Explore the vast range of titles available.

Fewer than half of the patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are cured. Since the introduction of adjuvant chemotherapy in 2004, no substantial progress has been made in adjuvant treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy of the MAGE-A3 cancer immunotherapeutic in surgically resected NSCLC. In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited patients aged at least 18 years with completely resected stage IB, II, and IIIA MAGE-A3-positive NSCLC who did or did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy from 443 centres in 34 countries (Europe, the Americas, and Asia Pacific). Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive 13 intramuscular injections of recMAGE-A3 with AS15 immunostimulant (MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic) or placebo during 27 months. Randomisation and treatment allocation at the investigator site was done centrally via internet with stratification for chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to group assignment. A minimisation algorithm accounted for the number of chemotherapy cycles received, disease stage, lymph node sampling procedure, performance status score, and lifetime smoking status. The primary endpoint was broken up into three co-primary objectives: disease-free survival in the overall population, the no-chemotherapy population, and patients with a potentially predictive gene signature. The final analyses included the total treated population (all patients who had received at least one treatment dose). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00480025. Between Oct 18, 2007, and July 17, 2012, we screened 13 849 patients for MAGE-A3 expression; 12 820 had a valid sample and of these, 4210 (33%) had a MAGE-A3-positive tumour. 2312 of these patients met all eligibility criteria and were randomly assigned to treatment: 1515 received MAGE-A3 and 757 received placebo and 40 were randomly assigned but never started treatment. 784 patients in the MAGE-A3 group also received chemotherapy, as did 392 in the placebo group. Median follow-up was 38·1 months (IQR 27·9–48·4) in the MAGE-A3 group and 39·5 months (27·9–50·4) in the placebo group. In the overall population, median disease-free survival was 60·5 months (95% CI 57·2–not reached) for the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic group and 57·9 months (55·7–not reached) for the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 95% CI 0·89–1·18; p=0·74). Of the patients who did not receive chemotherapy, median disease-free survival was 58·0 months (95% CI 56·6–not reached) in those in the MAGE-A3 group and 56·9 months (44·4–not reached) in the placebo group (HR 0·97, 95% CI 0·80–1·18; p=0·76). Because of the absence of treatment effect, we could not identify a gene signature predictive of clinical benefit to MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic. The frequency of grade 3 or worse adverse events was similar between treatment groups (246 [16%] of 1515 patients in the MAGE-A3 group and 122 [16%] of 757 in the placebo group). The most frequently reported grade 3 or higher adverse events were infections and infestations (37 [2%] in the MAGE-A3 group and 19 [3%] in the placebo group), vascular disorders (30 [2%] vs 17 [3%]), and neoplasm (benign, malignant, and unspecified (29 [2%] vs 16 [2%]). Adjuvant treatment with the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic did not increase disease-free survival compared with placebo in patients with MAGE-A3-positive surgically resected NSCLC. Based on our results, further development of the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic for use in NSCLC has been stopped. GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA.

Denosumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds to, and inhibits, the receptor activator of RANKL (TNFSF11) and might affect breast cancer biology, as shown by preclinical evidence. We aimed to assess whether denosumab combined with standard-of-care adjuvant or neoadjuvant systemic therapy and locoregional treatments would increase bone metastasis-free survival in women with breast cancer. In this international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (D-CARE), patients were recruited from 389 centres in 39 countries. We enrolled women (aged ≥ 18 years) with histologically confirmed stage II or III breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. On eligibility confirmation, investigators at each site telephoned an interactive voice response system to centrally randomly assign patients (1:1) based on a fixed stratified permuted block randomisation list (block size 4) to receive either denosumab (120 mg) or matching placebo subcutaneously every 3–4 weeks, starting with neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy, for about 6 months and then every 12 weeks for a total duration of 5 years. Stratification factors were breast cancer therapy, lymph node status, hormone receptor and HER2 status, age, and geographical region. The primary endpoint was the composite endpoint of bone metastasis-free survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01077154. Between June 2, 2010, and Aug 24, 2012, 4509 women were randomly assigned to receive denosumab (n=2256) or placebo (n=2253) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The primary analysis of the study was done when all patients had the opportunity to complete 5 years of follow-up with an analysis data cutoff date of Aug 31, 2017. The primary endpoint of bone metastasis-free survival was not significantly different between the groups (median not reached in either group; hazard ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·82–1·14; p=0·70). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events, reported in patients who had at least one dose of the investigational product (2241 patients with denosumab vs 2218 patients with placebo), were neutropenia (340 [15%] vs 328 [15%]), febrile neutropenia (112 [5%] vs 142 [6%]), and leucopenia (62 [3%] vs 61 [3%]). Positively adjudicated osteonecrosis of the jaw occurred in 122 (5%) of 2241 patients treated with denosumab versus four (<1%) of 2218 patients treated with placebo; treatment-emergent hypocalcaemia occurred in 152 (7%) versus 82 (4%). Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the placebo group due to acute myeloid leukaemia and depressed level of consciousness. Despite preclinical evidence suggesting RANKL inhibition might delay bone metastasis or disease recurrence in patients with early-stage breast cancer, in this study, denosumab did not improve disease-related outcomes for women with high-risk early breast cancer. Amgen.

Pembrolizumab monotherapy showed durable antitumour activity and manageable safety in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. We aimed to examine whether the addition of pembrolizumab would enhance the antitumour activity of chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, done in 209 sites in 29 countries, we randomly assigned patients 2:1 with untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer using a block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice-response system with integrated web-response to pembrolizumab (200 mg) every 3 weeks plus chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel; paclitaxel; or gemcitabine plus carboplatin) or placebo plus chemotherapy. Randomisation was stratified by type of on-study chemotherapy (taxane or gemcitabine–carboplatin), PD-L1 expression at baseline (combined positive score [CPS] ≥1 or <1), and previous treatment with the same class of chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting (yes or no). Eligibility criteria included age at least 18 years, centrally confirmed triple-negative breast cancer; at least one measurable lesion; provision of a newly obtained tumour sample for determination of triple-negative breast cancer status and PD-L1 status by immunohistochemistry at a central laboratory; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 0 or 1; and adequate organ function. The sponsor, investigators, other study site staff (except for the unmasked pharmacist), and patients were masked to pembrolizumab versus saline placebo administration. In addition, the sponsor, the investigators, other study site staff, and patients were masked to patient-level tumour PD-L1 biomarker results. Dual primary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival assessed in the PD-L1 CPS of 10 or more, CPS of 1 or more, and intention-to-treat populations. The definitive assessment of progression-free survival was done at this interim analysis; follow-up to assess overall survival is continuing. For progression-free survival, a hierarchical testing strategy was used, such that testing was done first in patients with CPS of 10 or more (prespecified statistical criterion was α=0·00411 at this interim analysis), then in patients with CPS of 1 or more (α=0·00111 at this interim analysis, with partial alpha from progression-free survival in patients with CPS of 10 or more passed over), and finally in the intention-to-treat population (α=0·00111 at this interim analysis). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518, and is ongoing. Between Jan 9, 2017, and June 12, 2018, of 1372 patients screened, 847 were randomly assigned to treatment, with 566 patients in the pembrolizumab–chemotherapy group and 281 patients in the placebo–chemotherapy group. At the second interim analysis (data cutoff, Dec 11, 2019), median follow-up was 25·9 months (IQR 22·8–29·9) in the pembrolizumab–chemotherapy group and 26·3 months (22·7–29·7) in the placebo–chemotherapy group. Among patients with CPS of 10 or more, median progression-free survival was 9·7 months with pembrolizumab–chemotherapy and 5·6 months with placebo–chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for progression or death, 0·65, 95% CI 0·49–0·86; one-sided p=0·0012 [primary objective met]). Median progression-free survival was 7·6 and 5·6 months (HR, 0·74, 0·61–0·90; one-sided p=0·0014 [not significant]) among patients with CPS of 1 or more and 7·5 and 5·6 months (HR, 0·82, 0·69–0·97 [not tested]) among the intention-to-treat population. The pembrolizumab treatment effect increased with PD-L1 enrichment. Grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse event rates were 68% in the pembrolizumab–chemotherapy group and 67% in the placebo–chemotherapy group, including death in <1% in the pembrolizumab–chemotherapy group and 0% in the placebo–chemotherapy group. Pembrolizumab–chemotherapy showed a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival versus placebo–chemotherapy among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer with CPS of 10 or more. These findings suggest a role for the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.

