Small clinical trials are necessary when there are difficulties in recruiting enough patients for conventional frequentist statistical analyses to provide an appropriate answer. These trials are often necessary for the study of rare diseases as well as specific study populations e.g. children. It has been estimated that there are between 6,000 and 8,000 rare diseases that cover a broad range of diseases and patients. In the European Union these diseases affect up to 30 million people, with about 50% of those affected being children. Therapies for treating these rare diseases need their efficacy and safety evaluated but due to the small number of potential trial participants, a standard randomised controlled trial is often not feasible. There are a number of alternative trial designs to the usual parallel group design, each of which offers specific advantages, but they also have specific limitations. Thus the choice of the most appropriate design is not simple. PubMed was searched to identify publications about the characteristics of different trial designs that can be used in randomised, comparative small clinical trials. In addition, the contents tables from 11 journals were hand-searched. An algorithm was developed using decision nodes based on the characteristics of the identified trial designs. We identified 75 publications that reported the characteristics of 12 randomised, comparative trial designs that can be used in for the evaluation of therapies in orphan diseases. The main characteristics and the advantages and limitations of these designs were summarised and used to develop an algorithm that may be used to help select an appropriate design for a given clinical situation. We used examples from publications of given disease-treatment-outcome situations, in which the investigators had used a particular trial design, to illustrate the use of the algorithm for the identification of possible alternative designs. The algorithm that we propose could be a useful tool for the choice of an appropriate trial design in the development of orphan drugs for a given disease-treatment-outcome situation.

Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are a critical determinant of resistance to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. This phase 1 study (MEDIPLEX, NCT02777710) investigated the safety and efficacy of pexidartinib, a CSF-1R–directed tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), and durvalumab (anti–PD-L1) in patients with advanced colorectal and pancreatic carcinoma with the aim to enhance responses to PD-L1 blockade by eliminating CSF-1–dependent suppressive TAM. Forty-seven patients were enrolled. No unexpected toxicities were observed, one (2%) high microsatellite instability CRC patient had a partial response, and seven (15%) patients experienced stable disease as their best response. Increase of CSF-1 concentrations and decrease of CD14 ^low CD16 ^high monocytes in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) confirmed CSF-1R engagement. Treatment decreased blood dendritic cell (DC) subsets and impaired IFN-λ/IL-29 production by type 1 conventional DCs in ex vivo TLR3-stimulated PBMCs. Pexidartinib also targets c-KIT and FLT3, both key growth factor receptors of DC development and maturation. In patients, FLT3-L concentrations increased with pexidartinib treatment, and AKT phosphorylation induced by FLT3-L ex vivo stimulation was abrogated by pexidartinib in human blood DC subsets. In addition, pexidartinib impaired the FLT3-L– but not GM-CSF–dependent generation of DC subsets from murine bone marrow (BM) progenitors in vitro and decreased DC frequency in BM and tumor-draining lymph node in vivo. Our results demonstrate that pexidartinib, through the inhibition of FLT3 signaling, has a deleterious effect on DC differentiation, which may explain the limited antitumor clinical activity observed in this study. This work suggests that inhibition of FLT3 should be considered when combining TKIs with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

The Transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) signaling has a paradoxical role in cancer development and outcome. Besides, the prognostic significance of the TGFβ1, SMAD4 in breast cancer patients is an area of many contradictions. The transcriptional intermediary factor 1γ (TIF1γ) is thought to interact with the TGFβ/SMAD signaling through different mechanisms. Our study aims to define the prognostic significance of TGFβ1, SMAD4 and TIF1γ expression in breast cancer patients and to detect possible interactions among those markers that might affect the outcome. Immunohistochemistry was performed on tissue microarray (TMA) blocks prepared from samples of 248 operable breast cancer patients who presented at Centre Léon Bérard (CLB) between 1998 and 2001. The intensity and the percentage of stained tumor cells were integrated into a single score (0–6) and a cutoff was defined for high or low expression for each marker. Correlation was done between TGFβ1, SMAD4 and TIF1γ expression with the clinico-pathologic parameters using Pearson’s chi-square test. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate distant metastasis free survival (DMFS), disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) and the difference between the groups was evaluated with log-rank test. 223 cases were assessable for TIF1γ, 204 for TGFβ1 and 173 for SMAD4. Median age at diagnosis was 55.8 years (range: 27 to 89 years). Tumors were larger than 20 mm in 49.2 % and 45.2 % had axillary lymph node (LN) metastasis (N1a to N3). 19.4 % of the patients had SBR grade I tumors, 46.8 % grade II tumors and 33.9 % grade III tumors. ER was positive in 85.4 %, PR in 75.5 % and Her2-neu was over-expressed in 10 % of the cases. Nuclear TIF1γ, cytoplasmic TGFβ1, nuclear and cytoplasmic SMAD4 stainings were high in 35.9 %, 30.4 %, 27.7 % and 52.6 % respectively. TIF1γ expression was associated with younger age (p = 0.006), higher SBR grade (p < 0.001), more ER negativity (p = 0.035), and tumors larger than 2 cm (p = 0.081), while TGFβ1 was not associated with any of the traditional prognostic factors. TGFβ1 expression in tumor cells was a marker of poor prognosis regarding DMFS (HR = 2.28; 95 % CI: 1.4 to 3.8; p = 0.002), DFS (HR = 2.00; 95 % CI: 1.25 to 3.5; p = 0.005) and OS (HR = 1.89; 95 % CI: 1.04 to 3.43; p = 0.037). TIF1γ expression carried a tendency towards poorer DMFS (p = 0.091), DFS (p = 0.143) and OS (p = 0.091). In the multivariate analysis TGFβ1 remained an independent predictor of shorter DMFS, DFS and OS. Moreover, the prognostic significance of TGFβ1 was more obvious in the TIF1γ high patient subgroup than in the patients with TIF1γ low expression. The subgroup expressing both markers had the worst DMFS (HR = 3.2; 95 % CI: 1.7 to 5.9; p < 0.0001), DFS (HR = 3.02; 95 % CI: 1.6 to 5.6; p < 0.0001) and OS (HR = 2.7; 95 % CI: 1.4 to 5.4; p = 0.005). There is a crosstalk between the TIF1γ and the TGFβ1/SMAD4 signaling that deteriorates the outcome of operable breast cancer patients and when combined together they can serve as an effective prognostic tool for those patients.

The BJC is owned by Cancer Research UK, a charity dedicated to understanding the causes, prevention and treatment of cancer and to making sure that the best new treatments reach patients in the clinic as quickly as possible. The journal reflects these aims. It was founded more than fifty years ago and, from the start, its far-sighted mission was to encourage communication of the very best cancer research from laboratories and clinics in all countries. The breadth of its coverage, its editorial independence and it consistent high standards, have made BJC one of the world's premier general cancer journals. Its increasing popularity is reflected by a steadily rising impact factor.