The benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. Initial results of the PREOPANC trial failed to demonstrate a ...statistically significant overall survival (OS) benefit. The long-term results are reported.
In this multicenter, phase III trial, patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or upfront surgery in 16 Dutch centers. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy consisted of three cycles of gemcitabine combined with 36 Gy radiotherapy in 15 fractions during the second cycle. After restaging, patients underwent surgery followed by four cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery followed by six cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine. The primary outcome was OS by intention-to-treat. No safety data were collected beyond the initial report of the trial.
Between April 24, 2013, and July 25, 2017, 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (n = 119) and upfront surgery (n = 127). At a median follow-up of 59 months, the OS was better in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group than in the upfront surgery group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96;
= .025). Although the difference in median survival was only 1.4 months (15.7 months
14.3 months), the 5-year OS rate was 20.5% (95% CI, 14.2 to 29.8) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 6.5% (95% CI, 3.1 to 13.7) with upfront surgery. The effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was consistent across the prespecified subgroups, including resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.
Neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and adjuvant gemcitabine improves OS compared with upfront surgery and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.
Preoperative chemoradiotherapy may improve the radical resection rate for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but the overall benefit is unproven.
In this randomized phase III ...trial in 16 centers, patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy, which consisted of 3 courses of gemcitabine, the second combined with 15 × 2.4 Gy radiotherapy, followed by surgery and 4 courses of adjuvant gemcitabine or to immediate surgery and 6 courses of adjuvant gemcitabine. The primary end point was overall survival by intention to treat.
Between April 2013 and July 2017, 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned; 119 were assigned to preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 127 to immediate surgery. Median overall survival by intention to treat was 16.0 months with preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 14.3 months with immediate surgery (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.05;
= .096). The resection rate was 61% and 72% (
= .058). The R0 resection rate was 71% (51 of 72) in patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 40% (37 of 92) in patients assigned to immediate surgery (
< .001). Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with significantly better disease-free survival and locoregional failure-free interval as well as with significantly lower rates of pathologic lymph nodes, perineural invasion, and venous invasion. Survival analysis of patients who underwent tumor resection and started adjuvant chemotherapy showed improved survival with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (35.2
19.8 months;
029). The proportion of patients who suffered serious adverse events was 52% versus 41% (
096).
Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer did not show a significant overall survival benefit. Although the outcomes of the secondary end points and predefined subgroup analyses suggest an advantage of the neoadjuvant approach, additional evidence is required.
Summary Background The optimum duration of first-line treatment with chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is unknown. The CAIRO3 study was ...designed to determine the efficacy of maintenance treatment with capecitabine plus bevacizumab versus observation. Methods In this open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients in 64 hospitals in the Netherlands. We included patients older than 18 years with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer, with stable disease or better after induction treatment with six 3-weekly cycles of capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (CAPOX-B), WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab (maintenance group) or observation (observation group). Randomisation was done centrally by minimisation, with stratification according to previous adjuvant chemotherapy, response to induction treatment, WHO performance status, serum lactate dehydrogenase concentration, and treatment centre. Both patients and investigators were aware of treatment assignment. We assessed disease status every 9 weeks. On first progression (defined as PFS1), patients in both groups were to receive the induction regimen of CAPOX-B until second progression (PFS2), which was the study's primary endpoint. All endpoints were calculated from the time of randomisation. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00442637. Findings Between May 30, 2007, and Oct 15, 2012, we randomly assigned 558 patients to either the maintenance group (n=279) or the observation group (n=279). Median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 36–57). The primary endpoint of median PFS2 was significantly improved in patients on maintenance treatment, and was 8·5 months in the observation group and 11·7 months in the maintenance group (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·56–0·81, p<0·0001). This difference remained significant when any treatment after PFS1 was considered. Maintenance treatment was well tolerated, although the incidence of hand-foot syndrome was increased (64 23% patients with hand-foot skin reaction during maintenance). The global quality of life did not deteriorate during maintenance treatment and was clinically not different between treatment groups. Interpretation Maintenance treatment with capecitabine plus bevacizumab after six cycles of CAPOX-B in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is effective and does not compromise quality of life. Funding Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG). The DCCG received financial support for the study from the Commissie Klinische Studies (CKS) of the Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF), Roche, and Sanofi-Aventis.
