Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials

Background Moderate di?erences in e?cacy between adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for breast cancer are plausible, and could a? ect treatment choices. We sought any such di?erences.

Methods We undertook individual-patient-data meta-analyses of the randomised trials comparing: any taxane-plusanthracycline-based regimen versus the same, or more, non-taxane chemotherapy (n=44 000); one anthracyclinebased regimen versus another (n=7000) or versus cyclo phosphamide, methotrexate, and ?uorouracil (CMF; n=18 000); and polychemotherapy versus no chemotherapy (n=32 000). The scheduled dosages of these three drugs and of the anthracyclines doxorubicin (A) and epirubicin (E) were used to de? ne standard CMF, standard 4AC, and CAF and CEF. Log-rank breast cancer mortality rate ratios (RRs) are reported.

Findings In trials adding four separate cycles of a taxane to a ?xed anthracycline-based control regimen, extending treatment duration, breast cancer mortality was reduced (RR 0·86, SE 0·04, two-sided signi?cance [2p]=0·0005). In trials with four such extra cycles of a taxane counterbalanced in controls by extra cycles of other cytotoxic drugs, roughly doubling non-taxane dosage, there was no signi?cant di?erence (RR 0·94, SE 0·06, 2p=0·33). Trials with CMF-treated controls showed that standard 4AC and standard CMF were equivalent (RR 0·98, SE 0·05, 2p=0·67), but that anthracycline-based regimens with substantially higher cumulative dosage than standard 4AC (eg, CAF or CEF) were superior to standard CMF (RR 0·78, SE 0·06, 2p=0·0004). Trials versus no chemotherapy also suggested greater mortality reductions with CAF (RR 0·64, SE 0·09, 2p<0·0001) than with standard 4AC (RR 0·78, SE 0·09, 2p=0·01) or
standard CMF (RR 0·76, SE 0·05, 2p<0·0001). In all meta-analyses involving taxane-based or anthracycline-based regimens, proportional risk reductions were little a? ected by age, nodal status, tumour diameter or di?erentiation (moderate or poor; few were well di?erentiated), oestrogen receptor status, or tamoxifen use. Hence, largely independently of age (up to at least 70 years) or the tumour characteristics currently available to us for the patients selected to be in these trials, some taxane-plus-anthracycline-based or higher-cumulative-dosage anthracycline-based regimens (not requiring stem cells) reduced breast cancer mortality by, on average, about one-third. 10-year overall mortality di?erences paralleled breast cancer mortality di?erences, despite taxane, anthracycline, and other toxicities.

Interpretation 10-year gains from a one-third breast cancer mortality reduction depend on absolute risks without chemotherapy (which, for oestrogen-receptor-positive disease, are the risks remaining with appropriate endocrine therapy). Low absolute risk implies low absolute bene?t, but information was lacking about tumour gene expression markers or quantitative immunohistochemistry that might help to predict risk, chemosensitivity, or both.

