Andrew Stanley

Warfarin thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients with central venous catheters (WARP): an open-label randomised trial.

BACKGROUND The role and dose of anticoagulants in thromboprophylaxis for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy through central venous catheters (CVCs) is controversial. We therefore assessed whether warfarin reduces catheter-related thrombosis compared with no warfarin and whether the dose of warfarin determines the thromboprophylactic effect. METHODS In 68 clinical centres in the UK, we randomly assigned 1590 patients aged at least 16 years with cancer who were receiving chemotherapy through CVCs to no warfarin, fixed-dose warfarin 1 mg per day, or dose-adjusted warfarin per day to maintain an international normalised ratio between 1.5 and 2.0. Clinicians who were certain of the benefit of warfarin randomly assigned patients to fixed-dose or dose-adjusted warfarin groups. The primary outcome was the rate of radiologically proven, symptomatic catheter-related thrombosis. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN 50312145. FINDINGS Compared with no warfarin (n=404), warfarin (n=408; 324 [79%] on fixed-dose and 84 [21%] on dose-adjusted) did not reduce the rate of catheter-related thromboses (24 [6%] vs 24 [6%]; relative risk 0.99, 95% CI 0.57-1.72, p=0.98). However, compared with fixed-dose warfarin (n=471), dose-adjusted warfarin (n=473) was superior in the prevention of catheter-related thromboses (13 [3%] vs 34 [7%]; 0.38, 0.20-0.71, p=0.002). Major bleeding events were rare; an excess was noted with warfarin compared with no warfarin (7 vs 1, p=0.07) and with dose-adjusted warfarin compared with fixed-dose warfarin (16 vs 7, p=0.09). A combined endpoint of thromboses and major bleeding showed no difference between comparisons. We did not note a survival benefit in either comparison. INTERPRETATION The findings show that prophylactic warfarin compared with no warfarin is not associated with a reduction in symptomatic catheter-related or other thromboses in patients with cancer and therefore we should consider newer treatments. FUNDING Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK.

Clinical outcomes in patients with castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) metastatic to bone randomized in the factorial TRAPEZE trial to docetaxel (D) with strontium-89 (Sr89), zoledronic acid (ZA), neither, or both (ISRCTN 12808747).

LBA5000 Background: Bony metastatic CRPC has a poor prognosis and high morbidity. TRAPEZE is a factorial RCT using three agents, D, ZA, and Sr89. All have palliative benefits and are used in bony metastatic CRPC to control bone symptoms and (for D) to prolong survival. ZA was approved on the basis of reducing skeletal related events (SRE). Sr89 was approved to control pain from metastases and to reduce the need for subsequent bone treatments. ZA is commonly combined with D in practice but evidence that the combination is effective is lacking and costs considerable. Sr89 is generally used as a palliative therapy in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase II analysis confirmed the safety and feasibility of combining these agents. TRAPEZE aimed to determine clinical and cost-effectiveness scheduling. METHODS Patients were randomised to receive 6 cycles of D plus prednisolone: alone; with ZA; with a single dose of Sr89 after cycle 6 or both. Primary outcomes were clinical progression-free survival (CPFS: pain progression, SRE or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were SRE free interval (SREFI); total SREs, and overall survival (OS). The log rank test and Cox regression modelling were used to determine clinical effectiveness. RESULTS TRAPEZE randomised 757 patients; median age 68.7 yrs; ECOG 0: 40% 1: 52% 2: 8%; prior RT 45%; median PSA 144 (IQR 51, 354). Provisional stratified log rank analysis of CPFS did not reach statistical significance for either agent (Sr89 p=0.11, ZA p=0.45). Cox regression analysis adjusted for all stratification variables showed benefit of Sr89 on CPFS (HR=0.845; 95%CI 0.72, 0.99, p=0.036) and confirmed no effect of ZA (p=0.46). ZA did show a significant effect on SREFI (HR=0.76; 95%CI 0.63, 0.93, p=0.008). There was no effect of either agent on overall survival (Sr89 p=0.74, ZA p=0.91). CONCLUSIONS Sr89 after six cycles of docetaxel improved CPFS but not OS. ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but did significantly improve median SREFI, mostly post progression, suggesting a role as post chemotherapy maintenance therapy. Further health economic and QoL analyses are pending. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION 12808747.

