Active Monitoring With or Without Endocrine Therapy for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: The COMET Randomized Clinical Trial.

E Shelley Hwang, Terry Hyslop, Thomas Lynch, Marc D Ryser, Anna Weiss, Anna Wolf, Kelsey Norris, Meredith Witten, Lars Grimm, Stuart Schnitt, Sunil Badve, Rachel Factor, Elizabeth Frank, Deborah Collyar, Desiree Basila, Donna Pinto, Mark A Watson, Robert West, Louise Davies, Jenny L Donovan, Ayako Shimada, Yutong Li, Yan Li, Antonia V Bennett, Shoshana Rosenberg, Jeffrey Marks, Eric Winer, Marc Boisvert, Armando Giuliano, Kelsey E Larson, Kathleen Yost, Priscilla F McAuliffe, Amy Krie, Nina Tamirisa, Lisa A Carey, Alastair M Thompson, Ann H Partridge
{"title":"Active Monitoring With or Without Endocrine Therapy for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: The COMET Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"E Shelley Hwang, Terry Hyslop, Thomas Lynch, Marc D Ryser, Anna Weiss, Anna Wolf, Kelsey Norris, Meredith Witten, Lars Grimm, Stuart Schnitt, Sunil Badve, Rachel Factor, Elizabeth Frank, Deborah Collyar, Desiree Basila, Donna Pinto, Mark A Watson, Robert West, Louise Davies, Jenny L Donovan, Ayako Shimada, Yutong Li, Yan Li, Antonia V Bennett, Shoshana Rosenberg, Jeffrey Marks, Eric Winer, Marc Boisvert, Armando Giuliano, Kelsey E Larson, Kathleen Yost, Priscilla F McAuliffe, Amy Krie, Nina Tamirisa, Lisa A Carey, Alastair M Thompson, Ann H Partridge","doi":"10.1001/jama.2024.26698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Active monitoring for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast has been proposed as an alternative to guideline-concordant care, but the safety of this approach is unknown.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare rates of invasive cancer in patients with low-risk DCIS receiving active monitoring vs guideline-concordant care.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Prospective, randomized noninferiority trial enrolling 995 women aged 40 years or older with a new diagnosis of hormone receptor-positive grade 1 or grade 2 DCIS without invasive cancer at 100 US Alliance Cancer Cooperative Group clinical trial sites from 2017 to 2023.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Participants were randomized to receive active monitoring (follow-up every 6 months with breast imaging and physical examination; n = 484) or guideline-concordant care (surgery with or without radiation therapy; n = 473).</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>The primary outcome was 2-year cumulative risk of ipsilateral invasive cancer diagnosis, according to planned intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, with a noninferiority bound of 5%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median age of the 957 participants analyzed was 63.6 (95% CI, 55.5-70.5) years in the guideline-concordant care group and 63.7 (95% CI, 60.0-71.6) years in the active monitoring group. Overall, 15.7% of participants were Black and 75.0% were White. In this prespecified primary analysis, median follow-up was 36.9 months; 346 patients had surgery for DCIS, 264 in the guideline-concordant care group and 82 in the active monitoring group. Forty-six women were diagnosed with invasive cancer, 19 in the active monitoring group and 27 in the guideline-concordant care group. The 2-year Kaplan-Meier cumulative rate of ipsilateral invasive cancer was 4.2% in the active monitoring group vs 5.9% in the guideline-concordant care group, a difference of -1.7% (upper limit of the 95% CI, 0.95%), indicating that active monitoring is not inferior to guideline-concordant care. Invasive tumor characteristics did not differ significantly between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Women with low-risk DCIS randomized to active monitoring did not have a higher rate of invasive cancer in the same breast at 2 years compared with those randomized to guideline-concordant care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02926911.</p>","PeriodicalId":17196,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":"972-980"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.26698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Active monitoring for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast has been proposed as an alternative to guideline-concordant care, but the safety of this approach is unknown.

Objective: To compare rates of invasive cancer in patients with low-risk DCIS receiving active monitoring vs guideline-concordant care.

Design, setting, and participants: Prospective, randomized noninferiority trial enrolling 995 women aged 40 years or older with a new diagnosis of hormone receptor-positive grade 1 or grade 2 DCIS without invasive cancer at 100 US Alliance Cancer Cooperative Group clinical trial sites from 2017 to 2023.

Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive active monitoring (follow-up every 6 months with breast imaging and physical examination; n = 484) or guideline-concordant care (surgery with or without radiation therapy; n = 473).

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was 2-year cumulative risk of ipsilateral invasive cancer diagnosis, according to planned intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, with a noninferiority bound of 5%.

Results: The median age of the 957 participants analyzed was 63.6 (95% CI, 55.5-70.5) years in the guideline-concordant care group and 63.7 (95% CI, 60.0-71.6) years in the active monitoring group. Overall, 15.7% of participants were Black and 75.0% were White. In this prespecified primary analysis, median follow-up was 36.9 months; 346 patients had surgery for DCIS, 264 in the guideline-concordant care group and 82 in the active monitoring group. Forty-six women were diagnosed with invasive cancer, 19 in the active monitoring group and 27 in the guideline-concordant care group. The 2-year Kaplan-Meier cumulative rate of ipsilateral invasive cancer was 4.2% in the active monitoring group vs 5.9% in the guideline-concordant care group, a difference of -1.7% (upper limit of the 95% CI, 0.95%), indicating that active monitoring is not inferior to guideline-concordant care. Invasive tumor characteristics did not differ significantly between groups.

Conclusions and relevance: Women with low-risk DCIS randomized to active monitoring did not have a higher rate of invasive cancer in the same breast at 2 years compared with those randomized to guideline-concordant care.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02926911.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
采用或不采用内分泌治疗对低风险导管原位癌进行主动监测:COMET随机临床试验。
重要性:主动监测低风险乳腺导管原位癌(DCIS)已被提议作为指南一致性护理的替代方案,但该方法的安全性尚不清楚。目的:比较低危DCIS患者接受主动监测与指南一致护理的浸润性癌发生率。设计、环境和参与者:前瞻性、随机、非劣效性试验,纳入995名年龄在40岁或以上、新诊断为激素受体阳性的1级或2级DCIS、无浸润性癌症的女性,研究地点为100个美国癌症联盟合作组临床试验地点,时间为2017年至2023年。干预措施:参与者随机接受积极监测(每6个月随访一次乳房成像和体格检查;N = 484)或符合指南的护理(手术加或不加放疗;n = 473)。主要结局和指标:根据计划意向治疗和方案分析,主要结局是2年同侧浸润性癌症诊断的累积风险,非劣效性界限为0.05%。结果:957名参与者的中位年龄在指南-一致护理组为63.6 (95% CI, 55.5-70.5)岁,在积极监测组为63.7 (95% CI, 60.0-71.6)岁。总体而言,15.7%的参与者是黑人,75.0%是白人。在这个预先指定的初步分析中,中位随访时间为36.9个月;346例患者接受了DCIS手术治疗,264例在指南-一致护理组,82例在积极监测组。46名妇女被诊断为浸润性癌症,其中19名在积极监测组,27名在指导一致护理组。主动监测组的2年同侧浸润性癌Kaplan-Meier累积率为4.2%,而指南一致护理组为5.9%,差异为-1.7% (95% CI上限,0.95%),表明主动监测并不逊于指南一致护理。两组间浸润性肿瘤特征无显著差异。结论和相关性:随机接受主动监测的低危DCIS患者2年时,同侧乳腺浸润性癌的发生率并不高于随机接受指南一致性治疗的患者。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT02926911。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
45.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA, published continuously since 1883, is an international peer-reviewed general medical journal. JAMA is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications.
期刊最新文献
Active Monitoring With or Without Endocrine Therapy for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: The COMET Randomized Clinical Trial. Is It Time to Abandon Surgery for Low-Risk DCIS? Removing Ineffective Drugs From the Market: Implications for Oral Phenylephrine and Beyond. UV Stabilizer BTMPS in the Illicit Fentanyl Supply in 9 US Locations. "The Birds Have a New Home": Creative Work as Therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1