Development of the Melanoma Concerns Questionnaire (MCQ-28); refinement of the EORTC QLQ-MEL38 module.

OBJECTIVE: Few patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed that adequately measure the patient-experience following diagnosis and treatment of melanoma. Building on previous research, which developed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Module (QLQ-MEL38), the aim of this study was to further test the hypothesised domain structure and psychometric properties of the phase 3 module, in a new larger sample of melanoma patients. METHODS: Melanoma patients (n = 270) were recruited from four countries (Australia, England, Serbia, and Spain). Patients completed the EORTC core questionnaire (QLQ-C30), the QLQ-MEL38, and a sociodemographic survey. Using this new larger dataset, comparisons were made with the hypothesised domain structure of the EORTC phase 3 module using principal component analysis. Items which formed subscales in a revised domain structure were then tested for goodness of fit (GoF) to the Rasch model. RESULTS: The original hypothesised and final domain structures were similar but not identical. Twenty-four items (83%) loaded onto the same distinct subscales previously generated by phase 3, and item-by-item comparison of the two pattern matrices indicated an extremely close match. Ten items were removed from the QLQ-MEL38 phase 3 module, and rescoring of some items was required. Four subscales, together with five individual items, comprised the final instrument. CONCLUSION: The newly developed measure (named the Melanoma Concerns Questionnaire; MCQ-28) was found to tap into several important psychosocial domains of concern to melanoma patients, particularly those being managed in "usual" clinic settings.

The ENHANCES study: a randomised controlled trial of a nurse-led survivorship intervention for patients treated for head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: A randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a nurse-delivered Head and Neck Cancer Survivor Self-Management Care Plan (HNCP) for patients who had completed treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: Ten oncology nurses were trained to deliver the HNCP. The HNCP consisted of one face-to-face hour-long meeting in which the patient's treatment was recorded, as were contact details of health professionals involved in their care and follow-up schedules. Patients were guided to nominate up to three goals for their future well-being and assisted to devise an action plan to achieve these. The HNCP was given to the patient and a copy was forwarded to their primary care physician. One hundred and nine patients were randomised after definitive curative intent treatment, 36 to HNCP, 36 to receive information about survivorship, and 37 to usual care. The primary outcome, analysed by intention-to-treat, was change in quality of life measured by the FACT-H&N from baseline to 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Quality of life of all groups decreased at 3 months but was close to baseline at 6 months. Compared with the usual care group, the only statistically significant mean difference at 6 months was for the information group on the physical well-being domain (mean difference 0.4, 95% - 1.8, 2.6, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A single-session nurse-delivered intervention is insufficient to improve the quality of life in HNC survivors compared with usual care. Provision of detailed written information about HNC survivorship is associated with improved physical well-being. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12613000542796.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) remains undetermined. This study compared outcomes in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for EAC. METHODS: Patients who underwent nCT or nCRT followed by surgery for EAC were identified from a prospective database (2000-2017) and included. After propensity score matching, the impact of the treatments on postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, pathological outcomes, and survival rates were compared. RESULTS: Of the 396 eligible patients, 262 patients were analysed following matching with 131 patients in both groups. There were no significant differences between the nCT and nCRT groups for overall complications (59% vs 57%, P = 0.802) or in-hospital mortality (2% vs 0%, P = 0.156). Patients who had nCRT had more R0 resections (93% vs 83%, P = 0.013), and higher pathological complete response rates (15% vs 5%, P < 0.001). No differences in 5-year overall survival rates (nCT vs nCRT; 44% vs 33%, P = 0.645) were found. CONCLUSION: In this study no differences between nCT and nCRT were seen in postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality in patients treated for EAC. Inspite of improved complete resection and pathological response there was no difference in the overall survival between the treatment modalities.

Acute Adverse Events and Postoperative Complications in a Randomized Trial of Preoperative Short-course Radiotherapy Versus Long-course Chemoradiotherapy for T3 Adenocarcinoma of the Rectum: Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group Trial (TROG 01.04).

OBJECTIVE: To compare acute adverse events (AE) and postoperative complication rates in a randomized trial of short-course (SC) versus long-course (LC) preoperative radiotherapy. BACKGROUND: Evidence demonstrates that adding neoadjuvant radiotherapy to surgery offers better local control in the management of rectal cancer. With both SC and LC therapy there is a potential for acute treatment-related toxicity and increased patient morbidity. METHODS: Eligible patients had clinical-stage T3 rectal adenocarcinoma within 12 cm of the anal verge with no evidence of metastasis. SC consisted of pelvic radiotherapy 5 × 5 Gy in 1 week, early surgery and 6 courses of adjuvant chemotherapy. LC was 50.4 Gy administered in 28 fractions during 5.5 weeks, with infusion 5-fluorouracil, surgery in 4 to 6 weeks, and 4 courses of chemotherapy. RESULTS: All SC patients and 93% of LC patients received preoperative planned radiotherapy. There was no 30-day operative mortality. A statistically significant higher percentage of at least 1 AE occurred in the LC group (SC, 72.3%; LC, 99.4%; P < 0.001). There were significant differences in favor of SC for grade 3 AE: radiation dermatitis (0% vs 5.6%, P = 0.003), proctitis (0% vs 3.7% P = 0.016), nausea (0% vs 3.1%, P = 0.029), fatigue (0% vs 3.7%, P = 0.016) and grade 3/4 diarrhea rates (1.3% vs 14.2% P < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in surgical complication rates were seen (SC 53.2 vs 50.4% LC, p = 0.68), although permanent stoma (38.0% vs 29.8%, P = 0.13) and anastomotic breakdown (7.1% vs 3.5%, P = 0.26) rates favored LC with perineal wound complications (38.3% vs 50.0%, P = 0.26) in favor of SC. CONCLUSIONS: LC had significantly higher AEs compared with SC with no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications. There were clinical trends in permanent stoma rates and anastomotic leaks in favor of LC but with an increased perineal wound breakdown rate.

Results of a phase II, open-label, non-comparative study of intralesional PV-10 followed by radiotherapy for the treatment of in-transit or metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: In-transit and recurrent dermal or subcutaneous melanoma metastases represent a significant burden of advanced disease. Intralesional Rose Bengal can elicit tumor selective ablation and a T-cell mediated abscopal effect in untreated lesions. A subset of patients in a phase II trial setting received external beam radiotherapy to their recurrent lesions with complete or partial response and no significant acute radiation reaction. METHODS: An open-label, single-arm phase II study was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of PV-10 followed by hypofractionated radiotherapy. Patients had in-transit melanoma metastases suitable for IL therapy and radiotherapy. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were enrolled and thirteen completed both treatment components. The overall response rate was 86.6% and the clinical benefit was 93.3% on an intention to treat analysis (CR 33.3%, PR 53.3%, SD 6.7%). The median follow up duration was 19.25 months. Size of metastases (<10 mm) predicted lesion complete response (74.6%). Treatment was well tolerated with no associated grade 4 or 5 adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of PV-10 and radiotherapy resulted in lesion-specific, normal tissue-sparing, ablation of disease with minimal local or systemic adverse effects.

Debate: adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy or not? More data is the wiser choice.

Every year 170,000 patients are diagnosed with brain metastases (BMs) in the United States. Traditionally, adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy (AWBRT) has been offered following local therapy with neurosurgery (NSx) and/or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to BMs. The aim is to increase intracranial control, thereby decreasing symptoms from intracranial progression and a neurological death. There is a rapidly evolving change in the radiation treatment of BMs happening around the world. AWBRT is now being passed over in favour of repeat scanning at regular intervals and more local therapies as more BMs appear radiologically, BMs that may never become symptomatic. This change has happened after the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) in Item 5 of its "Choosing Wisely 2014" list recommended: "Don't routinely add adjuvant whole brain radiation therapy to SRS for limited brain metastases". The guidelines are supposed to be based on the highest evidence to hand at the time. This article debates that the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published prior to this recommendation consistently showed AWBRT significantly increases intracranial control, and avoids a neurological death, what it is meant to do. It also points out that, despite the enormity of the problem, only 774 patients in total had been randomised over more than three decades. These trials were heterogeneous in many respects. This data can, at best, be regarded as preliminary. In particular, there are no single histology AWBRT trials yet completed. A phase two trial investigating hippocampal avoiding AWBRT (HAWBRT) showed significantly less NCF decline compared to historical controls. We now need more randomised data to confirm the benefit of adjuvant HAWBRT. However, the ASTRO Guideline has particularly impacted accrual to trials investigating this, especially the international ANZMTG 01.07 WBRTMel trial. This is an RCT investigating AWBRT following local treatment in patients with one to three BMs from melanoma. WBRTMel has accrued 196 of a required 220 to date but accrual has slowed. HAWBRT may now never be tested in a randomised setting. Encouraging more data in AWBRT is the wiser choice.

