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.

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 patient data meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus upfront surgery for carcinoma of the oesophagus or the gastro-oesophageal junction.

INTRODUCTION: Which neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced thoracic oesophagus (TE) or gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma is best remains an open question. Randomised controlled trials variously accrued patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, making strong conclusions hard to obtain. The primary objective of this individual participant data meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible trials should have closed to accrual before 2016 and compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery (CS) to surgery alone. All relevant published and unpublished trials were identified via searches of electronic databases, conference proceedings and clinical trial registers. The main end-point was OS. Investigators were contacted to obtain the individual patient data, which was recorded, harmonised and checked. A random-effects Cox model, stratified by trial, was used for meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were preplanned. RESULTS: 16 trials were identified as eligible. Individual patient data were obtained from 12 trial and 2478 patients. CS was associated with an improved OS versus surgery, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83 [0.72-0.96], p < 0.0001, translating to an absolute benefit of 5.7% at 5-years from 16.8% to 22.5%. Treatment effects did not vary substantially between adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.73 [0.62-0.87]) and squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.91 [0.76-1.08], interaction p = 0.26). A somewhat more pronounced effect was observed in gastro-oesophageal junction (HR = 0.68 [0.50-0.93]) versus TE (HR = 0.87 [0.75-1.00], interaction p = 0.07). CS was also associated with a greater disease-free survival (HR = 0.74 [0.64-0.85], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy conferred a better OS than surgery alone and should be considered in all anatomical location and histological subtypes.

Adjuvant Whole-Brain Radiation Therapy Compared With Observation After Local Treatment of Melanoma Brain Metastases: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: The brain is a common site of metastasis for patients with high-risk melanoma. Although surgery or stereotactic radiosurgery are highly effective local treatments for a small number of metastases, there is a high risk of developing additional brain metastases. The role of adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in reducing new metastases is controversial, with a lack of high-level evidence specifically for melanoma. METHODS: In this randomized phase III trial, patients who had local treatment of one to three melanoma brain metastases were randomly assigned to WBRT or observation. The primary end point was distant intracranial failure within 12 months, and secondary end points included time to intracranial failure, survival, and time to deterioration in performance status. RESULTS: Between April 2009 and September 2017, 215 patients were randomly assigned from 24 centers. Median follow-up was 48.1 months (range, 39.6 to 68 months). Forty-two percent of patients in the WBRT group and 50.5% of those in the observation developed distant intracranial failure within 12 months (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.23; P = .22) and the rates over the entire follow-up period were 52.0% and 57.9%, respectively (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.36; P = .39). Local failure rate was lower after WBRT (20.0% v 33.6%; P = .03). At 12 months, 41.5% of patients in the WBRT group and 51.4% of patients in the observation group had died (P = .28), with no difference in the rate of neurologic death. Median time to deterioration in performance status was 3.8 months after WBRT and 4.4 months with observation (P = .32). WBRT was associated with more grade 1 to 2 acute toxicity. CONCLUSION: After local treatment of one to three melanoma brain metastases, adjuvant WBRT does not provide clinical benefit in terms of distant intracranial control, survival, or preservation of performance status.

Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) after local treatment of brain metastases in melanoma patients: Statistical Analysis Plan.

BACKGROUND: The WBRTMel trial is a multinational, open-label, phase III randomised controlled trial comparing whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) to observation following local treatment of one to three melanoma brain metastases with surgery and/or stereotactic irradiation. The primary trial endpoint was to determine the effect of adding WBRT to local treatment on distant intracranial control, and the secondary endpoints were neurocognitive function, quality of life (QoL), performance status, overall survival, death from intracranial causes, death from melanoma and cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this update is to outline and publish the pre-determined statistical analysis plan (SAP) before the database lock and the start of analysis. METHODS: The SAP describes basic analysis principles, methods for dealing with a range of commonly encountered data analysis issues and the specific statistical procedures for analysing efficacy and safety outcomes. The SAP was approved after closure of recruitment and before completion of patient follow-up. It outlines the planned primary analyses and a range of subgroup and sensitivity analyses regarding the clinical and QoL outcomes. Health economic outcomes are not included in this plan but will be analysed separately. The SAP will be adhered to for the final data analysis of this trial to avoid analysis bias arising from knowledge of the data. RESULTS: The resulting SAP is consistent with best practice and will allow open and transparent reporting. CONCLUSION: We have developed a SAP for the WBRTMel trial which will be followed to ensure high-quality standards of internal validity to minimise analysis bias. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZ Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12607000512426 . Registered on 9 October 2007. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01503827 . Registered on 4 January 2012. Trial group reference numbers ANZMTG 01.07, TROG 08.05.

