Dataset Information

Adding Celecoxib With or Without Zoledronic Acid for Hormone-Naive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Results From an Adaptive, Multiarm, Multistage, Platform, Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Purpose Systemic Therapy for Advanced or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficacy is a randomized controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage, platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer who were initiating long-term hormone therapy. We report survival data for two celecoxib (Cel)-containing comparisons, which stopped accrual early at interim analysis on the basis of failure-free survival. Patients and Methods Standard of care (SOC) was hormone therapy continuously (metastatic) or for ≥ 2 years (nonmetastatic); prostate (± pelvic node) radiotherapy was encouraged for men without metastases. Cel 400 mg was administered twice a day for 1 year. Zoledronic acid (ZA) 4 mg was administered for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly for 2 years. Stratified random assignment allocated patients 2:1:1 to SOC (control), SOC + Cel, or SOC + ZA + Cel. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality. Results were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models adjusted for stratification factors. Results A total of 1,245 men were randomly assigned (Oct 2005 to April 2011). Groups were balanced: median age, 65 years; 61% metastatic, 14% N+/X M0, 25% N0M0; 94% newly diagnosed; median prostate-specific antigen, 66 ng/mL. Median follow-up was 69 months. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events were seen in 36% SOC-only, 33% SOC + Cel, and 32% SOC + ZA + Cel patients. There were 303 control arm deaths (83% prostate cancer), and median survival was 66 months. Compared with SOC, the adjusted hazard ratio was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.80 to 1.20; P = .847; median survival, 70 months) for SOC + Cel and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.70 to 1.05; P =.130; median survival, 76 months) for SOC + ZA + Cel. Preplanned subgroup analyses in men with metastatic disease showed a hazard ratio of 0.78 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.98; P = .033) for SOC + ZA + Cel. Conclusion These data show no overall evidence of improved survival with Cel. Preplanned subgroup analyses provide hypotheses for future studies.

SUBMITTER: Mason MD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5455701 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone. METHODS:Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC?+?ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC?+?Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC?+?ZA?+?Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided ? for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544). FINDINGS:2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC?+?ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC?+?Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC?+?ZA?+?Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC?+?ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC?+?Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC?+?ZA?+?Doc. INTERPRETATION:Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy. FUNDING:Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.

Project description:BackgroundLong-term hormone therapy alone is standard care for metastatic or high-risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer. STAMPEDE--an international, open-label, randomised controlled trial--uses a novel multiarm, multistage design to assess whether the early additional use of one or two drugs (docetaxel, zoledronic acid, celecoxib, zoledronic acid and docetaxel, or zoledronic acid and celecoxib) improves survival in men starting first-line, long-term hormone therapy. Here, we report the preplanned, second intermediate analysis comparing hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D) with hormone therapy alone (control arm A).MethodsEligible patients were men with newly diagnosed or rapidly relapsing prostate cancer who were starting long-term hormone therapy for the first time. Hormone therapy was given as standard care in all trial arms, with local radiotherapy encouraged for newly diagnosed patients without distant metastasis. Randomisation was done using minimisation with a random element across seven stratification factors. Patients randomly allocated to arm D received celecoxib 400 mg twice daily, given orally, until 1 year or disease progression (including prostate-specific antigen [PSA] failure). The intermediate outcome was failure-free survival (FFS) in three activity stages; the primary outcome was overall survival in a subsequent efficacy stage. Research arms were compared pairwise against the control arm on an intention-to-treat basis. Accrual of further patients was discontinued in any research arm showing safety concerns or insufficient evidence of activity (lack of benefit) compared with the control arm. The minimum targeted activity at the second intermediate activity stage was a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·92. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476, and with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN78818544.Findings2043 patients were enrolled in the trial from Oct 17, 2005, to Jan 31, 2011, of whom 584 were randomly allocated to receive hormone therapy alone (control group; arm A) and 291 to receive hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D). At the preplanned analysis of the second intermediate activity stage, with 305 FFS events (209 in arm A, 96 in arm D), there was no evidence of an advantage for hormone therapy plus celecoxib over hormone therapy alone: HR 0·94 (95% CI 0·74-1·20). [corrected]. 2-year FFS was 51% (95% CI 46-56) in arm A and 51% (95% CI 43-58) in arm D. There was no evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse events between groups (events of grade 3 or higher were noted at any time in 123 [23%, 95% CI 20-27] patients in arm A and 64 [25%, 19-30] in arm D). The most common grade 3-5 events adverse effects in both groups were endocrine disorders (55 [11%] of patients in arm A vs 19 [7%] in arm D) and musculoskeletal disorders (30 [6%] of patients in arm A vs 15 [6%] in arm D). The independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping accrual to both celecoxib-containing arms on grounds of lack of benefit and discontinuing celecoxib for patients currently on treatment, which was endorsed by the trial steering committee.InterpretationCelecoxib 400 mg twice daily for up to 1 year is insufficiently active in patients starting hormone therapy for high-risk prostate cancer, and we do not recommend its use in this setting. Accrual continues seamlessly to the other research arms and follow-up of all arms will continue to assess effects on overall survival.FundingCancer Research UK, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Medical Research Council (London, UK).

Project description:Background:Adding abiraterone acetate with prednisolone (AAP) or docetaxel with prednisolone (DocP) to standard-of-care (SOC) each improved survival in systemic therapy for advanced or metastatic prostate cancer: evaluation of drug efficacy: a multi-arm multi-stage platform randomised controlled protocol recruiting patients with high-risk locally advanced or metastatic PCa starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The protocol provides the only direct, randomised comparative data of SOC?+?AAP versus SOC?+?DocP. Method:Recruitment to SOC?+?DocP and SOC?+?AAP overlapped November 2011 to March 2013. SOC was long-term ADT or, for most non-metastatic cases, ADT for??2 years and RT to the primary tumour. Stratified randomisation allocated pts 2 : 1 : 2 to SOC; SOC?+?docetaxel 75?mg/m2 3-weekly×6?+?prednisolone 10?mg daily; or SOC?+?abiraterone acetate 1000?mg?+?prednisolone 5?mg daily. AAP duration depended on stage and intent to give radical RT. The primary outcome measure was death from any cause. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. This was not a formally powered comparison. A hazard ratio (HR) <1 favours SOC?+?AAP, and HR?>?1 favours SOC?+?DocP. Results:A total of 566 consenting patients were contemporaneously randomised: 189 SOC?+?DocP and 377 SOC?+?AAP. The patients, balanced by allocated treatment were: 342 (60%) M1; 429 (76%) Gleason 8-10; 449 (79%) WHO performance status 0; median age 66?years and median PSA 56?ng/ml. With median follow-up 4?years, 149 deaths were reported. For overall survival, HR?=?1.16 (95% CI 0.82-1.65); failure-free survival HR?=?0.51 (95% CI 0.39-0.67); progression-free survival HR?=?0.65 (95% CI 0.48-0.88); metastasis-free survival HR?=?0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.03); prostate cancer-specific survival HR?=?1.02 (0.70-1.49); and symptomatic skeletal events HR?=?0.83 (95% CI 0.55-1.25). In the safety population, the proportion reporting??1 grade 3, 4 or 5 adverse events ever was 36%, 13% and 1% SOC?+?DocP, and 40%, 7% and 1% SOC?+?AAP; prevalence 11% at 1 and 2 years on both arms. Relapse treatment patterns varied by arm. Conclusions:This direct, randomised comparative analysis of two new treatment standards for hormone-naïve prostate cancer showed no evidence of a difference in overall or prostate cancer-specific survival, nor in other important outcomes such as symptomatic skeletal events. Worst toxicity grade over entire time on trial was similar but comprised different toxicities in line with the known properties of the drugs. Trial registration:Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00268476.

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited research and literature on the data management challenges encountered in multi-arm, multi-stage platform and umbrella protocols. These trial designs allow both (1) seamless addition of new research comparisons and (2) early stopping of accrual to individual comparisons that do not show sufficient activity. FOCUS4 (colorectal cancer) and STAMPEDE (prostate cancer), run from the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (CTU) at UCL, are two leading UK examples of clinical trials implementing adaptive platform protocol designs. To date, STAMPEDE has added five new research comparisons, closed two research comparisons following pre-planned interim analysis (lack of benefit), adapted the control arm following results from STAMPEDE and other relevant trials, and completed recruitment to six research comparisons. FOCUS4 has closed one research comparison following pre-planned interim analysis (lack of benefit) and added one new research comparison, with a number of further comparisons in the pipeline. We share our experiences from the operational aspects of running these adaptive trials, focusing on data management.MethodsWe held discussion groups with STAMPEDE and FOCUS4 CTU data management staff to identify data management challenges specific to adaptive platform protocols. We collated data on a number of case report form (CRF) changes, database amendments and database growth since each trial began.DiscussionWe found similar adaptive protocol-specific challenges in both trials. Adding comparisons to and removing them from open trials provides extra layers of complexity to CRF and database development. At the start of an adaptive trial, CRFs and databases must be designed to be flexible and scalable in order to cope with the continuous changes, ensuring future data requirements are considered where possible. When adding or stopping a comparison, the challenge is to incorporate new data requirements while ensuring data collection within ongoing comparisons is unaffected. Some changes may apply to all comparisons; others may be comparison-specific or applicable only to patients recruited during a specific time period. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches to CRF and database design we implemented in these trials, particularly in relation to use and maintenance of generic versus comparison-specific CRFs and databases. The work required to add or remove a comparison, including the development and testing of changes, updating of documentation, and training of sites, must be undertaken alongside data management of ongoing comparisons. Adequate resource is required for these competing data management tasks, especially in trials with long follow-up. A plan is needed for regular and pre-analysis data cleaning for multiple comparisons that could recruit at different rates and periods of time. Data-cleaning activities may need to be split and prioritised, especially if analyses for different comparisons overlap in time.ConclusionsAdaptive trials offer an efficient model to run randomised controlled trials, but setting up and conducting the data management activities in these trials can be operationally challenging. Trialists and funders must plan for scalability in data collection and the resource required to cope with additional competing data management tasks.

