An open label randomized multicentre phase IIIb trial comparing parenteral substitution versus best supportive nutritional care in subjects with pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving 5-FU plus oxaliplatin as 2nd or higher line chemotherapy regarding clinical benefit - PANUSCO

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Pancreatic cancer is an extremely aggressive malignancy. Subjects are afflicted with a variety of disconcerting symptoms, including profound cachexia. Recent data indicate that the outcome of oncological patients suffering from cancer cachexia could be improved by parenteral nutrition and that parenteral nutrition results in an improvement of quality of life and in prolonged survival.</p> <p>Currently, there is no recommendation of routine use of parenteral nutrition. Furthermore, there is no clear recommendation for 2^ndline therapy (or higher) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma but often asked for.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>PANUSCO is an open label, controlled, prospective, randomized, multicentre phase IIIb trial with two parallel arms. All patients will be treated with 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and oxaliplatin on an outpatient basis at the study sites. Additionally, all patients will receive best supportive nutritional care (BSNC). In the experimental group BSNC will be expanded with parenteral nutrition (PN). In contrast, patients in the control group obtain solely BSNC. Parenteral nutrition will be applied overnight and at home by experienced medical staff.</p> <p>A total of 120 patients are planned to be enrolled. Primary endpoint is the comparison of the treatment groups with respect to event-free survival (EFS), defined as the time from randomization till time to development of an event defined as either an impairment (change from baseline of at least ten points in EORTC QLQ-C30, functional domain total score) or withdrawal due to fulfilling the special defined stopping criteria for chemotherapy as well as for nutritional intervention (NI) or death from any cause (whichever occurs first).</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The aim of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether parenteral nutrition in combination with defined 2^ndline or higher chemotherapy has an impact on quality of life for patients suffering from pancreatic adenocarcinoma.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60516908.</p

Impact of neo-adjuvant Sorafenib treatment on liver transplantation in HCC patients - a prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase III trial

Background: Liver Transplantation (LT) is treatment of choice for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within MILAN Criteria. Tumour progression and subsequent dropout from waiting list have significant impact on the survival. Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) controls tumour growth in the treated HCC nodule, however, the risk of tumour development in the untreated liver is increased by simultaneous release of neo-angiogenic factors. Due to its anti-angiogenic effects, Sorafenib delays the progression of HCC. Aim of this study was to determine whether combination of TACE and Sorafenib improves tumour control in HCC patients on waiting list for LT. Methods: Fifty patients were randomly assigned on a 1:1 ratio in double-blinded fashion at four centers in Germany and treated with TACE plus either Sorafenib (n = 24) or placebo (n = 26). The end of treatment was development of progressive disease according to mRECIST criteria or LT. The primary endpoint of the trial was the Time-to-Progression (TTP). Other efficacy endpoints were Tumour Response, Progression-free Survival (PFS), and Time-to-LT (TTLT). Results: The median time of treatment was 125 days with Sorafenib and 171 days with the placebo. Fourteen patients (seven from each group) developed tumour progression during the course of the study period. The Hazard Ratio of TTP was 1.106 (95% CI: 0.387, 3.162). The results of the Objective Response Rate, Disease Control Rate, PFS, and TTLT were comparable in both groups. The incidence of AEs was comparable in the placebo group (n = 23, 92%) and in the Sorafenib group (n = 23, 96%). Twelve patients (50%) on Sorafenib and four patients (16%) on placebo experienced severe treatment-related AEs. Conclusion: The TTP is similar after neo-adjuvant treatment with TACE and Sorafenib before LT compared to TACE and placebo. The Tumour Response, PFS, and TTLT were comparable. The safety profile of the Sorafenib group was similar to that of the placebo group. Trial registration: ISRCTN2408179

Randomised trial of proton vs. carbon ion radiation therapy in patients with chordoma of the skull base, clinical phase III study HIT-1-Study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chordomas of the skull base are relative rare lesions of the bones. Surgical resection is the primary treatment standard, though complete resection is nearly impossible due to close proximity to critical and hence also dose limiting organs for radiation therapy. Level of recurrence after surgery alone is comparatively high, so adjuvant radiation therapy is very important for the improvement of local control rates. Proton therapy is the gold standard in the treatment of skull base chordomas. However, high-LET beams such as carbon ions theoretically offer biologic advantages by enhanced biologic effectiveness in slow-growing tumors.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>This clinical study is a prospective randomised phase III trial. The trial will be carried out at Heidelberger Ionenstrahl-Therapie centre (HIT) and is a monocentric study.</p> <p>Patients with skull base chordoma will be randomised to either proton or carbon ion radiation therapy. As a standard, patients will undergo non-invasive, rigid immobilization and target volume delineation will be carried out based on CT and MRI data. The biologically isoeffective target dose to the PTV in carbon ion treatment (accelerated dose) will be 63 Gy E ± 5% and 72 Gy E ± 5% (standard dose) in proton therapy respectively. Local-progression free survival (LPFS) will be analysed as primary end point. Toxicity and overall survival are the secondary end points. Additional examined parameters are patterns of recurrence, prognostic factors and plan quality analysis.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Up until now it was impossible to compare two different particle therapies, i.e. protons and carbon ions directly at the same facility.</p> <p>The aim of this study is to find out, whether the biological advantages of carbon ion therapy can also be clinically confirmed and translated into the better local control rates in the treatment of skull base chordomas.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01182779</p

