Summary Background The relative safety of drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents, especially with respect to stent thrombosis, continues to be debated. In view of the overall low frequency of ...stent thrombosis, large sample sizes are needed to accurately estimate treatment differences between stents. We compared the risk of thrombosis between bare-metal and drug-eluting stents. Methods For this network meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials comparing different drug-eluting stents or drug-eluting with bare-metal stents currently approved in the USA were identified through Medline, Embase, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of international meetings. Information about study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted. Findings 49 trials including 50 844 patients randomly assigned to treatment groups were analysed. 1-year definite stent thrombosis was significantly lower with cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents (CoCr-EES) than with bare-metal stents (odds ratio OR 0·23, 95% CI 0·13–0·41). The significant difference in stent thrombosis between CoCr-EES and bare-metal stents was evident as early as 30 days (OR 0·21, 95% CI 0·11–0·42) and was also significant between 31 days and 1 year (OR 0·27, 95% CI 0·08–0·74). CoCr-EES were also associated with significantly lower rates of 1-year definite stent thrombosis compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (OR 0·28, 95% CI 0·16–0·48), permanent polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (OR 0·41, 95% CI 0·24–0·70), phosphorylcholine-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (OR 0·21, 95% CI 0·10–0·44), and Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (OR 0·14, 95% CI 0·03–0·47). At 2-year follow-up, CoCr-EES were still associated with significantly lower rates of definite stent thrombosis than were bare-metal (OR 0·35, 95% CI 0·17–0·69) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (OR 0·34, 95% CI 0·19–0·62). No other drug-eluting stent had lower definite thrombosis rates compared with bare-metal stents at 2-year follow-up. Interpretation In randomised studies completed to date, CoCr-EES has the lowest rate of stent thrombosis within 2 years of implantation. The finding that CoCr-EES also reduced stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents, if confirmed in future randomised trials, represents a paradigm shift. Funding The Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
Summary Background Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. This ...international phase 3 study compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combination consisting of bendamustine and rituximab. Methods Treatment-naive fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (aged 33–81 years) without del(17p) were enrolled after undergoing a central screening process. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation list using randomly permuted blocks with a block size of eight and were stratified according to participating country and Binet stage. Patients were allocated to receive six cycles of intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m2 per day) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m2 per day) for the first 3 days or to intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m2 per day) for the first 2 days of each cycle. Rituximab 375 mg/m2 was given intravenously in both groups on day 0 of cycle 1 and subsequently was given at 500 mg/m2 during the next five cycles on day 1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with the objective to assess non-inferiority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy. We aimed to show that the 2-year progression-free survival with bendamustine and rituximab was not 67·5% or less with a corresponding non-inferiority margin of 1·388 for the hazard ratio (HR) based on the 90·4% CI. The final analysis was done by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT%2000769522. Findings 688 patients were recruited between Oct 2, 2008, and July 11, 2011, of which 564 patients who met inclusion criteria were randomly assigned. 561 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 282 patients in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group and 279 in the bendamustine and rituximab group. After a median observation time of 37·1 months (IQR 31·0–45·5) median progression-free survival was 41·7 months (95% CI 34·9–45·3) with bendamustine and rituximab and 55·2 months (95% CI not evaluable) with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (HR 1·643, 90·4% CI 1·308–2·064). As the upper limit of the 90·4% CI was greater than 1·388 the null hypothesis for the corresponding non-inferiority hypothesis was not rejected. Severe neutropenia and infections were more frequently observed with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (235 84% of 279 vs 164 59% of 278, and 109 39% vs 69 25%, respectively) during the study. The increased frequency of infectious complications with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab was more pronounced in patients older than 65 years. Interpretation The combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab remains the standard front-line therapy in fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, but bendamustine and rituximab is associated with less toxic effects. Funding Roche Pharma AG, Mundipharma, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