Project description:Phonocardiogram (PCG), the graphic recording of heart signals, is analyzed to determine the cardiac mechanical function. In the recording of PCG signals, the major problem encountered is the corruption by surrounding noise signals. The noise-corrupted signal cannot be analyzed and used for advanced processing. Therefore, there is a need to denoise these signals before being employed for further processing. Adaptive Noise Cancellers are best suited for signal denoising applications and can efficiently recover the corrupted PCG signal. This paper introduces an optimal adaptive filter structure using a Sign Error LMS algorithm to estimate a noise-free signal with high accuracy. In the proposed filter structure, a noisy signal is passed through a multistage cascaded adaptive filter structure. The number of stages to be cascaded and the step size for each stage are adjusted automatically. The proposed Variable Stage Cascaded Sign Error LMS (SELMS) adaptive filter model is tested for denoising the fetal PCG signal taken from the SUFHS database and corrupted by Gaussian and colored pink noise signals of different input SNR levels. The proposed filter model is also tested for pathological PCG signals in the presence of Gaussian noise. The simulation results prove that the proposed filter model performs remarkably well and provides 8-10 dB higher SNR values in a Gaussian noise environment and 2-3 dB higher SNR values in the presence of colored noise than the existing cascaded LMS filter models. The MSE values are improved by 75-80% in the case of Gaussian noise. Further, the correlation between the clean signal and its estimate after denoising is more than 0.99. The PSNR values are improved by 7 dB in a Gaussian noise environment and 1-2 dB in the presence of pink noise. The advantage of using the SELMS adaptive filter in the proposed filter model is that it offers a cost-effective hardware implementation of Adaptive Noise Canceller with high accuracy.

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer (PCa) shows racial disparity in clinical and genomic characteristics, and Asian patients with PCa often present with more aggressive phenotypes at diagnosis. The ability of TP53 to serve as a prognostic biomarker of PCa has been well studied in Western populations. However, no studies to date have examined the role of TP53 in the disparities of primary hormone-naïve prostate cancer (HNPC) between Chinese and Western populations.MethodsWe collected prostate tumors and matched normal tissues or blood samples to perform targeted next-generation sequencing of 94 Chinese primary localized HNPC samples, and correlated these genomic profiles with clinical outcomes. The OncoKB knowledge database was used to identify and classify actionable alterations.ResultsThe aberrations of PTEN, CDK12, and SPOP in Chinese HNPC samples were similar to those in the Western samples. However, we demonstrated an association of a high frequency of TP53 alterations (21/94) with a relatively higher percentage of alterations in the Wnt signaling pathway (15/94) in Chinese HNPC. Additionally, we highlighted alterations of LRP1B as accounting for a high proportion of PCa and found more frequent alterations in CDH1 in Chinese PCa. Of these, only CDH1 alteration was associated with rapid biochemical recurrence (BCR). However, we verified that TP53 status was at the core of the genomic alteration landscape in Chinese HNPC with putative driver mutations because of the strong connections with other signaling pathways. The mutually exclusive relationship between alterations in TP53 and Wnt/CTNNB1 further molecularly characterizes subsets of prostate cancers. Moreover, the alteration of KMT2C was more likely to co-occur with TP53 alteration, indicating a more aggressive phenotype of PCa, which was associated with sensitivity to treatment with poly ADT-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.ConclusionsDetection of TP53 alterations has clinical utility for guiding precision cancer therapy for HNPC, especially in the Chinese population.

Dataset Information

Adding Celecoxib With or Without Zoledronic Acid for Hormone-Naive Prostate Cancer: Long-Term Survival Results From an Adaptive, Multiarm, Multistage, Platform, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets