First-Line Nivolumab and Relatlimab Plus Chemotherapy for Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: The Phase II RELATIVITY-060 Study.

PURPOSE: Open-label phase II study (RELATIVITY-060) to investigate the efficacy and safety of first-line nivolumab, a PD-1-blocking antibody, plus relatlimab, a lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3)-blocking antibody, plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated advanced gastric cancer (GC) or gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC). METHODS: Patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC were randomly assigned 1:1 to nivolumab + relatlimab (fixed-dose combination) + chemotherapy or nivolumab + chemotherapy. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review [BICR]) in patients whose tumors had LAG-3 expression ≥1%. RESULTS: Of 274 patients, 138 were randomly assigned to nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy and 136 to nivolumab + chemotherapy. Median follow-up was 11.9 months. In patients with LAG-3 expression ≥1%, BICR-assessed ORR (95% CI) was 48% (38 to 59) in the nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy arm and 61% (51 to 71) in the nivolumab + chemotherapy arm; median progression-free survival (95% CI) by BICR was 7.0 months (5.8 to 8.4) versus 8.3 months (6.9 to 12.1; hazard ratio [HR], 1.41 [95% CI, 0.97 to 2.05]), and median overall survival (95% CI) was 13.5 months (11.9 to 19.1) versus 16.0 months (10.9 to not estimable; HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.70 to 1.54]), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 69% and 61% of all treated patients, and 42% and 36% of patients discontinued because of any-grade TRAEs in the nivolumab + relatlimab + chemotherapy and nivolumab + chemotherapy arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: RELATIVITY-060 did not meet its primary end point of improved ORR in patients with LAG-3 expression ≥1% when relatlimab was added to nivolumab + chemotherapy compared with nivolumab + chemotherapy. Further studies are needed to address whether adding anti-LAG-3 to anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy can benefit specific GC/GEJC patient subgroups.

A plain language summary of the CheckMate 649 study: nivolumab in combination with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone for untreated advanced or metastatic cancer of the stomach or esophagus.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of the 1-year results of a clinical research study known as CheckMate 649 published in The Lancet in June 2021. The 2-year results on the participants' health and overall quality of life from the same study are in a second publication in Nature in March 2022. Until recently, chemotherapy was the only first treatment option for people with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma who had not been treated before. Patients receiving chemotherapy lived on average for less than 1 year. Nivolumab is an immunotherapy that works by activating a person's immune system to fight back against cancer cells. The goal of CheckMate 649 was to find out if the combination of nivolumab and chemotherapy would help patients with advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma live longer and without their cancer getting worse. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Results from the final analysis are reported here. Of 1581 people who took part in the study, 789 received nivolumab and chemotherapy and 792 received chemotherapy. Researchers found that, on average, participants who received nivolumab and chemotherapy lived longer overall than those who received chemotherapy alone. The length of time participants lived without their cancer getting worse was also longer on average with nivolumab and chemotherapy than chemotherapy treatment alone. However, more participants in the nivolumab and chemotherapy group had side effects than those in the chemotherapy group. The three most common side effects in both types of treatment were nausea (urge to vomit), diarrhea and peripheral neuropathy. Participants who received nivolumab and chemotherapy had a lower risk of their cancer symptoms worsening and reported that they were 'less bothered' from side effects of treatment than those receiving chemotherapy alone. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The nivolumab and chemotherapy combination is considered a new standard treatment option and is approved in several countries as a treatment for adults who have not been treated before for their advanced or metastatic gastroesophageal cancer based on results from CheckMate 649. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02872116 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab in gastro-oesophageal cancer.