Capivasertib (AZD5363) is a potent selective oral inhibitor of all three isoforms of the serine/threonine kinase AKT. The FAKTION trial investigated whether the addition of capivasertib to fulvestrant improved progression-free survival in patients with aromatase inhibitor-resistant advanced breast cancer. In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, postmenopausal women aged at least 18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 and oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic or locally advanced inoperable breast cancer who had relapsed or progressed on an aromatase inhibitor were recruited from 19 hospitals in the UK. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (day 1) every 28 days (plus a loading dose on day 15 of cycle 1) with either capivasertib 400 mg or matching placebo, orally twice daily on an intermittent weekly schedule of 4 days on and 3 days off (starting on cycle 1 day 15) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, loss to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent. Treatment allocation was done using an interactive web-response system using a minimisation method (with a 20% random element) and the following minimisation factors: measurable or non-measurable disease, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, PIK3CA status, and PTEN status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with a one-sided alpha of 0·20. Analyses were done by intention to treat. Recruitment is complete, and the trial is in follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01992952. Between March 16, 2015, and March 6, 2018, 183 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 140 (76%) were eligible and were randomly assigned to receive fulvestrant plus capivasertib (n=69) or fulvestrant plus placebo (n=71). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 4·9 months (IQR 1·6–11·6). At the time of primary analysis for progression-free survival (Jan 30, 2019), 112 progression-free survival events had occurred, 49 (71%) in 69 patients in the capivasertib group compared with 63 (89%) of 71 in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was 10·3 months (95% CI 5·0–13·2) in the capivasertib group versus 4·8 months (3·1–7·7) in the placebo group, giving an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0·58 (95% CI 0·39–0·84) in favour of the capivasertib group (two-sided p=0·0044; one-sided log rank test p=0·0018). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were hypertension (22 [32%] of 69 patients in the capivasertib group vs 17 [24%] of 71 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (ten [14%] vs three [4%]), rash (14 [20%] vs 0), infection (four [6%] vs two [3%]), and fatigue (one [1%] vs three [4%]). Serious adverse reactions occurred only in the capivasertib group, and were acute kidney injury (two), diarrhoea (three), rash (two), hyperglycaemia (one), loss of consciousness (one), sepsis (one), and vomiting (one). One death, due to atypical pulmonary infection, was assessed as possibly related to capivasertib treatment. One further death in the capivasertib group had an unknown cause; all remaining deaths in both groups (19 in the capivasertib group and 31 in the placebo group) were disease related. Progression-free survival was significantly longer in participants who received capivasertib than in those who received placebo. The combination of capivasertib and fulvestrant warrants further investigation in phase 3 trials. AstraZeneca and Cancer Research UK.

