| 1. |
- Fransson, Per, et al.
(författare)
-
Ultra-hypofractionated versus conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for prostate cancer (HYPO-RT-PC) : patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 22:2, s. 235-245
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The HYPO-RT-PC trial compared conventionally fractionated radiotherapy with ultra-hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients with localised prostate cancer. Ultra-hypofractionation was non-inferior to conventional fractionation regarding 5-year failure-free survival and toxicity. We aimed to assess whether patient-reported quality of life (QOL) differs between conventional fractionation and ultra-hypofractionation up to 6 years after treatment in the HYPO-RT-PC trial.METHODS: HYPO-RT-PC is a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial done in 12 centres (seven university hospitals and five county hospitals) in Sweden and Denmark. Inclusion criteria were histologically verified intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer (defined as T1c-T3a with one or two of the following risk factors: stage T3a; Gleason score ≥7; and prostate-specific antigen 10-20 ng/mL with no evidence of lymph node involvement or distant metastases), age up to 75 years, and WHO performance status 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to conventional fractionation (78·0 Gy in 39 fractions, 5 days per week for 8 weeks) or ultra-hypofractionation (42·7 Gy in seven fractions, 3 days per week for 2·5 weeks) via a minimisation algorithm with stratification by trial centre, T-stage, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen. QOL was measured using the validated Prostate Cancer Symptom Scale (PCSS) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at baseline, the end of radiotherapy, months 3, 6, 12, and 24 after radiotherapy, every other year thereafter up to 10 years, and at 15 years. The primary endpoint (failure-free survival) has been reported elsewhere. Here we report QOL, a secondary endpoint analysed in the per-protocol population, up to 6 years after radiotherapy. The HYPO-RT-PC trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN45905321.FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2005, and Nov 4, 2015, 1200 patients were enrolled and 1180 were randomly assigned (conventional fractionation n=591, ultra-hypofractionation n=589); 1165 patients (conventional fractionation n=582, ultra-hypofractionation n=583) were included in this QOL analysis. 158 (71%) of 223 patients in the conventional fractionation group and 146 (66%) of 220 in the ultra-hypofractionation group completed questionnaires at 6 years. The median follow-up was 48 months (IQR 25-72). In seven of ten bowel symptoms or problems the proportion of patients with clinically relevant deteriorations at the end of radiotherapy was significantly higher in the ultra-hypofractionation group than in the conventional fractionation group (stool frequency [p<0·0001], rush to toilet [p=0·0013], flatulence [p=0·0013], bowel cramp [p<0·0001], mucus [p=0·0014], blood in stool [p<0·0001], and limitation in daily activity [p=0·0014]). There were no statistically significant differences in the proportions of patients with clinically relevant acute urinary symptoms or problems (total 14 items) and sexual functioning between the two treatment groups at end of radiotherapy. Thereafter, there were no clinically relevant differences in urinary, bowel, or sexual functioning between the groups. At the 6-year follow-up there was no difference in the incidence of clinically relevant deterioration between the groups for overall urinary bother (43 [33%] of 132 for conventional fractionation vs 33 [28%] of 120 for ultra-hypofractionation; mean difference 5·1% [95% CI -4·4 to 14·6]; p=0·38), overall bowel bother (43 [33%] of 129 vs 34 [28%] of 123; 5·7% [-3·8 to 15·2]; p=0·33), overall sexual bother (75 [60%] of 126 vs 59 [50%] of 117; 9·1% [-1·4 to 19·6]; p=0·15), or global health/QOL (56 [42%] of 134 vs 46 [37%] of 125; 5·0% [-5·0 to 15·0]; p=0·41).INTERPRETATION: Although acute toxicity was higher for ultra-hypofractionation than conventional fractionation, this long-term patient-reported QOL analysis shows that ultra-hypofractionation was as well tolerated as conventional fractionation up to 6 years after completion of treatment. These findings support the use of ultra-hypofractionation radiotherapy for intermediate-to-high-risk prostate cancer.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mulder, Renée L., et al.
(författare)
-
Communication and ethical considerations for fertility preservation for patients with childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer : recommendations from the PanCareLIFE Consortium and the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group
- 2021
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 22:2, s. 68-80
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Patients with childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer who will be treated with gonadotoxic therapies are at increased risk for infertility. Many patients and their families desire biological children but effective communication about treatment-related infertility risk and procedures for fertility preservation does not always happen. The PanCareLIFE Consortium and the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group reviewed the literature and developed a clinical practice guideline that provides recommendations for ongoing communication methods for fertility preservation for patients who were diagnosed with childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer at age 25 years or younger and their families. Moreover, the guideline panel formulated considerations of the ethical implications that are associated with these procedures. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to grade the evidence and recommendations. In this clinical practice guideline, existing evidence and international expertise are combined to develop transparent recommendations that are easy to use to facilitate ongoing communication between health-care providers and patients with childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer who might be at high risk for fertility impairment and their families.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Bahadoer, Renu R., et al.
