Summary Background VEGFR-2 has a role in gastric cancer pathogenesis and progression. We assessed whether ramucirumab, a monoclonal antibody VEGFR-2 antagonist, in combination with paclitaxel would ...increase overall survival in patients previously treated for advanced gastric cancer compared with placebo plus paclitaxel. Methods This randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial was done at 170 centres in 27 countries in North and South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Patients aged 18 years or older with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and disease progression on or within 4 months after first-line chemotherapy (platinum plus fluoropyrimidine with or without an anthracycline) were randomly assigned with a centralised interactive voice or web-response system in a 1:1 ratio to receive ramucirumab 8 mg/kg or placebo intravenously on days 1 and 15, plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. A permuted block randomisation, stratified by geographic region, time to progression on first-line therapy, and disease measurability, was used. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat, and safety analysis included all patients who received at least one treatment with study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01170663 , and has been completed; patients who are still receiving treatment are in the extension phase. Findings Between Dec 23, 2010, and Sept 23, 2012, 665 patients were randomly assigned to treatment—330 to ramucirumab plus paclitaxel and 335 to placebo plus paclitaxel. Overall survival was significantly longer in the ramucirumab plus paclitaxel group than in the placebo plus paclitaxel group (median 9·6 months 95% CI 8·5–10·8 vs 7·4 months 95% CI 6·3–8·4, hazard ratio 0·807 95% CI 0·678–0·962; p=0·017). Grade 3 or higher adverse events that occurred in more than 5% of patients in the ramucirumab plus paclitaxel group versus placebo plus paclitaxel included neutropenia (133 41% of 327 vs 62 19% of 329), leucopenia (57 17% vs 22 7%), hypertension (46 14% vs eight 2%), fatigue (39 12% vs 18 5%), anaemia (30 9% vs 34 10%), and abdominal pain (20 6% vs 11 3%). The incidence of grade 3 or higher febrile neutropenia was low in both groups (ten 3% vs eight 2%). Interpretation The combination of ramucirumab with paclitaxel significantly increases overall survival compared with placebo plus paclitaxel, and could be regarded as a new standard second-line treatment for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Funding Eli Lilly and Company.
Summary Background Chemoradiation became the standard of care for anal cancer after the ACT I trial. However, only two-thirds of patients achieved local control, with 5-year survival of 50%; ...therefore, better treatments are needed. We investigated whether replacing mitomycin with cisplatin in chemoradiation improves response, and whether maintenance chemotherapy after chemoradiation improves survival. Methods In this 2×2 factorial trial, we enrolled patients with histologically confirmed squamous-cell carcinoma of the anus without metastatic disease from 59 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups, to receive either mitomycin (12 mg/m2 on day 1) or cisplatin (60 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29), with fluorouracil (1000 mg/m2 per day on days 1–4 and 29–32) and radiotherapy (50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions); with or without two courses of maintenance chemotherapy (fluorouracil and cisplatin at weeks 11 and 14). The random allocation was generated by computer and patients assigned by telephone. Randomisation was done by minimisation and stratified by tumour site, T and N stage, sex, age, and renal function. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to assignment. Primary endpoints were complete response at 26 weeks and acute toxic effects (for chemoradiation), and progression-free survival (for maintenance). The primary analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com , number 26715889. Findings We enrolled 940 patients: 472 were assigned to mitomycin, of whom 246 were assigned to no maintenance, 226 to maintenance; 468 were assigned to cisplatin, of whom 246 were assigned to no maintenance, 222 to maintenance. Median follow-up was 5·1 years (IQR 3·9–6·9). 391 of 432 (90·5%) patients in the mitomycin group versus 386 of 431 (89·6%) in the cisplatin group had a complete response at 26 weeks (difference −0·9%, 95% CI −4·9 to 3·1; p=0·64). Overall, toxic effects were similar in each group (334/472 71% for mitomycin vs 337/468 72% for cisplatin). The most common grade 3–4 toxic effects were skin (228/472 48% vs 222/468 47%), pain (122/472 26% vs 135/468 29%), haematological (124/472 26% vs 73/468 16%), and gastrointestinal (75/472 16% vs 85/468 18%). 3-year progression-free survival was 74% (95% CI 69–77; maintenance) versus 73% (95% CI 68–77; no maintenance; hazard ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·75–1·21; p=0·70). Interpretation The results of our trial—the largest in anal cancer to date—show that fluorouracil and mitomycin with 50·4 Gy radiotherapy in 28 daily fractions should remain standard practice in the UK. Funding Cancer Research UK.
