Contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB) as a salvage treatment for rectal cancer patients who developed local tumor re-growth after watch-and-wait approach.

Purpose: A watch-and-wait approach is an alternative to surgery for rectal cancer patients who have achieved a clinical complete response (cCR) following neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy. However, approximately 25-38% of patients experience subsequent local tumor re-growth that requires salvage surgery. We evaluated the effectiveness of contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB) as an alternative method of salvage therapy for those patients who were either unfit for or refused surgery. Oncological outcomes, tolerability, and feasibility of subsequent surgery for local treatment failure following CXB were reported. Material and methods: From 2009-2021, all patients treated with CXB as salvage therapy for local rectal cancer re-growth after watch-and-wait approach at our center were analyzed. Results: Contact X-ray brachytherapy as a salvage treatment (range, 90-110 Gy) was offered to 56 patients who experienced tumor re-growth following (chemo)radiation and watch-and-wait protocol. Median age was 76 (IQR = 66-83) years. Most patients (82%) had early-stage re-growth (ycT1/ycT2, ycN0), and 18% had more advanced stages (ycT3/ycT4, ycN0). After a median of 37-month follow-up (IQR = 19-53), 48% of patients who had early-stage re-growth achieved a sustained complete remission after CXB compared with 20% of those who had more advanced tumor stages. Disease-free and overall survivals for the whole cohort were 69% and 100% at 1-year, 51% and 82% at 3-year, and 51% and 65% at 5-years. CXB effectively controlled local re-growth-related symptoms. Mild post-CXB side effects occurred in 18% of cases. All (100%) eight patients who developed further local relapse, and 29% of those who had residual disease post-CXB salvage were successfully managed with subsequent surgery. Conclusions: Contact X-ray brachytherapy offers a new treatment option for patients in this situation whose other therapy options are not suitable for or refused initial surgery. Early local tumor re-growth responded best with minimal treatment-related toxicity and excellent symptom control. Disease-free and overall survival rates were acceptable, and delaying surgical salvage for local re-growth did not compromise patients' eventual long-term outcomes.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with radiation dose escalation with contact x-ray brachytherapy boost or external beam radiotherapy boost for organ preservation in early cT2-cT3 rectal adenocarcinoma (OPERA): a phase 3, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Organ preservation after reaching clinical complete response on neoadjuvant therapy is gaining interest for rectal cancers, although the role of radiation dose escalation is still not known. We aimed to determine whether a contact x-ray brachytherapy boost, following or preceding neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, increases the probability of 3-year organ preservation for patients with early rectal cancers. METHODS: OPERA was a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial done at 17 cancer centres that included operable patients, aged 18 years or older, with cT2, cT3a, or cT3b adenocarcinoma of low-mid rectum, tumours of less than 5 cm in diameter, and cN0 or cN1 smaller than 8 mm. All patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 45 Gy external beam radiotherapy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks with concurrent oral capecitabine (825 mg/m2 twice a day). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a boost of external beam radiotherapy at 9 Gy in five fractions (group A) or a boost with contact x-ray brachytherapy (90 Gy in three fractions; group B). Randomisation was done centrally using an independent web-based system and stratified by trial centre, tumour classification (cT2 vs cT3a or cT3b), tumour distance from rectum (<6 cm from anal verge vs ≥6 cm), and tumour diameter (<3 cm vs ≥3 cm). Treatment in group B was stratified by tumour diameter, with the contact x-ray brachytherapy boost given before neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with tumours smaller than 3 cm. The primary outcome was organ preservation at 3 years, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02505750, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2015, and June 26, 2020, 148 patients were assessed for eligibility and were randomly assigned to group A (n=74) or group B (n=74). Seven patients withdrew their consent (five in group A and two in group B). 141 patients were included in the primary efficacy analysis, including 69 assigned to group A (29 with tumours <3 cm in diameter and 40 with tumours ≥3 cm) and 72 assigned to group B (32 with tumours <3 cm and 40 with tumours ≥3 cm). After a median follow-up of 38·2 months (IQR 34·2-42·5), the 3-year organ preservation rate was 59% (95% CI 48-72) in group A versus 81% (72-91) in group B (hazard ratio [HR] 0·36, 95% CI 0·19-0·70; p=0·0026). For patients with tumours less than 3 cm in diameter, 3-year organ preservation rates were 63% (95% CI 47-84) in group A versus 97% (91-100) in group B (HR 0·07, 95% CI 0·01-0·57; p=0·012). For patients with tumours of 3 cm or larger, 3-year organ preservation rates were 55% (95% CI 41-74) in group A versus 68% (54-85) in group B (HR 0·54, 95% CI 0·26-1·10; p=0·11). 21 (30%) patients in group A and 30 (42%) in group B had an early grade 2-3 adverse event (p=1·0). The most common early grade 2-3 adverse events were proctitis (four [6%] in group A, nine [13%] in group B) and radiation dermatitis (seven [10%] in group A, two [3%] in group B). The main late side-effect was grade 1-2 rectal bleeding due to telangiectasia, which was more frequent in group B (37 [63%] of 59) than in group A (five [12%] of 43; p<0·0001) and subsided after 3 years. INTERPRETATION: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with a contact x-ray brachytherapy boost significantly improved the 3-year organ preservation rate, particularly for patients with tumours smaller than 3 cm who were treated with contact x-ray brachytherapy first, compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with a boost via external beam radiotherapy. This approach could be discussed and offered to operable patients with early cT2-cT3 disease who are keen to avoid surgery and seek organ preservation. FUNDING: The French Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Cinique.

