SEARCH · Search PubMed

Search Search PubMed

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

64 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Predictors of Efficacy Maintenance After Vunakizumab Discontinuation in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy cannot be maintained in some psoriasis patients after biological discontinuation. This study aimed to explore predictors of efficacy maintenance after vunakizumab discontinuation in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: This post hoc analysis used data from a phase III trial (NCT04839016); 291 patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who achieved 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score at Week 52 were enrolled. Efficacy maintenance was defined as patients who maintained PASI 90 or PASI 100 after 20 weeks of vunakizumab discontinuation. RESULTS: There were 44.7% and 72.5% of patients with PASI 100 and PASI 90 maintenance, respectively. In the multivariate logistic regression model, body mass index (BMI) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.922, p = 0.024) and treatment interruption (OR = 0.550, p = 0.020) were independently associated with a lower possibility of PASI 100 maintenance; however, the association of family history of psoriasis and the first time of PASI 100 achievement with PASI 100 maintenance did not achieve statistical significance. Duration of psoriasis (OR = 0.972, p = 0.049) and treatment interruption (OR = 0.257, p < 0.001) were independently associated with a lower possibility of PASI 90 maintenance. Two nomograms for predicting PASI 90 and PASI 100 maintenance were constructed based on the multivariate models, which disclosed good calibration performance. CONCLUSIONS: PASI 90 and PASI 100 maintenance rates are 72.5% and 44.7% after 20 weeks of vunakizumab discontinuation in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. BMI, treatment interruption, and duration of psoriasis predict a lower possibility of efficacy maintenance after vunakizumab discontinuation.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Durvalumab and tremelimumab, with or without lenvatinib, combined with transarterial chemoembolisation in participants with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (EMERALD-3): a global, randomised, open-label, sponsor-blinded, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE), a standard treatment for embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), induces tumour immune responses. Single tremelimumab regular interval durvalumab (STRIDE) is a standard treatment in advanced HCC. In this phase 3 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of STRIDE, with or without lenvatinib, plus TACE, in participants with embolisation-eligible HCC. METHODS: EMERALD-3 is a phase 3, randomised, open-label, sponsor-blinded study, conducted at 177 medical sites in 21 countries. Eligible participants were 18 years or older (aged ≥21 years in Egypt or Singapore) at screening and had confirmed HCC (by imaging or histopathologically from biopsy specimen, surgery, or both) not amenable to curative surgery, curative ablation, or transplantation but amenable to TACE. Participants had Child-Pugh class A liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and at least one measurable target intrahepatic lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, STRIDE plus TACE, or TACE until each group reached its preplanned enrolment target of 175 participants. After the STRIDE plus TACE group reached its enrolment target, randomisation was adjusted to continue in a 1:1 ratio between the STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE group and TACE group until approximately 275 participants were enrolled in each of these two groups. Randomisation used a centrally assigned interactive response technology system, stratified by region, baseline tumour burden, and previous palliative embolisation. In the STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE group, on the first day, participants were given 300 mg tremelimumab intravenously, followed by 1500 mg durvalumab plus oral lenvatinib (8 mg for <60 kg bodyweight or 12 mg for ≥60 kg bodyweight); participants then received 1500 mg durvalumab every 4 weeks plus once-daily lenvatinib for up to 36 cycles. In the STRIDE plus TACE group, participants were given 300 mg tremelimumab and 1500 mg durvalumab intravenously on the first day, followed by 1500 mg durvalumab every 4 weeks. The technique and number of TACE procedures were at the investigators' discretion, with the first procedure administered at least 7 days after the first dose of durvalumab in the two investigation treatment groups and within 7 days of random allocation in the TACE group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus TACE. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus TACE and progression-free survival and overall survival for STRIDE plus TACE versus TACE. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05301842), with enrolment completed. FINDINGS: From March 28, 2022, to Nov 20, 2024, 1124 participants were screened. The full analysis set comprised 760 participants, who were randomly allocated to STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE (n=293), STRIDE plus TACE (n=175), or TACE (n=292). 633 (83%) participants were male and 127 (17%) were female; 548 (72%) were Asian. At the first data cutoff (Sept 2, 2025); the overall median follow-up for progression-free survival was 10·0 months (IQR 4·6-17·2); median follow-up for progression-free survival was 11·0 months (IQR 4·8-18·4) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 8·3 months (4·1-15·5) for TACE. Median progression-free survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 12·2-16·7) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus 9·8 months (8·0-11·4) for TACE (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·57-0·86]; p=0·0007). At the second data cutoff (Feb 23, 2026) and a median follow-up for overall survival of 24·6 months (IQR 16·5-31·5) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 22·9 months (14·9-30·2) for TACE, median overall survival was 39·5 months (95% CI 34·1-not reached) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 34·7 months (28·8-not reached) for TACE (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·65-1·09]; p=0·18). At this data cutoff, median progression-free survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 10·2-15·9) for STRIDE plus TACE and 8·1 months (6·5-10·2) for the first 175 participants randomised to TACE (HR 0·71 [95% CI 0·56-0·91]), with median follow-up of 10·3 months (IQR 4·6-23·7) for STRIDE plus TACE and 7·7 months (3·0-18·5) for the first 175 participants randomly allocated to TACE. The most common adverse events of maximum grade 3 or 4 were hypertension (34 [12%] of 287) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, post-embolisation syndrome and anaemia (ten [6%] of 175 each) for STRIDE plus TACE, and post-embolisation (17 [6%] of 290) for TACE. 184 (64%) participants receiving STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, 89 (51%) receiving STRIDE plus TACE, and 68 (23%) receiving TACE had serious adverse events. Treatment-related adverse events with an outcome of death during the treatment-emergent period occurred in seven (2%) of 287 participants who received STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE (two for myocarditis; and one each for hepatic failure, haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, septic shock, cardiac failure, and unknown cause), none of 175 participants who received STRIDE plus TACE, and two (1%) of 290 participants who received TACE (one each for acute myocardial infarction and unknown cause). INTERPRETATION: STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE showed a statistically significant progression-free survival improvement versus TACE. These findings support a STRIDE-based regimen as a potential new treatment option for people with embolisation-eligible HCC; additional follow-up is being conducted for final analysis of overall survival across treatment groups. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (HARMONi): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ivonescimab has shown clinical efficacy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC whose disease progressed after third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. METHODS: HARMONi is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial done at 114 cancer centres and hospitals across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years (upper limit: 75 years in Asia) with stage IIIB/IIIC or IV non-squamous EGFR-mutated NSCLC, disease progression after treatment with a third-generation EGFR-TKI, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a centralised interactive voice response system or interactive web response system to receive ivonescimab (20 mg/kg) or placebo plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (target area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by brain metastases status at enrolment and geographical region. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent radiology review committee and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of trial treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06396065), has completed enrolment, and is ongoing for treatment and follow-up. FINDINGS: From Jan 25, 2022, to Oct 1, 2024, 660 individuals were screened for eligibility; of these, 438 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ivonescimab plus chemotherapy or placebo plus chemotherapy (219 per group). Of enrolled patients, 257 (59%) were female and 181 (41%) were male; 306 (70%) reported race as Asian, and 105 (24%) as White. At a median follow-up of 22·3 months (95% CI 21·5-23·0), 275 progression or death events had occurred in 345 patients (129 events among 172 patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 146 events among 173 patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 4·4 months (4·1-5·5) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·52; 95% CI 0·41-0·66; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 29·7 months (95% CI 27·7-31·0), 262 deaths occurred in 438 patients (122 in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 140 in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median overall survival was 16·8 months (14·3-19·0) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·0 months (12·8-15·7) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (HR 0·79; 0·62-1·01). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus the placebo plus chemotherapy group were decreased neutrophil count (42 [19%] of 218 vs 36 [17%] of 218), decreased white blood cell count (28 [13%] vs 24 [11%]), decreased platelet count (27 [12%] vs 14 [6%]), and anaemia (22 [10%] vs 27 [12%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 61 (28%) patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 33 (15%) patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events led to death in four patients (disease progression, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and hepatic failure, each in one patient; gastrointestinal haemorrhage and pulmonary embolism in one patient) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and five patients (pneumonitis, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, cognitive disorder, and embolic stroke, each in one patient) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy showed a clinically meaningful and statistically significant progression-free survival benefit in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI therapy. The clinical benefit and lack of new safety signals of ivonescimab with chemotherapy support the potential for the combination as a new treatment option in this patient population. FUNDING: Summit Therapeutics.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Adjuvant alectinib versus chemotherapy in resected ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ALINA): health-related quality-of-life and safety outcomes from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with resected, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adjuvant alectinib significantly improved disease-free survival versus platinum-based chemotherapy in the global, phase 3, open-label, randomised ALINA trial. We report safety and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) outcomes from the ALINA trial. METHODS: Eligible patients aged 18 years or older with resected, ALK-positive, stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA NSCLC (per the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union for International Cancer Control Cancer Staging Manual 7th edition) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) via a block-stratified randomisation method to receive oral alectinib (600 mg twice daily) for 24 months or intravenous platinum-based chemotherapy for four 3-week cycles. Randomisation was stratified according to disease stage and race. The primary endpoint, previously reported, was disease-free survival. Safety was a secondary endpoint and HRQoL was an exploratory endpoint. Safety was assessed by the investigator as per the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5·0 until 28 days after the last alectinib dose or chemotherapy cycle. HRQoL was assessed via the Short-Form 36-item health survey version 2 (SF-36v2) questionnaire at baseline, every 3 weeks to week 12, then every 12 weeks until disease recurrence, consent withdrawal, death, or week 96. Norm-based scoring was applied; clinically meaningful changes were defined using the SF-36v2 manual. Safety was assessed in the safety-evaluable population and HRQoL in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03456076) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 16, 2018, and Dec 8, 2021, 257 patients were assigned to receive alectinib (n=130) or chemotherapy (n=127). 123 (48%) patients were male and 134 (52%) were female; 143 (56%) were Asian. The safety-evaluable population comprised 128 patients who received alectinib and 120 patients who received chemotherapy; median duration of safety follow-up was 24·8 months (IQR 22·0-24·9) in the alectinib group and 3·7 months (IQR 3·7-3·8) in the chemotherapy group. The safety of adjuvant alectinib was generally consistent with its known profile. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (eight [6%] of 128), alanine aminotransferase increased (two [2%] of 128), and blood bilirubin increased (two [2%] of 128) in the alectinib group, and neutrophil count decreased (12 [10%] of 120), neutropenia (ten [8%] of 120), and nausea (five [4%] of 120) in the chemotherapy group. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in two (2%; one each with appendicitis and pneumonitis) of 128 patients in the alectinib group and eight (7%) of 120 patients in the chemotherapy group ( most common were gastrointestinal disorders in three [3%] patients). No deaths due to adverse events were reported in either group. There were fewer discontinuations due to adverse events with alectinib (seven [5%]) versus chemotherapy (15 [13%]). A clinically meaningful difference in improvement from baseline was seen at week 12 for bodily pain, role physical, mental health, social functioning, and vitality SF-36v2 domains with alectinib; improvements in physical and mental HRQoL were maintained over 2 years of active treatment (at week 96, mean Mental Component Summary score: 49·9 [SD 10·4]; mean Physical Component Summary score: 48·8 [SD 7·2]) and reached levels similar to the general population (population norm: 50). INTERPRETATION: For patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC, adjuvant alectinib had a manageable safety profile; HRQoL improved and was maintained over 2 years of active treatment. Together with the disease-free survival benefit seen in ALINA, these data support adjuvant alectinib as an important new standard-of-care for patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

