Design Issues of Randomized Phase II Trials and a Proposal for Phase II Screening Trials

Efficacy of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy in patients with oligometastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: A phase II study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) can extend survival and offers the potential for cure in some patients with oligometastatic disease (OMD). However, limited evidence exists regarding its use in oligometastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to prospectively investigate the efficacy and safety of SABR in patients with oligometastatic HCC.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with controlled primary HCC and one to five metastatic lesions amenable to SABR. The primary endpoint was treatment efficacy defined as overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included time to local progression, objective response rate, disease control rate, toxicities, and quality of life (QOL), assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 before, and 0, 1, and 3 months after SABR.

RESULTS

Overall, 40 consecutive patients received SABR on 62 lesions between 2021 and 2022. The most common locations for OMD were the lungs (48.4%), lymph nodes (22.6%), and bone (17.7%). After a median follow-up of 15.5 months, the 2-year OS was 80%. Median PFS was 5.3 months, with 1- and 2-year PFS rates of 21.2% and 0%, respectively. A shorter time to OMD from the controlled primary independently correlated with PFS (p = 0.039, hazard ratio 2.127) alongside age, Child-Pugh class, and alpha-fetoprotein (p = 0.002, 0.004, 0.019, respectively). The 2-year time to local progression, objective response rate, and disease control rate were 91.1%, 75.8%, and 98.4%, respectively. Overall, 10% of patients experienced acute toxicity, and 7.5% experienced late toxicity, with no grade 3+ toxicity. All QOL scores remained stable, whereas the patients without systemic treatments had improved insomnia and social functioning scores.

CONCLUSIONS

SABR is an effective and feasible option for oligometastatic HCC that leads to excellent local tumor control and improves survival without adversely affecting QOL.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is a non-invasive treatment approach capable of efficiently ablating the target lesion; however, neither the oligometastatic disease concept nor the potential benefits of SABR have been well-defined in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). According to this study, SABR is an effective and safe treatment option for oligometastatic HCC, yielding excellent local tumor control and survival improvement without worsening patients' quality of life, regardless of tumor sites. We also demonstrated that patients with a later presentation of OMD from the controlled primary and lower alpha-fetoprotein levels achieved better survival outcomes. This is the first prospective study of SABR in oligometastatic HCC, providing insights for the development of novel strategies to improve oncologic outcomes.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT05173610.

Surgery with or Without Darolutamide in High-risk and/or Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: The SUGAR (CCAFU-PR2) Phase 2 Trial Rationale and Protocol

BACKGROUND

High-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients frequently experience recurrence and progression after radical prostatectomy (RP). Neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has not demonstrated a clear oncological benefit and is not currently recommended.

OBJECTIVE

The SUGAR trial is the first phase 2, randomised, controlled, multicentre, noncommercial, open-label study investigating single-agent perioperative darolutamide compared with the standard of care (ie, upfront RP, without neoadjuvant ADT).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

SUGAR aims to randomise 240 men affected by nonmetastatic PCa, with the major eligibility criteria being International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥4, seminal vesicle invasion at magnetic resonance imaging and/or clinically node-positive disease. Patients in the experimental arm will undergo neoadjuvant darolutamide monotherapy, RP, and adjuvant darolutamide, completing 9 mo of treatment.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint is noncurable recurrence-free survival, an innovative and clinically meaningful measure; the secondary endpoints encompass safety; recurrence-free, metastasis-free, and overall survival; pathological response; and quality of life. A predictive biomarker analysis will also be performed.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Initial data suggest that intensified neoadjuvant treatment with androgen receptor signalling inhibitors (ARSIs) is associated with a sustained pathological response and may improve outcomes, via tumour downstaging and micrometastasis eradication. ARSI monotherapy could further enhance tolerability.

CONCLUSIONS

SUGAR will provide efficacy and safety information on perioperative darolutamide monotherapy compared with upfront RP, in a contemporary high-risk PCa population undergoing surgery.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The on-going SUGAR clinical trial evaluates 9 mo of darolutamide treatment in addition to radical prostatectomy, in men affected by prostate cancer with specific high-risk characteristics. It investigates whether this hormonal treatment can lower the rates of noncurable recurrences, maintaining a favourable tolerability profile.

Electron transport chain capacity expands yellow fever vaccine immunogenicity

Vaccination has successfully controlled several infectious diseases although better vaccines remain desirable. Host response to vaccination studies have identified correlates of vaccine immunogenicity that could be useful to guide development and selection of future vaccines. However, it remains unclear whether these findings represent mere statistical correlations or reflect functional associations with vaccine immunogenicity. Functional associations, rather than statistical correlates, would offer mechanistic insights into vaccine-induced adaptive immunity. Through a human experimental study to test the immunomodulatory properties of metformin, an anti-diabetic drug, we chanced upon a functional determinant of neutralizing antibodies. Although vaccine viremia is a known correlate of antibody response, we found that in healthy volunteers with no detectable or low yellow fever 17D viremia, metformin-treated volunteers elicited higher neutralizing antibody titers than placebo-treated volunteers. Transcriptional and metabolomic analyses collectively showed that a brief course of metformin, started 3 days prior to YF17D vaccination and stopped at 3 days after vaccination, expanded oxidative phosphorylation and protein translation capacities. These increased capacities directly correlated with YF17D neutralizing antibody titers, with reduced reactive oxygen species response compared to placebo-treated volunteers. Our findings thus demonstrate a functional association between cellular respiration and vaccine-induced humoral immunity and suggest potential approaches to enhancing vaccine immunogenicity.

Design of randomized clinical trials with a binary endpoint: Conditional versus unconditional analyses of a two-by-two table

When designing a randomized clinical trial to compare two treatments, the sample size required to have desired power with a specified type 1 error depends on the hypothesis testing procedure. With a binary endpoint (e.g., response), the trial results can be displayed in a 2 × 2 table. If one does the analysis conditional on the number of positive responses, then using Fisher's exact test has an actual type 1 error less than or equal to the specified nominal type 1 error. Alternatively, one can use one of many unconditional "exact" tests that also preserve the type 1 error and are less conservative than Fisher's exact test. In particular, the unconditional test of Boschloo is always at least as powerful as Fisher's exact test, leading to smaller required sample sizes for clinical trials. However, many statisticians have argued over the years that the conditional analysis with Fisher's exact test is the only appropriate procedure. Since having smaller clinical trials is an extremely important consideration, we review the general arguments given for the conditional analysis of a 2 × 2 table in the context of a randomized clinical trial. We find the arguments not relevant in this context, or, if relevant, not completely convincing, suggesting the sample-size advantage of the unconditional tests should lead to their recommended use. We also briefly suggest that since designers of clinical trials practically always have target null and alternative response rates, there is the possibility of using this information to improve the power of the unconditional tests.

Trifluridine/tipiracil + oxaliplatin ± nivolumab vs FOLFOX ± nivolumab in HER2 negative advanced oesogastric adenocarcinoma: The PRODIGE73-UCGI40-LOGICAN trial

BACKGROUND

Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) is approved in third-line treatment of patients with advanced/metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas (aGA/GEJA). The association of oxaliplatin with FTD/TPI is promising and the combination of FTD/TPI + oxaliplatin + nivolumab has shown a predictable and manageable safety profile.

AIMS

The aim is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FTD/TPI plus oxaliplatin with or without nivolumab in patients, with HER2 negative aGA/GEJA, unfit for triplet chemotherapy (TFOX/mFLOT regimen), in the first-line metastatic setting in comparison with the standard of care FOLFOX with or without nivolumab.

METHODS

This study is a prospective randomised, open label, comparative, multicentre, phase II trial designed to include 118 patients. The primary objective is to evaluate the superiority of FTD/TPI plus oxaliplatin with or without nivolumab over FOLFOX regimen with or without nivolumab in terms of PFS in a population of patients non candidate for triplet chemotherapy. Nivolumab will be used for patients whose tumour express PD-L1 with a CPS score ≥5.

DISCUSSION

PRODIGE73-UCGI40-LOGICAN study will provide efficacy and safety data on the association of FTD/TPI plus oxaliplatin with or without nivolumab versus FOLFOX regimen with or without nivolumab in first-line palliative setting, in patients with aGA/GEJA (NCT05476796).

Wireless Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Chronic Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN): A Proof-of-Concept Randomized Clinical Trial

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) affects approximately 30 to 60% of people who receive neurotoxic chemotherapy. CIPN is associated with impaired quality of life and function and has few effective treatments. This 6-site, subject and assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) was designed to assess 1) preliminary efficacy (ie, alpha pre-specified at .2) of a wearable, app-controlled, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) device for chronic CIPN and 2) feasibility of conducting a confirmatory trial within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) (NCT04367480). The primary outcome was the EORTC-CIPN20. The main secondary outcomes were individual symptoms assessed daily (via 0-10 numeric rating scales). The primary analysis was an analysis of covariance (outcome: EORTC-CIPN20, fixed effect: arm, covariates: baseline EORTC-CIPN20 and site). Secondary analyses used a similar analysis of covariance models (excluding site) for each symptom on subgroups of subjects with ≥4 out of 10 for that symptom at baseline. 142 eligible subjects were randomized and received a device; 130 (91%) completed the study. The difference between groups in the EORCT-CIPN20 at the endpoint (placebo-active) was 1.05 (95% Confidence Interval: -.56, 2.67; P = .199). The difference between groups for the individual symptoms was as follows: hot/burning pain: 1.37 (-.33, 3.08; P = .112), sharp/shooting pain: 1.21 (-.37, 2.79; P = .128), cramping: 1.35 (-.32, 3.02; P = .110), tingling: .23 (-.61, 1.08; P = .587), numbness: .27 (-.51, 1.05; P = .492). An RCT of an app-controlled TENS device for chronic CIPN with excellent retention is feasible in the NCORP. Preliminary efficacy evidence suggests that TENS is promising for pain and cramping from CIPN. A confirmatory RCT of TENS for painful CIPN is highly warranted. PERSPECTIVE: Daily, home-based TENS therapy demonstrates promising efficacy for painful CIPN symptoms in this proof-of-concept randomized clinical trial. Future confirmatory trial is warranted.