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.

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.

Role of radiotherapy in the pre-operative management of carcinoma of the esophagus.

The use of radiotherapy in the management of carcinoma of the esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction has undergone much evolution over the past 2 decades. Advances to define its role have been slow with meta-analyses often providing the most useful data. In spite of this many institutions around the world are divided about the role of radiotherapy in this disease and attribute different roles to radiotherapy based on clinical stage, tumor site and histology. The purpose of this review is to try to define the role of radiotherapy given our current knowledge base and to review which current and future trials may fill the gaps of knowledge that we currently have. It will also highlight the difficulties in making firm recommendations about the use of radiotherapy especially in a time when technology and treatments are rapidly evolving.

Long-term results of positron emission tomography-directed management of the neck in node-positive head and neck cancer after organ preservation therapy.

OBJECTIVES: The current study presents the long-term results from a study designed to evaluate a restaging positron emission tomography (PET) directed policy whereby neck dissections were omitted in all node positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (N+HNSCC) patients with PET-negative lymph nodes after definitive radiotherapy (RT), with or without chemotherapy. METHODS: A post-therapy nodal response assessment with PET and computed tomography (CT) was performed in patients who achieved a complete response at the primary site after definitive radiotherapy. Patients with PET-negative lymph nodes were observed regardless of residual CT abnormalities. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve patients, the majority of whom (83 patients, 74%) had oropharyngeal primaries, were treated on protocol. Median follow-up was 62months. Negative and positive predictive values for the restaging PET was 97.1% and 77.8% respectively, with only one patient who was PET-negative after treatment experiencing an isolated nodal relapse. CONCLUSION: PET-guided management of the neck following organ preservation therapy effectively spares neck dissections in patients with N+HNSCC without compromising isolated nodal control or overall survival.

Melanoma brain metastases: the impact of nodal disease.

Brain metastases (BMs) are a major source of mortality and morbidity in patients with melanoma. This study assesses prognostic nodal factors in patients with nodal metastatic melanoma with respect to the development of BMs. The aim was to identify a high risk subset that may benefit from brain directed management. Prospective surgical and clinical trial databases identified patients who had had nodal dissections and were seen through the Princess Alexandra Hospital Melanoma clinic between August 1995 and June 2010. Patient data was collected and event data was updated from medical imaging and clinical records. The primary endpoint was the rate of development of BMs. 474 patients were identified as having nodal dissections. Two hundred and eighty-seven patients (61%) were male with a median age of 52 (39-66). The most common nodal dissection site was axilla 190 (40%), followed by groin 154 (32.5%) and neck 130 (27.5%). Adjuvant radiotherapy to the nodal basin was delivered to 134 patients (28%). BMs occurred in 61 patients (12.9%) with a median time of 13.87 months from dissection. No lymph node characteristics were significantly associated with the development of BMs including: nodal region (p=0.72), nodal size (p=0.08), number of involved nodes (p=0.36), presence of extra-capsular spread (p=0.47) and AJCC N stage. There was no significant association between primary ulceration (p=0.37) or location and development of BMs. It appears that for patients with resected stage III melanoma there is no histopathological lymph node feature associated with the development of BMs. This highlights the importance of identifying molecular markers in nodal melanoma which may predict for BMs to further direct site-specific therapy.

Stage III melanoma in the axilla: patterns of regional recurrence after surgery with and without adjuvant radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: To describe the anatomic distribution of regionally recurrent disease in patients with stage III melanoma in the axilla after curative-intent surgery with and without adjuvant radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A single-institution, retrospective analysis of a prospective database of 277 patients undergoing curative-intent treatment for stage III melanoma in the axilla between 1992 and 2012 was completed. For patients who received radiation therapy and those who did not, patterns of regional recurrence were analyzed, and univariate analyses were performed to assess for potential factors associated with location of recurrence. RESULTS: There were 121 patients who received adjuvant radiation therapy because their clinicopathologic features conferred a greater risk of regional recurrence. There were 156 patients who received no radiation therapy. The overall axillary control rate was 87%. There were 37 patients with regional recurrence; 17 patients had received adjuvant radiation therapy (14%), and 20 patients (13%) had not. The likelihood of in-field nodal recurrence was significantly less in the adjuvant radiation therapy group (P=.01) and significantly greater in sites adjacent to the axilla (P=.02). Patients with high-risk clinicopathologic features who did not receive adjuvant radiation therapy also tended to experience in-field failure rather than adjacent-field failure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received adjuvant radiation therapy were more likely to experience recurrence in the adjacent-field regions rather than in the in-field regions. This may not simply reflect higher-risk pathology. Using this data, it may be possible to improve outcomes by reducing the number of adjacent-field recurrences after adjuvant radiation therapy.

