Petroni, Gina R.

Importance Assisted ventilation during delayed cord clamping (DCC) may improve the physiologic transition of extremely preterm infants immediately after birth. Objective To determine whether assisted ventilation during 120 seconds of DCC was associated with reduced higher-level resuscitative interventions (intubation, chest compressions, or epinephrine administration) compared with DCC for 30 to 60 seconds followed by resuscitation. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a secondary analysis of the VentFirst randomized clinical trial that was conducted from September 2, 2016, through February 21, 2023, at 12 centers in the US and Canada. Infants born at 23 weeks 0 days’ to 28 weeks 6 days’ gestational age (GA) were included. Intervention Infants randomized to the intervention received either positive-pressure ventilation or continuous positive airway pressure from 30 to 120 seconds after birth, followed by umbilical cord clamping. Those randomized to control received 30 to 60 seconds of DCC followed by assisted ventilation. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was the odds of higher-level resuscitative interventions in the delivery room (DR). Intention-to-treat analyses within 2 a priori cohorts (infants breathing well and not breathing well 30 seconds after birth) used the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) of intervention vs control. Results All 570 infants enrolled in the trial were included. Infants had a median (IQR) GA of 26.6 (25.2-27.9) weeks and 273 (47.9%) were female. A total of 271 infants (47.5%) were assessed as not breathing well 30 seconds after birth (150 intervention and 121 control), and 299 (52.5%) were assessed as breathing well 30 seconds after birth (128 intervention and 171 control). In the not-breathing-well cohort, 146 infants (53.9%) were intubated in the DR, 4 received chest compressions (2 intervention and 2 control), and 1 received epinephrine (control). Intubation was less frequent in the intervention group (71 infants [47.3%] vs 75 infants [62.0%]; OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.89). When adjusted by GA strata at randomization, infants in the 26 to 28 weeks’ GA stratum who were in the intervention group were less likely to be intubated in the DR (18 of 79 infants [22.8%] vs 29 of 60 infants [48.3%]; OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.65). However, there was no difference in intubation rates for infants in the 23 to 25 weeks’ GA stratum (53 of 71 infants [74.7%] vs 46 of 61 infants [75.4%]; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.44-2.12). Among infants breathing well at 30 seconds, 74 (24.7%) were intubated in the DR, and none received compressions or epinephrine. Intubation rates were similar between intervention and control in the breathing-well cohort. Conclusions and Relevance While the VentFirst trial did not find a difference in death or intraventricular hemorrhage, this secondary analysis found that assisted ventilation during DCC was associated with less intubation in the DR, primarily among infants born at 26 to 28 weeks’ gestation who were not breathing well 30 seconds after birth. Additional studies are needed before implementing assisted ventilation during DCC in clinical practice. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02742454

Background Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a challenging target for immunotherapy because it has an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can increase tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) density, which may predict overall survival (OS). We hypothesized that adding programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade to chemoradiotherapy would be well tolerated and increase TILs among patients with localized PDAC. Methods Patients were randomized 2:1 to Arm A (receiving pembrolizumab plus chemoradiotherapy (capecitabine and external beam radiation)) or Arm B (receiving chemoradiotherapy alone) before anticipated pancreatectomy. Primary endpoints were (1) incidence and severity of adverse events during neoadjuvant therapy and (2) density of TILs in resected tumor specimens. TIL density was assessed using multiplexed immunofluorescence histologic examination. Results Thirty-seven patients were randomized to Arms A (n=24) and B (n=13). Grade ≥3 adverse events related to neoadjuvant treatment were experienced by 9 (38%) and 4 (31%) patients in Arms A and B, respectively, with one patient experiencing dose-limiting toxicity in Arm A. Seventeen (71%) and 7 (54%) patients in Arms A and B, respectively, underwent pancreatectomy. Median CD8+ T-cell densities in Arms A and B were 67.4 (IQR: 39.2–141.8) and 37.9 (IQR: 22.9–173.4) cells/mm2, respectively. Arms showed no noticeable differences in density of CD8+Ki67+, CD4+, or CD4+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells; M1-like and M2-like macrophages; or granulocytes. Median OS durations were 27.8 (95% CI: 17.1 to NR) and 24.3 (95% CI: 12.6 to NR) months for Arms A and B, respectively. Conclusions Adding pembrolizumab to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was safe. However, no convincing effect on CD8+ TILs was observed.

