Contracts in Practice

Contracts are a form of lightweight formal specification embedded in the program text. Being executable parts of the code, they encourage programmers to devote proper attention to specifications, and help maintain consistency between specification and implementation as the program evolves. The present study investigates how contracts are used in the practice of software development. Based on an extensive empirical analysis of 21 contract-equipped Eiffel, C#, and Java projects totaling more than 260 million lines of code over 7700 revisions, it explores, among other questions: 1) which kinds of contract elements (preconditions, postconditions, class invariants) are used more often; 2) how contracts evolve over time; 3) the relationship between implementation changes and contract changes; and 4) the role of inheritance in the process. It has found, among other results, that: the percentage of program elements that include contracts is above 33% for most projects and tends to be stable over time; there is no strong preference for a certain type of contract element; contracts are quite stable compared to implementations; and inheritance does not significantly affect qualitative trends of contract usage

A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Phase II Trial of Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Apatorsen or Placebo in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: The RAINIER Trial.

Lessons learnedThe addition of the heat shock protein 27 (Hsp27)-targeting antisense oligonucleotide, apatorsen, to a standard first-line chemotherapy regimen did not result in improved survival in unselected patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.Findings from this trial hint at the possible prognostic and predictive value of serum Hsp27 that may warrant further investigation.BackgroundThis randomized, double-blinded, phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel plus either apatorsen, an antisense oligonucleotide targeting heat shock protein 27 (Hsp27) mRNA, or placebo in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.MethodsPatients were randomized 1:1 to Arm A (gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel plus apatorsen) or Arm B (gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel plus placebo). Treatment was administered in 28-day cycles, with restaging every 2 cycles, until progression or intolerable toxicity. Serum Hsp27 levels were analyzed at baseline and on treatment. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).ResultsOne hundred thirty-two patients were enrolled, 66 per arm. Cytopenias and fatigue were the most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events for both arms. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were 2.7 and 5.3 months, respectively, for arm A, and 3.8 and 6.9 months, respectively, for arm B. Objective response rate was 18% for both arms. Patients with high serum level of Hsp27 represented a poor-prognosis subgroup who may have derived modest benefit from addition of apatorsen.ConclusionAddition of apatorsen to chemotherapy does not improve outcomes in unselected patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer in the first-line setting, although a trend toward prolonged PFS and OS in patients with high baseline serum Hsp27 suggests this therapy may warrant further evaluation in this subgroup

The management of pancreatic cancer. Current expert opinion and recommendations derived from the 8th World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2006

This article summarizes the expert discussion on the management of pancreatic cancer, which took place during the 8th World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer in June 2006 in Barcelona. A multidisciplinary approach to a patient with pancreatic cancer is essential, in order to guarantee an optimal staging, surgery, selection of the appropriate (neo-)adjuvant strategy and chemotherapeutic choice management. Moreover, optimal symptomatic management requires a dedicated team of health care professionals. Quality control of surgery and pathology is especially important in this disease with a high locoregional failure rate. There is now solid evidence in favour of chemotherapy in both the adjuvant and palliative setting, and gemcitabine combined with erlotinib, capecitabine or platinum compounds seems to be slightly more active than gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer. There is a place for chemoradiotherapy in selected patients with locally advanced disease, while the role in the adjuvant setting remains controversial. Those involved in the care for patients with pancreatic cancer should be encouraged to participate in well-designed clinical trials, in order to increase the evidence-based knowledge and to make further progres

A multi-gene signature predicts outcome in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

© 2014 Haider et al.; licensee BioMed Central. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.Improved usage of the repertoires of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) profiles is crucially needed to guide the development of predictive and prognostic tools that could inform the selection of treatment options

Prognostic and therapeutic significance of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 as tumor marker in patients with pancreatic cancer

In pancreatic cancer ( PC) accurate determination of treatment response by imaging often remains difficult. Various efforts have been undertaken to investigate new factors which may serve as more appropriate surrogate parameters of treatment efficacy. This review focuses on the role of carbohydrate antigen 19- 9 ( CA 19- 9) as a prognostic tumor marker in PC and summarizes its contribution to monitoring treatment efficacy. We undertook a Medline/ PubMed literature search to identify relevant trials that had analyzed the prognostic impact of CA 19- 9 in patients treated with surgery, chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy for PC. Additionally, relevant abstract publications from scientific meetings were included. In advanced PC, pretreatment CA 19- 9 levels have a prognostic impact regarding overall survival. Also a CA 19- 9 decline under chemotherapy can provide prognostic information for median survival. A 20% reduction of CA 19- 9 baseline levels within the first 8 weeks of chemotherapy appears to be sufficient to define a prognostic relevant subgroup of patients ('CA 19- 9 responder'). It still remains to be defined whether the CA 19- 9 response is a more reliable method for evaluating treatment efficacy compared to conventional imaging. Copyright (c) 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel

Metformin as an Adjunctive Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of the Literature on Its Potential Therapeutic Use