Standard first-line chemotherapy results in disease progression and death within one year in most patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma1-4. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated superior overall survival versus chemotherapy at 12-month follow-up in gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction or oesophageal adenocarcinoma in the randomized, global CheckMate 649 phase 3 trial5 (programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) combined positive score ≥5 and all randomized patients). On the basis of these results, nivolumab plus chemotherapy is now approved as a first-line treatment for these patients in many countries6. Nivolumab and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor ipilimumab have distinct but complementary mechanisms of action that contribute to the restoration of anti-tumour T-cell function and induction of de novo anti-tumour T-cell responses, respectively7-11. Treatment combining 1 mg kg-1 nivolumab with 3 mg kg-1 ipilimumab demonstrated clinically meaningful anti-tumour activity with a manageable safety profile in heavily pre-treated patients with advanced gastro-oesophageal cancer12. Here we report both long-term follow-up results comparing nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone and the first results comparing nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy alone from CheckMate 649. After the 24.0-month minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in overall survival versus chemotherapy alone in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥5 (hazard ratio 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.61, 0.81) and all randomized patients (hazard ratio 0.79; 95% confidence interval 0.71, 0.88). Overall survival in patients with PD-L1 combined positive score ≥ 5 for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy alone did not meet the prespecified boundary for significance. No new safety signals were identified. Our results support the continued use of nivolumab plus chemotherapy as standard first-line treatment for advanced gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced NSCLC: 4-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In CheckMate 227, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) greater than or equal to 1% (primary end point) or less than 1% (prespecified descriptive analysis). We report results with minimum 4 years' follow-up. METHODS: Adults with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥1%); or to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Efficacy included OS and other measures. Safety included timing and management of immune-mediated adverse events (AEs). A post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to treatment-related AEs (TRAEs). RESULTS: After 54.8 months' median follow-up, OS remained longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1 greater than or equal to 1% (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.90) and PD-L1 less than 1% (0.64; 0.51-0.81); 4-year OS rate with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was 29% versus 18% (PD-L1 ≥1%); and 24% versus 10% (PD-L1 <1%). Benefits were observed in both squamous and nonsquamous histologies. In a descriptive analysis, efficacy was improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab relative to nivolumab (PD-L1 ≥1%) and nivolumab plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Safety was consistent with previous reports. The most common immune-mediated AE with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab plus chemotherapy was rash; most immune-mediated AEs (except endocrine events) occurred within 6 months from start of treatment and resolved within 3 months after, mainly with systemic corticosteroids. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs had long-term OS benefits, as seen in the all randomized population. CONCLUSIONS: At more than 4 years' minimum follow-up, with all patients off immunotherapy treatment for at least 2 years, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate durable long-term efficacy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No new safety signals were identified. Immune-mediated AEs occurred early and resolved quickly with guideline-based management. Discontinuation of nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs did not have a negative impact on the long-term benefits seen in all randomized patients.

First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 649): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: First-line chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma has a median overall survival (OS) of less than 1 year. We aimed to evaluate first-line programmed cell death (PD)-1 inhibitor-based therapies in gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma. We report the first results for nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial (CheckMate 649), we enrolled adults (≥18 years) with previously untreated, unresectable, non-HER2-positive gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, or oesophageal adenocarcinoma, regardless of PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression from 175 hospitals and cancer centres in 29 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1 while all three groups were open) via interactive web response technology (block sizes of six) to nivolumab (360 mg every 3 weeks or 240 mg every 2 weeks) plus chemotherapy (capecitabine and oxaliplatin every 3 weeks or leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin every 2 weeks), nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy alone. Primary endpoints for nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone were OS or progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review, in patients whose tumours had a PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) of five or more. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02872116. FINDINGS: From March 27, 2017, to April 24, 2019, of 2687 patients assessed for eligibility, we concurrently randomly assigned 1581 patients to treatment (nivolumab plus chemotherapy [n=789, 50%] or chemotherapy alone [n=792, 50%]). The median follow-up for OS was 13·1 months (IQR 6·7-19·1) for nivolumab plus chemotherapy and 11·1 months (5·8-16·1) for chemotherapy alone. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in significant improvements in OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [98·4% CI 0·59-0·86]; p<0·0001) and PFS (HR 0·68 [98 % CI 0·56-0·81]; p<0·0001) versus chemotherapy alone in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of five or more (minimum follow-up 12·1 months). Additional results showed significant improvement in OS, along with PFS benefit, in patients with a PD-L1 CPS of one or more and all randomly assigned patients. Among all treated patients, 462 (59%) of 782 patients in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group and 341 (44%) of 767 patients in the chemotherapy alone group had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (≥25%) were nausea, diarrhoea, and peripheral neuropathy across both groups. 16 (2%) deaths in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group and four (1%) deaths in the chemotherapy alone group were considered to be treatment-related. No new safety signals were identified. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab is the first PD-1 inhibitor to show superior OS, along with PFS benefit and an acceptable safety profile, in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in previously untreated patients with advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, or oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy represents a new standard first-line treatment for these patients. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb, in collaboration with Ono Pharmaceutical.