Late Toxicity of Prostate Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy Compared With Moderate Hypofractionation in a Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

We report late toxicity, quality of life (QOL), and urinary symptom score with prostate cancer radiation therapy in a randomized trial comparing moderate hypofractionation and ultrahypofrationation.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer were randomized to either Arm 1 (70 Gy/28 fractions) or Arm 2 (36.25 Gy/5 weekly fractions). Late toxicity was evaluated using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group/Subjective, Objective, Management, Analytical scales. QOL was assessed with the Expanded Prostate Inventory Composite-26 Short Form and urinary function with the International Prostate Symptom Score.

RESULTS

Eighty participants were randomized. Two from Arm 1 withdrew, leaving 36 patients in Arm 1 and 42 in Arm 2. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, except for worse International Prostate Symptom Score in Arm 2. No difference was observed in freedom from grade 3 or worse toxicity between treatments (P = .921), with only a single grade 3 event in each arm. There was no significant difference in freedom from grade 2 or worse toxicity (P = .280). No difference was observed in freedom from grade 2 or worse genitorurinary toxicity, with cumulative probabilities of 69.0% and 87.0% at 5 years for Arms 1 and 2, respectively (0.132). No difference was observed in freedom from grade 2 or worse gastrointestinal toxicity, with cumulative probabilities of 74.0% in Arm 1 and 80.0% in Arm 2 (P = .430). There were no significant differences in Expanded Prostate Inventory Composite-26 Short Form QOL between arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrahypofrationation, delivered weekly, is well tolerated with no significant differences in freedom from late toxicity compared with moderate hypofractionation.

Progesterone for Neurodevelopment in Fetuses With Congenital Heart Defects: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Neurodevelopmental outcomes for children with congenital heart defects (CHD) have improved minimally over the past 20 years.

Objectives

To assess the feasibility and tolerability of maternal progesterone therapy as well as the magnitude of the effect on neurodevelopment for fetuses with CHD.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This double-blinded individually randomized parallel-group clinical trial of vaginal natural progesterone therapy vs placebo in participants carrying fetuses with CHD was conducted between July 2014 and November 2021 at a quaternary care children's hospital. Participants included maternal-fetal dyads where the fetus had CHD identified before 28 weeks' gestational age and was likely to need surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass in the neonatal period. Exclusion criteria included a major genetic or extracardiac anomaly other than 22q11 deletion syndrome and known contraindication to progesterone. Statistical analysis was performed June 2022 to April 2024.

Intervention

Participants were 1:1 block-randomized to vaginal progesterone or placebo by diagnosis: hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS), transposition of the great arteries (TGA), and other CHD diagnoses. Treatment was administered twice daily between 28 and up to 39 weeks' gestational age.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the motor score of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-III; secondary outcomes included language and cognitive scales. Exploratory prespecified subgroups included cardiac diagnosis, fetal sex, genetic profile, and maternal fetal environment.

Results

The 102 enrolled fetuses primarily had HLHS (n = 52 [50.9%]) and TGA (n = 38 [37.3%]), were more frequently male (n = 67 [65.7%]), and without genetic anomalies (n = 61 [59.8%]). The mean motor score differed by 2.5 units (90% CI, -1.9 to 6.9 units; P = .34) for progesterone compared with placebo, a value not statistically different from 0. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested treatment heterogeneity for the motor score for cardiac diagnosis (P for interaction = .03) and fetal sex (P for interaction = .04), but not genetic profile (P for interaction = .16) or maternal-fetal environment (P for interaction = .70).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of maternal progesterone therapy, the overall effect was not statistically different from 0. Subgroup analyses suggest heterogeneity of the response to progesterone among CHD diagnosis and fetal sex.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02133573.

Decreasing polypharmacy in older adults with cancer: A pilot cluster-randomized trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with cancer and associated with multiple adverse outcomes. A single-site, cluster-randomized clinical trial will enroll older adults with cancer and polypharmacy starting chemotherapy and will assess the effectiveness and feasibility of deprescribing interventions by comparing two arms: a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention and a patient educational brochure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews will guide adaptation of deprescribing interventions for the oncology clinic (phase Ia), and eight patients will undergo the pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with iterative adaptations (phase Ib). In phase II, a pilot cluster-randomized trial (n = 72) will compare a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with a patient education brochure, with treating oncologists as the cluster. Both efficacy (relative dose intensity of planned chemotherapy, potentially inappropriate medications successfully deprescribed, chemotherapy toxicity, functional status, hospitalizations, falls, and symptoms) and implementation outcomes (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed.

DISCUSSION

This study is anticipated to provide pilot data to inform a nationwide randomized clinical trial of deprescribing in older adults starting cancer treatment. The cluster randomization is intended to provide an initial estimate for the intervention effect as well as oncologists' intra-class correlation coefficient. Deprescribing interventions may improve outcomes in older adults starting cancer treatment, but these interventions are understudied in this population, and it is unknown how best to implement them into oncology practice. The results of this trial will inform the design of large, randomized phase III trials of deprescribing.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier:NCT05046171. Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Whole-Brain Radiotherapy Alone vs Preceded by Bevacizumab, Etoposide, and Cisplatin for Untreated Brain Metastases From Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The incidence of brain metastasis is increasing in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Treatments to extend the control of brain metastasis are urgently required.

Objective

To investigate whether the addition of an induction treatment of bevacizumab, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEEP) improves brain-specific progression-free survival (PFS) after whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This open-label, randomized, multicenter clinical trial assessed patients with brain metastases from breast cancer (BMBC) in Taiwan from September 9, 2014, to December 24, 2018, with survival follow-up until December 31, 2021. Key inclusion criteria included metastatic brain tumors not suitable for focal treatment, WBRT naivety, age 20 to 75 years, and at least 1 measurable brain metastatic lesion. The primary end point was brain-specific PFS, with an expected hazard ratio of 0.60, a 2-sided α ≤ .20, and power of 0.8.

Interventions

Eligible patients were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 to the experimental arm, which involved 3 cycles of BEEP followed by WBRT, or the control arm, which involved WBRT alone.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the determination of brain-specific PFS by local investigators according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, the initiation of other brain-directed treatment after WBRT, or death. Other key end points included brain-specific objective response rate after 8 weeks of BEEP treatment or WBRT and 8-month brain-specific PFS rate, PFS, and overall survival.

Results

A total of 118 patients with BMBC were randomized, with the intention-to-treat cohort comprising 112 patients. The median age was 56 years (range, 34-71 years), and 61 patients (54.5%) had ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)-positive disease. The median (range) brain-specific PFS was 8.1 (0.3-29.5) vs 6.5 (0.9-25.5) months in the experimental and control arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.44-1.13; P = .15; significant at predefined α ≤ .20). The brain-specific objective response rate at 2 months was not significantly different (BEEP treatment vs WBRT, 41.9% vs 52.6%), but the 8-month brain-specific PFS rate was significantly higher in the experimental group (48.7% vs 26.3%; P = .03). Adverse events were generally manageable with prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor treatment.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings show that induction BEEP before WBRT may improve the control of BMBC compared with using upfront WBRT, which could address an unmet need for an effective systemic treatment for intractable brain and extracranial metastases from metastatic breast cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02185352.

Randomized phase II selection design with order constrained strata

The exploratory nature of phase II trials makes it quite common to include heterogeneous patient subgroups with different prognoses in the same trial. Incorporating such patient heterogeneity or stratification into statistical calculation for sample size can improve efficiency and reduce sample sizes in single-arm phase II trials with binary outcomes. However, such consideration is lacking in randomized phase II trials. In this paper, we propose methods that can utilize some natural order constraints that may exist in stratified population to gain statistical efficiency for randomized phase II designs. For thoroughness and simplicity, we focus on the randomized phase II selection designs in this paper, although our method can be easily generalized to the randomized phase II screening designs. We consider both binary and time-to-event outcomes in our development. Compared with methods that do not use order constraints, our method is shown to improve the probabilities of correct selection or reduce sample size in our simulation and real examples.

Association of Radiochemotherapy to Immunotherapy in unresectable locally advanced Oesophageal carciNoma-randomized phase 2 trial ARION UCGI 33/PRODIGE 67: the study protocol

BACKGROUND

In case of locally advanced and/or non-metastatic unresectable esophageal cancer, definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) delivering 50 Gy in 25 daily fractions in combination with platinum-based regimen remains the standard of care resulting in a 2-year disease-free survival of 25% which deserves to be associated with new systemic strategies. In recent years, several immune checkpoint inhibitors (anti-PD1/anti-PD-L1, anti-Program-Death 1/anti-Program-Death ligand 1) have been approved for the treatment of various solid malignancies including metastatic esophageal cancer. As such, we hypothesized that the addition of an anti-PD-L1 to CRT would provide clinical benefit for patients with locally advanced oesophageal cancer. To assess the efficacy of the anti-PD-L1 durvalumab in combination with CRT and then as maintenance therapy we designed the randomized phase II ARION (Association of Radiochemotherapy with Immunotherapy in unresectable Oesophageal carciNoma- UCGI 33/PRODIGE 67).

