IMPORTANCE Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) is an antimitotic treatment modality that interferes with glioblastoma cell division and organelle assembly by delivering low-intensity alternating electric fields to the tumor.OBJECTIVE To investigate whether TTFields improves progression-free and overall survival of patients with glioblastoma, a fatal disease that commonly recurs at the initial tumor site or in the central nervous system. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESProgression-free survival (tested at α = .046). The secondary end point was overall survival (tested hierarchically at α = .048). Analyses were performed for the intent-to-treat population. Adverse events were compared by group. RESULTSOf the 695 randomized patients (median age, 56 years; IQR, 48-63; 473 men [68%]), 637 (92%) completed the trial. Median progression-free survival from randomization was 6.7 months in the TTFields-temozolomide group and 4.0 months in the temozolomide-alone group (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52-0.76; P < .001). Median overall survival was 20.9 months in the TTFields-temozolomide group vs 16.0 months in the temozolomide-alone group (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53-0.76; P < .001). Systemic adverse event frequency was 48% in the TTFields-temozolomide group and 44% in the temozolomide-alone group. Mild to moderate skin toxicity underneath the transducer arrays occurred in 52% of patients who received TTFields-temozolomide vs no patients who received temozolomide alone. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn the final analysis of this randomized clinical trial of patients with glioblastoma who had received standard radiochemotherapy, the addition of TTFields to maintenance temozolomide chemotherapy vs maintenance temozolomide alone, resulted in statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival and overall survival. These results are consistent with the previous interim analysis.TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00916409

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00916409.

This is the first controlled trial evaluating an entirely novel cancer treatment modality delivering electric fields rather than chemotherapy. No improvement in overall survival was demonstrated, however efficacy and activity with this chemotherapy-free treatment device appears comparable to chemotherapy regimens that are commonly used for recurrent glioblastoma. Toxicity and quality of life clearly favoured TTF.

IMPORTANCE Data on BNT162b2 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) effectiveness and safety in pregnancy are currently lacking because pregnant women were excluded from the phase 3 trial.OBJECTIVE To assess the association between receipt of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among pregnant women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis was a retrospective cohort study within the pregnancy registry of a large state-mandated health care organization in Israel. Pregnant women vaccinated with a first dose from December 19, 2020, through February 28, 2021, were 1:1 matched to unvaccinated women by age, gestational age, residential area, population subgroup, parity, and influenza immunization status. Follow-up ended on April 11, 2021.EXPOSURES Exposure was defined by receipt of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. To maintain comparability, nonexposed women who were subsequently vaccinated were censored 10 days after their exposure, along with their matched pair. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was polymerase chain reaction-validated SARS-CoV-2 infection at 28 days or more after the first vaccine dose. RESULTSThe cohort included 7530 vaccinated and 7530 matched unvaccinated women, 46% and 33% in the second and third trimester, respectively, with a mean age of 31.1 years (SD, 4.9 years). The median follow-up for the primary outcome was 37 days (interquartile range, 21-54 days; range, 0-70). There were 118 SARS-CoV-2 infections in the vaccinated group and 202 in the unvaccinated group. Among infected women, 88 of 105 (83.8%) were symptomatic in the vaccinated group vs 149 of 179 (83.2%) in the unvaccinated group (P Ն .99). During 28 to 70 days of follow-up, there were 10 infections in the vaccinated group and 46 in the unvaccinated group. The hazards of infection were 0.33% vs 1.64% in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, respectively, representing an absolute difference of 1.31% (95% CI, 0.89%-1.74%), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.22 (95% CI, 0.11-0.43). Vaccine-related adverse events were reported by 68 patients; none was severe. The most commonly reported symptoms were headache (n = 10, 0.1%), general weakness (n = 8, 0.1%), nonspecified pain (n = 6, <0.1%), and stomachache (n = 5, <0.1%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this retrospective cohort study of pregnant women, BNT162b2 mRNA vaccination compared with no vaccination was associated with a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interpretation of study findings is limited by the observational design.

We used a nonredundant set of 621 protein-protein interfaces of known high-resolution structure to derive residue composition and residue-residue contact preferences. The residue composition at the interfaces, in entire proteins and in whole genomes correlates well, indicating the statistical strength of the data set. Differences between amino acid distributions were observed for interfaces with buried surface area of less than 1,000 A(2) versus interfaces with area of more than 5,000 A(2). Hydrophobic residues were abundant in large interfaces while polar residues were more abundant in small interfaces. The largest residue-residue preferences at the interface were recorded for interactions between pairs of large hydrophobic residues, such as Trp and Leu, and the smallest preferences for pairs of small residues, such as Gly and Ala. On average, contacts between pairs of hydrophobic and polar residues were unfavorable, and the charged residues tended to pair subject to charge complementarity, in agreement with previous reports. A bootstrap procedure, lacking from previous studies, was used for error estimation. It showed that the statistical errors in the set of pairing preferences are generally small; the average standard error is approximately 0.2, i.e., about 8% of the average value of the pairwise index (2.9). However, for a few pairs (e.g., Ser-Ser and Glu-Asp) the standard error is larger in magnitude than the pairing index, which makes it impossible to tell whether contact formation is favorable or unfavorable. The results are interpreted using physicochemical factors and their implications for the energetics of complex formation and for protein docking are discussed. Proteins 2001;43:89-102.