Prognostic value of serial blood S100B determinations in stage IIB-III melanoma patients: a corollary study to EORTC trial 18952.

S100B is a prognostic factor for melanoma as elevated levels correlate with disease progression and poor outcome. We determined its prognostic value based on updated information using serial determinations in stage IIb/III melanoma patients. 211 Patients who participated in the EORTC 18952 trial, evaluating efficacy of adjuvant intermediate doses of interferon α2b (IFN) versus observation, entered a corollary study. Over a period of 36 months, 918 serum samples were collected. The Cox time-dependent model was used to assess prognostic value of the latest (most recent) S100B determination. At first measurement, 178 patients had S100B values <0.2 μg/l and 33 ≥ 0.2 μg/l. Within the first group, 61 patients had, later on, an increased value of S100B (≥ 0.2 μg/l). An initial increased value of S100B, or during follow-up, was associated with worse distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS); hazard ratio (HR) of S100B ≥ 0.2 versus S100B < 0.2 was 5.57 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.81-8.16), P < 0.0001, after adjustment for stage, number of lymph nodes and sex. In stage IIb patients, the HR adjusted for sex was 2.14 (95% CI 0.71, 6.42), whereas in stage III, the HR adjusted for stage, number of lymph nodes and sex was 6.76 (95% CI 4.50-10.16). Similar results were observed regarding overall survival (OS). Serial determination of S100B in stage IIb-III melanoma is a strong independent prognostic marker, even stronger compared to stage and number of positive lymph nodes. The prognostic impact of S100B ≥ 0.2 μg/l is more pronounced in stage III disease compared with stage IIb.

New validated prognostic models and prognostic calculators in patients with low-grade gliomas diagnosed by central pathology review: a pooled analysis of EORTC/RTOG/NCCTG phase III clinical trials.

Background In a previous study, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) reported a scoring system to predict survival of patients with low-grade gliomas (LGGs). A major issue in the diagnosis of brain tumors is the lack of agreement among pathologists. New models in patients with LGGs diagnosed by central pathology review are needed. Methods Data from 339 EORTC patients with LGGs diagnosed by central pathology review were used to develop new prognostic models for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Data from 450 patients with centrally diagnosed LGGs recruited into 2 large studies conducted by North American cooperative groups were used to validate the models. Results Both PFS and OS were negatively influenced by the presence of baseline neurological deficits, a shorter time since first symptoms (<30 wk), an astrocytic tumor type, and tumors larger than 5 cm in diameter. Early irradiation improved PFS but not OS. Three risk groups have been identified (low, intermediate, and high) and validated. Conclusions We have developed new prognostic models in a more homogeneous LGG population diagnosed by central pathology review. This population better fits with modern practice, where patients are enrolled in clinical trials based on central or panel pathology review. We could validate the models in a large, external, and independent dataset. The models can divide LGG patients into 3 risk groups and provide reliable individual survival predictions. Inclusion of other clinical and molecular factors might still improve models' predictions.

Cost-effectiveness of temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme: a report from the EORTC 26981/22981 NCI-C CE3 Intergroup Study.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme versus initial radiotherapy alone from a public health care perspective. METHODS: The economic evaluation was performed alongside a randomized, multicenter, phase 3 trial. The primary endpoint of the trial was overall survival. Costs included all direct medical costs. Economic data were collected prospectively for a subgroup of 219 patients (38%). Unit costs for drugs, procedures, laboratory and imaging, radiotherapy, and hospital costs per day were collected from the official national reimbursement lists based on 2004. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, survival was expressed as 2.5 years restricted mean estimates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was constructed. Confidence intervals for the ICER were calculated using the Fieller method and bootstrapping. RESULTS: The difference in 2.5 years restricted mean survival between the treatment arms was 0.25 life-years and the ICER was euro37,361 per life-year gained with a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from euro19,544 to euro123,616. The area between the survival curves of the treatment arms suggests an increase of the overall survival gain for a longer follow-up. An extrapolation of the overall survival per treatment arm and imputation of costs for the extrapolated survival showed a substantial reduction in ICER. CONCLUSIONS: The ICER of euro37,361 per life-year gained is a conservative estimate. We concluded that despite the high TMZ acquisition costs, the costs per life-year gained are comparable to accepted first-line treatment with chemotherapy in patients with cancer.