(författare)
-
Short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy before total mesorectal excision (TME) versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME, and optional adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (RAPIDO) : a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 22:1, s. 29-42
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Systemic relapses remain a major problem in locally advanced rectal cancer. Using short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy and delayed surgery, the Rectal cancer And Preoperative Induction therapy followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial aimed to reduce distant metastases without compromising locoregional control. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial, participants were recruited from 54 centres in the Netherlands, Sweden, Spain, Slovenia, Denmark, Norway, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, had a biopsy-proven, newly diagnosed, primary, locally advanced rectal adenocardnoma, which was classified as high risk on pelvic MRI (with at least one of the following criteria: clinical tumour [cT] stage cT4a or cT4b, extramural vascular invasion, clinical nodal [cN] stage cN2, involved mesorectal fascia, or enlarged lateral lymph nodes), were mentally and physically fit for chemotherapy, and could be assessed for staging within S weeks before randomisation. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a management system with a randomly varying block design (each block size randomly chosen to contain two to four allocations), stratified by centre, ECOG performance status, cT stage, and cN stage, to either the experimental or standard of care group. All investigators remained masked for the primary endpoint until a prespecified number of events was reached. Patients allocated to the experimental treatment group received short-course radiotherapy (5 x 5 Gy over a maximum of 8 days) followed by six cycles of CAPDX chemotherapy (capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) orally twice daily on days 1-14, oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, and a chemotherapy-free interval between days 15-21) or nine cycles of FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1, leucovorin [folinic acid] 200 mg/m 2 intravenously on days 1 and 2, followed by bolus fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) intravenously and fluorouracil 600 mg/m 2 intravenously for 22 h on days 1 and 2, and a chemotherapy-free interval between days 3-14) followed by total mesorectal excision. Choice of CAPDX or FOLFOX4 was per physician discretion or hospital policy. Patients allocated to the standard of care group received 28 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy up to 50.4 Gy or 25 fractions of 2.0 Gy up to 50.0 Gy (per physician discretion or hospital policy), with concomitant twice-daily oral capecitabine 825 mg/m(2) followed by total mesorectal excision and, if stipulated by hospital policy, adjuvant chemotherapy with eight cycles of CAPDX or 12 cycles of FOLFOX4. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-related treatment failure, defined as the first occurrence of locoregional failure, distant metastasis, new primary colorectal tumour, or treatment-related death, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed by intention to treat. This study is registered with the EudraCT, 2010-023957-12, and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01558921, and is now complete. Findings Between June 21,2011, and June 2,2016,920 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a treatment, of whom 912 were eligible (462 in the experimental group; 450 in the standard of care group). Median follow-up was 4.6 years (IQR 3.5-5.5). At 3 years after randomisation, the cumulative probability of disease-related treatment failure was 23.7% (95% CI 19.8-27.6) in the experimental group versus 30.4% (26.1-34.6) in the standard of care group (hazard ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0-95; p=0-019). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse event during preoperative therapy in both groups was diarrhoea (81 [18%] of 460 patients in the experimental group and 41 [9%] of 441 in the standard of care group) and neurological toxicity during adjuvant chemotherapy in the standard of care group (16 [9%] of 187 patients). Serious adverse events occurred in 177 (38%) of 460 participants in the experimental group and, in the standard of care group, in 87 (34%) of 254 patients without adjuvant chemotherapy and in 64 (34%) of 187 with adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in four participants in the experimental group (one cardiac arrest, one pulmonary embolism, two infectious complications) and in four participants in the standard of care group (one pulmonary embolism, one neutropenic sepsis, one aspiration, one suicide due to severe depression). Interpretation The observed decreased probability of disease-related treatment failure in the experimental group is probably indicative of the increased efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy as opposed to adjuvant chemotherapy in this setting. Therefore, the experimental treatment can be considered as a new standard of care in high-risk locally advanced rectal cancer.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Bodei, Lisa, et al.
