We performed a systematic review of 28 case-control, 17 cohort and seven twin studies of the relationship between family history and risk of lung cancer and a meta-analysis of risk estimates. Data ...from both case-control and cohort studies show a significantly increased lung cancer risk associated with having an affected relative. Risk appears to be greater in relatives of cases diagnosed at a young age and in those with multiple affected family members. Increased lung cancer risk was observed in association with an affected spouse and twin studies, while limited, favour shared environmental exposures. The limitations of the currently published epidemiological studies to infer genetic susceptibility are discussed.
With the advent of targeted agents for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), overall survival has improved, and patients are being treated continuously for increasingly long periods of time. ...This has raised challenges in the management of adverse events (AEs) associated with the six targeted agents approved in RCC-sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, bevacizumab (in combination with interferon alpha), temsirolimus, and everolimus. Suggestions for monitoring and managing AEs have been published, but there are few consensus recommendations. In addition, there is a risk that patients will be subjected to multiple unnecessary investigations. In this review, we aimed to identify the level of supporting evidence for suggested AE management strategies to provide practical guidance on essential monitoring and management that should be undertaken when using targeted agents. Five databases were systematically searched for relevant English language articles (including American Society of Clinical Oncology abstracts) published between January 2007 and March 2011; European Society of Medical Oncology congress abstracts were hand searched. Strategies for AE management were summarized and categorized according to the level of recommendation. A total of 107 articles were identified that describe a large number of different investigations for monitoring AEs and interventions for AE management. We identify and summarize clear recommendations for the management of dermatologic, gastrointestinal, thyroid, cardiovascular, and other AEs, based predominantly on expert opinion. However, because the evidence for the suggested management strategies is largely anecdotal, there is a need for further systematic investigation of management strategies for AEs related to targeted therapies for RCC.
Lung cancer screening using low-dose CT (LDCT) was shown to reduce lung cancer mortality by 20% in the National Lung Screening Trial.
The pilot UK Lung Cancer Screening (UKLS) is a randomised ...controlled trial of LDCT screening for lung cancer versus usual care. A population-based questionnaire was used to identify high-risk individuals. CT screen-detected nodules were managed by a pre-specified protocol. Cost effectiveness was modelled with reference to the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial mortality reduction.
247 354 individuals aged 50-75 years were approached; 30.7% expressed an interest, 8729 (11.5%) were eligible and 4055 were randomised, 2028 into the CT arm (1994 underwent a CT). Forty-two participants (2.1%) had confirmed lung cancer, 34 (1.7%) at baseline and 8 (0.4%) at the 12-month scan. 28/42 (66.7%) had stage I disease, 36/42 (85.7%) had stage I or II disease. 35/42 (83.3%) had surgical resection. 536 subjects had nodules greater than 50 mm(3) or 5 mm diameter and 41/536 were found to have lung cancer. One further cancer was detected by follow-up of nodules between 15 and 50 mm(3) at 12 months. The baseline estimate for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of once-only CT screening, under the UKLS protocol, was £8466 per quality adjusted life year gained (CI £5542 to £12 569).
The UKLS pilot trial demonstrated that it is possible to detect lung cancer at an early stage and deliver potentially curative treatment in over 80% of cases. Health economic analysis suggests that the intervention would be cost effective-this needs to be confirmed using data on observed lung cancer mortality reduction.
ISRCTN 78513845.
The conduct of clinical trials should be an integral part of routine patient care. Treating patients in trials incurs additional costs over and above standard of care (SOC), but the extent of the ...cost burden is not known. We undertook a retrospective cost attribution analysis to quantitate the treatment costs associated with cancer clinical trial protocols conducted over a 2 year period.
All patients entered into oncology (non-haematology) clinical trials involving investigational medicinal products in 2009 and 2010 in a single UK institution were identified. The trial protocols on which they were treated were analysed to identify the treatment costs for the experimental arm(s) of the trial and the equivalent SOC had the patient not been entered in the trial. The treatment cost difference was calculated by subtracting the experimental treatment cost from SOC cost. For randomised trials, an average treatment cost was estimated by taking into account the number of arms and randomisation ratio. An estimate of the annual treatment costs was calculated.
A total of 357 adult oncology patients were treated on 53 different trial protocols: 40 phase III, 2 randomised II/III and 11 phase II design. A total of 27 trials were academic, non-commercial sponsored trials and 26 were commercial sponsored trials. When compared with SOC, the average treatment cost per patient was an excess of £431 for a non-commercial trial (range £6393 excess to £6005 saving) and a saving of £9294 for a commercial trial (range £0 to £71,480). There was an overall treatment cost saving of £388,719 in 2009 and £496,556 in 2010, largely attributable to pharmaceutical company provision of free drug supplies.
On an average, non-commercial trial protocols were associated with a small per patient excess treatment cost, whereas commercial trials were associated with a substantially higher cost saving. Taking into account the total number of patients recruited annually, treatment of patients on clinical trial protocols was associated with considerable cost savings across both the non-commercial and commercial portfolio.
