Noninferiority of cetuximab every-2-weeks versus standard once-weekly administration schedule for the first-line treatment of RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer

Abstract Aim This study assessed whether cetuximab 500 mg/m2 administered every 2 weeks (Q2W), when combined with chemotherapy as a first-line (1L) treatment, was noninferior to the approved dose (400 mg/m2 followed by 250 mg/m2 once weekly [Q1W]) for overall survival (OS) in adults with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods This pooled analysis included patients receiving 1L treatment with cetuximab Q1W or Q2W in combination with chemotherapy from post-authorisation studies with patient-level data available to the sponsor. Baseline characteristics were adjusted with a propensity score using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Noninferiority in terms of OS was tested with a noninferiority margin for the hazard ratio (HR) of 1.25 using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and rates of lung/liver metastases resection and serious adverse events. Results OS time was noninferior in the Q2W cohort (n = 554) compared to the Q1W cohort (n = 763), with a HR after IPTW (95% confidence interval) of 0.827 (0.715–0.956) and median OS times of 24.7 (Q1W) and 27.9 (Q2W) months. There were no major differences in PFS (HR: 0.915 [0.804–1.042]). The odds ratios (ORs) after IPTW for ORR (1.292 [1.031–1.617]) and the rates of lung/liver metastases resection (1.419 [1.043–1.932]) favoured the Q2W regimen. No differences were noted in the occurrence rate of any SAE between groups; the OR after IPTW was 1.089 (0.858–1.382). Conclusions The cetuximab Q2W regimen was noninferior to the Q1W regimen for OS in the 1L treatment of mCRC

The Lantern, 2012-2013

• How They Run • What Was Said in Boston • On the Last Day of the Month • An Angel Tries to Surprise Humans • I Wonder if God Modeled Boys After Books • Marred with Modern Scars • Feather Bed • Ode to a Pen • Objet Petit A • Breaking News: Grownups Fear Return of Disco • Neuroscience • New Document • We Were Stars, and the Sky was Our Grass • About a Man • Trojan • An Ode • Yr Body Sour • That Lake in Jamaica • Live While Chiefs are Still Fighting • Lament for Mathematics • The Robert Frost House • People Fell in Love on Me • Sunday Review • Looks Silly in Tiny Desk Chairs • Two Years Later • Better Than Nothing • Istanbul • Packs of Cigarettes • Sonnet • Outside King of Steaks • Obstinance • Coffee Grinds • Autumn Equinox • Homecoming • Oh, San Francisco • Slide: A Beginning • Slowly Last Summer • Of Dogs and Men • Letters Not Sent • Before the Race • The Little Things • Tarpon Springs • Payment for Rebellion • Wednesday • When is President\u27s Day? • Heartless Parallels and Perpendiculars • Railway • Presto Agitato • Easier Said Than Done • Waves • Four White Women • Rope • Alter Ego Self Portrait • Pebbles • Coney Island • Guanjuanto • Growth • Evolve • Winter Blackout • Honeybee • Frames • Wanderlust • Guiding Light 1 • Frick\u27s Lock • The Ones That Never Leave • In Memoriam: Rachel Blunthttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/lantern/1179/thumbnail.jp

Co-expression patterns of cancer associated fibroblast markers reveal distinct subgroups related to patient survival in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma

Background: The incidence of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is rapidly increasing in high income countries due to its association with persistent high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) infection. Recent scientific advances have highlighted the importance of the tumor microenvironment in OPSCC. In this study, including 216 OPSCC patients, we analyze the composition of four established markers of cancer associated fibroblasts (CAFs) in the context of intratumoral CD8 T-cell infiltration.Methods: Immunohistochemical staining for fibroblast activation protein (FAP), platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta (PDGFRb), periostin, alpha smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) and CD8 were analyzed digitally and their association with survival, tumor- and patient characteristics was assessed.Results: Co-expression of CAF markers was frequent but not associated with HPV status. FAPhigh and PDGFRbhigh expression were associated with increased CD8 T-cell infiltration. Low expression of PDGFRb improved patient survival in female patients but not in male patients. We identified PDGFRblow periostinlow α-SMAlow status as an independent predictor of improved survival (hazard ratio 0.377, p = 0.006).Conclusion: These findings elucidate the co-expression of four established CAF markers in OPSCC and underscore their association with T-cell infiltration and patient survival. Future analyses of CAF subgroups in OPSCC may enable the development of individualized therapies

Traumatic brain injury: integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research

No abstract available

Machine learning algorithms performed no better than regression models for prognostication in traumatic brain injury

