Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Factors Influencing Treatment Recommendations in Node-Negative Breast Cancer

Grade, tumor size, estrogen-receptor status, and younger age are the most significant factors influencing adjuvant chemotherapy recommendation for patients with node-negative breast cancer

Breast Radiotherapy after Oncoplastic Surgery—A Multidisciplinary Approach

Oncoplastic breast surgery encompasses a range of techniques used to provide equitable oncological outcomes compared with standard breast surgery while, simultaneously, prioritizing aesthetic outcomes. While the outcomes of oncoplastic breast surgery are promising, it can add an extra complexity to the treatment paradigm of breast cancer and impact on decision-making surrounding adjuvant therapies, like chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As such, early discussions at the multidisciplinary team meeting with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists present, should be encouraged to facilitate best patient care

Evaluating the role of magnetic resonance imaging post neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer in the NEONAB trial

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) accuracy after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) for breast cancer varies according to hormone receptor (HR), human epidermal growth factor receptor type-2 (HER2) subtype and Ki-67 proliferation index. Whether MRI accuracy varies by genomic signatures is unknown. We examined the accuracy of MRI in the NEONAB trial (Clinicaltrials.gov #: NCT01830244). AIM: To examine the accuracy of MRI to predict pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer in the NEONAB trial. METHODS: Patients with stages II-III breast cancer received sequential epirubicin, cyclophosphamide and nab-paclitaxel and trastuzumab if they were HER2+. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated to assess the utility of preoperative MRI to predict pathological complete response (pCR). Bland-Altman plots were used to assess agreement between MRI and pathological assessment of residual disease. RESULTS: MRI correctly predicted pCR in 64.1% of the cohort. Sensitivity and specificity were 52% and 78%, respectively; PPV 73% and NPV 58%. MRI predicted pCR most accurately in HER2-positive patients; sensitivity 58%, specificity 100%, PPV 100% and NPV 38%. MRI had higher PPV and NPV in tumours with Ki-67 ≥ 15% than tumours with Ki-67 < 15%, 75% versus 50% and 57.5% versus 50%, respectively. In this study, MRI underestimated residual tumour size by 1.65 mm (limits of agreement: 43.07-39.77 mm). CONCLUSIONS: MRI appears more accurate for predicting pCR in HER2+ disease than other subtypes and in cancers with Ki-67 ≥ 15% compared to those with Ki-67 < 15%. Accuracy of MRI in our HR+, RS ≥ 25 cohort is comparable to previous reports of unselected HR+ disease. MRI post-NST should be interpreted in conjunction with HER2 status and Ki-67 index of the primary

Low meprin alpha expression differentiates primary ovarian mucinous carcinoma from gastrointestinal cancers that commonly metastasise to the ovaries

Background: Currently, no specific immunohistochemical markers are available to differentiate primary mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (MOC) from adenocarcinomas originating at other sites that have metastasised to the ovary, which may have an impact on patient management and prognosis. Aim: To investigate the expression of two intestinal markers, galectin 4 and meprin α, in mucinous carcinomas of the ovary and gastrointestinal tract. Methods: Using immunohistochemical analysis, the expression of galectin 4 and meprin α was investigated in 10 MOCs and in 38 mucinous adenocarcinomas of colon, pancreas, stomach and appendix, the most common sites of origin of ovarian metastases. Results: Total cytoplasmic galectin 4 expression was relatively consistent between the different carcinomas. Membranous meprin α expression was significantly lower in MOCs compared with gastrointestinal carcinomas. Moreover, meprin α expression showed greater discrimination between the ovarian and gastrointestinal carcinomas than the cytokeratins CK7 and CK20, the current standard immunohistochemical markers used to determine the tissue origin of mucinous carcinomas involving the ovaries. Conclusions: Meprin α is a useful additional marker in differentiating primary from secondary mucinous adenocarcinomas of the ovary

Clinical activity of durvalumab for patients with advanced mismatch repair-deficient and repair-proficient endometrial cancer. A nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial

Background In this study, we assessed the activity of durvalumab, an antibody to programmed death ligand-1, in two cohorts of women with advanced endometrial cancers (AEC)—mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) and mismatch repair deficient (dMMR).Methods A multicenter phase two study was performed in women with AEC with pMMR tumor progressing after one to three lines of chemotherapy and women with AEC with dMMR tumor progressing after zero to three lines of chemotherapy. Mismatch repair status was based on immunohistochemistry expression. All women received durvalumab 1500 mg given every 4 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective tumor response by RECIST V.1.1 modified for immune-based therapeutics.Results Seventy-one women were recruited: 35 dMMR and 36 pMMR. Median follow-up was 19 vs 21 months in dMMR versus pMMR, respectively. Median age was 67 years. Histology in dMMR versus pMMR included endometrioid (94% vs 57%) and serous (0% vs 31%) and was high grade in 26% vs 74%. The objective tumor response rate (OTRR) in the dMMR cohort was 47% (17/36, 95% CI 32 to 63), including 6 complete responses and 11 partial responses (PRs)) vs 3% in the pMMR cohort (1/35, 95% CI 1 to 15, PR). In the dMMR cohort, durvalumab was the first-line therapy in 58% (OTRR 57%) and the second-line therapy in 39% (OTRR 38%). Median progression-free survival was 8.3 months in the dMMR cohort vs 1.8 months in the pMMR cohort. The 12-month overall survival (OS) rate was 71% in dMMR vs 51% in pMMR, with median OS not reached for dMMR vs 12 months for pMMR. Immune-related adverse events occurred in 14 women, mostly grades 1–2.Conclusion Durvalumab monotherapy showed promising activity and acceptable safety in AEC with dMMR regardless of prior lines of chemotherapy, but activity was limited in AEC with pMMR.Trial registration numbers ANZGOG1601, ACTRN12617000106336, and NCT03015129