Koein, Germany

Prospective, Multicenter Cohort Study on Primary Biliary Cholangitis

Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic autoimmune cholestatic liver disease. The course of the disease is characterized by a slow destruction of bile ducts, and progressive cholestasis. Prognosis depends on the development of cirrhosis and its complications. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has been established as standard therapy for PBC and improves patients' long-term outcome. However, UDCA is not a uniformly effective drug, and the prognosis of PBC patients insufficiently responding to treatment is markedly worse. For patients with suboptimal treatment response to UDCA obeticholic acid (OCA) as newly approved medication (OCALIVA®) is available as second line treatment. Due to the low prevalence and the slowly progressive course of the disease it is very difficult to investigate the prognosis of subgroups of PBC patients or to evaluate the effectivness of therapeutic interventions on clinical outcomes. Therefore, several national or international registries (UK-PBC Consortium or the Global PBC Study Group) were founded to better characterize the clinical course of PBC patients. Since in Germany a registry for PBC does not exist, the German PBC Cohort is being implemented as observational study to collect data on treatment progress and success in clinical routine that reflects real world conditions in Germany as closely as possible. The effectiveness and safety/tolerability of PBC treatment options (UDCA as standard therapy and second-line treatment options like OCALIVA in case of inadequate UDCA treatment response) will be evaluated. In approximatly 40 sites in Germany routine data is collected. There are no specifications for the diagnosis, therapy and monitoring of the PBC patients. The documentation of the routine data is carried out alongside with guideline recommended treatment intervals of the patients. Furthermore, a critical criterion for the German PBC Cohort study is the involvement of a sufficient number of gastroenterology specialized practices and outpatient clinics that have consciously not been selected based on the strict specifications of a clinical trial and which provide routine treatment for PBC patients. In addition, patient access is designed to be open. Data will be collected on patient groups that represent a majority of the PBC patients in Germany, but who are not being investigated in clinical trials.

MAintenance Therapy With Aromatase Inhibitor in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (MATAO)

Femara (letrozole) is an extensively investigated, marketed aromatase inhibitor (AI) widely used as treatment in the maintenance phase of estrogen-receptor (ER) positive breast cancer, as it inhibit the synthesis of estrogens. Estrogen is a well known driver of cancer growth in ER-positive tumors and a high percentage of the epithelial ovarian cancers express ER as well. Of which low grade ovarian cancers demonstrates the highest level of expression, supporting our strategy of a sub-group analysis (LOGOS). Therefore, letrozole in this study be investigated prospectively and evaluated as maintenance therapy after standard surgical and chemotherapy treatment in comparison to placebo (which is the current standard maintenance treatment) in subjects with primary, ER-positive low or high grade serous or endometrioid epithelial ovarian cancer (including fallopian tube and primary peritoneal cancer) of FIGO Stage II-IV, whose cancer has not progressed by the end of the platinum-based chemotherapy. The objectives are to evaluate the letrozole maintenance treatment compared to placebo in terms of - progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint) - overall survival (OS) - quality-adjusted progression free survival (QAPFS) - time to first subsequent treatment (TFST) - quality-adjusted time without symptoms of toxicity (Q-TWiST) - health related quality of life (QoL) assessed by EQ-5D-5L, FACT-ES and FACT-O questionnaires Methods: 540 for this study eligible subjects are 1:1 allocated in this randomized, controlled, double-blinded, multi-centre study to either the test (letrozole) or control (placebo) group. The maximum maintenance treatment duration is 5 years or until symptoms of toxicity or progression of underlying disease. Health and health-related quality of life will continuously be assessed at study entry and during routine recalls which are scheduled every 12 weeks for the first 2 years, followed by every 24 weeks for the next 3 years. Procedures performed to assess the participants' health are the same as are performed during the regular routine ovarian cancer follow-up visits: blood tests, physical as well as gynaecological examinations and may include imaging. In addition, the participants are asked to complete during the study quality of life (QoL) specific questionnaires and wear an activity tracker for one week just before the scheduled visits. These assessments will be used for the evaluation of letrozole's efficacy and burden in comparison to the standard maintenance treatment. Survival follow-up data after the mainentance treatment duration of 5 years (study end) are obtained for up to another 7 years.

