| 1. |
- Johansson, Annelie, et al.
(författare)
-
Twenty-Year Benefit From Adjuvant Goserelin and Tamoxifen in Premenopausal Patients With Breast Cancer in a Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 40:35, s. 4071-4082
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSETo assess the long-term (20-year) endocrine therapy benefit in premenopausal patients with breast cancer.METHODSSecondary analysis of the Stockholm trial (STO-5, 1990-1997) randomly assigning 924 premenopausal patients to 2 years of goserelin (3.6 mg subcutaneously once every 28 days), tamoxifen (40 mg orally once daily), combined goserelin and tamoxifen, or no adjuvant endocrine therapy (control) is performed. Random assignment was stratified by lymph node status; lymph node-positive patients (n = 459) were allocated to standard chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil). Primary tumor immunohistochemistry (n = 731) and gene expression profiling (n = 586) were conducted in 2020. The 70-gene signature identified genomic low-risk and high-risk patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis, multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression, and multivariable time-varying flexible parametric modeling assessed the long-term distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI). Swedish high-quality registries allowed a complete follow-up of 20 years.RESULTSIn estrogen receptor-positive patients (n = 584, median age 47 years), goserelin, tamoxifen, and the combination significantly improved long-term distant recurrence-free interval compared with control (multivariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.75, HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.87, and HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.94, respectively). Significant goserelin-tamoxifen interaction was observed (P = .016). Genomic low-risk patients (n = 305) significantly benefitted from tamoxifen (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.60), and genomic high-risk patients (n = 158) from goserelin (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.54). Increased risk from the addition of tamoxifen to goserelin was seen in genomic high-risk patients (HR, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.39 to 8.07). Moreover, long-lasting 20-year tamoxifen benefit was seen in genomic low-risk patients, whereas genomic high-risk patients had early goserelin benefit.CONCLUSIONThis study shows 20-year benefit from 2 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor-positive premenopausal patients and suggests differential treatment benefit on the basis of tumor genomic characteristics. Combined goserelin and tamoxifen therapy showed no benefit over single treatment. Long-term follow-up to assess treatment benefit is critical.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lagerlöf, Ingemar, et al.
(författare)
-
Limited, But Not Eliminated, Excess Long-Term Morbidity in Stage I-IIA Hodgkin Lymphoma Treated With Doxorubicin, Bleomycin, Vinblastine, and Dacarbazine and Limited-Field Radiotherapy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 40:13, s. 1487-1496
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE Balancing disease control and toxicity from chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) when treating early-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is important. Available data on long-term toxicity after RT for cHL mostly refer to RT techniques no longer in use. We aimed to describe long-term toxicity from modern limited-field (LF)-RT after two or four cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD). PATIENTS AND METHODS This study included all patients with cHL treated with two or four cycles of ABVD and 30 Gy LF-RT during 1999-2005 in Sweden. Patients (n = 215) and comparators (n = 860), matched for age, gender, and region of residence, were cross-checked against national health registries for malignancies, diseases of the circulatory system (DCS), and diseases of the respiratory system (DRS) from the day of diagnosis of cHL. RESULTS The risk of a malignancy was higher for patients than comparators, hazard ratio (HR) 1.5 (95% CI, 1.0 to 2.4), as was the risk for DCS 1.5 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.0) and for DRS 2.6 (95% CI, 1.6 to 4.3). The median followup was 16 years (range, 12-19 years). Of individual diagnoses in DCS, only venous thromboembolism was statistically significantly elevated. If the first 6 months (ie, time of active treatment for cHL) were excluded and censoring at relapse of cHL or diagnosis of any malignancy, the increased HR for venous thromboembolism diminished. Most of the excess risk for DRS consisted of asthma, HR 3.5 (95% CI, 1.8 to 6.8). Patients diagnosed with DRS were significantly younger than comparators. CONCLUSION Compared with toxicity from earlier RT techniques, excess morbidity was not eliminated, but lower than previously reported. The elevated risk of DRS was driven by diagnosis of asthma, which could in part be explained by misdiagnosis of persisting pulmonary toxicity.
|
|
| 3. |
- Monk, Bradley J., et al.