The complex relationship between lung tumor volume and survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated by definitive radiotherapy: a prospective, observational prognostic factor study of the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG 99.05).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate the hypothesis that primary tumor volume is prognostic independent of T and N stages in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated by definitive radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicenter prospective observational study. Patient eligibility: pathologically proven stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer planned for definitive radiotherapy (minimum 50 Gy in 20 fractions) using CT-based contouring. Volumes of the primary tumor and enlarged nodes were measured according to a standardized protocol. Survival was adjusted for the effect of T and N stage. RESULTS: There were 509 eligible patients. Five-year survival rates for tumor volume grouped by quartiles were, for increasing tumor volume, 22%, 14%, 15% and 21%. Larger primary tumor volume was associated with shorter survival (HR=1.060 (per doubling); 95% CI 1.01-1.12; P=0.029). However, after adjusting for the effects of T and N stage, there was no evidence for an association (HR=1.029, 95% CI, 0.96-1.10, P=0.39). There was evidence, however, that larger primary tumor volume was associated with an increased risk of dying, independently of T and N stage, in the first 18 months but not beyond. CONCLUSIONS: In patients treated by non-surgical means we were unable to show that lung tumor volume, overall, provides additional prognostic information beyond the T and N stage (TNM, 6th edition). There is evidence, however, that larger primary tumor volume adversely affects outcome only within the first 18 months. Larger tumor size alone should not by itself exclude patients from curative (chemo)radiotherapy.

Economic analysis of FDG-PET-guided management of the neck after primary chemoradiotherapy for node-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this economic analysis was to model different strategies using pre-treatment nodal stage or nodal response assessment with CT or positron emission tomography (PET)/CT to determine the need for neck dissection. METHODS: A cost-minimization analysis was developed on the basis of probability data from a prospective study of PET-guided management of the neck in patients achieving a complete response at the primary site. Costs were derived from our institution's activity-based clinical costing system. The effect of uncertainty was tested with sensitivity and scenario analyses including nationally representative cost data. RESULTS: Strategies incorporating PET had a 7% rate for neck dissection compared with 44% for CT-guided and 90% for planned neck dissection. The cost per patient was A$16,502 for planned neck dissection, A$8014 for CT-guided, and A$2573 for PET-guided. A policy with PET used only for incomplete response on CT was the least-cost strategy (A$2111). Policies incorporating PET remained the most efficient for all sensitivity/scenario analyses. CONCLUSION: The incorporation of PET/CT into nodal response assessment significantly reduced the number of unnecessary neck dissections and generated considerable cost savings in our cohort.

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.

Results of a prospective study of positron emission tomography-directed management of residual nodal abnormalities in node-positive head and neck cancer after definitive radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to present our prospectively evaluated positron emission tomography (PET)-directed policy for managing the neck in node-positive head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (N+HNSCC) after definitive radiotherapy (RT) with or without concurrent systemic therapy. METHODS: One hundred twelve consecutive patients who achieved a complete response at the primary site underwent a 12-week posttherapy nodal response assessment with PET and diagnostic CT. Patients with an equivocal PET underwent a repeat PET 4 to 6 weeks later. Patients with residual CT nodal abnormalities deemed PET-negative were uniformly observed regardless of residual nodal size. RESULTS: Median follow-up from commencement of RT was 28 months (range, 13-64 months). Residual CT nodal abnormalities were present in 50 patients (45%): 41 PET-negative and 9 PET-positive. All PET-negative residual CT nodal abnormalities were observed without subsequent isolated nodal failure. CONCLUSION: PET-directed management of the neck after definitive RT in node-positive HNSCC appropriately spares neck dissections in patients with PET-negative residual CT nodal abnormalities.