Adjuvant Nivolumab in Resected Esophageal or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: No adjuvant treatment has been established for patients who remain at high risk for recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. METHODS: We conducted CheckMate 577, a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial to evaluate a checkpoint inhibitor as adjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Adults with resected (R0) stage II or III esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and had residual pathological disease were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks for 16 weeks, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 480 mg every 4 weeks) or matching placebo. The maximum duration of the trial intervention period was 1 year. The primary end point was disease-free survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 24.4 months. Among the 532 patients who received nivolumab, the median disease-free survival was 22.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.6 to 34.0), as compared with 11.0 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 14.3) among the 262 patients who received placebo (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.69; 96.4% CI, 0.56 to 0.86; P<0.001). Disease-free survival favored nivolumab across multiple prespecified subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events that were considered by the investigators to be related to the active drug or placebo occurred in 71 of 532 patients (13%) in the nivolumab group and 15 of 260 patients (6%) in the placebo group. The trial regimen was discontinued because of adverse events related to the active drug or placebo in 9% of the patients in the nivolumab group and 3% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, disease-free survival was significantly longer among those who received nivolumab adjuvant therapy than among those who received placebo. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 577 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02743494.).

Meta-analysis examining overall survival in patients with pancreatic cancer treated with second-line 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin-based therapy after failing first-line gemcitabine-containing therapy: effect of performance status and comparison with other regimens.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis and few choices of therapy. For patients with adequate performance status, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are preferred first-line treatment. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapy (e.g. FOLFIRI, OFF, or FOLFOX) are often used in patients who previously received gemcitabine-based regimens. A systematic review was conducted of the safety and efficacy of FOLFOX for metastatic pancreatic cancer following prior gemcitabine-based therapy. A Bayesian fixed-effect meta-analysis with adjustment of patient performance status (PS) was conducted to evaluate overall survival (OS) and compare outcomes with nanoliposomal irinotecan combination therapy. METHODS: PubMed.gov , FDA.gov , ClinicalTrials.gov , congress abstracts, Cochrane.org library, and EMBASE database searches were conducted to identify randomized controlled trials of advanced/metastatic disease, prior gemcitabine-based therapy, and second-line treatment with 5-FU and oxaliplatin. The database search dates were January 1, 1990-June 30, 2019. Endpoints were OS and severe treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Trial-level PS scores were standardized by converting Karnofsky grade scores to Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Grade, and overall study-weighted PS was calculated based on weighted average of all patients. RESULTS: Of 282 studies identified, 11 randomized controlled trials (N = 454) were included in the meta-analysis. Baseline weighted PS scores predicted OS in 10 of the 11 studies, and calculated PS scores of 1.0 were associated with a median OS of 6.3 months (95% posterior interval, 5.4-7.4). After adjusting for baseline PS, FOLFOX had a similar treatment effect profile (median OS, range 2.6-6.7 months) as 5-FU/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy (median OS, 6.1 months; 95% confidence interval 4.8-8.9). Neutropenia and fatigue were the most commonly reported Grade 3-4 TRAEs associated with FOLFOX. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline PS is a strong prognostic factor when interpreting the efficacy of 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapy of pancreatic cancer after progression on first-line gemcitabine-based regimens. When baseline PS is considered, FOLFOX has a similar treatment effect as 5-FU and nanoliposomal irinotecan therapy and a comparable safety profile. These findings suggest that 5-FU and oxaliplatin-based therapies remain an acceptable and alternative second-line treatment option for patients with pancreatic cancer and adequate PS (e.g. ECOG 0-1) following gemcitabine treatment.