NEAT: National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trial - toxicity, delivered dose intensity and quality of life

The NEAT trial reported considerable benefit for ECMF (epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil) of 28% for relapse-free survival (RFS) and 30% for overall survival (OS), when compared with classical CMF in early breast cancer. To assess tolerability, toxicity, dose intensity and quality of life (QoL) analyses were undertaken. All 2021 eligible patients had common toxicity criteria (CTC), delivered chemotherapy and supportive treatments details and long-term morbidities recorded. The QoL substudy used multiple validated measures. ECMF produced low CTC scores, although higher than CMF for nausea, vomiting, alopecia, constipation, stomatitis (P<0.001), infection (P=0.001) and fatigue (P=0.03). Supportive treatments required, however, were similar across randomised treatments. On-treatment deaths were more common with CMF (13) than ECMF(5). Optimal course-delivered dose intensity (CDDI ⩾85%) was received more often by ECMF patients (83 vs 76%: P=0.0002), and was associated with better RFS (P=0.0006). QoL over 2 years was equivalent across treatments, despite minimally worse side effects for ECMF during treatment. ECMF benefit spanned all levels of toxicity, CDDI and QoL. There are no reported acute myeloid leukaemias or cardiac dysfunctions. ECMF is tolerable, deliverable, and significantly more effective than CMF, with no serious long-term toxicity or QoL detriment.

TRAPEZE: a randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy with zoledronic acid, strontium-89, or both, in men with bony metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer

BACKGROUND Bony metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer is associated with a poor prognosis and high morbidity. TRAPEZE was a two-by-two factorial randomised controlled trial of zoledronic acid (ZA) and strontium-89 (Sr-89), each combined with docetaxel. All have palliative benefits, are used to control bone symptoms and are used with docetaxel to prolong survival. ZA, approved on the basis of reducing skeletal-related events (SREs), is commonly combined with docetaxel in practice, although evidence of efficacy and cost-effectiveness is lacking. Sr-89, approved for controlling metastatic pain and reducing need for subsequent bone treatments, is generally palliatively used in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase II analysis confirmed the safety and feasibility of combining these agents. TRAPEZE aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of each agent. METHODS Patients were randomised to receive six cycles of docetaxel plus prednisolone: alone, with ZA, with a single Sr-89 dose after cycle 6, or with both. Primary outcomes were clinical progression-free survival (CPFS: time to pain progression, SRE or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were SRE-free interval (SREFI), total SREs, overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL). Log-rank test and Cox regression modelling were used to determine clinical effectiveness. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from the NHS perspective and expressed as cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). An additional analysis was carried out for ZA to reflect the availability of generic ZA. RESULTS PATIENTS 757 randomised (median age 68.7 years; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale score 0, 40%; 1, 52%; 2, 8%; prior radiotherapy, 45%); median prostate-specific antigen 143.78 ng/ml (interquartile range 50.8-353.9 ng/ml). Stratified log-rank analysis of CPFS was statistically non-significant for either agent (Sr-89, p = 0.11; ZA, p = 0.45). Cox regression analysis adjusted for stratification variables showed CPFS benefit for Sr-89 [hazard ratio (HR) 0.845, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.99; p = 0.036] and confirmed no effect of ZA (p = 0.46). ZA showed a significant SREFI effect (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.93; p = 0.008). Neither agent affected OS (Sr-89, p = 0.74; ZA, p = 0.91), but both increased total cost (vs. no ZA and no Sr-89, respectively); decreased post-trial therapies partly offset costs [net difference: Sr-89 £1341; proprietary ZA (Zometa(®), East Hanover, NJ, USA) £1319; generic ZA £251]. QoL was maintained in all trial arms; Sr-89 (0.08 additional QALYs) and ZA (0.03 additional QALYs) showed slight improvements. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Sr-89 was £16,590, with £42,047 per QALY for Zometa and £8005 per QALY for generic ZA. CONCLUSION Strontium-89 improved CPFS, but not OS. ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but significantly improved SREFI, mostly post progression, suggesting a role as post-chemotherapy maintenance therapy. QoL was well maintained in all treatment arms, with differing patterns of care resulting from the effects of Sr-89 on time to progression and ZA on SREFI and total SREs. The addition of Sr-89 resulted in additional cost and a small positive increase in QALYs, with an ICER below the £20,000 ceiling per QALY. The additional costs and small positive QALY changes in favour of ZA resulted in ICERs of £42,047 (Zometa) and £8005 for the generic alternative; thus, generic ZA represents a cost-effective option. Additional analyses on the basis of data from the Hospital Episode Statistics data set would allow corroborating the findings of this study. Further research into the use of ZA (and other bone-targeting therapies) with newer prostate cancer therapies would be desirable. STUDY REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN12808747. FUNDING This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 53. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Clinical Outcomes and Survival Following Treatment of Metastatic Castrate-Refractory Prostate Cancer With Docetaxel Alone or With Strontium-89, Zoledronic Acid, or Both The TRAPEZE Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE Bony metastatic castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) has a poor prognosis and high morbidity. Zoledronic acid (ZA) is commonly combined with docetaxel in practice but lacks evidence that combining is effective, and strontium-89 (Sr89) is generally used palliatively in patients unfit for chemotherapy. Phase 2 analysis of the TRAPEZE trial confirmed combining the agents was safe and feasible, and the objectives of phase 3 include assessment of the treatments on survival. OBJECTIVE To determine clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of combining docetaxel, ZA, and Sr89, all having palliative benefits and used in bony metastatic CRPC to control bone symptoms and, for docetaxel, to prolong survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The TRAPEZE trial is a 2 × 2 factorial trial comparing docetaxel alone or with ZA, Sr89, or both. A cohort of 757 participants were recruited between February 2005 and February 2012 from hospitals in the United Kingdom. Overall, 169 participants (45%) had received palliative radiotherapy, and the median (IQR) prostate-specific antigen level was 146 (51-354). Follow-ups were performed for at least 12 months. INTERVENTIONS Up to 10 cycles of docetaxel alone; docetaxel with ZA; docetaxel with a single Sr89 dose after 6 cycles; or docetaxel with both ZA and Sr89. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcomes included clinical progression-free survival (CPFS) (pain progression, skeletal-related events [SREs], or death) and cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes included SRE-free interval, pain progression-free interval, total SREs, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Overall, of 757 participants, 349 (46%) completed docetaxel treatment. Median (IQR) age was 68 (63-73) years. Clinical progression-free survival did not reach statistical significance for either Sr89 or ZA. Cox regression analysis adjusted for all stratification variables showed benefit of Sr89 on CPFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99; P = .03) and confirmed no effect of ZA (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.14; P = .81); ZA had a significant effect on SRE-free interval (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.95; P = .01). For OS, there was no effect of either Sr89 (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.79-1.08; P = 0.34) or ZA (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.84-1.16; P = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Strontium-89 combined with docetaxel improved CPFS but did not improve OS, SRE-free interval, or total SREs; ZA did not improve CPFS or OS but did significantly improve median SRE-free interval and reduced total SREs by around one-third, suggesting a role as postchemotherapy maintenance therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION isrctn.com Identifier: ISRCTN12808747.

Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid and strontium-89 as bone protecting treatments in addition to chemotherapy in patients with metastatic castrate-refractory prostate cancer: results from the TRAPEZE trial (ISRCTN 12808747)

To evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of adding zoledronic acid or strontium‐89 to standard docetaxel chemotherapy for patients with castrate‐refractory prostate cancer (CRPC).

A phase I/II trial of recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in the intensification of cisplatin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer.

A pilot study was undertaken in eight patients to assess the feasibility of recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (rH GM-CSF) support to intensify standard chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer using a shortened 15 day treatment interval. Only four patients completed the course of six cycles of cisplatin 75 mg m-2 and cyclophosphamide 750 mg m-2 with rH GM-CSF, 3-5 micrograms kg-1 day-1, days 3-14, but one of these suffered a toxic death on study. Another died of disease progression. There were two episodes of life-threatening infection (WHO grade 4), and three patients were withdrawn because of various rH GM-CSF-related problems. Although potentially affording some patients the hypothetical benefits of dose intensification, as well as the possible attraction of a shorter duration of chemotherapy, this regimen is not without problems.