Chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck cancer: 10-year follow-up of the UK Head and Neck (UKHAN1) trial.

BACKGROUND: Between 1990 and 2000, we examined the effect of timing of non-platinum chemotherapy when combined with radiotherapy. We aimed to determine whether giving chemotherapy concurrently with radiotherapy or as maintenance therapy, or both, affected clinical outcome. Here we report survival and recurrence after 10 years of follow-up. METHODS: Between Jan 15, 1990, and June 20, 2000, 966 patients were recruited from 34 centres in the UK and two centres from Malta and Turkey. Patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer, and who had not previously undergone surgery, were randomly assigned to one of four groups in a 3:2:2:2 ratio, stratified by centre and chemotherapy regimen: radical radiotherapy alone (n=233); radiotherapy with two courses of chemotherapy given simultaneously on days 1 and 14 of radiotherapy (SIM alone; n=166); or 14 and 28 days after completing radiotherapy (SUB alone, n=160); or both (SIM+SUB; n=154). Chemotherapy was either methotrexate alone, or vincristine, bleomycin, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. Patients who had previously undergone radical surgery to remove their tumour were only randomised to radiotherapy alone (n=135) or SIM alone (n=118), in a 3:2 ratio. The primary endpoints were overall survival (from randomisation), and event-free survival (EFS; recurrence, new tumour, or death; whichever occurred first) among patients who were disease-free 6 months after randomisation. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at www.Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00002476. FINDINGS: All 966 patients were included in the analyses. Among patients who did not undergo surgery, the median overall survival was 2.6 years (99% CI 1.9-4.2) in the radiotherapy alone group, 4.7 (2.6-7.8) years in the SIM alone group, 2.3 (1.6-3.5) years in the SUB alone group, and 2.7 (1.6-4.7) years in the SIM+SUB group (p=0.10). The corresponding median EFS were 1.0 (0.7-1.4), 2.2 (1.1-6.0), 1.0 (0.6-1.5), and 1.0 (0.6-2.0) years (p=0.005), respectively. For every 100 patients given SIM alone, there are 11 fewer EFS events (99% CI 1-21), compared with 100 given radiotherapy, 10 years after treatment. Among the patients who had previously undergone surgery, median overall survival was 5.0 (99% CI 1.8-8.0) and 4.6 (2.2-7.6) years in the radiotherapy alone and SIM alone groups (p=0.70), respectively, with corresponding median EFS of 3.7 (99% CI 1.1-5.9) and 3.0 (1.2-5.6) years (p=0.85), respectively. The percentage of patients who had a significant toxicity during treatment were: 11% (radiotherapy alone, n=25), 28% (SIM alone, n=47), 12% (SUB alone, n=19), and 36% (SIM+SUB, n=55) among patients without previous surgery; and 9% (radiotherapy alone, n=12) and 20% (SIM alone, n=24) among those who had undergone previous surgery. The most common toxicity during treatment was mucositis. The percentage of patients who had a significant toxicity at least 6 months after randomisation were: 6% (radiotherapy alone, n=13), 6% (SIM alone, n=10), 4% (SUB alone, n=7), and 6% (SIM+SUB, n=9) among patients who had no previous surgery; and 7% (radiotherapy alone, n=10) and 11% (SIM alone, n=13) among those who had undergone previous surgery. The most common toxicity 6 months after treatment was xerostomia, but this occurred in 3% or less of patients in each group. INTERPRETATION: Concurrent non-platinum chemoradiotherapy reduces recurrences, new tumours, and deaths in patients who have not undergone previous surgery, even 10 years after starting treatment. Chemotherapy given after radiotherapy (with or without concurrent chemotherapy) is ineffective. Patients who have undergone previous surgery for head and neck cancer do not benefit from non-platinum chemotherapy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, with support from University College London and University College London Hospital Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre.

Aromatase inhibitors in early hormone receptor-positive breast cancer : what is the optimal initiation time for the maximum benefit?

Breast cancer is common, affecting one in nine women worldwide. As stipulated by the St Gallen consensus guidelines, hormone therapy is an integral part of treatment for hormone-responsive disease. Previously, this has been with tamoxifen; however, as a result of a number of recent studies, aromatase inhibitors are now competing for use as first-line agents. In addition, there is as yet no firm consensus as to when and how these drugs should be used within the adjuvant setting. This article reviews the use of aromatase inhibitors in early stage hormone-positive breast cancer. It describes the evidence from the studies involving the aromatase inhibitors in an upfront, switch and extended setting. It further discusses the mathematical models proposed to determine the optimum timing of initiation. In light of the ongoing research into predictive biomarkers, this review then concentrates on whether future focus should be on more individualized treatment strategies than the optimum timing of aromatase inhibitors.

Endocrine approaches for the treatment of early and advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women.

Preventing clinical progression is the major treatment goal for both early and advanced breast cancer. For hormone-responsive cases (about 70% of the total), this can necessitate the use of sequential hormone therapies at various points during the patient's life. Newer hormonal therapies, such as the third-generation aromatase inhibitor anastrozole, are now competing with tamoxifen as first choice endocrine therapy in breast cancer. In addition, a further non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor letrozole has been shown to be beneficial when given at completion of 5 years adjuvant tamoxifen. In light of these new data, current treatment paradigms need to be reviewed. Already well established as second-line treatments for advanced breast cancer, the improved risk:benefit profiles of anastrozole and letrozole compared with tamoxifen mean that these agents are now also recognised alternative treatments in the first-line relapse setting. More recent studies demonstrate that anastrozole may also have an improved risk:benefit profile compared with tamoxifen when used as initial adjuvant therapy in early breast cancer. Anastrozole is also being evaluated as a preventative treatment in women at high risk of developing breast cancer. A new addition to the endocrine treatment armamentarium is the oestrogen receptor antagonist fulvestrant, which, unlike tamoxifen, has no agonist effects. Fulvestrant is at least as effective as anastrozole in the second-line treatment of advanced breast cancer, and provides similar benefits to tamoxifen when used as first-line therapy in patients with advanced, hormone receptor-positive tumours.