Dataset Information

Effect of Celecoxib vs Placebo as Adjuvant Therapy on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Breast Cancer: The REACT Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Patients with breast cancer remain at risk of relapse after adjuvant therapy. Celecoxib has shown antitumor effects in preclinical models of human breast cancer, but clinical evidence is lacking.

Objective

To evaluate the role of celecoxib as an addition to conventional therapy for women with ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative primary breast cancer.

Design, setting, and participants

The Randomized European Celecoxib Trial (REACT) was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind study conducted in 160 centers across the UK and Germany testing 2 years of adjuvant celecoxib vs placebo among 2639 patients recruited between January 19, 2007, and November 1, 2012, with follow-up 10 years after treatment completion. Eligible patients had completely resected breast cancer with local and systemic therapy according to local practice. Patients with ERBB2-positive or node-negative and T1, grade 1 tumors were not eligible. Randomization was in a 2:1 ratio between celecoxib or placebo. Statistical analysis was performed from May 5, 2019, to March 5, 2020.

Interventions

Patients received celecoxib, 400 mg, or placebo once daily for 2 years.

Main outcomes and measures

The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using Cox proportional hazards regression and log-rank analysis. Follow-up is complete.

Results

A total of 2639 patients (median age, 55.2 years [range, 26.8-86.0 years]) were recruited; 1763 received celecoxib, and 876 received placebo. Most patients' tumors (1930 [73%]) were estrogen receptor positive or progesterone receptor positive and ERBB2 negative. A total of 1265 patients (48%) had node-positive disease, and 1111 (42%) had grade 3 tumors. At a median follow-up of 74.3 months (interquartile range, 61.4-93.6 years), DFS events had been reported for 487 patients (19%): 18% for those who received celecoxib (n = 323; 5-year DFS rate = 84%) vs 19% for those who received placebo (n = 164; 5-year DFS rate = 83%); the unadjusted hazard ratio was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.80-1.17; log-rank P = .75). Rates of toxic effects were low across both treatment groups, with no evidence of a difference.

Conclusions and relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, patients showed no evidence of a DFS benefit for 2 years' treatment with celecoxib compared with placebo as adjuvant treatment of ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Longer-term treatment or use of a higher dose of celecoxib may lead to a DFS benefit, but further studies would be required to test this possibility.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02429427 and isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN48254013.

SUBMITTER: Coombes RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8283666 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAspirin and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal polyps and cancer in observational and randomized studies. The effect of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, as treatment for nonmetastatic colon cancer is unknown.ObjectiveTo determine if the addition of celecoxib to adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) improves disease-free survival in patients with stage III colon cancer.Design, setting, and participantsCancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/Southwest Oncology Group 80702 was a 2 × 2 factorial design, phase 3 trial conducted at 654 community and academic centers throughout the United States and Canada. A total of 2526 patients with stage III colon cancer were enrolled between June 2010 and November 2015 and were followed up through August 10, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive adjuvant FOLFOX (every 2 weeks) for 3 vs 6 months with or without 3 years of celecoxib (400 mg orally daily; n = 1263) vs placebo (n = 1261). This report focuses on the results of the celecoxib randomization.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was disease-free survival, measured from the time of randomization until documented recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points included overall survival, adverse events, and cardiovascular-specific events.ResultsOf the 2526 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 61.0 years [11 years]; 1134 women [44.9%]), 2524 were included in the primary analysis. Adherence with protocol treatment, defined as receiving celecoxib or placebo for more than 2.75 years or continuing treatment until recurrence, death, or unacceptable adverse events, was 70.8% for patients treated with celecoxib and 69.9% for patients treated with placebo. A total of 337 patients randomized to celecoxib and 363 to placebo experienced disease recurrence or died, and with 6 years' median follow-up, the 3-year disease-free survival was 76.3% for celecoxib-treated patients vs 73.4% for placebo-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR] for disease recurrence or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76-1.03; P = .12). The effect of celecoxib treatment on disease-free survival did not vary significantly according to assigned duration of adjuvant chemotherapy (P for interaction = .61). Five-year overall survival was 84.3% for celecoxib vs 81.6% for placebo (HR for death, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P = .13). Hypertension (any grade) occurred while treated with FOLFOX in 14.6% of patients in the celecoxib group vs 10.9% of patients in the placebo group, and a grade 2 or higher increase in creatinine levels occurred after completion of FOLFOX in 1.7% vs 0.5% of patients, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with stage III colon cancer, the addition of celecoxib for 3 years, compared with placebo, to standard adjuvant chemotherapy did not significantly improve disease-free survival.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01150045.

Project description:ImportanceMetformin, a biguanide commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes, has been associated with potential beneficial effects across breast cancer subtypes in observational and preclinical studies.ObjectiveTo determine whether the administration of adjuvant metformin (vs placebo) to patients with breast cancer without diabetes improves outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsMA.32, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, conducted in Canada, Switzerland, US, and UK, enrolled 3649 patients with high-risk nonmetastatic breast cancer receiving standard therapy between August 2010 and March 2013, with follow-up to October 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized (stratified for hormone receptor [estrogen receptor and/or progesterone receptor {ER/PgR}] status, positive vs negative; body mass index, ≤30 vs >30; human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [ERBB2, formerly HER2 or HER2/neu], positive vs negative; and any vs no chemotherapy) to 850 mg of oral metformin twice a day (n = 1824) or oral placebo twice a day (n = 1825) for 5 years.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Of the 8 secondary outcomes, overall survival, distant relapse-free survival, and breast cancer-free interval were analyzed.ResultsOf the 3649 randomized patients (mean age, 52.4 years; 3643 women [99.8%]), all (100%) were included in analyses. After a second interim analysis, futility was declared for patients who were ER/PgR-, so the primary analysis was conducted for 2533 patients who were ER/PgR+. The median duration of follow-up in the ER/PgR+ group was 96.2 months (range, 0.2-121 months). Invasive disease-free survival events occurred in 465 patients who were ER/PgR+. The incidence rates for invasive disease-free survival events were 2.78 per 100 patient-years in the metformin group vs 2.74 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.84-1.21; P = .93), and the incidence rates for death were 1.46 per 100 patient-years in the metformin group vs 1.32 per 100 patient-years in the placebo group (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.86-1.41; P = .47). Among patients who were ER/PgR-, followed up for a median of 94.1 months, incidence of invasive disease-free survival events was 3.58 vs 3.60 per 100 patient-years, respectively (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.30; P = .92). None of the 3 secondary outcomes analyzed in the ER/PgR+ group had statistically significant differences. Grade 3 nonhematological toxic events occurred more frequently in patients taking metformin than in patients taking placebo (21.5% vs 17.5%, respectively, P = .003). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events in the metformin vs placebo groups were hypertension (2.4% vs 1.9%), irregular menses (1.5% vs 1.4%), and diarrhea (1.9% vs 7.0%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with high-risk operable breast cancer without diabetes, the addition of metformin vs placebo to standard breast cancer treatment did not significantly improve invasive disease-free survival.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01101438.

Project description:BackgroundThe most appropriate timing of chemotherapy and hormone therapy administration is a critical issue in early breast cancer patients. The purpose of our study was to compare the efficacy of concurrent vs sequential administration of adjuvant chemotherapy and tamoxifen.MethodsWomen with node-positive primary breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive tamoxifen (20 mg/d for 5 years) during (concurrent arm) or after (sequential arm) adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy consisted of alternating regimens of cyclophosphamide, epidoxorubicin, and 5-fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil every 21 days for a total of 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were toxic effects and disease-free survival (DFS). No provision for interim analyses was made in the original study protocol. Survival curves were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox regression models, adjusted for age, menopausal status, tumor stage, and lymph node and hormone receptor status, were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsFrom 1985 to 1992, 431 patients were randomly assigned and studied according to the intention-to-treat principle. After a maximum of 15.4 years of follow-up (median 12.3 years), the estimated actuarial 10-year OS was equivalent for the two study arms (concurrent arm: 111 patients, 66%, 95% CI = 59% to 72%; sequential arm: 114 patients, 65%, 95% CI = 59% to 72%, P = .86). No differences in DFS and toxic effects were evident. Four interim analyses were performed, but no alpha error adjustment was necessary because of the largely negative results of this final analysis (sequential vs concurrent arm: HR of death = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.78 to 1.44, P = .76; HR of relapse = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.52, P = .36).ConclusionsNo statistically significant differences in OS, DFS, and toxic effects between concurrent and sequential adjuvant chemo- and hormone therapies were observed. Our study does not support the superiority of one schedule of chemo- and hormone-therapy administration over the other. However, because of the limited statistical power of the study, these results must be considered with caution.

