Explore the vast range of titles available.

Thoracic radiation intensification is debated in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of a boost radiotherapy dose up to 74 Gy in a functional sub-volume given according to on-treatment [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET results. In this multicentre, randomised, controlled non-comparative phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with inoperable stage III NSCLC without EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, and who were affiliated with or a beneficiary of a social benefit system, with evaluable tumour or node lesions, preserved lung function, and who were amenable to curative-intent radiochemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated using a central interactive web-response system in a non-masked method (1:1; minimisation method used [random factor of 0·8]; stratified by radiotherapy technique [intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy] and by centre at which patients were treated) either to the experimental adaptive radiotherapy group A, in which only patients with positive residual metabolism on [18F]FDG-PET at 42 Gy received a boost radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy in 33 fractions), with all other patients receiving standard radiotherapy dosing (66 Gy in 33 fractions over 6·5 weeks), or to the standard radiotherapy group B (66 Gy in 33 fractions) over 6·5 weeks. All patients received two cycles of induction platinum-based chemotherapy cycles (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]=6 once every 3 weeks, or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 60 mg/m2 orally [or 30 mg/m2 intravenously] on day 8 once every 3 weeks). Then they concomitantly received radiochemotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy (three cycles for 8 weeks, with once per week paclitaxel 40 mg/m2 intravenously and carboplatin AUC=2 or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously and vinorelbine 20 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 40 mg/m2 orally (or 20 mg/m2 intravenously) on day 8 in 21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was the 15-month local control rate in the eligible patients who received at least one dose of concomitant radiochemotherapy. This RTEP7–IFCT-1402 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02473133), and is ongoing. From Nov 12, 2015, to July 7, 2021, we randomly assigned 158 patients (47 [30%] women and 111 [70%] men) to either the boosted radiotherapy group A (81 [51%]) or to the standard radiotherapy group B (77 [49%)]. In group A, 80 (99%) patients received induction chemotherapy and 68 (84%) received radiochemotherapy, of whom 48 (71%) with residual uptake on [18F]FDG-PET after 42 Gy received a radiotherapy boost. In group B, all 77 patients received induction chemotherapy and 73 (95%) received radiochemotherapy. At the final analysis, the median follow-up for eligible patients who received radiochemotherapy (n=140) was 45·1 months (95% CI 39·3–48·3). The 15-month local control rate was 77·6% (95% CI 67·6–87·6%) in group A and 71·2% (95% CI 60·8–81·6%) in group B. Acute (within 90 days from radiochemotherapy initiation) grade 3–4 adverse events were observed in 20 (29%) of 68 patients in group A and 33 (45%) of 73 patients in group B, including serious adverse events in five (7%) patients in group A and ten (14%) patients in group B. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (seven [10%] of 68 in group A vs 16 [22%] of 73 in group B), and anaemia (five [7%] vs nine [12%]). In the acute phase, two deaths (3%) occurred in group B (one due to a septic shock related to chemotherapy, and the other due to haemotypsia not related to study treatment), and no deaths occurred in group A. After 90 days, one additional treatment-unrelated death occurred in group A and two deaths events occurred in group B (one radiation pneumonitis and one pneumonia unrelated to treatment). A thoracic radiotherapy boost, based on interim [18F]FDG-PET, led to a meaningful local control rate with no difference in adverse events between the two groups in organs at risk, in contrast with previous attempts at thoracic radiation intensification, warranting a randomised phase 3 evaluation of such [18F]FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy dose adaptation in patients with stage III NSCLC. Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National 2014.

We aimed to evaluate the additional information of 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) arterial uptake with respect to other conventional cardiovascular risk factors and arterial calcifications in patients with stable cancer. We compared the rate of cardiovascular events in 2 groups of patients with (n = 45) and without (n = 56) enhanced arterial 18FDG uptake, matched for the main clinical parameters. The extent and intensity of 18FDG uptake were quantified. A calcification index was also determined. About one third of the selected patients had a history of cardiovascular events and thus could be defined as “vulnerable patients.” Old cardiovascular events (>6 months before or after positron emission tomography [PET]) and recent cardiovascular events (<6 months before or after PET) were significantly more frequent in the high–FDG uptake group than in the low–FDG uptake group (48% vs 15%, respectively [ P = .0006], and 30% vs 1.8%, respectively [ P = .0002]). The extent of 18FDG arterial uptake was the unique factor significantly related to the occurrence of a recent event by either logistic regression or discriminant analysis ( P = .004 for all). Conversely, calcium index was the single factor related to old events ( P = .004 and P = .002, respectively). Extensive arterial 18FDG uptake might be an indicator of an evolving atherosclerotic process and should be mentioned in PET/computed tomography reports.

Sorafenib is the recommended treatment for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sorafenib to that of selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) with yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. SARAH was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, investigator-initiated, phase 3 trial done at 25 centres specialising in liver diseases in France. Patients were eligible if they were aged at least 18 years with a life expectancy greater than 3 months, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, Child-Pugh liver function class A or B score of 7 or lower, and locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC] stage C), or new hepatocellular carcinoma not eligible for surgical resection, liver transplantation, or thermal ablation after a previously cured hepatocellular carcinoma (cured by surgery or thermoablative therapy), or hepatocellular carcinoma with two unsuccessful rounds of transarterial chemoembolisation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a permutated block method with block sizes two and four to receive continuous oral sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or SIRT with 90Y-loaded resin microspheres 2–5 weeks after randomisation. Patients were stratified according to randomising centre, ECOG performance status, previous transarterial chemoembolisation, and presence of macroscopic vascular invasion. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of sorafenib or underwent at least one of the SIRT work-up exams. This study has been completed and the final results are reported here. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01482442. Between Dec 5, 2011, and March 12, 2015, 467 patients were randomly assigned; after eight patients withdrew consent, 237 were assigned to SIRT and 222 to sorafenib. In the SIRT group, 53 (22%) of 237 patients did not receive SIRT; 26 (49%) of these 53 patients were treated with sorafenib. Median follow-up was 27·9 months (IQR 21·9–33·6) in the SIRT group and 28·1 months (20·0–35·3) in the sorafenib group. Median overall survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·7–9·9) in the SIRT group versus 9·9 months (8·7–11·4) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% CI 0·94–1·41] for SIRT vs sorafenib; p=0·18). In the safety population, at least one serious adverse event was reported in 174 (77%) of 226 patients in the SIRT group and in 176 (82%) of 216 in the sorafenib group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (20 [9%] vs 41 [19%]), liver dysfunction (25 [11%] vs 27 [13%]), increased laboratory liver values (20 [9%] vs 16 [7%]), haematological abnormalities (23 [10%] vs 30 [14%]), diarrhoea (three [1%] vs 30 [14%]), abdominal pain (six [3%] vs 14 [6%]), increased creatinine (four [2%] vs 12 [6%]), and hand-foot skin reaction (one [<1%] vs 12 [6%]). 19 deaths in the SIRT group and 12 in the sorafenib group were deemed to be treatment related. In patients with locally advanced or intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma after unsuccessful transarterial chemoembolisation, overall survival did not significantly differ between the two groups. Quality of life and tolerance might help when choosing between the two treatments. Sirtex Medical Inc.

Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available. (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on (18)F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an (18)F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00964275. Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI -0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the (18)F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. A strategy including limited screening and a (18)F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included (18)F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not (18)F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).

Thoracic radiation intensification is debated in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of a boost radiotherapy dose up to 74 Gy in a functional sub-volume given according to on-treatment [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET results.BACKGROUNDThoracic radiation intensification is debated in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of a boost radiotherapy dose up to 74 Gy in a functional sub-volume given according to on-treatment [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG)-PET results.In this multicentre, randomised, controlled non-comparative phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with inoperable stage III NSCLC without EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who were affiliated with or a beneficiary of a social benefit system, with evaluable tumour or node lesions, preserved lung function, and who were amenable to curative-intent radiochemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated using a central interactive web-response system in a non-masked method (1:1; minimisation method used [random factor of 0·8]; stratified by radiotherapy technique [intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy] and by centre at which patients were treated) either to the experimental adaptive radiotherapy group A, in which only patients with positive residual metabolism on [18F]FDG-PET at 42 Gy received a boost radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy in 33 fractions), with all other patients receiving standard radiotherapy dosing (66 Gy in 33 fractions over 6·5 weeks), or to the standard radiotherapy group B (66 Gy in 33 fractions) over 6·5 weeks. All patients received two cycles of induction platinum-based chemotherapy cycles (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]=6 once every 3 weeks, or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 60 mg/m2 orally [or 30 mg/m2 intravenously] on day 8 once every 3 weeks). Then they concomitantly received radiochemotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy (three cycles for 8 weeks, with once per week paclitaxel 40 mg/m2 intravenously and carboplatin AUC=2 or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously and vinorelbine 20 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 40 mg/m2 orally (or 20 mg/m2 intravenously) on day 8 in 21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was the 15-month local control rate in the eligible patients who received at least one dose of concomitant radiochemotherapy. This RTEP7-IFCT-1402 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02473133), and is ongoing.METHODSIn this multicentre, randomised, controlled non-comparative phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with inoperable stage III NSCLC without EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and who were affiliated with or a beneficiary of a social benefit system, with evaluable tumour or node lesions, preserved lung function, and who were amenable to curative-intent radiochemotherapy. Patients were randomly allocated using a central interactive web-response system in a non-masked method (1:1; minimisation method used [random factor of 0·8]; stratified by radiotherapy technique [intensity-modulated radiotherapy vs three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy] and by centre at which patients were treated) either to the experimental adaptive radiotherapy group A, in which only patients with positive residual metabolism on [18F]FDG-PET at 42 Gy received a boost radiotherapy (up to 74 Gy in 33 fractions), with all other patients receiving standard radiotherapy dosing (66 Gy in 33 fractions over 6·5 weeks), or to the standard radiotherapy group B (66 Gy in 33 fractions) over 6·5 weeks. All patients received two cycles of induction platinum-based chemotherapy cycles (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]=6 once every 3 weeks, or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously once every 3 weeks and vinorelbine 30 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 60 mg/m2 orally [or 30 mg/m2 intravenously] on day 8 once every 3 weeks). Then they concomitantly received radiochemotherapy with platinum-based chemotherapy (three cycles for 8 weeks, with once per week paclitaxel 40 mg/m2 intravenously and carboplatin AUC=2 or cisplatin 80 mg/m2 intravenously and vinorelbine 20 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 40 mg/m2 orally (or 20 mg/m2 intravenously) on day 8 in 21-day cycles). The primary endpoint was the 15-month local control rate in the eligible patients who received at least one dose of concomitant radiochemotherapy. This RTEP7-IFCT-1402 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02473133), and is ongoing.From Nov 12, 2015, to July 7, 2021, we randomly assigned 158 patients (47 [30%] women and 111 [70%] men) to either the boosted radiotherapy group A (81 [51%]) or to the standard radiotherapy group B (77 [49%)]. In group A, 80 (99%) patients received induction chemotherapy and 68 (84%) received radiochemotherapy, of whom 48 (71%) with residual uptake on [18F]FDG-PET after 42 Gy received a radiotherapy boost. In group B, all 77 patients received induction chemotherapy and 73 (95%) received radiochemotherapy. At the final analysis, the median follow-up for eligible patients who received radiochemotherapy (n=140) was 45·1 months (95% CI 39·3-48·3). The 15-month local control rate was 77·6% (95% CI 67·6-87·6%) in group A and 71·2% (95% CI 60·8-81·6%) in group B. Acute (within 90 days from radiochemotherapy initiation) grade 3-4 adverse events were observed in 20 (29%) of 68 patients in group A and 33 (45%) of 73 patients in group B, including serious adverse events in five (7%) patients in group A and ten (14%) patients in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (seven [10%] of 68 in group A vs 16 [22%] of 73 in group B), and anaemia (five [7%] vs nine [12%]). In the acute phase, two deaths (3%) occurred in group B (one due to a septic shock related to chemotherapy, and the other due to haemotypsia not related to study treatment), and no deaths occurred in group A. After 90 days, one additional treatment-unrelated death occurred in group A and two deaths events occurred in group B (one radiation pneumonitis and one pneumonia unrelated to treatment).FINDINGSFrom Nov 12, 2015, to July 7, 2021, we randomly assigned 158 patients (47 [30%] women and 111 [70%] men) to either the boosted radiotherapy group A (81 [51%]) or to the standard radiotherapy group B (77 [49%)]. In group A, 80 (99%) patients received induction chemotherapy and 68 (84%) received radiochemotherapy, of whom 48 (71%) with residual uptake on [18F]FDG-PET after 42 Gy received a radiotherapy boost. In group B, all 77 patients received induction chemotherapy and 73 (95%) received radiochemotherapy. At the final analysis, the median follow-up for eligible patients who received radiochemotherapy (n=140) was 45·1 months (95% CI 39·3-48·3). The 15-month local control rate was 77·6% (95% CI 67·6-87·6%) in group A and 71·2% (95% CI 60·8-81·6%) in group B. Acute (within 90 days from radiochemotherapy initiation) grade 3-4 adverse events were observed in 20 (29%) of 68 patients in group A and 33 (45%) of 73 patients in group B, including serious adverse events in five (7%) patients in group A and ten (14%) patients in group B. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (seven [10%] of 68 in group A vs 16 [22%] of 73 in group B), and anaemia (five [7%] vs nine [12%]). In the acute phase, two deaths (3%) occurred in group B (one due to a septic shock related to chemotherapy, and the other due to haemotypsia not related to study treatment), and no deaths occurred in group A. After 90 days, one additional treatment-unrelated death occurred in group A and two deaths events occurred in group B (one radiation pneumonitis and one pneumonia unrelated to treatment).A thoracic radiotherapy boost, based on interim [18F]FDG-PET, led to a meaningful local control rate with no difference in adverse events between the two groups in organs at risk, in contrast with previous attempts at thoracic radiation intensification, warranting a randomised phase 3 evaluation of such [18F]FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy dose adaptation in patients with stage III NSCLC.INTERPRETATIONA thoracic radiotherapy boost, based on interim [18F]FDG-PET, led to a meaningful local control rate with no difference in adverse events between the two groups in organs at risk, in contrast with previous attempts at thoracic radiation intensification, warranting a randomised phase 3 evaluation of such [18F]FDG-PET-guided radiotherapy dose adaptation in patients with stage III NSCLC.Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National 2014.FUNDINGProgramme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique National 2014.

Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on 18F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an 18F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00964275. Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI −0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. A strategy including limited screening and a 18F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included 18F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not 18F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).

Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available.18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on18F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. Methods In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an18F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered withClinicalTrials.gov, numberNCT00964275. Findings Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the18F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI -0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the18F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the18F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the18F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the18F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. Interpretation A strategy including limited screening and a18F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included18F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not18F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. Funding Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).

Summary Background Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on 18F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. Methods In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an 18F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00964275. Findings Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI −0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the 18F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. Interpretation A strategy including limited screening and a 18F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included 18F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not 18F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. Funding Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).

Summary Background Clear guidelines for the investigation of occult malignancy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism are not yet available.18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18 F-FDG) PET/CT could serve as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in this context. We aimed to compare a screening strategy based on18 F-FDG PET/CT with a limited screening strategy for detection of malignant disease in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism. Methods In an open-label, multicentre, randomised study we enrolled patients from four French university hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (not provoked by a major inherited or acquired risk factor) were invited to participate. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a limited screening strategy (physical examination, usual laboratory tests, and basic radiographs) or a screening strategy consisting of the limited strategy plus an18 F-FDG PET/CT scan. Randomisation was done with a dedicated central web-based randomisation system, in block sizes of six, stratified by centre, and concealed from the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to study group assignment. Patients were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a cancer diagnosis in each group after the initial screening assessment. Analyses were conducted in modified intention-to-test and per-protocol populations. This trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00964275. Findings Between March 3, 2009, and Aug 18, 2012, we enrolled and randomly assigned 399 patients; five withdrew consent, leaving 197 in each group for the modified intention-to-test analysis. After initial screening assessment, cancer was diagnosed in 11 (5·6%) patients in the18 F-FDG PET/CT group and four (2·0%) patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 3·6%, 95% CI −0·4 to 7·9; p=0·07). At the initial screening assessment, seven (64%) of the 11 cancers diagnosed in the18 F-FDG PET/CT group were early-stage compared with two of four cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=1·00). One (0·5%) occult malignancy was detected in 186 patients who had negative initial screening in the18 F-FDG PET/CT group, compared with nine (4·7%) in 193 patients in the limited screening group (absolute risk difference 4·1%, 95% CI 0·8 to 8·4, p=0·01). Overall, five (42%) of the 12 cancers diagnosed in the18 F-FDG PET/CT group were advanced stage, compared with seven (54%) of the 13 cancers diagnosed in the limited screening group (p=0·70). 16 patients died during follow-up, eight (4·1%) in each group. Two (1·0%) patients in the18 F-FDG PET/CT group and five (2·5%) in the limited screening group had cancer-related deaths. Interpretation A strategy including limited screening and a18 F-FDG PET/CT was not associated with a significantly higher rate of cancer diagnosis after unprovoked venous thromboembolism. The risk of subsequent cancer diagnosis was, however, lower in patients who had negative initial screening that included18 F-FDG PET/CT than in patients who had negative initial limited screening. Whether or not18 F-FDG PET/CT might be useful in a more selected population of patients with a high risk of cancer remains to be determined. Funding Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (French Department of Health).

Purpose To evaluate the prognostic significance of increased mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake in PET/CT for the staging of advanced ovarian cancer. Methods We retrospectively evaluated patients managed for FIGO stage III/IV ovarian cancer between 1 January 2006 and 1 June 2009. Patients were included if they had undergone 18 F-FDG PET/CT and surgery for initial staging. Exclusion criteria were age younger than 18 years, inability to undergo general anaesthesia, recurrent ovarian cancer, and borderline or nonepithelial malignancy. Whole-body PET/CT was performed after intravenous 18 F-FDG injection. The location of abnormal hot spots and 18 F-FDG maximal standard uptake values (SUV max ) were recorded. We compared the complete cytoreduction and survival rates in groups defined based on mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake and SUV max values. Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival and disease-free survival were compared using the log-rank test. Hazard ratios with their 95% confidence intervals were computed. Adjusted hazard ratios were obtained using a multivariate Cox model. Results We included 53 patients, of whom 17 (32%) had increased mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in 14 (87.5%) of the 16 patients managed with primary surgery and in 21 (75%) of the 28 patients managed with interval surgery. Complete cytoreduction was achieved significantly more often among patients without increased mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake (80.6% vs. 35.3%; p  = 0.001). Disease-free survival was comparable between the two groups. By univariate analysis, overall mortality was significantly higher among patients with increased mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake (hazard ratio 5.70, 95% confidence interval 1.74–18.6). The only factor significantly associated with overall survival by multivariate analysis was complete cytoreduction (adjusted hazard ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.07–0.89). Conclusion Increased mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake was common in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. However, complete cytoreduction, which was significantly more frequent among patients without mediastinal 18 F-FDG uptake, was the only factor independently associated with survival.