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma has the worst prognosis of any cancer. New adjuvant chemotherapies are urgently required, which are well tolerated by patients with unresectable cancers. This paper reviews the existing proof of concept data, namely laboratory, pharmacoepidemiological, experimental medicine and clinical trial evidence for investigating metformin in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Laboratory evidence shows metformin inhibits mitochondrial ATP synthesis which directly and indirectly inhibits carcinogenesis. Drug–drug interactions of metformin with proton pump inhibitors and histamine H2-receptor antagonists may be of clinical relevance and pertinent to future research of metformin in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. To date, most cohort studies have demonstrated a positive association with metformin on survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, although there are many methodological limitations with such study designs. From experimental medicine studies, there are sparse data in humans. The current trials of metformin have methodological limitations. Two small randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported null findings, but there were potential inequalities in cancer staging between groups and poor compliance with the intervention. Proof of concept data, predominantly from laboratory work, supports assessing metformin as an adjunct for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in RCTs. Ideally, more experimental medicine studies are needed for proof of concept. However, many feasibility criteria need to be answered before such trials can progress

Randomised, open-label, phase II study of Gemcitabine with and without IMM-101 for advanced pancreatic cancer

Background: Immune Modulation and Gemcitabine Evaluation-1, a randomised, open-label, phase II, first-line, proof of concept study (NCT01303172), explored safety and tolerability of IMM-101 (heat-killed Mycobacterium obuense; NCTC 13365) with gemcitabine (GEM) in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Methods: Patients were randomised (2 : 1) to IMM-101 (10 mg ml−l intradermally)+GEM (1000 mg m−2 intravenously; n=75), or GEM alone (n=35). Safety was assessed on frequency and incidence of adverse events (AEs). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) were collected. Results: IMM-101 was well tolerated with a similar rate of AE and serious adverse event reporting in both groups after allowance for exposure. Median OS in the intent-to-treat population was 6.7 months for IMM-101+GEM v 5.6 months for GEM; while not significant, the hazard ratio (HR) numerically favoured IMM-101+GEM (HR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.44–1.04, P=0.074). In a pre-defined metastatic subgroup (84%), OS was significantly improved from 4.4 to 7.0 months in favour of IMM-101+GEM (HR, 0.54, 95% CI 0.33–0.87, P=0.01). Conclusions: IMM-101 with GEM was as safe and well tolerated as GEM alone, and there was a suggestion of a beneficial effect on survival in patients with metastatic disease. This warrants further evaluation in an adequately powered confirmatory study

Adjuvant nab-Paclitaxel + Gemcitabine in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaAdenocarcinoma ductal pancreáticoAdenocarcinoma ductal pancreàticPURPOSE This randomized, open-label trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine with those of gemcitabine for resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01964430). METHODS We assigned 866 treatment-naive patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) + gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) or gemcitabine alone to one 30-40 infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of six 28-day cycles. The primary end point was independently assessed disease-free survival (DFS). Additional end points included investigator-assessed DFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-seven of 432 patients and 310 of 434 patients completed nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine and gemcitabine treatment, respectively. At primary data cutoff (December 31, 2018; median follow-up, 38.5 [interquartile range [IQR], 33.8-43 months), the median independently assessed DFS was 19.4 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 18.8 months (gemcitabine; hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.729 to 1.063; P = .18). The median investigator-assessed DFS was 16.6 (IQR, 8.4-47.0) and 13.7 (IQR, 8.3-44.1) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.965; P = .02). The median OS (427 events; 68% mature) was 40.5 (IQR, 20.7 to not reached) and 36.2 (IQR, 17.7-53.3) months, respectively (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.680 to 0.996; P = .045). At a 16-month follow-up (cutoff, April 3, 2020; median follow-up, 51.4 months [IQR, 47.0-57.0]), the median OS (511 events; 81% mature) was 41.8 (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) versus 37.7 months (gemcitabine; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.687 to 0.973; P = .0232). At the 5-year follow-up (cutoff, April 9, 2021; median follow-up, 63.2 months [IQR, 60.1-68.7]), the median OS (555 events; 88% mature) was 41.8 versus 37.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.678 to 0.947; P = .0091). Eighty-six percent (nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine) and 68% (gemcitabine) of patients experienced grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Two patients per study arm died of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION The primary end point (independently assessed DFS) was not met despite favorable OS seen with nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine

Serum CA19-9 response as a surrogate for clinical outcome in patients receiving fixed-dose rate gemcitabine for advanced pancreatic cancer

The use of serial serum measurements of the carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) to guide treatment decisions and serve as a surrogate end point in clinical trial design requires further validation. We investigated whether CA19-9 decline represents an accurate surrogate for survival and time to treatment failure (TTF) in a cohort of 76 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving fixed-dose rate gemcitabine in three separate studies. Statistically significant correlations between percentage CA19-9 decline and both overall survival and TTF were found, with median survival ranging from 12.0 months for patients with the greatest degree of biomarker decline (>75%) compared with 4.3 months in those whose CA19-9 did not decline during therapy (P<0.001). Using specific thresholds, patients with ⩾25% decline in CA19-9 during treatment had significantly better outcomes than those who did not (median survival and TTF of 9.6 and 4.6 months vs 4.4 and 1.5 months; P<0.001). Similar results were seen using both 50 and 75% as cutoff points. We conclude that serial CA19-9 measurements correlate well with clinical outcomes in this patient population, and that decline in this biomarker should be entertained for possible use as a surrogate end point in clinical trials for the selection of new treatments in this disease