A randomised Phase II trial of carboplatin and gemcitabine ± vandetanib in first-line treatment of patients with advanced urothelial cell cancer not suitable to receive cisplatin

ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy and tolerability of the dual epidermal growth factor receptor/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, vandetanib, in combination with carboplatin and gemcitabine in the first‐line treatment of patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma urothelial cancer (UC) who were unsuitable for cisplatin.Patients and methodsFrom 2011 to 2014, 82 patients were randomised from 16 hospitals across the UK into the TOUCAN double‐blind, placebo‐controlled randomised Phase II trial, receiving six 21‐day cycles of intravenous carboplatin (target area under the concentration versus time curve 4.5, day 1) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 days 1 and 8) combined with either oral vandetanib 100 mg or placebo (once daily). Progression‐free survival (PFS; primary endpoint), adverse events, tolerability and feasibility of use, objective response rate and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Intention‐to‐treat and per‐protocol analyses were used to analyse the primary endpoint.ResultsThe 82 patients were randomised 1:1 to vandetanib (n = 40) or placebo (n = 42), and 25 patients (30%) completed six cycles of all allocated treatment. Toxicity Grade ≥3 was experienced in 80% (n = 32) and 76% (n = 32) of patients in the vandetanib and placebo arms, respectively. The median PFS was 6.8 and 8.8 months for the vandetanib and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65–1.76; P = 0.71); the median OS was 10.8 vs 13.8 months (HR 1.41, 95% CI 0.79–2.52; P = 0.88); and radiological response rates were 50% and 55%.ConclusionThere is no evidence that vandetanib improves clinical outcome in this setting. Our present data do not support its adoption as the regimen of choice for first‐line treatment in patients with UC who were unfit for cisplatin

Can Extra Care Housing support the changing needs of older people living with dementia?

With over two thirds of people with dementia living in the community and one third of those living alone, it is important to consider the future housing needs of this population, particularly as symptoms of cognitive impairment increase. Policy in England has focused on enabling people living with dementia to remain in their own homes for as long as possible, often with the support of a family carer. However, many people struggle to maintain an acceptable quality of life in their own homes as their dementia advances, often due to the design limitations of mainstream housing and the challenge of finding specialist domiciliary care that is affordable and of sufficient quality. Extra care housing (ECH) offers a model that aims to support older people living in their own apartments, while also offering specialist person-centred care as and when it is needed. This paper reports on a longitudinal project that explored how ECH can respond to the changing social care needs of residents, including those living with dementia. Participants included residents and staff from four ECH schemes, one of which was a specialist dementia scheme, in two regions of England. Interviews were carried with 51 residents across 4 rounds at 5 month intervals between October 2015 and June 2017. Interviews were also carried out with 7 managers, 20 care staff and 2 local authority commissioners of housing for older people. Key factors included person-centred care and support, flexible commissioning and staffing, appropriate design of the environment and suitable location of the scheme within the wider community. The challenge of delivering services that addresses these issues during a period of reduced public spending is acknowledged. Further research is suggested to compare different approaches to supporting people with dementia, including integrated and separated accommodation, and different stages of dementia

Critical Reflections on Methodological Challenge in Arts and Dementia Evaluation and Research

Methodological rigour, or its absence, is often a focus of concern for the emerging field of evaluation and research around arts and dementia. However, this paper suggests that critical attention should also be paid to the way in which individual perceptions, hidden assumptions and underlying social and political structures influence methodological work in the field. Such attention will be particularly important for addressing methodological challenges relating to contextual variability, ethics, value judgement, and signification identified through a literature review on this topic. Understanding how, where and when evaluators and researchers experience such challenges may help to identify fruitful approaches for future evaluation. This paper is based upon a presentation on the subject given at the First International Research Conference on the Arts and Dementia: Theory, Methodology and Evidence on 9 March 2017

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. METHODS: We did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91-1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed. INTERPRETATION: Remote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden

SUCCINCT: An open-label, single-arm, non-randomised, phase 2 trial of gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy in combination with Sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma

Gemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy (GC regimen) represents a standard treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma. We performed an open-label, single-arm, non-randomised, phase 2 trial evaluating the addition of sunitinib to standard GC chemotherapy (SGC regimen). Overall, 63 treatment-naïve participants were recruited and received up to six 21-d cycles of cisplatin 70 mg/m2 (intravenously [IV], day 1) and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (IV, days 1 and 8) combined with sunitinib 37.5 mg (orally, days 2–15). Following review of toxicity after the first six patients, the sunitinib dose was reduced to 25 mg for all patients. Overall response rate was 64%, with response noted in 37 of 58 patients. At 6 mo, 30 of 58 assessable patients (52%; 90% confidence interval [CI], 40–63%) were progression free. Median overall survival was 12 mo (95% CI, 9–15) and was heavily influenced by Bajorin prognostic group. Grade 3–4 toxicities were predominantly haematologic and limited the deliverability of the triple SGC regimen. The trial did not meet its prespecified primary end point of >60% patients progression free at 6 mo. Cumulative myelosuppression led to treatment delays of gemcitabine and cisplatin and dose reduction and/or withdrawal of sunitinib in the majority of cases. The triple-drug combination was not well tolerated. Phase 3 evaluation of the triple SGC regimen in advanced transitional cell carcinoma is not recommended.Patient summaryThe addition of sunitinib to standard cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy was poorly tolerated and did not improve outcomes in advanced urothelial carcinoma. Treatment delivery was limited by myelotoxicity