METHODS

ARION is a multicenter, open-label, randomized, comparative phase II trial. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio in each arm with a stratification according to tumor stage, histology and centre. Experimental arm relies on CRT with 50 Gy in 25 daily fractions in combination with FOLFOX regimen administrated during and after radiotherapy every two weeks for a total of 6 cycles and durvalumab starting with CRT for a total of 12 infusions. Standard arm is CRT alone. Use of Intensity Modulated radiotherapy is mandatory. The primary endpoint is to increase progression-free survival at 12 months from 50 to 68% (HR = 0.55) (power 90%; one-sided alpha-risk, 10%). Progression will be defined with central external review of imaging.

ANCILLARY STUDIES ARE PLANNED

PD-L1 Combined Positivity Score on carcinoma cells and stromal immune cells of diagnostic biopsy specimen will be correlated to disease free survival. The study of gut microbiota will aim to determine if baseline intestinal bacteria correlates with tumor response. Proteomic analysis on blood samples will compare long-term responder after CRT with durvalumab to non-responder to identify biomarkers.

CONCLUSION

Results of the present study will be of great importance to evaluate the impact of immunotherapy in combination with CRT and decipher immune response in this unmet need clinical situation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT: 03777813.Trial registration date: 5th December 2018.

Delta tocotrienol as a supplement to FOLFOXIRI in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study

PURPOSE

Triplet chemotherapy might be more effective than doublet chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but it may also be marked by increased toxicity. To investigate whether δ-tocotrienol, a vitamin E analogue, with possible neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects, reduces the toxicity of triplet chemotherapy, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in mCRC patients receiving first-line 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Seventy patients with mCRC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive FOLFOXIRI plus either δ-tocotrienol or placebo at the Department of Oncology, Vejle Hospital, Denmark. Eligibility criteria were adenocarcinoma in the colon or rectum, age 18-75 years and ECOG performance status 0-1. FOLFOXIRI was given in eight cycles followed by four cycles of 5-fluorouracil. δ-tocotrienol 300 mg or placebo × 3 daily was added during chemotherapy and for a maximum of two years. The primary endpoint was time to hospitalization or death during treatment with chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Median time to first hospitalization or death was 3.7 months in the placebo group (95% CI 1.93-not reached (NR)), and was NR in the δ-tocotrienol group (95% CI 1.87-NR) with a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI 0.36-1.36). Grade 3-4 toxicities were uncommon in both groups, except for neutropenia, which occurred in 19 patients (58%) in the placebo group and 17 patients (50%) in the δ-tocotrienol group. There were no grade 3 or 4 peripheral sensory neuropathy. In the placebo group, 24 patients (71%) had oxaliplatin dose reductions compared to 17 patients (47%) in the δ-tocotrienol group (p = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

The addition of δ-tocotrienol to FOLFOXIRI did not statistically significant prolong the time to first hospitalization or death compared to FOLFOXIRI plus placebo. Toxicity was manageable and not statistically different. There was a statistically significant difference in dose reductions of oxaliplatin pointing to a possible neuroprotective effect of δ-tocotrienol.

A phase II randomised controlled trial of adjuvant tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes for pretreatment Epstein-Barr virus DNA-selected high-risk nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients

PURPOSE

The safety and objective clinical responses were observed in the phase I study using adjuvant autologous tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) following concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

One hundred fifty-six patients with stage III-IVb and pretreatment Epstein-Barr virus DNA levels of ≥4000 copies/ml were randomly assigned to receive CCRT combined with TIL infusion (n = 78) or CCRT alone (n = 78). All patients received CCRT and patients assigned to the TIL group received TIL infusion within 1 week after CCRT. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) at 3 years.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 62.3 months, no significant difference was observed in the 3-year PFS rate between the CCRT plus TIL infusion group and CCRT alone group (75.6% versus 74.4%, hazard ratios, 1.08; 95% confidence intervals, 0.62-1.89). TIL infusion was safe without grade 3 or 4 adverse events and all the high-grade adverse effects were associated with myelosuppression caused by CCRT. Exploratory analysis showed that a potential survival benefit was observed with TILs in patients with lower levels of circulating CD8+TIM3+ cells, serum IL-8 or PD-L1. The infused TIL products in patients with favourable outcomes were associated with increased transcription of interferon-γ and a series of inflammatory related genes and a lower exhausted score.

CONCLUSION

The primary objective of prolonging PFS with CCRT plus TILs in high-risk NPC patients was not met. These findings may provide evidence for the design of future trials investigating the combination of TILs plus immune checkpoint inhibitors based on CCRT in high-risk NPC patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02421640.

Evolution of Phase II Oncology Trial Design: from Single Arm to Master Protocol

The recent development of novel anticancer treatments with diverse mechanisms of action has accelerated the detection of treatment candidates tremendously. The rapidly changing drug development landscapes and the high failure rates in Phase III trials both underscore the importance of more efficient and robust phase II designs. The goals of phase II oncology studies are to explore the preliminary efficacy and toxicity of the investigational product and to inform future drug development strategies such as go/no-go decisions for phase III development, or dose/indication selection. These complex purposes of phase II oncology designs call for efficient, flexible, and easy-to-implement clinical trial designs. Therefore, innovative adaptive study designs with the potential of improving the efficiency of the study, protecting patients, and improving the quality of information gained from trials have been commonly used in Phase II oncology studies. Although the value of adaptive clinical trial methods in early phase drug development is generally well accepted, there is no comprehensive review and guidance on adaptive design methods and their best practice for phase II oncology trials. In this paper, we review the recent development and evolution of phase II oncology design, including frequentist multistage design, Bayesian continuous monitoring, master protocol design, and innovative design methods for randomized phase II studies. The practical considerations and the implementation of these complex design methods are also discussed.

Combination Early-Phase Trials of Anticancer Agents in Children and Adolescents

PURPOSE

There is an increasing need to evaluate innovative drugs for childhood cancer using combination strategies. Strong biological rationale and clinical experience suggest that multiple agents will be more efficacious than monotherapy for most diseases and may overcome resistance mechanisms and increase synergy. The process to evaluate these combination trials needs to maximize efficiency and should be agreed by all stakeholders.

METHODS

After a review of existing combination trial methodologies, regulatory requirements, and current results, a consensus among stakeholders was achieved.

RESULTS

Combinations of anticancer therapies should be developed on the basis of mechanism of action and robust preclinical evaluation, and may include data from adult clinical trials. The general principle for combination early-phase studies is that, when possible, clinical trials should be dose- and schedule-confirmatory rather than dose-exploratory, and every effort should be made to optimize doses early. Efficient early-phase combination trials should be seamless, including dose confirmation and randomized expansion. Dose evaluation designs for combinations depend on the extent of previous knowledge. If not previously evaluated, limited evaluation of monotherapy should be included in the same clinical trial as the combination. Randomized evaluation of a new agent plus standard therapy versus standard therapy is the most effective approach to isolate the effect and toxicity of the novel agent. Platform trials may be valuable in the evaluation of combination studies. Patient advocates and regulators should be engaged with investigators early in a proposed clinical development pathway and trial design must consider regulatory requirements.

CONCLUSION

An optimized, agreed approach to the design and evaluation of early-phase pediatric combination trials will accelerate drug development and benefit all stakeholders, most importantly children and adolescents with cancer.

Design of phase II oncology trials evaluating combinations of experimental agents

We consider the design of phase II trials evaluating combinations of experimental therapies. In the modern era, many immunotherapy and targeted therapy regimens are being developed as combination regimens, including combinations consisting only of experimental agents. In some clinical or drug development scenarios, it may be difficult to isolate the effect of the individual agents composing a combination of this type, which makes the evaluation of the combination challenging. One such scenario arises when none of the agents making up the experimental combination have demonstrated single-agent activity in the clinical setting of interest. One solution to this problem is to use a randomized comparative trial in which the combination of interest is compared with 1 or both of its component agents, but some modifications to more traditional randomized comparative phase II trials must be made because all arms in such a trial would be experimental. In this manuscript, we present sensible modifications to randomized phase II trial designs that can be used in 2 common drug development scenarios of this type and provide a detailed discussion of the practical aspects of designing these trials. We also include 2 worked examples to further illustrate how to design such a trial.

Bypassing phase 2 in cancer drug development erodes the risk/benefit balance in phase 3 trials

OBJECTIVES

Drug developers sometimes launch phase 3 (P3) trials without supporting evidence from phase 2 (P2) trials. We call this practice "P2 bypass." The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of P2 bypass and to compare the safety and efficacy results for P3 trials that bypassed with those that did not.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We created a sample of P3 solid tumor trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with primary completion dates between 2013 and 2019. We then attempted to match each with a supporting P2 trial using strict and broad criteria. P3 outcomes were meta-analyzed using a random effects model with subgroup contrast between trials that bypassed and those that did not.

RESULTS

129 P3 trial arms met eligibility and nearly half involved P2 bypass. P3 trials involving P2 bypass produced significantly and nonsignificantly worse pooled efficacy estimates using broad and strict matching criteria, respectively. We did not observe significant differences in safety outcomes between P3 trials that bypassed P2 and those that did not.

CONCLUSION

The risk/benefit balance of P3 trials that bypassed P2 is less favourable than for trials supported by P2.

Dose optimization during drug development: whether and when to optimize

The goal of dose optimization during drug development is to identify a dose that preserves clinical benefit with optimal tolerability. Traditionally, the maximum tolerated dose in a small phase I dose escalation study is used in the phase II trial assessing clinical activity of the agent. Although it is possible that this dose level could be altered in the phase II trial if an unexpected level of toxicity is seen, no formal dose optimization has routinely been incorporated into later stages of drug development. Recently it has been suggested that formal dose optimization (involving randomly assigning patients between 2 or more dose levels) be routinely performed early in drug development, even before it is known that the experimental therapy has any clinical activity at any dose level. We consider the relative merits of performing dose optimization earlier vs later in the drug development process and demonstrate that a considerable number of patients may be exposed to ineffective therapies unless dose optimization is delayed until after clinical activity or benefit of the new agent has been established. We conclude that patient and public health interests may be better served by conducting dose optimization after (or during) phase III evaluation, with some exceptions when dose optimization should be performed after activity shown in phase II evaluation.

NRG Oncology/RTOG1205: A Randomized Phase II Trial of Concurrent Bevacizumab and Reirradiation Versus Bevacizumab Alone as Treatment for Recurrent Glioblastoma

PURPOSE

To assess whether reirradiation (re-RT) and concurrent bevacizumab (BEV) improve overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS), compared with BEV alone in recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). The primary objective was OS, and secondary objectives included PFS, response rate, and treatment adverse events (AEs) including delayed CNS toxicities.

METHODS

NRG Oncology/RTOG1205 is a prospective, phase II, randomized trial of re-RT and BEV versus BEV alone. Stratification factors included age, resection, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS). Patients with recurrent GBM with imaging evidence of tumor progression ≥ 6 months from completion of prior chemo-RT were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to re-RT, 35 Gy in 10 fractions, with concurrent BEV IV 10 mg/kg once in every 2 weeks or BEV alone until progression.

RESULTS

From December 2012 to April 2016, 182 patients were randomly assigned, of whom 170 were eligible. Patient characteristics were well balanced between arms. The median follow-up for censored patients was 12.8 months. There was no improvement in OS for BEV + RT, hazard ratio, 0.98; 80% CI, 0.79 to 1.23; P = .46; the median survival time was 10.1 versus 9.7 months for BEV + RT versus BEV alone. The median PFS for BEV + RT was 7.1 versus 3.8 months for BEV, hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.0; P = .05. The 6-month PFS rate improved from 29.1% (95% CI, 19.1 to 39.1) for BEV to 54.3% (95% CI, 43.5 to 65.1) for BEV + RT, P = .001. Treatment was well tolerated. There were a 5% rate of acute grade 3+ treatment-related AEs and no delayed high-grade AEs. Most patients died of recurrent GBM.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, NRG Oncology/RTOG1205 is the first prospective, randomized multi-institutional study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of re-RT in recurrent GBM using modern RT techniques. Overall, re-RT was shown to be safe and well tolerated. BEV + RT demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS, specifically the 6-month PFS rate but no difference in OS.

Design, power, and alpha levels in randomized phase II oncology trials

BACKGROUND

The statistical plan of a phase II trial should balance minimizing the premature termination of potentially beneficial therapies (i.e. false negatives) and the further, costly testing of ineffective drugs (i.e. false positives). We sought to examine the methodology, reporting, and bias in the interpretation of outcomes of phase II oncology trials in recent years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective cross-sectional analysis, we reviewed all full-length articles published on PubMed from 1 January 2021 to 20 June 2022. We searched for data regarding the sample size calculation (number, α value, power, and expected effect size), the primary and secondary outcomes and results, and the authors' conclusion of the study.

RESULTS

About 5.4% of studies (n = 10) used a statistical power that was inferior to 80%, and 16.7% (n = 34) did not indicate the level of power for the sample size calculation. Approximately 16.7% (n = 31) of studies used a one-sided α level of ≤0.025; 17.7% (n = 33) of studies used a predefined threshold (no comparator effect size or difference between groups) to determine the sample size for efficacy. The percentage of studies with a positive authors' conclusion but not meeting the primary endpoint, or the endpoint was equivocal, was 27.4% (n = 51).

CONCLUSION

Many randomized phase II studies in oncology failed to report essential data for determining sample size calculations, many did not actually use a comparator to determine efficacy even though the studies were randomized, and many had positive conclusions even though the results were indeterminate or the primary endpoint was not met.

Radiotherapy and paclitaxel plus pazopanib or placebo in anaplastic thyroid cancer (NRG/RTOG 0912): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Anaplastic thyroid cancer is a rare and aggressive cancer with no standard radiotherapy-based local treatment. Based on data suggesting synergy between pazopanib and paclitaxel in anaplastic thyroid cancer, NRG Oncology did a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 2 clinical trial comparing concurrent paclitaxel and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with the addition of pazopanib or placebo with the aim of improving overall survival in this patient population.

METHODS

Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with a pathological diagnosis of anaplastic thyroid cancer, any TNM stage, Zubrod performance status of 0-2, no recent haemoptysis or bleeding, and no brain metastases. Patients were enrolled from 34 centres in the USA. Initially, a run-in was done to establish safety. In the randomised phase 2 trial, patients in the experimental group (pazopanib) received 2-3 weeks of weekly paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) intravenously and daily pazopanib suspension 400 mg orally followed by concurrent weekly paclitaxel (50 mg/m2), daily pazopanib (300 mg), and IMRT 66 Gy given in 33 daily fractions (2 Gy fractions). In the control group (placebo), pazopanib was replaced by matching placebo. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the two treatment groups by permuted block randomisation by NRG Oncology with stratification by metastatic disease. All investigators, patients, and funders of the study were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01236547, and is complete.

FINDINGS

The safety run-showed the final dosing regimen to be safe based on two out of nine participants having adverse events of predefined concern. Between June 23, 2014, and Dec 30, 2016, 89 patients were enrolled to the phase 2 trial, of whom 71 were eligible (36 in the pazopanib group and 35 in the placebo group; 34 [48%] males and 37 [52%] females). At the final analysis (data cutoff March 9, 2020), with a median follow-up of 2·9 years (IQR 0·002-4·0), 61 patients had died. Overall survival was not significantly improved with pazopanib versus placebo, with a median overall survival of 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-12·8) in the pazopanib group versus 7·3 months (4·3-10·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·52-1·43; one-sided log-rank p=0·28). 1-year overall survival was 37·1% (95% CI 21·1-53·2) in the pazopanib group and 29·0% (13·2-44·8) in the placebo group. The incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (pazopanib 88·9% [32 of 36 patients] and placebo 85·3% [29 of 34 patients]; p=0·73). The most common clinically significant grade 3-4 adverse events in the 70 eligible treated patients (36 in the pazopanib group and 34 in the placebo group) were dysphagia (13 [36%] vs 10 [29%]), radiation dermatitis (8 [22%] vs 13 [38%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (12 [33%] vs none), increased aspartate aminotransferase (eight [22%] vs none), and oral mucositis (five [14%] vs eight [24%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported for 16 (44%) patients on pazopanib and 12 (35%) patients on placebo. The most common serious adverse events were dehydration and thromboembolic event (three [8%] each) in patients on pazopanib and oral mucositis (three [8%]) in those on placebo. There was one treatment-related death in each group (sepsis in the pazopanib group and pneumonitis in the placebo group).

INTERPRETATION

To our knowledge, this study is the largest randomised anaplastic thyroid cancer study that has completed accrual showing feasibility in a multicenter NCI National Clinical Trials Network setting. Although no significant improvement in overall survival was recorded in the pazopanib group, the treatment combination was shown to be feasible and safe, and hypothesis-generating data that might warrant further investigation were generated.

FUNDING

National Cancer Institute and Novartis.

Carboplatin and paclitaxel plus avelumab compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (MITO END-3): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Adding immunotherapy to first-line chemotherapy might improve outcomes for patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. We aimed to compare carboplatin and paclitaxel versus avelumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line treatment with avelumab given concurrent to chemotherapy and as maintenance after the end of chemotherapy.

METHODS

MITO END-3 is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial conducted at 31 cancer institutes, hospitals, and universities in Italy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed advanced (FIGO stage III-IV) or recurrent endometrial cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and no previous systemic anticancer therapy as primary treatment for advanced or metastatic disease. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computerised minimisation procedure stratified by centre, histology, and stage at study entry, to either receive carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 5 mg/mL × min) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m²; standard group) intravenously every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles or avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously) added to carboplatin and paclitaxel (experimental group) every 3 weeks and then every 2 weeks as a single maintenance treatment after the end of chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients, treating clinicians, and those assessing radiological examinations were not masked to study treatment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, measured in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analysis. Experimental group superiority was tested with 80% power and one-tailed α 0·20. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03503786) and EudraCT (2016-004403-31).

FINDINGS

From April 9, 2018, to May 13, 2021, 166 women were assessed for eligibility and 39 were excluded. 125 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin and paclitaxel (n=62) or avelumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (n=63) and included in the ITT population. The median follow-up was 23·3 months (IQR 13·2-29·6) and was similar between the two groups. 91 progression-free survival events were reported, with 49 events in 62 patients in the standard group and 42 events in 63 patients in the experimental group. The median progression-free survival was 9·9 months (95% CI 6·7-12·1) in the standard group and 9·6 months (7·2-17·7) in the experimental group (HR of progression or death 0·78 [60% CI 0·65-0·93]; one-tailed p=0·085). Serious adverse events were reported more frequently in the experimental group (24 vs seven events in the standard group); neutrophil count decrease was the most frequent grade 3-4 adverse event (19 [31%] of 61 patients in the experimental group vs 26 [43%] of 61 patients in the standard group). Two deaths occurred in the experimental group during treatment (one respiratory failure following severe myositis [possibly related to treatment] and one cardiac arrest [not related to treatment]).

