Comparing Breast Cancer Multiparameter Tests in the OPTIMA Prelim Trial: No Test Is More Equal Than the Others

Background: Previous reports identifying discordance between multiparameter tests at the individual patient level have been largely attributed to methodological shortcomings of multiple in silico studies. Comparisons between tests, when performed using actual diagnostic assays, have been predicted to demonstrate high degrees of concordance. OPTIMA prelim compared predicted risk stratification and subtype classification of different multiparameter tests performed directly on the same population. Methods: Three hundred thirteen women with early breast cancer were randomized to standard (chemotherapy and endocrine therapy) or test-directed (chemotherapy if Oncotype DX recurrence score >25) treatment. Risk stratification was also determined with Prosigna (PAM50), MammaPrint, MammaTyper, NexCourse Breast (IHC4-AQUA), and conventional IHC4 (IHC4). Subtype classification was provided by Blueprint, MammaTyper, and Prosigna. Results: Oncotype DX predicted a higher proportion of tumors as low risk (82.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 77.8% to 86.4%) than were predicted low/intermediate risk using Prosigna (65.5%, 95% CI = 60.1% to 70.9%), IHC4 (72.0%, 95% CI = 66.5% to 77.5%), MammaPrint (61.4%, 95% CI = 55.9% to 66.9%), or NexCourse Breast (61.6%, 95% CI = 55.8% to 67.4%). Strikingly, the five tests showed only modest agreement when dichotomizing results between high vs low/intermediate risk. Only 119 (39.4%) tumors were classified uniformly as either low/intermediate risk or high risk, and 183 (60.6%) were assigned to different risk categories by different tests, although 94 (31.1%) showed agreement between four of five tests. All three subtype tests assigned 59.5% to 62.4% of tumors to luminal A subtype, but only 121 (40.1%) were classified as luminal A by all three tests and only 58 (19.2%) were uniformly assigned as nonluminal A. Discordant subtyping was observed in 123 (40.7%) tumors. Conclusions: Existing evidence on the comparative prognostic information provided by different tests suggests that current multiparameter tests provide broadly equivalent risk information for the population of women with estrogen receptor (ER)–positive breast cancers. However, for the individual patient, tests may provide differing risk categorization and subtype information

The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention supported five randomized trials to recruit to target: a mixed-methods evaluation

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of the Quintet Recruitment Intervention (QRI) on recruitment in challenging randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have applied the intervention. The QRI aims to understand recruitment difficulties, and then implements ‘QRI-actions’ to address these as recruitment proceeds.Study Design and SettingA mixed-methods study, comprising: a) before-and-after comparisons of recruitment rates and numbers of patients approached, and b) qualitative case studies, including documentary analysis and interviews with RCT investigators.ResultsFive UK-based publicly-funded RCTs were included in the evaluation. All recruited to target. RCT2 and RCT5 both received up-front pre-recruitment training before the intervention was applied. RCT2 did not encounter recruitment issues and recruited above target from its outset. Recruitment difficulties, particularly communication issues, were identified and addressed through QRI-actions in RCTs 1, 3, 4 and 5. Randomization rates significantly improved post-QRI-action in RCTs 1,3, and 4. QRI-actions addressed issues with approaching eligible patients in RCTs 3 and 5, which both saw significant increases in patients approached. Trial investigators reported that the QRI had unearthed issues they had been unaware of, and reportedly changed their practices post QRI-action.ConclusionThere is promising evidence to suggest the QRI can support recruitment to difficult RCTs. This needs to be substantiated with future controlled evaluations

Quantifying Duration of Proteinuria Remission and Association with Clinical Outcome in IgA Nephropathy

BACKGROUND: On the basis of findings of observational studies and a meta-analysis, proteinuria reduction has been proposed as a surrogate outcome in IgA nephropathy. How long a reduction in proteinuria needs to be maintained to mitigate the long-term risk of disease progression is unknown. METHODS: In this retrospective multiethnic cohort of adult patients with IgA nephropathy, we defined proteinuria remission as a ≥25% reduction in proteinuria from the peak value after biopsy, and an absolute reduction in proteinuria to <1 g/d. The exposure of interest was the total duration of first remission, treated as a time-varying covariate using longitudinal proteinuria measurements. We used time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression models to quantify the association between the duration of remission and the primary outcome (ESKD or a 50% reduction in eGFR). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.9 years, 274 of 1864 patients (14.7%) experienced the primary outcome. The relationship between duration of proteinuria remission and outcome was nonlinear. Each 3 months in sustained remission up to approximately 4 years was associated with an additional 9% reduction in the risk of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.89 to 0.93). Thereafter, each additional 3 months in remission was associated with a smaller, nonsignificant risk reduction (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.03). These findings were robust to multivariable adjustment and consistent across clinical and histologic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of proteinuria as a surrogate outcome in IgA nephropathy, but additionally demonstrate the value of quantifying the duration of proteinuria remission when estimating the risk of hard clinical endpoints

Improving treatment decisions using personalized risk assessment from the International IgA Nephropathy Prediction Tool.

Immunosuppression in IgA nephropathy (IgAN) should be reserved for patients at high-risk of disease progression, which KDIGO guidelines determine based solely on proteinuria 1g or more/day. To investigate if treatment decisions can be more accurately accomplished using individualized risk from the International IgAN Prediction Tool, we simulated allocation of a hypothetical immunosuppression therapy in an international cohort of adults with IgAN. Two decision rules for treatment were applied based on proteinuria 1g or more/day or predicted risk from the Prediction Tool above a threshold probability. An appropriate decision was defined as immunosuppression allocated to patients experiencing the primary outcome (50% decline in eGFR or ESKD) and withheld otherwise. The net benefit and net reduction in treatment are the proportion of patients appropriately allocated to receive or withhold immunosuppression, adjusted for the harm from inappropriate decisions, calculated for all threshold probabilities from 0-100%. Of 3299 patients followed for 5.1 years, 522 (15.8%) experienced the primary outcome. Treatment allocation based solely on proteinuria οϕ 1g or more/day had a negative net benefit (was harmful) because immunosuppression was increasingly allocated to patients without progressive disease. Compared to using proteinuria, treatment allocation using the Prediction Tool had a larger net benefit up to 23.4% (95% confidence interval 21.5-25.2%) and a larger net reduction in treatment up to 35.1% (32.3-37.8%). Thus, allocation of immunosuppression to high-risk patients with IgAN can be substantially improved using the Prediction Tool compared to using proteinuria