Project description:ImportanceLocoregionally advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) is treated curatively; however, risk of recurrence remains high among some patients. The ERBB family blocker afatinib has shown efficacy in recurrent or metastatic HNSCC.ObjectiveTo assess whether afatinib therapy after definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT) improves disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with HNSCC.Design, setting, and participantsThis multicenter, phase 3, double-blind randomized clinical trial (LUX-Head & Neck 2) studied 617 patients from November 2, 2011, to July 4, 2016. Patients who had complete response after CRT, comprising radiotherapy with cisplatin or carboplatin, with or without resection of residual disease, for locoregionally advanced high- or intermediate-risk HNSCC of the oral cavity, hypopharynx, larynx, or oropharynx were included in the study. Data analysis was of the intention-to-treat population.InterventionsPatients were randomized (2:1) to treatment with afatinib (40 mg/d) or placebo, stratified by nodal status (N0-2a or N2b-3) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0 or 1). Treatment continued for 18 months or until disease recurrence, unacceptable adverse events, or patient withdrawal.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was DFS, defined as time from the date of randomization to the date of tumor recurrence or secondary primary tumor or death from any cause. Secondary end points were DFS at 2 years, overall survival (defined as time from the date of randomization to death), and health-related quality of life.ResultsA total of 617 patients were studied (mean [SD] age, 58 [8.4] years; 528 male [85.6%]). Recruitment was stopped after a preplanned interim futility analysis on July 4, 2016, on recommendation from an independent data monitoring committee. Treatment was discontinued. Median DFS was 43.4 months (95% CI, 37.4 months to not estimable) in the afatinib group and not estimable (95% CI, 40.1 months to not estimable) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.81-1.57; stratified log-rank test P = .48). The most common grade 3 and 4 drug-related adverse effects were acneiform rash (61 [14.8%] of 411 patients in the afatinib group vs 1 [0.5%] of 206 patients in the placebo group), stomatitis (55 [13.4%] in the afatinib group vs 1 [0.5%] in the placebo group), and diarrhea (32 [7.8%] in the afatinib group vs 1 [0.5%] in the placebo group).Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings indicate that treatment with afatinib after CRT did not improve DFS and was associated with more adverse events than placebo in patients with primary, unresected, clinically high- to intermediate-risk HNSCC. The use of adjuvant afatinib after CRT is not recommended.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01345669.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess progesterone treatment of intractable seizures in women with partial epilepsy.MethodsThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III, multicenter, clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of adjunctive cyclic natural progesterone therapy vs placebo treatment of intractable seizures in 294 subjects randomized 2:1 to progesterone or placebo, stratified by catamenial and noncatamenial status. It compared treatments on proportions of ≥50% responders and changes in seizure frequency from 3 baseline to 3 treated menstrual cycles.ResultsThere was no significant difference in proportions of responders between progesterone and placebo in the catamenial and noncatamenial strata. Prespecified secondary analysis showed that the level of perimenstrual seizure exacerbation (C1 level) was a significant predictor of responders for progesterone but not placebo. With increasing C1 levels, responders increased from 21% to 57% with progesterone vs 19% to 20% with placebo. Reductions in seizure frequency correlated with increasing C1 levels for progesterone but not placebo, progressing from 26% to 71% for progesterone vs 25% to 26% for placebo. A prespecified clinically important separation between progesterone and placebo responders (37.8% vs 11.1%; p = 0.037) was realized among 21.4% of women who had C1 level ≥3.ConclusionThere was no difference in the primary outcome of ≥50% responder rates between progesterone vs placebo for catamenial or noncatamenial groups. Post hoc findings suggest that the level of perimenstrual seizure exacerbation is a significant predictor of responder rate with progesterone and that progesterone may provide clinically important benefit for a subset of women with perimenstrually exacerbated seizures.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class III evidence that cyclic progesterone is ineffective in women with intractable partial epilepsy. Post hoc analysis identified a subset of women with higher levels of perimenstrual seizure exacerbation that were responsive to treatment.

Project description:ImportanceTonsillectomy is a common pediatric procedure for the treatment of sleep-disordered breathing and chronic tonsillitis. Up to half of children having this procedure experience a perioperative respiratory adverse event.ObjectiveTo determine whether inhaled albuterol sulfate (salbutamol sulfate) premedication decreases the risk of perioperative respiratory adverse events in children undergoing anesthesia for tonsillectomy.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial (the Reducing Anesthetic Complications in Children Undergoing Tonsillectomies [REACT] trial) was conducted at Perth Children's Hospital (formerly Princess Margaret Hospital for Children), the only tertiary pediatric hospital in Western Australia. Participants included 484 children aged 0 to 8 years who were undergoing anesthesia for tonsillectomy. The study was conducted between July 15, 2014, and May 18, 2017.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to receive either albuterol (2 actuations, 200 μg) or placebo before their surgery.Main outcomes and measuresOccurrence of perioperative respiratory adverse events (bronchospasm, laryngospasm, airway obstruction, desaturation, coughing, and stridor) until discharge from the postanesthesia care unit.ResultsOf 484 randomized children (median [range] age, 5.6 [1.6-8.9] years; 285 [58.9%] boys), 479 data sets were available for intention-to-treat analysis. Perioperative respiratory adverse events occurred in 67 of 241 children (27.8%) receiving albuterol and 114 of 238 children (47.9%) receiving placebo. After adjusting for age, type of airway device, and severity of obstructive sleep apnea in a binary logistic regression model, the likelihood of perioperative respiratory adverse events remained significantly higher in the placebo group compared with the albuterol group (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9-4.2; P < .001). Significant differences were seen in children receiving placebo vs albuterol in laryngospasm (28 [11.8%] vs 12 [5.0%]; P = .009), coughing (79 [33.2%] vs 27 [11.2%]; P < .001), and oxygen desaturation (54 [22.7%] vs 36 [14.9%]; P = .03).Conclusions and relevanceAlbuterol premedication administered before tonsillectomy under general anesthesia in young children resulted in a clinically significant reduction in rates of perioperative respiratory adverse events compared with the rates in children who received placebo. Premedication with albuterol should be considered for children undergoing tonsillectomy.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ACTRN12614000739617.