INTERPRETATION

Adding avelumab to first-line chemotherapy deserves further testing in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer, although consideration of mismatch repair status is warranted.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

Augmenting randomized clinical trial data with historical control data: Precision medicine applications

As precision medicine becomes more precise, the sizes of the molecularly targeted subpopulations become increasingly smaller. This can make it challenging to conduct randomized clinical trials of the targeted therapies in a timely manner. To help with this problem of a small patient subpopulation, a study design that is frequently proposed is to conduct a small randomized clinical trial (RCT) with the intent of augmenting the RCT control arm data with historical data from a set of patients who have received the control treatment outside the RCT (historical control data). In particular, strategies have been developed that compare the treatment outcomes across the cohorts of patients treated with the standard (control) treatment to guide the use of the historical data in the analysis; this can lessen the potential well-known biases of using historical controls without any randomization. Using some simple examples and completed studies, we demonstrate in this commentary that these strategies are unlikely to be useful in precision medicine applications.

Addition of Niraparib to Best Supportive Care as Maintenance Treatment in Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Whose Disease Did Not Progress After First-line Platinum-based Chemotherapy: The Meet-URO12 Randomized Phase 2 Trial

BACKGROUND

Platinum-based chemotherapy (PBCT) is the standard first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Potential cross-sensitivity can be hypothesized between platinum drugs and poly-ADP ribose-polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE

To compare maintenance treatment with the PARP inhibitor niraparib plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced UC without disease progression after first-line PBCT.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Meet-URO12 is a randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 2 trial. Patients with advanced UC, without disease progression after four to six cycles of PBCT, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, were enrolled between August 2019 and March 2021. Randomization was stratified by ECOG performance status (0/1) and response to PBCT (objective response/stable disease).

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized (2:1) to experimental arm A (niraparib 300 or 200 mg daily according to body weight and baseline platelets, plus BSC) or control arm B (BSC alone).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The secondary endpoints reported in this primary analysis are progression-free rate at 6 mo and safety (adverse event rate).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Fifty-eight patients were randomized (39 in arm A and 19 in arm B). The median age was 69 yr, ECOG performance status was 0 in 66% and 1 in 34%; and the best response with chemotherapy was objective response in 55% and stable disease in 45%. The median PFS was 2.1 mo in arm A and 2.4 mo in arm B (hazard ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.75, p = 0.81). The 6-mo progression-free rates were 28.2% and 26.3%, respectively. The most common adverse events with niraparib were anemia (50%, grade [G]3 11%), thrombocytopenia (37%, G3-4 16%), neutropenia (21%, G3 5%), fatigue (32%, G3 16%), constipation (32%, G3 3%), mucositis (13%, G3 3%), and nausea (13%, G3 3%). The main limitation of the study is the small sample size: in March 2021, approval of maintenance avelumab for the same setting rendered randomization of patients in the control arm to BSC alone unethical, and accrual was stopped prematurely.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of maintenance niraparib to BSC after first-line PBCT did not demonstrate a significant improvement in PFS in patients with UC. These results do not support the conduction of a phase 3 trial with single agent niraparib in this population.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this trial, we tested the efficacy of niraparib as maintenance treatment in patients affected by advanced urothelial cancer after the completion of first-line chemotherapy. We could not demonstrate a significant improvement in progression-free survival with maintenance niraparib.

Immunotherapy with CD25/CD71-allodepleted T cells to improve T-cell reconstitution after matched unrelated donor hematopoietic stem cell transplant: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AIMS

Delayed immune reconstitution is a major challenge after matched unrelated donor (MUD) stem cell transplant (SCT). In this randomized phase 2 multi-center trial, Adoptive Immunotherapy with CD25/71 allodepleted donor T cells to improve immunity after unrelated donor stem cell transplant (NCT01827579), the authors tested whether allodepleted donor T cells (ADTs) can safely be used to improve immune reconstitution after alemtuzumab-based MUD SCT for hematological malignancies.

METHODS

Patients received standard of care or up to three escalating doses of ADTs generated through CD25+/CD71+ immunomagnetic depletion. The primary endpoint of the study was circulating CD3+ T-cell count at 4 months post-SCT. Twenty-one patients were treated, 13 in the ADT arm and eight in the control arm.

RESULTS

The authors observed a trend toward improved CD3+ T-cell count at 4 months in the ADT arm versus the control arm (230/µL versus 145/µL, P = 0.18), and three ADT patients achieved normal CD3+ T-cell count at 4 months (>700/µL). The rates of significant graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) were comparable in both cohorts, with grade ≥2 acute GVHD in seven of 13 and four of eight patients and chronic GVHD in three of 13 and three of eight patients in the ADT and control arms, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that adoptive transfer of ADTs is safe, but that in the MUD setting the benefit in terms of T-cell reconstitution is limited. This approach may be of more use in the context of more rigorous T-cell depletion.

Evaluation of two-stage designs of Phase 2 single-arm trials in glioblastoma: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Due to economical and ethical reasons, the two-stage designs have been widely used for Phase 2 single-arm trials in oncology because the designs allow us to stop the trial early if the proposed treatment is likely to be ineffective. Nonetheless, none has examined the usage for published articles that had applied the two-stage designs in Phase 2 single-arm trials in brain tumor. A complete systematic review and discussions for overcoming design issues might be important to better understand why oncology trials have shown low success rates in early phase trials.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed published single-arm two-stage Phase 2 trials for patients with glioblastoma and high-grade gliomas (including newly diagnosed or recurrent). We also sought to understand how these two-stage trials have been implemented and discussed potential design issues which we hope will be helpful for investigators who work with Phase 2 clinical trials in rare and high-risk cancer studies including Neuro-Oncology. The systematic review was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA)-statement. Searches were conducted using the electronic database of PubMed, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov for potentially eligible publications from inception by two independent researchers up to May 26, 2022. The followings were key words for the literature search as index terms or free-text words: "phase II trials", "glioblastoma", and "two-stage design". We extracted disease type and setting, population, therapeutic drug, primary endpoint, input parameters and sample size results from two-stage designs, and historical control reference, and study termination status.

RESULTS

Among examined 29 trials, 12 trials (41%) appropriately provided key input parameters and sample size results from two-stage design implementation. Among appropriately implemented 12 trials, discouragingly only 3 trials (10%) explained the reference information of historical control rates. Most trials (90%) used Simon's two-stage designs. Only three studies have been completed for both stages and two out of the three completed studies had shown the efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Right implementation for two-stage design and sample size calculation, transparency of historical control and experimental rates, appropriate selection on primary endpoint, potential incorporation of adaptive designs, and utilization of Phase 0 paradigm might help overcoming the challenges on glioblastoma therapeutic trials in Phase 2 trials.

Oligometastases: Emerging Evidence

The hypothesis that ablative therapies (such as surgery or radiation) can be used to cure patients with a limited number of metastases was influential in changing practice. Early assertions of efficacy were based on observational studies, often without control groups, showing better-than-expected outcomes. However, in the past decade, new evidence from randomized trials has emerged, which in some cases have affirmed old hypotheses, but in other cases have raised new questions. In this review, we discuss the challenges in defining oligometastatic disease, summarize the randomized evidence evaluating metastasis-directed therapy in patients with oligometastatic disease, provide context for the difficulty in generating randomized evidence, and examine ongoing phase III studies.

Optimal predictive probability designs for randomized biomarker-guided oncology trials

Introduction

Efforts to develop biomarker-targeted anti-cancer therapies have progressed rapidly in recent years. With efforts to expedite regulatory reviews of promising therapies, several targeted cancer therapies have been granted accelerated approval on the basis of evidence acquired in single-arm phase II clinical trials. And yet, in the absence of randomization, patient prognosis for progression-free survival and overall survival may not have been studied under standard of care chemotherapies for emerging biomarker subpopulations prior to the submission of an accelerated approval application. Historical control rates used to design and evaluate emerging targeted therapies often arise as population averages, lacking specificity to the targeted genetic or immunophenotypic profile. Thus, historical trial results are inherently limited for inferring the potential "comparative efficacy" of novel targeted therapies. Consequently, randomization may be unavoidable in this setting. Innovations in design methodology are needed, however, to enable efficient implementation of randomized trials for agents that target biomarker subpopulations.

Methods

This article proposes three randomized designs for early phase biomarker-guided oncology clinical trials. Each design utilizes the optimal efficiency predictive probability method to monitor multiple biomarker subpopulations for futility. Only designs with type I error between 0.05 and 0.1 and power of at least 0.8 were considered when selecting an optimal efficiency design from among the candidate designs formed by different combinations of posterior and predictive threshold. A simulation study motivated by the results reported in a recent clinical trial studying atezolizumab treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma is used to evaluate the operating characteristics of the various designs.

Results

Out of a maximum of 300 total patients, we find that the enrichment design has an average total sample size under the null of 101.0 and a total average sample size under the alternative of 218.0, as compared to 144.8 and 213.8 under the null and alternative, respectively, for the stratified control arm design. The pooled control arm design enrolled a total of 113.2 patients under the null and 159.6 under the alternative, out of a maximum of 200. These average sample sizes that are 23-48% smaller under the alternative and 47-64% smaller under the null, as compared to the realized sample size of 310 patients in the phase II study of atezolizumab.

Discussion

Our findings suggest that potentially smaller phase II trials to those used in practice can be designed using randomization and futility stopping to efficiently obtain more information about both the treatment and control groups prior to phase III study.

Daily irradiation versus irradiation at two- to three-day intervals in stereotactic radiotherapy for patients with 1-5 brain metastases: study protocol for a multicenter open-label randomized phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Radiobiological daily changes within tumors are considered to be quite different between stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) (e.g., 50 Gy in 4 fractions) and conventional radiotherapy (e.g., 60 Gy in 30 fractions). We aim to assess the optimal interval of irradiation in SRT and compare outcomes of daily irradiation with irradiation at two- to three-day intervals in SRT for patients with one to five brain metastases (BM).

METHODS

This study is conducted as a multicenter open-label randomized phase II trial. Patients aged 20 or older with one to five BM, less than 3.0 cm diameter, and Karnofsky Performance Status ≥70 are eligible. A total of 70 eligible patients will be enrolled. After stratifying by the number of BMs (1, 2 vs. 3-5) and diameter of the largest tumor (< 2 cm vs. ≥ 2 cm), we randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive daily irradiation (Arm 1), or irradiation at two- to three-day intervals (Arm 2). Both arms are performed with total dose of 27-30 Gy in 3 fractions. The primary endpoint is an intracranial local control rate, defined as intracranial local control at initially treated sites. We use a randomized phase II screening design with a two-sided α of 0∙20. The phase II trial is positive with p < 0.20. All analyses are intention to treat. This study is registered with the UMIN-clinical trials registry, number UMIN000048728.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide an assessment of the impact of SRT interval on local control, survival, and toxicity for patients with 1-5 BM. The trial is ongoing and is recruiting now.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000048728. Date of registration: August 23, 2022. https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-bin/ctr/ctr_view_reg.cgi?recptno=R000055515 .

Considerations in the design of animal infection pilot studies

Ethical research with experimental systems (animals or humans) requires a rationale for the number of subjects to be included in a study. Standard methods for estimating sample size are not fit-for-purpose when the experimenter cannot predict the effect size/outcome with any certainty. These types of studies are often designated "pilot study"; however, there are few guidelines for sample size needed for a pilot study. Here we seek to address this issue. Concerning survival analysis it is noted that the experimenter can adjust the parameters of the experiment to improve the power. We propose that the experimenter needs to consider the "limit of interest" needed to represent an effect that the experimenter would be prepared to defend in terms of scientific or medical interest. Conventional power analysis is then used to estimate the n to deliver an alpha (false positive rate) of p < 0.2. This approach provides a balance that can inform a future study, demonstrate a strong effect or dismiss if no effect was observed. Where weight change or infection burden is considered, parametric analysis can be used. Here the main requirement for the pilot study is to establish a meaningful estimate of variability for subsequent power analysis. When considering the confidence intervals for standard deviations, it can be noted that a turning point is reached for n of four to six, beyond which we observe diminishing returns, suggesting that sample sizes should be greater than four. Finally, we discuss both the importance in statistical blocking and repeated measures in maximising the usefulness of the pilot study; and the importance of considering and outlining analysis techniques prior to performing the experiment. These findings are intended to be useful in the design of experiments in further prospective research.

Pirfenidone for the prevention of radiation-induced lung injury in patients with locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Radiation-induced lung injury (RILI) is one of the most clinically-challenging toxicities and dose-limiting factors during and/or after thoracic radiation therapy for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). With limited effective protective drugs against RILI, the main strategy to reduce the injury is strict adherence to dose-volume restrictions of normal lungs. RILI can manifest as acute radiation pneumonitis with cellular injury, cytokine release and cytokine recruitment to inflammatory infiltrate, and subsequent chronic radiation pulmonary fibrosis. Pirfenidone inhibits the production of inflammatory cytokines, scavenges-free radicals and reduces hydroxyproline and collagen formation. Hence, pirfenidone might be a promising drug for RILI prevention. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pirfenidone in preventing RILI in patients with locally advanced ESCC receiving chemoradiotherapy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is designed as a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, single-centre phase 2 trial and will explore whether the addition of pirfenidone during concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) could prevent RILI in patients with locally advanced ESCC unsuitable for surgery. Eligible participants will be randomised at 1:1 to pirfenidone and placebo groups. The primary endpoint is the incidence of grade >2 RILI. Secondary endpoints include the incidence of any grade other than grade >2 RILI, time to RILI occurrence, changes in pulmonary function after CCRT, completion rate of CCRT, disease-free survival and overall survival. The follow-up period will be 1 year. In case the results meet the primary endpoint of this trial, a phase 3 multicentre trial with a larger sample size will be required to substantiate the evidence of the benefit of pirfenidone in RILI prevention.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Fujian Union Hospital (No. 2021YF001-02). The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, and national and international conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100043032.

In search of effective therapies: the current landscape of phase II trials in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma

PURPOSE

Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are diagnosed in 4-6 cases per 100 000 people a year and are associated with an unfavorable prognosis. Around one-third of patients will develop metastatic disease that requires palliative systemic therapy. Current therapeutic options have limited activity, and new treatments are tested, mainly in phase II trials. There is high variability and no standardization of phase II designs. We aimed to analyze the current landscape of phase II studies in STS and evaluate how its statistical design can affect the results.

METHODS

Full-text phase II studies published in STS patients between 2005 and 2020 were identified and analyzed.

RESULTS

We have identified 102 trials, of which 77.4% were single-arm trials, 16.7% were randomized comparative trials (RCT), and 5.9% were randomized noncomparative trials. Including multiple cohorts, 22 randomized and 128 single-arm cohorts were analyzed. Nearly 80% of trials reported full statistical bases of the design. Over 20 different primary endpoints were used, with PFS as the most common in RCT trials (81.8%) and ORR (36.7%) and 3-months progression-free survival (PFS) rate (21.9%) in single-arm trials. Overall, 27.3% of RCT and 37.5% of single-arm trials were positive. Among single-arm trials, studies using 3- or 6-month rates were more often positive than those based on ORR.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high heterogeneity in sarcoma trial designs, mainly in primary-endpoint and hypotheses used for size calculation. There is an unmet need for standardization that will incorporate factors associated with the rarity of the disease, outcomes detected in previous trials and real-life studies, and specific characteristics of new therapeutic agents.

Durvalumab after Sequential High Dose Chemoradiotherapy versus Standard of Care (SoC) for Stage III NSCLC: A Bi-Centric Trospective Comparison Focusing on Pulmonary Toxicity

Introduction: The standard of care (SoC) for unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is durvalumab maintenance therapy after concurrent chemoradiation in patients with PD-L1 > 1%. However, the concurrent approach is only amenable for about one-third of patients due to co-morbidities. Although sequential regimens are usually not regarded as curative, these schedules applied in a dose-escalated manner may be similarly radical as SoC. As combining high-dose radiation and durvalumab remains a question of debate this retrospective bi-center study aims to evaluate pulmonary toxicity after high-dose chemoradiotherapy beyond 70 Gy compared to SoC. Patients and Methods: Patients with NSCLC stage III received durvalumab after either sequential high-dose chemoradiation or concomitant SoC. Chemotherapy consisted of platinum combined with either pemetrexed, taxotere, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine. The primary endpoint was short-term pulmonary toxicity occurring within six months after the end of radiotherapy (RT). Results: A total of 78 patients were eligible for this analysis. 18F-FDG-PET-CT, cranial MRT, and histological/cytological verification were mandatory in the diagnostic work-up. The high-dose and SoC group included 42/78 (53.8%) and 36/78 (46.2%) patients, respectively, which were matched according to baseline clinical variables. While the interval between the end of RT and the start of durvalumab was equal in both groups (p = 0.841), more courses were administered in the high-dose cohort (p = 0.031). Pulmonary toxicity was similar in both groups (p = 0.599), whereas intrathoracic disease control was better in the high-dose group (local control p = 0.081, regional control p = 0.184). Conclusion: The data of this hypothesis-generating study suggest that sequential high-dose chemoradiation followed by durvalumab might be similar to SoC in terms of pulmonary toxicity and potentially more effective with respect to intra-thoracic disease control. Larger trials with a prospective design are warranted to validate these results.

Protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial of a mobile health exercise intervention for older patients with myeloid neoplasms (GO-EXCAP 2)

INTRODUCTION

We have shown the Exercise for Cancer Patients (EXCAP©®) exercise program improved physical function and symptoms and reduced inflammatory markers in patients with cancer. However, adherence to exercise was lower in older adults compared to their younger counterparts. We then leveraged a mobile app to deliver EXCAP©® and adapted the intervention [Geriatric-Oncology (GO)-EXCAP] for older patients with myeloid neoplasms. In this pilot randomized trial, the primary goal is to determine effect sizes. We propose to assess the preliminary efficacy of GO-EXCAP compared to a behavioral placebo control on physical function, patient-reported outcomes (fatigue, mood, and quality of life), and inflammatory markers in 100 patients aged ≥60 years with myeloid neoplasms receiving outpatient chemotherapy.

METHODS

GO-EXCAP consists of the EXCAP©® exercise prescription (daily home-based progressive aerobic walking and resistance exercises with rated perceived exercise of 5-8), EXCAP©® kit (i.e., activity tracker, resistance bands, print manual, bag), a mobile app, and an in-person or virtual session with the exercise physiologist to deliver exercise prescription. The intervention will last for three cycles of chemotherapy (approximately 12 weeks). The primary outcome measure will be physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery). Secondary outcome measures include fatigue (Brief Fatigue Inventory), mood (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale), and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia). Exploratory outcome measures include inflammatory markers.

DISCUSSION

Older adults with myeloid neoplasms receiving outpatient chemotherapy serve as an ideal model for studying an individually tailored mobile health exercise intervention in vulnerable older patients receiving cancer treatments to prevent physical function decline and improve symptoms.