Inhibition of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) is a promising approach to overcome resistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer. Pictilisib is an oral inhibitor of multiple PI3K isoforms. The aim of this study is to establish if addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant can improve progression-free survival in oestrogen receptor-positive, endocrine-resistant breast cancer. In this two-part, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, we recruited postmenopausal women aged 18 years or older with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer resistant to treatment with an aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant or metastatic setting, from 123 medical centres across 21 countries. Part 1 included patients with or without PIK3CA mutations, whereas part 2 included only patients with PIK3CA mutations. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 in part 1 and 2:1 in part 2) via a computer-generated hierarchical randomisation algorithm to daily oral pictilisib (340 mg in part 1 and 260 mg in part 2) or placebo starting on day 15 of cycle 1, plus intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg on day 1 and day 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of subsequent cycles in both groups. In part 1, we stratified patients by presence or absence of PIK3CA mutation, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, and measurable or non-measurable disease. In part 2, we stratified patients by previous aromatase inhibitor treatment for advanced or metastatic disease or relapse during or within 6 months of an aromatase inhibitor treatment in the adjuvant setting and measurable or non-measurable disease. All patients and those administering treatment and assessing outcomes were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population for both parts 1 and 2 and also separately in patients with PIK3CA-mutated tumours in part 1. Tumour assessment (physical examination and imaging scans) was investigator-assessed and done at screening and after 8 weeks, 16 weeks, 24 weeks, and 32 weeks of treatment from day 1 of cycle 1 and every 12 weeks thereafter. We assessed safety in as-treated patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01437566. In part 1, between Sept 27, 2011, and Jan 11, 2013, we randomly allocated 168 patients to the pictilisib (89 [53%]) or placebo (79 [47%]) group. In part 2, between March 18, 2013, and Jan 2, 2014, we randomly allocated 61 patients to the pictilisib (41 [67%]) or placebo (20 [33%]) group. In part 1, we found no difference in median progression-free survival between the pictilisib (6·6 months [95% CI 3·9–9·8]) and placebo (5·1 months [3·6–7·3]) group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·52–1·06]; p=0·096). We also found no difference when patients were analysed according to presence (pictilisib 6·5 months [95% CI 3·7–9·8] vs placebo 5·1 months [2·6–10·4]; HR 0·73 [95% CI 0·42–1·28]; p=0·268) or absence (5·8 months [3·6–11·1] vs 3·6 months [2·8–7·3]; HR 0·72 [0·42–1·23]; p=0·23) of PIK3CA mutation. In part 2, we also found no difference in progression-free survival between groups (5·4 months [95% CI 3·8–8·3] vs 10·0 months [3·6–13·0]; HR 1·07 [95% CI 0·53–2·18]; p=0·84). In part 1, grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 54 (61%) of 89 patients in the pictilisib group and 22 (28%) of 79 in the placebo group. 19 serious adverse events related to pictilisib treatment were reported in 14 (16%) of 89 patients. Only one (1%) of 79 patients reported treatment-related serious adverse events in the placebo group. In part 2, grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 15 (36%) of 42 patients in the pictilisib group and seven (37%) of 19 patients in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events related to pictilisib treatment were reported in two (5%) of 42 patients. One treatment-related serious adverse event occurred in one (5%) of 19 patients in the placebo group. Although addition of pictilisib to fulvestrant did not significantly improve progression-free survival, dosing of pictilisib was limited by toxicity, potentially limiting its efficacy. For future assessment of PI3K inhibition as an approach to overcome resistance to hormonal therapy, inhibitors with greater selectivity than that of pictilisib might be needed to improve tolerability and potentially increase efficacy. No further investigation of pictilisib in this setting is ongoing. F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Biomarkers to improve the risk–benefit of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy for late recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer would be clinically valuable. We compared the prognostic ability of the