Summary Background FIRE-3 compared first-line 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic ...colorectal cancer. The same study also reported an exploratory analysis of a subgroup of patients with tumours that were wild-type at other RAS genes ( KRAS and NRAS exons 2–4). We report here efficacy results for the FIRE-3 final RAS ( KRAS/NRAS , exons 2–4) wild-type subgroup. Moreover, new metrics of tumour dynamics were explored during a centralised radiological review to investigate how FOLFIRI plus cetuximab conferred overall survival benefit in the absence of differences in investigator-assessed objective responses and progression-free survival. Methods FIRE-3 was a randomised phase 3 trial comparing FOLFIRI plus cetuximab with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. The primary endpoint of the FIRE-3 study was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.0 in the intention-to-treat population. A centralised radiological review of CT scans was done in a post-hoc analysis to assess objective response according to RECIST 1.1, early tumour shrinkage, depth of response, duration of response, and time to response in the final RAS wild-type subgroup. Comparisons between treatment groups with respect to objective response rate and early tumour shrinkage were made using Fisher's exact test (two-sided), while differences in depth of response were investigated with a two-sided Wilcoxon test. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00433927. Findings In the final RAS wild-type population (n=400), median overall survival was better in the FOLFIRI plus cetuximab group than the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group (33·1 months 95% CI 24·5–39·4 vs 25·0 months 23·0–28·1; hazard ratio 0·70 0·54–0·90; p=0·0059), although investigator-assessed objective response and progression-free survival were comparable between treatment groups. Centralised radiological review of CT-assessable patients (n=330) showed that the proportion of patients achieving an objective response (113 of 157, 72·0% 95% CI 64·3–78·8 vs 97 of 173, 56·1% 48·3–63·6; p=0·0029), frequency of early tumour shrinkage (107 of 157, 68·2% 60·3–75·4 vs 85 of 173, 49·1% 41·5–56·8; p=0·0005), and median depth of response (–48·9% –54·3 to −42·0 vs −32·3% –38·2 to −29·2; p<0·0001) were significantly better in extended RAS wild-type patients receiving FOLFIRI plus cetuximab versus those receiving FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. No differences in duration of response and time to response were observed between treatment groups. Interpretation This analysis provides a new framework that connects alternative metrics of response to overall survival. Superior response-related outcome parameters, such as early tumour shrinkage and depth of response, obtained by centralised radiological review correlated with the overall survival benefit conferred by FOLFIRI plus cetuximab compared with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab in the extended RAS wild-type subgroup. Funding Merck KGaA and Pfizer.
Summary Background Cetuximab and bevacizumab have both been shown to improve outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer when added to chemotherapy regimens; however, their comparative ...effectiveness when partnered with first-line fluorouracil, folinic acid, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) is unknown. We aimed to compare these agents in patients with KRAS (exon 2) codon 12/13 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18–75 years with stage IV, histologically confirmed colorectal cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2, an estimated life expectancy of greater than 3 months, and adequate organ function, from centres in Germany and Austria. Patients were centrally randomised by fax (1:1) to FOLFIRI plus cetuximab or FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (using permuted blocks of randomly varying size), stratified according to ECOG performance status, number of metastatic sites, white blood cell count, and alkaline phosphatase concentration. The primary endpoint was objective response analysed by intention to treat. The study has completed recruitment, but follow-up of participants is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00433927. Findings Between Jan 23, 2007, and Sept 19, 2012, 592 patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type tumours were randomly assigned and received treatment (297 in the FOLFIRI plus cetuximab group and 295 in the FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab group). 184 (62·0%, 95% CI 56·2–67·5) patients in the cetuximab group achieved an objective response compared with 171 (58·0%, 52·1–63·7) in the bevacizumab group (odds ratio 1·18, 95% CI 0·85–1·64; p=0·18). Median progression-free survival was 10·0 months (95% CI 8·8–10·8) in the cetuximab group and 10·3 months (9·8–11·3) in the bevacizumab group (hazard ratio HR 1·06, 95% CI 0·88–1·26; p=0·55); however, median overall survival was 28·7 months (95% CI 24·0–36·6) in the cetuximab group compared with 25·0 months (22·7–27·6) in the bevacizumab group (HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·62–0·96; p=0·017). Safety profiles were consistent with the known side-effects of the study drugs. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in both treatment groups were haematotoxicity (73 25% of 297 patients in the cetuximab group vs 62 21% of 295 patients in the bevacizumab group), skin reactions (77 26% vs six 2%), and diarrhoea (34 11% vs 40 14%). Interpretation Although the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response did not significantly differ between the FOLFIRI plus cetuximab and FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab groups, the association with longer overall survival suggests that FOLFIRI plus cetuximab could be the preferred first-line regimen for patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Funding Merck KGaA.
Summary Background Rituximab plus chemotherapy, most often CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), is the first-line standard of care for patients with advanced indolent ...lymphoma, and for elderly patients with mantle-cell lymphoma. Bendamustine plus rituximab is effective for relapsed or refractory disease. We compared bendamustine plus rituximab with CHOP plus rituximab (R-CHOP) as first-line treatment for patients with indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas. Methods We did a prospective, multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial at 81 centres in Germany between Sept 1, 2003, and Aug 31, 2008. Patients aged 18 years or older with a WHO performance status of 2 or less were eligible if they had newly diagnosed stage III or IV indolent or mantle-cell lymphoma. Patients were stratified by histological lymphoma subtype, then randomly assigned according to a prespecified randomisation list to receive either intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of a 4-week cycle) or CHOP (cycles every 3 weeks of cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 , doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 , and vincristine 1·4 mg/m2 on day 1, and prednisone 100 mg/day for 5 days) for a maximum of six cycles. Patients in both groups received rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of each cycle. Patients and treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, with a non-inferiority margin of 10%. Analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00991211 , and the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices of Germany, BfArM 4021335. Findings 274 patients were assigned to bendamustine plus rituximab (261 assessed) and 275 to R-CHOP (253 assessed). At median follow-up of 45 months (IQR 25–57), median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the bendamustine plus rituximab group than in the R-CHOP group (69·5 months 26·1 to not yet reached vs 31·2 months 15·2–65·7; hazard ratio 0·58, 95% CI 0·44–0·74; p<0·0001). Bendamustine plus rituximab was better tolerated than R-CHOP, with lower rates of alopecia (0 patients vs 245 (100%) of 245 patients who recieved ≥3 cycles; p<0·0001), haematological toxicity (77 30% vs 173 68%; p<0·0001), infections (96 37% vs 127 50%); p=0·0025), peripheral neuropathy (18 7% vs 73 29%; p<0·0001), and stomatitis (16 6% vs 47 19%; p<0·0001). Erythematous skin reactions were more common in patients in the bendamustine plus rituximab group than in those in the R-CHOP group (42 16% vs 23 9%; p=0·024). Interpretation In patients with previously untreated indolent lymphoma, bendamustine plus rituximab can be considered as a preferred first-line treatment approach to R-CHOP because of increased progression-free survival and fewer toxic effects. Funding Roche Pharma AG, Ribosepharm/Mundipharma GmbH.
Background In the BAsel Stent Kosten Effektivitäts Trial PROspective Validation Examination (BASKET-PROVE), drug-eluting stents (DESs) had similar 2-year rates of death and myocardial infarction but ...lower rates of target vessel revascularization and major adverse cardiac events compared with bare-metal stents (BMSs). However, comparative clinical effects of newest-generation DES with biodegradable polymers vs second-generation DES or newest-generation BMS with biocompatible coatings, all combined with a prasugrel-based antiplatelet therapy, on 2-year outcomes are not known. Methods In BASKET-PROVE II, 2,400 patients with de novo lesions in native vessels ≥3 mm in diameter are randomized 1:1:1 to receive a conventional DES, a DES with a biodegradable polymer, or a BMS with biocompatible coating. In addition to aspirin, stable patients with BMS will receive prasugrel for 1 month, whereas all others will receive prasugrel for 12 months. The primary end point will be combined cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization up to 2 years. Secondary end points include stent thrombosis and major bleeding. The primary aim is to test (1) the noninferiority of a biodegradable-polymer DES to a conventional DES and (2) the superiority of both DESs to BMS. A secondary aim is to compare the outcomes with those of BASKET-PROVE regarding the effects of prasugrel-based vs clopidogrel-based antiplatelet therapy. Results By the end of 2010, 878 patients (37% of those planned) were enrolled. Conclusions This study will test the comparative long-term safety and efficacy of newest-generation stents on the background of contemporary antiplatelet therapy in a large all-comer population undergoing large native coronary artery stenting.
Summary Background Absorbable scaffolds were designed to overcome the limitations of conventional, non-absorbable metal-based drug-eluting stents. So far, only polymeric absorbable scaffolds are ...commercially available. We aimed to assess the safety and performance of a novel second-generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS 2G) in patients with de-novo coronary artery lesions. Methods We did this prospective, multicentre, non-randomised, first-in-man trial at 13 percutaneous coronary intervention centres in Belgium, Brazil, Denmark, Germany, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Eligible patients had stable or unstable angina or documented silent ischaemia, and a maximum of two de-novo lesions with a reference vessel diameter between 2·2 mm and 3·7 mm. Clinical follow-up was scheduled at months 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36. Patients were scheduled for angiographic follow-up at 6 months, and a subgroup of patients was scheduled for intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, and vasomotion assessment. All patients were recommended to take dual antiplatelet treatment for at least 6 months. The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss at 6 months. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01960504. Findings Between Oct 8, 2013, and May 22, 2015, we enrolled 123 patients with 123 coronary target lesions. At 6 months, mean in-segment late lumen loss was 0·27 mm (SD 0·37), and angiographically discernable vasomotion was documented in 20 (80%) of 25 patients. Intravascular ultrasound assessments showed a preservation of the scaffold area (mean 6·24 mm2 SD 1·15 post-procedure vs 6·21 mm2 1·22 at 6 months) with a low mean neointimal area (0·08 mm2 0·09), and optical coherence tomography did not detect any intraluminal mass. Target lesion failure occurred in four (3%) patients: one (<1%) patient died from cardiac death, one (<1%) patient had periprocedural myocardial infarction, and two (2%) patients needed clinically driven target lesion revascularisation. No definite or probable scaffold thrombosis was observed. Interpretation Our findings show that implantation of the DREAMS 2G device in de-novo coronary lesions is feasible, with favourable safety and performance outcomes at 6 months. This novel absorbable metal scaffold could be an alternative to absorbable polymeric scaffolds for treatment of obstructive coronary disease. Funding Biotronik AG.
Background Delayed-onset urticarial or maculopapular rashes are frequently observed in children treated with β-lactams. Many are labeled “allergic” without reliable testing. Objective Determine the ...etiology of these rashes by exploring both infectious and allergic causes. Methods Children presenting to the emergency department with delayed-onset urticarial or maculopapular rashes were enrolled. Acute and convalescent sera were obtained for viral screening along with a throat swab. Subjects underwent intradermal and patch skin testing for β-lactams 2 months after presentation. Anti–β-lactam blood allergy tests were also obtained. All subjects underwent an oral challenge test (OCT) with the culprit antibiotic. Results Eighty-eight children were enrolled between 2006 and 2008. There were 11 (12.5%) positive intradermal and no positive patch tests. There were 2 (2.3%) positive blood allergy tests. There were 6 (6.8%) subjects with a positive OCT, 2 were intradermal-negative, and 4 were intradermal-positive. No OCT reactions were more severe than the index event. Most subjects had at least 1 positive viral study, 54 (65.9%) in the OCT negative group. Conclusion In this situation, β-lactam allergy is clearly overdiagnosed because the skin rash is only rarely reproducible (6.8%) by a subsequent challenge. Viral infections may be an important factor in many of these rashes. OCTs were positive in a minority of intradermal skin test–positive subjects. Patch testing and blood allergy testing provided no useful information. OCTs should be considered in all children who develop a delayed-onset urticarial or maculopapular rash during treatment with a β-lactam.
Summary Background Fludarabine-based chemoimmunotherapy with rituximab is frequently used in patients with indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas who relapse after alkylating chemotherapy. We aimed to ...compare the efficacy and safety of rituximab with bendamustine or fludarabine in patients with relapsed, indolent, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and mantle-cell lymphoma. Methods For this randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients from 55 centres in Germany, who were subsequently randomised centrally according to prespecified randomisation lists with permuted blocks of randomly variable block size to rituximab (375 mg/m2 , day 1) plus either bendamustine (90 mg/m2 , days 1 and 2) or fludarabine (25 mg/m2 , days 1–3) every 28 days for a maximum of six 28-day cycles. Patients were aged 18 years or older with a WHO performance status of 0–2 and had relapsed or refractory indolent or mantle-cell lymphoma; patients refractory to regimens that included rituximab, bendamustine, or purine analogue drugs were excluded. Patients were stratified by histological subtypes of lymphoma and by their latest previous therapies. Treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and the final analysis was completed per protocol. Non-inferiority of bendamustine plus rituximab versus fludarabine plus rituximab was defined as a difference of less than 15% in 1-year progression-free survival. The protocol was amended in July, 2006, after approval of rituximab maintenance (375 mg/m2 every 3 months for up to 2 years), which was then given to patients achieving a response to either trial treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01456351 (closed to enrolment, follow-up is ongoing). Findings Between Oct 8, 2003, and Aug 5, 2010, we randomly assigned 230 patients to treatment groups (116 bendamustine plus rituximab, 114 fludarabine plus rituximab). 11 patients were excluded for protocol violations and were not followed up further (two in the bendamustine plus rituximab group and nine in the fludarabine plus rituximab group). Thus, 219 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis (114 bendamustine plus rituximab, 105 fludarabine plus rituximab). 1-year progression-free survival with bendamustine plus rituximab was 0·76 (95% CI 0·68–0·84) and 0·48 (0·39–0·58) with fludarabine plus rituximab (non-inferiority p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 96 months (IQR 73·2–112·9), median progression-free survival with bendamustine plus rituximab was 34·2 months (95% CI 23·5–52·7) and 11·7 months (8·0–16·1) with fludarabine plus rituximab (hazard ratio HR 0·54 95% CI 0·38–0·72, log-rank test p<0·0001). Safety outcomes were similar in both groups, with 46 serious adverse events recorded (23 in the bendamustine plus rituximab group and 23 in the fludarabine plus rituximab group), most commonly myelosuppression and infections. Interpretation In combination with rituximab, bendamustine was more effective than fludarabine, suggesting that bendamustine plus rituximab may be the preferred treatment option for patients with relapsed indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas. Funding Roche Pharma AG, Ribosepharm GmbH, Mundipharma GmbH, Studiengruppe indolente Lymphome (StiL).
A Meta-Analysis of 16 Randomized Trials of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Albert Schömig, Alban Dibra, Stephan Windecker, Julinda ...Mehilli, José Suárez de Lezo, Christoph Kaiser, Seung-Jung Park, Jean-Jacque Goy, Jae-Hwan Lee, Emilio Di Lorenzo, Jinjin Wu, Peter Jüni, Matthias E. Pfisterer, Bernhard Meier, Adnan Kastrati We performed a meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) with a total number of 8,695 patients. Mean follow-up period ranged from 9 to 37 months. Compared with PES, SES significantly reduced the risk of reintervention (hazard ratio HR of 0.74; 95% confidence interval CI 0.63 to 0.87), and stent thrombosis (HR of 0.66; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.94), without significantly impacting on the risk of death (HR of 0.92; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13), or myocardial infarction (HR of 0.84; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.03). Thus, SES are superior to PES in terms of a significant reduction of the risk of reintervention and stent thrombosis.
PDF