Celecoxib plus hormone therapy versus hormone therapy alone for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: first results from the STAMPEDE multiarm, multistage, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND:
Long-term hormone therapy alone is standard care for metastatic or high-risk, non-metastatic prostate cancer. STAMPEDE--an international, open-label, randomised controlled trial--uses a novel multiarm, multistage design to assess whether the early additional use of one or two drugs (docetaxel, zoledronic acid, celecoxib, zoledronic acid and docetaxel, or zoledronic acid and celecoxib) improves survival in men starting first-line, long-term hormone therapy. Here, we report the preplanned, second intermediate analysis comparing hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D) with hormone therapy alone (control arm A).
METHODS:
Eligible patients were men with newly diagnosed or rapidly relapsing prostate cancer who were starting long-term hormone therapy for the first time. Hormone therapy was given as standard care in all trial arms, with local radiotherapy encouraged for newly diagnosed patients without distant metastasis. Randomisation was done using minimisation with a random element across seven stratification factors. Patients randomly allocated to arm D received celecoxib 400 mg twice daily, given orally, until 1 year or disease progression (including prostate-specific antigen [PSA] failure). The intermediate outcome was failure-free survival (FFS) in three activity stages; the primary outcome was overall survival in a subsequent efficacy stage. Research arms were compared pairwise against the control arm on an intention-to-treat basis. Accrual of further patients was discontinued in any research arm showing safety concerns or insufficient evidence of activity (lack of benefit) compared with the control arm. The minimum targeted activity at the second intermediate activity stage was a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·92. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00268476, and with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN78818544.
FINDINGS:
2043 patients were enrolled in the trial from Oct 17, 2005, to Jan 31, 2011, of whom 584 were randomly allocated to receive hormone therapy alone (control group; arm A) and 291 to receive hormone therapy plus celecoxib (arm D). At the preplanned analysis of the second intermediate activity stage, with 305 FFS events (209 in arm A, 96 in arm D), there was no evidence of an advantage for hormone therapy plus celecoxib over hormone therapy alone: HR 0·94 (95% CI 0·74-1·20). [corrected]. 2-year FFS was 51% (95% CI 46-56) in arm A and 51% (95% CI 43-58) in arm D. There was no evidence of differences in the incidence of adverse events between groups (events of grade 3 or higher were noted at any time in 123 [23%, 95% CI 20-27] patients in arm A and 64 [25%, 19-30] in arm D). The most common grade 3-5 events adverse effects in both groups were endocrine disorders (55 [11%] of patients in arm A vs 19 [7%] in arm D) and musculoskeletal disorders (30 [6%] of patients in arm A vs 15 [6%] in arm D). The independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping accrual to both celecoxib-containing arms on grounds of lack of benefit and discontinuing celecoxib for patients currently on treatment, which was endorsed by the trial steering committee.
INTERPRETATION:
Celecoxib 400 mg twice daily for up to 1 year is insufficiently active in patients starting hormone therapy for high-risk prostate cancer, and we do not recommend its use in this setting. Accrual continues seamlessly to the other research arms and follow-up of all arms will continue to assess effects on overall survival.

The Management of Long-Term Sickness Absence in Large Public Sector Healthcare Organisations: A Realist Evaluation Using Mixed Methods

Purpose The success of measures to reduce long-term sickness absence (LTSA) in public sector organisations is contingent on organisational context. This realist evaluation investigates how interventions interact with context to influence successful management of LTSA. Methods Multi-method case study in three Health and Social Care Trusts in Northern Ireland comprising realist literature review, semi-structured interviews (61 participants), Process-Mapping and feedback meetings (59 participants), observation of training, analysis of documents. Results Important activities included early intervention; workplace-based occupational rehabilitation; robust sickness absence policies with clear trigger points for action. Used appropriately, in a context of good interpersonal and interdepartmental communication and shared goals, these are able to increase the motivation of staff to return to work. Line managers are encouraged to take a proactive approach when senior managers provide support and accountability. Hindering factors: delayed intervention; inconsistent implementation of policy and procedure; lack of resources; organisational complexity; stakeholders misunderstanding each other’s goals and motives. Conclusions Different mechanisms have the potential to encourage common motivations for earlier return from LTSA, such as employees feeling that they have the support of their line manager to return to work and having the confidence to do so. Line managers’ proactively engage when they have confidence in the support of seniors and in their own ability to address LTSA. Fostering these motivations calls for a thoughtful, diagnostic process, taking into account the contextual factors (and whether they can be modified) and considering how a given intervention can be used to trigger the appropriate mechanisms.

Young Stellar Object VARiability (YSOVAR): Long Timescale Variations in the Mid-infrared

