Randomized Study of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynaekologische Onkologie Ovarian Cancer Study Group Comparing Quality of Life in Patients With Ovarian Cancer Treated With Cisplatin/Paclitaxel Versus Carboplatin/Paclitaxel

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 579-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elfriede R. Greimel ◽  
Vesna Bjelic-Radisic ◽  
Jacobus Pfisterer ◽  
Felix Hilpert ◽  
Fedor Daghofer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The objective of this study was to compare the quality of life (QoL) of ovarian cancer patients treated with paclitaxel/carboplatin (TC) versus paclitaxel/cisplatin (PT) and to determine the impact of treatment toxicity on the various QoL domains. Patients and Methods In this phase III trial, 798 patients with ovarian cancer stages IIB-IV were randomly assigned to receive TC or PT. The primary end point was progression-free survival; secondary end points included toxicity, QoL, and response to treatment. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 before treatment, within 3 days before the second and the fourth chemotherapy cycle, and 3 weeks after completion of chemotherapy. Results Previously reported data showed that patients undergoing TC or PT did not differ in progression-free survival and overall survival. However, the TC arm was superior, indicating a better overall QoL compared with the PT arm. Controlling for toxicity and age, a significant treatment by assessment time interaction was found for four QoL functioning scales and three symptoms scales. Patients in the TC arm showed better means scores after treatment on overall QoL (P = .012), physical functioning (P = .012), role functioning (P = .005), and cognitive functioning (P = .024), compared with the PT arm. Concerning symptom experience, patients undergoing TC showed less nausea and vomiting (P < .001), less appetite loss (P < .001), and less fatigue (P = .033) after completion of treatment compared with patients undergoing PT. Conclusion The TC regimen achieved better QoL outcomes compared with the PT regimen. Thus, clinicians may consider replacing cisplatin with carboplatin when treating ovarian cancer patients with chemotherapy.

DICE: Study Protocol for a Randomised Trial Investigating a Novel Therapy Called TAK228 in Ovarian Cancer Resistant to Standard Treatment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Webber ◽  
Francesca Fiorentino ◽  
Jonathan Krell ◽  
Consuelo Nohpal de la Rosa
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Weekly Paclitaxel ◽  
Novel Therapy ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

Abstract Background:The standard initial treatment for ovarian cancer is surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy and potentially maintenance therapy with avastin or inhibitors of poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP). While a proportion of women are cured by this approach, the vast majority will relapse and become resistant to platinum chemotherapy either initially or on subsequent treatment. There is an unmet need to improve response to treatment and quality of life in these women. TAK228 is a novel therapy that can be added to standard treatment in the participant population and the aim of the DICE trial is to assess its effectiveness. Laboratory and clinical research has shown that these ovarian cancers may respond to the molecular target of a drug such as TAK228, and there have been studies using it in other advanced solid tumours including endometrial cancer. Methods: 124 eligible women will be recruited from participating research sites in the United Kingdom (UK) and Germany. Randomised participants will receive either weekly paclitaxel alone (standard treatment, n=62) or TAK228 plus weekly paclitaxel (n=62) until the cancer significantly worsens, there are significant adverse events or any other protocol-defined stopping criteria. Participants will be monitored for response to treatment (using radiological imaging), adverse events and quality of life during both randomised treatment and subsequent follow up.Discussion:The primary objective/endpoint of the study is to compare the two treatments in terms of progression free survival, or the length of time that each participant is alive without the cancer significantly worsening according to defined assessment criteria. If the addition of TAK228 to weekly paclitaxel chemotherapy is shown to significantly improve this statistically, and adverse events and quality of life are not significantly worse than standard treatment, then TAK228 plus weekly paclitaxel could potentially be taken forward within the context of a larger phase III trial.Trial registration:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03648489. Registered 27th August 2018.https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03648489

PROSPER: A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab (nivo) versus observation in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN 8143).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS684-TPS684 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Christine Harshman ◽  
Maneka Puligandla ◽  
Naomi B. Haas ◽  
Mohamad Allaf ◽  
Charles G. Drake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Immune System ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

TPS684 Background: The anti-PD-1 antibody nivo improves overall survival in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 has shown an OS benefit compared to a pure adjuvant approach in mouse solid tumor models. The PROSPER RCC trial aims to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system prior to nephrectomy with neoadjuvant nivo and continued engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients with high risk M0 RCC compared to surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is currently accruing patients with clinical stage ≥T2 or node positive M0 RCC of any histology. Tumor biopsy prior to randomization is mandatory to ensure RCC and permits in depth correlative science. The investigational arm will receive two doses of nivo 240mg prior to surgery followed by adjuvant nivo for 9 months (q2 wks x 3 mo followed by 480mg q4 wks x 6 mo). The control arm will undergo standard nephrectomy followed by observation. Randomized patients are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and histology. To enhance accrual and patient quality of life, key upcoming amendments are being instituted. These include biopsy only in the nivo arm, allowance of oligometastatic disease and bilateral renal masses that can be fully resected/ablated, and change of nivo dosing to q4 wks (1 neoadj; 9 adj). With accrual of 766 patients, there is 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ~56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is also powered to evaluate a significant increase in overall survival (HR 0.67). Safety, feasibility, and quality of life endpoints critical to adjuvant therapy considerations are incorporated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational work aimed at investigating the impact of the baseline immune milieu, the changes induced by neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 priming, and how both correlate with clinical outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

