Gun Wickart-Johansson

Tecemotide (L-BLP25) versus placebo after chemoradiotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (START): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Effective maintenance therapies after chemoradiotherapy for lung cancer are lacking. Our aim was to investigate whether the MUC1 antigen-specific cancer immunotherapy tecemotide improves survival in patients with stage III unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer when given as maintenance therapy after chemoradiation. METHODS The phase 3 START trial was an international, randomised, double-blind trial that recruited patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer who had completed chemoradiotherapy within the 4-12 week window before randomisation and received confirmation of stable disease or objective response. Patients were stratified by stage (IIIA vs IIIB), response to chemoradiotherapy (stable disease vs objective response), delivery of chemoradiotherapy (concurrent vs sequential), and region using block randomisation, and were randomly assigned (2:1, double-blind) by a central interactive voice randomisation system to either tecemotide or placebo. Injections of tecemotide (806 μg lipopeptide) or placebo were given every week for 8 weeks, and then every 6 weeks until disease progression or withdrawal. Cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m(2) (before tecemotide) or saline (before placebo) was given once before the first study drug administration. The primary endpoint was overall survival in a modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00409188. FINDINGS From Feb 22, 2007, to Nov 15, 2011, 1513 patients were randomly assigned (1006 to tecemotide and 507 to placebo). 274 patients were excluded from the primary analysis population as a result of a clinical hold, resulting in analysis of 829 patients in the tecemotide group and 410 in the placebo group in the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was 25.6 months (95% CI 22.5-29.2) with tecemotide versus 22.3 months (19.6-25.5) with placebo (adjusted HR 0.88, 0.75-1.03; p=0.123). In the patients who received previous concurrent chemoradiotherapy, median overall survival for the 538 (65%) of 829 patients assigned to tecemotide was 30.8 months (95% CI 25.6-36.8) compared with 20.6 months (17.4-23.9) for the 268 (65%) of 410 patients assigned to placebo (adjusted HR 0.78, 0.64-0.95; p=0.016). In patients who received previous sequential chemoradiotherapy, overall survival did not differ between the 291 (35%) patients in the tecemotide group and the 142 (35%) patients in the placebo group (19.4 months [95% CI 17.6-23.1] vs 24.6 months [18.8-33.0], respectively; adjusted HR 1.12, 0.87-1.44; p=0.38). Grade 3-4 adverse events seen with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were dyspnoea (49 [5%] of 1024 patients in the tecemotide group vs 21 [4%] of 477 patients in the placebo group), metastases to central nervous system (29 [3%] vs 6 [1%]), and pneumonia (23 [2%] vs 12 [3%]). Serious adverse events with a greater than 2% frequency with tecemotide were pneumonia (30 [3%] in the tecemotide group vs 14 [3%] in the placebo group), dyspnoea (29 [3%] vs 13 [3%]), and metastases to central nervous system (32 [3%] vs 9 [2%]). Serious immune-related adverse events did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION We found no significant difference in overall survival with the administration of tecemotide after chemoradiotherapy compared with placebo for all patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. However, tecemotide might have a role for patients who initially receive concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and further study in this population is warranted. FUNDING Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany).

Two-year results from a Swedish study on conventional versus accelerated radiotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma The ARTSCAN study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Studies on accelerated fractionation (AF) in head and neck cancer have shown increased local control and survival compared with conventional fractionation (CF), while others have been non-conclusive. In 1998 a national Swedish group decided to perform a randomised controlled clinical study of AF. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with verified squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx (except glottic T1-T2, N0) and hypopharynx were included. Patients with prior chemotherapy or surgery were excluded. Patients were randomised to either CF (2Gy/day, 5days/week for 7 weeks, total dose 68Gy) or to AF (1.1Gy+2.0Gy/day, 5days/week for 4.5weeks, total dose 68Gy). An extensive quality assurance protocol was followed throughout the study. The primary end point was loco-regional tumour control (LRC) at two years after treatment. RESULTS The study was closed in 2006 when 750 patients had been randomised. Eighty-three percent of the patients had stages III-IV disease. Forty eight percent had oropharyngeal, 21% laryngeal, 17% hypopharyngeal and 14% oral cancers. There were no significant differences regarding overall survival (OS) or LRC between the two regimens. The OS at two years was 68% for AF and 67% for CF. The corresponding figures for LRC were 71% and 67%, respectively. There was a trend towards improved LRC for oral cancers treated (p=0.07) and for large tumours (T3-T4) (p=0.07) treated with AF. The AF group had significantly worse acute reactions, while there was no significant increase in late effects. CONCLUSION Overall the AF regimen did not prove to be more efficacious than CF. However, the trend towards improved results in AF for oral cancers needs to be further investigated.

Mature results from a Swedish comparison study of conventional versus accelerated radiotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma – The ARTSCAN trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE This report contains the mature five-year data from the Swedish ARTSCAN trial including information on the influence of p16 positivity (p16+) for oropharyngeal cancers. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients with previously untreated squamous cell carcinoma without distant metastases of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx (except T1-2, N0 glottic cancers) and hypopharynx were included. Patients were randomised between accelerated fractionation (AF) (1.1Gy+2Gy per day, 5days/week for 4.5weeks, total dose 68Gy) and conventional fractionation (CF) (2Gy per day, 5days/week for 7weeks, total dose 68Gy). Human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated p16-expression was assessed retrospectively in tumour tissues from patients with oropharyngeal carcinoma. RESULTS There was no significant difference in loco-regional control (LRC) between AF and CF (log-rank test p=0.75). LRC at 5years was 65.5% for AF and 64.9% for CF. Overall survival (OS) was similar in both arms (p=0.99). The estimated cancer specific survival (CSS) at 5years was 62.2% (AF) and 63.3% (CF) (p=0.99). 206 specimens were analysed for p16 with 153 specimens (74%) identified as p16+. P16 status did not discriminate for response to AF vs. CF with regard to LRC, OS or CSS. Patients with p16+ tumours had a statistically significant better overall prognosis compared with p16- tumours. CONCLUSION This update confirms the results of the 2-year report. We failed to identify a positive effect resulting from AF with regards to LRC, OS and CSS. The addition of information on the HPV-associated p16 overexpression did not explain this lack of effect.

Differences in health related quality of life in the randomised ARTSCAN study; accelerated vs. conventional radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. A five year follow up.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Health related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed in the randomised, prospective ARTSCAN study comparing conventional radiotherapy (CF) with accelerated radiotherapy (AF) for head and neck cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS 750 patients with squamous cell carcinoma (of any grade and stage) in the oral cavity, oro-, or hypopharynx or larynx (except T1-2, N0 glottic carcinoma) without distant metastases were randomised to either conventional fractionation (2 Gy/day, 5 days/week in 49 days, total dose 68 Gy) or accelerated fractionation (1.1+2.0 Gy/day, 5 days/week in 35 days, total dose 68 Gy). HRQoL was assessed with EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-H&N35 and HADS at baseline, at end of radiotherapy (eRT) and at 3 and 6 months and 1, 2 and 5 years after start of treatment. RESULTS The AF group reported HRQoL was significantly lower at eRT and at 3 months for most symptoms, scales and functions. Few significant differences were noted between the groups at 6 months and 5 years. Scores related to functional oral intake never reached baseline. CONCLUSION In comparison to CF, AF has a stronger adverse effect on HRQoL in the acute phase.

It Is Tough and Tiring but It Works--Children's Experiences of Undergoing Radiotherapy.

Approximately 300 children ages 0 to 18 are diagnosed with cancer in Sweden every year, and 80 to 90 of them undergo radiotherapy treatment. The aim was to describe children’s experiences of preparing for and undergoing radiotherapy, and furthermore to describe children’s suggestions for improvement. Thirteen children between the ages of 5 and 15 with various cancer diagnoses were interviewed. Data was analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The findings revealed five categories: positive and negative experiences with hospital stays and practical arrangements; age-appropriate information, communication, and guidance to various degrees; struggle with emotions; use of distraction and other suitable coping strategies; and children’s suggestions for improvement during radiotherapy. An overarching theme emerged: “It is tough and tiring but it works”. Some key areas were: explanatory visits, the need for information and communication, being afraid, discomfort and suffering, the need for media distraction, dealing with emotions, and the need for support. A systematic, family-centered preparation program could possible help families prepare and individualized distraction during radiotherapy could contribute to reducing distress. Further studies with interventions could clarify successful programs.

Children Undergoing Radiotherapy: Swedish Parents' Experiences and Suggestions for Improvement

Approximately 300 children, from 0 to 18 years old, are diagnosed with cancer in Sweden every year. Of these children, 80–90 of them undergo radiotherapy treatment for their cancer. Although radiotherapy is an encounter with advanced technology, few studies have investigated the child’s and the parent’s view of the procedure. As part of an ongoing multicenter study aimed to improve patient preparation and the care environment in pediatric radiotherapy, this article reports the findings from interviews with parents at baseline. The aim of the present study was twofold: to describe parents’ experience when their child undergoes radiotherapy treatment, and to report parents’ suggestions for improvements during radiotherapy for their children. Sixteen mothers and sixteen fathers of children between 2–16 years old with various cancer diagnoses were interviewed. Data were analyzed using content analysis. The findings showed that cancer and treatment turns people’s lives upside down, affecting the entire family. Further, the parents experience the child’s suffering and must cope with intense feelings. Radiotherapy treatment includes preparation by skilled and empathetic staff. The parents gradually find that they can deal with the process; and lastly, parents have suggestions for improvements during the radiotherapy treatment. An overarching theme emerged: that despair gradually turns to a sense of security, with a sustained focus on and close interaction with the child. In conclusion, an extreme burden was experienced around the start of radiotherapy, though parents gradually coped with the process.

Parents’ Experiences and Responses to an Intervention for Psychological Preparation of Children and Families During the Child’s Radiotherapy:

The aim of this study was to evaluate parents’ experiences and responses to a systematic intervention for psychological preparation of children and families during the child’s radiotherapy (RT) treatment. In this case-control study at 3 pediatric RT centers, an intervention with a preparatory kit, including age-adjusted information on tablets, gift of a stuffed toy or a pair of headphones, a parent booklet, and toy models of the computed tomography and RT machines was implemented. For evaluation, a mixed methods data collection was conducted. A total of 113 parents of children undergoing RT were included—n = 59 in the baseline group and n = 54 in the intervention group. Health-related quality of life was rated low, but parents in the intervention group expressed less anxiety after the RT compared with the baseline group. They found information suitable for their young children, siblings, and friends were involved and the toy models were used for play. Parents expressed positive feelings due to close interaction with staff and each other within the family. The solutions developed within a human-centered design approach and shaped as a systematic family-centered strategy contributed to parents understanding and coping with the child’s RT.