Ruth E. Langley

BACKGROUND: A regimen of epirubicin, cisplatin, and infused fluorouracil (ECF) improves survival among patients with incurable locally advanced or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma. We assessed whether the addition of a perioperative regimen of ECF to surgery improves outcomes among patients with potentially curable gastric cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach, esophagogastric junction, or lower esophagus to either perioperative chemotherapy and surgery (250 patients) or surgery alone (253 patients). Chemotherapy consisted of three preoperative and three postoperative cycles of intravenous epirubicin (50 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and cisplatin (60 mg per square meter) on day 1, and a continuous intravenous infusion of fluorouracil (200 mg per square meter per day) for 21 days. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: ECF-related adverse effects were similar to those previously reported among patients with advanced gastric cancer. Rates of postoperative complications were similar in the perioperative-chemotherapy group and the surgery group (46 percent and 45 percent, respectively), as were the numbers of deaths within 30 days after surgery. The resected tumors were significantly smaller and less advanced in the perioperative-chemotherapy group. With a median follow-up of four years, 149 patients in the perioperative-chemotherapy group and 170 in the surgery group had died. As compared with the surgery group, the perioperative-chemotherapy group had a higher likelihood of overall survival (hazard ratio for death, 0.75; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.93; P=0.009; five-year survival rate, 36 percent vs. 23 percent) and of progression-free survival (hazard ratio for progression, 0.66; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.81; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with operable gastric or lower esophageal adenocarcinomas, a perioperative regimen of ECF decreased tumor size and stage and significantly improved progression-free and overall survival. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN93793971 [controlled-trials.com].).

BACKGROUND: Based on previous findings, we hypothesised that radiotherapy to the prostate would improve overall survival in men with metastatic prostate cancer, and that the benefit would be greatest in patients with a low metastatic burden. We aimed to compare standard of care for metastatic prostate cancer, with and without radiotherapy. METHODS: We did a randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 117 hospitals in Switzerland and the UK. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. We randomly allocated patients open-label in a 1:1 ratio to standard of care (control group) or standard of care and radiotherapy (radiotherapy group). Randomisation was stratified by hospital, age at randomisation, nodal involvement, WHO performance status, planned androgen deprivation therapy, planned docetaxel use (from December, 2015), and regular aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. Standard of care was lifelong androgen deprivation therapy, with up-front docetaxel permitted from December, 2015. Men allocated radiotherapy received either a daily (55 Gy in 20 fractions over 4 weeks) or weekly (36 Gy in six fractions over 6 weeks) schedule that was nominated before randomisation. The primary outcome was overall survival, measured as the number of deaths; this analysis had 90% power with a one-sided α of 2·5% for a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·75. Secondary outcomes were failure-free survival, progression-free survival, metastatic progression-free survival, prostate cancer-specific survival, and symptomatic local event-free survival. Analyses used Cox proportional hazards and flexible parametric models, adjusted for stratification factors. The primary outcome analysis was by intention to treat. Two prespecified subgroup analyses tested the effects of prostate radiotherapy by baseline metastatic burden and radiotherapy schedule. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476. FINDINGS: Between Jan 22, 2013, and Sept 2, 2016, 2061 men underwent randomisation, 1029 were allocated the control and 1032 radiotherapy. Allocated groups were balanced, with a median age of 68 years (IQR 63-73) and median amount of prostate-specific antigen of 97 ng/mL (33-315). 367 (18%) patients received early docetaxel. 1082 (52%) participants nominated the daily radiotherapy schedule before randomisation and 979 (48%) the weekly schedule. 819 (40%) men had a low metastatic burden, 1120 (54%) had a high metastatic burden, and the metastatic burden was unknown for 122 (6%). Radiotherapy improved failure-free survival (HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·68-0·84; p<0·0001) but not overall survival (0·92, 0·80-1·06; p=0·266). Radiotherapy was well tolerated, with 48 (5%) adverse events (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group grade 3-4) reported during radiotherapy and 37 (4%) after radiotherapy. The proportion reporting at least one severe adverse event (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or worse) was similar by treatment group in the safety population (398 [38%] with control and 380 [39%] with radiotherapy). INTERPRETATION: Radiotherapy to the prostate did not improve overall survival for unselected patients with newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Medical Research Council, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis.

PURPOSE: OEO2 is a randomized, controlled trial of preoperative chemotherapy in patients undergoing radical surgery for esophageal cancer. Random assignment was to surgery alone (S) or to two cycles of combination cisplatin and fluorouracil before surgery (CS). Initial results reported in 2002 demonstrated an advantage for both disease-free and overall survival in the CS group. The analysis has now been updated after a median follow-up of 6 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: OEO2 recruited 802 patients, 400 on CS and 402 on S. The nature of the first recurrence event and cause of death are detailed. Survival has been determined from Kaplan-Meier curves and treatment comparisons made with the log-rank test. Survival by extent of resection is presented. RESULTS: There were 655 deaths, 335 for S and 320 for CS. The survival benefit has been maintained with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.98; P = .03) which in absolute terms is a 5-year survival of 23.0% for CS compared with 17.1% for S. The treatment effect is consistent in both adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma. The first disease-free survival event was macroscopic residual disease from incomplete resection (R2) or no resection in 26.4% of the S group versus 14.3% of the CS P < .001. Three-year survival by type of resection was R0 42.4%, R1 was 18.0%, and R2 was 8.6%. CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up confirms that preoperative chemotherapy improves survival in operable esophageal cancer and should be considered as a standard of care.

