No abstract

No abstract

young women about pregnancy considerations and preventing unnecessary abortions. Ideally, evidence from large prospective randomized trials would set better guidelines, and yet the complexity of such studies limits their feasibility.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The optimal duration of filgrastim as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in early breast cancer patients is unknown, with 5, 7 or 10 days being commonly prescribed. This trial evaluates whether 5 days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. Patients and methods: In this randomised, open-label trial, early breast cancer patients who were to receive filgrastim as primary FN prophylaxis were randomly allocated to 5 versus 7 versus 10 days of filgrastim for all chemotherapy cycles. A protocol amendment in November 2017 allowed subsequent patients (N ¼ 324) to be randomised to either 5 or 7/10 days. The primary outcome was a composite of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisations. Secondary outcomes included chemotherapy dose reductions, delays and discontinuations. Analyses were carried out by per protocol (primary) and intention-to-treat, and the non-inferiority margin was set at 3% for the risk of having FN and/or hospitalisation per cycle of chemotherapy. Results: Patients (N ¼ 466) were randomised to receive 5 (184, 39.5%), or 7/10 (282, 60.5%) days of filgrastim. In our primary analysis, the difference in risk of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation per cycle was À1.52% [95% confidence interval (CI): À3.22% to 0.19%] suggesting non-inferiority of a 5-day filgrastim schedule compared with 7/10-days. The difference in events per cycle for FN was 0.11% (95% CI: À1.05 to 1.27) while for treatment-related hospitalisations it was À1.68% (95% CI: À2.73% to À0.63%). The overall proportions of patients having at least one occurrence of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation were 11.8% and 14.96% for the 5-and 7/10-day groups, respectively (risk difference: À3.17%, 95% CI: À9.51% to 3.18%). Conclusion: Five days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. Given the cost and toxicity of this agent, 5 days should be considered standard of care. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02428114 and NCT02816164.

The role of adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not well defined. Recent randomized controlled trials showed a disease-free survival (DFS) benefit in patients harboring an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Yet, older trials on patients with any EGFR status did not demonstrate the same benefit. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of adjuvant TKIs in NSCLC patients. The electronic databases Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials. Random effect models were used. The primary outcome was DFS measured as hazard ratio (HR). The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) measured as HR, 2-year DFS and toxicity expressed as risk ratio and odds ratio (OR), respectively. Subgroup analyses assessed DFS by trial design. Six trials incorporating 1860 patients were included. In patients harboring an EGFR mutation, adjuvant TKIs decreased the risk of disease recurrence by 48% (HR: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35-0.78), improved 2-year DFS (HR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.43-0.66) but did not improve OS (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.22-1.89). The risk of developing ≥grade 3 skin toxicity (OR: 6.07, 95% CI: 4.34-8.51) and diarrhea (OR: 4.05; 95% CI: 2.44-6.74) was increased. In subgroup analyses, the DFS benefit was more pronounced in trials using TKIs over chemotherapy compared with trials using TKIs postchemotherapy. In conclusion, adjuvant TKIs decrease the risk of recurrence in NSCLC patients harboring an EGFR mutation but do not improve OS. Longer follow-up is needed for a definitive assessment of OS and to define the role of adjuvant TKI for NSCLC in the clinical practice.

No abstract