The YSOVAR (Young Stellar Object VARiability) Spitzer Space Telescope observing program obtained the first extensive mid-infrared (3.6 and 4.5 μm) time series photometry of the Orion Nebula Cluster plus smaller footprints in 11 other star-forming cores (AFGL 490, NGC 1333, Mon R2, GGD 12-15, NGC 2264, L1688, Serpens Main, Serpens South, IRAS 20050+2720, IC 1396A, and Ceph C). There are ~29,000 unique objects with light curves in either or both IRAC channels in the YSOVAR data set. We present the data collection and reduction for the Spitzer and ancillary data, and define the "standard sample" on which we calculate statistics, consisting of fast cadence data, with epochs roughly twice per day for ~40 days. We also define a "standard sample of members" consisting of all the IR-selected members and X-ray-selected members. We characterize the standard sample in terms of other properties, such as spectral energy distribution shape. We use three mechanisms to identify variables in the fast cadence data—the Stetson index, a χ2 fit to a flat light curve, and significant periodicity. We also identified variables on the longest timescales possible of six to seven years by comparing measurements taken early in the Spitzer mission with the mean from our YSOVAR campaign. The fraction of members in each cluster that are variable on these longest timescales is a function of the ratio of Class I/total members in each cluster, such that clusters with a higher fraction of Class I objects also have a higher fraction of long-term variables. For objects with a YSOVAR-determined period and a [3.6]-[8] color, we find that a star with a longer period is more likely than those with shorter periods to have an IR excess. We do not find any evidence for variability that causes [3.6]-[4.5] excesses to appear or vanish within our data set; out of members and field objects combined, at most 0.02% may have transient IR excesses.

Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Long-term hormone therapy has been the standard of care for advanced prostate cancer since the 1940s. STAMPEDE is a randomised controlled trial using a multiarm, multistage platform design. It recruits men with high-risk, locally advanced, metastatic or recurrent prostate cancer who are starting first-line long-term hormone therapy. We report primary survival results for three research comparisons testing the addition of zoledronic acid, docetaxel, or their combination to standard of care versus standard of care alone.

METHODS: Standard of care was hormone therapy for at least 2 years; radiotherapy was encouraged for men with N0M0 disease to November, 2011, then mandated; radiotherapy was optional for men with node-positive non-metastatic (N+M0) disease. Stratified randomisation (via minimisation) allocated men 2:1:1:1 to standard of care only (SOC-only; control), standard of care plus zoledronic acid (SOC + ZA), standard of care plus docetaxel (SOC + Doc), or standard of care with both zoledronic acid and docetaxel (SOC + ZA + Doc). Zoledronic acid (4 mg) was given for six 3-weekly cycles, then 4-weekly until 2 years, and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) for six 3-weekly cycles with prednisolone 10 mg daily. There was no blinding to treatment allocation. The primary outcome measure was overall survival. Pairwise comparisons of research versus control had 90% power at 2·5% one-sided α for hazard ratio (HR) 0·75, requiring roughly 400 control arm deaths. Statistical analyses were undertaken with standard log-rank-type methods for time-to-event data, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs derived from adjusted Cox models. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00268476) and ControlledTrials.com (ISRCTN78818544).

FINDINGS: 2962 men were randomly assigned to four groups between Oct 5, 2005, and March 31, 2013. Median age was 65 years (IQR 60-71). 1817 (61%) men had M+ disease, 448 (15%) had N+/X M0, and 697 (24%) had N0M0. 165 (6%) men were previously treated with local therapy, and median prostate-specific antigen was 65 ng/mL (IQR 23-184). Median follow-up was 43 months (IQR 30-60). There were 415 deaths in the control group (347 [84%] prostate cancer). Median overall survival was 71 months (IQR 32 to not reached) for SOC-only, not reached (32 to not reached) for SOC + ZA (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·79-1·11; p=0·450), 81 months (41 to not reached) for SOC + Doc (0·78, 0·66-0·93; p=0·006), and 76 months (39 to not reached) for SOC + ZA + Doc (0·82, 0·69-0·97; p=0·022). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect (for any of the treatments) across prespecified subsets. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported for 399 (32%) patients receiving SOC, 197 (32%) receiving SOC + ZA, 288 (52%) receiving SOC + Doc, and 269 (52%) receiving SOC + ZA + Doc.

INTERPRETATION: Zoledronic acid showed no evidence of survival improvement and should not be part of standard of care for this population. Docetaxel chemotherapy, given at the time of long-term hormone therapy initiation, showed evidence of improved survival accompanied by an increase in adverse events. Docetaxel treatment should become part of standard of care for adequately fit men commencing long-term hormone therapy.

FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, Pfizer, Janssen, Astellas, NIHR Clinical Research Network, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research.