Fluorouracil-based adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: long-term results of the EORTC 22921 randomised study.

BACKGROUND: EORTC trial 22921 examined the addition of preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy to preoperative radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer. After a median follow-up of 5 years, chemotherapy-irrespective of timing-significantly improved local control. Adjuvant chemotherapy did not improve survival, but the Kaplan-Meier curves diverged, suggesting possible delayed benefit. Here, we report the updated long-term results. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with clinical stage T3 or T4 resectable rectal cancer to receive preoperative radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy before surgery followed by either adjuvant chemotherapy or surveillance. Randomisation was done using minimisation with factors of institution, sex, T stage, and distance from the tumour to the anal verge. Study coordinators, clinicians, and patients were aware of assignment. Radiotherapy consisted of 45 Gy to the posterior pelvis in 25 fractions of 1·8 Gy over 5 weeks. Each course of chemotherapy consisted of fluorouracil (350 mg/m(2) per day intravenous bolus) and folinic acid (leucovorin; 20 mg/m(2) per day intravenous bolus). For preoperative chemotherapy, two courses were given (during weeks 1 and 5 of radiotherapy). Adjuvant chemotherapy was given in four cycles, every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival. This analysis was done by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00002523. FINDINGS: 1011 patients were randomly assigned to treatment between April, 1993, and March, 2003 (252 to preoperative radiotherapy and 253 to each of the other three groups). After a median follow-up of 10·4 years (IQR 7·8-13·1), 10-year overall survival was 49·4% (95% CI 44·6-54·1) for the preoperative radiotherapy group and 50·7% (45·9-55·2) for the preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy group (HR 0·99, 95% CI 0·83-1·18; p=0·91). 10-year overall survival was 51·8% (95% CI 47·0-56·4) for the adjuvant chemotherapy group and 48·4% (43·6-53·0) for the surveillance group (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·09, p=0·32). 10-year disease-free survival was 44·2% (95% CI 39·5-48·8) for the preoperative radiotherapy group and 46·4% (41·7-50·9) for the preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy group (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·79-1·10; p=0·38). 10-year disease-free survival was 47·0% (95% CI 42·2-51·6) for the adjuvant chemotherapy group and 43·7% (39·1-48·2) for the surveillance group (HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·08, p=0·29). At 10 years, cumulative incidence of local relapse was 22·4% (95% CI 17·1-27·6) with radiotherapy alone, 11·8% (7·8-15·8) with neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, 14·5% (10·1-18·9) with radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy and 11·7% (7·7-15·6) with both adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p=0·0017). There was no difference in cumulative incidence of distant metastases (p=0·52). The frequency of long-term side-effects did not differ between the four groups (p=0·22). INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant fluorouracil-based chemotherapy after preoperative radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) does not affect disease-free survival or overall survival. Our trial does not support the current practice of adjuvant chemotherapy after preoperative radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. New treatment strategies incorporating neoadjuvant chemotherapy are required. FUNDING: EORTC, US National Cancer Institute, Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, Ligue contre le Cancer Comité du Doubs.

Concomitant chemoradiotherapy versus acceleration of radiotherapy with or without concomitant chemotherapy in locally advanced head and neck carcinoma (GORTEC 99-02): an open-label phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant chemoradiotherapy and accelerated radiotherapy independently improve outcomes for patients with locally advanced head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of a combination of these approaches. METHODS: In our open-label phase 3 randomised trial, we enrolled patients with locally advanced, stage III and IV (non-metastatic) HNSCC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. We randomly allocated patients centrally with a computer program (with centre, T stage, N stage, and localisation as minimisation factors) in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive conventional chemoradiotherapy (70 Gy in 7 weeks plus three cycles of 4 days' concomitant carboplatin-fluorouracil), accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy (70 Gy in 6 weeks plus two cycles of 5 days' concomitant carboplatin-fluorouracil), or very accelerated radiotherapy alone (64·8 Gy [1·8 Gy twice daily] in 3·5 weeks). The primary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS), was assessed in all enrolled patients. This trial is completed. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00828386. FINDINGS: Between Feb 29, 2000, and May 9, 2007, we randomly allocated 279 patients to receive conventional chemoradiotherapy, 280 to accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy, and 281 to very accelerated radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 4·9-6·2); rates of chemotherapy and radiotherapy compliance were good in all groups. Accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy offered no PFS benefit compared with conventional chemoradiotherapy (HR 1·02, 95% CI 0·84-1·23; p=0·88) or very accelerated radiotherapy (0·83, 0·69-1·01; p=0·060); conventional chemoradiotherapy improved PFS compared with very accelerated radiotherapy (0·82, 0·67-0·99; p=0·041). 3-year PFS was 37·6% (95% CI 32·1-43·4) after conventional chemoradiotherapy, 34·1% (28·7-39·8) after accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy, and 32·2% (27·0-37·9) after very accelerated radiotherapy. More patients in the very accelerated radiotherapy group had RTOG grade 3-4 acute mucosal toxicity (226 [84%] of 268 patients) compared with accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy (205 [76%] of 271 patients) or conventional chemoradiotherapy (180 [69%] of 262; p=0·0001). 158 (60%) of 265 patients in the conventional chemoradiotherapy group, 176 (64%) of 276 patients in the accelerated radiotherapy-chemotherapy group, and 190 (70%) of 272 patients in the very accelerated radiotherapy group were intubated with feeding tubes during treatment (p=0·045). INTERPRETATION: Chemotherapy has a substantial treatment effect given concomitantly with radiotherapy and acceleration of radiotherapy cannot compensate for the absence of chemotherapy. We noted the most favourable outcomes for conventional chemoradiotherapy, suggesting that acceleration of radiotherapy is probably not beneficial in concomitant chemoradiotherapy schedules. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health.

Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Locoregional Relapse Prediction in Oropharyngeal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence to support surgery or radiotherapy as the best treatment for resectable oropharyngeal cancers with a negative HPV status. Predictive algorithms may help to decide which strategy to choose, but they will only be accepted by caregivers and European authorities if they are interpretable. As a proof of concept, we developed a predictive and interpretable algorithm to predict locoregional relapse at 18 months for oropharyngeal cancers as a first step towards that goal. METHODS: The model was based on clinical and Pyradiomics features extracted from the dosimetric CT scan. Intraclass correlation was used to filter out features dependant on delineation. Correlated redundant features were also removed. An XGBoost model was cross-validated and optimised on the HN1 cohort (79 patients), and performances were assessed on the ART ORL cohort (45 patients). The Shapley Values were used to provide an overall and local explanation of the model. RESULTS: On the ART ORL cohort, the model trained on HN1 yielded a precision-or predictive positive value-of 0.92, a recall of 0.42, an area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic of 0.68 and an accuracy of 0.64. The most contributory features were shape Voxel Volume, grey level size zone matrix Small Area Emphasis (glszmSAE), gldm Dependence Non Uniformity Normalized (gldmDNUN), Sex and Age. CONCLUSIONS: We developed an interpretable and generalizable model that could yield a good precision-positive predictive value-for relapse at 18 months on a different test cohort.

Induction chemotherapy followed by cisplatin or cetuximab concomitant to radiotherapy for laryngeal/hypopharyngeal cancer: Long-term results of the TREMPLIN randomised GORTEC trial.

BACKGROUND: In Europe, induction chemotherapy (ICT) followed by radiotherapy is preferred to conventional chemoradiotherapy to avoid total laryngectomy in patients with laryngeal/hypopharyngeal cancer. In comparison with conventional radiotherapy, bioradiotherapy with cetuximab significantly improves locoregional control rates (LCRs) and overall survival (OS) without any increase in unmanageable toxicity. METHODS: Patients included had untreated non-metastatic stage III-IV laryngeal/hypopharyngeal invasive squamous cell carcinoma. Good responders after three cycles of docetaxel-cisplatin-5-fluorouracil (TPF)-ICT (docetaxel and cisplatin, 75 mg/m2 each on day 1, and 5-fluorouracil, 750 mg/m2/day on days 1-5) every 3 weeks were randomised to receive radiotherapy (70 Gy) with concurrent cisplatin (100 mg/m2/day on days 1, 22 and 43 of radiotherapy) or cetuximab (400 mg/m2 of loading dose, 250 mg/m2/week during radiotherapy). The primary end-point was larynx preservation. The secondary end-points were laryngo-oesophageal dysfunction-free survival (LEDFS), LCR and OS. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were enrolled. Among 126 TPF-ICT responders, 116 were randomised to receive either cisplatin (n = 60) or cetuximab (n = 56). The median follow-up was 77.5 months. Five-year OS rates were 66.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-0.79) versus 66.9% (95% CI: 0.54-0.79) (p = 0.9), respectively. Five-year LCRs were 79.8% (95% CI: 69.5-90.0) versus 67.8% (95% CI: 55.1-80.5%) (p = 0.18). Five-year LEDFS was 62.2% (95% CI: 49.7-74.8%) versus 56.2% (95% CI: 43.0-69.4) (p = 0.38). Late grade III/IV salivary gland and laryngeal toxicity occurred in 10.3% versus 9.8% and 6.8% versus 11.8% of patients receiving cisplatin-radiotherapy versus cetuximab, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in LEDFS was observed between the two arms. TPF-ICT followed by conventional chemoradiotherapy or cetuximab was feasible, and long-term toxicity was not statistically different between the two arms. LEDFS appears as a relevant end-point.