Summary Background The optimum use of cytotoxic drugs for advanced colorectal cancer has not been defined. Our aim was to investigate whether combination treatment is better than sequential ...administration of the same drugs in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Methods We randomly assigned 820 patients with advanced colorectal cancer to receive either first-line treatment with capecitabine, second-line irinotecan, and third-line capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (sequential treatment; n=410) or first-line treatment capecitabine plus irinotecan and second-line capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (combination treatment; n=410). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov with the number NCT00312000. Findings 17 patients (nine in the sequential treatment group, eight in the combination group) were found to be ineligible and were excluded from the analysis. 675 (84%) patients died during the study: 336 in the sequential group and 339 in the combination group. Median overall survival was 16·3 (95% CI 14·3–18·1) months for sequential treatment and 17·4 (15·2–19·2) months for combination treatment (p=0·3281). The hazard ratio for combination versus sequential treatment was 0·92 (95% CI 0·79–1·08; p=0·3281). The frequency of grade 3–4 toxicity over all lines of treatment did not differ significantly between the two groups, except for grade 3 hand-foot syndrome, which occurred more often with sequential treatment than with combination treatment (13% vs 7%; p=0·004). Interpretation Combination treatment does not significantly improve overall survival compared with the sequential use of cytotoxic drugs in advanced colorectal cancer. Thus sequential treatment remains a valid option for patients with advanced colorectal cancer.
Highlights • One fifth of operated colorectal cancer patients will develop metachronous metastases. • Colon and rectal cancer patients have different patterns of metastatic spread. • Median time to ...diagnosis depends on site of metastasis. • The risk for metastases is associated with patient and tumour characteristics.
We conducted a population-based study to establish the incidence, treatment and overall survival over time of patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma.
All patients diagnosed with small bowel ...adenocarcinoma in the Netherlands between 1999 and 2013 were included (n = 1775). Age-standardized incidence rates were calculated per 100 000 person-years using the European standardized population rate. The influence of patient and tumor characteristics on the administration of chemotherapy was analyzed by means of a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The Cochran-Armitage trend test was conducted to evaluate trends in treatment and survival and the Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify prognostic factors of overall survival.
The incidence of small bowel adenocarcinomas increased, mainly due to an almost twofold increase of duodenal adenocarcinomas. Patients with locoregional duodenal tumors were less likely to undergo surgery (58%), towards 95% of the locoregional jejunal and ileal tumors (p < 0.0001). The use of chemotherapy doubled for adjuvant (7-15%) and palliative chemotherapy (19-37%). Median overall survival of patients with locoregional disease increased from 19 to 34 months (p = 0.0006), whereas median overall survival of patients with metastatic disease remained 4-5 months. Favorable prognostic factors for prolonged survival in locoregional disease, identified by multivariable survival analysis, included age <60 years, tumor stage I or II, diagnosis in 2009-2013, surgical treatment and chemotherapy. Favorable prognostic factors for prolonged survival in metastatic disease were age <50 years, jejunal tumors, surgical treatment and chemotherapy.
Small bowel adenocarcinomas are rare tumors with an increasing incidence. The administration of adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy doubled, but median overall survival only increased for patients with locoregional disease. Given the rarity and dismal prognosis, it is important to develop international studies to determine the optimal treatment for these patients.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Preoperative chemoradiotherapy according to the chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer followed by surgery study (CROSS) has become a standard of care for patients with locally advanced resectable ...esophageal or junctional cancer. We aimed to assess long-term outcome of this regimen.
From 2004 through 2008, we randomly assigned 366 patients to either five weekly cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Gy in 23 fractions, 5 days per week) followed by surgery, or surgery alone. Follow-up data were collected through 2018. Cox regression analyses were performed to compare overall survival, cause-specific survival, and risks of locoregional and distant relapse. The effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy beyond 5 years of follow-up was tested with time-dependent Cox regression and landmark analyses.
The median follow-up was 147 months (interquartile range, 134-157). Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy had better overall survival (hazard ratio HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.89). The effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on overall survival was not time-dependent (
value for interaction,
= .73), and landmark analyses suggested a stable effect on overall survival up to 10 years of follow-up. The absolute 10-year overall survival benefit was 13% (38%
25%). Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy reduced risk of death from esophageal cancer (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.80). Death from other causes was similar between study arms (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.99). Although a clear effect on isolated locoregional (HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.72) and synchronous locoregional plus distant relapse (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.72) persisted, isolated distant relapse was comparable (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.13).
The overall survival benefit of patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal or junctional cancer who receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy according to CROSS persists for at least 10 years.
