The Royal College of Radiologists National Vulvar Cancer Audit

AIMS

This audit examined UK vulvar cancer practice from March 2018 to January 2019 and compared it to standards from national and international recommendations. Follow-up data collection in 2020 examined patient outcomes and toxicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Audit standards were based on Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) guidance and published literature. A web-based questionnaire was sent to the audit leads at all cancer centres in the UK. Prospective data collection included patient demographics, tumour characteristics, radiotherapy indications, dosimetry, timelines, and follow-up data. The audit targets were 95% compliance with the RCR dose/fractionation schemes in definitive and adjuvant patients, 40% use of intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), 100% of radical patients treated as category 1, and 95% use of gap compensation for category 1 patients.

RESULTS

34/54 UK radiotherapy centres (63%) completed data entry for 152 patients. 23 out of 34 (68%) centres submitted follow-up data for 94 patients. One indicator exceeded the audit target: 98% of radical patients received IMRT. The indicators of RCR dose/fractionation compliance for adjuvant/definitive radiotherapy were achieved by 80%/43% for the primary, 80%/86% for elective lymph nodes, and 21%/21% for pathological lymph nodes. The use of concomitant chemotherapy with radical radiotherapy in suitable patients was achieved by 71%. Other indicators demonstrated that 78% were treated as category 1 and 27% used gap compensation. Acute toxicity was mostly related to skin, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary sites. Grade 3 and Grade 4 toxicities were seen at acceptable rates within the radical and adjuvant groups. Late toxicity was mostly grade 0.

CONCLUSION

This audit provides a comprehensive picture of UK practice. IMRT is widely used in the UK, and treatment-related toxicity is moderate. The dose fractionation was very heterogeneous. The designation of vulvar cancer as category 1 was not regularly followed for radical/adjuvant patients, and there was minimal gap compensation during treatment.

Defining the Optimal Treatment Strategy in Patients With Uterine Serous Carcinoma

AIMS

Uterine serous carcinoma (USC) is an aggressive subtype of endometrial cancer with high rates of relapse and death. As adjuvant therapy might be beneficial in early-stage disease, the impact of standard complete surgical staging is questioned. Therefore, we wanted to explore the optimal treatment strategy for women diagnosed with USC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective multicentre study of women diagnosed with primary USC in the UK and the Netherlands. Treatment strategy in relation to overall survival and progression-free survival was recorded and evaluated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. Furthermore, primary surgical staging and/or adjuvant treatment in relation to patterns of recurrence were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 272 women with a median age of 70 years were included. Most patients presented with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I disease (44%). Overall, 48% of patients developed recurrent disease, most (58%) with a distant component. Women treated with chemotherapy showed significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.81; P = 0.005) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.80; P = 0.04) in multivariable analysis. Furthermore, even in surgically staged women with FIGO stage IA disease, a high recurrence rate of 42% was seen.

CONCLUSION

Women with USC who received adjuvant chemotherapy showed better survival rates compared with those who received other or no adjuvant treatment. The benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy was observed across all tumour stages, including surgically staged FIGO stage IA. These data question the role of surgical staging in the absence of macroscopic disease in USC.

Risk factors and mortality associated with permanent pacemaker after surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Early versus late implantation

INTRODUCTION

Inflation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has increased the number of patients requiring a postprocedure permanent pacemaker (PPM). We investigate the impact of PPM on mid-term mortality comparing SAVR versus TAVR procedures and risk factors for early and late (>14 days) need of PPM.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, single-center evaluation of 903 patients that underwent either SAVR or TAVR procedures at the Yale New Haven Hospital from 2012 to 2017. Patients were stratified into PPM and non-PPM groups. We performed Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analysis to characterize mid-term mortality. Further subgroup analysis was performed to identify risk factors for early and late PPM implantation in the TAVR cohort.

RESULTS

There was no correlation between PPM implantation and mid-term mortality in both SAVR (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69; confidence interval [CI] = 0.21-2.30; p = .56) and TAVR (HR = 0.70; CI = 0.42-1.17; p = .18) patients. The presence of the right bundle branch block (Odds ratio = 24.07; 95% CI = 2.34-247.64, p = .007) was associated with higher odds of early PPM requirement after TAVR procedures.

CONCLUSION

PPM placement after SAVR or TAVR procedures is not associated with increased mid-term mortality. In-depth characterization of risk factors for early and late PPM implantation will require further analysis in the growing TAVR patient population.