The prognostic role of inflammatory markers in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with bevacizumab: A translational study [ASCENT].

BACKGROUND: In spite of demonstrating prognostic and possibly predictive benefit in retrospective cohorts and meta-analyses of cancer populations, including colorectal cancer (CRC), prospective evaluation of the relationship between neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and treatment outcomes in previously untreated mCRC patients receiving bevacizumab-based therapy has not yet been performed. METHODS: An open-label, single arm, multi-centre study. Patients received first-line bevacizumab plus XELOX or mFOLFOX6 (Phase-A) and continued bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI beyond first progression (Phase-B). Analyses included the association of NLR with phase A progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A sub-study investigated the safety in patients with the primary in situ tumor. An exploratory sub-study examined relationships of circulating proteomic markers with PFS. RESULTS: Phase-A enrolled 128 patients; median age was 64 years (range: 26-84), 70 (55%) were female, 71 (56%) were PS-0 and 51 (40%) had primary in situ tumor. Fifty-three (41%) patients entered Phase-B. The median baseline (b) NLR was 3.2 (range: 1.5-20.4) with 32 (25%) patients having bNLR > 5. The PFS hazard ratio (HR) by bNLR > 5 versus ≤ 5 was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.9-2.2; p = 0.101). The median PFS was 9.2 months (95% CI: 7.9-10.8) for Phase-A and 6.7 months (95% CI: 3.0-8.2) for Phase-B. The HR for OS based on bNLR > 5 versus ≤ 5 was 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0-2.7; p = 0.052). The median OS was 25 months (95% CI: 19.2-29.7) for the full analysis set and 14.9 months for Phase-B. Baseline levels of nine proteomic markers showed a relationship with PFS. Treatment related toxicities were consistent with what has previously been published. There were 4 (3%) instances of GI perforation, of which, 3 (6%) occurred in the primary in situ tumor group. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study are aligned with the previously reported trend towards worse PFS and OS in patients with higher bNLR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01588990; posted May 1, 2012.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with high tumour mutational burden: patient-reported outcomes results from the randomised, open-label, phase III CheckMate 227 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III CheckMate 227 study, first-line nivolumab + ipilimumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival (co-primary end-point) versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and high tumour mutational burden (TMB; ≥10 mutations/megabase). AIM: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in this population. METHODS: Disease-related symptoms and general health status were assessed using the validated PRO questionnaires Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and EQ-5D, respectively. LCSS average symptom burden index (ASBI) and three-item global index (3-IGI) and EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) and utility index (UI) scores and changes from baseline were analysed descriptively. Longitudinal changes were assessed by mixed-effect model repeated measures (MMRMs) and time to first deterioration/improvement analyses. RESULTS: In the high TMB population, PRO questionnaire completion rates were ∼90% at baseline and >80% for most on-treatment assessments. During treatment, mean changes from baseline with nivolumab + ipilimumab showed early, clinically meaningful improvements in LCSS ASBI/3-IGI and EQ-5D VAS/UI; with chemotherapy, symptoms and health-related quality of life remained stable (LCSS ASBI/3-IGI, EQ-5D UI) or improved following induction (EQ-5D VAS). MMRM-assessed changes in symptom burden were improved with nivolumab + ipilimumab versus chemotherapy. Symptom deterioration by week 12 was lower with nivolumab + ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (22.3% versus 35.0%; absolute risk reduction: 12.7% [95% confidence interval 2.4-22.5]), irrespective of discontinuation. Time to first deterioration was delayed with nivolumab + ipilimumab versus chemotherapy across LCSS and EQ-5D summary measures. CONCLUSION: First-line nivolumab + ipilimumab demonstrated early, sustained improvements in PROs versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and high TMB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02477826.

Mechanical suppression of osteolytic bone metastases in advanced breast cancer patients: a randomised controlled study protocol evaluating safety, feasibility and preliminary efficacy of exercise as a targeted medicine.

BACKGROUND: Skeletal metastases present a major challenge for clinicians, representing an advanced and typically incurable stage of cancer. Bone is also the most common location for metastatic breast carcinoma, with skeletal lesions identified in over 80% of patients with advanced breast cancer. Preclinical models have demonstrated the ability of mechanical stimulation to suppress tumour formation and promote skeletal preservation at bone sites with osteolytic lesions, generating modulatory interference of tumour-driven bone remodelling. Preclinical studies have also demonstrated anti-cancer effects through exercise by minimising tumour hypoxia, normalising tumour vasculature and increasing tumoural blood perfusion. This study proposes to explore the promising role of targeted exercise to suppress tumour growth while concomitantly delivering broader health benefits in patients with advanced breast cancer with osteolytic bone metastases. METHODS: This single-blinded, two-armed, randomised and controlled pilot study aims to establish the safety, feasibility and efficacy of an individually tailored, modular multi-modal exercise programme incorporating spinal isometric training (targeted muscle contraction) in 40 women with advanced breast cancer and stable osteolytic spinal metastases. Participants will be randomly assigned to exercise or usual medical care. The intervention arm will receive a 3-month clinically supervised exercise programme, which if proven to be safe and efficacious will be offered to the control-arm patients following study completion. Primary endpoints (programme feasibility, safety, tolerance and adherence) and secondary endpoints (tumour morphology, serum tumour biomarkers, bone metabolism, inflammation, anthropometry, body composition, bone pain, physical function and patient-reported outcomes) will be measured at baseline and following the intervention. DISCUSSION: Exercise medicine may positively alter tumour biology through numerous mechanical and non-mechanical mechanisms. This randomised controlled pilot trial will explore the preliminary effects of targeted exercise on tumour morphology and circulating metastatic tumour biomarkers using an osteolytic skeletal metastases model in patients with breast cancer. The study is principally aimed at establishing feasibility and safety. If proven to be safe and feasible, results from this study could have important implications for the delivery of this exercise programme to patients with advanced cancer and sclerotic skeletal metastases or with skeletal lesions present in haematological cancers (such as osteolytic lesions in multiple myeloma), for which future research is recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: anzctr.org.au , ACTRN-12616001368426 . Registered on 4 October 2016.

Can exercise suppress tumour growth in advanced prostate cancer patients with sclerotic bone metastases? A randomised, controlled study protocol examining feasibility, safety and efficacy.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise may positively alter tumour biology through numerous modulatory and regulatory mechanisms in response to a variety of modes and dosages, evidenced in preclinical models to date. Specifically, localised and systemic biochemical alterations produced during and following exercise may suppress tumour formation, growth and distribution by virtue of altered epigenetics and endocrine-paracrine activity. Given the impressive ability of targeted mechanical loading to interfere with metastasis-driven tumour formation in human osteolytic tumour cells, it is of equal interest to determine whether a similar effect is observed in sclerotic tumour cells. The study aims to (1) establish the feasibility and safety of a combined modular multimodal exercise programme with spinal isometric training in advanced prostate cancer patients with sclerotic bone metastases and (2) examine whether targeted and supervised exercise can suppress sclerotic tumour growth and activity in spinal metastases in humans. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-blinded, two-armed, randomised, controlled and explorative phase I clinical trial combining spinal isometric training with a modular multimodal exercise programme in 40 men with advanced prostate cancer and stable sclerotic spinal metastases. Participants will be randomly assigned to (1) the exercise intervention or (2) usual medical care. The intervention arm will receive a 3-month, supervised and individually tailored modular multimodal exercise programme with spinal isometric training. Primary endpoints (feasibility and safety) and secondary endpoints (tumour morphology; biomarker activity; anthropometry; musculoskeletal health; adiposity; physical function; quality of life; anxiety; distress; fatigue; insomnia; physical activity levels) will be measured at baseline and following the intervention. Statistical analyses will include descriptive characteristics, t-tests, effect sizes and two-way (group × time) repeated-measures analysis of variance (or analysis of covariance) to examine differences between groups over time. The data-set will be primarily examined using an intention-to-treat approach with multiple imputations, followed by a secondary sensitivity analysis to ensure data robustness using a complete cases approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) of Edith Cowan University and the Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group. If proven to be feasible and safe, this study will form the basis of future phase II and III trials in human patients with advanced cancer. To reach a maximum number of clinicians, practitioners, patients and scientists, outcomes will be disseminated through national and international clinical, conference and patient presentations, as well as publication in high-impact, peer-reviewed academic journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN 12616000179437.

