Salvage Treatment and Outcomes of Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer after Failed Concurrent Chemoradiation with or without Adjuvant Chemotherapy: Post Hoc Data Analysis from the ACTLACC Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the type of salvage treatment and outcomes of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer who failed treatment with concurrent chemoradiation with or without adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: This was post hoc analyses of data from the randomized trial which included 259 patients who had FIGO stage IIB-IVA and had either pelvic radiation therapy concurrent with cisplatin followed by observation or paclitaxel plus carboplatin. Data of the patients who failed primary treatment were collected: type of salvage treatments, time to progress after salvage therapy, progression-free (PFS) and overall survivals (OS). RESULTS: After primary treatment, 85 patients had either persistence (36.5%), progression (18.8%), or recurrences (44.7%). The sites of failure were loco/regional in 52.9%, systemic failure in 30.6%, and loco-regional and systemic in 16.5%. Chemotherapy was given in 51.8%, being the sole therapy in 34.1%. Majority were combination agents (31.8%), with paclitaxel/carboplatin as the most common regimen. Radiation to the metastatic sites along with chemotherapy was used in 14.1% whereas palliative radiation therapy or supportive care was used in approximately 10% of each. The median time from the start of salvage treatment to progression was 9.2 months (range 0.2-64.0 months) with median PFS of 11.2 months (95% CI, 7.2-15.3 months). Median overall survival 27.3 months (95% CI, 4.4-69.6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy, either alone or with radiation therapy, was the most common salvage treatment in LACC after failure from primary treatment. The time to progress and PFS were less than 1 year with OS of approximately 2 years.

Long-Term Outcomes and Sites of Failure in Locally Advanced, Cervical Cancer Patients Treated by Concurrent Chemoradiation with or without Adjuvant Chemotherapy: ACTLACC Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate sites of failure and long-term survival outcomes of locally advanced stage cervical cancer patients who had standard concurrent chemo-radiation (CCRT) versus those along with adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) after CCRT. METHODS: Patients aged 18-70 years who had FIGO stage IIB-IVA without para-aortic lymph node enlargement (excluding by International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2018 stage IIIC2r), The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores 0-2, and non-aggressive histopathology were randomized to have CCRT with weekly cisplatin followed by observation (arm A) or ACT with paclitaxel plus carboplatin every 4 weeks for 3 cycles (arm B). RESULTS: From 2015-2017, 259 patients were evaluated. The majority of patients were in stage II and had squamous cell carcinoma with a median tumor size of 5 cm. After the median follow-up of 40.87 months, 17.1% of the patients in arm A and 12.3% of the patients in arm B experienced recurrences (p=0.280). Adding all events of failure (persistence/progression/recurrence), treatment failures tended to be lower in arm A than in arm B: 13.2 versus 21.5 % for loco-regional failure (p = 0.076) and 3.9 versus 6.9% for loco-regional failure and systemic failure (p = 0.278). On the other hand, systemic failure tended to be higher in arm A than in arm B: 13.2% versus 6.9% (p =0.094). The 5-year progression-free survival and 5-year overall survival of patients in both arms were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: ACT with paclitaxel plus carboplatin after CCRT did not improve response or survival of patients compared to CCRT alone. Although systemic failure tended to be lower in patients who had ACT after CCRT than those who had only CCRT, loco-regional failure with or without systemic failure tended to be higher. However, all of these differences were not statistically significant.

Cost-utility analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy after concurrent chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to compare the cost utility of concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) to CCRT followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (CCRT/ACT) in locally advanced cervical cancer (LACC) using provider and societal viewpoints. METHODS: Data from our trial which was a multi-centre study evaluating the efficacy of ACT compared to CCRT/ACT were entered into a decision tree model. The data included clinical probability, direct medical and non-medical costs, and utility obtained from the patients. The total cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were estimated for a time horizon of 3 years. All costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually. RESULTS: The cost of CCRT and CCRT/ACT was approximately 3,058 and 6,896 USD and 4,309 and 7,480 USD from provider and from societal viewpoints, respectively. The QALYs for CCRT and CCRT/ACT were 2.31480 and 2.32045, respectively. The ICER was 569,575 USD per QALY. For stage III-IVA LACC, the ICER was 28,050 USD per QALY. In the sensitivity analysis, the cost of ACT was the most significant influential parameter on the ICER. The ICER would be 0.26-fold lower if the cost of ACT was reduced by 25%. At the current ceiling threshold of 5,000 USD/QALY, CCRT had a 100% probability of being the best option. CONCLUSIONS: In the Thai context, CCRT is more cost effective than CCRT/ACT for stage IIB-IVA LACC. CCRT/ACT may be considered only for stage III-IVA LACC because it has a lower ICER than other types of LACC.