Planned organ preservation for elderly patients with rectal cancer using short course radiotherapy and a contact brachytherapy boost-an International multi-institution analysis.

Background and purpose: The use of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and contact X-Ray brachytherapy (CXB) is emerging as an effective alternative in patients with early stage rectal cancer with the intent of organ preservation (OP). Short course radiotherapy (SCRT) is an alternative EBRT schedule for patients not fit for chemotherapy or for longer courses of EBRT. There are no multicentre studies that have reported on the outcomes of SCRT with a CXB boost, therefore we present these from patients from centres from the UK and Sweden. Materials and methods: From the Guildford Colorectal Database or local databases, 258 patients who underwent SCRT and CXB with the intent of OP from five centres treated between 2007 and 2019 were identified. Response and survival data was analysed and presented. Results: With a median age of 81, 226 patients were treated with radiotherapy alone (RTA) and 32 immediately after local excision (ILE). Median follow-up was 24 months. 70% and 97% of patients in the RTA and ILE groups respectively had a complete clinical response (cCR) after SCRT with CXB. Of those, local relapse was seen in 16% of the RTA and 3% of the ILE group. Median survival was 40 months after CXB in the RTA and 52 months in the ILE group. 94% of patients remained stoma-free to the point of latest follow-up. Conclusion: This data suggests that CXB when combined with SCRT, in a mainly elderly and comorbid population, provides good palliation with stoma-avoidance. Oncological outcomes compare with previously published work. A greater focus is required on quality of life outcomes after OP.

Clinical prediction models assessing response to radiotherapy for rectal cancer: protocol for a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer has a high prevalence. The standard of care for management of localised disease involves major surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy, but these modalities are sometimes associated with mortality and morbidity. The notion of 'watch and wait' has therefore emerged and offers an organ-sparing approach to patients after administering a less invasive initial treatment, such as X-ray brachytherapy (Papillon technique). It is thus important to evaluate how likely patients are to respond to such therapies, to develop patient-tailored treatment pathways. We propose a systematic review to identify published clinical prediction models of the response of rectal cancer to treatment that includes radiotherapy and here present our protocol. METHODS: Included studies will develop multivariable clinical prediction models which assess response to treatment and overall survival of adult patients who have been diagnosed with any stage of rectal cancer and have received radiotherapy treatment with curative intent. Cohort studies and randomised controlled trials will be included. The primary outcome will be the occurrence of salvage surgery at 1 year after treatment. Secondary outcomes include salavage surgery at at any reported time point, the predictive accuracy of models, the quality of the developed models and the feasibility of using the model in clinical practice. Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and CINAHL will be searched from inception to 24 February 2022. Keywords and phrases related to rectal cancer, radiotherapy and prediction models will be used. Studies will be selected once the deduplication, title, abstract and full-text screening process have been completed by two independent reviewers. The PRISMA-P checklist will be followed. A third reviewer will resolve any disagreement. The data extraction form will be pilot-tested using a representative 5% sample of the studies reviewed. The CHARMS checklist will be implemented. Risk of bias in each study will be assessed using the PROBAST tool. A narrative synthesis will be performed and if sufficient data are identified, meta-analysis will be undertaken as described in Debray et al. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will identify factors that predict response to the treatment protocol. Any gaps for potential development of new clinical prediction models will be highlighted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42022277704.