Absence of progression as assessed by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors predicts survival in advanced GI stromal tumors treated with imatinib mesylate: the intergroup EORTC-ISG-AGITG phase III trial.

PURPOSE: From February 2001 to February 2002, 946 patients with advanced GI stromal tumors (GISTs) treated with imatinib were included in a controlled EORTC/ISG/AGITG (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Italian Sarcoma Group/Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group) trial. This analysis investigates whether the response classification assessed by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), predicts for time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Per protocol, the first three disease assessments were done at 2, 4, and 6 months. For the purpose of the analysis (landmark method), disease response was subclassified in six categories: partial response (PR; > 30% size reduction), minor response (MR; 10% to 30% reduction), no change (NC) as either NC- (0% to 10% reduction) or NC+ (0% to 20% size increase), progressive disease (PD; > 20% increase/new lesions), and subjective PD (clinical progression). RESULTS: A total of 906 patients had measurable disease at entry. At all measurement time points, complete response (CR), PR, and MR resulted in similar TTP and OS; this was also true for NC- and NC+, and for PD and subjective PD. Patients were subsequently classified as responders (CR/PR/MR), NC (NC+/NC-), or PD. This three-class response categorization was found to be highly predictive of further progression or survival for the first two measurement points. After 6 months of imatinib, responders (CR/PR/MR) had the same survival prognosis as patients classified as NC. CONCLUSION: RECIST perfectly enables early discrimination between patients who benefited long term from imatinib and those who did not. After 6 months of imatinib, if the patient is not experiencing PD, the pattern of radiologic response by tumor size criteria has no prognostic value for further outcome. Imatinib needs to be continued as long as there is no progression according to RECIST.

Quality assurance of the EORTC 22043-30041 trial in post-operative radiotherapy in prostate cancer: Results of the Dummy Run procedure.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The EORTC 22043-30041 trial investigates the role of the addition of androgen suppression to post-operative radiotherapy in patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy. As part of the quality assurance of radiotherapy (QART) a Dummy Run (DR) procedure was performed. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The protocol included detailed and published delineation guidelines. Participating institutions digitally submitted radiotherapy treatment volumes and a treatment plan for a standard clinical case. Submissions were centrally reviewed using the VODCA software platform. RESULTS: Thirty-eight submissions from thirty-one institutions were reviewed. Six were accepted without comments. Twenty-three were accepted with comments on one or more items: target volume delineation (22), OAR delineation (23), planning and dosimetry (3) or treatment verification (1). Nine submissions were rejected requiring resubmission, seven for target volume delineation reasons alone. Intervention to highlight the importance of delineation guidelines was made prior to the entry of the first patient in the trial. After this, a lower percentage of resubmissions was required. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC 22043-30041 Dummy Run highlights the need for timely and effective QART in clinical trials. The variation in target volume and OAR definition demonstrates that clinical guidelines and radiotherapy protocols are not a substitute for QART procedures. Early intervention in response to the Dummy Run improved protocol understanding.

MGMT promoter methylation is prognostic but not predictive for outcome to adjuvant PCV chemotherapy in anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors: a report from EORTC Brain Tumor Group Study 26951.

