Effectiveness of electrocautery, topical cidofovir and topical sinecatechins for the Treatment of Anal High-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions in Persons with HIV: an open-label, randomized controlled trial
Joaquin Burgos, Adrià Curran, Jorge Garcia, David Campany, Vicente Descalzo, Paula Suanzes, Jordi Navarro, Bibiana Planas, Marta Sanchiz, Stefania Landolfi, Carme Dinares, Javier Hernádez-Losa, Vicenç Falcó
{"title":"Effectiveness of electrocautery, topical cidofovir and topical sinecatechins for the Treatment of Anal High-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesions in Persons with HIV: an open-label, randomized controlled trial","authors":"Joaquin Burgos, Adrià Curran, Jorge Garcia, David Campany, Vicente Descalzo, Paula Suanzes, Jordi Navarro, Bibiana Planas, Marta Sanchiz, Stefania Landolfi, Carme Dinares, Javier Hernádez-Losa, Vicenç Falcó","doi":"10.1093/cid/ciaf086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Doubts remain about the best treatment for managing premalignant lesions (HSIL) associated with anal cancer. Methods The TREATAIN trial was an open-label, randomized study conducted at Hospital Vall d’Hebron (Spain). Persons with HIV and anal HSIL were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive treatment with electrocautery, topical cidofovir 1% ointment, or topical sinecatechins 10%. The primary outcome was histological resolution of HSIL. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, participant satisfaction, HPV clearance, and HSIL recurrence. EudraCT: 2018-001730-18. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04055142. Results Between October 2020 and November 2022, 100 participants were enrolled (36 in the electrocautery arm, 28 in cidofovir arm, and 36 in the sinecatechins arm). Modified intention-to-treat analysis showed a response rate of 69·4% [95% CI; 54·4-84·5] of patients in the electrocautery group, 82·1% [95% CI; 67·9-96·3] in the cidofovir group, and 61·1% [95% CI; 45·2-77] in the sinecatechins group (p=0.189). During the 48-weeks follow-up period, recurrence was observed in 7 participants (28%) in the electrocautery group, 7 (30·4%) in the cidofovir group, and 8 (36·4%) in the sinecatechins group (Log-rank test p=0·811). Side effects were reported by 97·2% of patients in the electrocautery group, 85·7% in the cidofovir group, and 33% in the sinecatechins group (p<0·001). Patients were more satisfied with the sinecatechins treatment (5·6 ± 0·4), followed by electrocautery (5·1 ± 0·8), while lower satisfaction was reported with cidofovir treatment (4·77 ± 0·96), p<0.001. Conclusion No statistically significant difference was observed in efficacy between treatments; in contrast, sinecatechins was the most accepted and well-tolerated treatment.","PeriodicalId":10463,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaf086","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background Doubts remain about the best treatment for managing premalignant lesions (HSIL) associated with anal cancer. Methods The TREATAIN trial was an open-label, randomized study conducted at Hospital Vall d’Hebron (Spain). Persons with HIV and anal HSIL were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive treatment with electrocautery, topical cidofovir 1% ointment, or topical sinecatechins 10%. The primary outcome was histological resolution of HSIL. Secondary outcomes included adverse events, participant satisfaction, HPV clearance, and HSIL recurrence. EudraCT: 2018-001730-18. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04055142. Results Between October 2020 and November 2022, 100 participants were enrolled (36 in the electrocautery arm, 28 in cidofovir arm, and 36 in the sinecatechins arm). Modified intention-to-treat analysis showed a response rate of 69·4% [95% CI; 54·4-84·5] of patients in the electrocautery group, 82·1% [95% CI; 67·9-96·3] in the cidofovir group, and 61·1% [95% CI; 45·2-77] in the sinecatechins group (p=0.189). During the 48-weeks follow-up period, recurrence was observed in 7 participants (28%) in the electrocautery group, 7 (30·4%) in the cidofovir group, and 8 (36·4%) in the sinecatechins group (Log-rank test p=0·811). Side effects were reported by 97·2% of patients in the electrocautery group, 85·7% in the cidofovir group, and 33% in the sinecatechins group (p<0·001). Patients were more satisfied with the sinecatechins treatment (5·6 ± 0·4), followed by electrocautery (5·1 ± 0·8), while lower satisfaction was reported with cidofovir treatment (4·77 ± 0·96), p<0.001. Conclusion No statistically significant difference was observed in efficacy between treatments; in contrast, sinecatechins was the most accepted and well-tolerated treatment.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Infectious Diseases (CID) is dedicated to publishing original research, reviews, guidelines, and perspectives with the potential to reshape clinical practice, providing clinicians with valuable insights for patient care. CID comprehensively addresses the clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of a wide spectrum of infectious diseases. The journal places a high priority on the assessment of current and innovative treatments, microbiology, immunology, and policies, ensuring relevance to patient care in its commitment to advancing the field of infectious diseases.