Adjuvant lymph-node field radiotherapy versus observation only in patients with melanoma at high risk of further lymph-node field relapse after lymphadenectomy (ANZMTG 01.02/TROG 02.01): 6-year follow-up of a phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended for patients with melanoma after lymphadenectomy. We previously showed this treatment reduced risk of repeat lymph-node field cancer in patients with a high risk of recurrence but had no effect on overall survival. Here, we aim to update the relapse and survival data from that trial and assess quality of life and toxic effects. METHODS: In the ANZMTG 01.02/TROG 02.01 randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients who had undergone lymphadenectomy for a palpable lymph-node field relapse and were at high risk of recurrence at 16 hospitals (11 in Australia, three in New Zealand, one in Netherlands, and one in Brazil). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to adjuvant radiotherapy (48 Gy in 20 fractions, given over a maximum of 30 days) or observation, stratified by institution, areas of lymph-node field (parotid and cervical, axilla, or groin), number of involved nodes (≤3 vs >3), maximum involved node diameter (≤4 cm vs >4 cm), and extent of extracapsular extension (none, limited, or extensive). Participants, those giving treatment, and those assessing outcomes were not masked to treatment allocation, but participants were unaware of each other's treatment allocation. In this follow-up, we assessed outcomes every 3 months from randomisation for the first 2 years, then every 6 months up to 5 years, then annually. The primary endpoint was lymph-node field relapse as a first relapse, assessed in patients without major eligibility infringements (determined by an independent data monitoring committee). We assessed late adverse effects (occurring >90 days after surgery or start of radiotherapy) with standard criteria in the as-treated population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00287196. FINDINGS: Between March 21, 2003, and Nov 15, 2007, we randomly assigned 123 patients to adjuvant radiotherapy (109 eligible for efficacy assessments) and 127 to observation (108 eligible). The final follow-up date was Nov 15, 2011. Median follow-up was 73 months (IQR 61-91). 23 (21%) relapses occurred in the adjuvant radiotherapy group compared with 39 (36%) in the observation group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·52 [95% CI 0·31-0·88], p=0·023). Overall survival (HR 1·27 [95% CI 0·89-1·79], p=0·21) and relapse-free survival (0·89 [0·65-1·22], p=0·51) did not differ between groups. Minor, long-term toxic effects from radiotherapy (predominantly pain, and fibrosis of the skin or subcutaneous tissue) were common, and 20 (22%) of 90 patients receiving adjuvant radiotherapy developed grade 3-4 toxic effects. 18 (20%) of 90 patients had grade 3 toxic effects, mainly affecting skin (nine [10%] patients) and subcutaneous tissue (six [7%] patients). Over 5 years, a significant increase in lower limb volumes was noted after adjuvant radiotherapy (mean volume ratio 15·0%) compared with observation (7·7%; difference 7·3% [95% CI 1·5-13·1], p=0·014). No significant differences in upper limb volume were noted between groups. INTERPRETATION: Long-term follow-up supports our previous findings. Adjuvant radiotherapy could be useful for patients for whom lymph-node field control is a major issue, but entry to an adjuvant systemic therapy trial might be a preferable first option. Alternatively, observation, reserving surgery and radiotherapy for a further recurrence, might be an acceptable strategy. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Cancer Council Australia, Melanoma Institute Australia, and the Cancer Council South Australia.

Patterns of Recurrence in Patients with Stage IIIB/C Cutaneous Melanoma of the Head and Neck Following Surgery With and Without Adjuvant Radiation Therapy: Is Isolated Regional Recurrence Salvageable?

BACKGROUND: Understanding recurrence patterns is vital for guiding treatment. This study describes recurrence patterns for patients with stage IIIB/C head and neck melanoma (HNM) after therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) ± adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). We also report outcomes for salvage therapy for patients with isolated regional relapse. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A single-institution prospective database of 173 patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage IIIB/C HNM undergoing TLND between 1997 and 2012 was retrospectively reviewed. Timing and patterns of recurrence were reviewed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were undertaken using the Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods to determine factors predictive of recurrence. Median follow-up was 32 months. RESULTS: Adjuvant RT was administered to 66/173 (38 %) patients. Patients selected for RT had a higher AJCC stage and had more extracapsular invasion. The 5-year distant, cervical nodal and in-transit recurrence rates were 38, 10, and 13 %, respectively, following surgery alone compared with 60, 17, and 31 %, respectively, for the adjuvant RT group. The head and neck regional 5-year recurrence rate (combining in-basin nodal and in-transit) was 23 % for the entire cohort. Isolated cervical recurrence occurred in 19 patients: 17/19 underwent salvage surgery (10/17 patients received RT after salvage surgery) and 2/19 had RT alone. However, distant recurrence occurred in 12/19 salvage patients, with most occurring within 12 months, while 4/19 were disease free. CONCLUSIONS: Using a selective approach for adjuvant RT, isolated cervical recurrence after TLND is uncommon. Isolated cervical recurrence can be salvaged effectively with further local therapy; however, distant disease frequently follows.

