% of patients had no cirrhosis. Prior treatment had been given to 31.8% of HCC patients and 61.5% of ICC patients. The median maximum dimension was 5.0 cm (range, 1.9 to 12.0 cm) for HCC patients and 6.0 cm (range, 2.2 to 10.9 cm) for ICC patients. Multiple tumors were present in 27.3% of HCC patients and in 12.8% of ICC patients. Tumor vascular thrombosis was present in 29.5% of HCC patients and in 28.2% of ICC patients. The median dose delivered to both HCC and ICC patients was 58.0 Gy. With a median follow-up among survivors of 19.5 months, the LC rate at 2 years was 94.8% for HCC and 94.1% for ICC. The overall survival rate at 2 years was 63.2% for HCC and 46.5% ICC. Conclusion High-dose hypofractionated proton therapy demonstrated high LC rates for HCC and ICC safely, supporting ongoing phase III trials of radiation in HCC and ICC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document