RNA Disruption Assay (RDA)-Breast Cancer Response Evaluation for Individualized Therapy

Study Rationale: There is some evidence that identifying non-responders early in neoadjuvant treatment and offering alternative agents (response-guided therapy) increased pathological complete response (pCR) rates and/or survival resulting in improved care and incremental cost effectiveness. Differentiating non-responders to chemotherapy from responders with reliable guidance tools early during therapy is crucial to the success of response-guided therapy. The current study aims to provide validation results of RDA as a tumour response assessment tool that uses tumour core biopsies starting from 35 +/- 4 days after the initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Study Objectives and Endpoints: The primary objective of the study is to determine the 2 RDI cut-offs to have a diagnostic test optimized in terms of both negative and positive predictive values NPV and PPV (in a training set of patients i.e. phase 1 of the study) for predicting nopCR/pCR and to establish the performance characteristics for the first cut-off (test result "zone 1") in terms of NPV as primary endpoint (in a validation set i.e. phase 2). The secondary objective is to assess the test's NPV in the different cancer subtypes and the test's PPV in Her2+ patients; also to assess and compare pCR prevalence, residual cancer burden (RCB class at surgery) and DFS (secondary endpoints) in zones 1-3 for all patients and each cancer subtype. Patient Population: The study aims to enrol approximately 801 patients in centres in the US, Canada, Italy, Germany, Spain and France and Poland. The population consists of patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer and scheduled to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy as part of standard of care treatment. Throughout the study, patients will receive standard of care neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatments including taxanes, anthracyclines or other targeted drugs and drug combinations as prescribed based on the investigators' / clinicians' choice. Adjuvant therapies (e.g. radiotherapy, hormonal treatment ... etc.) may be prescribed to patients according to standard of care and independently of the RDI score results. RDA is presently in an experimental stage and clinicians will not receive or use the RDA results in this study. Biopsy Collection: - 1st core needle biopsy for RDA (2 specimens): Time Point: 35 +/- days after initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy; - 2nd core needle biopsy for RDA (2 specimens): Time Point: if therapy is changed (as part of SoC), a second biopsy ~2-3 weeks after initiation of new drugs; Timing by type of drug schedule 3-weekly: at 16 days +/- 2 days, Bi-weekly: at day of 2nd dose preferably before drug admin., Weekly: at day of 4th dose preferably before drug admin. If Therapy is not changed (as part of SoC), a second biopsy is taken at 55 +/- 5 days after the first initiation of neoadjuvant therapy. Statistical Plan: The study consists of a training set / phase 1 (80 fully evaluable patients) to determine response zone cut-offs using pCR outcomes and RDA's predictive values, and a validation set / phase 2 (454 fully evaluable patients) to validate the performance characteristics of the RDA test. The study aims to enrol 801 patients in order to achieve an accrual of 534 fully evaluable patients (phase 1 and 2) which is the number required to adequately statistically power the trial. Combined statistical analysis and various subgroup analyses will be performed for the primary and secondary objectives. Duration and Follow-up: There will be an active patient accrual until last patient is accrued (to achieve the required patient numbers) in addition to 60 months of patient follow-up.

German Cardiac Arrest Registry

VAC-Stent Registry

For this registry, quality assurance data will be prospectively collected from all patients who receive the VAC-Stent®. The VAC-Stent® combines a vacuum sponge, which lies intraluminal and conditions the wound, with a covered stent, which seals the sponge from the lumen and thus ensures passage. Due to its design, the new medical device VAC-Stent® offers a solution for the most important problems of the covered stent, the stent migration and the lack of drainage function, as well as for those of the endoluminal vacuum sponge, the blockage of the gastrointestinal lumen and the difficult application. The VAC-Stent® is the technical advancement for all indications of the covered stent and for the indication of the endoluminal vacuum sponge, so that a very good effectiveness with reduced complications can be expected for these clinical situations. The VAC-Stent® therefore offers the prospect of an innovative further development in the endoscopic treatment of leaks in the gastrointestinal tract, without any new and unknown risks being associated with it. The primary aim of this registry is to collect data on the quality assurance and application of the VAC-Stent® and thus to evaluate the suitability of the VAC-Stent® for sealing leaks in the oesophagus or colon. In addition, the safety and efficacy of the VAC-Stent® will be demonstrated.