Chemotherapy with preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative radiotherapy is recommended for selected patients with rectal cancer. We evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to preoperative radiotherapy and the use of postoperative chemotherapy in the treatment of rectal cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with clinical stage T3 or T4 resectable rectal cancer to receive preoperative radiotherapy, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, preoperative radiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy, or preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. Radiotherapy consisted of 45 Gy delivered over a period of 5 weeks. One course of chemotherapy consisted of 350 mg of fluorouracil per square meter of body-surface area per day and 20 mg of leucovorin per square meter per day, both given for 5 days. Two courses were combined with preoperative radiotherapy in the group receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy and the group receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy; four courses were planned postoperatively in the group receiving preoperative radiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy and the group receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy and postoperative chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: We enrolled 1011 patients in the trial. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the groups that received chemotherapy preoperatively (P=0.84) and those that received it postoperatively (P=0.12). The combined 5-year overall survival rate for all four groups was 65.2%. The 5-year cumulative incidence rates for local recurrences were 8.7%, 9.6%, and 7.6% in the groups that received chemotherapy preoperatively, postoperatively, or both, respectively, and 17.1% in the group that did not receive chemotherapy (P=0.002). The rate of adherence to preoperative chemotherapy was 82.0%, and to postoperative chemotherapy was 42.9%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with rectal cancer who receive preoperative radiotherapy, adding fluorouracil-based chemotherapy preoperatively or postoperatively has no significant effect on survival. Chemotherapy, regardless of whether it is administered before or after surgery, confers a significant benefit with respect to local control. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00002523 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Improved Outcome by Adding Concurrent Chemotherapy to Cetuximab and Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Head and Neck Carcinomas: Results of the GORTEC 2007-01 Phase III Randomized Trial.

Purpose To investigate the effect of adding concurrent chemotherapy (CT) to cetuximab plus radiotherapy (RT; CT-cetux-RT) compared with cetuximab plus RT (cetux-RT) in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN). Patients and Methods In this phase III randomized trial, patients with N0-2b, nonoperated, stage III or IV (nonmetastatic) LA-SCCHN were enrolled. Patients received once-daily RT up to 70 Gy with weekly cetuximab or with weekly cetuximab and concurrent carboplatin and fluorouracil (three cycles). To detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 for progression-free survival (PFS) with 85% power at a two-sided significance level of P = .05, 203 patients needed to be included in each arm. Results Four hundred six patients were randomly assigned to either CT-cetux-RT or cetux-RT. Patient and tumor characteristics were well balanced between arms, including p16 status. With a median follow-up of 4.4 years, the HR for PFS favored the CT-cetux-RT arm (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94; P = .015), with 3-year PFS rates of 52.3% and 40.5% and median PFS times of 37.9 and 22.4 months in the CT-cetux-RT and cetux-RT arms, respectively. The HR for locoregional control was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.76; P < .001) in favor of CT-cetux-RT. These benefits were observed regardless of p16 status for oropharynx carcinomas. Overall survival (HR, 0.80; P = .11) and distant metastases rates (HR, 1.19; P = .50) were not significantly different between the two arms. The CT-cetux-RT arm, compared with cetux-RT, had a higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 mucositis (73% v 61%, respectively; P = .014) and of hospitalizations for toxicity (42% v 22%, respectively; P < .001). Conclusion The addition of concurrent carboplatin and fluorouracil to cetux-RT improved PFS and locoregional control, with a nonsignificant gain in survival. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence of a clinical benefit for treatment intensification using cetux-RT as a backbone in LA-SCCHN.

A phase II open-label multicenter study of gefitinib in combination with irradiation followed by chemotherapy in patients with inoperable stage III non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gefitinib is an oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors which may act as a radiosensitizer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy of gefitinib 250 mg once daily in combination with thoracic radiotherapy (66 Gy in 6.5 weeks, 2 Gy/day, 5 fractions/week) followed by consolidation chemotherapy (IV cisplatin and vinorelbine) as first line treatment in a population of unselected stage IIIB NSCLC patients according to EGFR mutation status. RESULTS: Due to a low accrual rate in this study, the sample size (n = 50) was not reached. Sixteen patients were included in four centers, 50% had adenocarcinoma and 75% were male. Genomic alterations (7 patients studied) retrieved TP53 mutation in 2 patients and no EGFR mutation. Four weeks after radiotherapy, 3 patients (19%) had a partial response, 6 (38%) had a stable disease, and 7 had a progression (44%). Median overall survival was 11 months and median progression-free survival was 5 months. At the time of the last contact, 5 patients (31%) were still alive. Main toxicities were gastrointestinal (81%), cutaneous (81%), general (56%), and respiratory (50%). There were 12>G3 adverse events in 7 (47%) patients, and there was one toxic-death during the concomitant period due to an interstitial pneumonitis. There were two possible adverse events-related deaths during the chemotherapy period (pulmonary embolism (n = 1) and sudden death after the administration of the 3rd course of chemotherapy (n = 1)). CONCLUSION: The benefit of Gefitinib-RT could not be confirmed due to premature trial discontinuation. Further evaluation is required, especially in patients with EGFR mutated NSCLC.

Very accelerated radiotherapy or concurrent chemoradiotherapy for N3 head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: Pooled analysis of two GORTEC randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the outcome of N3 patients treated with very accelerated radiotherapy (VART) or different schedules of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) within two phase III trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 179 patients with N3 HNSCC from two GORTEC randomized trials (96-01 and 99-02) were pooled. Patients received either VART: 64.8Gy/3.5weeks or one of the 3 following CRT regimens: Conventional CRT: 70Gy/7weeks+3 cycles carboplatin-5FU; Moderately accelerated CRT: 70Gy/6weeks+2 cycles carboplatin-5FU; Strongly intensified CRT: 64Gy/5weeks+cisplatin (days 2, 16, 30) and 5 FU (days 1-5, 29-33) followed by 2 cycles adjuvant cisplatin-5FU. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 13.3 and 5.2years for GORTEC 96-01 and GORTEC 99-02, respectively. Five-year overall survival (OS) was 13.8%. No significant difference was observed between CRT versus VART in terms of OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.93, p=0.68), loco-regional progression (HR: 0.70, p=0.13), or distant progression (HR: 0.86, p=0.53). OS was worse for patients with T3-4 tumors versus early T stage (11.0% versus 25.7%, p=0.015). In multivariate analysis, the oropharyngeal subsite presented a higher risk of distant metastasis (as first event 46.5% vs 19.2%, p<0.001),). A significant interaction between treatment modalities and subsites has been observed concerning loco-regional and distant failures. CONCLUSION: The outcome of N3 HNSCC was extremely poor despite treatment intensification and no difference between CRT and VART. Both distant metastases and loco-regional failures remain important treatment challenge.

Multicenter Randomized Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial GORTEC (Groupe Oncologie Radiotherapie Tete et Cou) 2009-01 Evaluating the Effect of the Regenerating Agent on Radiodermatitis of Head and Neck Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Concomitant cetuximab and radiation therapy (RT) can induce severe radiodermatitis in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). OTD70DERM, a regenerating agent (RGTA), is a structural and functional analogue of glycosaminoglycans. Preclinical studies have shown that topical RGTA can markedly reduce radiation-induced mucosal and cutaneous toxicities without tumor protection. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of topical RGTA on radiodermatitis in patients with HNC undergoing RT and cetuximab, for whom RT-induced skin reactions are frequent and/or severe. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade ≥2 radiodermatitis. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients with newly diagnosed HNC undergoing conventionally fractionated RT (70 Gy in 35 fractions) and weekly cetuximab. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive topical OTD70DERM or placebo on irradiated skin once daily. The National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0, was used to evaluate radiodermatitis (photographs of radiation zone). The Dermatology Life Quality Index score was also evaluated. All the skin reactions seen on the photographs were scored independently by 2 outside experts. RESULTS: Of the 76 randomized patients (38 in each arm), 72 were available for the final radiodermatitis evaluation (37 in the RGTA arm and 35 in the placebo arm). No significant difference was observed concerning the incidence or duration of grade ≥2 radiodermatitis between the 2 arms (81% for RGTA vs 80% for placebo; P=.9). Also, no significant difference was found between the 2 arms regarding grade ≥2 radiodermatitis evaluated by the 2 experts using the photographs of 68 patients (76% vs 74%; P=.78). Finally, no significant difference was found in the Dermatology Life Quality Index score (score >10, 15% vs 20%; P=.45). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the good preclinical rationale, RGTA did not reduce the incidence and severity of radiodermatitis in patients with HNC.

