Effect of Celecoxib vs Placebo as Adjuvant Therapy on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Breast Cancer: The REACT Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with breast cancer remain at risk of relapse after adjuvant therapy. Celecoxib has shown antitumor effects in preclinical models of human breast cancer, but clinical evidence is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of celecoxib as an addition to conventional therapy for women with ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative primary breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Randomized European Celecoxib Trial (REACT) was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind study conducted in 160 centers across the UK and Germany testing 2 years of adjuvant celecoxib vs placebo among 2639 patients recruited between January 19, 2007, and November 1, 2012, with follow-up 10 years after treatment completion. Eligible patients had completely resected breast cancer with local and systemic therapy according to local practice. Patients with ERBB2-positive or node-negative and T1, grade 1 tumors were not eligible. Randomization was in a 2:1 ratio between celecoxib or placebo. Statistical analysis was performed from May 5, 2019, to March 5, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received celecoxib, 400 mg, or placebo once daily for 2 years. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using Cox proportional hazards regression and log-rank analysis. Follow-up is complete. RESULTS: A total of 2639 patients (median age, 55.2 years [range, 26.8-86.0 years]) were recruited; 1763 received celecoxib, and 876 received placebo. Most patients' tumors (1930 [73%]) were estrogen receptor positive or progesterone receptor positive and ERBB2 negative. A total of 1265 patients (48%) had node-positive disease, and 1111 (42%) had grade 3 tumors. At a median follow-up of 74.3 months (interquartile range, 61.4-93.6 years), DFS events had been reported for 487 patients (19%): 18% for those who received celecoxib (n = 323; 5-year DFS rate = 84%) vs 19% for those who received placebo (n = 164; 5-year DFS rate = 83%); the unadjusted hazard ratio was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.80-1.17; log-rank P = .75). Rates of toxic effects were low across both treatment groups, with no evidence of a difference. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, patients showed no evidence of a DFS benefit for 2 years' treatment with celecoxib compared with placebo as adjuvant treatment of ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Longer-term treatment or use of a higher dose of celecoxib may lead to a DFS benefit, but further studies would be required to test this possibility. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02429427 and isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN48254013.

Synchronous versus sequential chemo-radiotherapy in patients with early stage breast cancer (SECRAB): A randomised, phase III, trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal sequence of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy for breast cancer is unknown. SECRAB assesses whether local control can be improved without increased toxicity. METHODS: SECRAB was a prospective, open-label, multi-centre, phase III trial comparing synchronous to sequential chemo-radiotherapy, conducted in 48 UK centres. Patients with invasive, early stage breast cancer were eligible. Randomisation (performed using random permuted block assignment) was stratified by centre, axillary surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy boost. Permitted chemotherapy regimens included CMF and anthracycline-CMF. Synchronous radiotherapy was administered between cycles two and three for CMF or five and six for anthracycline-CMF. Sequential radiotherapy was delivered on chemotherapy completion. Radiotherapy schedules included 40 Gy/15F over three weeks, and 50 Gy/25F over five weeks. The primary outcome was local recurrence at five and ten years, defined as time to local recurrence, and analysed by intention to treat. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00003893. FINDINGS: Between 02-July-1998 and 25-March-2004, 2297 patients were recruited (1150 synchronous and 1146 sequential). Baseline characteristics were balanced. With 10.2 years median follow-up, the ten-year local recurrence rates were 4.6% and 7.1% in the synchronous and sequential arms respectively (hazard ratio (HR) 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43-0.90; p = 0.012). In a planned sub-group analysis of anthracycline-CMF, the ten-year local recurrence rates difference were 3.5% versus 6.7% respectively (HR 0.48 95% CI: 0.26-0.88; p = 0.018). There was no significant difference in overall or disease-free survival. 24% of patients on the synchronous arm suffered moderate/severe acute skin reactions compared to 15% on the sequential arm (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in late adverse effects apart from telangiectasia (p = 0.03). INTERPRETATION: Synchronous chemo-radiotherapy significantly improved local recurrence rates. This was delivered with an acceptable increase in acute toxicity. The greatest benefit of synchronous chemo-radiation was in patients treated with anthracycline-CMF. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK (CR UK/98/001) and Pharmacia.

The Results of Low-Dose Total Skin Electron Beam Radiation Therapy (TSEB) in Patients With Mycosis Fungoides From the UK Cutaneous Lymphoma Group.