Comparison of Treatment Outcome between Hypofractionated Radiotherapy and Conventional Radiotherapy in Postmastectomy Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare Conventional fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) and Hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) in terms of treatment outcomes, such as in 5-year loco-regional recurrence free survival, disease free survival, overall survival, and distant metastatic free survival rates as well as toxicity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data obtained from 462 breast cancer patients who received complete adjuvant radiotherapy treatment between January 2012 and December 2014. One hundred twenty eight patients received CFRT 2 Gy daily fractions at a total dose of 48-60 Gy (group 1), while 334 patients received HFRT 2.65-2.67 Gy daily for 15-19 fractions at a total dose of 39.7-47.8 Gy 9 (grup 2). Treatment outcome such as 5-year loco-regional recurrence free survival, disease free survival, overall survival, and distant metastatic free survival rates as well as toxicity were measured and compared between two groups. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 65.7 months (ranging from 45.1 to 95.2 months). Five-year loco-regional recurrence free survival rate was 96.1% in both CFRT and HFRT groups (p=0.993). Five-year disease-free survival rate of CFRT group was higher (68.8%), but this difference was not significant (HFRT =63.5%) (p=0.396). These were complied with 5-year overall survival rate (71.9% and 64.7%, p=0.385). Five-year distant metastatic free survival rate was 85.9% in CFRT group and 79.6% in HFRT group (p=0.169). No difference was observed between two groups in terms of toxicities, including changes in chest wall appearance, skin fibrosis, brachial plexopathy, arm edema, pulmonary fibrosis, and cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: The treatment outcomes of hypofractionated radiotherapy in the postmastectomy breast cancer patients is comparable to the outcomes of conventional treatment at the Chonburi Cancer Hospital as previously reported from other studies, and HFRT can be implemented in resource-limited settings.

A randomized controlled trial comparing concurrent chemoradiation versus concurrent chemoradiation followed by adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer patients: ACTLACC trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare response rate and survivals of locally advanced stage cervical cancer patients who had standard concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) alone to those who had adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) after CCRT. METHODS: Patients aged 18-70 years who had International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IIB-IVA without para-aortic lymph node enlargement, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores 0-2, and non-aggressive histopathology were randomized to have CCRT with weekly cisplatin followed by observation (arm A) or by ACT with paclitaxel plus carboplatin every 4 weeks for 3 cycles (arm B). RESULTS: Data analysis of 259 patients showed no significant difference in complete responses at 4 months after treatment between arm A (n=129) and arm B (n=130): 94.1% vs. 87.0% (p=0.154) respectively. With the median follow-up of 27.4 months, 15.5% of patients in arm A and 10.8% in arm B experienced recurrences (p=0.123). There were no significant differences of overall or loco-regional failure. However, systemic recurrences were significantly lower in arm B than arm A: 5.4% vs. 10.1% (p=0.029). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and 3-year overall survival (OS) of the patients in both arms were not significantly different. The hazard ratio of PFS and OS of arm B compared to arm A were 1.26 (95% CI=0.82-1.96; p=0.293) and 1.42 (95% CI=0.81-2.49; p=0.221) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ACT with paclitaxel plus carboplatin after CCRT did not improve response rate and survival compared to CCRT alone. Only significant decrease of systemic recurrences with ACT was observed, but not overall or loco-regional failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02036164, Thai Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: TCTR 20140106001.

Cost-utility analysis of 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine for adjuvant treatment in locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy at concurrent time with radiation therapy (RT) or at adjuvant time alone in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is used with several regimens. The cost-utility analysis was conducted to compare administration of two 5-FU regimens and capecitabine in the aspect of provider and societal viewpoint. METHODS: Stage II or III rectal cancer patients who received pre-operative or post-operative concurrent chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were compared by using decision tree model between (I) 5-FU plus leucovorin (LV) for 5 days per cycle (Mayo Clinic regimen); (II) 5-FU continuous infusion (CI) for 120-h per cycle (CAO/ARO/AIO-94 protocol); (III) standard regimen of capecitabine. All probability data were extracted from landmark study. Direct medical costs were the cost from database of Drug Medical Supply Information Center, while direct non-medical cost and utility were interviewed from stage II and III rectal cancer patients. The time horizon of this study was 5 years. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was the final result in this study, which determined as the numerator of the difference of costs among three drug regimens, and the difference of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from each drug was the denominator. RESULTS: 5-FU plus LV was the cheapest and least efficacy for adjuvant treatment of LARC in both provider and societal viewpoint. In provider viewpoint, the ICERs of 5-FU CI and capecitabine were 334,550 THB/QALY (US $9,840/QALY) and 189,935 THB/QALY (US $5,586/QALY), respectively, with the corresponding societal viewpoint of 264,447 THB/QALY (US $7,778/QALY) and 119,120 THB/QALY (US $3,504/QALY) when 5-FU plus LV was used as comparator. The most influential parameter for value of treatment was acquisition cost of capecitabine. At the willingness to pay for one QALY gained in Thailand (160,000 THB or US $4,706), 5-FU plus LV, 5-FU CI and capecitabine had probabilities of cost-effectiveness of 63%, 2% and 35%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Capecitabine was the most expensive regimen but produced the higher effectiveness than 5-FU plus LV and 5-FU CI. The most influential parameter in the model was acquisition cost of capecitabine.