Summary Background Initial results of the ChemoRadiotherapy for Oesophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone in ...patients with squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus or oesophagogastric junction showed a significant increase in 5-year overall survival in favour of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group after a median of 45 months' follow-up. In this Article, we report the long-term results after a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Methods Patients with clinically resectable, locally advanced cancer of the oesophagus or oesophagogastric junction (clinical stage T1N1M0 or T2–3N0–1M0, according to the TNM cancer staging system, sixth edition) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio with permuted blocks of four or six to receive either weekly administration of five cycles of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (intravenous carboplatin AUC 2 mg/mL per min and intravenous paclitaxel 50 mg/m2 of body-surface area for 23 days) with concurrent radiotherapy (41·4 Gy, given in 23 fractions of 1·8 Gy on 5 days per week) followed by surgery, or surgery alone. The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed by intention-to-treat. No adverse event data were collected beyond those noted in the initial report of the trial. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR487, and has been completed. Findings Between March 30, 2004, and Dec 2, 2008, 368 patients from eight participating centres (five academic centres and three large non-academic teaching hospitals) in the Netherlands were enrolled into this study and randomly assigned to the two treatment groups: 180 to surgery plus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 188 to surgery alone. Two patients in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group withdrew consent, so a total of 366 patients were analysed (178 in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 188 in the surgery alone group). Of 171 patients who received any neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in this group, 162 (95%) were able to complete the entire neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimen. After a median follow-up for surviving patients of 84·1 months (range 61·1–116·8, IQR 70·7–96·6), median overall survival was 48·6 months (95% CI 32·1–65·1) in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 24·0 months (14·2–33·7) in the surgery alone group (HR 0·68 95% CI 0·53–0·88; log-rank p=0·003). Median overall survival for patients with squamous cell carcinomas was 81·6 months (95% CI 47·2–116·0) in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 21·1 months (15·4–26·7) in the surgery alone group (HR 0·48 95% CI 0·28–0·83; log-rank p=0·008); for patients with adenocarcinomas, it was 43·2 months (24·9–61·4) in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery group and 27·1 months (13·0–41·2) in the surgery alone group (HR 0·73 95% CI 0·55–0·98; log-rank p=0·038). Interpretation Long-term follow-up confirms the overall survival benefits for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy when added to surgery in patients with resectable oesophageal or oesophagogastric junctional cancer. This improvement is clinically relevant for both squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma subtypes. Therefore, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy according to the CROSS trial followed by surgical resection should be regarded as a standard of care for patients with resectable locally advanced oesophageal or oesophagogastric junctional cancer. Funding Dutch Cancer Foundation (KWF Kankerbestrijding).
Children from multi-problem families have an increased risk for experiencing mental health problems. These families face problems in several domains that are often found to be chronic and ...intergenerational. Yet, the effects of mental health care for youths from multi-problem families are small at best, urging research on new treatment programs. The InConnection approach is an integrated care program to improve resilience of youths with mental health needs from multi-problem families by connecting professional expertise from multiple disciplines with the informal social network of the youth. Youths are asked to nominate a youth-initiated mentor (YIM) from the supportive adults in their network.
This quasi-experimental study compared the effectiveness of the InConnection approach to treatment as usual in a sample of 107 families (n = 66 intervention group, n = 41 control group) with n = 115 youths receiving treatment (cases). Youths (n = 102 reports, M
= 15.59 years), parents (n = 85 reports) and case managers (n = 107 reports) responded to questionnaires four times over 15 months. Using these data, we measured youth resilience as the primary outcome, seven secondary outcomes, and three intermediate outcomes.
Latent growth models showed only one significant change in outcomes over time across conditions, namely a decrease in case manager-reported child unsafety, and only two condition effects, which were both parent-reported. Parents in the InConnection group reported improvements over time in youth's emotional and behavioral problems and their own positive parenting, whereas control parents reported no changes (ps ≤ 0.013).
The treatment conditions were not effective in improving most of the youth and parental outcomes over time, except for child safety reported by the case manager. The InConnection approach only outperformed care as usual on two parent-reported outcomes. Future research should examine for whom and under what circumstances the InConnection approach works more convincingly.
Netherlands Trial Register NL7565. Retrospectively registered on 05/03/2019.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Magnetic resonance imaging–detected extramural venous invasion (mrEMVI) and tumor deposits (TDs) are risk factors for the development of local recurrence and distant metastases (DMs) in rectal ...cancer. However, little is known about their response to neoadjuvant treatment and its relation to oncologic outcomes. This study evaluated the incidence and features of mrEMVI and TDs before and after neoadjuvant treatment in relation to the development of local recurrence and DMs.
Patients with cT3/4 rectal cancer without synchronous metastases who underwent surgery in a tertiary referral hospital were retrospectively analyzed. MRI scans were re-evaluated for the presence of mrEMVI, the occurrence of TDs, and response to neoadjuvant therapy (mr-vTRG).
In total, 277 patients were included, of whom 163 (58.8%) presented with mrEMVI. TDs were present in 56.4% of mrEMVI-positive and 9.6% of mrEMVI-negative patients (P < .001). The 5-year DM rate was significantly higher in mrEMVI-positive patients with and without TDs (45.2% and 35.9%, respectively) compared with mrEMVI-negative patients (25.7%; P = .012). After neoadjuvant treatment, the 5-year DM rate of patients with mr-vTRG 3-5 was 46.1%, whereas good responders (mr-vTRG 1-2) had a DM rate similar to mrEMVI-negative patients (25.7% and 25.7%, respectively; P = .002). The occurrence of TDs and larger mrEMVI size resulted in a lower likelihood of regression of mrEMVI.
The prevalence of mrEMVI and TDs in cT3-4 rectal cancer is high and is associated with worsened oncologic outcomes. mrEMVI regression (mr-vTRG 1-2), which occured in 25% of the cases, leads to oncologic outcomes similar to those in patients without mrEMVI on baseline MRI.
PDF