PURPOSE: Total skin electron beam radiation therapy (TSEB) is a very effective treatment of mycosis fungoides. Following reports of similar durations of response to lower doses of TSEB, a low-dose schedule of TSEB was introduced in the United Kingdom. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A protocol of 12 Gy in 8 fractions over a period of 2 weeks was agreed on by use of the Stanford University technique. Data were collected prospectively, and the results were analyzed according to the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-International Society for Cutaneous Lymphomas endpoints (EORTC-ISCL). Toxicity was scored according to CTCAE v4.0 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0). RESULTS: One hundred three patients received treatment, with a median follow-up period of 20.6 months (range, 3.3-53 months). Of these patients, 54 had stage IB disease, 33 had stage IIB, 12 had stage III, and 4 had stage IV. The median age was 68 years (range, 26-91 years). The complete response rate was 18%, the partial response rate was 69%, stable disease was present in 8%, and progression on treatment was found in 5%. In the patients who had a complete response, the median time to relapse was 7.3 months. The median response duration was 11.8 months. Median progression-free survival for all patients was 13.2 months. It was significantly longer, at 26.5 months, in patients with stage IB disease compared with 11.3 months in patients with stage IIB (P=.003; hazard ratio, 2.66) and 10.2 months in patients with stage III (P=.002; hazard ratio, 4.62). The treatment was well tolerated with lower toxicity than higher-dose schedules. CONCLUSIONS: The low-dose TSEB schedule of 12 Gy in 8 fractions over a period of 2 weeks is well tolerated and is an effective option for patients with mycosis fungoides.

Adjuvant zoledronic acid in patients with early breast cancer: final efficacy analysis of the AZURE (BIG 01/04) randomised open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant bisphosphonates in early breast cancer is uncertain. We therefore did a large randomised trial to investigate the effect of the adjuvant use of zoledronic acid on disease-free survival (DFS) in high-risk patients with early breast cancer. METHODS: In the AZURE trial, an open-label, international, multicentre, randomised, controlled, parallel-group phase 3 trial, women (age ≥18 years) with stage II or III breast cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) by a central automated 24-h computer-generated telephone minimisation system (balanced for number of involved axillary lymph nodes, tumour stage, oestrogen receptor status, type and timing of systemic therapy, menopausal status, statin use, and treatment centre) to receive standard adjuvant systemic treatment alone (control group) or with 4 mg intravenous zoledronic acid every 3-4 weeks for six doses, then every 3 months for eight doses, followed by every 6 months for five doses, for a total of 5 years of treatment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints were invasive DFS (IDFS), overall survival, time to bone metastases, time to distant recurrence, and subgroup analyses of variables included in the randomisation. All patients have completed study treatment. Results from the intention-to-treat final analysis of this fully recruited study are presented after a median follow-up of 84 months (IQR 66-93). This final efficacy analysis was planned to take place after 940 DFS events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00072020. FINDINGS: 3360 women were recruited from 174 centres in seven countries between Sept 4, 2003, and Feb 16, 2006. The number of DFS events did not differ between groups: 493 in the control group and 473 in the zoledronic acid group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·94, 95% CI 0·82-1·06; p=0·30). IDFS (HR 0·93, 95% CI 0·82-1·05; p=0·22), overall survival (0·93, 0·81-1·08; p=0·37), and distant recurrences (0·93, 0·81-1·07; p=0·29) were much the same in both groups. Zoledronic acid reduced the development of bone metastases, both as a first event (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·63-0·96; p=0·020) and at any time during follow-up (0·81, 0·68-0·97; p=0·022). The effects of zoledronic acid on DFS were not affected by oestrogen-receptor status. However, zoledronic acid improved IDFS in those who were over 5 years since menopause at trial entry (n=1041; HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·63-0·96) but not in all other (premenopause, perimenopause, and unknown status) menopausal groups (n=2318; HR 1·03, 95% CI 0·89-1·20). 33 cases of suspected osteonecrosis of the jaw have been reported, with 26 confirmed on central review, all in the zoledronic acid group (1·7%, 95% CI 1·0-2·4). INTERPRETATION: These results suggest no overall benefit from the addition of zoledronic acid to standard adjuvant treatments for early breast cancer. However, zoledronic acid does reduce the development of bone metastases and, for women with established menopause, improved disease outcomes. FUNDING: Novartis Global and NIHR Cancer Research Network.

