Prospective Multicenter Trial of Cervical Arthroplasty with the ROTAIO® Cervical Disc Prosthesis.

STUDY DESIGN Clinical observational study. OBJECTIVE The ROTAIO® cervical disc prosthesis is a novel unconstrained implant with a variable center of rotation aiming at physiological motion. The objective of this multicenter prospective trial was to evaluate clinical outcome and complications within 2 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS 120 patients (72 females and 48 males with median age of 43.0 years [23-60 yrs] underwent ACDA (ROTAIO®, SIGNUS Medical, Alzenau, Germany) and were prospectively followed for 24 months. Preoperative complaints were mainly associated with radiculopathy (n = 104) or myelopathy (n=16). There were 108 monosegmental and 12 bisegmental procedures including 6 hybrid constructs. Clinical outcome was evaluated at 3, 12 and 24 months in 100%, 96% and 77% of the cohort by VAS, NDI, WL-26, Patient`s Satisfaction Index (PSI), SF-36, Nurick Score, mJOA, Composite Success Rate, complications, patient`s overall satisfaction and analgesics use. RESULTS Highly significant clinical improvements were observed according to NDI and VAS (P < .0001 (arm); P < .001 (neck); P = .002 (head)) at all time points. Analgetic use could be reduced in 87.1 to 95.2%. Doctor`s visits have been reduced in 93.8% after 24 months. Patient`s overall satisfaction was high with 78.4 to 83.5% of patients. The composite success rate was 77.5% after 12 months and 76.9% after 24 months. There were no major complications in this series. Slight subsidence of the prosthesis was observed in 2 patients and 3 patients demonstrated fusion after 24 months. 2 patients developed symptomatic foraminal stenosis, so that implant removal and fusion was performed resulting in a revision rate of 1.7% in 2 years. CONCLUSION The ROTAIO® cervical disc prosthesis is a safe and efficient treatment option for symptomatic degenerative disc disease demonstrating highly significant clinical improvement and high patient`s overall satisfaction with very low revision rates at 2 years

Baseline T1 hyperintense and diffusion-restricted lesions are not linked to prolonged survival in bevacizumab-treated glioblastoma patients of the GLARIUS trial

Purpose The phase II GLARIUS trial assigned patients with newly diagnosed, O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter non-methylated glioblastoma to experimental bevacizumab/irinotecan (BEV/IRI) or standard temozolomide (TMZ). To identify subpopulations with a particularly favorable course, we assessed the prognostic potential of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) markers before treatment onset. Methods MRIs at baseline (before treatment onset) were analyzed for T1-hyperintense and diffusion-restricted lesions; as well as the presence of both hyperintense and diffusion-restricted (double positive) lesions. The MRI findings were correlated with overall and progression-free survival. Results MRI scans were evaluable in 71% of the GLARIUS modified intention-to-treat population (n = 121 of 170; 88 patients in the BEV/IRI arm, and 33 patients in the TMZ control arm). Diffusion-restricted and T1 hyperintense lesions were present in 60% and 65% of patients in BEV/IRI arm, while 57% and 63% were found in the TMZ arm, respectively. Double positive lesions were found in 37% of BEV/IRI patients and in 39% of TMZ patients. Neither the presence of T1-hyperintense, diffusion-restricted lesions, nor double positive lesions were associated with improved survival. Conclusions Baseline T1-hyperintense and diffusion-restricted lesions are not suitable to predict progression-free or overall survival of patients treated with bevacizumab/irinotecan or temozolomide

Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan Versus Temozolomide in Newly Diagnosed O-6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Nonmethylated Glioblastoma: The Randomized GLARIUS Trial

Purpose In patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma that harbors a nonmethylated O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promotor, standard temozolomide (TMZ) has, at best, limited efficacy. The GLARIUS trial thus explored bevacizumab plus irinotecan (BEV+IRI) as an alternative to TMZ. Patients and Methods In this phase II, unblinded trial 182 patients in 22 centers were randomly assigned 2: 1 to BEV (10mg/kg every 2 weeks) during radiotherapy (RT) followed by maintenance BEV (10mg/kg every 2 weeks) plus IRI(125 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks) or to daily TMZ (75 mg/m(2)) during RT followed by six courses of TMZ (150-200 mg/m(2)/d for 5 days every 4 weeks). The primary end point was the progression-free survival rate after 6 months (PFS-6). Results In the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population, PFS-6 was increased from 42.6% with TMZ(95% CI, 29.4% to 55.8%) to 79.3% with BEV+IRI (95% CI, 71.9% to 86.7%; P < .001). PFS was prolonged from a median of 5.99 months (95% CI, 2.7 to 7.3 months) to 9.7 months (95% CI, 8.7 to 10.8 months; P < .001). At progression, crossover BEV therapy was given to 81.8% of all patients who received any sort of second-line therapy in the TMZ arm. Overall survival (OS) was not different in the two arms: the median OS was 16.6 months (95% CI, 15.4 to 18.4 months) with BEV+IRI and was 17.5 months (95% CI, 15.1 to 20.5 months) with TMZ. The time course of quality of life (QOL) in six selected domains of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and QLQ-BN20 (which included cognitive functioning), of the Karnofsky performance score, and of the Mini Mental State Examination score was not different between the treatment arms. Conclusion BEV+IRI resulted in a superior PFS-6 rate and median PFS compared with TMZ. However, BEV+IRI did not improve OS, potentially because of the high crossover rate. BEV+IRI did not alter QOL compared with TMZ. (C) 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncolog

Interdisciplinary Screening, Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up of Breast Cancer. Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3-Level, AWMF Registry Number 032/045OL, December 2017) - Part 1 with Recommendations for the Screening, Diagnosis and Therapy of Breast Cancer

Purpose The aim of this official guideline coordinated and published by the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) and the German Cancer Society (DKG) was to optimize the screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care of breast cancer. Methods The process of updating the S3 guideline dating from 2012 was based on the adaptation of identified source guidelines which were combined with reviews of evidence compiled using PICO (Patients/Interventions/Control/Outcome) questions and the results of a systematic search of literature databases and the selection and evaluation of the identified literature. The interdisciplinary working groups took the identified materials as their starting point to develop recommendations and statements which were modified and graded in a structured consensus procedure. Recommendations Part 1 of this short version of the guideline presents recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and follow-up care of breast cancer. The importance of mammography for screening is confirmed in this updated version of the guideline and forms the basis for all screening. In addition to the conventional methods used to diagnose breast cancer, computed tomography (CT) is recommended for staging in women with a higher risk of recurrence. The follow-up concept includes suggested intervals between physical, ultrasound and mammography examinations, additional high-tech diagnostic procedures, and the determination of tumor markers for the evaluation of metastatic disease