(författare)
-
A Randomized, Phase III Trial to Evaluate Rucaparib Monotherapy as Maintenance Treatment in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer (ATHENA-MONO/GOG-3020/ENGOT-ov45)
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 40:34, s. 3952-3964
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSEATHENA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: ) was designed to evaluate rucaparib first-line maintenance treatment in a broad patient population, including those without BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA) mutations or other evidence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), or high-risk clinical characteristics such as residual disease. We report the results from the ATHENA-MONO comparison of rucaparib versus placebo.METHODSPatients with stage III-IV high-grade ovarian cancer undergoing surgical cytoreduction (R0/complete resection permitted) and responding to first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomly assigned 4:1 to oral rucaparib 600 mg twice a day or placebo. Stratification factors were HRD test status, residual disease after chemotherapy, and timing of surgery. The primary end point of investigator-assessed progression-free survival was assessed in a step-down procedure, first in the HRD population (BRCA-mutant or BRCA wild-type/loss of heterozygosity high tumor), and then in the intent-to-treat population.RESULTSAs of March 23, 2022 (data cutoff), 427 and 111 patients were randomly assigned to rucaparib or placebo, respectively (HRD population: 185 v 49). Median progression-free survival (95% CI) was 28.7 months (23.0 to not reached) with rucaparib versus 11.3 months (9.1 to 22.1) with placebo in the HRD population (log-rank P = .0004; hazard ratio [HR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.72); 20.2 months (15.2 to 24.7) versus 9.2 months (8.3 to 12.2) in the intent-to-treat population (log-rank P < .0001; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.68); and 12.1 months (11.1 to 17.7) versus 9.1 months (4.0 to 12.2) in the HRD-negative population (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.95). The most common grade & GE; 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were anemia (rucaparib, 28.7% v placebo, 0%) and neutropenia (14.6% v 0.9%).CONCLUSIONRucaparib monotherapy is effective as first-line maintenance, conferring significant benefit versus placebo in patients with advanced ovarian cancer with and without HRD.
|
|
| 4. |
- Olofsson Bagge, Roger, et al.
(författare)
-
Isolated Hepatic Perfusion With Melphalan for Patients With Isolated Uveal Melanoma Liver Metastases : A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial (the SCANDIUM Trial)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 41:16, s. 3042-3050
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: About half of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma present with isolated liver metastasis, in whom the median survival is 6-12 months. The few systemic treatment options available only moderately prolong survival. Isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) with melphalan is a regional treatment option, but prospective efficacy and safety data are lacking.METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial, patients with previously untreated isolated liver metastases from uveal melanoma were randomly assigned to receive a one-time treatment with IHP with melphalan or best alternative care (control group). The primary end point was overall survival at 24 months. Here, we report the secondary outcomes of response according to RECIST 1.1 criteria, progression-free survival (PFS), hepatic PFS (hPFS), and safety.RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were randomly assigned, and 87 patients were assigned to either IHP (n = 43) or a control group receiving the investigator's choice of treatment (n = 44). In the control group, 49% received chemotherapy, 39% immune checkpoint inhibitors, and 9% locoregional treatment other than IHP. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the overall response rates (ORRs) were 40% versus 4.5% in the IHP and control groups, respectively (P < .0001). The median PFS was 7.4 months versus 3.3 months (P < .0001), with a hazard ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.36), and the median hPFS was 9.1 months versus 3.3 months (P < .0001), both favoring the IHP arm. There were 11 treatment-related serious adverse events in the IHP group compared with seven in the control group. There was one treatment-related death in the IHP group.CONCLUSION: IHP treatment resulted in superior ORR, hPFS, and PFS compared with best alternative care in previously untreated patients with isolated liver metastases from primary uveal melanoma.