Targeted Radiotherapy Using Contact X-ray Brachytherapy 50 kV.

Rectal adenocarcinoma is a quite radioresistant tumor. In order to achieve non-operative management (NOM) radiotherapy plays a major role. Targeted radiotherapy aiming at high precision 3D radiotherapy uses stereotactic image-guided external beam radiotherapy machines. To further safely increase the tumor dose, endocavitary brachytherapy (ECB) is an original approach. There are two different ways to perform such an ECB: contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB) using a 50 kV X-ray generator with an X-ray tube positioned under eye guidance into the rectal cavity and high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRB) using iridium-192 sources positioned into the rectal cavity under image guidance. This study focused on CXB. CXB uses a small mobile generator that produces 50 kV X-rays with limited penetration. This technique is well adapted to accessible tumors of limited size and especially needs a high dose rate (≥15 Gy/minutes) for rectal tumors. It is performed on an ambulatory basis. A total dose between 80−110 Gy is delivered in 3−4 fractions over 3 to 6 weeks into a small volume (5 cm3). CXB was pioneered in the 1970s by Papillon using the Philips RT 50TM. Since 2009, the Papillon P50TM has been used in 11 institutions in Europe. The OPERA Phase III trial tested the hypothesis that a CXB boost (90 Gy/3 fr) compared to an EBRT boost (9 Gy/5 fr) for T2−T3 ab < 5 cm and N0−N1 < 8 mm will increase the 3-year organ preservation (OP) rate when combined with 45 Gy/5 weeks with concomitant capecitabine. Out of more than 300 patients with tumors < 3 cm (1962−1992), Papillon reported a long-term local control close to 85%. Similar results were published in Europe and USA at that time. The Lyon R96-2 Phase III trial (2004) demonstrated that, when combined with preoperative EBRT, a CXB boost (90 Gy/3 fr) significantly increased the rate of clinical complete response (cCR) and sphincter preservation, with some patients having OP at 10 years. With more than 2000 patients treated in Europe (2010−2020) using the Papillon 50TM, organ preservation appears possible in close to 80% of cases in selected early T2−T3. The OPERA trial closed after 141 inclusions (2015−2020) after an independent data monitoring committee recommendation because of promising results. At the 2-year follow-up (blinded data), the rate of cCR and OP were 77% and 72%, respectively, for the 141 tumors, and for T < 3 cm (61 pts), they were 86% and 85%, respectively, with good bowel function. The final results should be available in 2022. Organ preservation using NOM appears to be a promising approach for rectal cancer. A CXB boost with chemoradiotherapy in selected early T2−T3 could become an attractive option to achieve a planned OP. This approach should be proposed to well-informed patients after discussion in an MDT.

Whole-lung Low Dose Irradiation for SARS-Cov2 Induced Pneumonia in the Geriatric Population: An Old Effective Treatment for a New Disease? Recommendation of the International Geriatric Radiotherapy Group.

A cytokine storm induced by SARS-Cov2 may produce pneumonitis which may be fatal for older patients with underlying lung disease. Hyper-elevation of Interleukin1 (IL-1), Tumor necrosis factor-1alfa (TNF-1 alfa), and Interleukin 6 (IL-6) produced by inflammatory macrophage M1 may damage the lung alveoli leading to severe pneumonitis, decreased oxygenation, and potential death despite artificial ventilation. Older patients may not be suitable candidates for pharmaceutical intervention targeting IL-1/6 blockade or artificial ventilation. Low dose total lung (LDTL) irradiation at a single dose of 50 cGy may stop this cytokine cascade, thus preventing, and/or reversing normal organs damage. This therapy has been proven in the past to be effective against pneumonitis of diverse etiology and could be used to prevent death of older infected patients. Thus, LDRT radiotherapy may be a cost-effective treatment for this frail patient population whom radiation -induced malignancy is not a concern because of their advanced age. This hypothesis should be tested in future prospective trials.

Older Cancer Patients during the COVID-19 Epidemic: Practice Proposal of the International Geriatric Radiotherapy Group.