Clinical Outcomes of Several IMRT Techniques for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis.

PURPOSE: The Advanced Radiotherapy Oto-Rhino-Laryngologie (ART-ORL) study (NCT02024035) was performed to prospectively evaluate the clinical and economic aspects of helical TomoTherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (RapidArc, Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) for patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fourteen centers participated in this prospective comparative study. Randomization was not possible based on the availability of equipment. Patients with epidermoid or undifferentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma or epidermoid carcinoma of the oropharynx and oral cavity (T1-T4, M0, N0-N3) were included between February 2010 and February 2012. Only the results of the clinical study are presented in this report, as the results of the economic assessment have been published previously. Inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score analysis was undertaken in an effort to adjust for potential bias due to nonrandomization. Locoregional control, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival assessed 18 months after treatment, as well as long-term toxicity and salivary function, were evaluated. RESULTS: The analysis included 166 patients. The following results are given after inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment. The locoregional control rate at 18 months was significantly better in the TomoTherapy group: 83.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 72.5%-90.2%) versus 72.7% (95% CI, 62.1%-80.8%) in the RapidArc group (P=.025). The cancer-specific survival rate was better in the TomoTherapy group: 97.2% (95% CI, 89.3%-99.3%) versus 85.5% (95% CI, 75.8%-91.5%) in the RapidArc group (P=.014). No significant difference was shown in progression-free or overall survival. TomoTherapy induced fewer acute salivary disorders (P=.012). Posttreatment salivary function degradation was worse in the RapidArc group (P=.012). CONCLUSIONS: TomoTherapy provided better locoregional control and cancer-specific survival than RapidArc treatment, with fewer salivary disorders. No significant difference was shown in progression-free and overall survival. These results should be explored in a randomized trial.

[Clinical research activity of the French cancer cooperative network: Overview and perspectives]. / Activité de recherche clinique académique des investigateurs du réseau des Groupes coopérateurs en oncologie (GCO) : bilan et perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: The French Cancer Plan 2014-2019 stresses the importance of strengthening collaboration between all stakeholders involved in the fight against cancer, including cancer cooperative groups and intergroups. This survey aimed to describe the basics characteristics and clinical research activity among the Cancer Cooperative Groups (Groupes coopérateurs en oncologie). The second objective was to identify facilitators and barriers to their research activity. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all the clinicians involved in 2014 as investigators in a clinical trial sponsored by one of the ten members of the Cancer Cooperative Groups network. The questions were related to their profile, research activity and the infrastructure existing within their healthcare center to support clinical research and related compliance activities. RESULTS: In total, 366 investigators responded to our survey. The academic clinical trials sponsored by the Cancer Cooperative Groups represented an important part of the research activity of the investigators in France in 2014. These academic groups contributed to the opening of many research sites throughout all regions in France. Factors associated with a higher participation of investigators (more than 10 patients enrolled in a trial over a year) include the existing support of healthcare professionals (more than 2 clinical research associate (CRA) OR=11.16 [3.82-32.6] compared to none) and the practice of their research activity in a University Hospital Center (CHU) rather than a Hospital Center (CH) (OR=2.15 [1.20-3.83]). CONCLUSION: This study highlighted factors that can strengthen investigator clinical research activities and subsequently improve patient access to evidence-based new cancer therapies in France.

Enhanced tumorocidal effect of chemotherapy with preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer: preliminary results--EORTC 22921.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial evaluated the addition of chemotherapy (CT) to preoperative radiation (preop RT) and the value of postoperative CT for improving the survival in patients with T3-4 resectable rectal cancer. Patients were allocated to the following four arms: arm 1, preop RT 45 Gy in 5 weeks; arm 2, preop RT plus two 5-day CT courses (fluorouracil 350 mg/m2/d and leucovorin 20 mg/m2/d) in the first and fifth week of RT; arm 3, preop RT plus four postoperative CT courses; and arm 4, preop RT and CT plus postoperative CT. We investigated the effect of adding CT on the pathologic parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand eleven patients were entered onto the trial; 505 received preop RT (arms 1 and 3), and 506 received preop RT-CT (arms 2 and 4). We analyzed the differences in tumor size, tumor node stage, number of retrieved nodes, and histologic features such as lymphatic, venous, and perineural invasions, tumor differentiation, and tumor type. RESULTS: After preop RT-CT, tumors were smaller (P < .0001), had less advanced pT (P < .001) and pN stages (P < .001), had small numbers of examined nodes (P = .046), and less frequent LVN invasions (P < or = .008). Mucinous tumors increased after preop RT-CT (P < .001). CONCLUSION: In patients with rectal cancer, preliminary results of EORTC Trial 22921 indicate that the addition of CT to preop RT induces down-sizing, downstaging, and significant changes in histologic characteristics. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the impact on local control and survival.

