Peri-operative chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in operable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma (UK Medical Research Council ST03): primary analysis results of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2–3 trial

Background: Peri-operative chemotherapy and surgery is a standard of care for patients with resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against VEGF, improves the proportion of patients responding to treatment in advanced gastric cancer. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with resectable gastric, oesophagogastric junction, or lower oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Methods: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 2–3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with histologically proven, resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma from 87 UK hospitals and cancer centres. We randomly assigned patients 1:1 to receive peri-operative epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, in addition to surgery. Patients in the control group (chemotherapy alone) received three pre-operative and three post-operative cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy: 50 mg/m2 epirubicin and 60 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1250 mg/m2 oral capecitabine on days 1–21. Patients in the investigational group received the same treatment as the control group plus 7·5 mg/kg intravenous bevacizumab on day 1 of every cycle of chemotherapy and for six further doses once every 21 days following chemotherapy, as maintenance treatment. Randomisation was done by means of a telephone call to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, where staff used a computer programme that implemented a minimisation algorithm with a random element to establish the allocation for the patient at the point of randomisation. Patients were stratified by chemotherapy centre, site of tumour, and tumour stage. The primary outcome for the phase 3 stage of the trial was overall survival (defined as the time from randomisation until death from any cause), analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Here, we report the primary analysis results of the trial; all patients have completed treatment and the required number of primary outcome events has been reached. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN 46020948, and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00450203. Findings: Between Oct 31, 2007, and March 25, 2014, 1063 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone (n=533) or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (n=530). At the time of analysis, 508 deaths were recorded (248 in the chemotherapy alone group and 260 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group). 3-year overall survival was 50·3% (95% CI 45·5–54·9) in the chemotherapy alone group and 48·1% (43·2–52·7) in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·08, 95% CI 0·91–1·29; p=0·36). Apart from neutropenia no other toxic effects were reported at grade 3 or worse severity in more than 10% of patients in either group. Wound healing complications were more prevalent in the bevacizumab group, occurring in 53 (12%) patients in this group compared with 33 (7%) patients in the chemotherapy alone group. In patients who underwent oesophagogastrectomy, post-operative anastomotic leak rates were higher in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (23 [10%] of 233 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 52 [24%] of 220 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group); therefore, recruitment of patients with lower oesophageal or junctional tumours planned for an oesophagogastric resection was stopped towards the end of the trial. Serious adverse events for all patients included anastomotic leaks (30 events in chemotherapy alone group vs 69 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group), and infections with normal neutrophil count (42 events vs 53). Interpretation: The results of this trial do not provide any evidence for the use of bevacizumab in combination with peri-operative epiribicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy for patients with resectable gastric, oesophagogastric junction, or lower oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Bevacizumab might also be associated with impaired wound healing. Funding: Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, and F Hoffmann-La Roche Limited

Development and potential role of type-2 sodium-glucose transporter inhibitors for management of type 2 diabetes

There is a recognized need for new treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Recovery of glucose from the glomerular filtrate represents an important mechanism in maintaining glucose homeostasis and represents a novel target for the management of T2DM. Recovery of glucose from the glomerular filtrate is executed principally by the type 2 sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT2). Inhibition of SGLT2 promotes glucose excretion and normalizes glycemia in animal models. First reports of specifically designed SGLT2 inhibitors began to appear in the second half of the 1990s. Several candidate SGLT2 inhibitors are currently under development, with four in the later stages of clinical testing. The safety profile of SGLT2 inhibitors is expected to be good, as their target is a highly specific membrane transporter expressed almost exclusively within the renal tubules. One safety concern is that of glycosuria, which could predispose patients to increased urinary tract infections. So far the reported safety profile of SGLT2 inhibitors in clinical studies appears to confirm that the class is well tolerated. Where SGLT2 inhibitors will fit in the current cascade of treatments for T2DM has yet to be established. The expected favorable safety profile and insulin-independent mechanism of action appear to support their use in combination with other antidiabetic drugs. Promotion of glucose excretion introduces the opportunity to clear calories (80–90 g [300–400 calories] of glucose per day) in patients that are generally overweight, and is expected to work synergistically with weight reduction programs. Experience will most likely lead to better understanding of which patients are likely to respond best to SGLT2 inhibitors, and under what circumstances

Phylogenomic analysis of a 55.1 kb 19-gene dataset resolves a monophyletic Fusarium that includes the Fusarium solani Species Complex

Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user¿s needs and established successful practice. In 2013, the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani species complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged in 2015 by one research group who proposed dividing the genus Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC described as members of the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification in 2018 based on claims that the 2013 concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic. Here, we test this claim and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a genus Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students, and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species described as genus Neocosmospora were recombined in genus Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural, and practical taxonomic option availabl

Attitudes to outcomes measured in clinical trials of cardiovascular prevention

Background: Selecting outcome measures in cardiovascular prevention trials should be informed by their importance to selected populations. Major vascular event outcomes are usually prioritized in these trials with considerably less attention paid to cognitive and functional outcomes. Aim: To examine views on importance of outcome measures used in clinical trials. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Methods: Of 367 individuals approached, 280 (76%) participated: outpatients attending cardiovascular prevention clinics (n = 97), active retirement groups members (n = 75), medical students (n = 108). Participants were asked to rank, in order of importance, outcome measures, which may be included in cardiovascular prevention trials. Results were compared between two groups: <65s (n = 157) and >= 65s (n = 104). Results: When asked what outcomes were most important to measure in cardiovascular prevention trials, respondents reported: death (31.6%) stroke (28.5%), dementia (26.9%), myocardial infarction (MI) (7.9%) and requiring nursing home (NH) care (5.1%). When asked the most relevant outcomes regarding successful ageing respondents reported; maintaining independence (32.4%), avoiding major illness (24.3%), good family life (23.6%), living as long as possible (15.8%), avoiding NH care (3.1%) and contributing to society (0.8%) as most important. When asked what outcome concerned them most about the future, respondents reported: dementia (32.6%), dependence (30.4%), death (12.8%), stroke (12.5%), cancer (6.2%) requiring NH care (4.8%) and MI (0.7%). Maintaining independence was considered most important in younger and older cohorts. Conclusion: Cognitive and functional outcomes are important patient-relevant outcomes, sometimes more important than major vascular events. Incorporating these outcomes into trials may encourage patient participation and adherence to preventative regimens