Nonplatinum Topotecan Combinations Versus Topotecan Alone for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: Results of a Phase III Study of the North-Eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology Ovarian Cancer Study Group

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (19) ◽  
pp. 3176-3182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jalid Sehouli ◽  
Dirk Stengel ◽  
Guelten Oskay-Oezcelik ◽  
Alain G. Zeimet ◽  
Harald Sommer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Recurrent Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Platinum Refractory

PurposeThe management of recurrent ovarian cancer remains controversial. Single-agent topotecan is an established treatment option, and preliminary evidence suggests improved tumor control by combining topotecan with etoposide or gemcitabine.Patients and MethodsWomen with relapsed ovarian cancer after primary surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned to topotecan monotherapy 1.25 mg/m2/d, topotecan 1.0 mg/m2plus oral etoposide 50 mg/d, or topotecan 0.5 mg/m2/d plus gemcitabine 800 mg/m2on day 1 and 600 mg/m2on day 8 every 3 weeks. Patients were stratified for platinum-refractory and platinum-sensitive disease according to a recurrence-free interval of less or more than 12 months, respectively. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, objective response rates, toxicity, and quality of life (as measured by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] 30-item Quality-of-Life Questionnaire).ResultsThe trial enrolled 502 patients with a mean age of 60.5 years (± 10.2 years), 208 of whom were platinum resistant. Median overall survival was 17.2 months (95% CI, 13.5 to 21.9 months) with topotecan, 17.8 months (95% CI, 13.7 to 20.0 months) with topotecan plus etoposide (log-rank P = .7647), and 15.2 months (95% CI, 11.3 to 20.9 months) with topotecan plus gemcitabine (log-rank P = .2344). Platinum-sensitive patients lived significantly longer than platinum-refractory patients (21.9 v 10.6 months). The median progression-free survival was 7.0, 7.8, and 6.3 months, respectively. Objective response rates were 27.8%, 36.1%, and 31.6%, respectively. Patients under combined treatment were at higher risk of severe thrombocytopenia.ConclusionNonplatinum topotecan combinations do not provide a survival advantage over topotecan alone in women with relapsed ovarian cancer.

Health-related quality of life/patient-reported outcomes in relapsed ovarian cancer: Results from a randomized phase III study of trabectedin with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) versus PLD alone

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5526-5526
Author(s):  
C. N. Krasner ◽  
A. Poveda ◽  
T. Herzog ◽  
J. Vermorken ◽  
B. Monk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Gi Symptoms ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
The Impact

5526 Background: In an open-label, multicenter, randomized phase III study comparing the combination of trabectedin and PLD to PLD alone in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer, the combination demonstrated significantly improved progression free survival and response rates, manageable non-cumulative toxicity, and fewer PLD-associated adverse events. We studied the impact of the combination of trabectedin with PLD on the quality of life (QoL)/patient-reported outcomes (PRO) evaluated as part of the trial. Methods: QoL/PRO questionnaires, EORTC-QLQ C30, OV28, and EQ-5D were completed by patients at screening and on Day 1 of every other treatment cycle starting with Cycle 1, and at the end-of-treatment visit. Global health status/QoL, fatigue, rain subscales from QLQ C30, and abdominal pain/GI symptoms scale from OV28 were chosen a priori for primary analyses. Other scales of the three questionnaires were analyzed on a supportive basis. Results: A total of 672 patients were randomized. 663 (98%) completed at least the baseline questionnaires. Median cycles of treatment was 6 (131 days) for the combination arm and 5 (143 days) for the monotherapy arm. Mixed effects models (using a covariance structure of AR[1]) predicting the score at baseline and follow-up scores as a function of treatment, days after baseline, and interaction between treatment and days after baseline showed no significant differences between the treatment arms for any of the prespecified scales. Similar analyses of other scales, including EQ-5D Health Index scores and Health State on the Visual Analog Scale, support the findings. Conclusions: The addition of trabectedin to PLD results in superior efficacy in patients with relapsed ovarian cancer, with no added decrement to overall health status as assessed by PRO. [Table: see text]

PROSPER: A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab (nivo) versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN 8143).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4597-TPS4597 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Christine Harshman ◽  
Maneka Puligandla ◽  
Naomi B. Haas ◽  
Mohamad Allaf ◽  
Charles G. Drake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Immune System ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Perioperative Therapy ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