|
|
| 5. |
- Oonk, Maaike H. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Radiotherapy Versus Inguinofemoral Lymphadenectomy as Treatment for Vulvar Cancer Patients With Micrometastases in the Sentinel Node : Results of GROINSS-V II
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 39:32, s. 3623-3632
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE The Groningen International Study on Sentinel nodes in Vulvar cancer (GROINSS-V)-II investigated whether inguinofemoral radiotherapy is a safe alternative to inguinofemoral lymphadenectomy (IFL) in vulvar cancer patients with a metastatic sentinel node (SN). METHODS GROINSS-V-II was a prospective multicenter phase-II single-arm treatment trial, including patients with early-stage vulvar cancer (diameter < 4 cm) without signs of lymph node involvement at imaging, who had primary surgical treatment (local excision with SN biopsy). Where the SN was involved (metastasis of any size), inguinofemoral radiotherapy was given (50 Gy). The primary end point was isolated groin recurrence rate at 24 months. Stopping rules were defined for the occurrence of groin recurrences. RESULTS From December 2005 until October 2016, 1,535 eligible patients were registered. The SN showed metastasis in 322 (21.0%) patients. In June 2010, with 91 SN-positive patients included, the stopping rule was activated because the isolated groin recurrence rate in this group went above our predefined threshold. Among 10 patients with an isolated groin recurrence, nine had SN metastases > 2 mm and/or extracapsular spread. The protocol was amended so that those with SN macrometastases (> 2 mm) underwent standard of care (IFL), whereas patients with SN micrometastases (<= 2 mm) continued to receive inguinofemoral radiotherapy. Among 160 patients with SN micrometastases, 126 received inguinofemoral radiotherapy, with an ipsilateral isolated groin recurrence rate at 2 years of 1.6%. Among 162 patients with SN macrometastases, the isolated groin recurrence rate at 2 years was 22% in those who underwent radiotherapy, and 6.9% in those who underwent IFL (P = .011). Treatment-related morbidity after radiotherapy was less frequent compared with IFL. CONCLUSION Inguinofemoral radiotherapy is a safe alternative for IFL in patients with SN micrometastases, with minimal morbidity. For patients with SN macrometastasis, radiotherapy with a total dose of 50 Gy resulted in more isolated groin recurrences compared with IFL.
|
|
| 6. |
- Helgadottir, H., et al.
(författare)
-
Survival after introduction of adjuvant treatment in stage III melanoma: a nationwide registry-based study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Jnci-Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press. - 0027-8874 .- 1460-2105. ; 41:16
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Adjuvant treatments with PD-1 and BRAF+MEK inhibitors statistically significantly prolong recurrence-free survival in stage III cutaneous melanoma. Yet, the effect on overall survival is still unclear. Based on recurrence-free survival outcomes, these treatments have been approved and widely implemented. The treatments have considerable side effects and costs, and overall survival effect remains a highly anticipated outcome. Methods Clinical and histopathological parameters were obtained from the Swedish Melanoma Registry for patients diagnosed with stage III melanoma between 2016 and 2020. The patients were divided depending on if they were diagnosed before or from July 2018, based on the timepoint when adjuvant treatment was introduced in Sweden. Patients were followed up until the end of 2021. In this cohort study, melanoma-specific and overall survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-regression analyses. Results There were 1371 patients diagnosed with stage III primary melanoma in Sweden in 2016-2020. The 2-year overall survival rates, comparing the 634 patients in the precohort and the 737 in the postcohort, were 84.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 81.4% to 87.3%) and 86.1% (95% CI = 83.4% to 89.0%), respectively, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.70 to 1.19, P = .51). Further, no statistically significant overall or melanoma-specific survival differences were seen when comparing the precohort and the postcohort in different subgroups for age, sex, or tumor characteristics. Conclusions In this nationwide population-based and registry-based study, no survival benefit was detected in patients diagnosed before or after the implementation of adjuvant treatment in stage III melanoma. These findings encourage a careful assessment of the current recommendations on adjuvant treatment.
|
|