Radiotherapy for cutaneous melanoma: current and future applications.

Cutaneous malignant melanoma remains a significant health burden worldwide despite advances in the management of locoregionally advanced and metastatic disease. Historically, the efficacy of radiation therapy (RT) has been questioned due to the perceived radioresistance of melanoma cancer cells in vitro. Nowadays, RT has limited indications for primary disease, but is used for high-risk nodal disease and in the palliative setting. This review article outlines the current role of RT for melanoma and its expanding role in oligometastatic disease scenarios as an alternative approach to surgery and highlights potential future applications to harness RT interaction with immunomodulatory targeted therapies.

Evaluation of the clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction related to the use of internal eye shields for electron external beam radiation therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Cancers around the eye are often treated using orthovoltage machines or by plastic surgery, neither of which are widely available in regional Australia. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) using electrons and an internal eye shield is an alternative, relatively underreported technique which can provide similar cosmetic and functional outcomes. This report aimed to describe the process for the use of internal eye shields at GenesisCare Fraser Coast Radiation Oncology (GCFCRO) and the associated clinical outcomes and patient perceptions of the delivery and results of this procedure. METHODS: This project was conducted in two phases. Phase I was an audit of the departmental technique and short-term clinical outcomes of 17 patients who received EBRT for skin cancer near the eyes at GCFCRO in partnership with Wide Bay Hospital and Health Service (WBHHS). Phase II was a survey of nine of those patients to elicit the patient perspective of the delivery and long-term outcomes of the treatment. RESULTS: Phase I revealed the departmental procedures for simulation, planning and treatment at GCFCRO are consistent with other departments published protocols. Phase II results detailed positive patient perspectives regarding cosmetic outcomes and receipt of EBRT for skin cancer near their eyes. CONCLUSION: EBRT with an internal eye shield is an acceptable alternative modality to surgery for squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) and basal cell carcinomas (BCC) around the eye in the definitive and adjuvant setting. This is particularly important in regional locations to facilitate patients receiving high-quality care and outcomes locally.

Utility of 30-day mortality as a quality metric for palliative radiation treatment: A population-based analysis from Queensland, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Palliative radiotherapy (PRT) is frequently used to treat symptoms of advanced cancer, however benefits are questionable when life expectancy is limited. The 30-day mortality rate after PRT is a potential quality indicator, and results from a recent meta-analysis suggest a benchmark of 16% as an upper limit. In this population-based study from Queensland, Australia, we examined 30-day mortality rates following PRT and factors associated with decreased life expectancy. METHODS: Retrospective population data from Queensland Oncology Repository was used. Study population data included 22,501 patients diagnosed with an invasive cancer who died from any cause between 2008 and 2017 and had received PRT. Thirty-day mortality rates were determined from the date of last PRT fraction to date of death. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors independently associated with risk of death within 30 days of PRT. RESULTS: Overall 30-day mortality after PRT was 22.2% with decreasing trend in more recent years (P = 0.001). Male (HR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.13-1.27); receiving 5 or less radiotherapy fractions (HR = 2.97, 95% CI = 2.74-3.22 and HR = 2.17, 95% CI = 2.03-2.32, respectively) and receiving PRT in a private compared to public facility (HR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.51-1.71) was associated with decreased survival. CONCLUSION: The 30-day mortality rate in Queensland following PRT is higher than expected and there is scope to reduce unnecessarily protracted treatment schedules. We encourage other Australian and New Zealand centres to examine and report their own 30-day mortality rate following PRT and would support collaboration for 30-day mortality to become a national and international quality metric for radiation oncology centres.

Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy vs Chemotherapy for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Importance: The prognosis of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction (AEG) is poor. From current evidence, it remains unclear to what extent preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy achieve better outcomes than surgery alone. Objective: To assess the association of preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy in patients with AEG with overall survival and other outcomes. Data Sources: Literature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform was performed from inception to April 21, 2023. Study Selection: Two blinded reviewers screened for randomized clinical trials comparing preoperative CRT plus surgery with preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery, 1 intervention with surgery alone, or all 3 treatments. Only data from participants with AEG were included from trials that encompassed mixed histology or gastric cancer. Among 2768 initially identified studies, 17 (0.6%) met the selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were followed for extracting data and assessing data quality by 2 independent extractors. A bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the 2-stage approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall and disease-free survival, postoperative morbidity, and mortality. Results: The analyses included 2549 patients (2206 [86.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [9.4] years) from 17 trials (conducted from 1989-2016). Both preoperative CRT plus surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% credible interval (CrI), 0.62-0.90]; 3-year difference, 105 deaths per 1000 patients) and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery (HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.64-0.91]; 3-year difference, 90 deaths per 1000 patients) showed longer overall survival than surgery alone. Comparing the 2 modalities yielded similar overall survival (HR, 1.04 [95% CrI], 0.83-1.28]; 3-year difference, 15 deaths per 1000 patients fewer for CRT). Similarly, disease-free survival was longer for both modalities compared with surgery alone. Postoperative morbidity was more frequent after CRT plus surgery (odds ratio [OR], 2.94 [95% CrI, 1.01-8.59]) than surgery alone. Postoperative mortality was not significantly more frequent after CRT plus surgery than surgery alone (OR, 2.50 [95% CrI, 0.66-10.56]) or after chemotherapy plus surgery than CRT plus surgery (OR, 0.44 [95% CrI, 0.08-2.00]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis of patients with AEG, both preoperative CRT and preoperative and/or perioperative chemotherapy were associated with longer survival without relevant differences between the 2 modalities. Thus, either of the 2 treatments may be recommended to patients.

Adjuvant radiotherapy versus observation alone for patients at risk of lymph-node field relapse after therapeutic lymphadenectomy for melanoma: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of radiotherapy after therapeutic lymphadenectomy for patients with melanoma at high risk of further lymph-node field and distant recurrence is controversial. Decisions for radiotherapy in this setting are made on the basis of retrospective, non-randomised studies. We did this randomised trial to assess the effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on lymph-node field control in patients who had undergone therapeutic lymphadenectomy for metastatic melanoma in regional lymph nodes. METHODS: This randomised controlled trial included patients from 16 hospitals in Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Brazil. To be eligible for this trial, patients had to be at high risk of lymph-node field relapse, judged on the basis of number of nodes involved, extranodal spread, and maximum size of involved nodes. After lymphadenectomy, randomisation was done centrally by computer and patients assigned by telephone in a ratio of 1:1 to receive adjuvant radiotherapy of 48 Gy in 20 fractions or observation, with institution, lymph-node field, number of involved nodes, maximum node diameter, and extent of extranodal spread as minimisation factors. Participants, those giving treatment, and those assessing outcomes were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was lymph-node field relapse (as a first relapse), analysed for all eligible patients. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00287196. The trial is now closed and follow-up discontinued. FINDINGS: 123 patients were randomly allocated to the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 127 to the observation group between March 20, 2002, and Sept 21, 2007. Two patients withdrew consent and 31 had a major eligibility infringement as decided by the independent data monitoring committee, resulting in 217 eligible for the primary analysis (109 in the adjuvant radiotherapy group and 108 in the observation group). Median follow-up was 40 months (IQR 27-55). Risk of lymph-node field relapse was significantly reduced in the adjuvant radiotherapy group compared with the observation group (20 relapses in the radiotherapy group vs 34 in the observation group, hazard ratio [HR] 0·56, 95% CI 0·32-0·98; p=0·041), but no differences were noted for relapse-free survival (70 vs 73 events, HR 0·91, 95% CI 0·65-1·26; p=0·56) or overall survival (59 vs 47 deaths, HR 1·37, 95% CI 0·94-2·01; p=0·12). The most common grade 3 and 4 adverse events were seroma (nine in the radiotherapy group vs 11 in the observation group), radiation dermatitis (19 in the radiotherapy group), and wound infection (three in the radiotherapy group vs seven in the observation group). INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant radiotherapy improves lymph-node field control in patients at high risk of lymph-node field relapse after therapeutic lymphadenectomy for metastatic melanoma. Adjuvant radiotherapy should be discussed with patients at high risk of relapse after lymphadenectomy. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Cancer Australia, Melanoma Institute Australia, Cancer Council of South Australia.

