Adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation for patients with high-risk stage I endometrial cancer treated with curative intent surgery: impact on recurrence and survival.

BACKGROUND: Survival benefits of post-operative systemic and radiation therapy in high-risk stage I endometrial cancer are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare recurrence patterns and survival outcomes of post-surgical treatment in patients with high-risk stage I endometrial cancer and to determine whether adjuvant therapy significantly improves outcomes. METHODS: High-risk stage I endometrial cancer was defined as either stage IB grade 3 endometrioid histology or myoinvasive non-endometrioid histology. Consecutive patients diagnosed between January 2000 and December 2010 in eight cancer centers were included. Patients, disease, and treatment characteristics were summarized by descriptive statistics. Overall survival, disease-specific survival, and relapse-free survival were examined using Cox's proportional hazards regression and log-rank test. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Of 2317 patients with stage I endometrial cancer, 414 patients had high-risk disease. Use of chemotherapy did not improve overall survival (relative risk (RR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.14, p=0.13) or disease-specific survival (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.85, p=0.84). Significant improvement in recurrence-free survival was observed in patients who received chemotherapy (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.95, p=0.03). Use of radiation therapy did not improve overall survival, recurrence-free survival, or disease-specific survival. Patients who received four cycles or fewer of chemotherapy versus five to six cycles had similar overall survival, disease-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Post-operative chemotherapy or radiation in stage I high-risk endometrial cancer is not associated with improved cancer-specific or overall survival. More than four cycles of chemotherapy did not improve survival compared with four cycles or fewer.

Adjuvant Treatment of Early Ovarian Clear Cell Carcinoma: A Population-Based Study of Whole Abdominal Versus Pelvic Nodal Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant treatment in early ovarian clear cell carcinoma (OCCC) is not yet standardized. The objective of this population-based study was to compare the outcome of patients with early OCCC treated with adjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy (chemoRT) and evaluate the association of adjuvant radiotherapy regimens (whole abdominal radiotherapy [WART] versus pelvic nodal radiotherapy [PRT]) with outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chart review was conducted to identify patients with stage I and II OCCC with complete information on staging. Patients with stage IA, IB, or IC OCCC purely resulting from capsular rupture were excluded because the provincial protocol does not recommend adjuvant treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 403 patients were identified and 343 received adjuvant treatment, of whom 255 had stage IC or II OCCC and 153 were eligible for final analysis. On Cox multivariable regression, receipt of chemoRT (n=90) was associated with an improvement in failure-free survival (FFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.94) compared with chemotherapy alone (n=63). Use of chemoRT also resulted in 54% reduction in the cumulative incidence of cancer-specific mortality (subdistribution HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.89). However, there was no significant difference in the HR for overall survival (OS) between the chemoRT (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.43-1.13) and chemotherapy group. Relative to chemotherapy + WART (chemo-WART), chemotherapy + PRT (chemo-PRT) was not associated with any significant difference in HR for FFS (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.40-4.44) or OS (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.37-3.46). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemoRT was associated with a lower risk of failure compared with chemotherapy alone. However, there was no difference in OS between the adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoRT regimens. Additionally, no significant difference in terms of FFS or OS was found between the chemo-WART and chemo-PRT groups.

Provincial development of a patient-reported outcome initiative to guide patient care, quality improvement, and research.

The BC Cancer Agency Radiotherapy (RT) program started the Prospective Outcomes and Support Initiative (POSI) at all six centres to utilize patient-reported outcomes for immediate clinical care, quality improvement, and research. Patient-reported outcomes were collected at time of computed tomography simulation via tablet and 2 to 4 weeks post-RT via either tablet or over the phone by a registered nurse. From 2013 to 2016, patients were approached on 20,150 attempts by POSI for patients treated with RT for bone metastases (52%), brain metastases (11%), lung cancer (17%), gynecological cancer (16%), head and neck cancer (2%), and other pilots (2%). The accrual rate for all encounters was 85% (n = 17,101), with the accrual rate varying between the lowest and the highest accruing centre from 78% to 89% ( P < .001) and varying by tumour site ( P < .001). Using the POSI database, we have performed research and quality improvement initiatives that have changed practice.

The incidence of symptomatic brain metastases from extra-pulmonary small cell carcinoma: Is there a role for prophylactic cranial irradiation in a clinically relevant population cohort?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To examine the incidence and outcomes of patients with brain metastases from extra-pulmonary small cell carcinoma (EPSCC) and assess the indication for prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Provincial cancer registry was used to conduct a retrospective, population-based study of patients diagnosed with EPSCC between January 1997 and December 2011. The primary end point was the incidence of brain metastases. The secondary endpoint was overall survival. A "PCI Eligible" cohort was defined to provide an estimation of the incidence of brain metastases in clinically relevant patients. RESULTS: In 287 patients, the primary sites were 21% gastrointestinal, 34% genito-urinary, 14% gynecologic, 5% head/neck and 25% unknown primary. Thirty-five (12.5%) patients had brain metastases: 12 (4.2%) at initial diagnosis and 23 (8%) later in the disease course. In PCI Eligible patients, the 3-year cumulative incidence of new brain metastases was 5.5% for M0 stage disease and 26.3% for M1 disease. There was no significant difference in the incidence of brain metastases between primary sites. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of brain metastases in patients with EPSCC is comparatively low, even in a cohort of patients that were suitable for PCI. Based on our analysis, we cannot recommend PCI for patients with EPSCC.

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes with single versus multiple fraction palliative radiotherapy for bone metastasis in a population-based cohort.

BACKGROUND: Despite randomized control trials showing equivalent efficacy between single-fraction (SF) and multiple-fraction (MF) radiation therapy (RT) for bone metastases (BoM), considerable variation in fractionation exists. We compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following SF versus MF RT in a population-based cohort. METHODS: PROs were chosen to assess patients' perception of pain, function, and symptom frustration. Total score was the sum of the 3 questions. RESULTS: 968 patients completed pre and post-RT PROs, 35% (335) had complicated BoM. Overall, there were no differences in total score improvement (79% vs. 83%; p=0.13), nor for complicated BoM (77% vs. 84%; p=0.12), SFRT and MFRT respectively. On multivariate analysis no differences in improvement in total score were observed between SFRT and MFRT overall (OR=0.71; 95% CI 0.49-1.02; p=0.06), nor for complicated BoM (OR=0.74; 95% CI 0.39-1.39; p=0.35). In the complicated BoM subset, pain complete response (CR) (19% vs. 33%; p=0.01) and functional improvement occurred more commonly in the MFRT group (69% vs. 81%; p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Improvements in PROs for pain, function and symptom frustration were similar between SFRT and MFRT supporting the use of hypofractionated regimens. Using a simple, 3-question, telephone-based questionnaire to assess response to palliative RT is a feasible strategy to collect PROs.