Summary Background Dose intensification with a combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP) every 2 weeks improves outcomes in patients older than 60 years with ...diffuse large B-cell lymphoma compared with CHOP every 3 weeks. We investigated whether this survival benefit from dose intensification persists in the presence of rituximab (R-CHOP) in all age groups. Methods Patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated bulky stage IA to stage IV diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 119 centres in the UK were randomly assigned centrally in a one-to-one ratio, using minimisation, to receive six cycles of R-CHOP every 14 days plus two cycles of rituximab (R-CHOP-14) or eight cycles of R-CHOP every 21 days (R-CHOP-21). R-CHOP-21 was intravenous cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 , doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 , vincristine 1·4 mg/m2 (maximum dose 2 mg), and rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, and oral prednisolone 40 mg/m2 on days 1–5, administered every 21 days for a total of eight cycles. R-CHOP-14 was intravenous cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 , doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 , vincristine 2 mg, rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, and oral prednisolone 100 mg on days 1–5, administered every 14 days for six cycles, followed by two further infusions of rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1 every 14 days. The trial was not masked. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). This study is registered, number ISCRTN 16017947. Findings 1080 patients were assigned to R-CHOP-21 (n=540) and R-CHOP-14 (n=540). With a median follow-up of 46 months (IQR 35–57), 2-year OS was 82·7% (79·5–85·9) in the R-CHOP-14 group and 80·8% (77·5–84·2) in the R-CHOP-21 (standard) group (hazard ratio 0·90, 95% CI 0·70–1·15; p=0·3763). No significant improvement was noted in 2-year progression-free survival (R-CHOP-14 75·4%, 71·8–79·1, and R-CHOP-21 74·8%, 71·0–78·4; 0·94, 0·76–1·17; p=0·5907). High international prognostic index, poor-prognosis molecular characteristics, and cell of origin were not predictive for benefit from either schedule. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was higher in the R-CHOP-21 group (318 60% of 534 vs 167 31% of 534), with no prophylactic use of recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor mandated in this group, whereas grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia was higher with R-CHOP-14 (50 9% vs 28 5%); other frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (58 11% vs 28 5%) and infection (125 23% vs 96 18%). Frequencies of non-haematological adverse events were similar in the R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 groups. Interpretation R-CHOP-14 is not superior to R-CHOP-21 chemotherapy for previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; therefore, R-CHOP-21 remains the standard first-line treatment in patients with this haematological malignancy. No molecular or clinical subgroup benefited from dose intensification in this study. Funding Chugai Pharmaceutical, Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres scheme at both University College London and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, and Institute of Cancer Research.
Summary Background EGFR overexpression occurs in 27–55% of oesophagogastric adenocarcinomas, and correlates with poor prognosis. We aimed to assess addition of the anti-EGFR antibody panitumumab to ...epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (EOC) in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Methods In this randomised, open-label phase 3 trial (REAL3), we enrolled patients with untreated, metastatic, or locally advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma at 63 centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals) in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive up to eight 21-day cycles of open-label EOC (epirubicin 50 mg/m2 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 per day on days 1–21) or modified-dose EOC plus panitumumab (mEOC+P; epirubicin 50 mg/m2 and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 per day on days 1–21, and panitumumab 9 mg/kg on day 1). Randomisation was blocked and stratified for centre region, extent of disease, and performance status. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. After a preplanned independent data monitoring committee review in October, 2011, trial recruitment was halted and panitumumab withdrawn. Data for patients on treatment were censored at this timepoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00824785. Findings Between June 2, 2008, and Oct 17, 2011, we enrolled 553 eligible patients. Median overall survival in 275 patients allocated EOC was 11·3 months (95% CI 9·6–13·0) compared with 8·8 months (7·7–9·8) in 278 patients allocated mEOC+P (hazard ratio HR 1·37, 95% CI 1·07–1·76; p=0·013). mEOC+P was associated with increased incidence of grade 3–4 diarrhoea (48 17% of 276 patients allocated mEOC+P vs 29 11% of 266 patients allocated EOC), rash (29 11% vs two 1%), mucositis (14 5% vs none), and hypomagnesaemia (13 5% vs none) but reduced incidence of haematological toxicity (grade ≥3 neutropenia 35 13% vs 74 28%). Interpretation Addition of panitumumab to EOC chemotherapy does not increase overall survival and cannot be recommended for use in an unselected population with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Funding Amgen, UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.