High-dose radiotherapy in patients with high-risk prostate cancers treated with long-term androgen deprivation therapy (GETUG AFU 18): a randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with high-risk prostate cancer, the role of dose-escalated radiotherapy in combination with long-term androgen deprivation treatment (ADT) is controversial, without any demonstrated benefit on cancer-specific or overall survival. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a 10 Gy dose increase, from 70 Gy to 80 Gy, on progression-free survival in men with high-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with high-risk prostate cancer, defined as prostate-specific antigen of 20 ng/mL or more, Gleason score of at least 8, or clinical stage T3-T4, from 25 centres in France. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by minimisation, stratified by centre and previous pelvic lymph node dissection, to receive prostate-targeted dose-escalated external beam radiotherapy (80 Gy; 2 Gy per fraction for 8 weeks) or standard-dose external beam radiotherapy (70 Gy; 2 Gy per fraction for 7 weeks), combined with long-term ADT. Neither the participants nor the investigators were masked to the allocated treatment. The primary endpoint was 5-year progression-free survival defined as the time from randomisation to first biochemical (defined as prostate-specific antigen >nadir plus 2 ng/mL) or clinical (ie, local, regional, or metastatic) disease progression, analysed in the intention-to-treat population, with 197 events required. 5-year progression-free survival was the prespecified endpoint, and 10-year progression-free survival was additionally reported (post hoc) in view of the low number of events at 5 years. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00967863, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between April 6, 2009, and Jan 24, 2013, 505 patients with high-risk prostate cancer were enrolled; 250 were assigned to receive dose-escalated radiotherapy (80 Gy) and 255 to receive standard dose radiotherapy (70 Gy). All participants were male and ethnicity data were not collected. At a median follow-up of 9·5 years (IQR 8·5-10·3), 5-year progression-free survival was 91·4% (95% CI 87·0-94·4) in the dose-escalation group versus 88·1% (83·2-91·6) in the control group, and 10-year progression-free survival was 83·6% (77·8-88·0) versus 72·2% (65·3-78·0; stratified HR 0·56, 95% CI 0·40-0·78, p<0·0001). Grade 3 or worse adverse events assessed at 6 months (acute toxicity) were observed in 60 (24%) of patients in the dose-escalation group and 62 (25%) in the control group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were sexual disorders (28 [11%] in the dose-escalation group vs 20 [8%] in the control group) and bladder or urethra disorders (12 [5%] vs 19 [8%]). Adverse events assessed at 5 years (late toxicity) occurred in 118 (70%) of 168 in the dose-escalation group and 122 (73%) of 168 in the control group; grade 3 or worse late toxicities occurred in 19 (8%) participants in the dose-escalated radiotherapy group versus 17 (7%) participants in the control group. The most common late grade 3 adverse event was bladder or urethra disorders (seven [4%] vs three [2%], respectively). Serious adverse events occurred in nine (4%) patients in the dose escalation group and nine (4%) in the control group; none were considered to be treatment related. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: For patients with high-risk prostate cancer, radiotherapy at a total dose of 80 Gy, in combination with long-term ADT, improved progression-free survival and could be a potential option in this situation. However, given the low number of events, further research is needed to consolidate and confirm the benefit in dose-escalation in prostate cancer-specific survival and overall survival. FUNDING: French National Cancer Institute and AstraZeneca.

Aged↗

PubMed2026

Manual, digital, and AI tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte scoring: a secondary analysis of the APHINITY randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Stromal tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are prognostic in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer, but their role in the context of dual HER2 blockade remains undefined. We evaluated manual, digital, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based sTIL quantification, together with AI-derived spatial metrics, for prognostic and treatment-benefit stratification using tumour samples from the phase 3 APHINITY trial. METHODS: In the APHINITY trial, 4805 patients were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with pertuzumab or chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with placebo. Median follow-up was 74·1 months (IQR 68·3-75·4). We analysed 4262 haematoxylin and eosin-stained images using manual assessment, an automated digital approach, AI-based lymphocyte quantification (AI percentage lymphocytes), and two AI-derived spatial features (AI-TIL and immune hotspot). Interobserver reproducibility was assessed in 262 randomly chosen tumour samples scored independently by five pathologists. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess associations between TIL levels and invasive disease-free survival (primary outcome in APHINITY), distant recurrence-free interval, and overall survival. The heterogeneity of pertuzumab benefit was evaluated using subgroup analyses, subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot analyses, and nested Cox models with treatment-by-biomarker interaction terms. FINDINGS: Manual scoring showed high interobserver reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient 0·84 [95% CI 0·79-0·88]). Concordance between manual and automated methods was modest. AI-based scoring (AI percentage lymphocytes) reclassified 120 (11·6%) of 1035 node-positive tumours from immune-low (by manual scoring) to immune-high; this subgroup of patients showed greater separation of 5-year invasive disease-free survival curves between pertuzumab and placebo groups compared with patients whose tumours were concordantly classified as immune-low by both manual and AI-based approaches. Higher levels of TILs were associated with improved invasive disease-free survival for all sTIL measurement approaches and spatial measurements (hazard ratios [HRs] 0·41-0·93). Pertuzumab was associated with improved invasive disease-free survival at higher sTIL levels across all measurement approaches (HRs 0·36-0·48), but was not associated with higher values of spatial measures. The largest 6-year absolute improvements with pertuzumab were observed in patients with node-positive disease whose tumours scored in the highest level of immune infiltration of manual sTIL scoring (≥70·0%; mean absolute improvement 12·1 percentage points [SD 2·8]). In nested prognostic and predictive models, AI-based immune hotspot scores provided the most consistent additional information when combined with any sTIL measurement (all p<0·010). INTERPRETATION: Standardised manual sTIL scoring was reproducible, and digital and AI-based methods showed consistent prognostic stratification and potential for treatment-benefit stratification despite only modest correlation between platforms. AI spatial metrics provided complementary information beyond sTIL density and could support more scalable immune assessment. Future studies are needed to validate these approaches in independent cohorts and to clarify their clinical utility for stratifying contemporary HER2-directed therapies. FUNDING: None.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Venetoclax added to dose-adjusted EPOCH-R for newly diagnosed double-hit lymphomas: phase 2 results from ALLIANCE A051701, an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial.

