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.

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.

PROSPER: Phase III RandOmized Study Comparing PERioperative nivolumab versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN EA8143).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4596-TPS4596
Author(s):  
Mohamad E. Allaf ◽  
Se Eun Kim ◽  
Viraj A. Master ◽  
David F. McDermott ◽  
Sabina Signoretti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Perioperative Therapy ◽  
Tumor Biopsy ◽  
Care Surgery ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

TPS4596 Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival 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 metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of February 10, 2021, 704 patients have been enrolled (N = 805). Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

PROSPER: Phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN EA8143).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS5101-TPS5101
Author(s):  
Naomi B. Haas ◽  
Maneka Puligandla ◽  
Mohamad E. Allaf ◽  
David F. McDermott ◽  
Charles G. Drake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Perioperative Therapy ◽  
Tumor Biopsy ◽  
Care Surgery ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

TPS5101 Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival 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 metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of February 2020, 396 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013 .

PROSPER: Phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN EA8143).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS765-TPS765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Christine Harshman ◽  
Maneka Puligandla ◽  
Mohamad E. Allaf ◽  
David F. McDermott ◽  
Charles G. Drake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Perioperative Therapy ◽  
Tumor Biopsy ◽  
Care Surgery ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

TPS765 Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival 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 metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of October 18, 2019, 317 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

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.

scholarly journals Adjuvant Esophagectomy versus Definitive Chemoradiotherapy for Patients with Clinical Stage N0 and Pathological Stage T1b Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma After Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Study Protocol for A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (Ad-ESD Trial)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Yang ◽  
Yuchen Su ◽  
Xiaobin Zhang ◽  
Jun Liu ◽  
Hong Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Squamous Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Stage ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Definitive Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background: Esophagectomy is still the prior additional treatment for pathological T1b (pT1b) esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after endoscopic resection (ER). ER followed with definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) has showed increased quality of life as well as comparable oncological outcomes to esophagectomy. However, there is no well-designed, phase III trial to compare the two treatment for patients with pT1b ESCC.Methods: One hundred seventy-six patients with clinical stage N0 (cN0) and pT1b ESCC will be recruited at three centers and randomized to the esophagectomy group or the dCRT group. The clinical lymph node status will be measured by image examination including computer tomography and positron emission tomography-computed tomography. The pathological tumor status will be diagnosed after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). All patients will be followed up for 60 months after randomization. The primary endpoint is the 5-year overall survival. The secondary endpoints are quality of life, related adverse events, 3-year overall survival and relapse-free survival rates.Discussion: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first phase III randomized controlled trial to compare the esophagectomy and dCRT for patients with cN0-pT1b ESCC after ESD. Based on the results of this study, we will show whether dCRT will benefit patients more than esophagectomy. which will contribute more high-quality evidence to the primary salvage treatment for these patients.Trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04135664. Registered on 10 August 2019.

scholarly journals Improved gastrointestinal profile with diroximel fumarate is associated with a positive impact on quality of life compared with dimethyl fumarate: results from the randomized, double-blind, phase III EVOLVE-MS-2 study

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 175628642199399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Wundes ◽  
Sibyl Wray ◽  
Ralf Gold ◽  
Barry A. Singer ◽  
Elzbieta Jasinska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Medication Use ◽  
Dimethyl Fumarate ◽  
Daily Activities ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Symptomatic Medication ◽  
Gi Symptoms ◽  
Symptom Intensity ◽  
The Impact

Background: Diroximel fumarate (DRF) is a novel oral fumarate approved for relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS). DRF demonstrated significantly improved gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability versus dimethyl fumarate (DMF) with fewer days of Individual Gastrointestinal Symptom and Impact Scale (IGISIS) scores ⩾2, GI adverse events (AEs), and treatment discontinuations due to GI AEs. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of GI tolerability events on quality of life (QoL) for patients with relapsing–remitting MS who received DRF or DMF in EVOLVE-MS-2. Methods: A post hoc analysis was conducted in patients who were enrolled in the randomized, blinded, 5-week, EVOLVE-MS-2 [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03093324] study of DRF versus DMF. Patients completed daily IGISIS and Global GISIS (GGISIS) eDiary questionnaires to assess GI symptom intensity and interference with daily activities and work. Results: In total, 504 patients (DRF, n = 253; DMF, n = 251) received study drug and 502 (DRF, n = 253; DMF, n = 249) completed at least one post-baseline questionnaire. With DRF, GI symptoms were less likely to interfere ‘quite a bit’ or ‘extremely’ with regular daily activities [IGISIS: DRF, 9.5% (24/253) versus DMF, 28.9% (72/249)] or work productivity [GGISIS: DRF, 6.1% (10/165) versus DMF, 11.3% (18/159)]. DRF-treated patients had fewer days with ⩾1 h of missed work (DRF, 43 days, n = 20 versus DMF, 88 days, n = 26). DMF-treated patients reported highest GI symptom severity and missed work at week 2–3 shortly after completing the titration period, which coincided with the majority of GI-related treatment discontinuations [58.3% (7/12)]. GI tolerability AEs [DRF, 34.8% (88/253); DMF, 48.2% (121/251)], concomitant symptomatic medication use [DRF, 19.3% (17/88) versus DMF, 30.6% (37/121)], and GI-related discontinuations (DRF, 0.8% versus DMF, 4.8%) were lower with DRF versus DMF. Conclusions: The improved GI tolerability with DRF translated into clinically meaningful benefits to QoL, as patients experienced less impact on daily life and work and required less concomitant symptomatic medication use. Trial registration: [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03093324]

scholarly journals The patients’ perspective on coordinated action for cancer and AMR

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Apostolidis
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Immune System ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Treatments ◽  
Unique Challenge ◽  
Coordinated Action ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Patients Perspective

Abstract The speaker will present the perspective of the cancer patients, and the challenges they encounter across the spectrum of care and what measures they consider relevant in terms of prevention, diagnosis, treatment and, indeed, to raise awareness of the impact of AMR on rendering cancer treatments ineffective. She will elaborate on survivorship, and on the impact of AMR on the quality of life of patients, their carers, and families. Emphasis will be given on the implications of modern therapies, such as immunotherapy, representing a unique challenge in terms of better understanding the effect on overall health of patients, with the effect they have the immune system, further weakening the patient and leaving him/her exposed to infections potentially of higher risk than cancer itself.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document