John North
University of Otago
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by John North.
Lancet Oncology | 2005
Bryan Burmeister; B. Mark Smithers; Val Gebski; Lara Fitzgerald; R. John Simes; Peter G. Devitt; Stephen P. Ackland; D. C. Gotley; David Joseph; Jeremy Millar; John North; Euan Walpole; James W. Denham
BACKGROUND Resection remains the best treatment for carcinoma of the oesophagus in terms of local control, but local recurrence and distant metastasis remain an issue after surgery. We aimed to assess whether a short preoperative chemoradiotherapy regimen improves outcomes for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer. METHODS 128 patients were randomly assigned to surgery alone and 128 patients to surgery after 80 mg/m(2) cisplatin on day 1, 800 mg/m(2) fluorouracil on days 1-4, with concurrent radiotherapy of 35 Gy given in 15 fractions. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, tumour response, toxic effects, patterns of failure, and quality of life. Analysis was done by intention to treat. FINDINGS Neither progression-free survival nor overall survival differed between groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82 [95% CI 0.61-1.10] and 0.89 [0.67-1.19], respectively). The chemoradiotherapy-and-surgery group had more complete resections with clear margins than did the surgery-alone group (103 of 128 [80%] vs 76 of 128 [59%], p=0.0002), and had fewer positive lymph nodes (44 of 103 [43%] vs 69 of 103 [67%], p=0.003). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with squamous-cell tumours had better progression-free survival with chemoradiotherapy than did those with non-squamous tumours (HR 0.47 [0.25-0.86] vs 1.02 [0.72-1.44]). However, the trial was underpowered to determine the real magnitude of benefit in this subgroup. INTERPRETATION Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin and fluorouracil does not significantly improve progression-free or overall survival for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer compared with surgery alone. However, further assessment is warranted of the role of chemoradiotherapy in patients with squamous-cell tumours.
Lancet Oncology | 2011
James W. Denham; Allison Steigler; David S. Lamb; David Joseph; Sandra Turner; John Matthews; Chris Atkinson; John North; David Christie; Nigel Spry; Keen Hun Tai; Chris Wynne; Catherine D'Este
BACKGROUND The TROG 96.01 trial assessed whether 3-month and 6-month short-term neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (NADT) decreases clinical progression and mortality after radiotherapy for locally advanced prostate cancer. Here we report the 10-year results. METHODS Between June, 1996, and February, 2000, 818 men with T2b, T2c, T3, and T4 N0 M0 prostate cancers were randomly assigned to receive radiotherapy alone, 3 months of NADT plus radiotherapy, or 6 months of NADT plus radiotherapy. The radiotherapy dose for all groups was 66 Gy, delivered to the prostate and seminal vesicles (excluding pelvic nodes) in 33 fractions of 2 Gy per day (excluding weekends) over 6·5-7·0 weeks. NADT consisted of 3·6 mg goserelin given subcutaneously every month and 250 mg flutamide given orally three times a day. NADT began 2 months before radiotherapy for the 3-month NADT group and 5 months before radiotherapy for the 6-month NADT group. Primary endpoints were prostate-cancer-specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Treatment allocation was open label and randomisation was done with a minimisation technique according to age, clinical stage, tumour grade, and initial prostate-specific antigen concentration (PSA). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. The trial has been closed to follow-up and all main endpoint analyses are completed. The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12607000237482. FINDINGS 802 men were eligible for analysis (270 in the radiotherapy alone group, 265 in the 3-month NADT group, and 267 in the 6-month NADT group) after a median follow-up of 10·6 years (IQR 6·9-11·6). Compared with radiotherapy alone, 3 months of NADT decreased the cumulative incidence of PSA progression (adjusted hazard ratio 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·90; p=0·003) and local progression (0·49, 0·33-0·73; p=0·0005), and improved event-free survival (0·63, 0·52-0·77; p<0·0001). 6 months of NADT further reduced PSA progression (0·57, 0·46-0·72; p<0·0001) and local progression (0·45, 0·30-0·66; p=0·0001), and led to a greater improvement in event-free survival (0·51, 0·42-0·61, p<0·0001), compared with radiotherapy alone. 3-month NADT had no effect on distant progression (0·89, 0·60-1·31; p=0·550), prostate cancer-specific mortality (0·86, 0·60-1·23; p=0·398), or all-cause mortality (0·84, 0·65-1·08; p=0·180), compared with radiotherapy alone. By contrast, 6-month NADT decreased distant progression (0·49, 0·31-0·76; p=0·001), prostate cancer-specific mortality (0·49, 0·32-0·74; p=0·0008), and all-cause mortality (0·63, 0·48-0·83; p=0·0008), compared with radiotherapy alone. Treatment-related morbidity was not increased with NADT within the first 5 years after randomisation. INTERPRETATION 6 months of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation combined radiotherapy is an effective treatment option for locally advanced prostate cancer, particularly in men without nodal metastases or pre-existing metabolic comorbidities that could be exacerbated by prolonged androgen deprivation. FUNDING Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council, Hunter Medical Research Institute, AstraZeneca, and Schering-Plough.
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2003
David S. Lamb; James W. Denham; Hedy Mameghan; David Joseph; Sandra Turner; John Matthews; Ian Franklin; Chris Atkinson; John North; Michael Poulsen; Olga Kovacev; Randall Robertson; Lynne Francis; David Christie; Nigel Spry; Keen.-H Tai; Chris Wynne; Gillian Duchesne
PURPOSE To determine the acceptability of short term neo-adjuvant maximal androgen deprivation (MAD) to patients treated with external beam radiation for locally advanced prostate cancer. METHODS Between 1996 and 2000, 818 patients with locally advanced, but non-metastatic, prostate cancer were entered into a randomised clinical trial (TROG 96.01), which compared radiation treatment alone with the same radiation treatment and 3 or 6 months neo-adjuvant MAD with goserelin and flutamide. Relevant symptoms, and how troublesome they were to the patient, were scored using a self-assessment questionnaire. This was completed by the patient at registration, and at specified times during and after treatment. Patients taking flutamide had liver function tests checked at regular intervals. RESULTS All patients have completed at least 12 months follow-up after treatment. Nearly all patients completed planned treatment with goserelin, but 27% of patients in the 6-month MAD treatment arm, and 20% in the 3-month arm, had to stop flutamide early. This was mainly due to altered liver function (up to 17% patients) and bowel side effects (up to 8% patients). However, although flutamide resulted in more bowel symptoms for patients on MAD, there was significant reduction in some urinary symptoms on this treatment. Acute bowel and urinary side effects at the end of radiation treatment were similar in all treatment arms. Side effect severity was unrelated to radiation target volume size, which was reduced by MAD, but symptomatology prior to any treatment was a powerful predictor. Of the 36% of patients who were sexually active before any treatment, the majority became inactive whilst on MAD. However, sexual activity at 12 months after radiation treatment was similar in all treatment arms, indicating that the effects of short term MAD on sexual function are reversible. CONCLUSION Despite temporary effects on sexual activity, and compliance difficulties with flutamide, short-term neo-adjuvant MAD was not perceived by patients to be a major inconvenience. If neo-adjuvant MAD in the way tested can be demonstrated to lead to improved biochemical control and/or survival, then patients would view these therapeutic gains as worthwhile. Compliance with short-term goserelin was excellent, confirming that LH-RH analogues have a potential role in more long-term adjuvant treatment. However, for more protracted androgen deprivation, survival advantages and deleterious effects need to be assessed in parallel, in order to determine the optimal duration of treatment.
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology | 2007
John North; David Perez; Gary Fentiman; Peter Sykes; Alex Dempster; Maria Pearse
© 2007 The Authors 77 Journal compilation
Prostate Cancer | 2012
Allison Steigler; James W. Denham; David S. Lamb; Nigel Spry; David Joseph; John Matthews; Chris Atkinson; Sandra Turner; John North; David Christie; Keen Hun Tai; Chris Wynne
Purpose. Survival following biochemical failure is highly variable. Using a randomized trial dataset, we sought to define a risk stratification scheme in men with locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPC). Methods. The TROG 96.01 trial randomized 802 men with LAPC to radiation ± neoadjuvant androgen suppression therapy (AST) between 1996 and 2000. Ten-year follow-up data was used to develop three-tier post-biochemical failure risk stratification schemes based on cutpoints of time to biochemical failure (TTBF) and PSA doubling time (PSADT). Schemes were evaluated in univariable, competing risk models for prostate cancer-specific mortality. The performance was assessed by c-indices and internally validated by the simple bootstrap method. Performance rankings were compared in sensitivity analyses using multivariable models and variations in PSADT calculation. Results. 485 men developed biochemical failure. c-indices ranged between 0.630 and 0.730. The most discriminatory scheme had a high risk category defined by PSADT < 4 months or TTBF < 1 year and low risk category by PSADT > 9 months or TTBF > 3 years. Conclusion. TTBF and PSADT can be combined to define risk stratification schemes after biochemical failure in men with LAPC treated with short-term AST and radiotherapy. External validation, particularly in long-term AST and radiotherapy datasets, is necessary.
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2013
James W. Denham; Allison Steigler; Keen Hun Tai; David Joseph; John Matthews; Chris Atkinson; Nigel Spry; Sandra Turner; John North; David Christie; Chris Wynne; David S. Lamb
PURPOSE In the TROG 96.01 trial 6 month neo-adjuvant androgen suppression (NAS) and radiotherapy (RT) for locally advanced prostate cancer prevented distant progressions (DPs) when compared to RT alone, but 3 months did not. We ask why? METHODS Between 1996 and 2000, 802 men with T2-4 N0 M0 prostate cancers received RT alone (0 month NAS) to 66 Gy, 3 months or 6 months NAS before RT. Interval hazards and cumulative incidences of DP were compared using competing risks methodology. RESULTS In the first 4 follow-up years 39, 40 and 26 DPs were diagnosed in subjects treated with 0, 3 and 6 month NAS, respectively. Compared with 0 month, significant reductions in PSA doubling time in subjects with DP occurred following 3 month NAS (p=0.01), but a significant reduction (p=0.01) and a near significant delay in DPs (p=0.06) occurred after 6 month NAS. Subsequently 25, 20 and 11 DPs occurred in the three trial arms. After early secondary therapy for PSA or local progression 34, 19 and 12 DPs were diagnosed after median delays of almost 4 years. CONCLUSIONS The data are consistent with the failure of 3 month NAS to prevent the progression of sub-clinical metastatic deposits already present before treatment.
Lancet Oncology | 2005
James W. Denham; Allison Steigler; David S. Lamb; David Joseph; Hedy Mameghan; Sandra Turner; John Matthews; Ian Franklin; Chris Atkinson; John North; Michael Poulsen; David Christie; Nigel Spry; Keen Hun Tai; Chris Wynne; Gillian Duchesne; Olga Kovacev; Catherine D'Este
2002 ASCO Annual Meeting | 2002
Bryan Burmeister; B. M. Smithers; L. Fitzgerald; Val Gebski; Peter G. Devitt; Stephen P. Ackland; David Joseph; Jeremy Millar; John North; Euan Walpole; James W. Denham
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2009
Anne Capp; Mario Inostroza-Ponta; Dana Bill; Pablo Moscato; Chi Lai; David Christie; David S. Lamb; Sandra Turner; David Joseph; John Matthews; Chris Atkinson; John North; Michael Poulsen; Nigel Spry; Keen Hun Tai; Chris Wynne; Gillian Duchesne; Allison Steigler; James W. Denham
Radiotherapy and Oncology | 2005
David Christie; James W. Denham; Allison Steigler; David S. Lamb; Sandra Turner; Hedy Mameghan; David Joseph; John Matthews; Ian Franklin; Chris Atkinson; John North; Michael Poulsen; Nigel Spry; Keen Hun Tai; Chris Wynne; Gillian Duchesne; Olga Kovacev; Lynne Francis; Andrew Kramar; Cate D'Este; Dana Bill