Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Clinical Trial of Anti-T-Lymphocyte Globulin to Assess Impact on Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease-Free Survival in Patients Undergoing HLA-Matched Unrelated Myeloablative Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.
Purpose Several open-label randomized studies have suggested that in vivo T-cell depletion with anti-T-lymphocyte globulin (ATLG; formerly antithymocyte globulin-Fresenius) reduces chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) without compromising survival. We report a prospective, double-blind phase III trial to investigate the effect of ATLG (Neovii Biotech, Lexington, MA) on cGVHD-free survival. Patients and Methods Two hundred fifty-four patients 18 to 65 years of age with acute leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome who underwent myeloablative HLA-matched unrelated hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) were randomly assigned one to one to placebo (n =128 placebo) or ATLG (n = 126) treatment at 27 sites. ⋯ Conclusion In this prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of ATLG in unrelated myeloablative HCT, the incorporation of ATLG did not improve moderate-severe cGVHD-free survival. Moderate-severe cGVHD was significantly lower with ATLG, but PFS and OS also were lower. Additional analyses are needed to understand the appropriate role for ATLG in HCT.
-
Purpose The American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) produced an evidence-based guideline on radiation therapy in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) that was determined to be relevant to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership. After applying standard critical appraisal policy and endorsement procedures, ASCO chose to endorse the ASTRO guideline. Methods The ASTRO guideline was reviewed by ASCO content experts for clinical accuracy and by ASCO methodologists for developmental rigor. ⋯ ASCO Endorsement Panel qualifying statements and minor modifications were made to the ASTRO recommendations. The staging system that is referenced in these guidelines is the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition. Additional information is available at: www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .
-
Purpose The current epidemic of prescription opioid misuse has increased scrutiny of postoperative opioid prescribing. Some 6% to 8% of opioid-naïve patients undergoing noncancer procedures develop new persistent opioid use; however, it is unknown if a similar risk applies to patients with cancer. We sought to define the risk of new persistent opioid use after curative-intent surgery, identify risk factors, and describe changes in daily opioid dose over time after surgery. ⋯ Across different procedures, the covariate-adjusted risk of new persistent opioid use in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy was 15% to 21%, compared with 7% to 11% for those with no chemotherapy. Conclusion New persistent opioid use is a common iatrogenic complication in patients with cancer undergoing curative-intent surgery. This problem requires changes to prescribing guidelines and patient counseling during the surveillance and survivorship phases of care.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Monthly Zoledronic Acid, Zoledronic Acid Every 3 Months, and Monthly Denosumab in Women With Breast Cancer and Skeletal Metastases: CALGB 70604 (Alliance).
Purpose Skeletal-related events (SREs) such as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, or the necessity for radiation or surgery to bone metastasis cause considerable morbidity, decrements in quality of life, and costs to the health care system. The results of a recent large randomized trial (Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology [CALGB/Alliance 70604]) showed that zoledronic acid (ZA) every 3 months was noninferior to monthly ZA in reducing the risks of SREs. We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness (CE) of monthly ZA, ZA every 3 months, and monthly denosumab in women with breast cancer and skeletal metastases. ⋯ Conclusion ZA every 3 months was more CE in reducing the risks of SRE than monthly denosumab. This analysis was one of the first to incorporate the costs of generic ZA and one of the first independent CE analyses not sponsored by either Novartis or Amgen, the makers of ZA and denosumab, respectively. ZA every 3 months is the more CE option and more reasonable alternative to monthly denosumab.