Robert Grieve

Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial

Summary Background Preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy reduces the risk of local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer. However, improvements in surgery and histopathological assessment mean that the role of radiotherapy needs to be reassessed. We compared short-course preoperative radiotherapy versus initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy. Methods We undertook a randomised trial in 80 centres in four countries. 1350 patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the rectum were randomly assigned, by a minimisation procedure, to short-course preoperative radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions; n=674) or to initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions with concurrent 5-fluorouracil) restricted to patients with involvement of the circumferential resection margin (n=676). The primary outcome measure was local recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842. Findings At the time of analysis, which included all participants, 330 patients had died (157 preoperative radiotherapy group vs 173 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy), and median follow-up of surviving patients was 4 years. 99 patients had developed local recurrence (27 preoperative radiotherapy vs 72 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We noted a reduction of 61% in the relative risk of local recurrence for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 95% CI 0·27–0·58, p<0·0001), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6·2% (95% CI 5·3–7·1) (4·4% preoperative radiotherapy vs 10·6% selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We recorded a relative improvement in disease-free survival of 24% for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (HR 0·76, 95% CI 0·62–0·94, p=0·013), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6·0% (95% CI 5·3–6·8) (77·5% vs 71·5%). Overall survival did not differ between the groups (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·73–1·13, p=0·40). Interpretation Taken with results from other randomised trials, our findings provide convincing and consistent evidence that short-course preoperative radiotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with operable rectal cancer. Funding Medical Research Council (UK) and the National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial

Summary Background Local recurrence rates in operable rectal cancer are improved by radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) and surgical techniques such as total mesorectal excision. However, the contributions of surgery and radiotherapy to outcomes are unclear. We assessed the effect of the involvement of the circumferential resection margin and the plane of surgery achieved. Methods In this prospective study, the plane of surgery achieved and the involvement of the circumferential resection margin were assessed by local pathologists, using a standard pathological protocol in 1156 patients with operable rectal cancer from the CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 trial, which compared short-course (5 days) preoperative radiotherapy and selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy, between March, 1998, and August, 2005. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842. Findings 128 patients (11%) had involvement of the circumferential resection margin, and the plane of surgery achieved was classified as good (mesorectal) in 604 (52%), intermediate (intramesorectal) in 398 (34%), and poor (muscularis propria plane) in 154 (13%). We found that both a negative circumferential resection margin and a superior plane of surgery achieved were associated with low local recurrence rates. Hazard ratio (HR) was 0·32 (95% CI 0·16–0·63, p=0·0011) with 3-year local recurrence rates of 6% (5–8%) and 17% (10–26%) for patients who were negative and positive for circumferential resection margin, respectively. For plane of surgery achieved, HRs for mesorectal and intramesorectal groups compared with the muscularis propria group were 0·32 (0·16–0·64) and 0·48 (0·25–0·93), respectively. At 3 years, the estimated local recurrence rates were 4% (3–6%) for mesorectal, 7% (5–11%) for intramesorectal, and 13% (8–21%) for muscularis propria groups. The benefit of short-course preoperative radiotherapy did not differ in the three plane of surgery groups (p=0·30 for trend). Patients in the short-course preoperative radiotherapy group who had a resection in the mesorectal plane had a 3-year local recurrence rate of only 1%. Interpretation In rectal cancer, the plane of surgery achieved is an important prognostic factor for local recurrence. Short-course preoperative radiotherapy reduced the rate of local recurrence for all three plane of surgery groups, almost abolishing local recurrence in short-course preoperative radiotherapy patients who had a resection in the mesorectal plane. The plane of surgery achieved should therefore be assessed and reported routinely. Funding Medical Research Council (UK) and the National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Breast-cancer adjuvant therapy with zoledronic acid