A randomized phase II trial of two regimens of moderate dose chemoradiation therapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer not suitable for curative therapy: Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Study TROG 03.07.

BACKGROUND: There are patients with stage I-III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who are not suitable for curative radical chemoradiation therapy. There are patients with an isolated solitary extracranial metastasis who have improved outcomes compared with those with cranial or multiple metastases. Patients of good performance status receiving moderate dose radiation therapy have improved survival. Two regimens of moderate dose chemoradiation therapy for such patients were compared in a randomized phase II trial. METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had stage I-IIIB NSCLC, unsuitable for curative therapy, or stage IV with a PET-detected extracranial solitary metastasis. Patients were randomized to the following groups-arm A: 40 Gy/20 fractions/4 weeks with concurrent weekly vinorelbine 25 mg/m + cisplatin 20 mg/m or arm B: 30 Gy/15 fractions/3 weeks with concurrent weekly gemcitabine 200 mg. Primary end points were feasibility, response rates, and toxicity. Secondary end points were progression-free survival, overall survival, and quality of life. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were randomized. Compliance was above 90% for both arms. The overall response rate was 51% in arm A and 38% in arm B (p = 0.147). Grade 3/4 toxicity in both arms was acceptable. There was no difference in median progression-free survival between the two arms (5.5 versus 5.0 months, p = 0.19). Patients in arm A had longer median survival but this did not reach statistical significance (13.1 versus 8.3 months, p = 0.25). No difference in quality of life was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Arm A was chosen for a future phase II comparison with radiation therapy alone as it demonstrated a response rate greater than 50%, and data suggested that arm A had superior survival to arm B.

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.

T1-2 anal carcinoma requires elective inguinal radiation treatment--the results of Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group study TROG 99.02.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Elective inguinal irradiation increases morbidity. We describe outcomes of moderate intensity chemoradiation treating anal canal and adjacent pelvic nodes only. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty patients with T1-2, N0 anal carcinoma were enrolled between March 1999 and March 2003. Inguinal nodes were NOT electively irradiated. The anal canal and regional pelvic nodes received 36 Gy/20# over 4 weeks, and 2 weeks later the anal canal was boosted with 14.4 Gy/8#. Chemotherapy was 5 fluorouracil 800 mg/m(2)/day on days 1-4 and 36-39, and Mitomycin C 10mg/m(2) on day 1. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 44 months. Complete response was 95%. Four year results were; overall survival 71%, local control 82%, and colostomy-free survival (including salvage) 85%. Inguinal failure occurred in 22.5% but was isolated in only 12.5%. Treatment was well tolerated acutely with no toxic deaths. Severe late toxicity occurred in 7.5%. CONCLUSIONS: This moderate dose 'non inguinal' chemoradiation regimen resulted in modest acute toxicity, minimal long term morbidity and local control in line with other series. However staging failed to identify 12.5% of patients whose isolated inguinal failure might have been prevented by elective irradiation. Without more effective staging, all patients should receive elective inguinal irradiation.

Is concurrent radiation therapy required in patients receiving preoperative chemotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus? A randomised phase II trial.

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) and preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) for resectable oesophageal cancer have been shown to improve overall survival in meta-analyses. There are limited data comparing these preoperative therapies. We report the outcomes of a randomised phase II trial comparing preoperative CT and CRT for resectable adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction. METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive preoperative CT with cisplatin (80 mg/m(2)) and infusional 5 fluorouracil (1000 mg/m(2)/d) on days 1 and 21, or preoperative CRT with the same drugs accompanied by concurrent radiation therapy commencing on day 21 of chemotherapy and the 5 fluorouracil reduced to 800 mg/m(2)/d. The radiation dose was 35 Gy in 15 fractions over 3 weeks. The endpoints were toxicity, response rates, resection (R) status, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and quality of life. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were enrolled on the study: 36 received preoperative CT and 39 preoperative CRT. Toxicity was similar for CT and CRT. Eight patients (11%) did not proceed to resection. The histopathological response rate (CRT 31% versus CT 8%, p = 0.01) and R1 resection rate (CRT 0% versus CT 11%, p = 0.04) favoured those receiving CRT. The median PFS was 14 and 26 months for CT and CRT respectively (p = 0.37). The median OS was 29 months for CT compared with 32 months for CRT (p = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Despite no difference in survival, the improvement from preoperative CRT with respect to margin involvement makes this treatment a reasonable option for bulky, locally advanced resectable adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus.