Search

Dose-finding in cancer clinical trials has been dominated by algorithmic designs on the principle that the highest tolerable dose is also the most effective dose. This assumption no longer applies to the biologic treatments that are characterized by different toxicity and/or efficacy profiles to the extent that the best therapeutic dose might be well below any dose that produces serious toxicity. As such, we propose a two-stage design with focus on immunotherapy trials, incorporating both safety and efficacy information. The first stage establishes the safety profile of each dose, with escalation decisions based on likelihood principles. Continuous immunologic outcomes are used to evaluate the relative efficacy of the doses. The second stage employs an adaptive randomization to assign patients to doses showing higher efficacy. Safety is being continuously monitored throughout Stage 2, where some doses may be ‘closed’ due to unacceptable toxicity. The proposed design is compared to the modified toxicity probability interval (mTPI) design using percent dose allocation and estimation of outcomes under different scenarios. We show that by using an efficacy-driven adaptive randomization with safety constraints, the allocation distribution is skewed towards more efficacious doses, and thus limit the number of patients exposed to toxic or non-therapeutic doses. Supplementary materials for this article are available online. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The majority of smokers do not intend to quit in the near term, making unmotivated smokers a key group to target in public health efforts. Although it is often assumed that continuing smokers will have stable rates of smoking over time, limited research has addressed this issue, particularly among smokers not seeking treatment. In the current study, the aims were to (1) characterize the trajectory of naturalistic smoking among unmotivated smokers and (2) examine relationships between naturalistic smoking trajectories and other smoking-related variables.Methods: The study sample comprised 579 control-group (ie, untreated) smokers within a parent clinical trial, who completed a total of nine assessments over 1 year.Results: Trajectory modeling identified four smoking trajectory groups: stable (72%), shallow decreasers (20%), steep decreasers (5%), and increasers (3%). Membership in the decreasing groups was associated with higher motivation to quit, greater history of quit attempts, and higher cigarettes per day. Females were more likely to be in the increasing versus stable group.Conclusions: Findings provide needed information on stability and change in cigarette consumption over the course of 1 year among an untreated sample of smokers and identified baseline sociodemographic and smoking-related predictors of smoking trajectory group. Refining understanding of these groups is critical in updating population-based tobacco policy modeling efforts and informing cessation induction efforts that capitalize on naturalistic changes in smoking rate over time.Implications: In the current study, we found that approximately 25% of smokers who endorsed low quit motivation at baseline reduced their cigarette consumption over the course of a year, while 3% increased their cigarette consumption and the majority of smokers (72%) maintained a stable pattern. Refining understanding of smoking trajectories is critical in updating population-based tobacco policy modeling efforts and informing cessation induction efforts that capitalize on naturalistic changes in smoking rate over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Within the context of busy clinical settings, health‐care providers need practical, evidence‐based options to engage smokers in quitting. Sampling of nicotine replacement therapy [i.e. provision of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT starter kits)] is a brief, pragmatic strategy to address this need. We aimed to compare the effects of NRT sampling plus standard care (SC), relative to SC alone, provided by primary care providers during routine clinic visits. Design Cluster‐randomized clinical trial. Setting: Twenty‐two primary care clinics in South Carolina, USA. Participants: Adult smokers [n = 1245; 61% female, mean age = 50.7, standard deviation (SD) = 13.5] both motivated and unmotivated to quit, seen during routine clinical visit. Interventions were provider‐delivered SC (n = 652, 12 clinics) cessation advice or SC + a 2‐week supply of both nicotine patch and lozenge, with minimal instructions on use (n = 593; 10 clinics). Measurements The primary outcome was 7‐day point prevalence smoking abstinence at 6‐month follow‐up, using intent‐to‐treat. Additional outcomes included NRT use and quit attempts, assessed at 1, 3 and 6 months following baseline. Findings Seven‐day point prevalence abstinence rates were significantly higher in the NRT sampling group throughout follow‐up, including at 6 months [12 versus 8%, odds ratio (OR) = 1.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.0–2.4]. NRT sampling increased prevalence of any use of NRT (65 versus 25%, OR = 5.8, 95% CI = 4.3–7.7), with higher prevalence of use at 6 months (25 versus 14%, OR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.5–2.7). NRT sampling increased the rate of quit attempts in the initial month (24 versus 18%, OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.0–2.3) but had no significant effect on overall rate of quit attempts (48 versus 45%, OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 0.8–1.7). Conclusion: Providing smokers with a free 2‐week starter kit of nicotine replacement therapy increased quit attempts, use of stop smoking medications and smoking abstinence compared with standard care in a primary care setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Primary care is the most important point of healthcare contact for smokers. Brief physician advice to quit, based on the 5As/AAR model, offers some efficacy but is inconsistently administered and has limited population impact. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) sampling, defined as provision of a brief NRT starter kit, when added to the 5As/AAR, is well-suited to primary care because it is simple, brief, and can be provided to all smokers. This article describes the design and methods of an ongoing comparative effectiveness trial testing standard care vs. standard care + NRT sampling within primary care. Methods Smokers were recruited directly from primary care practices between July 2014 and December 2017 within an established network of South Carolina clinics. Interventions were delivered randomly by clinic personnel, and phone-based follow-ups were centrally coordinated by research staff to track outcomes through six months post-intervention. Primary study aims are to examine the impact of NRT sampling on smoking, inclusive of cessation, quit attempts, and uptake of evidence-based treatment. Results Twenty-two clinics were recruited. Across clinics, patient census ranged from 985 to 10,957 and number of providers ranged from 1 to 63. Average patient age across clinics was 52.9 years and smoking prevalence across ranged from 10.6% to 28.5%. Conclusion Improving the effectiveness and reach of brief interventions within primary care could have a considerable impact on population quit rates. We consider the advantages and disadvantages of key methodological decisions relevant to the design of future primary care-based cessation trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Case reports and small prospective trials suggest that administering targeted therapies to patients with advanced cancer and an identified genomic target may be associated with clinical benefit. The Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) study, a phase II prospective, nonrandomized, multibasket pragmatic clinical trial, aims to identify signals of drug activity when US Food and Drug Administration–approved drugs are matched to prespecified genomic targets in patients with advanced cancer, outside of approved indications. Methods: Patients eligible to participate in TAPUR are age ≥ 12 years and have advanced measurable or evaluable solid tumors, multiple myeloma, or B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Eligible participants are matched to any of the 16 US Food and Drug Administration–approved study drugs based on protocol-specified genomic inclusion and exclusion criteria. Genomic profiling from any Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments–certified, College of American Pathologists–accredited laboratory is acceptable. The treating physician selects the treatment from the available study therapies or consults with the TAPUR Molecular Tumor Board. Participants are placed into multiple parallel cohorts defined by tumor type, genomic alteration, and drug. The primary study end point within each cohort is objective response or stable disease of at least 16 weeks duration. Secondary end points include safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Results: More than 1,000 participants have thus far been registered, and more than 800 have been treated with a TAPUR study drug. Two study cohorts have permanently closed to enrollment because of lack of antitumor activity, and 12 have expanded to the second stage of enrollment after promising preliminary activity. Conclusion: The TAPUR study will describe the efficacy and toxicity of the targeted drugs used outside of their approved indications when matched to a somatic genomic variant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immunotherapy with PD-1 or PD-L1 blockade fails to induce a response in about 80% of patients with unselected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and many of those who do initially respond then develop resistance to treatment. Agonists that target the shared interleukin-2 (IL-2) and IL-15Rβγ pathway have induced complete and durable responses in some cancers, but no studies have been done to assess the safety or efficacy of these agonists in combination with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. We aimed to define the safety, tolerability, and activity of this drug combination in patients with NSCLC.Methods: In this non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b trial, we enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously treated histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC from three academic hospitals in the USA. Key eligibility criteria included measurable disease, eligibility to receive anti-PD-1 immunotherapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients received the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody nivolumab intravenously at 3 mg/kg (then 240 mg when US Food and Drug Administration [FDA]-approved dosing changed) every 14 days (either as new treatment or continued treatment at the time of disease progression) and the IL-15 superagonist ALT-803 subcutaneously once per week on weeks 1-5 of four 6-week cycles for 6 months. ALT-803 was administered at one of four escalating dose concentrations: 6, 10, 15, or 20 μg/kg. The primary endpoint was to define safety and tolerability and to establish a recommended phase 2 dose of ALT-803 in combination with nivolumab. Analyses were per-protocol and included any patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02523469; phase 2 enrolment of patients is ongoing.Findings: Between Jan 18, 2016, and June 28, 2017, 23 patients were enrolled and 21 were treated at four dose levels of ALT-803 in combination with nivolumab. Two patients did not receive treatment because of the development of inter-current illness during enrolment, one patient due to leucopenia and one patient due to pulmonary dysfunction. No dose-limiting toxicities were recorded and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The most common adverse events were injection-site reactions (in 19 [90%] of 21 patients) and flu-like symptoms (15 [71%]). The most common grade 3 adverse events, occurring in two patients each, were lymphocytopenia and fatigue. A grade 3 myocardial infarction occurred in one patient. No grade 4 or 5 adverse events were recorded. The recommended phase 2 dose of ALT-803 is 20 μg/kg given once per week subcutaneously in combination with 240 mg intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks.Interpretation: ALT-803 in combination with nivolumab can be safely administered in an outpatient setting. The promising clinical activity observed with the addition of ALT-803 to the regimen of patients with PD-1 monoclonal antibody relapsed and refractory disease shows evidence of anti-tumour activity for a new class of agents in NSCLC.Funding: Altor BioScience (a NantWorks company), National Institutes of Health, and Medical University of South Carolina Hollings Cancer Center. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Malignant melanoma incidence has been increasing for over 30 years, and despite promising new therapies, metastatic disease remains difficult to treat. We describe preliminary results from a Phase I clinical trial (NCT01586403) of adoptive cell therapy in which three patients received autologous CD4+ and CD8+ T cells transduced with a lentivirus carrying a tyrosinase-specific TCR and a marker protein, truncated CD34 (CD34t). This unusual MHC Class I-restricted TCR produces functional responses in both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Parameters monitored on transduced T cells included activation (CD25, CD69), inhibitory (PD-1, TIM-3, CTLA-4), costimulatory (OX40), and memory (CCR7) markers. For the clinical trial, T cells were activated, transduced, selected for CD34t+ cells, then re-activated, and expanded in IL-2 and IL-15. After lymphodepleting chemotherapy, patients were given transduced T cells and IL-2, and were followed for clinical and biological responses. Transduced T cells were detected in the circulation of three treated patients for the duration of observation (42, 523, and 255 days). Patient 1 tolerated the infusion well but died from progressive disease after 6 weeks. Patient 2 had a partial response by RECIST criteria then progressed. After progressing, Patient 2 was given high-dose IL-2 and subsequently achieved complete remission, coinciding with the development of vitiligo. Patient 3 had a mixed response that did not meet RECIST criteria for a clinical response and developed vitiligo. In two of these three patients, adoptive transfer of tyrosinase-reactive TCR-transduced T cells into metastatic melanoma patients had clinical and/or biological activity without serious adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]