A randomized evaluation of the TriGuard™ HDH cerebral embolic protection device to Reduce the Impact of Cerebral Embolic LEsions after TransCatheter Aortic Valve ImplanTation: the REFLECT I trial

AIMS

The REFLECT I trial investigated the safety and effectiveness of the TriGuard™ HDH (TG) cerebral embolic deflection device in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This prospective, multicentre, single-blind, 2:1 randomized (TG vs. no TG) study aimed to enrol up to 375 patients, including up to 90 roll-in patients. The primary combined safety endpoint (VARC-2 defined early safety) at 30 days was compared with a performance goal. The primary efficacy endpoint was a hierarchical composite of (i) all-cause mortality or any stroke at 30 days, (ii) National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) worsening at 2-5 days or Montreal Cognitive Assessment worsening at 30 days, and (iii) total volume of cerebral ischaemic lesions detected by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 2-5 days. Cumulative scores were compared between treatment groups using the Finkelstein-Schoenfeld method. A total of 258 of the planned, 375 patients (68.8%) were enrolled (54 roll-in and 204 randomized). The primary safety outcome was met compared with the performance goal (21.8% vs. 35%, P < 0.0001). The primary hierarchical efficacy endpoint was not met (mean efficacy score, higher is better: -5.3 ± 99.8 TG vs. 11.8 ± 96.4 control, P = 0.31). Covert central nervous system injury was numerically lower with TG both in-hospital (46.1% vs. 60.3%, P = 0.0698) and at 5 days (61.7 vs. 76.2%, P = 0.054) compared with controls.

CONCLUSION

REFLECT I demonstrated that TG cerebral protection during TAVR was safe in comparison with historical TAVR data but did not meet the predefined effectiveness endpoint compared with unprotected TAVR controls.

Randomized Evaluation of TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: REFLECT II

OBJECTIVES

The REFLECT II (Randomized Evaluation of TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the TriGUARD 3 (TG3) cerebral embolic protection in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND

Cerebral embolization occurs frequently following transcatheter aortic valve replacement and procedure-related ischemic stroke occurs in 2% to 6% of patients at 30 days. Whether cerebral protection with TriGuard 3 is safe and effective in reducing procedure-related cerebral injury is not known.

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, single-blind, 2:1 randomized (TG3 vs. no TG3) study was designed to enroll up to 345 patients. The primary 30-day safety endpoint (Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 defined) was compared with a performance goal (PG). The primary hierarchical composite efficacy endpoint (including death or stroke at 30 days, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score worsening in hospital, and cerebral ischemic lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 2 to 5 days) was compared using the Finkelstein-Schoenfeld method.

RESULTS

REFLECT II enrolled 220 of the planned 345 patients (63.8%), including 41 roll-in and 179 randomized patients (121 TG3 and 58 control subjects) at 18 US sites. The sponsor closed the study early after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommended enrollment suspension for unblinded safety data review. The trial met its primary safety endpoint compared with the PG (15.9% vs. 34.4% (p < 0.0001). The primary hierarchal efficacy endpoint at 30 days was not met (mean scores [higher is better]: -8.58 TG3 vs. 8.08 control; p = 0.857). A post hoc diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging analysis of per-patient total lesion volume above incremental thresholds showed numeric reductions in total lesion volume >500 mm³ (-9.7%) and >1,000 mm³ (-44.5%) in the TG3 group, which were more pronounced among patients with full TG3 coverage: -51.1% (>500 mm³) and -82.9% (>1,000 mm³).

CONCLUSIONS

The REFLECT II trial demonstrated that the TG3 was safe compared with a historical PG but did not meet its pre-specified primary superiority efficacy endpoint.

Adjunctive Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Importance

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established alternative to surgery for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Adjunctive antithrombotic therapy used to mitigate thrombotic risks in patients undergoing TAVR must be balanced against bleeding complications, since both are associated with increased mortality.

Observation

Stroke risk associated with TAVR is lower than that associated with surgical aortic valve replacement in recent trials including patients at intermediate or low risk, but it is constant beginning at the time of implant and accrues over time based on patient risk factors. Patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR also have a sizable risk of life-threatening or major bleeding. Although dual antiplatelet therapy for 3 to 6 months after TAVR is the guideline-recommended regimen, this practice is not well supported by current evidence. In patients with no indication for oral anticoagulation, current registry-based evidence suggests that single antiplatelet therapy may be safer than dual antiplatelet therapy. Similarly, oral anticoagulation monotherapy appears superior to anticoagulation plus antiplatelet therapy in those where oral anticoagulant use is indicated. To date, no risk prediction models have been established to guide antithrombotic therapy.

Conclusions and Relevance

Despite the growing volume of TAVR procedures to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis, evidence for adjunctive antithrombotic therapy remains rather scarce. Ongoing clinical trials will provide better understanding to guide antithrombotic therapy.

Comparison of a Complete Percutaneous Versus Surgical Approach to Aortic Valve Replacement and Revascularization in Patients at Intermediate Surgical Risk: Results From the Randomized SURTAVI Trial

BACKGROUND

For patients with severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease, the completely percutaneous approach to aortic valve replacement and revascularization has not been compared with the standard surgical approach.