BACKGROUND Data suggest that the adjuvant use of bisphosphonates reduces rates of recurrence and death in patients with early-stage breast cancer. We conducted a study to determine whether treatment with zoledronic acid, in addition to standard adjuvant therapy, would improve disease outcomes in such patients. METHODS In this open-label phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 3360 patients to receive standard adjuvant systemic therapy either with or without zoledronic acid. The zoledronic acid was administered every 3 to 4 weeks for 6 doses and then every 3 to 6 months to complete 5 years of treatment. The primary end point of the study was disease-free survival. A second interim analysis revealed that a prespecified boundary for lack of benefit had been crossed. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 59 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the primary end point, with a rate of disease-free survival of 77% in each group (adjusted hazard ratio in the zoledronic acid group, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.13; P=0.79). Disease recurrence or death occurred in 377 patients in the zoledronic acid group and 375 of those in the control group. The numbers of deaths--243 in the zoledronic acid group and 276 in the control group--were also similar, resulting in rates of overall survival of 85.4% in the zoledronic acid group and 83.1% in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.01; P=0.07). In the zoledronic acid group, there were 17 confirmed cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw (cumulative incidence, 1.1%; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.7; P<0.001) and 9 suspected cases; there were no cases in the control group. Rates of other adverse effects were similar in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS These findings do not support the routine use of zoledronic acid in the adjuvant management of breast cancer. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and the National Cancer Research Network; AZURE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN79831382.).

Oral ibandronic acid versus intravenous zoledronic acid in treatment of bone metastases from breast cancer: a randomised, open label, non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND Bisphosphonates are routinely used in the treatment of metastatic bone disease from breast cancer to reduce pain and bone destruction. Zoledronic acid given by intravenous infusion has been widely used, but places a substantial logistical burden on both patient and hospital. As a result, the use of oral ibandronic acid has increased, despite the absence of comparative data. In the ZICE trial, we compared oral ibandronic acid with intravenous zoledronic acid for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer to bone. METHODS This phase 3, open-label, parallel group active-controlled, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 study was done in 99 UK hospitals. Eligibility criteria included at least one radiologically confirmed bone metastasis from a histologically confirmed breast cancer. Patients with ECOG performance status 0 to 2 and clinical decision to treat with bisphosphonates within 3 months of randomisation were randomly assigned to receive 96 weeks of treatment with either intravenous zoledronic acid at 4 mg every 3-4 weeks or oral ibandronic acid 50 mg daily. Randomisation (1:1) was done via a central computerised system within stratified block sizes of four. Randomisation was stratified on whether patients had current or planned treatment with chemotherapy; current or planned treatment with hormone therapy; and whether they had a previous skeletal-related event within the last 3 months or had planned radiotherapy treatment to the bone or planned orthopaedic surgery due to bone metastases. The primary non-inferiority endpoint was the frequency and timing of skeletal-related events over 96 weeks, analysed using a per-protocol analysis. All active (non-withdrawn) patients have now reached the 96-week timepoint and the trial is now in long-term follow-up. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326820. FINDINGS Between Jan 13, 2006, and Oct 4, 2010, 705 patients were randomly assigned to receive ibandronic acid and 699 to receive zoledronic acid; three patients withdrew immediately after randomisation. The per-protocol analysis included 654 patients in the ibandronic acid group and 672 in the zoledronic acid group. Annual rates of skeletal-related events were 0·499 (95% CI 0·454-0·549) with ibandronic acid and 0·435 (0·393-0·480) with zoledronic acid; the rate ratio for skeletal-related events was 1·148 (95% CI 0·967-1·362). The upper CI was greater than the margin of non-inferiority of 1·08; therefore, we could not reject the null hypothesis that ibandronic acid was inferior to zoledronic acid. More patients in the zoledronic acid group had renal toxic effects than in the ibandronic acid group (226 [32%] of 697 vs 172 [24%] of 704) but rates of osteonecrosis of the jaw were low in both groups (nine [1%] of 697 vs five [<1%] of 704). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were fatigue (97 [14%] of 697 patients allocated zoledronic acid vs 98 [14%] of 704 allocated ibandronic acid), increased bone pain (91 [corrected] [13%] vs 85 [corrected] [12%]), joint pain (41 [corrected] [6%] vs 38 [5%]), infection (31 [5%] vs 23 [corrected] [3%]), and nausea or vomiting (38 [5%] vs 41 [6%]). INTERPRETATION Our results suggest that zoledronic acid is preferable to ibandronic acid in preventing skeletal-related events caused by bone metastases. However, both drugs have acceptable side-effect profiles and the oral formulation is more convenient, and could still be considered if the patient has a strong preference or if difficulties occur with intravenous infusions. FUNDING Roche Products Ltd (educational grant), supported by National Institute for Health Research Cancer Network, following endorsement by Cancer Research UK (CRUKE/04/022).