Positive sentinel lymph node metastasis from a metastasis in Melanoma.

The rationale for certain patterns of metastatic spread seen in melanoma is not well understood. Currently, there is no clear experimental evidence to support the potential for metastases to form metastases in this disease. We report a case of a 31-year-old woman, with metastatic melanoma, who developed axillary lymph node metastases hypothesized to originate from a breast metastasis rather than the primary disease. Improved understanding of the underlying molecular processes involved in systemic spread would facilitate development of improved adjuvant therapies and prognostic markers.

Audit of patients with mesothelioma treated with pemetrexed in a single institution in Western Australia.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a devastating malignancy that until recently has had no effective treatment. Pemetrexed in combination with cisplatin entered routine clinical practice following reports of efficacy in 2003. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with malignant mesothelioma at a single institution treated with pemetrexed in any combination or as monotherapy between 2004 and 2007. During this period, 62 patients received pemetrexed-based chemotherapy for MPM, most of whom were male (87%), treated in the palliative setting (84%) and received pemetrexed in combination with a platinum agent (95%). Pemetrexed was found to be well tolerated and produced clinical benefit and response rates similar to other published studies for its use in MPM in the phase IV or community practice settings. Patients with progressive disease as their best radiological response had very poor outcomes, while patients with stable disease had similar outcomes to those with responses. We confirmed that survival after commencement of pemetrexed-based chemotherapy remains under one year in this group of patients, somewhat less than the survival reported in phase III trials that currently inform clinical decision making. Further research is required to identify those patients who might benefit from pemetrexed based on molecular predictive markers.

Outbreak of sporotrichosis, Western Australia.

A cluster of sporotrichosis cases occurred in the Busselton-Margaret River region of Western Australia from 2000 to 2003. Epidemiologic investigation and mycologic culture for Sporothrix schenckii implicated hay initially distributed through a commercial hay supplier as the source of the out-break. Declining infection rates have occurred after various community measures were instigated.

Chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting--prevention and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting are among the most feared consequences of cancer treatment. Recent developments in drug treatment make the goal of no nausea or vomiting during chemotherapy realistic. OBJECTIVE: In this article we review the pathogenesis and management of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting. DISCUSSION: Regimens to prevent chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting are guided by the emetogenic potential of the chemotherapeutic agents used. Combined prophylactic therapy targets different pathways, improving the efficacy of prevention and treatment of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting. General practitioners have an important role in patients undergoing chemotherapy by reinforcing the importance of prophylactic treatment and administering rescue treatment for patients with breakthrough or prolonged nausea and vomiting postchemotherapy.

Epidemiological features and control of an outbreak of scarlet fever in a Perth primary school.

Scarlet fever was associated with feared outbreaks and mortality in the 19th Century. It occurs sporadically in modern society and infection is readily treated with antibiotics. We report on a scarlet fever outbreak in children attending a primary school in Perth, Western Australia, in late 2003. A total of 13 cases were identified over a five week period. Six of the cases were pre-primary children (ages 4 to 5) from the same class of 26 children (attack rate 23.1%). Three of the remaining seven cases were older siblings of pre-primary cases who developed scarlet fever after their younger siblings. Screening of the children and teachers from the two pre-primary classes at the school yielded 12 positive pharyngeal swabs for group A Streptococcus. Emm-typing of the screening isolates indicated that a common strain was circulating within the outbreak pre-primary class, with four of six isolates identified as emm-type 3. The overall group A Streptococcus carriage rate in screened students in this class was 31.6 per cent and the carriage rate for emm-type 3 was 21.1 per cent. Carriers were treated with oral penicillin V to eradicate carriage and control the outbreak. No further cases of scarlet fever were reported after the treatment of pharyngeal carriers. Outbreaks of scarlet fever still occur in young children and identification and treatment of carriers may still be valuable.