4128 Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a challenging target for immunotherapy due to suppressive immune-microenvironment. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) can increase the presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). We hypothesized that the combination of CRT and pembrolizumab can lead to further increase in TILs and their activation. Methods: Patients with resectable or borderline resectable PC were randomized 2:1 to the investigational treatment (Arm A) of pembrolizumab 200mg IV every 3 weeks concurrently with CRT (capecitabine 825 mg/m2 orally twice daily and radiation 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions over 28 days) or CRT only (Arm B) prior to surgical resection. The primary endpoints were treatment safety and density of TILs with the objective to estimate differences in TILs density between the investigational and the control arms. Immune cell densities were assessed using multiplexed immunofluorescence on resected tumor specimens. Densities of CD8+TILs were measured in 2-10 representative regions containing residual cancer per case and then averaged to obtain overall densities. The study was amended after enrollment of 37 patients to allow FOLFIRINOX prior to CRT, given changes in standard of care. Results: 37 patients were enrolled (24 Arm A and 13 Arm B). Post-neoadjuvant therapy, 13 patients had unresectable disease (9 on A and 4 on B), and 24 patients underwent surgery and were evaluable for the TILs primary endpoint (17 arm A and 7 arm B). The mean difference (A-B) in CD8+ cell density was 36 cells/mm2 (95% CI -85 to 157, stdev 130) (p 0.48). Additional analysis did not show significant differences in CD8+Ki67+ (activated cytotoxic T-cells), CD4+, and CD4+FOXP3+ (regulatory T cells), M1- or M2-like polarized macrophages, or granulocytes. The median recurrence free survival (RFS) was 18.2 months on Arm A and 14.1 on Arm B (p 0.41) and Overall Survival was 27.8 months on Arm A and 24.3 on Arm B (p 0.68) with a median follow up of 2.2 years. The most common grade 3 treatment-related toxicities were lymphopenia reported in 29% on Arm A and 31% on Arm B followed by diarrhea in 8% on Arm A attributed to CRT. There was only 1 DLT of increased ALT attributed to the combination on Arm A that resolved after holding the treatment and receiving steroids. There were no major surgical complications reported within 30 days post-surgery. Conclusions: The combination of CRT and pembrolizumab is safe. Preliminary analysis shows that the addition of pembrolizumab to CRT has minimal effects on several immune cell populations including CD8+TILs in the PC microenvironment. The study is currently enrolling 25 more patients who receive FOLFIRINOX prior to randomization to CRT+/- Pembrolizumab, which will help to dissect the immune modulatory effect of chemotherapy followed by CRT. Clinical trial information: NCT02305186.

Abstract Purpose: Assessing impact of poor accrual on premature trial closure requires a relevant metric. We propose defining accrual sufficiency on apparent ability to address primary endpoints (PE) rather than attaining accrual targets. Experimental Design: All phase III trials open January 1, 1993, to December 31, 2002, by five U.S. oncology Clinical Trials Cooperative Groups (CTCG) were evaluated for accrual sufficiency and scientific results. Sufficient accrual included meeting accrual target, CTCGs documentation attesting adequate accrual, or conclusive results at interim analysis; insufficient accrual included poor accrual as cited closure reason or other reasons rendering a trial unable to address its primary endpoints. Closure rates based on our accrual sufficiency definition are compared with rates of meeting accrual targets and addressing the primary endpoints. A percentage of target accrual above which trials commonly answer the intended scientific question was identified to serve as an alternative to meeting full target accrual in designating accrual success. Results: Of 238 eligible trials, 158 (66%) closed with sufficient accrual. Among 80 trials with insufficient accrual, 70 (29%) closed specifically because of poor accrual. Inadequate accrual rates are overemphasized when defining accrual success solely by meeting accrual targets. Nearly 75% of trials conclusively addressed the primary endpoints with positive results in 39% of trials. Exceeding 80% of target accrual serves as a reliable proxy for answering the intended scientific question. Conclusions: Approximately one third of phase III trials closed with insufficient accrual to address the primary endpoints, primarily due to poor accrual. Defining accrual sufficiency broader than meeting accrual targets represents a fairer account of trial closures. Clin Cancer Res; 18(1); 256–62. ©2011 AACR.