The use of herbal medicines by people with cancer: a cross-sectional survey

Background:A large proportion of cancer patients are estimated to use herbal medicines, but data to substantiate this are lacking. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of herbal medicine use among cancer patients in the West Midlands, and determine the characteristics predicting herbal medicine use.Methods:A cross-sectional survey of oncology patients (n=1498) being followed up at a hospital in Coventry was undertaken. Recipients were asked about herbal medicine use since their cancer diagnosis, and the association between sociodemographic and cancer-related characteristics and herbal medicine use was evaluated.Results:A total of 1134 responses were received (75.7%). The prevalence of herbal medicine use was 19.7% (95% CI: 17.4–22.1; n=223). Users were more likely to be affluent, female, and aged under 50 years. Usage increased with time since cancer diagnosis (X2 for trend=4.63; P=0.031). A validation data set, derived from a survey of oncology patients in Birmingham (n=541) with differing socioeconomic characteristics showed no significant difference in estimated prevalence (16.6%; 95% CI: 11.9–22.2).Conclusion:A substantial number of people with cancer are likely to be taking herbal medicines. Understanding the self-medication behaviours of these individuals is essential if health-care professionals are to support treatment adherence and avoid unwanted pharmacological interactions.

ChlVPP/PABlOE and radiotherapy in advanced Hodgkin's disease. The Central Lymphoma Group.

PURPOSE The United Kingdom Central Lymphoma Group (CLG) has modified mechlorethamine, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone/doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (MOPP/ABVD) by substituting mechlorethamine with chlorambucil and dacarbazine with etoposide in the treatment of patients with advanced Hodgkins disease (HD). Prednisolone is included in the bleomycin-containing combination, and the vinca alkaloids have been switched to balance the myelotoxicity of the two component regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS The resulting ChlVPP/PABlOE regimen is as follows: on days 1 to 14, chlorambucil 6 mg/m2 orally, procarbazine 100 mg/m2 orally, and prednisolone 30 mg/m2 orally; on days 1 and 8, vinblastine 6 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.); on day 29, doxorubicin 40 mg/m2 i.v.; on days 29 and 36, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 (maximum, 2 mg) i.v., and bleomycin 10 mg/m2 i.v.; on days 30, 31, and 32, etoposide 200 mg/m2/d orally; on days 29 to 43, inclusive, prednisolone, 30 mg/m2 orally. The second full cycle restarts on day 50. Treatment continues to maximum response plus two full cycles, but with a minimum of three full cycles. Radiotherapy is administered, after chemotherapy, to sites of previously bulky disease. Since 1983, 216 patients with previously untreated, advanced Hodgkins disease (HD) have entered this study. RESULTS The complete remission (CR) rate after chemotherapy was 73% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67% to 79%), and after additional radiotherapy was 85% (95% CI, 80% to 90%). The failure-free survival (FFS) rate at 5 years was 68% (95% CI, 61% to 74%), and the overall actuarial survival at 5 years was 78% (95% CI, 72% to 84%). The CR rate in patients in the poorer prognostic categories was high: 81% in patients with albumin levels less than 37 g/L, 79% in patients older than 40 years of age, 84% in stages IIIB plus i.v. disease, and 79% in patients presenting with B symptoms. As expected, nausea and vomiting were not major problems, although infection, often in the context of myelosuppression, complicated almost half the cases, and 29% of patients required admission at some stage for treatment of infection. CONCLUSION In this multicenter study, ChlVPP/PABlOE produced results comparable to those reported for MOPP/ABVD, but with less nausea and vomiting. Treatment duration was shorter than in the original MOPP/ABVD regimen, and than that used in the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) trial. It will now be compared with PABlOE alone.

NEAT: National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trial - toxicity, delivered dose intensity and quality of life

The NEAT trial reported considerable benefit for ECMF (epirubicin followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil) of 28% for relapse-free survival (RFS) and 30% for overall survival (OS), when compared with classical CMF in early breast cancer. To assess tolerability, toxicity, dose intensity and quality of life (QoL) analyses were undertaken. All 2021 eligible patients had common toxicity criteria (CTC), delivered chemotherapy and supportive treatments details and long-term morbidities recorded. The QoL substudy used multiple validated measures. ECMF produced low CTC scores, although higher than CMF for nausea, vomiting, alopecia, constipation, stomatitis (P<0.001), infection (P=0.001) and fatigue (P=0.03). Supportive treatments required, however, were similar across randomised treatments. On-treatment deaths were more common with CMF (13) than ECMF(5). Optimal course-delivered dose intensity (CDDI ⩾85%) was received more often by ECMF patients (83 vs 76%: P=0.0002), and was associated with better RFS (P=0.0006). QoL over 2 years was equivalent across treatments, despite minimally worse side effects for ECMF during treatment. ECMF benefit spanned all levels of toxicity, CDDI and QoL. There are no reported acute myeloid leukaemias or cardiac dysfunctions. ECMF is tolerable, deliverable, and significantly more effective than CMF, with no serious long-term toxicity or QoL detriment.