Oral ibandronic acid versus intravenous zoledronic acid in treatment of bone metastases from breast cancer: a randomised, open label, non-inferiority phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Bisphosphonates are routinely used in the treatment of metastatic bone disease from breast cancer to reduce pain and bone destruction. Zoledronic acid given by intravenous infusion has been widely used, but places a substantial logistical burden on both patient and hospital. As a result, the use of oral ibandronic acid has increased, despite the absence of comparative data. In the ZICE trial, we compared oral ibandronic acid with intravenous zoledronic acid for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer to bone. METHODS: This phase 3, open-label, parallel group active-controlled, multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 study was done in 99 UK hospitals. Eligibility criteria included at least one radiologically confirmed bone metastasis from a histologically confirmed breast cancer. Patients with ECOG performance status 0 to 2 and clinical decision to treat with bisphosphonates within 3 months of randomisation were randomly assigned to receive 96 weeks of treatment with either intravenous zoledronic acid at 4 mg every 3-4 weeks or oral ibandronic acid 50 mg daily. Randomisation (1:1) was done via a central computerised system within stratified block sizes of four. Randomisation was stratified on whether patients had current or planned treatment with chemotherapy; current or planned treatment with hormone therapy; and whether they had a previous skeletal-related event within the last 3 months or had planned radiotherapy treatment to the bone or planned orthopaedic surgery due to bone metastases. The primary non-inferiority endpoint was the frequency and timing of skeletal-related events over 96 weeks, analysed using a per-protocol analysis. All active (non-withdrawn) patients have now reached the 96-week timepoint and the trial is now in long-term follow-up. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326820. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2006, and Oct 4, 2010, 705 patients were randomly assigned to receive ibandronic acid and 699 to receive zoledronic acid; three patients withdrew immediately after randomisation. The per-protocol analysis included 654 patients in the ibandronic acid group and 672 in the zoledronic acid group. Annual rates of skeletal-related events were 0·499 (95% CI 0·454-0·549) with ibandronic acid and 0·435 (0·393-0·480) with zoledronic acid; the rate ratio for skeletal-related events was 1·148 (95% CI 0·967-1·362). The upper CI was greater than the margin of non-inferiority of 1·08; therefore, we could not reject the null hypothesis that ibandronic acid was inferior to zoledronic acid. More patients in the zoledronic acid group had renal toxic effects than in the ibandronic acid group (226 [32%] of 697 vs 172 [24%] of 704) but rates of osteonecrosis of the jaw were low in both groups (nine [1%] of 697 vs five [<1%] of 704). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were fatigue (97 [14%] of 697 patients allocated zoledronic acid vs 98 [14%] of 704 allocated ibandronic acid), increased bone pain (91 [corrected] [13%] vs 85 [corrected] [12%]), joint pain (41 [corrected] [6%] vs 38 [5%]), infection (31 [5%] vs 23 [corrected] [3%]), and nausea or vomiting (38 [5%] vs 41 [6%]). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that zoledronic acid is preferable to ibandronic acid in preventing skeletal-related events caused by bone metastases. However, both drugs have acceptable side-effect profiles and the oral formulation is more convenient, and could still be considered if the patient has a strong preference or if difficulties occur with intravenous infusions. FUNDING: Roche Products Ltd (educational grant), supported by National Institute for Health Research Cancer Network, following endorsement by Cancer Research UK (CRUKE/04/022).

Brachial arterial temperature as an indicator of core temperature: proof of concept and potential applications.

There is potential for heat loss and hypothermia during anesthesia and also for hyperthermia if heat conservation and active warming measures are not accurately titrated. Accurate temperature monitoring is particularly important in procedures in which the patient is actively cooled and then rewarmed such as during cardiopulmonary bypass surgery (CPB). We simultaneously measured core, nasopharyngeal, and brachial artery temperatures to investigate the last named as a potential peripheral temperature monitoring site. Ten patients undergoing hypothermic CPB were instrumented for simultaneous monitoring of temperatures in the pulmonary artery (PA), aortic arterial inflow (AI), nasopharynx (NP), and brachial artery (BA). Core temperature was defined as PA temperature before and after CPB and the AI temperature during CPB. Mean deviations of BA and NP temperatures from core temperature were calculated for three steady-state periods (before, during, and after CPB). Mean deviation of BA and NP temperatures from AI temperature was also calculated during active rewarming. A total of 1862 measurements were obtained and logged from eight patients. Mean BA and NP deviations from core temperature across the steady-state periods (before, during, and after CBP) were, respectively: .23 +/- .25, -.26 +/- .3, and -.09 +/- .05 degrees C (BA), and .11 +/- .19, -.1 +/- .47, and -.04 +/- .3 degrees C (NP). During steady-state periods, there was no evidence of a difference between the mean BA and NP deviation. During active rewarming, the mean difference between the BA and AI temperatures was .14 +/- .36 degrees C. During this period, NP temperature lagged behind AI and BA temperatures by up to 41 minutes and was up to 5.3 degres C lower than BA (mean difference between BA and NP temperatures was 1.22 +/- .58 degrees C). The BA temperature is an adequate surrogate for core temperature. It also accurately tracks the changing AI temperature during rewarming and is therefore potentially useful in detecting a hyperthermic perfusate, which might cause cerebral hyperthermia.