Phase I/II intra-patient dose escalation study of vorinostat in children with relapsed solid tumor, lymphoma, or leukemia

Background: Until today, adult and pediatric clinical trials investigating single-agent or combinatorial HDAC inhibitors including vorinostat in solid tumors have largely failed to demonstrate efficacy. These results may in part be explained by data from preclinical models showing significant activity only at higher concentrations compared to those achieved with current dosing regimens. In the current pediatric trial, we applied an intra-patient dose escalation design. The purpose of this trial was to determine a safe dose recommendation (SDR) of single-agent vorinostat for intra-patient dose escalation, pharmacokinetic analyses (PK), and activity evaluation in children (3-18 years) with relapsed or therapy-refractory malignancies. Results: A phase I intra-patient dose (de)escalation was performed until individual maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The starting dose was 180 mg/m(2)/day with weekly dose escalations of 50 mg/m(2) until DLT/maximum dose. After MTD determination, patients seamlessly continued in phase II with disease assessments every 3 months. PK and plasma cytokine profiles were determined. Fifty of 52 patients received treatment. n = 27/50 (54%) completed the intra-patient (de)escalation and entered phase II. An SDR of 130 mg/m(2)/day was determined (maximum, 580 mg/m(2)/day). n = 46/50 (92%) patients experienced treatment-related AEs which were mostly reversible and included thrombocytopenia, fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, anemia, and vomiting. n = 6/50 (12%) had treatment-related SAEs. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Higher dose levels resulted in higher C-max. Five patients achieved prolonged disease control (> 12 months) and showed a higher C-max (> 270 ng/mL) and MTDs. Best overall response (combining PR and SD, no CR observed) rate in phase II was 6/27 (22%) with a median PFS and OS of 5.3 and 22.4 months. Low levels of baseline cytokine expression were significantly correlated with favorable outcome. Conclusion: An SDR of 130 mg/m(2)/day for individual dose escalation was determined. Higher drug exposure was associated with responses and long-term disease stabilization with manageable toxicity. Patients with low expression of plasma cytokine levels at baseline were able to tolerate higher doses of vorinostat and benefited from treatment. Baseline cytokine profile is a promising potential predictive biomarker

Non-randomized therapy trial to determine the safety and efficacy of heavy ion radiotherapy in patients with non-resectable osteosarcoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Osteosarcoma is the most common primary malignant bone tumor in children and adolescents. For effective treatment, local control of the tumor is absolutely critical, because the chances of long term survival are <10% and might effectively approach zero if a complete surgical resection of the tumor is not possible. Up to date there is no curative treatment protocol for patients with non-resectable osteosarcomas, who are excluded from current osteosarcoma trials, e.g. <it>EURAMOS1</it>. Local photon radiotherapy has previously been used in small series and in an uncontrolled, highly individualized fashion, which, however, documented that high dose radiotherapy can, in principle, be used to achieve local control. Generally the radiation dose that is necessary for a curative approach can hardly be achieved with conventional photon radiotherapy in patients with non-resectable tumors that are usually located near radiosensitive critical organs such as the brain, the spine or the pelvis. In these cases particle Radiotherapy (proton therapy (PT)/heavy ion therapy (HIT) may offer a promising new alternative. Moreover, compared with photons, heavy ion beams provide a higher physical selectivity because of their finite depth coverage in tissue. They achieve a higher relative biological effectiveness. Phase I/II dose escalation studies of HIT in adults with non-resectable bone and soft tissue sarcomas have already shown favorable results.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This is a monocenter, single-arm study for patients ≥ 6 years of age with non-resectable osteosarcoma. Desired target dose is 60-66 Cobalt Gray Equivalent (Gy E) with 45 Gy PT (proton therapy) and a carbon ion boost of 15-21 GyE. Weekly fractionation of 5-6 × 3 Gy E is used. PT/HIT will be administered exclusively at the Ion Radiotherapy Center in Heidelberg. Furthermore, FDG-PET imaging characteristics of non-resectable osteosarcoma before and after PT/HIT will be investigated prospectively. Systemic disease before and after PT/HIT is targeted by standard chemotherapy protocols and is not part of this trial.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The primary objectives of this trial are the determination of feasibility and toxicity of HIT. Secondary objectives are tumor response, disease free survival and overall survival. The aim is to improve outcome for patients with non-resectable osteosarcoma.</p> <p>Trail Registration</p> <p>Registration number (ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT01005043</p