BACKGROUND: Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and dexamethasone are widely used to treat brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although there have been no randomised clinical trials showing that WBRT improves either quality of life or overall survival. Even after treatment with WBRT, the prognosis of this patient group is poor. We aimed to establish whether WBRT could be omitted without a significant effect on survival or quality of life. METHODS: The Quality of Life after Treatment for Brain Metastases (QUARTZ) study is a non-inferiority, phase 3 randomised trial done at 69 UK and three Australian centres. NSCLC patients with brain metastases unsuitable for surgical resection or stereotactic radiotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to optimal supportive care (OSC) including dexamethasone plus WBRT (20 Gy in five daily fractions) or OSC alone (including dexamethasone). The dose of dexamethasone was determined by the patients' symptoms and titrated downwards if symptoms improved. Allocation to treatment group was done by a phone call from the hospital to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London using a minimisation programme with a random element and stratification by centre, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), gender, status of brain metastases, and the status of primary lung cancer. The primary outcome measure was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). QALYs were generated from overall survival and patients' weekly completion of the EQ-5D questionnaire. Treatment with OSC alone was considered non-inferior if it was no more than 7 QALY days worse than treatment with WBRT plus OSC, which required 534 patients (80% power, 5% [one-sided] significance level). Analysis was done by intention to treat for all randomly assigned patients. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN3826061. FINDINGS: Between March 2, 2007, and Aug 29, 2014, 538 patients were recruited from 69 UK and three Australian centres, and were randomly assigned to receive either OSC plus WBRT (269) or OSC alone (269). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups, and the median age of participants was 66 years (range 38-85). Significantly more episodes of drowsiness, hair loss, nausea, and dry or itchy scalp were reported while patients were receiving WBRT, although there was no evidence of a difference in the rate of serious adverse events between the two groups. There was no evidence of a difference in overall survival (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·90-1·26), overall quality of life, or dexamethasone use between the two groups. The difference between the mean QALYs was 4·7 days (46·4 QALY days for the OSC plus WBRT group vs 41·7 QALY days for the OSC group), with two-sided 90% CI of -12·7 to 3·3. INTERPRETATION: Although the primary outcome measure result includes the prespecified non-inferiority margin, the combination of the small difference in QALYs and the absence of a difference in survival and quality of life between the two groups suggests that WBRT provides little additional clinically significant benefit for this patient group. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, and the National Health and Medical Research Council in Australia.

IMPORTANCE: Mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (MMRD) and microsatellite instability (MSI) are prognostic for survival in many cancers and for resistance to fluoropyrimidines in early colon cancer. However, the effect of MMRD and MSI in curatively resected gastric cancer treated with perioperative chemotherapy is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association among MMRD, MSI, and survival in patients with resectable gastroesophageal cancer randomized to surgery alone or perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy in the Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary post hoc analysis of the MAGIC trial included participants who were treated with surgery alone or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery for operable gastroesophageal cancer from July 1, 1994, through April 30, 2002. Tumor sections were assessed for expression of the MMR proteins mutL homologue 1, mutS homologue 2, mutS homologue 6, and PMS1 homologue 2. The association among MSI, MMRD, and survival was assessed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Interaction between MMRD and MSI status and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of the 503 study participants, MSI results were available for 303 patients (283 with microsatellite stability or low MSI [median age, 62 years; 219 males (77.4%)] and 20 with high MSI [median age, 66 years; 14 males (70.0%)]). A total of 254 patients had MSI and MMR results available. Patients treated with surgery alone who had high MSI or MMRD had a median OS that was not reached (95% CI, 11.5 months to not reached) compared with a median OS among those who had neither high MSI nor MMRD of 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.7-27.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.15-1.15; P = .09). In contrast, patients treated with chemotherapy plus surgery who had either high MSI or MMRD had a median OS of 9.6 months (95% CI, 0.1-22.5 months) compared with a median OS among those who were neither high MSI nor MMRD of 19.5 months (95% CI, 15.4-35.2 months; hazard ratio, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.08-4.42; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the MAGIC trial, MMRD and high MSI were associated with a positive prognostic effect in patients treated with surgery alone and a differentially negative prognostic effect in patients treated with chemotherapy. If independently validated, MSI or MMRD determined by preoperative biopsies could be used to select patients for perioperative chemotherapy.