Cost Analysis of Complex Radiation Therapy for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.

PURPOSE: This cost analysis aimed to prospectively assess differences in costs between TomoTherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Economic data were gathered from a multicenter study. However, randomization was not possible due to the availability of equipment. Costs were calculated using the microcosting technique from the hospital's perspective (in 2013 euros), and the time horizon was radiation therapy. Only resources that entered the hospital production process and which were likely to vary between the strategies being compared were considered. Acute adverse events observed within the time horizon were also assessed. RESULTS: The cost analysis was based on a total of 173 patient treatments given between 2010 and 2012 in 14 French cancer centers: 73 patients were treated with TomoTherapy, 92 with VMAT RapidArc, and 8 with VMAT SmartArc. Estimated costs of SmartArc were removed from the comparison due to the small sample size. The mean ± SD cost per patient of the treatment planning phase was €314 (±€214) for TomoTherapy and €511 (±€590) for RapidArc. Mean costs ± SD per patient of irradiation reached €3144 (±€565) for TomoTherapy and €1350 (±€299) for RapidArc. The most sensitive parameter of irradiation was the annual operating time of accelerators. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals for the mean costs of irradiation were €3016 to €3272 for TomoTherapy and €1281 to €1408 for RapidArc. The number of acute adverse events during radiation therapy was not significantly different between strategies. CONCLUSIONS: TomoTherapy appeared to be more expensive than RapidArc mainly due to the higher price of the accelerator, the higher costs of maintenance, and the longer duration of treatment sessions. Because strategies were not significantly different in clinical effect, RapidArc appeared to be the strategy to be recommended at this stage of knowledge.

Final results of the 94-01 French Head and Neck Oncology and Radiotherapy Group randomized trial comparing radiotherapy alone with concomitant radiochemotherapy in advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma.

PURPOSE: We report the 5-year survival and late toxicity results of a randomized clinical trial, which showed a 3-year improvement in overall survival and locoregional control of stage III or IV oropharynx carcinoma, using concomitant radiochemotherapy (arm B), compared with standard radiotherapy (arm A). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 226 patients were entered onto a phase III multicenter randomized trial comparing radiotherapy alone (70 Gy in 35 fractions; arm A) with concomitant radiochemotherapy (70 Gy in 35 fractions with three cycles of a 4-day regimen comprising carboplatin and fluorouracil; arm B). Prognostic factors were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis. Five-year late toxicity was evaluated using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria for neurological toxicity, hearing, taste, mandibula, and teeth damage, and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity criteria for skin, salivary gland, and mucosa. RESULTS: Five-year overall survival, specific disease-free survival, and locoregional control rates were 22% and 16% (log-rank P =.05), 27% and 15% (P =.01), and 48% and 25% (P =.002), in arm B and arm A, respectively. Stage IV, hemoglobin level lower than 125 g/L, and standard treatment were independent prognostic factors of short survival and locoregional failure by univariate and multivariate analysis. One or more grade 3 to 4 complications occurred in 56% of the patients in arm B, compared with 30% in arm A (P was not significant). CONCLUSION: Concomitant radiochemotherapy improved overall survival and locoregional control rates and does not statistically increase severe late morbidity. Anemia was the most important prognostic factor for survival in both arms.

Interstitial brachytherapy of periorificial skin carcinomas of the face: a retrospective study of 97 cases.

PURPOSE: To analyze outcomes after interstitial brachytherapy of facial periorificial skin carcinomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 97 skin carcinomas (88 basal cell carcinomas, 9 squamous cell carcinomas) of the nose, periorbital areas, and ears from 40 previously untreated patients (Group 1) and 57 patients who had undergone surgery (Group 2). The average dose was 55 Gy (range, 50-65 Gy) in Group 1 and 52 Gy (range, 50-60 Gy) in Group 2 (mean implantation times: 79 and 74 hours, respectively). We calculated survival rates and assessed functional and cosmetic results de visu. RESULTS: Median age was 71 years (range, 17-97 years). There were 29 T1, 8 T2, 1 T3, and 2 Tx tumors in Group 1. Tumors were <2 cm in Group 2. Local control was 92.5% in Group 1 and 88% in Group 2 (median follow-up, 55 months; range, 6-132 months). Five-year disease-free survival was better in Group 1 (91%; range, 75-97) than in Group 2 (80%; range, 62-90; p = 0.23). Of the 34 patients whose results were reassessed, 8 presented with pruritus or epiphora; 1 Group 2 patient had an impaired eyelid aperture. Cosmetic results were better in Group 1 than in Group 2 with, respectively, 72% (8/11) vs. 52% (12/23) good results and 28 (3/11) vs. 43% (10/23) fair results. CONCLUSIONS: Brachytherapy provided a high level of local control and good cosmetic results for facial periorificial skin carcinomas that pose problems of surgical reconstruction. Results were better for untreated tumors than for incompletely excised tumors or tumors recurring after surgery.