Three cytotoxic drugs combined with pelvic radiation and as maintenance chemotherapy for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA): Long-term follow-up of a phase II pilot study using 5-fluorouracil, mitomycin C and cisplatin

PURPOSE Phase III trials in the 1990s for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) demonstrated 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and mitomycinC (MMC) chemoradiation (CRT) improved outcome compared to radiation (RT) alone, but local recurrence remained significant. This prospective pilot study intensified treatment by integrating 3 cytotoxic drugs into CRT and maintenance chemotherapy. METHODS CRT comprised 5-FU 1000 mg/m(2) days 1-4,29-32, MMC 10 mg/m(2) day 1 and Cisplatin (CDDP) 60 mg/m(2) days1 and 29, with 45 Gy in 25 daily fractions, followed by a 15 Gy boost. Maintenance chemotherapy started 4-8 weeks later, three courses repeated every 21 days, using 5-FU/CDDP doses above, with MMC reduced to 7 mg/m(2) and administered with the first and third cycles. RESULTS In CRT only 14/19 (74%) patients received protocol-defined chemotherapy doses in week 5. Compliance to maintenance chemotherapy was poor. 15/19 started cycle 1, 13 started cycle 2 and 11 cycle 3. 17/19 experienced G3-G5 toxicity (16 Grade 3/4 and one Grade 5). 16/19 patients (84%) remain alive and disease-free - median follow-up 79 months (34-115). CONCLUSIONS Despite favourable results, the significant toxicity and low compliance of the three-drug CRT regimen used, deemed it unsuitable for testing in a phase III trial. A two-drug maintenance regimen was explored in the ACT II trial.

Five-year follow-up of a prospective randomised multi-centre trial of weekly chemotherapy (CAPOMEt) versus cyclical chemotherapy (CHOP-Mtx) in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

Background: Weekly alternating regimen known as CAPOMEt is compared to standard cyclical chemotherapy (CHOP-Mtx) in aggressive non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL). Patients and methods: Three hundred and eighty-one patients with aggressive NHL were randomised to receive either cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone and methotrexate (CHOP-Mtx) on a cyclical basis or a weekly regimen incorporating the same drugs with the addition of etoposide (CAPOMEt). Results: After pathological review, 281 patients were deemed eligible. At the census date of 31 March 1994, 158 patients were alive with a median follow up of 5.9 years (minimum 3.0 years). Analysis of all patients and eligible patients showed no significant treatment differences in the rates of complete remission (CR), failure free survival (FFS) or overall survival (OS) between the two arms. The actuarial median OS was 24 months for CAPOMEt compared with 31 months for CHOP-Mtx, with five-year actuarial survival rates of 37% and 43%, respectively. Myelosuppression was significantly more severe with CHOP-Mtx and neurotoxicity was much more common with CAPOMEt. Conclusion: Weekly CAPOMEt is equally effective as standard cyclical CHOP-Mtx treatment in aggressive NHL.

The Role of the Final FRCR Examination in Specialist Training in Clinical Oncology

“In examinations, the foolish ask questions the wise cannot answer” Oscar Wilde, 1854e1900 This witty Irishman’s scathing analysis of examinations has a certain resonance with those of us who took professional examinations, such asFRCR, in daysgone by, although our claim to wisdom might be overstated, as many have subsequently gone on to become the examiners. The Final FRCR examination in clinical oncology has changed from being the pre-eminent arbiter of fitness for the certificate of completion of training to having a collaborative role in a matrix of assessment, within a curriculum that provides a summative assessment of knowledge and competence across a variety of assessment methods. The Postgraduate Medical Education Board has set out the principles that should be addressed to ensure the transparency and fairness of a postgraduate assessment system for trainees and their trainers. These principles assure the general public that trainees who have been allowed to progress will have been assessed properly and will have the required level of competence [1]. These educational principles underpinning assessment in postgraduate training are set out below, before the changes to the Final FRCR in response to them are described.