Summary Background Guidelines for anal cancer recommend assessment of response at 6–12 weeks after starting treatment. Using data from the ACT II trial, we determined the optimum timepoint to assess ...clinical tumour response after chemoradiotherapy. Methods The previously reported ACT II trial was a phase 3 randomised trial of patients of any age with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed, squamous cell carcinoma of the anus without metastatic disease from 59 centres in the UK. We randomly assigned patients (by minimisation) to receive either intravenous mitomycin (one dose of 12 mg/m2 on day 1) or intravenous cisplatin (one dose of 60 mg/m2 on days 1 and 29), with intravenous fluorouracil (one dose of 1000 mg/m2 per day on days 1–4 and 29–32) and radiotherapy (50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions); and also did a second randomisation after initial therapy to maintenance chemotherapy (fluorouracil and cisplatin) or no maintenance chemotherapy. The primary outcome was complete clinical response (the absence of primary and nodal tumour by clinical examination), in addition to overall survival and progression-free survival from time of randomisation. In this post-hoc analysis, we analysed complete clinical response at three timepoints: 11 weeks from the start of chemoradiotherapy (assessment 1), 18 weeks from the start of chemoradiotherapy (assessment 2), and 26 weeks from the start of chemoradiotherapy (assessment 3) as well as the overall and progression-free survival estimates of patients with complete clinical response or without complete clinical response at each assessment. We analysed both the overall trial population and a subgroup of patients who had attended each of the three assessments by modified intention-to-treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com , ISRCTN 26715889. Findings We enrolled 940 patients from June 4, 2001, until Dec 16, 2008. Complete clinical response was achieved in 492 (52%) of 940 patients at assessment 1 (11 weeks), 665 (71%) of patients at assessment 2 (18 weeks), and 730 (78%) of patients at assessment 3 (26 weeks). 691 patients attended all three assessments and in this subgroup, complete clinical response was reported in 441 (64%) patients at assessment 1, 556 (80%) at assessment 2, and 590 (85%) at assessments 3. 151 (72%) of the 209 patients who had not had a complete clinical response at assessment 1 had a complete clinical response by assessment 3. In the overall trial population of 940 patients, 5 year overall survival in patients who had a clinical response at assessments 1, 2, 3 was 83% (95% CI 79–86), 84% (81–87), and 87% (84–89), respectively and was 72% (66–78), 59% (49–67), and 46% (37–55) for patients who did not have a complete clinical response at assessments 1, 2, 3, respectively. In the subgroup of 691 patients, 5 year overall survival in patients who had a clinical response at assessment 1, 2, 3 was 85% (81–88), 86% (82–88), and 87% (84–90), respectively, and was 75% (68–80), 61% (50–70), and 48% (36–58) for patients who did not have a complete clinical response at assessment 1, 2, 3, respectively. Similarly, progression-free survival in both the overall trial population and the subgroup was longer in patients who had a complete clinical response, compared with patients who did not have a complete clinical response, at all three assessments. Interpretation Many patients who do not have a complete clinical response when assessed at 11 weeks after commencing chemoradiotherapy do in fact respond by 26 weeks, and the earlier assessment could lead to some patients having unnecessary surgery. Our data suggests that the optimum time for assessment of complete clinical response after chemoradiotherapy for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anus is 26 weeks from starting chemoradiotherapy. We suggest that guidelines should be revised to indicate that later assessment is acceptable. Funding Cancer Research UK.
Summary Background Patients with advanced-stage, low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma have conventionally undergone watchful waiting until disease progression. We assessed whether rituximab use ...could delay the need for chemotherapy or radiotherapy compared with watchful waiting and the effect of this strategy on quality of life (QoL). Methods Asymptomatic patients (aged ≥18 years) with low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma (grades 1, 2, and 3a) were randomly assigned centrally (1:1:1), by the minimisation approach stratified by institution, grade, stage, and age, to watchful waiting, rituximab 375 mg/m2 weekly for 4 weeks (rituximab induction), or rituximab induction followed by a maintenance schedule of 12 further infusions given at 2-monthly intervals for 2 years (maintenance rituximab). On Sept 30, 2007, recruitment into the rituximab induction group was closed and the study was amended to a two-arm study. The primary endpoints were time to start of new treatment and QoL at month 7 (ie, 6 months after completion of rituximab induction). All randomly assigned patients were included in the analysis of time to start of new treatment on an intention-to-treat basis. The main study is now completed and is in long-term follow-up. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00112931. Findings Between Oct 15, 2004, and March 25, 2009, 379 patients from 118 centres in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Turkey, and Poland were randomly assigned to watchful waiting or maintenance rituximab. 84 patients were recruited to the rituximab induction group before it was closed early. There was a significant difference in the time to start of new treatment, with 46% (95% CI 39–53) of patients in the watchful waiting group not needing treatment at 3 years compared with 88% (83–92) in the maintenance rituximab group (hazard ratio HR 0·21, 95% CI 0·14–0·31; p<0·0001). 78% (95% CI 69–87) of patients in the rituximab induction group did not need treatment at 3 years, which was significantly more than in the watchful waiting group (HR 0·35, 95% CI 0·22–0·56; p<0·0001), but no different compared with the maintenance rituximab group (0·75, 0·41–1·34; p=0·33). Compared with the watchful waiting group, patients in the maintenance rituximab group had significant improvements in the Mental Adjustment to Cancer scale score (p=0·0004), and Illness Coping Style score (p=0·0012) between baseline and month 7. Patients in the rituximab induction group did not show improvements in their QoL compared with the watchful waiting group. There were 18 serious adverse events reported in the rituximab groups (four in the rituximab induction group and 14 in the maintenance rituximab group), 12 of which were grade 3 or 4 (five infections, three allergic reactions, and four cases of neutropenia), all of which fully resolved. Interpretation Rituximab monotherapy should be considered as a treatment option for patients with asymptomatic, advanced-stage, low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma. Funding Cancer Research UK, Lymphoma Research Trust, Lymphoma Association, and Roche.
Summary Background The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with ...resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. Methods We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. Findings Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5–31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7–27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 95% CI 0·68–0·98, p=0·032). 608 grade 3–4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3–4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. Interpretation The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Funding Cancer Research UK.
Summary Background Bevacizumab improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer. Our aim was to assess the use of bevacizumab in combination with ...oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma. Methods Patients from 330 centres in 34 countries were enrolled into this phase 3, open-label randomised trial. Patients with curatively resected stage III or high-risk stage II colon carcinoma were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 , leucovorin 200 mg/m2 , and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion on day 1; leucovorin 200 mg/m2 plus fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus plus 600 mg/m2 22-h continuous infusion on day 2) every 2 weeks for 12 cycles; bevacizumab 5 mg/kg plus FOLFOX4 (every 2 weeks for 12 cycles) followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks); or bevacizumab 7·5 mg/kg plus XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 2 weeks plus oral capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–15) every 3 weeks for eight cycles followed by bevacizumab monotherapy 7·5 mg/kg every 3 weeks (eight cycles over 24 weeks). Block randomisation was done with a central interactive computerised system, stratified by geographic region and disease stage. Surgery with curative intent occurred 4–8 weeks before randomisation. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival, analysed for all randomised patients with stage III disease. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00112918. Findings Of the total intention-to-treat population (n=3451), 2867 patients had stage III disease, of whom 955 were randomly assigned to receive FOLFOX4, 960 to receive bevacizumab–FOLFOX4, and 952 to receive bevacizumab–XELOX. After a median follow-up of 48 months (range 0–66 months), 237 patients (25%) in the FOLFOX4 group, 280 (29%) in the bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 group, and 253 (27%) in the bevacizumab–XELOX group had relapsed, developed a new colon cancer, or died. The disease-free survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·17 (95% CI 0·98–1·39; p=0·07), and for bevacizumab–XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·07 (0·90–1·28; p=0·44). After a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the overall survival hazard ratio for bevacizumab–FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 was 1·27 (1·03–1·57; p=0·02), and for bevacizumab–XELOX versus FOLFOX4 was 1·15 (0·93–1·42; p=0·21). The 573 patients with high-risk stage II cancer were included in the safety analysis. The most common grade 3–5 adverse events were neutropenia (FOLFOX4: 477 42% of 1126 patients, bevacizumab-FOLFOX4: 416 36% of 1145 patients, and bevacizumab–XELOX: 74 7% of 1135 patients), diarrhoea (110 10%, 135 12%, and 181 16%, respectively), and hypertension (12 1%, 122 11%, and 116 10%, respectively). Serious adverse events were more common in the bevacizumab groups (bevacizumab–FOLFOX4: 297 26%; bevacizumab–XELOX: 284 25%) than in the FOLFOX4 group (226 20%). Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving FOLFOX4, two receiving bevacizumab–FOLFOX4, and five receiving bevacizumab–XELOX. Interpretation Bevacizumab does not prolong disease-free survival when added to adjuvant chemotherapy in resected stage III colon cancer. Overall survival data suggest a potential detrimental effect with bevacizumab plus oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in these patients. On the basis of these and other data, we do not recommend the use of bevacizumab in the adjuvant treatment of patients with curatively resected stage III colon cancer. Funding Genentech, Roche, and Chugai.