BACKGROUND: High-grade B-cell lymphoma with rearrangements of MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6, known as double-hit lymphoma, is a highly aggressive malignancy with poor outcomes after standard chemoimmunotherapy. We aimed to study whether the addition of the BCL2-inhibitor venetoclax to chemoimmunotherapy in patients with double-hit lymphoma resulted in superior efficacy compared with chemotherapy alone. METHODS: ALLIANCE A051701 is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial in separate cohorts of patients with double-hit lymphoma and patients with double-expressor lymphoma. In this analysis, we report phase 2 results from the double-hit lymphoma cohort. Patients aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed double-hit lymphoma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2 were recruited from 41 hospitals and outpatient clinics in the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive DA-EPOCH-R (dose-adjusted etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab) either alone (DA-EPOCH-R group) or with venetoclax (DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group) using permuted block randomisation schedule. All patients and investigators were aware of group assignment. DA-EPOCH-R was administered on a 21-day schedule for up to six total cycles. Venetoclax was given as 600 mg by mouth daily on days 4-8 of cycle 1 and on days 1-5 of cycles 2-6. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the modified intent-to-treat population inclusive of all eligible patients with centrally confirmed double-hit lymphoma. The safety analysis population consisted of all evaluable patients who received at least one dose of protocol treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03984448) and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: 36 patients were randomly assigned to the DA-EPOCH-R group and 37 to the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group between Oct 22, 2019, and Sept 18, 2020. Median age was 65 years (IQR 56-73) and baseline demographic factors were well balanced between groups, with 30 (45%) female and 36 (55%) male patients. Most patients (59 [89%]) were white, two (3%) were Asian, one (2%) was Black or African American, and four (6%) had unknown or unreported ethnicity. The majority of patients had MYC-BCL2 double-hit lymphoma (59 [89%] patients), advanced stage disease (57 [86%] patients), and high-intermediate/high-risk IPI score (42 [64%] patients). Median follow-up was 34·7 months (IQR 30·1-36·8). Median progression-free survival was 28·4 months (95% CI 5·2-not estimable) in the DA-EPOCH-R group (n=30) and 7·7 months (95% CI 4·7-NE) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (n=36; hazard ratio [HR] 1·13, 95% CI 0·53-2·37; p=0·75). Deaths on treatment occurred in one (3%) patient in the DA-EPOCH-R group (due to dyspnoea; possibly related to treatment) and six (17%) patients in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (four due to sepsis [three at least possible related and one unrelated], two due to cardiac arrest [at least possibly related]), prompting early closure of the double-hit lymphoma cohort. The most common grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse event was febrile neutropenia, occurring in 15 (43%) of 35 patients in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group and 11 (37%) of 30 patients in the DA-EPOCH-R group. The median overall survival has not been reached in either group. The 24-month overall survival estimates were 72% (95% CI 52-85) in the DA-EPOCH-R group compared with 52% (95% CI 33-68) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (HR 2·49, 95% CI 1·03-6·04; p=0·038). INTERPRETATION: The addition of venetoclax to DA-EPOCH-R resulted in excess mortality, prompting early study closure. Robust accrual shows that prospective multicentre trials are feasible in double-hit lymphoma, and the outcomes in the DA-EPOCH-R group serve as a benchmark for future studies. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