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic is unprecedented as it reached all countries in the world within a record short period of time. Even though COVID-19 infection may be just severe in any adults, older adults (65-year-old or older) may experience a higher mortality rate. Among those affected, cancer patients may have a worse outcome compared to the general population because of their depressed immune status. As the health resources of most countries are limited, clinicians may face painful decisions about which patients to save if they require artificial ventilation. Cancer patients, especially the older ones, may be denied supportive care because of their shorter life expectancy. Thus, special considerations should be taken to prevent infection of older cancer patients and to provide them with adequate social support during their cancer treatment. The following proposal was reached: (1) Education of health care providers about the special needs of older cancer patients and their risks of infection. (2) Special consideration such as surgical masks and separate scheduling should be made to protect them from being infected. (3) Social services such as patient navigators should be provided to ensure adequate medical supply, food, and daily transportation to cancer centers. (4) Close monitoring through phone calls, telecommunication to ensure social distancing and psychological support from patient family to prevent anxiety and depression. (5) Shorter course of radiotherapy by use of hypofractionation where possible to decrease the needs for daily transportation and exposure to infection. (6) Enrollment of older cancer patients in clinical trials for potential antiviral medications if infection does occur. (7) Home health care telemedicine may be an effective strategy for older cancer patients with COVID-19 infection to avoid hospital admission when health care resources become restricted. (8) For selected patients, immunotherapy and targeted therapy may become the systemic therapy of choice for older cancer patients and need to be tested in clinical trials.

Role of radiotherapy in the treatment of rectal cancer in older patients.

Striking a balance between cancer treatment and patient-centred care is becoming ever more important in older patients with rectal cancer as the population is ageing. The treatment decision made by the modern multidisciplinary colorectal team will recommend pre-operative chemo-radiotherapy followed by surgery for advance rectal cancer and surgery alone for early rectal cancer, as the "standard of care" is surgery. However, an alternative non-surgical treatment option should be consider for older patients with rectal cancer as the surgical harm can far outweigh the potential benefits. There is published evidence that mortality is higher with increasing age. An alternative treatment option to surgery when patients are not suitable or refusing surgery is to offer them external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) or chemo radiotherapy (EBCRT). A proportion of these patients can achieve a clinical complete response (cCR) which enable adoption of 'watch and wait' strategy to avoid surgery. However, a third of patients who achieved initial cCR can develop local regrowth within the first two years. This require salvage surgery which reduces their chance of organ preservation. Contact X-ray brachytherapy (CXB) or High Dose Rate Endo Brachy Therapy (HDREBT) boost following external beam radiotherapy can improve the initial cCR rate and reduce the risk of local regrowth. Those patients with persistent residual cancer or regrowth after brachytherapy boost following EBCRT or EBRT can have salvage surgery later without compromising their chance of cure. Therefore, patients should be fully aware of their treatment options and have 'a choice' when deciding and consenting their treatment.

Challenges Facing Radiation Oncologists in The Management of Older Cancer Patients: Consensus of The International Geriatric Radiotherapy Group.

The management of older cancer patients remains difficult because of data paucity. Radiation oncologists need to identify potential issues which could affect treatment of those patients. A workshop was organized in Barcelona among international radiation oncologists with special interest in the management of older cancer patients on April 22, 2018. The following consensus was reached: 1. Older cancer patients often faced unconscious discriminating bias from cancer specialists and institutions because of their chronological age. 2. Advances in radiotherapy techniques have allowed patients with multiple co-morbidities precluding surgery or systemic therapy to achieve potential cure in early disease stages. 3. The lack of biomarkers for frailty remains an impediment to future research. 4. Access to healthcare insurance and daily transportation remains an issue in many countries; 5. Hypofractionation, brachytherapy, or stereotactic techniques may be ideally suited for older cancer patients to minimize transportation issues and to improve tolerance to radiotherapy. 6. Patients with locally advanced disease who are mentally and physically fit should receive combined therapy for potential cure. 7. The role of systemic therapy alone or combined with radiotherapy for frail patients needs to be defined in future clinical trials because of targeted agents or immunotherapy may be less toxic compared to conventional chemotherapy.

Personalized management of elderly patients with rectal cancer: Expert recommendations of the European Society of Surgical Oncology, European Society of Coloproctology, International Society of Geriatric Oncology, and American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer.

With an expanding elderly population and median rectal cancer detection age of 70 years, the prevalence of rectal cancer in elderly patients is increasing. Management is based on evidence from younger patients, resulting in substandard treatments and poor outcomes. Modern management of rectal cancer in the elderly demands patient-centered treatment, assessing frailty rather than chronological age. The heterogeneity of this group, combined with the limited available data, impedes drafting evidence-based guidelines. Therefore, a multidisciplinary task force convened experts from the European Society of Surgical Oncology, European Society of Coloproctology, International Society of Geriatric Oncology and the American College Surgeons Commission on Cancer, with the goal of identifying the best practice to promote personalized rectal cancer care in older patients. A crucial element for personalized care was recognized as the routine screening for frailty and geriatrician involvement and personalized care for frail patients. Careful patient selection and improved surgical and perioperative techniques are responsible for a substantial improvement in rectal cancer outcomes. Therefore, properly selected patients should be considered for surgical resection. Local excision can be utilized when balancing oncologic outcomes, frailty and life expectancy. Watch and wait protocols, in expert hands, are valuable for selected patients and adjuncts can be added to improve complete response rates. Functional recovery and patient-reported outcomes are as important as oncologic-specific outcomes in this age group. The above recommendations and others were made based on the best-available evidence to guide the personalized treatment of elderly patients with rectal cancer.

Preoperative chemoradiation with capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab in rectal cancer: significance of pre-treatment and post-resection RAS mutations.

BACKGROUND: The influence of EGFR pathway mutations on cetuximab-containing rectal cancer preoperative chemoradiation (CRT) is uncertain. METHODS: In a prospective phase II trial (EXCITE), patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined non-metastatic rectal adenocarinoma threatening/involving the surgical resection plane received pelvic radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine, irinotecan and cetuximab. Resection was recommended 8 weeks later. The primary endpoint was histopathologically clear (R0) resection margin. Pre-planned retrospective DNA pyrosequencing (PS) and next generation sequencing (NGS) of KRAS, NRAS, PIK3CA and BRAF was performed on the pre-treatment biopsy and resected specimen. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were recruited and 76 underwent surgery, with R0 resection in 67 (82%, 90%CI: 73-88%) (four patients with clinical complete response declined surgery). Twenty-four patients (30%) had an excellent clinical or pathological response (ECPR). Using NGS 24 (46%) of 52 matched biopsies/resections were discrepant: ten patients (19%) gained 13 new resection mutations compared to biopsy (12 KRAS, one PIK3CA) and 18 (35%) lost 22 mutations (15 KRAS, 7 PIK3CA). Tumours only ever testing RAS wild-type had significantly greater ECPR than tumours with either biopsy or resection RAS mutations (14/29 [48%] vs 10/51 [20%], P=0.008), with a trend towards increased overall survival (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05-1.03, P=0.055). CONCLUSIONS: This regimen was feasible and the primary study endpoint was met. For the first time using pre-operative rectal CRT, emergence of clinically important new resection mutations is described, likely reflecting intratumoural heterogeneity manifesting either as treatment-driven selective clonal expansion or a geographical biopsy sampling miss.

Watch-and-wait approach versus surgical resection after chemoradiotherapy for patients with rectal cancer (the OnCoRe project): a propensity-score matched cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Induction of a clinical complete response with chemoradiotherapy, followed by observation via a watch-and-wait approach, has emerged as a management option for patients with rectal cancer. We aimed to address the shortage of evidence regarding the safety of the watch-and-wait approach by comparing oncological outcomes between patients managed by watch and wait who achieved a clinical complete response and those who had surgical resection (standard care). METHODS: Oncological Outcomes after Clinical Complete Response in Patients with Rectal Cancer (OnCoRe) was a propensity-score matched cohort analysis study, that included patients of all ages diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma without distant metastases who had received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 daily fractions with concurrent fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy) at a tertiary cancer centre in Manchester, UK, between Jan 14, 2011, and April 15, 2013. Patients who had a clinical complete response were offered management with the watch-and-wait approach, and patients who did not have a complete clinical response were offered surgical resection if eligible. We also included patients with a clinical complete response managed by watch and wait between March 10, 2005, and Jan 21, 2015, across three neighbouring UK regional cancer centres, whose details were obtained through a registry. For comparative analyses, we derived one-to-one paired cohorts of watch and wait versus surgical resection using propensity-score matching (including T stage, age, and performance status). The primary endpoint was non-regrowth disease-free survival from the date that chemoradiotherapy was started, and secondary endpoints were overall survival, and colostomy-free survival. We used a conservative p value of less than 0·01 to indicate statistical significance in the comparative analyses. FINDINGS: 259 patients were included in our Manchester tertiary cancer centre cohort, 228 of whom underwent surgical resection at referring hospitals and 31 of whom had a clinical complete response, managed by watch and wait. A further 98 patients were added to the watch-and-wait group via the registry. Of the 129 patients managed by watch and wait (median follow-up 33 months [IQR 19-43]), 44 (34%) had local regrowths (3-year actuarial rate 38% [95% CI 30-48]); 36 (88%) of 41 patients with non-metastatic local regrowths were salvaged. In the matched analyses (109 patients in each treatment group), no differences in 3-year non-regrowth disease-free survival were noted between watch and wait and surgical resection (88% [95% CI 75-94] with watch and wait vs 78% [63-87] with surgical resection; time-varying p=0·043). Similarly, no difference in 3-year overall survival was noted (96% [88-98] vs 87% [77-93]; time-varying p=0·024). By contrast, patients managed by watch and wait had significantly better 3-year colostomy-free survival than did those who had surgical resection (74% [95% CI 64-82] vs 47% [37-57]; hazard ratio 0·445 [95% CI 0·31-0·63; p<0·0001), with a 26% (95% CI 13-39) absolute difference in patients who avoided permanent colostomy at 3 years between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: A substantial proportion of patients with rectal cancer managed by watch and wait avoided major surgery and averted permanent colostomy without loss of oncological safety at 3 years. These findings should inform decision making at the outset of chemoradiotherapy. FUNDING: Bowel Disease Research Foundation.