Postoperative interstitial brachytherapy for resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficiency and toxicity of postoperative brachytherapy (POBT) in the treatment of resectable mobile tongue squamous cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center study of patients with SSC of the mobile tongue who were treated between August 1992 and June 2013 by glossectomy and neck dissection followed by (192)Ir interstitial brachytherapy of the tumor bed. Endpoints were local control, cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and morbidity. Independent prognostic factors were analyzed in a Cox regression model. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients were identified (median age, 55 years [range, 15-84]; 76% male). Patient and tumor characteristics were: T1T2N0 (85%), pN+ (13%), positive surgical margins (14%), negative margins <5 mm (29%), dysplasic margins (14%), lymphatic vessel invasion (5%), and perineural spread (5%). Median followup was 6.7 years (1.5 months to 17.7 years). Local control, CSS, and OS rates at 2 years were 79%, 81%, and 72%, respectively. The corresponding 5-year rates were 76%, 67%, and 56%, respectively. After POBT, 22% of patients presented grade ≥2 necrosis and 8% experienced chronic pain. Independent prognostic factors were positive surgical margins for poor local control and tumor recurrence and lymphatic vessel invasion for poor OS. CONCLUSION: POBT provided good local control and better CSS and OS than reported for surgery alone. Morbidity was higher than that reported for brachytherapy alone but may be considered acceptable in a well-selected patient population at high risk of local recurrence.

Preliminary data of the GORTEC 2000-02 phase III trial comparing intravenous and subcutaneous administration of amifostine for head and neck tumors treated by external radiotherapy.

A prospective randomized study is comparing intravenous (IV; arm A) versus subcutaneous (SC; arm B) administration of amifostine in patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Main eligibility criteria were newly diagnosed squamous cell head and neck cancer, inclusion of at least 75% of both parotid glands within radiation fields that would receive at least 40 Gy, and no evidence of distant metastasis. Prophylactic use of pilocarpine and concomitant chemotherapy were prohibited. Intravenous administration of amifostine is 200 mg/m2/d in a short 3-minute infusion 15 to 30 minutes before each fraction of radiotherapy. Subcutaneous administration is 500 mg/d in two, slow 1.25-mL injections at two different sites 20 to 60 minutes before each radiotherapy fraction. Antiemetic treatment and blood pressure monitoring are required in both arms. As of April 25, 2002, 111 of the 292 required patients were included. Data are available for the first 54 patients. Acute toxicity included nausea/vomiting (12% for arm A; 13% for arm B), hypotension (6% in arm A; 0% in arm B), skin rash (15% in arm A; 16% in arm B), and asthenia (4% in arm A; 0% in arm B). Compliance with amifostine administration was 70% in arm A (IV) and 80% in arm B (SC). The rate of acute xerostomia (> or = grade 2) was 23% in arm A and 19% in arm B. These preliminary results indicate that tolerance is better with SC than IV administration, particularly because of the absence of hypotension. The absence of hypotension with SC administration facilitates patient monitoring and management in radiotherapy departments. More patients and data are required to assess the long-term efficacy of SC administration on acute and late xerostomia.

Radiotherapy with concomitant weekly docetaxel for Stages III/IV oropharynx carcinoma. Results of the 98-02 GORTEC Phase II trial.

PURPOSE: We designed a prospective Phase II clinical trial to evaluate the addition of weekly chemotherapy using Docetaxel during standard radiation therapy in patients with Stages III and IV oropharynx carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 63 patients have been entered in a Phase II multicenter trial. Radiotherapy delivered, with conventional fractionation, 70 Gy in 35 fractions. Patients received during the period of radiotherapy seven cycles of Docetaxel (20 mg/m2 each week). RESULTS: Radiotherapy compliance was good in respect to total dose, treatment duration, and treatment interruption. The rate of Grade 3 and 4 mucositis was 84%. Grade 3 and 4 skin toxicity occurred in 53% of the patients. Hematologic toxicity was infrequent, with only a 5% rate of Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia. Three-year overall actuarial survival and disease-free survival rates were, respectively, 47% (95% CI = 39-68%) and 39% (95% CI = 30-57%). The local and regional control rate was 64%. CONCLUSION: The adjunction of weekly Docetaxel to conventional radiotherapy is feasible. Mucositis and skin toxicity were the major acute toxic effects. Therapeutic results were similar to those observed with concomitant chemotherapy using platinum and/or 5-FU. Further trials using Docetaxel in combination with other cytotoxic agents are needed.