Longitudinal trajectory of quality of life for patients with melanoma brain metastases: A secondary analysis from a whole brain radiotherapy randomized clinical trial.

Purpose: Brain metastases are common in patients with advanced melanoma. This study describes 12-month quality of life (QoL) trajectories following local management of 1-3 melanoma brain metastases. Methods: This study assessed QoL data collected during a multi-center, prospective, open-label, phase III randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) with observation after local treatment of 1-3 melanoma brain metastases. Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core (QLQ-C30) and Brain Tumour (BN-20) questionnaires at baseline and every 2 months, for 12 months.Using growth mixture modelling, QoL trajectories were identified for global health status, QLQ-C30 and BN-20 subscales for patients with baseline and at least one follow-up assessment. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine associations between trajectories, demographic, and clinical factors. Results: After combining QoL data from observation and WBRT arms, QLQ-C30 and BN-20 trajectories were calculated for 139 and 137 patients respectively. Depending on the QoL domain, 9-54 % of patients reported a deterioration in QoL. Older age (≥65 years) was significantly associated with deterioration in global health status (OR = 2.88, 95 %CI = 1.27-6.54), physical (OR = 3.49, 95 %CI = 1.29-9.41), role (OR = 4.15, 95 %CI = 1.77-9.71), social (OR = 4.42, 95 % CI = 1.57-12.46), cognitive (OR = 6.70, 95 % CI = 1.93-23.29) and motor functioning (OR = 4.95, 95 %CI = 1.95-12.61) and increased future uncertainty (OR = 0.20, 95 %CI = 0.07-0.53). Female sex (OR = 0.10, 95 %CI = 0.02-0.41), not having neurosurgery at baseline (OR = 0.09, 95 %CI = 0.02-0.52), 2-3 brain metastases (OR = 5.75, 95 %CI = 1.76-18.85) or receiving adjuvant WBRT (OR = 6.77, 95 %CI = 2.00-22.99) were associated with poorer physical, emotional, cognitive and social outcomes respectively. Conclusions: Poorer QoL outcomes in the first 12 months after diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases were observed in patients aged ≥ 65 years, females, having 2-3 brain metastases, non-surgical treatment of metastases or adjuvant WBRT.Clinical Trial Registration Number:Whole Brain Radiotherapy Trial (WBRTMel) was registered with the Australian Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12607000512426) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01503827).Study Support:This project was funded by Cancer Australia PdCCRS (Grants No. 512358, 1009485, and 1084046) and the National Helath and Medical Research Coucil of Australia (NHMRC; Grant No. 1135285).ADT was supported by a Cancer Australia Priority-driven Collaborative Cancer Research Scheme. Project #1046923. RLM was supported by an NHMRC Fellowship #1194703 and a University of Sydney, Robinson Fellowship. JFT was supported by an NHMRC Program Grant #1093017.

Individual Participant Data Network Meta-Analysis of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The optimal neoadjuvant treatment for resectable carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (TE) or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains a matter of debate. We performed an individual participant data (IPD) network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to study the effect of chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, with a focus on tumor location and histology subgroups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All, published or unpublished, RCTs closed to accrual before December 31, 2015 and having compared at least two of the following strategies were eligible: upfront surgery (S), chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS), and chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery (CRS). All analyses were conducted on IPD obtained from investigators. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The IPD-NMA was analyzed by a one-step mixed-effect Cox model adjusted for age, sex, tumor location, and histology. The NMA was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018107158). RESULTS: IPD were obtained for 26 of 35 RCTs (4,985 of 5,807 patients) corresponding to 12 comparisons for CS-S, 12 for CRS-S, and four for CRS-CS. CS and CRS led to increased OS when compared with S with hazard ratio (HR) = 0.86 (0.75 to 0.99), P = .03 and HR = 0.77 (0.68 to 0.87), P < .001 respectively. The NMA comparison of CRS versus CS for OS gave a HR of 0.90 (0.74 to 1.09), P = .27 (consistency P = .26, heterogeneity P = .0038). For CS versus S, a larger effect on OS was observed for GEJ versus TE tumors (P = .036). For the CRS versus S and CRS versus CS, a larger effect on OS was observed for women (P = .003, .012, respectively). CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy were consistently better than S alone across histology, but with some variation in the magnitude of treatment effect by sex for CRS and tumor location for CS. A strong OS difference between CS and CRS was not identified.

Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for resectable oesophageal carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In a previous meta-analysis, we identified a survival benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy before surgery in patients with resectable oesophageal carcinoma. We updated this meta-analysis with results from new or updated randomised trials presented in the past 3 years. We also compared the benefits of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: To identify additional studies and published abstracts from major scientific meetings, we searched Medline, Embase, and Central (Cochrane clinical trials database) for studies published since January, 2006, and also manually searched for abstracts from major conferences from the same period. Only randomised studies analysed by intention to treat were included, and searches were restricted to those databases citing articles in English. We used published hazard ratios (HRs) if available or estimates from other survival data. We also investigated treatment effects by tumour histology and relations between risk (survival after surgery alone) and effect size. FINDINGS: We included all 17 trials from the previous meta-analysis and seven further studies. 12 were randomised comparisons of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus surgery alone (n=1854), nine were randomised comparisons of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone (n=1981), and two compared neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n=194) in patients with resectable oesophageal carcinoma; one factorial trial included two comparisons and was included in analyses of both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (n=78) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n=81). The updated analysis contained 4188 patients whereas the previous publication included 2933 patients. This updated meta-analysis contains about 3500 events compared with about 2230 in the previous meta-analysis (estimated 57% increase). The HR for all-cause mortality for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was 0.78 (95% CI 0.70-0.88; p<0.0001); the HR for squamous-cell carcinoma only was 0.80 (0.68-0.93; p=0.004) and for adenocarcinoma only was 0.75 (0.59-0.95; p=0.02). The HR for all-cause mortality for neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 0.87 (0.79-0.96; p=0.005); the HR for squamous-cell carcinoma only was 0.92 (0.81-1.04; p=0.18) and for adenocarcinoma only was 0.83 (0.71-0.95; p=0.01). The HR for the overall indirect comparison of all-cause mortality for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 0.88 (0.76-1.01; p=0.07). INTERPRETATION: This updated meta-analysis provides strong evidence for a survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy over surgery alone in patients with oesophageal carcinoma. A clear advantage of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over neoadjuvant chemotherapy has not been established. These results should help inform decisions about patient management and design of future trials. FUNDING: Cancer Australia and the NSW Cancer Institute.

Malignant Broncho-Oesophageal Fistula following Radiotherapy for Noninvasive T3 Oesophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Malignant tracheo-oesophageal fistula (TEF) can result from tumour progression and invasion of adjacent organs, or a complication of treatment. In the posttreatment setting, incidence of TEF in cases with preceding airway invasion (T4b) are not infrequently reported; however, for those for whom disease was confined to organ (T1-3) at staging, this is a rare complication. Management for these cases is palliative in nature, with the goal to prevent aspiration by closing the connection and facilitate safe resumption of oral intake where possible. Herein we report a case of a 71-year-old female with a T3 oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, who presented with new onset dysphagia 2 weeks after completing a course of definitive radiotherapy and was found to have a broncho-oesophageal fistula. This patient was managed with dual stenting of both the airway and oesophagus, an emerging management option for this condition, and was thereafter able to safely resume oral intake.

Whole brain radiotherapy after local treatment of brain metastases in melanoma patients--a randomised phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Cerebral metastases are a common cause of death in patients with melanoma. Systemic drug treatment of these metastases is rarely effective, and where possible surgical resection and/or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) are the preferred treatment options. Treatment with adjuvant whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) following neurosurgery and/or SRS is controversial. Proponents of WBRT report prolongation of intracranial control with reduced neurological events and better palliation. Opponents state melanoma is radioresistant; that WBRT yields no survival benefit and may impair neurocognitive function. These opinions are based largely on studies in other tumour types in which assessment of neurocognitive function has been incomplete. METHODS/DESIGN: This trial is an international, prospective multi-centre, open-label, phase III randomised controlled trial comparing WBRT to observation following local treatment of intracranial melanoma metastases with surgery and/or SRS. Patients aged 18 years or older with 1-3 brain metastases excised and/or stereotactically irradiated and an ECOG status of 0-2 are eligible. Patients with leptomeningeal disease, or who have had previous WBRT or localised treatment for brain metastases are ineligible. WBRT prescription is at least 30 Gy in 10 fractions commenced within 8 weeks of surgery and/or SRS. Randomisation is stratified by the number of cerebral metastases, presence or absence of extracranial disease, treatment centre, sex, radiotherapy dose and patient age. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with distant intracranial failure as determined by MRI assessment at 12 months. Secondary end points include: survival, quality of life, performance status and neurocognitive function. DISCUSSION: Accrual to previous trials for patients with brain metastases has been difficult, mainly due to referral bias for or against WBRT. This trial should provide the evidence that is currently lacking in treatment decision-making for patients with melanoma brain metastases. The trial is conducted by the Australia and New Zealand Melanoma Trials Group (ANZMTG-study 01-07), and the Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) but international participation is encouraged. Twelve sites are open to date with 43 patients randomised as of the 31st March 2011. The target accrual is 200 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12607000512426.

