Dataset Information

Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis).

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Vincristine is an integral component of treatment for children with cancer. Its main dose-limiting side effect is vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The VINCA trial was a randomized controlled trial that explored the effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection of vincristine on the development of VIPN in children with cancer. The short-term outcomes (median follow-up 9 months) showed that there was no difference in VIPN between the randomization groups. However, 1-hour infusion was less toxic in children who also received azoles. We now report the results of the final analyses (median follow-up 20 months), which includes treatment outcome as a secondary objective (follow-up 3 years).

Methods

VIPN was measured 1-7 times per participant using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and the pediatric-modified total neuropathy score. Poisson mixed model and logistic generalized estimating equation analysis for repeated measures were performed.

Results

Forty-five participants per randomization group were included. There was no significant effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection on VIPN. In participants receiving concurrent azoles, the total CTCAE score was significantly lower in the one-hour group (rate ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.80, p = 0.003). Four patients in the one-hour group and one patient in the push group relapsed. Two patients in the one-hour group died.

Conclusion

1-hour infusion of vincristine is not protective against VIPN. However, in patients receiving concurrent azoles, 1-hour infusion may be less toxic. The difference in treatment outcome is most likely the result of differences in risk profile.

SUBMITTER: Uittenboogaard A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10587928 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis).

Uittenboogaard Aniek A van den Berg Marleen H MH Abbink Floor C H FCH Twisk Jos W R JWR van der Sluis Inge M IM van den Bos Cor C van den Heuvel-Eibrink Marry M MM Segers Heidi H Chantrain Christophe C van der Werff Ten Bosch Jutte J Willems Leen L Kaspers Gertjan J L GJL van de Velde Mirjam Esther ME

Cancer medicine 20230921 19

<h4>Introduction</h4>Vincristine is an integral component of treatment for children with cancer. Its main dose-limiting side effect is vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The VINCA trial was a randomized controlled trial that explored the effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection of vincristine on the development of VIPN in children with cancer. The short-term outcomes (median follow-up 9 months) showed that there was no difference in VIPN between the randomization gro ...[more]

PMID: 37732486

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy, safety, and cost utility of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) with multiple daily injection (MDI) regimens during the first year following diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in children and young people.DesignPragmatic, multicentre, open label, parallel group, randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation.Setting15 paediatric National Health Service (NHS) diabetes services in England and Wales. The study opened to recruitment in May 2011 and closed in January 2017.ParticipantsPatients aged between 7 months and 15 years, with a new diagnosis of type 1 diabetes were eligible to participate. Patients who had a sibling with the disease, and those who took drug treatments or had additional diagnoses that could have affected glycaemic control were ineligible.InterventionsParticipants were randomised, stratified by age and treating centre, to start treatment with CSII or MDI within 14 days of diagnosis. Starting doses of aspart (CSII and MDI) and glargine or detemir (MDI) were calculated according to weight and age, and titrated according to blood glucose measurements and according to local clinical practice.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was glycaemic control (as measured by glycated haemoglobin; HbA1c) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were percentage of patients in each treatment arm with HbA1c within the national target range, incidence of severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis, change in height and body mass index (as measured by standard deviation scores), insulin requirements (units/kg/day), partial remission rate (insulin dose adjusted HbA1c <9), paediatric quality of life inventory score, and cost utility based on the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained from an NHS costing perspective.Results294 participants were randomised and 293 included in intention to treat analyses (CSI, n=144; MDI, n=149). At 12 months, mean HbA1c was comparable with clinically unimportant differences between CSII and MDI participants (60.9 mmol/mol v 58.5 mmol/mol, mean difference 2.4 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval -0.4 to 5.3), P=0.09). Achievement of HbA1c lower than 58 mmol/mol was low among the two groups (66/143 (46%) CSII participants v 78/142 (55%) MDI participants; relative risk 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.06)). Incidence of severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis were low in both groups. Fifty four non-serious and 14 serious adverse events were reported during CSII treatment, and 17 non-serious and eight serious adverse events during MDI treatment. Parents (but not children) reported superior PedsQL scores for those patients treated with CSII compared to those treated with MDI. CSII was more expensive than MDI by £1863 (€2179; $2474; 95% confidence interval £1620 to £2137) per patient, with no additional QALY gains (difference -0.006 (95% confidence interval -0.031 to 0.018)).ConclusionDuring the first year following type 1 diabetes diagnosis, no clinical benefit of CSII over MDI was identified in children and young people in the UK setting, and treatment with either regimen was suboptimal in achieving HbA1c thresholds. CSII was not cost effective.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN29255275; European Clinical Trials Database 2010-023792-25.

Project description:BackgroundUrgent antiretroviral therapy (ART) among hospitalised HIV-infected children might accelerate recovery or worsen outcomes associated with immune reconstitution. We aimed to compare urgent versus post-stabilisation ART among hospitalised HIV-infected children in Kenya.MethodsIn this unmasked randomised controlled trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) HIV-infected, ART-naive children aged 0-12 years who were eligible for treatment to receive ART within 48 h (urgent group) or in 7-14 days (post-stabilisation group) at four hospitals in Kenya (two in Nairobi and two in western Kenya). We excluded children with suspected or confirmed CNS infection. A statistician not involved in study procedures did block randomisation with variable block sizes generated using STATA version 12. We followed children for 6 months for primary outcomes: mortality, drug toxicity, and immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS). We did all analyses in a modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02063880.FindingsWe began enrolment on April 24, 2013, and completed follow-up on Nov 17, 2015. We enrolled 191 (76%) of 250 hospitalised HIV-infected children. Of these, 183 children were randomly assigned: 90 to urgent ART and 93 to post-stabilisation ART. 181 (99%) of 183 children were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. Median age was 1·9 years (IQR 0·8-4·8). Baseline sociodemographic, clinical, and virological characteristics did not differ between groups except median CD4 cell percentage, which was lower in the urgent group (13% [IQR 9-18] vs 17% [IQR 9-24]; p=0·052). Of 181 admission diagnoses, 118 (65%) were pneumonia, 58 (32%) malnutrition, and 27 (15%) suspected tuberculosis. Median time to ART was 1 day (IQR 1-1) in the urgent group and 8 days (IQR 7-11) in the post-stabilisation group. Overall, mortality risk at 6 months was 61 per 100 person-years. Mortality risk did not differ by group (70 per 100 person-years in the urgent group vs 54 per 100 person-years in the post-stabilisation group; hazard ratio [HR] 1·26, 95% CI 0·67-2·37) p=0.47, even after adjusting for baseline CD4 cell percentage (adjusted HR 1·30, 95% CI 0·69-2·45; p=0·41). The incidence of IRIS, and drug toxicity was not significantly different between trial arms. There were no differences between treatment groups in the proportion of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (34 [38%] of 90 children in the urgent group vs 40 [44%] of 91 children in the post-stabilisation group; p=0·40) or the proportion of any change in ART regimen (five [7%] vs six [8%]; p=0·79). We discontinued randomisation at interim review when the futility boundary was crossed.InterpretationEarly mortality risk was extremely high among hospitalised HIV-infected children. Urgent ART did not improve survival.FundingNational Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, USA.

Dataset Information

Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis).

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets