Explore the vast range of titles available.

We aimed to identify a five-fraction schedule of adjuvant radiotherapy (radiation therapy) delivered in 1 week that is non-inferior in terms of local cancer control and is as safe as an international standard 15-fraction regimen after primary surgery for early breast cancer. Here, we present 5-year results of the FAST-Forward trial. FAST-Forward is a multicentre, phase 3, randomised, non-inferiority trial done at 97 hospitals (47 radiotherapy centres and 50 referring hospitals) in the UK. Patients aged at least 18 years with invasive carcinoma of the breast (pT1–3, pN0–1, M0) after breast conservation surgery or mastectomy were eligible. We randomly allocated patients to either 40 Gy in 15 fractions (over 3 weeks), 27 Gy in five fractions (over 1 week), or 26 Gy in five fractions (over 1 week) to the whole breast or chest wall. Allocation was not masked because of the nature of the intervention. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse; assuming a 2% 5-year incidence for 40 Gy, non-inferiority was predefined as ≤1·6% excess for five-fraction schedules (critical hazard ratio [HR] of 1·81). Normal tissue effects were assessed by clinicians, patients, and from photographs. This trial is registered at isrctn.com, ISRCTN19906132. Between Nov 24, 2011, and June 19, 2014, we recruited and obtained consent from 4096 patients from 97 UK centres, of whom 1361 were assigned to the 40 Gy schedule, 1367 to the 27 Gy schedule, and 1368 to the 26 Gy schedule. At a median follow-up of 71·5 months (IQR 71·3 to 71·7), the primary endpoint event occurred in 79 patients (31 in the 40 Gy group, 27 in the 27 Gy group, and 21 in the 26 Gy group); HRs versus 40 Gy in 15 fractions were 0·86 (95% CI 0·51 to 1·44) for 27 Gy in five fractions and 0·67 (0·38 to 1·16) for 26 Gy in five fractions. 5-year incidence of ipsilateral breast tumour relapse after 40 Gy was 2·1% (1·4 to 3·1); estimated absolute differences versus 40 Gy in 15 fractions were −0·3% (−1·0 to 0·9) for 27 Gy in five fractions (probability of incorrectly accepting an inferior five-fraction schedule: p=0·0022 vs 40 Gy in 15 fractions) and −0·7% (−1·3 to 0·3) for 26 Gy in five fractions (p=0·00019 vs 40 Gy in 15 fractions). At 5 years, any moderate or marked clinician-assessed normal tissue effects in the breast or chest wall was reported for 98 of 986 (9·9%) 40 Gy patients, 155 (15·4%) of 1005 27 Gy patients, and 121 of 1020 (11·9%) 26 Gy patients. Across all clinician assessments from 1–5 years, odds ratios versus 40 Gy in 15 fractions were 1·55 (95% CI 1·32 to 1·83, p<0·0001) for 27 Gy in five fractions and 1·12 (0·94 to 1·34, p=0·20) for 26 Gy in five fractions. Patient and photographic assessments showed higher normal tissue effect risk for 27 Gy versus 40 Gy but not for 26 Gy versus 40 Gy. 26 Gy in five fractions over 1 week is non-inferior to the standard of 40 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks for local tumour control, and is as safe in terms of normal tissue effects up to 5 years for patients prescribed adjuvant local radiotherapy after primary surgery for early-stage breast cancer. National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

A 3-year structured exercise program after adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer improved disease-free and overall survival, physical functioning, and fitness, as compared with health education alone.

Whether surgical axillary staging as part of breast-conserving therapy can be omitted without compromising survival has remained unclear. In this prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial, we investigated the omission of axillary surgery as compared with sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer staged as T1 or T2 (tumor size, ≤5 cm) who were scheduled to undergo breast-conserving surgery. We report here the per-protocol analysis of invasive disease-free survival (the primary efficacy outcome). To show the noninferiority of the omission of axillary surgery, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate had to be at least 85%, and the upper limit of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for invasive disease or death had to be below 1.271. A total of 5502 eligible patients (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer) underwent randomization in a 1:4 ratio. The per-protocol population included 4858 patients; 962 were assigned to undergo treatment without axillary surgery (the surgery-omission group), and 3896 to undergo sentinel-lymph-node biopsy (the surgery group). The median follow-up was 73.6 months. The estimated 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 91.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.9 to 93.5) among patients in the surgery-omission group and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.8 to 92.6) among patients in the surgery group, with a hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14), which was below the prespecified noninferiority margin. The analysis of the first primary-outcome events (occurrence or recurrence of invasive disease or death from any cause), which occurred in a total of 525 patients (10.8%), showed apparent differences between the surgery-omission group and the surgery group in the incidence of axillary recurrence (1.0% vs. 0.3%) and death (1.4% vs. 2.4%). The safety analysis indicates that patients in the surgery-omission group had a lower incidence of lymphedema, greater arm mobility, and less pain with movement of the arm or shoulder than patients who underwent sentinel-lymph-node biopsy. In this trial involving patients with clinically node-negative, T1 or T2 invasive breast cancer (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer), omission of surgical axillary staging was noninferior to sentinel-lymph-node biopsy after a median follow-up of 6 years. (Funded by the German Cancer Aid; INSEMA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02466737.).

Among patients with endoscopically resected early gastric cancers who were infected with Helicobacter pylori , the incidence of metachronous gastric cancer was 50% lower among those who received active treatment with antibiotics than among controls.

Results from a phase 2 trial of the TPEx chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel–platinum–cetuximab) showed promising results, with a median overall survival of 14·0 months in first-line recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the TPEx regimen with the standard of care EXTREME regimen (platinum–fluorouracil–cetuximab) in this setting. This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, done in 68 centres (cancer centres, university and general hospitals, and private clinics) in France, Spain, and Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18–70 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment; had at least one measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using the TenAlea website by investigators or delegated clinical research associates to the TPEx regimen or the EXTREME regimen, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, previous cetuximab treatment, and country. The TPEx regimen consisted of docetaxel 75 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2, both intravenously on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (intravenously 400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently). Four cycles were repeated every 21 days with systematic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support at each cycle. In case of disease control after four cycles, intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m2 was continued every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The EXTREME regimen consisted of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m2 on day 1–4, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m2 weekly subsequently) all delivered intravenously. Six cycles were delivered every 21 days followed by weekly 250 mg/m2 cetuximab as maintenance therapy in case of disease control. G-CSF support was not mandatory per the protocol in the EXTREME regimen. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of chemotherapy or cetuximab. Enrolment is closed and this is the final analysis. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268695. Between Oct 10, 2014, and Nov 29, 2017, 541 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment regimens (271 to TPEx, 270 to EXTREME). Two patients in the TPEx group had major deviations in consent forms and were not included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 34·4 months (IQR 26·6–44·8) in the TPEx group and 30·2 months (25·5–45·3) in the EXTREME group. At data cutoff, 209 patients had died in the TPEx group and 218 had died in the EXTREME group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 14·5 months [95% CI 12·5–15·7] in the TPEx group and 13·4 months [12·2–15·4] in the EXTREME group; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74–1·08]; p=0·23). 214 (81%) of 263 patients in the TPEx group versus 246 (93%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group had grade 3 or worse adverse events during chemotherapy (p<0·0001). In the TPEx group, 118 (45%) of 263 patients had at least one serious adverse event versus 143 (54%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group. 16 patients in the TPEx group and 21 in the EXTREME group died in association with adverse events, including seven patients in each group who had fatal infections (including febrile neutropenia). Eight deaths in the TPEx group and 11 deaths in the EXTREME group were assessed as treatment related, most frequently sepsis or septic shock (four in each treatment group). Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint, with no significant improvement in overall survival with TPEx versus EXTREME, the TPEx regimen had a favourable safety profile. The TPEx regimen could provide an alternative to standard of care with the EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, especially for those who might not be good candidates for up-front pembrolizumab treatment. Merck Santé and Chugai Pharma.

In a randomized trial involving more than 1000 patients, outcomes including recurrence rate and overall survival were similar among patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and those undergoing open surgery. Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide and accounts for nearly 1.4 million new cases and 694,000 deaths per year. Approximately one third of all colorectal cancers are localized in the rectum. 1 – 4 Less than a half century ago, rectal cancer had a poor prognosis, with cancer recurrence rates in the pelvic or perineal area (locoregional recurrence) of up to 40% and 5-year survival rates after surgical resection of less than 50%. 5 , 6 In the 1980s, Heald and Ryall 6 introduced a new surgical technique of complete removal of the fatty envelope surrounding the rectum (mesorectum), called total mesorectal . . .

Patients with early-stage estrogen-receptor–positive, node-negative breast cancer whose 21-gene Oncotype DX profile suggested a low risk of recurrence were safely treated with endocrine therapy alone and were spared exposure to adjuvant chemotherapy. Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide and in the United States, and it is the leading cause of death from cancer in women worldwide. 1 Prognostic factors for the recurrence of breast cancer at a distant site regardless of treatment include clinicopathologic features such as tumor size and grade and the number of axillary lymph nodes with metastasis. 2 Predictive factors that identify a benefit from specific therapies include the expression of the estrogen receptor and the progesterone receptor, which identifies patients who benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy, 3 and overexpression of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 . . .

Men with high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer are treated with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for 3 years, often combined with radiotherapy. We analysed new data from two randomised controlled phase 3 trials done in a multiarm, multistage platform protocol to assess the efficacy of adding abiraterone and prednisolone alone or with enzalutamide to ADT in this patient population. These open-label, phase 3 trials were done at 113 sites in the UK and Switzerland. Eligible patients (no age restrictions) had high-risk (defined as node positive or, if node negative, having at least two of the following: tumour stage T3 or T4, Gleason sum score of 8–10, and prostate-specific antigen [PSA] concentration ≥40 ng/mL) or relapsing with high-risk features (≤12 months of total ADT with an interval of ≥12 months without treatment and PSA concentration ≥4 ng/mL with a doubling time of <6 months, or a PSA concentration ≥20 ng/mL, or nodal relapse) non-metastatic prostate cancer, and a WHO performance status of 0–2. Local radiotherapy (as per local guidelines, 74 Gy in 37 fractions to the prostate and seminal vesicles or the equivalent using hypofractionated schedules) was mandated for node negative and encouraged for node positive disease. In both trials, patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by use of a computerised algorithm, to ADT alone (control group), which could include surgery and luteinising-hormone-releasing hormone agonists and antagonists, or with oral abiraterone acetate (1000 mg daily) and oral prednisolone (5 mg daily; combination-therapy group). In the second trial with no overlapping controls, the combination-therapy group also received enzalutamide (160 mg daily orally). ADT was given for 3 years and combination therapy for 2 years, except if local radiotherapy was omitted when treatment could be delivered until progression. In this primary analysis, we used meta-analysis methods to pool events from both trials. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was metastasis-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, biochemical failure-free survival, progression-free survival, and toxicity and adverse events. For 90% power and a one-sided type 1 error rate set to 1·25% to detect a target hazard ratio for improvement in metastasis-free survival of 0·75, approximately 315 metastasis-free survival events in the control groups was required. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety according to the treatment started within randomised allocation. STAMPEDE is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00268476, and with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN78818544. Between Nov 15, 2011, and March 31, 2016, 1974 patients were randomly assigned to treatment. The first trial allocated 455 to the control group and 459 to combination therapy, and the second trial, which included enzalutamide, allocated 533 to the control group and 527 to combination therapy. Median age across all groups was 68 years (IQR 63–73) and median PSA 34 ng/ml (14·7–47); 774 (39%) of 1974 patients were node positive, and 1684 (85%) were planned to receive radiotherapy. With median follow-up of 72 months (60–84), there were 180 metastasis-free survival events in the combination-therapy groups and 306 in the control groups. Metastasis-free survival was significantly longer in the combination-therapy groups (median not reached, IQR not evaluable [NE]–NE) than in the control groups (not reached, 97–NE; hazard ratio [HR] 0·53, 95% CI 0·44–0·64, p<0·0001). 6-year metastasis-free survival was 82% (95% CI 79–85) in the combination-therapy group and 69% (66–72) in the control group. There was no evidence of a difference in metatasis-free survival when enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate were administered concurrently compared with abiraterone acetate alone (interaction HR 1·02, 0·70–1·50, p=0·91) and no evidence of between-trial heterogeneity (I2 p=0·90). Overall survival (median not reached [IQR NE–NE] in the combination-therapy groups vs not reached [103–NE] in the control groups; HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·48–0·73, p<0·0001), prostate cancer-specific survival (not reached [NE–NE] vs not reached [NE–NE]; 0·49, 0·37–0·65, p<0·0001), biochemical failure-free-survival (not reached [NE–NE] vs 86 months [83–NE]; 0·39, 0·33–0·47, p<0·0001), and progression-free-survival (not reached [NE–NE] vs not reached [103–NE]; 0·44, 0·36–0·54, p<0·0001) were also significantly longer in the combination-therapy groups than in the control groups. Adverse events grade 3 or higher during the first 24 months were, respectively, reported in 169 (37%) of 451 patients and 130 (29%) of 455 patients in the combination-therapy and control groups of the abiraterone trial, respectively, and 298 (58%) of 513 patients and 172 (32%) of 533 patients of the combination-therapy and control groups of the abiraterone and enzalutamide trial, respectively. The two most common events more frequent in the combination-therapy groups were hypertension (abiraterone trial: 23 (5%) in the combination-therapy group and six (1%) in control group; abiraterone and enzalutamide trial: 73 (14%) and eight (2%), respectively) and alanine transaminitis (abiraterone trial: 25 (6%) in the combination-therapy group and one (<1%) in control group; abiraterone and enzalutamide trial: 69 (13%) and four (1%), respectively). Seven grade 5 adverse events were reported: none in the control groups, three in the abiraterone acetate and prednisolone group (one event each of rectal adenocarcinoma, pulmonary haemorrhage, and a respiratory disorder), and four in the abiraterone acetate and prednisolone with enzalutamide group (two events each of septic shock and sudden death). Among men with high-risk non-metastatic prostate cancer, combination therapy is associated with significantly higher rates of metastasis-free survival compared with ADT alone. Abiraterone acetate with prednisolone should be considered a new standard treatment for this population. Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Janssen, and Astellas.

In the randomised, phase 3 equivalence trial on electron intraoperative radiotherapy (ELIOT), accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) with the use of intraoperative radiotherapy was associated with a higher rate of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) than whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Here, we aimed to examine the planned long-term recurrence and survival outcomes from the ELIOT trial. This single-centre, randomised, phase 3 equivalence trial was done at the European Institute of Oncology (Milan, Italy). Eligible women, aged 48–75 years with a clinical diagnosis of a unicentric breast carcinoma with an ultrasound diameter not exceeding 25 mm, clinically negative axillary lymph nodes, and who were suitable for breast-conserving surgery, were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, with a random permuted block design (block size of 16) and stratified by clinical tumour size, to receive post-operative WBI with conventional fractionation (50 Gy given as 25 fractions of 2 Gy, plus a 10 Gy boost), or 21 Gy intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons (ELIOT) in a single dose to the tumour bed during surgery. The trial was open label and no-one was masked to treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of IBTR. The trial was designed assuming a 5-year IBTR rate of 3% in the WBI group and equivalence of the two groups, if the 5-year IBTR rate in the ELIOT group did not exceed a 2·5 times excess, corresponding to 7·5%. Overall survival was the secondary endpoint. The main analysis was done by intention to treat. The cumulative incidence of IBTR events and overall survival were assessed at 5, 10, and 15 years of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01849133. Between Nov 20, 2000, and Dec 27, 2007, 1305 women were enrolled and randomly assigned: 654 to the WBI group and 651 to the ELIOT group. After a median follow-up of 12·4 years (IQR 9·7–14·7), 86 (7%) patients developed IBTR, with 70 (11%) cases in the ELIOT group and 16 (2%) in the WBI group, corresponding to an absolute excess of 54 IBTRs in the ELIOT group (HR 4·62, 95% CI 2·68–7·95, p<0·0001). In the ELIOT group, the 5-year IBTR rate was 4·2% (95% CI 2·8–5·9), the 10-year rate was 8·1% (6·1–10·3), and the 15-year rate was 12·6% (9·8–15·9). In the WBI group, the 5-year IBTR rate was 0·5% (95% CI 0·1–1·3), the 10-year rate was 1·1% (0·5–2·2), and the 15-year rate was 2·4% (1·4–4·0). At final follow-up on March 11, 2019, 193 (15%) women had died from any cause, with no difference between the two groups (98 deaths in the ELIOT group vs 95 in the WBI group; HR 1·03, 95% CI 0·77–1·36, p=0·85). In the ELIOT group, the overall survival rate was 96·8% (95% CI 95·1–97·9) at 5 years, 90·7% (88·2–92·7) at 10 years, and 83·4% (79·7–86·4) at 15 years; and in the WBI group, the overall survival rate was 96·8% (95·1–97·9) at 5 years, 92·7% (90·4–94·4) at 10 years, and 82·4% (78·5–85·6) at 15 years. We did not collect long-term data on adverse events. The long-term results of this trial confirmed the higher rate of IBTR in the ELIOT group than in the WBI group, without any differences in overall survival. ELIOT should be offered to selected patients at low-risk of IBTR. Italian Association for Cancer Research, Jacqueline Seroussi Memorial Foundation for Cancer Research, Umberto Veronesi Foundation, American Italian Cancer Foundation, The Lombardy Region, and Italian Ministry of Health.

Intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons allows the substitution of conventional postoperative whole breast irradiation with one session of radiotherapy with the same equivalent dose during surgery. However, its ability to control for recurrence of local disease required confirmation in a randomised controlled trial. This study was done at the European Institute of Oncology (Milan, Italy). Women aged 48–75 years with early breast cancer, a maximum tumour diameter of up to 2·5 cm, and suitable for breast-conserving surgery were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio (using a random permuted block design, stratified for clinical tumour size [<1·0 cm vs 1·0–1·4 cm vs ≥1·5 cm]) to receive either whole-breast external radiotherapy or intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons. Study coordinators, clinicians, and patients were aware of the assignment. Patients in the intraoperative radiotherapy group received one dose of 21 Gy to the tumour bed during surgery. Those in the external radiotherapy group received 50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2 Gy, followed by a boost of 10 Gy in five fractions. This was an equivalence trial; the prespecified equivalence margin was local recurrence of 7·5% in the intraoperative radiotherapy group. The primary endpoint was occurrence of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrences (IBTR); overall survival was a secondary outcome. The main analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01849133. 1305 patients were randomised (654 to external radiotherapy and 651 to intraoperative radiotherapy) between Nov 20, 2000, and Dec 27, 2007. After a medium follow-up of 5·8 years (IQR 4·1–7·7), 35 patients in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and four patients in the external radiotherapy group had had an IBTR (p<0·0001). The 5-year event rate for IBRT was 4·4% (95% CI 2·7–6·1) in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and 0·4% (0·0–1·0) in the external radiotherapy group (hazard ratio 9·3 [95% CI 3·3–26·3]). During the same period, 34 women allocated to intraoperative radiotherapy and 31 to external radiotherapy died (p=0·59). 5-year overall survival was 96·8% (95% CI 95·3–98·3) in the intraoperative radiotherapy group and 96·9% (95·5–98·3) in the external radiotherapy group. In patients with data available (n=464 for intraoperative radiotherapy; n=412 for external radiotherapy) we noted significantly fewer skin side-effects in women in the intraoperative radiotherapy group than in those in the external radiotherapy group (p=0·0002). Although the rate of IBTR in the intraoperative radiotherapy group was within the prespecified equivalence margin, the rate was significantly greater than with external radiotherapy, and overall survival did not differ between groups. Improved selection of patients could reduce the rate of IBTR with intraoperative radiotherapy with electrons. Italian Association for Cancer Research, Jacqueline Seroussi Memorial Foundation for Cancer Research, and Umberto Veronesi Foundation.