(författare)
-
Molecular profiling of neuroendocrine tumours to predict response and toxicity to peptide receptor radionuclide therapy
- 2020
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 21:9, s. E431-E443
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) is a type of radiotherapy that targets peptide receptors and is typically used for neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). Some of the key challenges in its use are the prediction of efficacy and toxicity, patient selection, and response optimisation. In this Review, we assess current knowledge on the molecular profile of NETs and the strategies and tools used to predict, monitor, and assess the toxicity of PRRT. The few mutations in tumour genes that can be evaluated (eg, ATM and DAXX) are limited to pancreatic NETs and are most likely not informative. Assays that are transcriptomic or based on genes are effective in the prediction of radiotherapy response in other cancers. A blood-based assay for eight genes (the PRRT prediction quotient [PPQ]) has an overall accuracy of 95% for predicting responses to PRRT in NETs. No molecular markers exist that can predict the toxicity of PRRT. Candidate molecular targets include seven single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that are susceptible to radiation. Transcriptomic evaluations of blood and a combination of gene expression and specific SNPs, assessed by machine learning with algorithms that are tumour-specific, might yield molecular tools to enhance the efficacy and safety of PRRT.
|
|
| 7. |
- Copland, Emma, et al.
(författare)
-
Antihypertensive treatment and risk of cancer : an individual participant data meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 22:4, s. 558-570
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Findings 33 trials met the inclusion criteria, and included 260 447 participants with 15 012 cancer events. Median follow-up of included participants was 4?2 years (IQR 3?0?5?0). In the individual participant data meta-analysis comparing each drug class with all other comparators, no associations were identified between any antihypertensive drug class and risk of any cancer (HR 0?99 [95% CI 0?95?1?04] for ACEIs; 0?96 [0?92?1?01] for ARBs; 0?98 [0?89?1?07] for 13 blockers; 1?01 [0?95?1?07] for thiazides), with the exception of calcium channel blockers (1?06 [1?01?1?11]). In the network meta-analysis comparing drug classes against placebo, we found no excess cancer risk with any drug class (HR 1?00 [95% CI 0?93?1?09] for ACEIs; 0?99 [0?92?1?06] for ARBs; 0?99 [0?89?1?11] for 13 blockers; 1?04 [0?96?1?13] for calcium channel blockers; 1?00 [0?90?1?10] for thiazides). Summary Background Some studies have suggested a link between antihypertensive medication and cancer, but the evidence is so far inconclusive. Thus, we aimed to investigate this association in a large individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from Jan 1, 1966, to Sept 1, 2019, to identify potentially eligible randomised controlled trials. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials comparing one blood pressure lowering drug class with a placebo, inactive control, or other blood pressure lowering drug. We also required that trials had at least 1000 participant years of follow-up in each treatment group. Trials without cancer event information were excluded. We requested individual participant data from the authors of eligible trials. We pooled individual participant-level data from eligible trials and assessed the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), 13 blockers, calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics on cancer risk in one-stage individual participant data and network meta-analyses. Cause-specific fixed-effects Cox regression models, stratified by trial, were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs). The primary outcome was any cancer event, defined as the first occurrence of any cancer diagnosed after randomisation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018099283). Findings 33 trials met the inclusion criteria, and included 260 447 participants with 15 012 cancer events. Median follow-up of included participants was 4 & middot;2 years (IQR 3 & middot;0 & ndash;5 & middot;0). In the individual participant data meta-analysis comparing each drug class with all other comparators, no associations were identified between any antihypertensive drug class and risk of any cancer (HR 0 & middot;99 [95% CI 0 & middot;95 & ndash;1 & middot;04] for ACEIs; 0 & middot;96 [0 & middot;92 & ndash;1 & middot;01] for ARBs; 0 & middot;98 [0 & middot;89 & ndash;1 & middot;07] for 13 blockers; 1 & middot;01 [0 & middot;95 & ndash;1 & middot;07] for thiazides), with the exception of calcium channel blockers (1 & middot;06 [1 & middot;01 & ndash;1 & middot;11]). In the network meta-analysis comparing drug classes against placebo, we found no excess cancer risk with any drug class (HR 1 & middot;00 [95% CI 0 & middot;93 & ndash;1 & middot;09] for ACEIs; 0 & middot;99 [0 & middot;92 & ndash;1 & middot;06] for ARBs; 0 & middot;99 [0 & middot;89 & ndash;1 & middot;11] for 13 blockers; 1 & middot;04 [0 & middot;96 & ndash;1 & middot;13] for calcium channel blockers; 1 & middot;00 [0 & middot;90 & ndash;1 & middot;10] for thiazides). Interpretation We found no consistent evidence that antihypertensive medication use had any effect on cancer risk. Although such findings are reassuring, evidence for some comparisons was insufficient to entirely rule out excess risk, in particular for calcium channel blockers.
|
|
| 8. |
- Gronberg, B. H., et al.
(författare)
-
High-dose versus standard-dose twice-daily thoracic radiotherapy for patients with limited stage small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Lancet Oncology. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 22:3, s. 321-331
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is standard treatment for limited stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Twice-daily thoracic radiotherapy of 45 Gy in 30 fractions is considered to be the most effective schedule. The aim of this study was to investigate whether high-dose, twice-daily thoracic radiotherapy of 60 Gy in 40 fractions improves survival. Methods This open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial was done at 22 public hospitals in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Patients aged 18 years and older with treatment-naive confirmed limited stage SCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2, and measurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 were eligible. All participants received four courses of intravenous cisplatin 75 ing/m 2 or carboplatin (area under the curve 5-6 mg/mL x min, Calvert's formula) on day 1 and intravenous etoposide 100 mg/m 2 on days 1-3 every 3 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) in permuted blocks (sized between 4 and 10) stratifying for ECOG performance status, disease stage, and presence of pleural effusion to receive thoracic radiotherapy of 45 Gy in 30 fractions or 60 Gy in 40 fractions to the primary lung tumour and PET-CT positive lymph node metastases starting 20-28 days after the first chemotherapy course. Patients in both groups received two fractions per day, ten fractions per week. Responders were offered prophylactic cranial irradiation of 25-30 Gy. The primary endpoint, 2-year overall survival, was assessed after all patients had been followed up for a minimum of 2 years. All randomly assigned patients were included in the efficacy analyses, patients commencing thoracic radiotherapy were included in the safety analyses. Follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02041845. Findings Between July 8,2014, and June 6,2018,176 patients were enrolled, 170 of whom were randomly assigned to 60 Gy (n=89) or 45 Gy (n=81). Median follow-up for the primary analysis was 49 months (IQR 38-56). At 2 years, 66 (74.2% [95% CI 63-8-82.9]) patients in the 60 Gy group were alive, compared with 39 (48.1% 136-9-59.51) patients in the 45 Gy group (odds ratio 3.09 [95% CI 1.62-5-89]; p=0-0005). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (72 [81%] of 89 patients in the 60 Gy group vs 62 181%1 of 77 patients in the 45 Gy group), neutropenic infections (24 [27%] vs 30 [39%1), thrombocytopenia (21 [24%] vs 19 125%1), anaemia (14 [16%] vs 15 120%D, and oesophagitis (19 [21%] vs 14 [18%]). There were 55 serious adverse events in 38 patients in the 60 Gy group and 56 serious adverse events in 44 patients in the 45 Gy group. There were three treatment-related deaths in each group (one neutropenic fever, one aortic dissection, and one pneumonitis in the 60 Gy group; one thrombocytic bleeding, one cerebral infarction, and one myocardial infarction in the 45 Gy group). Interpretation The higher radiotherapy dose of 60 Gy resulted in a substantial survival improvement compared with 45 Gy, without increased toxicity, suggesting that twice-daily thoracic radiotherapy of 60 Gy is an alternative to existing schedules. Copyright (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 9. |
- Lawler, Mark, et al.
(författare)
-
European Groundshot-addressing Europe's cancer research challenges: a Lancet Oncology Commission.
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. Oncology. - 1474-5488 .- 1470-2045. ; 24:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Cancer research is a crucial pillar for countries to deliver more affordable, higher quality, and more equitable cancer care. Patients treated in research-active hospitals have better outcomes than patients who are not treated in these settings. However, cancer in Europe is at a crossroads. Cancer was already a leading cause of premature death before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the disastrous effects of the pandemic on early diagnosis and treatment will probably set back cancer outcomes in Europe by almost a decade. Recognising the pivotal importance of research not just to mitigate the pandemic today, but to build better European cancer services and systems for patients tomorrow, the Lancet Oncology European Groundshot Commission on cancer research brings together a wide range of experts, together with detailed new data on cancer research activity across Europe during the past 12 years. We have deployed this knowledge to help inform Europe's Beating Cancer Plan and the EU Cancer Mission, and to set out an evidence-driven, patient-centred cancer research roadmap for Europe. The high-resolution cancer research data we have generated show current activities, captured through different metrics, including by region, disease burden, research domain, and effect on outcomes. We have also included granular data on research collaboration, gender of researchers, and research funding. The inclusion of granular data has facilitated the identification of areas that are perhaps overemphasised in current cancer research in Europe, while also highlighting domains that are underserved. Our detailed data emphasise the need for more information-driven and data-driven cancer research strategies and planning going forward. A particular focus must be on central and eastern Europe, because our findings emphasise the widening gap in cancer research activity, and capacity and outcomes, compared with the rest of Europe. Citizens and patients, no matter where they are, must benefit from advances in cancer research. This Commission also highlights that the narrow focus on discovery science and biopharmaceutical research in Europe needs to be widened to include such areas as prevention and early diagnosis; treatment modalities such as radiotherapy and surgery; and a larger concentration on developing a research and innovation strategy for the 20 million Europeans living beyond a cancer diagnosis. Our data highlight the important role of comprehensive cancer centres in driving the European cancer research agenda. Crucial to a functioning cancer research strategy and its translation into patient benefit is the need for a greater emphasis on health policy and systems research, including implementation science, so that the innovative technological outputs from cancer research have a clear pathway to delivery. This European cancer research Commission has identified 12 key recommendations within a call to action to reimagine cancer research and its implementation in Europe. We hope this call to action will help to achieve our ambitious 70:35 target: 70% average survival for all European cancer patients by 2035.
