27 research outputs found

    EPEN-04. SIOP EPENDYMOMA I: FINAL RESULTS, LONG TERM FOLLOW-UP AND MOLECULAR ANALYSIS OF THE TRIAL COHORT: A BIOMECA CONSORTIUM STUDY

    Get PDF
    IntroductionSurgery and radiotherapy are established childhood ependymoma treatments. The efficacy of chemotherapy has been debated. We report final results of the SIOP Ependymoma I trial, with 12-year follow-up, in the context of a post-hoc analysis of more recently described biomarkers.Aims and MethodsThe trial assessed event free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients aged three to 21 years with non-metastatic intracranial ependymoma, treated with a staged management strategy targeting maximum local control. The study also assessed: the response rate (RR) of subtotally resected (STR) disease to vincristine, etoposide and cyclophosphamide (VEC); and surgical operability. Children with gross total resection (GTR) received radiotherapy of 54 Gy in 30 daily fractions over six weeks, whilst those with STR received VEC before radiotherapy. We retrospectively assessed methylation and 1q status alongside hTERT, RELA, Tenascin C, H3K27me3 and pAKT expression.ResultsBetween 1999 and 2007, 89 participants were enrolled, 15 were excluded with metastatic (n=4) or non-ependymoma tumours (n=11) leaving a final cohort of 74. Five- and ten-year EFS was 49.5% and 46.7%, OS was 69.3% and 60.5%. 1q gain was associated with poorer EFS (p=0.002, HR=3.00, 95%CI 1.49–6.10). hTERT expression was associated with worse five-year EFS (20.0% Vs 83.3%, p=0.014, HR=5.8). GTR was achieved in 33/74 (44.6%) and associated with improved EFS (p=0.006, HR=2.81, 95% confidence interval 1.35–5.84). There was an improvement in GTR rates in the latter half of the trial (1999-2002 32.4% versus 2003-2007 56.8%). Despite the protocol, 12 participants with STR did not receive chemotherapy. However, chemotherapy RR was 65.5% (19/29, 95%CI 45.7–82.1).ConclusionsVEC exceeded the pre-specified RR of 45% in children over three years with STR intracranial ependymoma. However, cases of inaccurate stratification at treating centres highlights the need for rapid central review. We also confirmed associations between 1q gain, hTERT expression and outcome

    Evaluation of sit-stand workstations in an office setting: A randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Excessive sitting time is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease mortality and morbidity independent of physical activity. This aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a sit-stand workstation on sitting time, and vascular, metabolic and musculoskeletal outcomes in office workers, and to investigate workstation acceptability and feasibility. Methods: A two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled trial was conducted in one organisation. Participants were asymptomatic full-time office workers aged ≥18 years. Each participant in the intervention arm had a sit-stand workstation installed on their workplace desk for 8 weeks. Participants in the control arm received no intervention. The primary outcome was workplace sitting time, assessed at 0, 4 and 8 weeks by an ecological momentary assessment diary. Secondary behavioural, cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal outcomes were assessed. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed via questionnaire and interview. ANCOVA and magnitude-based inferences examined intervention effects relative to controls at 4 and 8 weeks. Participants and researchers were not blind to group allocation. Results: Forty-seven participants were randomised (intervention n = 26; control n = 21). Relative to the control group at 8 weeks, the intervention group had a beneficial decrease in sitting time (-80.2 min/8-h workday (95 % CI = -129.0, -31.4); p = 0.002), increase in standing time (72.9 min/8-h workday (21.2, 124.6); p = 0.007) and decrease in total cholesterol (-0.40 mmol/L (-0.79, -0.003); p = 0.049). No harmful changes in musculoskeletal discomfort/pain were observed relative to controls, and beneficial changes in flow-mediated dilation and diastolic blood pressure were observed. Most participants self-reported that the workstation was easy to use and their work-related productivity did not decrease when using the device. Factors that negatively influenced workstation use were workstation design, the social environment, work tasks and habits. Conclusion: Short-term use of a feasible sit-stand workstation reduced daily sitting time and led to beneficial improvements in cardiometabolic risk parameters in asymptomatic office workers. These findings imply that if the observed use of the sit-stand workstations continued over a longer duration, sit-stand workstations may have important ramifications for the prevention and reduction of cardiometabolic risk in a large proportion of the working population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02496507

    Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

    Get PDF

    Quality of life after postmastectomy radiotherapy in patients with intermediate-risk breast cancer (SUPREMO): 2-year follow-up results of a randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background Postmastectomy radiotherapy in patients with four or more positive axillary nodes reduces breast cancer mortality, but its role in patients with one to three involved nodes is controversial. We assessed the effects of postmastectomy radiotherapy on quality of life (QOL) in women with intermediate-risk breast cancer. Methods SUPREMO is an open-label, international, parallel-group, randomised, controlled trial. Women aged 18 years or older with intermediate-risk breast cancer (defined as pT1–2N1; pT3N0; or pT2N0 if also grade III or with lymphovascular invasion) who had undergone mastectomy and, if node positive, axillary surgery, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive chest wall radiotherapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions or a radiobiologically equivalent dose of 45 Gy in 20 fractions or 40 Gy in 15 fractions) or no radiotherapy. Randomisation was done with permuted blocks of varying block length, and stratified by centre, without masking of patients or investigators. The primary endpoint is 10-year overall survival. Here, we present 2-year results of QOL (a prespecified secondary endpoint). The QOL substudy, open to all UK patients, consists of questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23, Body Image Scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS], and EQ-5D-3L) completed before randomisation, and at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years. The prespecified primary outcomes within this QOL substudy were global QOL, fatigue, physical function, chest wall symptoms, shoulder and arm symptoms, body image, and anxiety and depression. Data were analysed by intention to treat, using repeated mixed-effects methods. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN61145589. Findings Between Aug 4, 2006, and April 29, 2013, 1688 patients were enrolled internationally and randomly assigned to receive chest wall radiotherapy (n=853) or not (n=835). 989 (79%) of 1258 patients from 111 UK centres consented to participate in the QOL substudy (487 in the radiotherapy group and 502 in the no radiotherapy group), of whom 947 (96%) returned the baseline questionnaires and were included in the analysis (radiotherapy, n=471; no radiotherapy, n=476). At up to 2 years, chest wall symptoms were worse in the radiotherapy group than in the no radiotherapy group (mean score 14·1 [SD 15·8] in the radiotherapy group vs 11·6 [14·6] in the no radiotherapy group; effect estimate 2·17, 95% CI 0·40–3·94; p=0·016); however, there was an improvement in both groups between years 1 and 2 (visit effect −1·34, 95% CI −2·36 to −0·31; p=0·010). No differences were seen between treatment groups in arm and shoulder symptoms, body image, fatigue, overall QOL, physical function, or anxiety or depression scores. Interpretation Postmastectomy radiotherapy led to more local (chest wall) symptoms up to 2 years postrandomisation compared with no radiotherapy, but the difference between groups was small. These data will inform shared decision making while we await survival (trial primary endpoint) results. Funding Medical Research Council, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Cancer Australia, Dutch Cancer Society, Trustees of Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation

    Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

    Get PDF
    Background Some high-income countries have deployed fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines, but the clinical need, effectiveness, timing, and dose of a fourth dose remain uncertain. We aimed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of fourth-dose boosters against COVID-19.Methods The COV-BOOST trial is a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines given as third-dose boosters at 18 sites in the UK. This sub-study enrolled participants who had received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) as their third dose in COV-BOOST and randomly assigned them (1:1) to receive a fourth dose of either BNT162b2 (30 µg in 0·30 mL; full dose) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 50 µg in 0·25 mL; half dose) via intramuscular injection into the upper arm. The computer-generated randomisation list was created by the study statisticians with random block sizes of two or four. Participants and all study staff not delivering the vaccines were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity, and immunogenicity (antispike protein IgG titres by ELISA and cellular immune response by ELISpot). We compared immunogenicity at 28 days after the third dose versus 14 days after the fourth dose and at day 0 versus day 14 relative to the fourth dose. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who received a fourth-dose booster regardless of their SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Immunogenicity was primarily analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population comprising seronegative participants who had received a fourth-dose booster and had available endpoint data. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 73765130, and is ongoing.Findings Between Jan 11 and Jan 25, 2022, 166 participants were screened, randomly assigned, and received either full-dose BNT162b2 (n=83) or half-dose mRNA-1273 (n=83) as a fourth dose. The median age of these participants was 70·1 years (IQR 51·6–77·5) and 86 (52%) of 166 participants were female and 80 (48%) were male. The median interval between the third and fourth doses was 208·5 days (IQR 203·3–214·8). Pain was the most common local solicited adverse event and fatigue was the most common systemic solicited adverse event after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster doses. None of three serious adverse events reported after a fourth dose with BNT162b2 were related to the study vaccine. In the BNT162b2 group, geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration at day 28 after the third dose was 23 325 ELISA laboratory units (ELU)/mL (95% CI 20 030–27 162), which increased to 37 460 ELU/mL (31 996–43 857) at day 14 after the fourth dose, representing a significant fold change (geometric mean 1·59, 95% CI 1·41–1·78). There was a significant increase in geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration from 28 days after the third dose (25 317 ELU/mL, 95% CI 20 996–30 528) to 14 days after a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 (54 936 ELU/mL, 46 826–64 452), with a geometric mean fold change of 2·19 (1·90–2·52). The fold changes in anti-spike protein IgG titres from before (day 0) to after (day 14) the fourth dose were 12·19 (95% CI 10·37–14·32) and 15·90 (12·92–19·58) in the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively. T-cell responses were also boosted after the fourth dose (eg, the fold changes for the wild-type variant from before to after the fourth dose were 7·32 [95% CI 3·24–16·54] in the BNT162b2 group and 6·22 [3·90–9·92] in the mRNA-1273 group).Interpretation Fourth-dose COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines are well tolerated and boost cellular and humoral immunity. Peak responses after the fourth dose were similar to, and possibly better than, peak responses after the third dose