Summary Substantial progress has been made in colorectal cancer in the past decade. Screening, used to identify individuals at an early stage, has improved outcome. There is greater understanding of ...the genetic basis of inherited colorectal cancer and identification of patients at risk. Optimisation of surgery for patients with localised disease has had a major effect on survival at 5 years and 10 years. For rectal cancer, identification of patients at greatest risk of local failure is important in the selection of patients for preoperative chemoradiation, a strategy proven to improve outcomes in these patients. Stringent postoperative follow-up helps the early identification of potentially radically treatable oligometastatic disease and improves long-term survival. Treatment with adjuvant fluoropyrimidine for colon and rectal cancers further improves survival, more so in stage III than in stage II disease, and oxaliplatin-based combination chemotherapy is now routinely used for stage III disease, although efficacy must be carefully balanced against toxicity. In stage II disease, molecular markers such as microsatellite instability might help select patients for treatment. The integration of targeted treatments with conventional cytotoxic drugs has expanded the treatment of metastatic disease resulting in incremental survival gains. However, biomarker development is essential to aid selection of patients likely to respond to therapy, thereby rationalising treatments and improving outcomes.
Summary Background Peri-operative chemotherapy and surgery is a standard of care for patients with resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against VEGF, ...improves the proportion of patients responding to treatment in advanced gastric cancer. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of adding bevacizumab to peri-operative chemotherapy in patients with resectable gastric, oesophagogastric junction, or lower oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 2–3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with histologically proven, resectable oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma from 87 UK hospitals and cancer centres. We randomly assigned patients 1:1 to receive peri-operative epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab, in addition to surgery. Patients in the control group (chemotherapy alone) received three pre-operative and three post-operative cycles of epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy: 50 mg/m2 epirubicin and 60 mg/m2 cisplatin on day 1 and 1250 mg/m2 oral capecitabine on days 1–21. Patients in the investigational group received the same treatment as the control group plus 7·5 mg/kg intravenous bevacizumab on day 1 of every cycle of chemotherapy and for six further doses once every 21 days following chemotherapy, as maintenance treatment. Randomisation was done by means of a telephone call to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, where staff used a computer programme that implemented a minimisation algorithm with a random element to establish the allocation for the patient at the point of randomisation. Patients were stratified by chemotherapy centre, site of tumour, and tumour stage. The primary outcome for the phase 3 stage of the trial was overall survival (defined as the time from randomisation until death from any cause), analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Here, we report the primary analysis results of the trial; all patients have completed treatment and the required number of primary outcome events has been reached. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN 46020948, and with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00450203. Findings Between Oct 31, 2007, and March 25, 2014, 1063 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone (n=533) or chemotherapy plus bevacizumab (n=530). At the time of analysis, 508 deaths were recorded (248 in the chemotherapy alone group and 260 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group). 3-year overall survival was 50·3% (95% CI 45·5–54·9) in the chemotherapy alone group and 48·1% (43·2–52·7) in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (hazard ratio HR 1·08, 95% CI 0·91–1·29; p=0·36). Apart from neutropenia no other toxic effects were reported at grade 3 or worse severity in more than 10% of patients in either group. Wound healing complications were more prevalent in the bevacizumab group, occurring in 53 (12%) patients in this group compared with 33 (7%) patients in the chemotherapy alone group. In patients who underwent oesophagogastrectomy, post-operative anastomotic leak rates were higher in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group (23 10% of 233 in the chemotherapy alone group vs 52 24% of 220 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group); therefore, recruitment of patients with lower oesophageal or junctional tumours planned for an oesophagogastric resection was stopped towards the end of the trial. Serious adverse events for all patients included anastomotic leaks (30 events in chemotherapy alone group vs 69 in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab group), and infections with normal neutrophil count (42 events vs 53). Interpretation The results of this trial do not provide any evidence for the use of bevacizumab in combination with peri-operative epiribicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy for patients with resectable gastric, oesophagogastric junction, or lower oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Bevacizumab might also be associated with impaired wound healing. Funding Cancer Research UK, MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, and F Hoffmann-La Roche Limited.
PDF