Background Research on barriers to accrual has typically emphasized factors influencing participation after trial activation. Purpose We sought to identify factors influencing trial design and accrual predictions prior to trial activation associated with sufficient accrual. Methods A 30-question web-based survey was sent to the study chair and lead statistician for all 248 phase III trials open in 1993–2002 by five Clinical Trials Cooperative Groups. Questions addressed prior trial experience, trial design elements, accrual predictions, and perceived accrual influences. Accrual sufficiency categorization was derived from Clinical Trials Cooperative Group records: sufficient accrual included trials closed with complete accrual or at interim analysis, insufficient accrual included trials closed with inadequate accrual. Responses were analyzed by respondent role (study chair/lead statistician) and accrual sufficiency. Results Three hundred and nine eligible responses were included (response rate, 63%; lead statisticians, 81%; and study chairs, 45%), representing trials with sufficient (63%) and insufficient accruals (37%). Study chair seniority or lead statistician experience was not linked to accrual sufficiency. Literature review, study chair's personal experience, and expert opinion within Clinical Trials Cooperative Group most commonly influenced control arm selection. Clinical Trials Cooperative Group experience most influenced accrual predictions. These influences were not associated with accrual sufficiency. Among respondents citing accrual difficulties (41%), factors negatively influencing accrual were not consistently identified. Respondents credited three factors with positively influencing accrual: clinical relevance of study, lack of competing trials, and protocol paralleling normal practice. Limitations Perceptions of lead statisticians and study chairs may not accurately reflect accrual barriers encountered by participating physicians or patients. Survey responses may be subject to recall bias. Conclusion Consistent factors explaining poor accrual were not identified, suggesting reasons for poor accrual are not well understood and warrant further study. Alternate strategies for accrual prediction are needed since Clinical Trials Cooperative Group experience is linked to successful and unsuccessful accrual.

Background A major challenge for randomized phase III oncology trials is the frequent low rates of patient enrollment, resulting in high rates of premature closure due to insufficient accrual. Purpose We conducted a pilot study to determine the extent of trial closure due to poor accrual, feasibility of identifying trial factors associated with sufficient accrual, impact of redesign strategies on trial accrual, and accrual benchmarks designating high failure risk in the clinical trials cooperative group (CTCG) setting. Methods A subset of phase III trials opened by five CTCGs between August 1991 and March 2004 was evaluated. Design elements, experimental agents, redesign strategies, and pretrial accrual assessment supporting accrual predictions were abstracted from CTCG documents. Percent actual/predicted accrual rate averaged per month was calculated. Trials were categorized as having sufficient or insufficient accrual based on reason for trial termination. Analyses included univariate and bivariate summaries to identify potential trial factors associated with accrual sufficiency. Results Among 40 trials from one CTCG, 21 (52.5%) trials closed due to insufficient accrual. In 82 trials from five CTCGs, therapeutic trials accrued sufficiently more often than nontherapeutic trials (59% vs 27%, p = 0.05). Trials including pretrial accrual assessment more often achieved sufficient accrual than those without (67% vs 47%, p = 0.08). Fewer exclusion criteria, shorter consent forms, other CTCG participation, and trial design simplicity were not associated with achieving sufficient accrual. Trials accruing at a rate much lower than predicted (<35% actual/predicted accrual rate) were consistently closed due to insufficient accrual. Limitations This trial subset under-represents certain experimental modalities. Data sources do not allow accounting for all factors potentially related to accrual success. Conclusion Trial closure due to insufficient accrual is common. Certain trial design factors appear associated with attaining sufficient accrual. Defining accrual benchmarks for early trial termination or redesign is feasible, but better accrual prediction methods are critically needed. Future studies should focus on identifying trial factors that allow more accurate accrual predictions and strategies that can salvage open trials experiencing slow accrual. Clinical Trials 2010; 7: 312—321. http://ctj.sagepub.com