Objective: We aimed to explore the added value of common machine learning (ML) algorithms for prediction of outcome for moderate and severe traumatic brain injury. Study Design and Setting: We performed logistic regression (LR), lasso regression, and ridge regression with key baseline predictors in the IMPACT-II database (15 studies, n = 11,022). ML algorithms included support vector machines, random forests, gradient boosting machines, and artificial neural networks and were trained using the same predictors. To assess generalizability of predictions, we performed internal, internal-external, and external validation on the recent CENTER-TBI study (patients with Glasgow Coma Scale <13, n = 1,554). Both calibration (calibration slope/intercept) and discrimination (area under the curve) was quantified. Results: In the IMPACT-II database, 3,332/11,022 (30%) died and 5,233(48%) had unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale less than 4). In the CENTER-TBI study, 348/1,554(29%) died and 651(54%) had unfavorable outcome. Discrimination and calibration varied widely between the studies and less so between the studied algorithms. The mean area under the curve was 0.82 for mortality and 0.77 for unfavorable outcomes in the CENTER-TBI study. Conclusion: ML algorithms may not outperform traditional regression approaches in a low-dimensional setting for outcome prediction after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Similar to regression-based prediction models, ML algorithms should be rigorously validated to ensure applicability to new populations

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Primary versus early secondary referral to a specialized neurotrauma center in patients with moderate/severe traumatic brain injury: a CENTER TBI study

Funder: ZNS - Hannelore Kohl Stiftung; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007731Funder: Integra LifeSciences CorporationFunder: OneMindAbstract: Background: Prehospital care for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) varies with some emergency medical systems recommending direct transport of patients with moderate to severe TBI to hospitals with specialist neurotrauma care (SNCs). The aim of this study is to assess variation in levels of early secondary referral within European SNCs and to compare the outcomes of directly admitted and secondarily transferred patients. Methods: Patients with moderate and severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale < 13) from the prospective European CENTER-TBI study were included in this study. All participating hospitals were specialist neuroscience centers. First, adjusted between-country differences were analysed using random effects logistic regression where early secondary referral was the dependent variable, and a random intercept for country was included. Second, the adjusted effect of early secondary referral on survival to hospital discharge and functional outcome [6 months Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE)] was estimated using logistic and ordinal mixed effects models, respectively. Results: A total of 1347 moderate/severe TBI patients from 53 SNCs in 18 European countries were included. Of these 1347 patients, 195 (14.5%) were admitted after early secondary referral. Secondarily referred moderate/severe TBI patients presented more often with a CT abnormality: mass lesion (52% vs. 34%), midline shift (54% vs. 36%) and acute subdural hematoma (77% vs. 65%). After adjusting for case-mix, there was a large European variation in early secondary referral, with a median OR of 1.69 between countries. Early secondary referral was not associated with functional outcome (adjusted OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.78–1.69), nor with survival at discharge (1.05, 0.58–1.90). Conclusions: Across Europe, substantial practice variation exists in the proportion of secondarily referred TBI patients at SNCs that is not explained by case mix. Within SNCs early secondary referral does not seem to impact functional outcome and survival after stabilisation in a non-specialised hospital. Future research should identify which patients with TBI truly benefit from direct transportation

How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study

Abstract: Background: The European Union (EU) aims to optimize patient protection and efficiency of health-care research by harmonizing procedures across Member States. Nonetheless, further improvements are required to increase multicenter research efficiency. We investigated IRB procedures in a large prospective European multicenter study on traumatic brain injury (TBI), aiming to inform and stimulate initiatives to improve efficiency. Methods: We reviewed relevant documents regarding IRB submission and IRB approval from European neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI). Documents included detailed information on IRB procedures and the duration from IRB submission until approval(s). They were translated and analyzed to determine the level of harmonization of IRB procedures within Europe. Results: From 18 countries, 66 centers provided the requested documents. The primary IRB review was conducted centrally (N = 11, 61%) or locally (N = 7, 39%) and primary IRB approval was obtained after one (N = 8, 44%), two (N = 6, 33%) or three (N = 4, 23%) review rounds with a median duration of respectively 50 and 98 days until primary IRB approval. Additional IRB approval was required in 55% of countries and could increase duration to 535 days. Total duration from submission until required IRB approval was obtained was 114 days (IQR 75–224) and appeared to be shorter after submission to local IRBs compared to central IRBs (50 vs. 138 days, p = 0.0074). Conclusion: We found variation in IRB procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration. Research collaborations could benefit from the implementation of more uniform legislation and regulation while acknowledging local cultural habits and moral values between countries