A Phase II trial of Higher RadiOtherapy Dose In The Eradication of early rectal cancer (APHRODITE): protocol for a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The standard of care for patients with localised rectal cancer is radical surgery, often combined with preoperative neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. While oncologically effective, this treatment strategy is associated with operative mortality risks, significant morbidity and stoma formation. An alternative approach is chemoradiotherapy to try to achieve a sustained clinical complete response (cCR). This non-surgical management can be attractive, particularly for patients at high risk of surgical complications. Modern radiotherapy techniques allow increased treatment conformality, enabling increased radiation dose to the tumour while reducing dose to normal tissue. The objective of this trial is to assess if radiotherapy dose escalation increases the cCR rate, with acceptable toxicity, for treatment of patients with early rectal cancer unsuitable for radical surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

APHRODITE (A Phase II trial of Higher RadiOtherapy Dose In The Eradication of early rectal cancer) is a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled phase II trial aiming to recruit 104 participants from 10 to 12 UK sites. Participants will be allocated with a 2:1 ratio of intervention:control. The intervention is escalated dose radiotherapy (62 Gy to primary tumour, 50.4 Gy to surrounding mesorectum in 28 fractions) using simultaneous integrated boost. The control arm will receive 50.4 Gy to the primary tumour and surrounding mesorectum. Both arms will use intensity-modulated radiotherapy and daily image guidance, combined with concurrent chemotherapy (capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin or omitted). The primary endpoint is the proportion of participants with cCR at 6 months after start of treatment. Secondary outcomes include early and late toxicities, time to stoma formation, overall survival and patient-reported outcomes (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) questionnaire).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial obtained ethical approval from North West Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee (reference number 19/NW/0565) and is funded by Yorkshire Cancer Research. The final trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and adhere to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN16158514.

Acute Toxicity of Ultrahypofractionation Compared to Moderate Hypofractionation in Prostate Cancer Treatment - a Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

To report on the early toxicities and quality of life (QOL) of localized prostate cancer radiotherapy in a randomized trial comparing moderate hypofractionation (MHF) to ultrahypofractionation (UHF) MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intermediate to high risk localized prostate cancer patients were randomized to radiotherapy with MHF (70 Gy in 28 daily fractions) or UHF (36.25 Gy in 5 weekly fractions). Early toxicities (CTCAE and RTOG/SOMA scales) and patient reported QOL (EPIC questionnaire) were analysed when all patients had a minimum of 6 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Eighty participants were randomized but two withdrew from radiotherapy.  Analysis was done on 78 patients.  The two arms were balanced in key patient and disease characteristics except for a statistically worse baseline urinary function in the UHF arm (IPSS > 7: 68% vs 36% p = 0.004). There are no statistically significant differences between the two arms in Grade 3 or Grade 2 toxicities: ≥ Grade 3 - MHF 8%, UHF 2% (p=0.235); ≥ Grade 2 MHF 36%, UHF 24% (p=0.235). There are also no significant differences in percentages of patients with a "minimal important change" of QOL in the Incontinence (MHF 36%, UHF 33% p =0.746), Irritative/Obstructive (MHF 56%, UHF 74% p=0.074) or Bowel domains (MHF 58%, UHF 52% p=0.508) on the EPIC questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

UHF radiotherapy for prostate cancer is well tolerated and there were no significant differences in toxicities and quality of life changes between UHF and MHF up to six months after treatment in the current trial.

Impact of Open Dialogue about Complementary Alternative Medicine-A Phase II Randomized Controlled Trial

Simple Summary

A large number of patients with cancer use complementary alternative medicine (CAM), such as diet supplements, massage and acupuncture, as an adjunct to conventional cancer treatment and care. Some types of CAM reduce nausea and vomiting, pain, fear, fatigue and depression, but CAM may also cause new symptoms and side effects. Therefore, it is crucial that cancer patients receive professional guidance on how to use CAM in a safe and healthy manner. Open dialogue about CAM between patients and health professionals is, however, not an integrated part of cancer treatment and care. Therefore, the aim of our study was to assess how open dialogue, including guidance about CAM, affected patients’ safety and health when it was an integrated part of the cancer treatment and care. We found that open dialogue about CAM does not compromise patient safety and that it may improve patients’ quality of life, self-care and survival.

Abstract

Complementary alternative medicine (CAM) may reduce the symptom burden of side effects to antineoplastic treatment but also cause new side effects and non-adherence to conventional treatment. The aim of this RCT was to investigate the impact of open dialogue about complementary alternative medicine (OD-CAM) on cancer patients’ safety, health and quality of life (QoL). Patients undergoing antineoplastic treatment were randomly assigned to standard care (SC) plus OD-CAM or SC alone. The primary endpoint was frequency of grade 3–4 adverse events (AE) eight weeks after enrollment. Secondary endpoints were frequency of grade 1–4 AE, QoL, psychological distress, perceived information, attitude towards and use of CAM 12 and 24 weeks after enrollment. Survival was analyzed post hoc. Fifty-seven patients were randomized to the OD-CAM group and fifty-five to the SC group. No significant difference in frequency of grade 3–4 AEs was shown. The same applied to grade 1–4 AEs and QoL, psychological distress and perceived information. A tendency towards better QoL, improved survival and a lower level of anxiety was found in the OD-CAM group. OD-CAM is not superior to SC in reducing the frequency of AEs in patients undergoing antineoplastic treatment. OD-CAM does not compromise patient safety; it may reduce psychological stress and improve QoL and overall survival.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to support medication decision-making and quality of life in women with breast cancer: protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy is affected by medication side-effects and associated distress. Previous interventions focused on educating women to enhance adherence have proved minimally effective. We co-designed an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention to enhance medication decision-making and quality of life by targeting a broader range of factors, including side-effect management and psychological flexibility. This study aims to establish key trial parameters, assess the acceptability of the intervention and the extent to which it can be delivered with fidelity, and to demonstrate "proof of principle" regarding its efficacy on primary and process outcomes.

METHODS

The ACTION intervention includes an individual 1:1 ACT session followed by three group sessions involving 8-10 women and two practitioner psychologists. Participants are also provided with access to a website containing evidence-based methods for self-managing side-effects. The ACT sessions were adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic to be remotely delivered via video conferencing software. To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention, a multi-site, exploratory, two-arm, individually randomised external pilot trial with a nested qualitative study will be undertaken. Eighty women with early stage breast cancer prescribed adjuvant endocrine therapy will be randomised (1:1) to receive treatment as usual or treatment as usual plus the ACTION intervention. The planned future primary outcome is medication adherence assessed by the ASK-12 measure. Progression to a phase III RCT will be based on criteria related to recruitment and follow-up rates, acceptability to patients, competency and fidelity of delivery, and proof of principle for change in medication adherence.

DISCUSSION

This external pilot trial will be used to ascertain the feasibility of undertaking a future phase III RCT to definitively evaluate an ACT-based intervention to support medication taking behaviour and quality of life in women with early stage breast cancer on adjuvant endocrine therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN: 12027752. Registered 24 December 2020, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12027752.

siRNA nanohybrid systems: false hope or feasible answer in cancer management

Finding out predisposition and makeup alterations in cancer cells has prompted the exploration of exogenous small interference RNA (siRNA) as a therapeutic agent to deal with cancer. siRNA is subjected to many limitations that hinders its cellular uptake. Various nanocarriers have been loaded with siRNA to improve their cellular transportation and have moved to clinical trials. However, many restrictions as low encapsulation efficiency, nanocarrier cytotoxicity and premature release of siRNA have impeded the single nanocarrier use. The realm of nanohybrid systems has emerged to overcome these limitations and to synergize the criteria of two or more nanocarriers. Different nanohybrid systems that were developed as cellular pathfinders for the exogenous siRNA to target cancer will be illustrated in this review.

Assessment of Capecitabine and Bevacizumab With or Without Atezolizumab for the Treatment of Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Cotargeting vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 may produce anticancer activity in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The clinical benefit of atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy and bevacizumab remains unclear for the treatment of mCRC.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with refractory mCRC and to perform exploratory analyses among patients with microsatellite-stable (MSS) disease and liver metastasis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This double-blind phase 2 randomized clinical trial enrolled 133 patients between September 25, 2017, and June 28, 2018 (median duration of follow-up for PFS, 20.9 months), with data cutoff on May 4, 2020. The study was conducted at multiple centers through the Academic and Community Cancer Research United network. Adult patients with mCRC who experienced disease progression while receiving fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody therapy (if the patient had a RAS wild-type tumor) were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive capecitabine (850 or 1000 mg/m2) twice daily on days 1 to 14 and bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) on day 1 plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg; investigational group) or placebo (placebo group) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was PFS; 110 events were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 with 80% power (1-sided α = .10). Secondary end points were objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and toxic effects.

RESULTS

Of 133 randomized patients, 128 individuals (median age, 58.0 years [IQR, 51.0-65.0 years]; 77 men [60.2%]) were assessed for efficacy (82 in the investigational group and 46 in the placebo group). Overall, 15 patients (11.7%) self-identified as African American or Black, 8 (6.3%) as Asian, 1 (0.8%) as Pacific Islander, 101 (78.9%) as White, 1 (0.8%) as multiple races (Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and White), and 2 (1.6%) as unknown race or unsure of race. Microsatellite-stable disease was present in 110 patients (69 in the investigational group and 41 in the placebo group). Median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 4.1-6.4 months) in the investigational group and 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.2 months) in the placebo group (1-sided log-rank P = .07, a statistically significant result; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.09). Among patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair, the HR for PFS was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.44-0.99). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events in the investigational vs placebo groups were hypertension (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), diarrhea (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]), and hand-foot syndrome (6 patients [7.0%] vs 2 patients [4.3%]). One treatment-related death occurred in the investigational group. In the investigational group, the response rate was higher among patients without liver metastasis (3 of 13 individuals [23.1%]) vs with liver metastasis (4 of 69 individuals [5.8%]). The benefit of atezolizumab for PFS and OS was greater among patients without vs with liver metastasis (primary analysis of PFS: HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.27-1.47] vs 0.77 [95% CI, 0.51-1.17]; OS: HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11-1.02] vs 1.14 [95% CI, 0.72-1.81]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of atezolizumab to capecitabine and bevacizumab therapy provided limited (ie, not clinically meaningful) clinical benefit. Patients with MSS and proficient mismatch repair tumors and those without liver metastasis benefited more from dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor and programmed cell death 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 pathways.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02873195.