|
|
| 10. |
- Mehanna, Hisham, et al.
(författare)
-
Prognostic implications of p16 and HPV discordance in oropharyngeal cancer (HNCIG-EPIC-OPC) : a multicentre, multinational, individual patient data analysis
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 24:3, s. 239-251
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: p16(INK4a) (p16) immunohistochemistry is the most widely used biomarker assay for inferring HPV causation in oropharyngeal cancer in clinical and trial settings. However, discordance exists between p16 and HPV DNA or RNA status in some patients with oropharyngeal cancer. We aimed to clearly quantify the extent of discordance, and its prognostic implications.Methods: In this multicentre, multinational individual patient data analysis, we did a literature search in PubMed and Cochrane database for systematic reviews and original studies published in English between Jan 1, 1970, and Sept 30, 2022. We included retrospective series and prospective cohorts of consecutively recruited patients previously analysed in individual studies with minimum cohort size of 100 patients with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the oropharynx. Patient inclusion criteria were diagnosis with a primary squamous cell carcinoma of oropharyngeal cancer; data on p16 immunohistochemistry and on HPV testing; information on age, sex, tobacco, and alcohol use; staging by TNM 7th edition; information on treatments received; and data on clinical outcomes and follow-up (date of last follow-up if alive, date of recurrence or metastasis, and date and cause of death). There were no limits on age or performance status. The primary outcomes were the proportion of patients of the overall cohort who showed the different p16 and HPV result combinations, as well as 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival. Patients with recurrent or metastatic disease or who were treated palliatively were excluded from overall survival and disease-free survival analyses. Multivariable analysis models were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for different p16 and HPV testing methods for overall survival, adjusted for prespecified confounding factors.Findings: Our search returned 13 eligible studies that provided individual data for 13 cohorts of patients with oropharyngeal cancer from the UK, Canada, Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Spain. 7895 patients with oropharyngeal cancer were assessed for eligibility. 241 were excluded before analysis, and 7654 were eligible for p16 and HPV analysis. 5714 (74middot7%) of 7654 patients were male and 1940 (25middot3%) were female. Ethnicity data were not reported. 3805 patients were p16-positive, 415 (10middot9%) of whom were HPV-negative. This proportion differed significantly by geographical region and was highest in the areas with lowest HPV-attributable fractions (r=-0middot744, p=0middot0035). The proportion of patients with p16+/HPV- oropharyngeal cancer was highest in subsites outside the tonsil and base of tongue (29middot7% vs 9middot0%, p<0middot0001). 5-year overall survival was 81middot1% (95% CI 79middot5-82middot7) for p16+/HPV+, 40middot4% (38middot6-42middot4) for p16-/HPV-, 53middot2% (46middot6-60middot8) for p16-/HPV+, and 54middot7% (49middot2-60middot9) for p16+/HPV-. 5-year disease-free survival was 84middot3% (95% CI 82middot9-85middot7) for p16+/HPV+, 60middot8% (58middot8-62middot9) for p16-/HPV-; 71middot1% (64middot7-78middot2) for p16-/HPV+, and 67middot9% (62middot5-73middot7) for p16+/HPV-. Results were similar across all European sub-regions, but there were insufficient numbers of discordant patients from North America to draw conclusions in this cohort.Interpretation: Patients with discordant oropharyngeal cancer (p16-/HPV+ or p16+/HPV-) had a significantly worse prognosis than patients with p16+/HPV+ oropharyngeal cancer, and a significantly better prognosis than patients with p16-/HPV- oropharyngeal cancer. Along with routine p16 immunohistochemistry, HPV testing should be mandated for clinical trials for all patients (or at least following a positive p16 test), and is recommended where HPV status might influence patient care, especially in areas with low HPV-attributable fractions.
|
|