breast-cancer index (BCI) assay, 21-gene recurrence score (Oncotype DX), and an immunohistochemical prognostic model (IHC4) for both early and late recurrence in patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive, node-negative (N0) disease who took part in the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) clinical trial. In this prospective comparison study, we obtained archival tumour blocks from the TransATAC tissue bank from all postmenopausal patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer from whom the 21-gene recurrence score and IHC4 values had already been derived. We did BCI analysis in matched samples with sufficient residual RNA using two BCI models—cubic (BCI-C) and linear (BCI-L)—using previously validated cutoffs. We assessed prognostic ability of BCI for distant recurrence over 10 years (the primary endpoint) and compared it with that of the 21-gene recurrence score and IHC4. We also tested the ability of the assays to predict early (0–5 years) and late (5–10 years) distant recurrence. To assess the ability of the biomarkers to predict recurrence beyond standard clinicopathological variables, we calculated the change in the likelihood-ratio χ2 (LR-Δχ2) from Cox proportional hazards models. Suitable tissue was available from 665 patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive, N0 breast cancer for BCI analysis. The primary analysis showed significant differences in risk of distant recurrence over 10 years in the categorical BCI-C risk groups (p<0·0001) with 6·8% (95% CI 4·4–10·0) of patients in the low-risk group, 17·3% (12·0–24·7) in the intermediate group, and 22·2% (15·3–31·5) in the high-risk group having distant recurrence. The secondary analysis showed that BCI-L was a much stronger predictor for overall (0–10 year) distant recurrence compared with BCI-C (interquartile HR 2·30 [95% CI 1·62–3·27]; LR-Δχ2=22·69; p<0·0001). When compared with BCI-L, the 21-gene recurrence score was less predictive (HR 1·48 [95% CI 1·22–1·78]; LR-Δχ2=13·68; p=0·0002) and IHC4 was similar (HR 1·69 [95% CI 1·51–2·56]; LR-Δχ2=22·83; p<0·0001). All further analyses were done with the BCI-L model. In a multivariable analysis, all assays had significant prognostic ability for early distant recurrence (BCI-L HR 2·77 [95% CI 1·63–4·70], LR-Δχ2=15·42, p<0·0001; 21-gene recurrence score HR 1·80 [1·42–2·29], LR-Δχ2=18·48, p<0·0001; IHC4 HR 2·90 [2·01–4·18], LR-Δχ2=29·14, p<0·0001); however, only BCI-L was significant for late distant recurrence (BCI-L HR 1·95 [95% CI 1·22–3·14], LR-Δχ2=7·97, p=0·0048; 21-gene recurrence score HR 1·13 [0·82–1·56], LR-Δχ2=0·48, p=0·47; IHC4 HR 1·30 [0·88–1·94], LR-Δχ2=1·59, p=0·20). BCI-L was the only significant prognostic test for risk of both early and late distant recurrence and identified two risk populations for each timeframe. It could help to identify patients at high risk for late distant recurrence who might benefit from extended endocrine or other therapy. Avon Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Breast Cancer Foundation, US Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program, Susan G Komen for the Cure, Breakthrough Breast Cancer through the Mary-Jean Mitchell Green Foundation, AstraZeneca, Cancer Research UK, and the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the Royal Marsden (London, UK).

Breast cancer mortality is principally due to recurrent tumors that arise from a reservoir of residual tumor cells that survive therapy. Remarkably, breast cancers can recur after extended periods of clinical remission, implying that at least some residual tumor cells pass through a dormant phase prior to relapse. Nevertheless, the mechanisms that contribute to breast cancer recurrence are poorly understood. Using a mouse model of recurrent mammary tumorigenesis in combination with bioinformatics analyses of breast cancer patients, we have identified a role for Notch signaling in mammary tumor dormancy and recurrence. Specifically, we found that Notch signaling is acutely upregulated in tumor cells following HER2/neu pathway inhibition, that Notch signaling remains activated in a subset of dormant residual tumor cells that persist following HER2/neu downregulation, that activation of Notch signaling accelerates tumor recurrence, and that inhibition of Notch signaling by either genetic or pharmacological approaches impairs recurrence in mice. Consistent with these findings, meta-analysis of microarray data from over 4,000 breast cancer patients revealed that elevated Notch pathway activity is independently associated with an increased rate of recurrence. Together, these results implicate Notch signaling in tumor recurrence from dormant residual tumor cells and provide evidence that dormancy is a targetable stage of breast cancer progression.