Novel radiation techniques for rectal cancer.

The concepts for management of rectal cancer have changed drastically over the past few years. Through national bowel cancer screening programmes in the Western countries and the increasing use of endoscopic procedures as diagnostic tool, there is increase in detection of rectal cancer in early stages. There is increase in ageing population worldwide but more so in Western countries. In addition, there is realisation of harm from extirpative surgical procedures which are directed towards managing advanced rectal cancer in the past. Increase in cost of health care burden has also led the investigators to seek alternative treatment options which are effective, safe and cost effective. There are several modern radiation techniques which fits this bill and we need to be aware of newer novel radiation techniques to fulfil this gap.

Mitomycin or cisplatin chemoradiation with or without maintenance chemotherapy for treatment of squamous-cell carcinoma of the anus (ACT II): a randomised, phase 3, open-label, 2 × 2 factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiation became the standard of care for anal cancer after the ACT I trial. However, only two-thirds of patients achieved local control, with 5-year survival of 50%; therefore, better treatments are needed. We investigated whether replacing mitomycin with cisplatin in chemoradiation improves response, and whether maintenance chemotherapy after chemoradiation improves survival. METHODS: In this 2 × 2 factorial trial, we enrolled patients with histologically confirmed squamous-cell carcinoma of the anus without metastatic disease from 59 centres in the UK. Patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups, to receive either mitomycin (12 mg/m(2) on day 1) or cisplatin (60 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 29), with fluorouracil (1000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1-4 and 29-32) and radiotherapy (50.4 Gy in 28 daily fractions); with or without two courses of maintenance chemotherapy (fluorouracil and cisplatin at weeks 11 and 14). The random allocation was generated by computer and patients assigned by telephone. Randomisation was done by minimisation and stratified by tumour site, T and N stage, sex, age, and renal function. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to assignment. Primary endpoints were complete response at 26 weeks and acute toxic effects (for chemoradiation), and progression-free survival (for maintenance). The primary analyses were done by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com, number 26715889. FINDINGS: We enrolled 940 patients: 472 were assigned to mitomycin, of whom 246 were assigned to no maintenance, 226 to maintenance; 468 were assigned to cisplatin, of whom 246 were assigned to no maintenance, 222 to maintenance. Median follow-up was 5.1 years (IQR 3.9-6.9). 391 of 432 (90.5%) patients in the mitomycin group versus 386 of 431 (89.6%) in the cisplatin group had a complete response at 26 weeks (difference -0.9%, 95% CI -4.9 to 3.1; p=0.64). Overall, toxic effects were similar in each group (334/472 [71%] for mitomycin vs 337/468 [72%] for cisplatin). The most common grade 3-4 toxic effects were skin (228/472 [48%] vs 222/468 [47%]), pain (122/472 [26%] vs 135/468 [29%]), haematological (124/472 [26%] vs 73/468 [16%]), and gastrointestinal (75/472 [16%] vs 85/468 [18%]). 3-year progression-free survival was 74% (95% CI 69-77; maintenance) versus 73% (95% CI 68-77; no maintenance; hazard ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.21; p=0.70). INTERPRETATION: The results of our trial--the largest in anal cancer to date--show that fluorouracil and mitomycin with 50.4 Gy radiotherapy in 28 daily fractions should remain standard practice in the UK. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.