Explore the vast range of titles available.

The international standard radiotherapy schedule for breast cancer treatment delivers a high total dose in 25 small daily doses (fractions). However, a lower total dose delivered in fewer, larger fractions (hypofractionation) is hypothesised to be at least as safe and effective as the standard treatment. We tested two dose levels of a 13-fraction schedule against the standard regimen with the aim of measuring the sensitivity of normal and malignant tissues to fraction size. Between 1998 and 2002, 2236 women with early breast cancer (pT1-3a pN0-1 M0) at 17 centres in the UK were randomly assigned after primary surgery to receive 50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2·0 Gy versus 41·6 Gy or 39 Gy in 13 fractions of 3·2 Gy or 3·0 Gy over 5 weeks. Women were eligible if they were aged over 18 years, did not have an immediate surgical reconstruction, and were available for follow-up. Randomisation method was computer generated and was not blinded. The protocol-specified principal endpoints were local-regional tumour relapse, defined as reappearance of cancer at irradiated sites, late normal tissue effects, and quality of life. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN59368779. 749 women were assigned to the 50 Gy group, 750 to the 41·6 Gy group, and 737 to the 39 Gy group. After a median follow up of 5·1 years (IQR 4·4–6·0) the rate of local-regional tumour relapse at 5 years was 3·6% (95% CI 2·2–5·1) after 50 Gy, 3·5% (95% CI 2·1–4·3) after 41·6 Gy, and 5·2% (95% CI 3·5–6·9) after 39 Gy. The estimated absolute differences in 5-year local-regional relapse rates compared with 50 Gy were 0·2% (95% CI −1·3% to 2·6%) after 41·6 Gy and 0·9% (95% CI −0·8% to 3·7%) after 39 Gy. Photographic and patient self-assessments suggested lower rates of late adverse effects after 39 Gy than with 50 Gy, with an HR for late change in breast appearance (photographic) of 0·69 (95% CI 0·52–0·91, p=0·01). From a planned meta-analysis with the pilot trial, the adjusted estimates of α/β value for tumour control was 4·6 Gy (95% CI 1·1–8·1) and for late change in breast appearance (photographic) was 3·4 Gy (95% CI 2·3–4·5). The data are consistent with the hypothesis that breast cancer and the dose-limiting normal tissues respond similarly to change in radiotherapy fraction size. 41·6 Gy in 13 fractions was similar to the control regimen of 50 Gy in 25 fractions in terms of local-regional tumour control and late normal tissue effects, a result consistent with the result of START Trial B. A lower total dose in a smaller number of fractions could offer similar rates of tumour control and normal tissue damage as the international standard fractionation schedule of 50 Gy in 25 fractions.

The international standard radiotherapy schedule for early breast cancer delivers 50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2·0 Gy over 5 weeks, but there is a long history of non-standard regimens delivering a lower total dose using fewer, larger fractions (hypofractionation). We aimed to test the benefits of radiotherapy schedules using fraction sizes larger than 2·0 Gy in terms of local-regional tumour control, normal tissue responses, quality of life, and economic consequences in women prescribed post-operative radiotherapy. Between 1999 and 2001, 2215 women with early breast cancer (pT1-3a pN0-1 M0) at 23 centres in the UK were randomly assigned after primary surgery to receive 50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2·0 Gy over 5 weeks or 40 Gy in 15 fractions of 2·67 Gy over 3 weeks. Women were eligible for the trial if they were aged over 18 years, did not have an immediate reconstruction, and were available for follow-up. Randomisation method was computer generated and was not blinded. The protocol-specified principal endpoints were local-regional tumour relapse, defined as reappearance of cancer at irradiated sites, late normal tissue effects, and quality of life. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN59368779. 1105 women were assigned to the 50 Gy group and 1110 to the 40 Gy group. After a median follow up of 6·0 years (IQR 5·0–6·2) the rate of local-regional tumour relapse at 5 years was 2·2% (95% CI 1·3–3·1) in the 40 Gy group and 3·3% (95% CI 2·2 to 4·5) in the 50 Gy group, representing an absolute difference of −0·7% (95% CI −1·7% to 0·9%)—ie, the absolute difference in local-regional relapse could be up to 1·7% better and at most 1% worse after 40 Gy than after 50 Gy. Photographic and patient self-assessments indicated lower rates of late adverse effects after 40 Gy than after 50 Gy. A radiation schedule delivering 40 Gy in 15 fractions seems to offer rates of local-regional tumour relapse and late adverse effects at least as favourable as the standard schedule of 50 Gy in 25 fractions.

Prostate cancer might have high radiation-fraction sensitivity, implying a therapeutic advantage of hypofractionated treatment. We present a pre-planned preliminary safety analysis of side-effects in stages 1 and 2 of a randomised trial comparing standard and hypofractionated radiotherapy. We did a multicentre, randomised study and recruited men with localised prostate cancer between Oct 18, 2002, and Aug 12, 2006, at 11 UK centres. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive conventional or hypofractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and all were given with 3–6 months of neoadjuvant androgen suppression. Computer-generated random permuted blocks were used, with risk of seminal vesicle involvement and radiotherapy-treatment centre as stratification factors. The conventional schedule was 37 fractions of 2 Gy to a total of 74 Gy. The two hypofractionated schedules involved 3 Gy treatments given in either 20 fractions to a total of 60 Gy, or 19 fractions to a total of 57 Gy. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients with grade 2 or worse toxicity at 2 years on the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale. The primary analysis included all patients who had received at least one fraction of radiotherapy and completed a 2 year assessment. Treatment allocation was not masked and clinicians were not blinded. Stage 3 of this trial completed the planned recruitment in June, 2011. This study is registered, number ISRCTN97182923. 153 men recruited to stages 1 and 2 were randomly assigned to receive conventional treatment of 74 Gy, 153 to receive 60 Gy, and 151 to receive 57 Gy. With 50·5 months median follow-up (IQR 43·5–61·3), six (4·3%; 95% CI 1·6–9·2) of 138 men in the 74 Gy group had bowel toxicity of grade 2 or worse on the RTOG scale at 2 years, as did five (3·6%; 1·2–8·3) of 137 men in the 60 Gy group, and two (1·4%; 0·2–5·0) of 143 men in the 57 Gy group. For bladder toxicities, three (2·2%; 0·5–6·2) of 138 men, three (2·2%; 0·5–6·3) of 137, and none (0·0%; 97·5% CI 0·0–2·6) of 143 had scores of grade 2 or worse on the RTOG scale at 2 years. Hypofractionated high-dose radiotherapy seems equally well tolerated as conventionally fractionated treatment at 2 years. Stage 1 was funded by the Academic Radiotherapy Unit, Cancer Research UK programme grant; stage 2 was funded by the Department of Health and Cancer Research UK.

Few trials of adjuvant breast radiotherapy have incorporated patient-reported breast symptoms and related areas of quality of life. We assessed these measures in a quality-of-life study that was part of the randomised START (Standardisation of Breast Radiotherapy) trials. In START trial A, 2236 patients were randomly assigned to receive either 39 Gy or 41·6 Gy delivered in 13 fractions over 5 weeks or a global standard of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. In START trial B, 2215 women were randomly assigned to receive either 40 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks or the same control regimen (50 Gy in 25 fractions) as in trial A. 2739 patients were eligible for the quality-of-life study of whom 2208 (81%) were accrued (1129 patients from trial A and 1079 from trial B). Participants completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR23 questionnaires and protocol-specific radiotherapy items up to 5 years after radiotherapy. We compared results across regimens with generalised estimating equations and survival analyses. The START trials are registered, ISRCTN59368779. At 5 years, up to 40% women reported moderate or marked changes to the breast after radiotherapy, and arm and shoulder pain affected up to a third of patients. Breast symptoms and body image concerns reduced over time. Rates of radiotherapy adverse effects were lower for the 39 Gy regimen in trial A and the 40 Gy regimen in trial B, compared with the 50 Gy control regimen; rates of radiotherapy adverse effects were similar between the 41·6 Gy and 50 Gy regimens in trial A. Adverse change in skin appearance was significantly lower for patients who received 39 Gy compared with those who received 50 Gy (HR 0·63, 95% CI 0·47–0·84) and for those who received 40 Gy compared with those who received 50 Gy (0·76, 0·60–0·97); no significant difference was observed between patients who received 41·6 Gy and those who received 50 Gy in trial A (0·83, 0·63–1·08). Patient self-ratings of breast symptoms discriminated a 10% difference in randomised dose intensity. Up to a third of women reported moderate or marked pain in the arm and shoulder over 5 years whilst more than 10% experienced moderate or marked arm and hand swelling, with no significant difference in arm/shoulder subscale scores between the regimens in trial A or trial B; many baseline arm and shoulder symptoms were associated with prior surgery. A substantial proportion of women report moderate or marked breast, arm, and shoulder symptoms over 5 years of follow-up after radiotherapy, but with no detriment to body image. Nonetheless, most patients stand to gain from hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens with a potential for fewer adverse effects; this strengthens the evidence from the START trials for hypofractionated regimens for women requiring radiotherapy for early breast cancer. Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, UK Department of Health.

Abstract Background In 2018, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the macrocylic lactone moxidectin (MOX) at 8 mg dosage for onchocerciasis treatment in individuals aged ≥12 years. Severe adverse reactions have occurred after ivermectin (IVM), also a macrocyclic lactone, in individuals with high Loa microfilarial density (MFD). This study compared the safety and efficacy of a 2 mg MOX dose and the standard 150 µg/kg IVM dose in individuals with low L loa MFD. Methods A double-blind, randomized, ivermectin-controlled trial of a 2 mg moxidectin dose was conducted in Cameroon between May and July 2022. It enrolled 72 adult men with L loa MFD between 5 and 1000 microfilariae/mL. Outcomes were occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and L loa MFD reduction rate during the first month off treatment. Results No serious or severe AEs occurred among the 36 MOX- or the 36 IVM-treated individuals. Forty-nine AEs occurred in the MOX arm versus 59 AEs in the IVM arm. Grade 2 AE incidence was higher among IVM- than MOX-treated participants (38.5% and 14.3%, respectively, P = .043). Median MFD reduction rates were significantly higher after IVM than MOX at day 3 (70.2% vs 48.5%), day 7 (76.4% vs 50.0%), and day 30 (79.8% vs 48.1%). Conclusions A single 2 mg MOX dose is as safe as 150 µg/kg IVM in patients with low L loa MFD. Further studies with higher MOX doses and in patients with higher MFD are warranted. Clinical Trials Registration NCT04049851.

Background and objectivesPreventive chemotherapy (PCT) is the main strategy currently used to control and/or eliminate onchocerciasis, lymphatic filariasis (LF) and soil transmitted helminthiasis (STH), and community participation (through implementation or adherence to PCT) is critical. This study aimed at investigating knowledge/perceptions of populations of the Mbengwi health district (North West Region, Cameroon), in relation to their attitudes/practices regarding the most prevalent neglected tropical diseases (NTDs).MethodsA household-based cross-sectional survey was carried out in the Mbengwi health district (North West Region, Cameroon) using the cluster sampling technique. Clusters were selected using the probability proportionate to estimate size strategy. In each cluster, the random walk technique was used for the selection of households, and a structure questionnaire was administered to 2–3 of its members.ResultsA total of 254 households from 26 clusters were visited, and 514 individuals were interviewed. The sex ratio of interviewees (1.08) was unbiased, and their ages ranged between 10 and 99 years old. Though most of the respondents declared having already heard of these NTDs (41.6%, 73.9% and 90.5% for onchocerciasis, LF and STH, respectively), only a minority of them were aware of how they are acquired/transmitted (8.9%, 9.2% and 32.7% for onchocerciasis, LF and STH, respectively), or prevented (23.1%, 18.9% and 47.2% for onchocerciasis, LF and STH, respectively).ConclusionsThis study revealed poor knowledge/perceptions and wrong attitudes/practices of interviewees as regards to these NTDs, and these misconceptions can seriously affect the adherence and contribution of populations to the success of PCTs. It appears compulsory to reinforce information, education, and communication, with a focus on the rationale and importance behind PCTs, to optimize/improve community participation.

Background: Preventive chemotherapy (PCT) is the main strategy currently used to control and/or eliminate onchocerciasis (Oncho), lymphatic filariasis (LF) and Soil Transmitted Helminthiasis (STH), and community participation (through implementation of MDA or adherence to PCT) is critical to achieve this goal. However, these Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) are still persisting in most endemic areas as a consequence of sub-optimal treatment coverage, the presence of systematic non-compliers in communities ... This study aimed at investigating whether the knowledge, attitudes and practices of populations about these NTDs can explain the poor trends towards elimination. Methodology: A cross-sectional survey was carried out in the Mbengwi Health District (North West Region, Cameroon) using the cluster sampling technique. Clusters were selected using the Probability Proportionate to Estimate Size strategy. In each cluster, the random walk technique was used for the selection of households, and a structure questionnaire was administered to 2-3 of its members. Principal Findings: A total of 254 households from 26 clusters were visited, and 514 individuals were interviewed. The sex ratio of interviewees (1.08) was unbiased, and their ages ranged between 10 and 99 years old. Though most of the respondents declared having already heard of these NTDs (41.2%, 73.7% and 89.9% for Oncho, LF and STH respectively), only a minority of them were aware of correct response of how they are acquired/transmitted (3.7%, 6.8% and 12.5% for Oncho, LF and STH respectively), and prevented (23.1%, 18.9% and 47.2% for Oncho, LF and STH respectively). Even when respondents were aware that medicines were useful to prevent and/or treat these NTDs, almost none of them knew the drug used or the treatment frequency. Conclusion/Significance: This study reveals that interviewees exhibit poor knowledge, attitudes and practices as regards to these NTDs, although they are endemic in the study area and PCTs given yearly since a while. These misconceptions can seriously affect the adherence and contribution of populations to the success of PCTs, and it appears compulsory to improve individual knowledge, with a focus on the importance and rationale behind MDA, to optimize their attitudes and practices, especially community participation to PCTs.