IntroductionAlterations in the CDK4/6—RB signaling pathway are common causes of cell cycle dysregulation in many cancers, including glioblastoma. Palbociclib is an oral inhibitor of CDK4/6, which leads to phosphorylation of RB1 and cell-cycle arrest. We conducted a two-arm study evaluating efficacy and tissue pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of palbociclib in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.MethodsEligibility criteria included confirmation of RB1 proficiency by IHC; ≤ 3 relapses; KPS ≥ 60; no limit on prior treatments. Arm 1 received palbociclib for 7 days prior to indicated resection followed by adjuvant palbociclib. Arm 2 received palbociclib without resection. Primary objective was PFS6; secondary included toxicity, OS, and ORR. Exploratory aims included biomarker assessment and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic effects in surgical patients.ResultsTotal of 22 patients were enrolled; 6 on Arm 1 and 16 on Arm 2. Trial was stopped early secondary to lack of efficacy, with 95% of evaluable patients progressing within 6 months. Median PFS was 5.14 weeks (range 5 days–142 weeks) and median OS was 15.4 weeks (range 2–274 weeks). Two patients (10%) had related grade ≥ 3 AEs. In Arm 1, 5 patients had tissue concentrations of palbociclib felt to be sufficient for biological effect and paired samples available for RB1 IHC. There were no consistent changes in RB1 expression or cell proliferation in the paired tissue.ConclusionIn this trial, despite adequate tissue PK, palbociclib monotherapy was not an effective treatment for recurrent glioblastoma. However, these were heavily pretreated patients and targeting the CDK4/6 pathway may still deserve further exploration.

BackgroundThe definition and predictors of early recurrence (ER) for gastric cancer (GC) patients after radical gastrectomy are unclear.MethodsA minimum-p value approach was used to evaluate the optimal cutoff value of recurrence-free survival to determine ER and late recurrence (LR). Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated for inflammatory indices. Potential risk factors for ER were assessed with a Cox regression model. A decision curve analysis was performed to evaluate the clinical utility.ResultsA total of 401 patients recruited in a clinical trial (NCT02327481) from January 2015 to April 2016 were included in this study. The optimal length of recurrence-free survival to distinguish between ER (n = 44) and LR (n = 52) was 12 months. Factors associated with ER included a preoperative C-reactive protein–albumin ratio (CAR) ≥ 0.131, stage III and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (PAC) > 3 cycles. The risk model consisting of both the CAR and TNM stage had a higher predictive ability and better clinical utility than TNM stage alone. Further stratification analysis of the stage III patients found that for the patients with a CAR < 0.131, both PAC with 1–3 cycles (p = 0.029) and > 3 cycles (p < 0.001) could reduce the risk of ER. However, for patients with a CAR ≥ 0.131, a benefit was observed only if they received PAC > 3 cycles (54.2% vs 16.0%, p = 0.004), rather than 1–3 cycles (58.3% vs 54.2%, p = 0.824).ConclusionsA recurrence-free interval of 12 months was found to be the optimal threshold for differentiating between ER and LR. Preoperative CAR was a promising predictor of ER and PAC response. PAC with 1–3 cycles may not exert a protective effect against ER for stage III GC patients with CAR ≥ 0.131.

Background Positron emission tomography targeting the prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA PET/CT) has demonstrated unparalleled performance as a staging examination for prostate cancer resulting in substantial changes in management. However, the impact of altered management on patient outcomes is largely unknown. This study aims to assess the impact of intensified radiotherapy or surgery guided by PSMA PET/CT in patients at risk of advanced prostate cancer. Methods This pan-Canadian phase III randomized controlled trial will enroll 776 men with either untreated high risk prostate cancer (CAPRA score 6–10 or stage cN1) or biochemically recurrent prostate cancer post radical prostatectomy (PSA > 0.1 ng/mL). Patients will be randomized 1:1 to either receive conventional imaging or conventional plus PSMA PET imaging, with intensification of radiotherapy or surgery to newly identified disease sites. The primary endpoint is failure free survival at 5 years. Secondary endpoints include rates of adverse events, time to next-line therapy, as well as impact on health-related quality of life and cost effectiveness as measured by incremental cost per Quality Adjusted Life Years gained. Discussion This study will help create level 1 evidence needed to demonstrate whether or not intensification of radiotherapy or surgery based on PSMA PET findings improves outcomes of patients at risk of advanced prostate cancer in a manner that is cost-effective. Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04557501 on September 21, 2020.