Is education an effective management strategy for reducing cancer-related fatigue?

PURPOSE: The use of education is recommended to teach patients self-care behaviours to reduce cancer-related fatigue, however, there is little evidence of its effectiveness or optimal timing. This educationally based cancer-related fatigue intervention trial, CAN-FIT, aimed to reduced severity of fatigue in radiotherapy patients. METHODS: One hundred and ten participants aged≥18 years undergoing curative radiotherapy were randomly assigned to receive (1) pre- and post-radiotherapy fatigue education and support (RFES); (2) pre-RFES only; (3) post-RFES only; or (4) no RFES (standard care). Data collection occurred at pre- and post- radiotherapy and at 6-weeks follow-up. RESULTS: The intervention was not associated with reduction in fatigue levels at any assessment point. Significant changes were seen with secondary activity-based outcomes: Physical activity participation: Pre-RFES was associated with significantly greater increase in vigorous [Assessment (Ax)1-Ax2: 1.05 (0.24, 1.86) p<0.01: Ax2-Ax3: 1.24, (0.44, 2.03) p<0.01] and moderate physical activity participation [Ax1-Ax2: 1.4 (0.53, 2.26) p<0.01]. Post-RFES was associated with significant improvements in walking levels [Ax1-Ax3: 5.82 (0.07, 11.56) p<0.05] compared with no pre-RFES. Paid and unpaid employment: Pre-RFES was associated with slower return to pre-treatment levels of paid work [Ax2-Ax3: -0.72 (-1.41, -0.04) p<0.05] than no pre-RFES. Post-RFES was associated with decreased levels of unpaid work [Ax1-Ax3: 561.79 (51.21, 1,072.37) p<0.05] compared with no post-RFES. CONCLUSION: The CAN-FIT programme did not significantly improve the primary outcome, level of fatigue, regardless of when it was delivered, however, significant changes were observed in activity-based outcomes. Further investigations into educationally based programmes should target activity participation rather than changes in underlying fatigue to improve overall patient health.

Phase I/II trial of concurrent extracranial palliative radiation therapy with Dabrafenib and Trametinib in metastatic BRAF V600E/K mutation-positive cutaneous Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent treatment with BRAF inhibitors and palliative radiation therapy (RT) could be associated with increased toxicity, especially skin toxicity. Current Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) consensus guideline recommend ceasing BRAF inhibitors during RT. There is a lack of data regarding concurrent RT with combined BRAF and MEK inhibitors. This single-arm phase I/II trial was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of palliative RT with concurrent Dabrafenib and Trametinib in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received Dabrafenib and Trametinib before and during palliative RT to soft tissue, nodal or bony metastases. The RT dose was escalated stepwise during the study period. Toxicity data including clinical photographs of the irradiated area was collected for up to 12 months following completion of RT. RESULTS: Between June 2016 to October 2019, ten patients were enrolled before the study was stopped early due to low accrual rate. Six patients were treated at level 1 (20 Gy in 5 fractions, any location) and 4 patients at level 2a (30 Gy in 10 fractions with no abdominal viscera exposed). All alive patients completed one year of post-RT follow-up. Of the 82 adverse events (AEs) documented, the majority (90%) were grade 1 and 2. Eight grade 3 events (10%) occurred in five patients, only one was treatment-related (grade 3 fever due to Dabrafenib and Trametinib). No patients experienced grade 3 or 4 RT related toxicities, including skin toxicities. One serious AE was documented in relation to a grade 3 fever due to Dabrafenib and Trametinib requiring hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of grade 3 and 4 RT-related toxicities in our study suggests that Dabrafenib and Trametinib may be continued concurrently during fractionated non-visceral palliative RT to extracranial sites.