No Efficacy of Dexamethasone Injections for Acute Sciatica: A Double-Blind Randomized Study Versus Saline.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of caudal injections for patients with acute sciatica remains controversial. The DEXHIA study was designed to evaluate whether ultrasound-guided caudal injection of dexamethasone provides superior clinical outcomes compared with saline placebo. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial included adult patients with sciatica secondary to lumbar disc herniation of less than 3 months' duration. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 16 mg of dexamethasone (4 mL) diluted with 16 mL of saline (DEXA group) or 20 mL of saline alone (PLACEBO group), administered by ultrasound-guided caudal epidural injection. The primary outcome was the change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 3 weeks. Secondary outcomes included leg pain and low back pain assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS), health-related quality of life (SF-36), need for repeat epidural injection, and need for lumbar surgery. Clinical assessments were performed at 3 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were randomized, with 53 participants assigned to each treatment group. The primary endpoint was not met, as the improvement in ODI at 3 weeks did not differ significantly between groups (mean change: -9.5 ± 4.4 in the DEXA group versus -13.8 ± 4.4 in the PLACEBO group; p = 0.18). No significant differences were observed for any relevant secondary outcome at any follow-up time point. During the 6-month follow-up, 34 patients in the DEXA group and 30 patients in the PLACEBO group underwent a second, non-blinded injection of dexamethasone (ns). Lumbar surgery was performed in 10 patients in the DEXA group and nine patients in the PLACEBO group (ns). Injection-related adverse events were mild and transient but occurred more frequently in the DEXA group. CONCLUSIONS: Caudal injection of soluble dexamethasone conferred no clinical benefit over saline placebo in patients with acute sciatica. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Epidural injections are widely used worldwide for the treatment of resistant sciatica and have been extensively studied in multiple meta-analyses. However, their clinical value remains debated due to the limited methodological quality of most available studies. We conducted a methodologically rigorous randomized, placebo-controlled trial, which yielded negative results. These findings question the efficacy of caudal epidural injection of a non-particulate corticosteroid administered via a remote (sacrococcygeal) approach for disc-related sciatica. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered under European Clinical Trials No. 2021-001571-17 and ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05000658.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of a Single-Pill Triple Combination of Valsartan, Amlodipine, and Chlorthalidone in Patients With Essential Hypertension Inadequately Controlled on Dual Therapy With Valsartan and Amlodipine: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Phase 3 Trial.

Many hypertensive patients require three or more antihypertensive agents to achieve target blood pressure. This randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase 3 trial conducted in South Korea evaluated the efficacy and safety of a single-pill triple combination therapy with valsartan (Val), amlodipine (Aml), and chlorthalidone (CTD) in patients whose blood pressure remained inadequately controlled on Val/Aml dual therapy. Patients uncontrolled after 4 weeks of Val/Aml 80/5 mg were randomized 1:1 to either Val/Aml/CTD 80/5/12.5 mg or Val/Aml 80/5 mg using a double-dummy design. After 2 weeks, doses were escalated to Val/Aml/CTD 160/5/25 mg or Val/Aml 160/5 mg, respectively, for a total treatment duration of 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) from baseline to week 8. Of 193 randomized patients, 178 completed the study. The least squares mean ± SE change in MSSBP was -19.70 ± 1.31 mmHg in the Val/Aml/CTD group versus -8.71 ± 1.26 mmHg in the control group, yielding a statistically significant between-group difference of -10.99 ± 1.81 mmHg (95% CI, -14.56 to -7.41; p < 0.0001). No serious adverse events occurred in the Val/Aml/CTD group, compared with an incidence of 1.98% in the control group (p = 0.4985). Triple combination therapy with Val/Aml/CTD demonstrated superior blood pressure reduction and a favorable safety profile in patients with essential hypertension inadequately controlled on Val/Aml dual therapy, supporting its use as an effective treatment option in this population. Trial Registration: This trial was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT06416865).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Nipocalimab Phase 3 Dose Selection for Severe Hemolytic Disease of the Fetus and Newborn.

Nipocalimab, a neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) blocker, is under evaluation for severe hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN). In the Phase 2 UNITY trial, weekly intravenous antenatal treatment with nipocalimab at dose regimens of 30 and 45 mg/kg prevented fetal anemia requiring intrauterine transfusion (IUT) in 54% of high-risk pregnancies and delayed the need for IUTs versus their previous pregnancies in the remaining 46% of pregnancies. This analysis aimed to select a weekly dose regimen of nipocalimab for the Phase 3 study in severe HDFN (NCT05912517) that maintains FcRn blockade throughout antenatal treatment, including with an unplanned dosing delay of up to 3 days. Observed pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) data from UNITY (i.e., nipocalimab concentrations, FcRn occupancy, and serum IgG) were analyzed using a model-based approach. A PK/PD model originally developed in nonpregnant participants was updated to incorporate gestational weight gain. Nipocalimab PK and FcRn occupancy were described by a two-compartment model with nonlinear, dose-dependent PK, which captured longitudinal PK, FcRn occupancy, and IgG profiles during dosing and return toward baseline postpartum after discontinuation. Both 30 and 45 mg/kg achieved ∼80%-85% reductions in maternal IgG; however, 30 mg/kg showed greater variability in predose trough concentrations, increasing the risk of falling below concentrations required for full FcRn occupancy across antenatal treatment. Simulations incorporating PK/PD variability indicated that 45 mg/kg weekly per current weight maintained full FcRn occupancy in >95% of pregnant individuals, even with dosing delays up to 3 days. Exploratory exposure-response analyses supported 45 mg/kg for the Phase 3 HDFN study.

Humans↗