An Overview of Phase 2 Clinical Trial Designs

Clinical trials are studies to test new treatments in humans. Typically, these treatments are evaluated over several phases to assess their safety and efficacy. Phase 1 trials are designed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of a new treatment, typically with a small number of patients (eg, 20-80), generally spread across several dose levels. Phase 2 trials are designed to determine whether the new treatment has sufficiently promising efficacy to warrant further investigation in a large-scale randomized phase 3 trial, as well as to further assess safety. These studies usually involve a few hundred patients. This article provides an overview of some of the most commonly used phase 2 designs for clinical trials and emphasizes their critical elements and considerations. Key references to some of the most commonly used phase 2 designs are given to allow the reader to explore in more detail the critical aspects when planning a phase 2 trial. A comparison of 3 potential designs in the context of the NRG-HN002 trial is presented to complement the discussion about phase 2 trials.

Trabectedin for recurrent WHO grade 2 or 3 meningioma: a randomized phase 2 study of the EORTC Brain Tumor Group (EORTC-1320-BTG)

BACKGROUND

No systemic treatment has been established for meningioma progressing after local therapies.

METHODS

This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study included adult patients with recurrent WHO grade 2 or 3 meningioma. Patients were 2:1 randomly assigned to intravenous trabectedin (1.5 mg/m 2 every three weeks) or local standard of care (LOC). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints comprised overall survival (OS), objective radiological response, safety, quality of life (QoL) assessment using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 questionnaires, and we performed tissue-based exploratory molecular analyses.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were randomized (n=29 in LOC, n=61 in trabectedin arm). With 71 events, median PFS was 4.17 months in the LOC and 2.43 months in the trabectedin arm (hazard ratio [HR]=1.42; 80% CI, 1.00-2.03; p=0.294) with a PFS-6 rate of 29.1% (95% CI, 11.9%-48.8%) and 21.1% (95% CI, 11.3%-32.9%), respectively. Median OS was 10.61 months in the LOC and 11.37 months in the trabectedin arm (HR=0.98; 95% CI, 0.54-1.76; p=0.94). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 44.4% patients in the LOC and 59% of patients in the trabectedin arm. Enrolled patients had impeded global QoL and overall functionality and high fatigue before initiation of systemic therapy. DNA methylation class, performance status, presence of a relevant co-morbidity, steroid use, and right hemisphere involvement at baseline were independently associated with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Trabectedin did not improve PFS and OS and was associated with higher toxicity than LOC treatment in patients with non-benign meningioma. Tumour DNA methylation class is an independent prognostic factor for OS.

A prospective phase II randomized trial of proton radiotherapy vs intensity-modulated radiotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma

BACKGROUND

To determine if proton radiotherapy (PT), compared to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), delayed time to cognitive failure in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM).

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomized unblinded to PT vs IMRT. The primary endpoint was time to cognitive failure. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), intracranial progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients were enrolled and 67 were evaluable with median follow-up of 48.7 months (range 7.1-66.7). There was no significant difference in time to cognitive failure between treatment arms (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.45-1.75; P = .74). PT was associated with a lower rate of fatigue (24% vs 58%, P = .05), but otherwise, there were no significant differences in PROs at 6 months. There was no difference in PFS (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.44-1.23; P = .24) or OS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.49-1.50; P = .60). However, PT significantly reduced the radiation dose for nearly all structures analyzed. The average number of grade 2 or higher toxicities was significantly higher in patients who received IMRT (mean 1.15, range 0-6) compared to PT (mean 0.35, range 0-3; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In this signal-seeking phase II trial, PT was not associated with a delay in time to cognitive failure but did reduce toxicity and patient-reported fatigue. Larger randomized trials are needed to determine the potential of PT such as dose escalation for GBM and cognitive preservation in patients with lower-grade gliomas with a longer survival time.

Docetaxel and prednisone with or without enzalutamide as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: CHEIRON, a randomised phase II trial

BACKGROUND

Pre-clinical data suggest that docetaxel and enzalutamide interfere with androgen receptor translocation and signalling. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of their concurrent administration in the first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

METHODS

In this open-label, randomised, phase II trial, previously untreated mCRPC patients were randomised 1:1 to receive eight 21-d courses of docetaxel 75 mg/m², oral prednisone 5 mg twice daily and oral enzalutamide 160 mg/d (arm DE), or the same treatment without enzalutamide (arm D). The primary end-point was the percentage of patients without investigator-assessed disease progression 6 months after the first docetaxel administration.

RESULTS

The 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel, prednisone and enzalutamide (n = 120) or docetaxel and prednisone (n = 126). The 6-month progression rate was 12.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.1-20.6) in arm DE and 27.8% (95% CI 22.8-39.4) in arm D (chi-squared test 10.01; P = 0.002). The most frequent grade III-IV adverse events were fatigue (12.5% in arm DE versus 5.6% in arm D), febrile neutropenia (9.3% versus 4.0%) and neutropenia (7.6% versus 5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of enzalutamide and docetaxel appears to be more clinically beneficial than docetaxel alone in previously untreated mCRPC patients, although serious adverse events were more frequent. Our findings suggest that first-line treatment with this combination could lead to an additional clinical benefit when prompt and prolonged disease control is simultaneously required. Clearly, these results should be considered cautiously because of the study's phase II design and the absence of an overall survival benefit.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

EudraCT 2014-000175-43 - NCT02453009.

Temozolomide with irinotecan versus temozolomide, irinotecan plus bevacizumab for recurrent medulloblastoma of childhood: Report of a COG randomized Phase II screening trial

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of children with medulloblastoma (MB) experience recurrence, which is usually incurable. This study compared the overall survival (OS) of patients receiving temozolomide (TMZ) and irinotecan with that of patients receiving TMZ, irinotecan, and bevacizumab for recurrent MB/central nervous system (CNS) primitive neuroectodermal tumor (PNET).

METHODS

Patients with relapsed/refractory MB or CNS PNET were randomly assigned to receive TMZ (150 mg/m² /day PO on days 1-5) and irinotecan (50 mg/m² /day IV on days 1-5) with or without bevacizumab (10 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 15).

RESULTS

One hundred five patients were eligible and treated on study. Median OS was 13 months in the standard arm and 19 months with the addition of bevacizumab; median event-free survival (EFS) was 6 months in the standard arm and 9 months with the addition of bevacizumab. The hazard ratio for death from the stratified relative-risk regression model is 0.63. Overall, 23 patients completed 12 courses of planned protocol therapy, 23% (12/52) in the experimental arm with bevacizumab versus 21% (11/53) in the standard arm. Toxicity profiles were comparable in both treatment arms. The estimate of the incidence of feasibility events associated with the bevacizumab arm is three of 52 (5.8%) (95% CI 1.2-16%). Events included myelosuppression, electrolyte abnormalities, diarrhea, and elevated transaminases. One intracranial hemorrhage event was observed in each arm.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to TMZ/irinotecan significantly reduced the risk of death in children with recurrent MB. The combination was relatively well tolerated in this heavily pretreated cohort. The three-drug regimen demonstrated a sufficient risk reduction to warrant further investigation.

Efficacy and Safety of Revacept, a Novel Lesion-Directed Competitive Antagonist to Platelet Glycoprotein VI, in Patients Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: The Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled ISAR-PLASTER Phase 2 Trial

Importance

The assessment of new antithrombotic agents with a favorable safety profile is clinically relevant.

Objective

To test the efficacy and safety of revacept, a novel, lesion-directed antithrombotic drug, acting as a competitive antagonist to platelet glycoprotein VI.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A phase 2 randomized clinical trial; patients were enrolled from 9 centers in Germany from November 20, 2017, to February 27, 2020; follow-up ended on March 27, 2020. The study included patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Interventions

Single intravenous infusion of revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, or placebo prior to the start of PCI on top of standard antithrombotic therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the composite of death or myocardial injury, defined as an increase in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin to at least 5 times the upper limit of normal within 48 hours from randomization. The safety end point was bleeding type 2 to 5 according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria at 30 days.

Results

Of 334 participants (median age, 67.4 years; interquartile range, 60-75.1 years; 253 men [75.7%]; and 330 White participants [98.8%]), 120 were allocated to receive the 160-mg dose of revacept, 121 were allocated to receive the 80-mg dose, and 93 received placebo. The primary end point showed no significant differences between the revacept and placebo groups: 24.4%, 25.0%, and 23.3% in the revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (P = .98). The high dose of revacept was associated with a small but significant reduction of high-concentration collagen-induced platelet aggregation, with a median 26.5 AU × min (interquartile range, 0.5-62.2 AU × min) in the revacept, 160 mg, group; 43.5 AU × min (interquartile range, 22.8-99.5 AU × min) in the revacept, 80 mg, group; and 41.0 AU × min (interquartile range, 31.2-101.0 AU × min) in the placebo group (P = .02), while adenosine 5'-diphosphate-induced aggregation was not affected. Revacept did not increase Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher bleeding at 30 days compared with placebo: 5.0%, 5.9%, and 8.6% in the revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (P = .36).

Conclusions and Relevance

Revacept did not reduce myocardial injury in patients with stable ischemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. There were few bleeding events and no significant differences between treatment arms.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03312855.