Late toxicity results of the GORTEC 94-01 randomized trial comparing radiotherapy with concomitant radiochemotherapy for advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma: comparison of LENT/SOMA, RTOG/EORTC, and NCI-CTC scoring systems.

PURPOSE: To prospectively assess 5-year late toxicity in patients treated by concomitant radiochemotherapy for locally advanced oropharynx carcinoma using three different toxicity scales. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 226 patients were entered in a Phase III multicenter, randomized trial comparing radiotherapy alone (70 Gy in 35 fractions: Arm A) with concomitant radiochemotherapy (70 Gy in 35 fractions with three cycles of a 4-day regimen containing carboplatin and 5-fluorouracil: Arm B). Five living patients, free of local or distant recurrences, could not be evaluated for late toxicity. Forty-four patients were eligible for late toxicity with a median follow-up of 5 years. Late toxicity was evaluated by the radiation oncologist using a large questionnaire containing 120 mixed items of three scales (NCI-CTC, LENT/SOMA, and RTOG). The data were then transposed on separate scales using corresponding grades. RESULTS: The 5-year overall survival rate was 22% in Arm B and 16% in Arm A (p = 0.05). The 5-year locoregional control rate was 48% in Arm B and 25% in Arm A (p = 0.002). The spinal cord was not affected by the concomitant adjunct of chemotherapy, and no deaths were caused by late toxicity. Using the three late toxicity scales, 100% of the patients treated with the combined modality (Arm B) developed one or more late complications vs. 94% in the radiotherapy-alone arm (Arm A). The difference was not statistically significant. The most commonly damaged organs (all Grade 1-4) were the salivary glands (100% in Arm B vs. 82% in Arm A, p <0.05), skin (78% vs. 47%, p <0.05), teeth (67% vs. 18%, p <0.05), mucosa (59% vs. 63% p = not significant), and mandible (44% vs. 12%, p <0.05). One or more Grade 3-4 complications occurred in 82% of the patients in Arm B vs. 47% in Arm A (p = 0.02) but concerned only the teeth. The correlation between the RTOG and LENT/SOMA scale and between the NCI-CTC and LENT/SOMA scale were low for Grade 1-4 toxicity (near 30%). The transposability of a patient's symptoms was significantly greater using the LENT/SOMA or RTOG/EORTC scaling systems than using the NCI-CTC system. CONCLUSION: Concomitant radiochemotherapy increased overall survival and locoregional control rates. The difference between the two treatment groups for Grade 3-4 complications was only significant for the teeth. The late toxicity assessment of a treatment may depend on the toxicity scale used. The LENT/SOMA scale seems to be the most accurate scale, but most of the score results were not concordant with those obtained with other scales. The results of this study confirm the necessity of using a common late toxicity scale in clinical trials.

[2000 Standards, Options and Recommendations for prognostic value of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes in non small cell lung cancer]. / Standards, Options et Recommandations 2000 pour l'intérêt pronostique des oncogènes et gènes suppresseurs de tumeurs dans les cancers bronchopulmonaires non à petites cellules.

CONTEXT: The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the Federation of French cancer centers (FNCLCC), the 20 French cancer centers, and specialists from French public universities, general hospitals and private clinics. The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and the outcome of cancer patients. The methodology is based on a literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To develop clinical practice guidelines for non small cell lung cancer patients according to the definitions of the Standards, Options and Recommendations project. METHODS: Data were identified by searching Medline , web sites, and using the personal reference lists of members of the expert groups. Once the guidelines were defined, the document was submitted for review to independent reviewers. RESULTS: This article presents the chapter "Prognosis significance of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes" from the full report "Standards, Options and Recommendation for non small cell lung cancer" validated in August 2000. The main recommendations are: 1) No clear clinical prognostic value of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes (p53, bcl-2, Ki-ras, c-erbB-2, Rb, p16) in non small cell lung cancer, can be established from the available evidences (standard, level of evidence C). 2) Prospective multicenter studies should be performed to assess prognostic significance of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes in non small cell lung cancer.