Association of sarcopenia and observed physical performance with attainment of multidisciplinary team planned treatment in non-small cell lung cancer: an observational study protocol

Background Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) frequently presents in advanced stages. A significant proportion of those with reportedly good ECOG performance status (PS) fail to receive planned multidisciplinary team (MDT) treatment, often for functional reasons, but an objective decline in physical performance is not well described. Sarcopenia, or loss of muscle mass, is an integral part of cancer cachexia. However, changes in both muscle mass and physical performance may predate clinically overt cachexia, and may be present even with normal body mass index. Physical fitness for treatment is currently subjectively assessed by means of the PS score, which may be inadequate in predicting tolerance to treatment. This study aims to evaluate whether measuring physical performance and muscle mass at baseline in NSCLC patients, in addition to PS score, is able to predict commencement and successful completion of MDT-planned treatment. Methods/design This is a prospective, single-centre exploratory study of NSCLC patients attending a Rapid Access Lung Cancer clinic. Baseline data collected are (methods in brackets): physical performance (Short Physical Performance Battery), muscle mass (bioelectrical impedance ± dual energy x-ray absorptiometry), patient and physician-assessed PS (ECOG and Karnofsky), nutritional status and presence of cachexia. Longitudinal data consists of receipt and completion of MDT treatment plan. The primary outcome measure is commencement of MDT-planned treatment, and important secondary outcomes include successful completion of treatment, length of stay in surgical patients, and risk of chemotherapy- and radiotherapy-related side effects. Discussion A more comprehensive assessment of phenotype, particularly with regards to physical performance and muscle mass, will provide additional discriminatory information of patients’ fitness for treatment. If positive, this study has the potential to identify targets for early intervention in those who are at risk of deterioration. This will subsequently enable optimisation of performance of patients with NSCLC, in anticipation of systemic treatment

TOUCAN: A randomised phase II trial of carboplatin and gemcitabine +/- vandetanib in first line treatment of advanced urothelial cell cancer in patients who are not suitable to receive cisplatin.

Background: Whilst cisplatin combination therapy remains the standard of care for patients with advanced urothelial cancers, many patients are unsuitable for cisplatin and go on to receive carboplatin combination therapy. Although responses are frequent, overall outcomes remain poor, and there is a high unmet need for more effective first line treatment. Vandetanib is a well-tolerated, oral inhibitor of vascular and epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, both of which are implicated in the pathogenesis of urothelial cancers. Methods: Patients with metastatic or inoperable urothelial cancer who had no prior chemotherapy and were unsuitable for cisplatin were randomly allocated to receive carboplatin (AUC 4.5, day 1) plus gemcitabine (1000mg/m2, days 1 and 8) plus either vandetanib (100mg od, days 1-21) (GCV) or matching placebo (GCP) in 21-day cycles up to a total of 6 cycles. Treatment allocation was double-blind. There was a planned safety review after the first 40 patients had received at least one cycle. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Sample size (n=82) was calculated using a one-sided alpha of 0.2 and power 80% to detect a HR of 0.65 for PFS. We present the final efficacy results. The trial was coordinated by the Wales Cancer Trials Unit at Cardiff University and funded by Cancer Research UK (CRUK/09/024) and AstraZeneca. Results: Of 82 patients, 40 received GCV. 62 (76%) had a bladder primary, and 56 (68%) had poor renal function. The arms were well balanced except for age > 75 (13 (16%) GCV, 23 (28%) GCP). Median PFS was 8.5 months (m) (95% CI 6.0, 9.7) and 8.8 m (5.8, 9.0) for GCV and GCP respectively (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.93 (0.50, 1.71), P=0.89). Overall survival was 10.8 m (8.0, 13.0) and 13.8 m (11.1, 16.6) for GCV and GCP respectively (adjusted HR 1.38 (0.77, 2.46), P=0.24). Response rates were 50% (n=20) and 55% (n=23) for GCV and GCP. All-grade adverse events were similar but there were significantly more grade 3+ events in the GCV arm. Conclusion: Vandetanib did not improve efficacy of chemotherapy but increased toxicity in advanced urothelial cancer not suitable for cisplatin. Clinical trial information: 68146831