Why do patients decline surgical trials? Findings from a qualitative interview study embedded in the Cancer Research UK BOLERO trial (Bladder cancer: Open versus Lapararoscopic or RObotic cystectomy)

Background Surgical trials have typically experienced recruitment difficulties when compared with other types of oncology trials. Qualitative studies have an important role to play in exploring reasons for low recruitment, although to date few such studies have been carried out that are embedded in surgical trials. The BOLERO trial (Bladder cancer: Open versus Lapararoscopic or RObotic cystectomy) is a study to determine the feasibility of randomisation to open versus laparoscopic access/robotic cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer. We describe the results of a qualitative study embedded within the clinical trial that explored why patients decline randomisation. Methods Ten semi-structured interviews with patients who declined randomisation to the clinical trial, and two interviews with recruiting research nurses were conducted. Data were analysed for key themes. Results The majority of patients declined the trial because they had preferences for a particular treatment arm, and in usual practice could choose which surgical method they would be given. In most cases the robotic option was preferred. Patients described an intuitive ‘sense’ that favoured the new technology and had carried out their own inquiries, including Internet research and talking with previous patients and friends and family with medical backgrounds. Medical histories and lifestyle considerations also shaped these personalised choices. Of importance too, however, were the messages patients perceived from their clinical encounters. Whilst some patients felt their surgeon favoured the robotic option, others interpreted ‘indirect’ cues such as the ‘established’ reputation of the surgeon and surgical method and comments made during clinical assessments. Many patients expressed a wish for greater direction from their surgeon when making these decisions. Conclusion For trials where the ‘new technology’ is available to patients, there will likely be difficulties with recruitment. Greater attention could be paid to how messages about treatment options and the trial are conveyed across the whole clinical setting. However, if it is too difficult to challenge such messages, then questions should be asked about whether genuine and convincing equipoise can be presented and perceived in such trials. This calls for consideration of whether alternative methods of generating evidence could be used when evaluating surgical techniques which are established and routinely available

The use of randomisation-based efficacy estimators in non-inferiority trials

Background In a non-inferiority (NI) trial, analysis based on the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle is anti-conservative, so current guidelines recommend analysing on a per-protocol (PP) population in addition. However, PP analysis relies on the often implausible assumption of no confounders. Randomisation-based efficacy estimators (RBEEs) allow for treatment non-adherence while maintaining a comparison of randomised groups. Fischer et al. have developed an approach for estimating RBEEs in randomised trials with two active treatments, a common feature of NI trials. The aim of this paper was to demonstrate the use of RBEEs in NI trials using this approach, and to appraise the feasibility of these estimators as the primary analysis in NI trials. Methods Two NI trials were used. One comparing two different dosing regimens for the maintenance of remission in people with ulcerative colitis (CODA), and the other comparing an orally administered treatment to an intravenously administered treatment in preventing skeletal-related events in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer (ZICE). Variables that predicted adherence in each of the trial arms, and were also independent of outcome, were sought in each of the studies. Structural mean models (SMMs) were fitted that conditioned on these variables, and the point estimates and confidence intervals compared to that found in the corresponding ITT and PP analyses. Results In the CODA study, no variables were found that differentially predicted treatment adherence while remaining independent of outcome. The SMM, using standard methodology, moved the point estimate closer to 0 (no difference between arms) compared to the ITT and PP analyses, but the confidence interval was still within the NI margin, indicating that the conclusions drawn would remain the same. In the ZICE study, cognitive functioning as measured by the corresponding domain of the QLQ-C30, and use of chemotherapy at baseline were both differentially associated with adherence while remaining independent of outcome. However, while the SMM again moved the point estimate closer to 0, the confidence interval was wide, overlapping with any NI margin that could be justified. Conclusion Deriving RBEEs in NI trials with two active treatments can provide a randomisation-respecting estimate of treatment efficacy that accounts for treatment adherence, is straightforward to implement, but requires thorough planning during the design stage of the study to ensure that strong baseline predictors of treatment are captured. Extension of the approach to handle nonlinear outcome variables is also required. Trial registration The CODA study: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT00708656. Registered on 8 April 2008. The ZICE study trial: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT00326820. Registered on 16 May 2006

A randomised Phase II trial of carboplatin and gemcitabine ± vandetanib in first-line treatment of patients with advanced urothelial cell cancer not suitable to receive cisplatin

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and tolerability of the dual epidermal growth factor receptor/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, vandetanib, in combination with carboplatin and gemcitabine in the first‐line treatment of patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma urothelial cancer (UC) who were unsuitable for cisplatin.Patients and methodsFrom 2011 to 2014, 82 patients were randomised from 16 hospitals across the UK into the TOUCAN double‐blind, placebo‐controlled randomised Phase II trial, receiving six 21‐day cycles of intravenous carboplatin (target area under the concentration versus time curve 4.5, day 1) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 days 1 and 8) combined with either oral vandetanib 100 mg or placebo (once daily). Progression‐free survival (PFS; primary endpoint), adverse events, tolerability and feasibility of use, objective response rate and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol analyses were used to analyse the primary endpoint.ResultsThe 82 patients were randomised 1:1 to vandetanib (n = 40) or placebo (n = 42), and 25 patients (30%) completed six cycles of all allocated treatment. Toxicity Grade ≥3 was experienced in 80% (n = 32) and 76% (n = 32) of patients in the vandetanib and placebo arms, respectively. The median PFS was 6.8 and 8.8 months for the vandetanib and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65–1.76; P = 0.71); the median OS was 10.8 vs 13.8 months (HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.79–2.52; P = 0.88); and radiological response rates were 50% and 55%.ConclusionThere is no evidence that vandetanib improves clinical outcome in this setting. Our present data do not support its adoption as the regimen of choice for first‐line treatment in patients with UC who were unfit for cisplatin

Watch Me Play!: protocol for a feasibility study of a remotely delivered intervention to promote mental health resilience for children (ages 0–8) across UK early years and children’s services

Background: Half of mental health problems are established by the age of 14 years and 75% by 24 years. Early intervention and prevention of mental ill health are therefore vitally important. However, increased demand over recent years has meant that access to child mental health services is often restricted to those in severest need. Watch Me Play! (WMP) is an early intervention designed to support caregiver attunement and attention to the child to promote social-emotional well-being and thereby mental health resilience. Originally developed in the context of a local authority mental health service for children in care, it is now also delivered online as a low intensity, scalable, preventative intervention. Although WMP shows promise and is already used in some services, we do not yet know whether it is effective. Methods: A non-randomised single group feasibility study with embedded process evaluation. We propose to recruit up to 40 parents/carers of children aged 0–8 years who have been referred to early years and children’s services in the UK. WMP involves a parent watching the child play and talking to their child about their play (or for babies, observing and following signals) for up to 20 min per session. Some sessions are facilitated by a trained practitioner who provides prompts where necessary, gives feedback, and discusses the child’s play with the caregiver. Services will offer five facilitated sessions, and parents will be asked to do at least 10 additional sessions on their own with their child in a 5-week period. Feasibility outcomes examined are as follows: (i) recruitment, (ii) retention, (iii) adherence, (iv) fidelity of delivery, (v) barriers and facilitators of participation, (vi) intervention acceptability, (vii) description of usual care, and (viii) data collection procedures. Intervention mechanisms will be examined through qualitative interview data. Economic evaluation will be conducted estimating cost of the intervention and cost of service use for child and parents/carers quality-adjusted life years. Discussion: This study will address feasibility questions associated with progression to a future randomised trial of WMP. Trial registration: ISRCTN13644899. Registered on 14th April 2023

Fulvestrant plus vandetanib versus placebo for the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to aromatase inhibitor therapy (FURVA): a multicentre, Phase 2, randomised controlled trial

Background: FURVA, a randomised, double-blind Phase II trial, investigated whether the addition of vandetanib to fulvestrant improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with an aromatase inhibitor(AI)-resistant advanced breast cancer. Methods: Postmenopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+ve)/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, who experienced disease progression on an AI, were randomised (1:1) to fulvestrant 500 mg (Q28) with vandetanib 300 mg od (f + v) or placebo (f + p) until disease progression or discontinuation. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and the influence of REarranged during Transfection (RET) signalling on outcomes. Results: In total, 165 participants were randomised to f + v (n = 80) or f + p (n = 85). Median PFS was 5.5 months (m) for f + v compared to 5.5 m for f + p (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88; 95% CI: 0.62–1.23; P = 0.22). Unexpectedly, high total RET expression was associated with a PFS advantage of 8.87 m vs 3.94 with low RET (HR 0.493: 95% CI 0.32–0.77; P = 0.002) independent of the treatment arm, supported by an OS advantage 21.95 m vs 18.04 (HR 0.584; 95% CI 0.34–1.00; P = 0.051) in the high-RET group. Conclusion: The addition of vandetanib to fulvestrant does not improve PFS. However, high total RET expression was associated with improved PFS, suggesting RET may have a prognostic role in patients treated with fulvestrant. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02530411

Review of transfusion practice in orthopaedic surgery

Donated blood is a limited resource. The impact of variant Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease is a potential threat to the blood supply. As 10% of the red cells issued to hospitals are used in orthopaedic surgery, elective orthopaedic surgery may well suffer disruption if the supply of red cells is compromised in the future. A survey of transfusion practice confirmed wide variation in practice in elective joint replacement survey. It is, therefore, essential that orthopaedic surgeons and transfusion specialists collaborate to ensure that blood is used appropriately. Current measures to conserve allogeneic blood in elective joint replacement surgery will be reviewed. The extent to which these strategies are used in hospitals and their efficacy will be discussed

Characterization of Long-Term Survival of Syngeneic Hepatocytes in Rat Peritoneum

Hepatocyte transplantation is a potential therapy for both acute and chronic hepatic insufficiency and also for treatment of inborn errors of metabolism affecting the liver. The peritoneum is one site for implantation and has several advantages: cells implanted there can be easily identified and observed, and it has a relatively large capacity. Long-term survival using "pure" hepatocytes in the peritoneum have been disappointing. We hypothesized that cotransplantation of hepatocytes with nonparenchymal cells would help maintain differentiated hepatocyte function. Rat liver cells transplanted intraperitoneally into August rats were sacrificed at 7 days, 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months and analyzed for presence, basal proliferation, and functionality of hepatocytes. To demonstrate that ectopic hepatocytes remained susceptible to exogenous growth factors affecting cell proliferation, rats 9 and 12 months after transplantation were stimulated with tri-iodothyronine and KGF. Hepatocytes were identified 7 days to >12 months, by H&E and immunohistochemically, as ectopic islands in the omental fat. Functionality was confirmed by glycogen deposition. Basal proliferation in 7-day rats was 28.0 +/- 10/1000 hepatocytes in ectopic islands (cf. 5.70 +/- 2.7/1000 in recipient liver). Proliferation in ectopic islands was greater than host liver. Growth factor-stimulated proliferation in ectopic islands induced a 70-fold increase in DNA synthesis. In conclusion, hepatocytes transplanted with nonparenchymal cells survive, proliferate, and function in the peritoneum of normal rats, and respond to exogenous growth stimuli. Their survival and proliferation in the presence of a normal functioning liver has implications for the potential use of the peritoneal site clinically for supplementation of liver function in metabolic disorders