Genome-wide association studies have provided evidence that common variation at 5p15.33 (TERT-CLPTM1L), 6p21.33 and 15q25.1 (CHRNA5-CHRNA3) influences lung cancer risk. To examine if variation at any ...of these loci influences the risk of lung cancer in never-smokers, we compared 5p15.33-TERT (rs2736100), 5p15.33-CLPTM1L (rs4975616), 6p21.33-BAT3 (rs3117582), 15q25.1-CHRNA3 (rs8042374) and 15q25.1-CHRNA3 (rs12914385) genotypes in a series of 239 never-smoker lung cancer cases and 553 never-smoker controls. A statistically significant association between lung cancer risk and 5p15.33 genotypes was found: rs2736100 (odds ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.63–0.97; P = 0.02), rs4975616 (odds ratio = 0.69, 95% confidence interval: 0.55–0.85; P = 7.95 × 10−4), primarily for adenocarcinoma. There was no evidence of association between 6p21.33 or 15q25.1 variation and risk of lung cancer. This analysis provides evidence that TERT-CLPTM1L variants may influence the risk of lung cancer outside the context of tobacco smoking.
The effects of sorafenib--an oral multikinase inhibitor targeting the tumour and tumour vasculature--were evaluated in patients with advanced melanoma enrolled in a large multidisease Phase II ...randomised discontinuation trial (RDT). Enrolled patients received a 12-week run-in of sorafenib 400 mg twice daily (b.i.d.). Patients with changes in bi-dimensional tumour measurements <25% from baseline were then randomised to sorafenib or placebo for a further 12 weeks (ie to week 24). Patients with > or =25% tumour shrinkage after the run-in continued on open-label sorafenib, whereas those with > or =25% tumour growth discontinued treatment. This analysis focussed on secondary RDT end points: changes in bi-dimensional tumour measurements from baseline after 12 weeks and overall tumour responses (WHO criteria) at week 24, progression-free survival (PFS), safety and biomarkers (BRAF, KRAS and NRAS mutational status). Of 37 melanoma patients treated during the run-in phase, 34 were evaluable for response: one had > or =25% tumour shrinkage and remained on open-label sorafenib; six (16%) had <25% tumour growth and were randomised (placebo, n=3; sorafenib, n=3); and 27 had > or =25% tumour growth and discontinued. All three randomised sorafenib patients progressed by week 24; one remained on sorafenib for symptomatic relief. All three placebo patients progressed by week-24 and were re-started on sorafenib; one experienced disease re-stabilisation. Overall, the confirmed best responses for each of the 37 melanoma patients who received sorafenib were 19% stable disease (SD) (ie n=1 open-label; n=6 randomised), 62% (n=23) progressive disease (PD) and 19% (n=7) unevaluable. The overall median PFS was 11 weeks. The six randomised patients with SD had overall PFS values ranging from 16 to 34 weeks. The most common drug-related adverse events were dermatological (eg rash/desquamation, 51%; hand-foot skin reaction, 35%). There was no relationship between V600E BRAF status and disease stability. DNA was extracted from the biopsies of 17/22 patients. Six had V600E-positive tumours (n=4 had PD; n=1 had SD; n=1 unevaluable for response), and 11 had tumours containing wild-type BRAF (n=9 PD; n=1 SD; n=1 unevaluable for response). In conclusion, sorafenib is well tolerated but has little or no antitumour activity in advanced melanoma patients as a single agent at the dose evaluated (400 mg b.i.d.). Ongoing trials in advanced melanoma are evaluating sorafenib combination therapies.
This exploratory study evaluated the safety/efficacy of nintedanib or sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
Ninety-six patients were randomised (2:1) ...to either nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or sunitinib (50 mg kg(-1) once daily (4 weeks on treatment; 2 weeks off)). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) at 9 months. P-values reported are descriptive only; the study was not powered for such comparisons.
Progression-free survival at 9 months was comparable between nintedanib and sunitinib (43.1% vs 45.2%, respectively; P=0.85). Median PFS was 8.4 months in each group (hazard ratio (HR), 1.12; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-1.80; P=0.64). Median overall survival was 20.4 and 21.2 months for nintedanib and sunitinib, respectively (HR, 0.92; 95% CI: 0.54-1.56; P=0.76). Overall incidence of any grade adverse events (AEs) was comparable (90.6% vs 93.8%); AEs grade ⩾ 3 were lower with nintedanib than sunitinib (48.4% vs 59.4%). Nintedanib was associated with lower incidences of some AEs typical of antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs): hypertension, hypothyroidism, hand-foot syndrome, cardiac disorders and haematological abnormalities.
In patients with advanced RCC, nintedanib has promising efficacy and similar tolerability to sunitinib, and a manageable safety profile with fewer TKI-associated AEs.
Individuals appraise events as a consequence of their own actions (i.e. internal locus of control, LoC) or as the outcome of chance or others' will (i.e. external LoC). We hypothesized that having a ...more external LoC would be associated with higher risk of tobacco and alcohol use. Few studies have examined this association using large prospective data. We evaluated within the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) the associations between LoC at 16 and tobacco and alcohol consumption at 17 and 21 years using logistic regression. A more external LoC at age 16 (
= 4656) was associated with higher odds of being a weekly smoker at age 17 (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.25) and 21 (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.07-1.21) and with dependence measured using the Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence at age 17 (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05-1.51) and 21 (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.49). Individuals with external LoC at age 16 were more likely to be hazardous drinkers according to the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test at age 17 (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.15) but not at 21 (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96-1.06). Having a more external LoC at age 16 is associated with increased tobacco consumption at age 17 and 21 and alcohol consumption at 17 years. LoC may represent an intervention target for preventing substance use and dependence.
PDF