Three cytotoxic drugs combined with pelvic radiation and as maintenance chemotherapy for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA): long-term follow-up of a phase II pilot study using 5-fluorouracil, mitomycin C and cisplatin.

PURPOSE: Phase III trials in the 1990s for squamous cell carcinoma of the anus (SCCA) demonstrated 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and mitomycinC (MMC) chemoradiation (CRT) improved outcome compared to radiation (RT) alone, but local recurrence remained significant. This prospective pilot study intensified treatment by integrating 3 cytotoxic drugs into CRT and maintenance chemotherapy. METHODS: CRT comprised 5-FU 1000 mg/m(2) days 1-4,29-32, MMC 10 mg/m(2) day 1 and Cisplatin (CDDP) 60 mg/m(2) days1 and 29, with 45 Gy in 25 daily fractions, followed by a 15 Gy boost. Maintenance chemotherapy started 4-8 weeks later, three courses repeated every 21 days, using 5-FU/CDDP doses above, with MMC reduced to 7 mg/m(2) and administered with the first and third cycles. RESULTS: In CRT only 14/19 (74%) patients received protocol-defined chemotherapy doses in week 5. Compliance to maintenance chemotherapy was poor. 15/19 started cycle 1, 13 started cycle 2 and 11 cycle 3. 17/19 experienced G3-G5 toxicity (16 Grade 3/4 and one Grade 5). 16/19 patients (84%) remain alive and disease-free - median follow-up 79 months (34-115). CONCLUSIONS: Despite favourable results, the significant toxicity and low compliance of the three-drug CRT regimen used, deemed it unsuitable for testing in a phase III trial. A two-drug maintenance regimen was explored in the ACT II trial.

Breast-cancer adjuvant therapy with zoledronic acid.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest that the adjuvant use of bisphosphonates reduces rates of recurrence and death in patients with early-stage breast cancer. We conducted a study to determine whether treatment with zoledronic acid, in addition to standard adjuvant therapy, would improve disease outcomes in such patients. METHODS: In this open-label phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 3360 patients to receive standard adjuvant systemic therapy either with or without zoledronic acid. The zoledronic acid was administered every 3 to 4 weeks for 6 doses and then every 3 to 6 months to complete 5 years of treatment. The primary end point of the study was disease-free survival. A second interim analysis revealed that a prespecified boundary for lack of benefit had been crossed. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 59 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the primary end point, with a rate of disease-free survival of 77% in each group (adjusted hazard ratio in the zoledronic acid group, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.13; P=0.79). Disease recurrence or death occurred in 377 patients in the zoledronic acid group and 375 of those in the control group. The numbers of deaths--243 in the zoledronic acid group and 276 in the control group--were also similar, resulting in rates of overall survival of 85.4% in the zoledronic acid group and 83.1% in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.01; P=0.07). In the zoledronic acid group, there were 17 confirmed cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw (cumulative incidence, 1.1%; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.7; P<0.001) and 9 suspected cases; there were no cases in the control group. Rates of other adverse effects were similar in the two study groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings do not support the routine use of zoledronic acid in the adjuvant management of breast cancer. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and the National Cancer Research Network; AZURE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN79831382.).

Impact of short-course preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer on patients' quality of life: data from the Medical Research Council CR07/National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group C016 randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The Medical Research Council CR07/National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group C016 (MRC CR07/NCIC CTG C016) trial showed that, in patients with operable rectal cancer, short-course preoperative radiotherapy (PRE) reduced the rate of local recurrence compared with surgery followed by selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy for patients with a positive circumferential resection margin. However, the advantages of giving PRE to all patients needs to be balanced against any negative impact on patients' quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All 1,350 patients were asked to complete the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36-item (MOS SF-36) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Colorectal 38-item (EORTC QLQ-CR38) questionnaires. A priori hypotheses related to the impact of treatment on sexual, bowel, and physical function and general health. RESULTS: Male sexual dysfunction was significantly increased following surgery (P < .001), although there was no difference between treatment arms. However, a treatment difference had emerged at 6 months (PRE patients reporting significantly greater dysfunction; P = .004), which persisted out to at least 2 years (an insufficient number of female patients completed the sexual dysfunction questions to draw firm conclusions). Both treatment groups reported similar levels of decreased physical function at 3 months, but thereafter it returned to baseline levels. There was no evidence of any major changes between treatments or time points in terms of general health or bowel function, but exploratory analysis indicated a significant (P = .006 at 2 years) increase in the level of fecal incontinence with PRE. CONCLUSION: These results from a large randomized trial using validated patient-completed questionnaires show that, for males, the main adverse effect was sexual dysfunction, and the main cause of this was surgery, but that PRE also affected sexual and some aspects of bowel functioning.

The use of herbal medicines by people with cancer: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Between 7% and 48% of cancer patients report taking herbal medicines after diagnosis. Because of the possibility of unwanted side effects or interactions with conventional treatments, people with cancer are generally advised to tell the professionals treating them if they are taking any form of medication, including herbal medicines and supplements. Studies suggest that only about half do so and that the professionals themselves have at best very limited knowledge and feel unable to give informed advice. This study is intended to inform the future development of information resources for cancer patients, survivors and healthcare professionals including tools for use before or during consultation to make it easier for patients to mention, and for healthcare professionals to ask about, use of herbal medications. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a three-phase study. In phase 1, a systematic review of the literature on self-medication with herbal medicines among UK populations living with cancer will establish the current evidence base on use of herbal medicine, sources of information, characteristics and motivations. This will allow us to better understand what aspects need further investigation and inform the topic guide for a qualitative study (phase 2). Six focus groups of six to eight cancer patients who have used at least one herbal preparation since diagnosis will explore behaviour, beliefs, knowledge, information sources and needs in an informal conversational setting.Informed by the findings of the systematic review and qualitative study, in phase 3 we will construct and pilot a questionnaire for a future large-scale survey to quantify and prioritise people's beliefs, needs and information preferences. DISCUSSION: Despite known interactions with conventional cancer treatments and contraindications for some herbal remedies with specific cancers, reliable information resources for patients are very limited. Identifying cancer patients' information needs and preferences is the first step in creating a suitable resource for both the public and the professionals advising them.

Preoperative radiotherapy versus selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer (MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG C016): a multicentre, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative or postoperative radiotherapy reduces the risk of local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer. However, improvements in surgery and histopathological assessment mean that the role of radiotherapy needs to be reassessed. We compared short-course preoperative radiotherapy versus initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: We undertook a randomised trial in 80 centres in four countries. 1350 patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the rectum were randomly assigned, by a minimisation procedure, to short-course preoperative radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions; n=674) or to initial surgery with selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions with concurrent 5-fluorouracil) restricted to patients with involvement of the circumferential resection margin (n=676). The primary outcome measure was local recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842. FINDINGS: At the time of analysis, which included all participants, 330 patients had died (157 preoperative radiotherapy group vs 173 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy), and median follow-up of surviving patients was 4 years. 99 patients had developed local recurrence (27 preoperative radiotherapy vs 72 selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We noted a reduction of 61% in the relative risk of local recurrence for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.39, 95% CI 0.27-0.58, p<0.0001), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6.2% (95% CI 5.3-7.1) (4.4% preoperative radiotherapy vs 10.6% selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy). We recorded a relative improvement in disease-free survival of 24% for patients receiving preoperative radiotherapy (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.94, p=0.013), and an absolute difference at 3 years of 6.0% (95% CI 5.3-6.8) (77.5%vs 71.5%). Overall survival did not differ between the groups (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.73-1.13, p=0.40). INTERPRETATION: Taken with results from other randomised trials, our findings provide convincing and consistent evidence that short-course preoperative radiotherapy is an effective treatment for patients with operable rectal cancer.

Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Local recurrence rates in operable rectal cancer are improved by radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) and surgical techniques such as total mesorectal excision. However, the contributions of surgery and radiotherapy to outcomes are unclear. We assessed the effect of the involvement of the circumferential resection margin and the plane of surgery achieved. METHODS: In this prospective study, the plane of surgery achieved and the involvement of the circumferential resection margin were assessed by local pathologists, using a standard pathological protocol in 1156 patients with operable rectal cancer from the CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 trial, which compared short-course (5 days) preoperative radiotherapy and selective postoperative chemoradiotherapy, between March, 1998, and August, 2005. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN 28785842. FINDINGS: 128 patients (11%) had involvement of the circumferential resection margin, and the plane of surgery achieved was classified as good (mesorectal) in 604 (52%), intermediate (intramesorectal) in 398 (34%), and poor (muscularis propria plane) in 154 (13%). We found that both a negative circumferential resection margin and a superior plane of surgery achieved were associated with low local recurrence rates. Hazard ratio (HR) was 0.32 (95% CI 0.16-0.63, p=0.0011) with 3-year local recurrence rates of 6% (5-8%) and 17% (10-26%) for patients who were negative and positive for circumferential resection margin, respectively. For plane of surgery achieved, HRs for mesorectal and intramesorectal groups compared with the muscularis propria group were 0.32 (0.16-0.64) and 0.48 (0.25-0.93), respectively. At 3 years, the estimated local recurrence rates were 4% (3-6%) for mesorectal, 7% (5-11%) for intramesorectal, and 13% (8-21%) for muscularis propria groups. The benefit of short-course preoperative radiotherapy did not differ in the three plane of surgery groups (p=0.30 for trend). Patients in the short-course preoperative radiotherapy group who had a resection in the mesorectal plane had a 3-year local recurrence rate of only 1%. INTERPRETATION: In rectal cancer, the plane of surgery achieved is an important prognostic factor for local recurrence. Short-course preoperative radiotherapy reduced the rate of local recurrence for all three plane of surgery groups, almost abolishing local recurrence in short-course preoperative radiotherapy patients who had a resection in the mesorectal plane. The plane of surgery achieved should therefore be assessed and reported routinely.

Epirubicin and cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil as adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The National Epirubicin Adjuvant Trial (NEAT) and the BR9601 trial examined the efficacy of anthracyclines in the adjuvant treatment of early breast cancer. METHODS: In NEAT, we compared four cycles of epirubicin followed by four cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) with six cycles of CMF alone. In the BR9601 trial, we compared four cycles of epirubicin followed by four cycles of CMF, with eight cycles of CMF alone every 3 weeks. The primary end points were relapse-free and overall survival. The secondary end points were adverse effects, dose intensity, and quality of life. RESULTS: The two trials included 2391 women with early breast cancer; the median follow-up was 48 months. Relapse-free and overall survival rates were significantly higher in the epirubicin-CMF groups than in the CMF-alone groups (2-year relapse-free survival, 91% vs. 85%; 5-year relapse-free survival, 76% vs. 69%; 2-year overall survival, 95% vs. 92%; 5-year overall survival, 82% vs. 75%; P<0.001 by the log-rank test for all comparisons). Hazard ratios for relapse (or death without relapse) (0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.82; P<0.001) and death from any cause (0.67; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.82; P<0.001) favored epirubicin plus CMF over CMF alone. Independent prognostic factors were nodal status, tumor grade, tumor size, and estrogen-receptor status (P<0.001 for all four factors) and the presence or absence of vascular or lymphatic invasion (P=0.01). These factors did not significantly interact with the effect of epirubicin plus CMF. The overall incidence of adverse effects was significantly higher with epirubicin plus CMF than with CMF alone but did not significantly affect the delivered-dose intensity or the quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Epirubicin plus CMF is superior to CMF alone as adjuvant treatment for early breast cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00003577 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Day surgery preoperative anxiety reduction and coping strategies.

Hospitalization, even in patients who are not faced with the prospect of surgery, is known to cause anxiety. One may, therefore, expect some degree of anxiety in patients attending for day surgery. Anxiety provokes a physiological stress response, which impedes the healing process. Thus, the reduction of preoperative anxiety is widely accepted as part of nursing care. This article investigates the coping strategies that patients adopt and the suitability of current anxiety-reduction interventions. It argues that individual coping styles do not remain static but adapt according to need and proposes that, as a result of lack of awareness, the therapeutic potential of the nurse-patient relationship in anxiety-reduction is being overshadowed by uncertainty-reduction approaches which place a disproportionate emphasis on the provision of information.

Nutritional care: implications and recommendations for nursing.

Nutrition is a basic human requirement with both physiological and psychosocial dimensions that affect well-being. In times of illness ensuring adequate nutrition is particularly important because of the central part it plays in healing and recovery. This article explores the premise that current nutritional care in nursing practice is often inadequate with the result that patients' nutritional requirements are not met. It investigates the causative factors of poor nutritional care in nursing practice, the implications of such practice for both the patient and the professional, and proposes a number of recommendations for future change.