METHODS

The prospective SURTAVI trial (Safety and Efficiency Study of the Medtronic CoreValve System in the Treatment of Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement) enrolled intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis from 87 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe between June 2012 and June 2016. Complex coronary artery disease with SYNTAX score (Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Trial) >22 was an exclusion criterion. Patients were stratified according to the need for revascularization and then randomly assigned to treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Patients assigned to revascularization in the TAVR group underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, whereas those in the SAVR group had coronary artery bypass grafting. The primary end point was the rate of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years.

RESULTS

Of 1660 subjects with attempted aortic valve implants, 332 (20%) were assigned to revascularization. They had a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score for mortality (4.8±1.7% versus 4.4±1.5%; P<0.01) and were more likely to be male (65.1% versus 54.2%; P<0.01) than the 1328 patients not assigned to revascularization. After randomization to treatment, there were 169 patients undergoing TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention, 163 patients undergoing SAVR and coronary artery bypass grafting, 695 patients undergoing TAVR, and 633 patients undergoing SAVR. No significant difference in the rate of the primary end point was found between TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention and SAVR and coronary artery bypass grafting (16.0%; 95% CI, 11.1-22.9 versus 14.0%; 95% CI, 9.2-21.1; P=0.62), or between TAVR and SAVR (11.9%; 95% CI, 9.5-14.7 versus 12.3%; 95% CI, 9.8-15.4; P=0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients at intermediate surgical risk with severe aortic stenosis and noncomplex coronary artery disease (SYNTAX score ≤22), a complete percutaneous approach of TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention is a reasonable alternative to SAVR and coronary artery bypass grafting.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov. Unique identifier: NCT01586910.

Risk factors associated with excessive negative energy balance in commercial United Kingdom dairy herds

This study assessed risk factors associated with excessive negative energy balance (eNEB) in UK dairy cows between April 2006 and March 2015. Blood samples were analysed for β-hydroxybutyrate (BHB), non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) and glucose. Following removal of all potential duplicate cows, a final dataset of 69,161 unique individual cows was obtained including biochemical results, individual cow and feed data. Generalised linear mixed-effect models and multivariable classification tree-based models showed that individual cow risk factors for eNEB included: (1) days relative to predicted calving date (dry cows); (2) days in milk (lactating cows); (3) body condition score (BCS; lactating cows ≥ BCS 4; OR 2.1); (4) milk yield (around 40 L per day); (5) parity (first lactation heifers; odds ratio [OR] 0.46 compared to older cows during lactation); and (6) chronic inflammatory conditions as assessed by globulin concentrations ≥ 50 g/L (OR 0.79 for cows with evidence of chronic inflammation). There was a higher prevalence during April to October (OR 1.19), and the lowest prevalence was in November. Feeding grass silage and wholecrop (silage made from cereal crops) to dry cows was associated with a reduced prevalence of eNEB, whereas access to grazed grass was associated with a higher prevalence in both the dry period (OR 1.32) and lactation (OR 1.33). Knowledge of the risk factors associated with eNEB in commercial dairy herds assists in both the implementation of herd monitoring programs and reduction of eNEB in dairy herds, with associated reductions in the risk of periparturient diseases and improved dairy cow performance.

Prevalence of excessive negative energy balance in commercial United Kingdom dairy herds

The objectives of this study were to determine the individual animal and herd level prevalence of excessive negative energy balance (eNEB) in commercial UK dairy herds. Between April 2006 and March 2015, blood samples from 84,369 individual cows from 1748 different UK farms were received by a commercial laboratory service specializing in dairy cow nutritional monitoring. Following removal of all potential duplicate cows, the final dataset comprised 69,161 unique individual cows. The prevalence of eNEB was determined using plasma thresholds of β-hydroxybutyrate (BHB), non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) and glucose. Overall prevalence of subclinical ketosis (SCK) in the first 20 days of lactation was 28.5%, 17.3% and 11.7% using BHB thresholds of 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4 mmol/L respectively. Prevalence of NEFA values ≥0.5 mmol/L in the last 10 days prior to calving was 26.0%, and 40.3% of cows had NEFA values ≥0.7 mmol/L in the first 20 days in milk (DIM). Combining BHB, NEFA and glucose showed that 52.0% of cows had one or more of the three biochemical measures of energy balance outside the respective threshold value in the last 10 days pre-calving, and 75.2% of cows showed a similar biochemical pattern in the first 20 DIM. The median herd prevalence of elevated BHB and/or NEFA was 37.5% in late pregnancy and 59.8% in the first 20 DIM, with substantial herd variation. Using multiple measures for the assessment of energy balance, this study has shown that eNEB affects substantial numbers of UK dairy cows.