    Dosimetric Comparison and Potential for Improved Clinical Outcomes of Paediatric CNS Patients Treated with Protons or IMRT

    No full text
    Background: We compare clinical outcomes of paediatric patients with CNS tumours treated with protons or IMRT. CNS tumours form the second most common group of cancers in children. Radiotherapy plays a major role in the treatment of many of these patients but also contributes to late side effects in long term survivors. Radiation dose inevitably deposited in healthy tissues outside the clinical target has been linked to detrimental late effects such as neurocognitive, behavioural and vascular effects in addition to endocrine abnormalities and second tumours. Methods: A literature search was performed using keywords: protons, IMRT, CNS and paediatric. Of 189 papers retrieved, 10 were deemed relevant based on title and abstract screening. All papers directly compared outcomes from protons with photons, five papers included medulloblastoma, four papers each included craniopharyngioma and low grade gliomas and three papers included ependymoma. Results: This review found that while proton beam therapy offered similar clinical target coverage, there was a demonstrable reduction in integral dose to normal structures. Conclusions: This in turn suggests the potential for superior long term outcomes for paediatric patients with CNS tumours both in terms of radiogenic second cancers and out-of-field adverse effects

    Permanent hair loss associated with taxane chemotherapy use in breast cancer: A retrospective survey at two tertiary UK cancer centres.

    No full text
    Purpose: Taxane chemotherapy is commonly used in the management of breast cancer. Hair loss (alopecia) is an expected side effect which may have a significant effect on quality of life. Alopecia is normally temporary but permanent chemotherapy-induced alopecia (pCIA) is increasingly recognised especially following docetaxel chemotherapy. However, the prevalence following docetaxel is not well understood and there is no published literature for paclitaxel chemotherapy. The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence and patterns of pCIA resulting from both docetaxel and paclitaxel chemotherapy at two tertiary UK cancer centres. Methods: In collaboration between Clatterbridge Cancer Centre and The Christie NHS Foundation Trusts, a retrospective survey was conducted for breast cancer patients who had received taxane chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Patients who had concluded chemotherapy at least a year previously were contacted by post and invited to participate by completing a questionnaire and returning it to their treatment centre. Data collected included the incidence and pattern of pCIA using the Savin pictorial hair loss scale, and the methods used by patients to manage it. Fisher's exact test was used to compare pCIA between the docetaxel and paclitaxel cohorts. Results: 383 patients responded to the survey (a 63.3% overall response rate). These comprised 245 patients receiving docetaxel and 138 patients treated with paclitaxel. pCIA was reported by 23.3% of patients receiving docetaxel and 10.1% paclitaxel (p &lt; 0.01). Overall 16.7% of patients in both groups reported the ongoing use of products or appliances such as wigs to camouflage their pCIA. In the docetaxel group, pCIA appeared to be more frequent in post-menopausal women than peri- or pre-menopausal women (37.8%, 12.3% and 19.6% respectively [Chi-square test p &lt; 0.01]). Also in the docetaxel group, there appeared to be a trend for more severe scalp alopecia when the patient also received an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or tamoxifen and this difference was most marked in those who had received both an AI and tamoxifen as components of their treatment regime (p = 0.04). The use of scalp cooling was only recorded in the Christie paclitaxel group (n = 12). Of these 12 patients, 83.3% reported no hair loss. While overall rates of permanent eyebrow, eyelash and nostril hair loss were low, this pattern of hair loss appeared more frequent in the paclitaxel than the docetaxel group 4.3% vs. 1.8% (p = 0.29). Conclusions: Both docetaxel and paclitaxel may cause permanent scalp hair loss, but it is significantly more prevalent with docetaxel compared with paclitaxel. Implications for Cancer Survivors: Clinicians should counsel patients regarding the risk of permanent alopecia prior to embarking upon taxane chemotherapy and routinely offer scalp cooling if available. More research is required to understand the pathobiology of this important and previously under recognised long-term side effect to enable more active preventive and management approaches.</p
    corecore