Niraparib vs Niraparib Plus Bevacizumab in Patients With Platinum/Taxane-based Chemotherapy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer

Eligible patients will be those patients with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed, advanced (FIGO stage III/IV, except FIGO stage IIIA2 without nodal involvement) invasive high grade epithelial ovarian cancer, peritoneal cancer, or fallopian tube cancer, who have either undergone upfront primary surgery or plan to undergo chemotherapy with interval debulking surgery (IDS). In addition, patients should not have any medical contraindications that would exclude treatment with bevacizumab and/or niraparib. All eligible patients will receive the first cycle of chemotherapy (carboplatin area under curve [AUC] 5 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m²) as part of Study Run-In-Period (cycle 1). In parallel, central laboratory will determine the breast cancer (BRCA) status in tumor tissue (tBRCA). All patients with a valid central tBRCA test result will be randomized prior to day 1 of cycle 2 in a 1:1 ratio in the following treatment arms: Arm 1: Patients will receive further 5 cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel q21d followed by niraparib once daily for up to a total of 3 years Arm 2: Patients will receive further 5 cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel plus bevacizumab q21d followed by bevacizumab q21d (for up to 1 year) and niraparib once daily for up to a total of 3 years. The study aims to investigate, if the treatment strategy of carboplatin / paclitaxel / bevacizumab / niraparib is superior to the treatment of carboplatin / paclitaxel / niraparib-Inhibitor in an all-comer population.

The ABC-HCC Trial: Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab vs. Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) in Intermediate-stage HepatoCellular Carcinoma

The main purpose of this phase IIIb study is to test the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab compared to TACE in patients with intermediate stage liver cancer. Primary efficacy objective is to assess the efficacy of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab compared to TACE in patients with intermediate stage liver cancer. The secondary efficacy objective is to further characterize the responses obtained with the respective therapeutic strategy and to assess the impact of each therapeutic strategy on liver function over time. Furthermore the objective is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of each therapeutic strategy and their respective impact on Quality of Life and to identify prognostic and predictive angiogenic and immune related biomarkers (tissue and circulating) for study endpoints. This is a Phase IIIb, randomised, multicenter, open-label study. Approximately 434 patients suffering from intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma will be enrolled in this trial. Patients will be recruited from up to 60 sites in 10 different countries.

A Study of Nipocalimab Administered to Adults With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis

Non-interventional Study to Collect Real-world Clinical and Patient-reported Outcomes in Ovarian Cancer

ABLATE Versus PACE: PVI or AV Node Ablation and PM Implantation for Elderly Patients with Persistent AF

Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is a major public and represents a major public health problem with increasing healthcare costs and increased mortality risk. In case of recurrent symptomatic atrial fibrillation current guidelines recommend pulmonary-vein isolation (PVI) as invasive treatment option. However, 5-year arrhythmia-free survival estimate is 29% after single catheter ablation. Although the long-term success rates in maintaining sinus rhythm are higher than with drug-based rhythm control, they are still moderate, especially in older patients with comorbidities. Therefore, repeated interventions are often necessary. An effective method for frequency control is atrioventricular (AV) node ablation after implantation of a pacemaker ("ablate-and-pace"). In this case, the ventricular rate is only set by the pacemaker and can be programmed according to the patient's needs. There are some theoretical disadvantages of this treatment option (pacemaker dependency, reduction of cardiac outpout due to lack of atrial contraction) which is why this method nowadays is almost exclusively used in older (and physically less active) patients. The ABLATE versus PACE trial is a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing at 196 these two treatment options in terms of rehospitalizations due to cardiovascular causes and quality of life in elderly patients (≥ 75 years) with normal ejection fraction (≥ 50%).