Phase II study of intravenous etoposide in patients with relapsed ependymoma (CNS 2001 04)

BackgroundRelapsed ependymoma has a dismal prognosis, and the role of chemotherapy at relapse remains unclear. This study prospectively evaluated the efficacy of intensive intravenous (IV) etoposide in patients less than 21 years of age with relapsed intracranial ependymoma (NCT00278252).MethodsThis was a single-arm, open-label, phase II trial using Gehan’s two-stage design. Patients received IV etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17 of each 28-day cycle, up to maximum of 6 cycles. Primary outcome was radiological response after 3 cycles. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed in 10 patients.ResultsTwenty-five patients were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Three patients were excluded in per-protocol (PP) analysis. After 3 cycles of etoposide, 5 patients (ITT 20%/PP 23%) had a complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or objective response (OR). Nine patients (ITT 36%/PP 41%,) had a best overall response of CR, PR, or OR. 1-year PFS was 24% in ITT and 23% in PP populations. 1-year OS was 56% and 59%, 5-year OS was 20% and 18%, respectively, in ITT and PP populations. Toxicity was predominantly hematological, with 20/25 patients experiencing a grade 3 or higher hematological adverse event.ConclusionsThis study confirms the activity of IV etoposide against relapsed ependymoma, however, this is modest, not sustained, and similar to that with oral etoposide, albeit with increased toxicity. These results confirm the dismal prognosis of this disease, provide a rationale to include etoposide within drug combinations, and highlight the need to develop novel treatments for recurrent ependymoma

Venetoclax combined with low dose cytarabine compared to standard of care intensive chemotherapy for the treatment of favourable risk adult acute myeloid leukaemia (VICTOR): Study protocol for an international, open-label, multicentre, molecularly-guided randomised, phase II trial

Background: For patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), the only potentially curative treatment is intensive chemotherapy (IC). This is highly toxic, particularly for patients > 60 years, potentially leading to prolonged hospitalisations requiring intensive supportive care, and sometimes treatment-related death. This also results in extensive healthcare costs and negatively impacts quality of life (QoL). Venetoclax with low-dose cytarabine (VEN + LDAC) is a novel, low-intensity treatment for AML patients who cannot receive IC. VEN + LDAC is given as an outpatient and toxicity appears significantly lower than with IC. Analysis of clinical trials performed to date are promising for patients with the genotype NPM1mutFLT3 ITDneg, where remission and survival rates appear comparable to those achieved with IC. Methods: VICTOR is an international, two-arm, open-label, multi-centre, non-inferiority, randomised-controlled phase II trial to assess VEN + LDAC compared to standard of care (IC) as first-line treatment in older patients (initially aged ≥ 60 years) with newly diagnosed AML. The trial will recruit patients with a NPM1mutFLT3 ITDneg genotype; those with a favourable risk in relation to the experimental treatment. University of Birmingham is the UK co-ordinating centre, with national hubs in Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, and Auckland District Health Board, New Zealand. The primary outcome is molecular event-free survival time where an event is defined as failure to achieve morphological complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete blood count recovery after two cycles of therapy; molecular persistence, progression or relapse requiring treatment change; morphological relapse, or; death. Secondary outcomes include cumulative resource use at 12- and 24-months, and QoL as assessed by EORTCQLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-3L at 3-, 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-months. The trial employs an innovative Bayesian design with target sample size of 156 patients aged > 60 years. Discussion: The principle underpinning the VICTOR trial is that the chance of cure for patients in the experimental arm should not be compromised, therefore, an adaptive design with regular checks on accumulating data has been employed, which will allow for a staged expansion of the trial population to include younger patients if, and when, there is sufficient evidence of non-inferiority in older patients. Trial registration: EudraCT: 2020–000,273-24; 21-Aug-2020. ISRCTN: 15,567,173; 08-Dec-2020

Selenium and Vitamin E for Prevention of Non–Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer Recurrence and Progression:A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Selenium and vitamin E have been identified as promising agents for the chemoprevention of recurrence and progression of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Objective: To determine whether selenium and/or vitamin E may prevent disease recurrence in patients with newly diagnosed NMIBC.Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, 2 × 2 factorial randomized clinical trial included patients with newly diagnosed NMIBC recruited from 10 secondary or tertiary care hospitals in the UK. A total of 755 patients were screened for inclusion; 484 did not meet the inclusion criteria, and 1 declined to participate. A total of 270 patients were randomly assigned to 4 groups (selenium plus placebo, vitamin E plus placebo, selenium plus vitamin E, and placebo plus placebo) in a double-blind fashion between July 17, 2007, and October 10, 2011. Eligibility included initial diagnosis of NMIBC (stages Ta, T1, or Tis); randomization within 12 months of first transurethral resection was required.Interventions: Oral selenium (200 μg/d of high-selenium yeast) and matched vitamin E placebo, vitamin E (200 IU/d of d-alfa-tocopherol) and matched selenium placebo, selenium and vitamin E, or placebo and placebo.Main Outcome and Measures: Recurrence-free interval (RFI) on an intention-to-treat basis (analyses completed on November 28, 2022).Results: The study randomized 270 patients (mean [SD] age, 68.9 [10.4] years; median [IQR] age, 69 [63-77] years; 202 male [75%]), with 65 receiving selenium and vitamin E placebo, 71 receiving vitamin E and selenium placebo, 69 receiving selenium and vitamin E, and 65 receiving both placebos. Median overall follow-up was 5.5 years (IQR, 5.1-6.1 years); 228 patients (84%) were followed up for more than 5 years. Median treatment duration was 1.5 years (IQR, 0.9-2.5 years). The study was halted because of slow accrual. For selenium (n = 134) vs no selenium (n = 136), there was no difference in RFI (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.65-1.31; P = .65). For vitamin E (n = 140) vs no vitamin E (n = 130), there was a statistically significant detriment to RFI (hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.02-2.09; P = .04). No significant differences were observed for progression-free interval or overall survival time with either supplement. Results were unchanged after Cox proportional hazards regression modeling to adjust for known prognostic factors. In total, 1957 adverse events were reported; 85 were serious adverse events, and all were considered unrelated to trial treatment.Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of selenium and vitamin E, selenium supplementation did not reduce the risk of recurrence in patients with NMIBC, but vitamin E supplementation was associated with an increased risk of recurrence. Neither selenium nor vitamin E influenced progression or overall survival. Vitamin E supplementation may be harmful to patients with NMIBC, and elucidation of the underlying biology is required.Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN13889738<br/