TPS4597 Background: The anti-PD-1 antibody nivo improves overall survival (OS) in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. There is no standard adjuvant (adjuv) systemic therapy that increases OS over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 has shown an OS benefit compared to a pure adjuv approach in mouse solid tumor models. Multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers have shown remarkable pathologic responses with neoadjuvant (neoadj) PD-1 blockade. Two ongoing ph 2 studies of perioperative nivo in M0 RCC patients are showing preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays (NCT02575222; NCT02595918). PROSPER RCC (NCT03055013) aims to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system prior to nephrectomy with neoadj nivo and continued engagement with adjuv blockade in patients with high risk RCC compared to surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is currently accruing patients with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for nephrectomy. Oligometastases are permitted if can be rendered NED. We amended the study to enhance accrual and patient quality of life by changing nivo dosing to 480mg q4 wks and requiring baseline tumor biopsy only in the nivo arm. The investigational arm receives 1 dose of nivo prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuv doses. The control arm undergoes standard nephrectomy followed by observation. Randomized patients are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. Accrual of 805 patients provides 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ~56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life endpoints have been integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational work aimed at investigating the impact of the baseline immune milieu, the changes induced by neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 priming, and how both may predict clinical outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

Impact on quality of life of adding cetuximab to irinotecan in patients who have failed prior oxaliplatin-based therapy: The EPIC trial

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4003-4003 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Eng ◽  
J. Maurel ◽  
W. Scheithauer ◽  
L. Wong ◽  
M. Lutz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Health Status ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Global Health Status ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
The Impact

4003 Background: EPIC, a multinational phase III clinical trial examined the impact of cetuximab on survival in pretreated EGFR- expressing metastatic colorectal (MCRC) patients (pts). Pts were randomized to either cetuximab 400 mg/m2 followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly and irinotecan 350 mg/m2 q 3 weeks or irinotecan alone. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with quality of life being one of the secondary endpoints. Methods: Health Related Quality of life (HRQoL) of pts in this trial was assessed through the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, version 3.0. Pts completed the questionnaire pretreatment, every second cycle, and at first follow-up visit. HRQoL was compared between treatment arms using a Wei-Lachin test. Results: Baseline demographics were balanced between the arms. Cetuximab plus irinotecan (n=648) was superior to irinotecan alone (n=650) in progression-free survival (HR 0.69, p<.0001) and response rate (16.4 vs 4.2%, p<.0001). OS was comparable between the arms, but may have been influenced by subsequent therapy: 46% of subjects in the irinotecan alone arm received cetuximab, 89% of them in combination with irinotecan. Baseline HRQoL scores did not significantly differ between treatment arms for 11 of the 15 scales. For 4 scales (Social Functioning, Fatigue, Dyspnea, and Appetite Loss), there were statistically significant differences in baseline scores, in favor of the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm. Non- compliance rates (missing questionnaires) were similar between the arms. A statistically significant difference was noted for pts in the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm in HRQoL on 10 of the 15 scales as compared to patients in the irinotecan arm, with the scores of the cetuximab plus irinotecan arm consistently higher, as noted by the scales of Global Health Status (p=.047), pain (p< .0001), and nausea (p<.0001). Conclusions: In addition to statistically significant improvements in PFS and RR in patients receiving cetuximab plus irinotecan compared with irinotecan alone, HRQoL was better preserved on the combination arm with less deterioration in symptom scores (pain, nausea, insomnia), as well as global health status scores. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Statistical analysis plan for the Dual mTorc Inhibition in advanCed/recurrent Epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer (of clear cell, endometrioid and high-grade serous type, and carcinosarcoma) trial (DICE)

Trials ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Consuelo Nóhpal de la Rosa ◽  
Jonathan Krell ◽  
Emily Day ◽  
Aaron Clarke ◽  
Meena Reddi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Statistical Analysis Plan ◽  
Weekly Paclitaxel ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Eortc Qlq

Abstract Background Treatment for ovarian cancer includes platinum-based chemotherapy, but many women become resistant to chemotherapy, becoming platinum-resistant. Standard of care for these women is weekly paclitaxel chemotherapy, but cancers can often become paclitaxel resistant. TAK228, an investigational dual TORC1/2 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that can be added to standard treatment. The DICE trial is a phase II international multicentre, parallel-group, superiority clinical trial with 1:1, open label randomisation which has the aim of investigating the effectiveness of TAK228 plus weekly paclitaxel. The planned sample size is 124 women (62 per treatment arm) with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Objective To outline the planned analyses for DICE in a statistical analysis plan (SAP) before database hard lock and the start of analysis. This ensures that bias is minimised during the analysis phase. Results This SAP provides detailed descriptions of the analysis principles and statistical procedures for analysing primary and secondary outcomes of the trial. The primary outcome is overall progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival (PFS) at 24 weeks, overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), time to progression (TTP), clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 4 months, Cancer Antigen 125 (CA125) response according to Gynaecological Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) criteria, overall survival (OS), safety and tolerability as assessed by adverse events and the quality-of-life questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OV28). This detailed description includes significance levels, sensitivity analyses and compliance analysis. Discussion The DICE trial will determine whether the addition of TAK228 to weekly paclitaxel chemotherapy shows a statistically significant improvement to participant’s progression free and overall survival and that the adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL) are not significantly worse than the standard treatment. The study commenced recruitment in September 2018. An interim analysis was performed in early 2021, the results of which advised continuation of the trial. The study recruitment is ongoing and is due to complete by the end of 2021. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT03648489. Registered on 27 August 2018

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document