PURPOSE: O6-methylguanine-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation has been shown to predict survival of patients with glioblastomas if temozolomide is added to radiotherapy (RT). It is unknown if MGMT promoter methylation is also predictive to outcome to RT followed by adjuvant procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy in patients with anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors (AOT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer study 26951, 368 patients with AOT were randomly assigned to either RT alone or to RT followed by adjuvant PCV. From 165 patients of this study, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor tissue was available for MGMT promoter methylation analysis. This was investigated with methylation specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. RESULTS: In 152 cases, an MGMT result was obtained, in 121 (80%) cases MGMT promoter methylation was observed. Methylation strongly correlated with combined loss of chromosome 1p and 19q loss (P = .00043). In multivariate analysis, MGMT promoter methylation, 1p/19q codeletion, tumor necrosis, and extent of resection were independent prognostic factors. The prognostic significance of MGMT promoter methylation was equally strong in the RT arm and the RT/PCV arm for both progression-free survival and overall survival. In tumors diagnosed at central pathology review as glioblastoma, no prognostic effect of MGMT promoter methylation was observed. CONCLUSION: In this study, on patients with AOT MGMT promoter methylation was of prognostic significance and did not have predictive significance for outcome to adjuvant PCV chemotherapy. The biologic effect of MGMT promoter methylation or pathogenetic features associated with MGMT promoter methylation may be different for AOT compared with glioblastoma.

EORTC-ROG expert opinion: radiotherapy volume and treatment guidelines for neoadjuvant radiation of adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction and the stomach.

PURPOSE: The Gastro-Intestinal Working Party of the EORTC Radiation Oncology Group (GIWP-ROG) developed guidelines for target volume definition in neoadjuvant radiation of adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) and the stomach. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Guidelines about the definition of the clinical target volume (CTV) are based on a systematic literature review of the location and frequency of local recurrences and lymph node involvement in adenocarcinomas of the GEJ and the stomach. Therefore, MEDLINE was searched up to August 2008. Guidelines concerning prescription, planning and treatment delivery are based on a consensus between the members of the GIWP-ROG. RESULTS: In order to support a curative resection of GEJ and gastric cancer, an individualized preoperative treatment volume based on tumour location has to include the primary tumour and the draining regional lymph nodes area. Therefore we recommend to use the 2nd English Edition of the Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association which developed the concept of assigning tumours of the GEJ and the stomach to anatomically defined sub-sites corresponding respectively to a distinct lymphatic spread pattern. CONCLUSION: The GIWP-ROG defined guidelines for preoperative irradiation of adenocarcinomas of the GEJ and the stomach to reduce variability in the framework of future clinical trials.

LAPATAX: A randomized phase II trial of FEC-docetaxel combined with lapatinib and/or trastuzumab as neoadjuvant therapy of HER2- positive breast cancer-EORTC 10054 trial.

Background: Patients with HER2 +ve breast cancer suitable for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have been shown in a series of clinical trials to have the best outcome when treated with anthracyclines (A), taxanes (T), and trastuzumab (Tz). Recent evidence confirms that adjuvant Tz is more effective when given concomitantly rather than sequentially with T (Perez SABCS 2009). Whilst there remains uncertainty as to the most efficacious A-T regimen and duration of Tz, there is widespread use in Europe of FEC-D [3 cycles of 5-FU 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 100 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 (FEC100) followed by 3 cycles of docetaxel 100 mg/m2 (D) q3w] following the results of PACS-01. The advent of TKI anti-HER2 agents such as L could offer superior outcomes if combined with NAC. However, a phase I study in heavily pre-treated advanced breast cancer reported difficulties in combining lapatinib (L) with D 100 mg/m2 (LoRusso JCO 2008). Methods: EORTC 10054 is designed as a two-part study to compare FEC-D with either Tz, L or their combination as NAC for patients with HER2 +ve large operable or locally advanced breast cancer. Before and on-treatment frozen tumor and blood samples will be taken to better define which tumours are particularly sensitive to either Tz and/or L. Stage 1: (complete) a dose- finding study has confirmed that with primary prophylactic G-CSF, D 100 mg/m2 can be safely and effectively given with L 1,250 mg daily continuously. The dose-limiting toxicity was myelosuppression, and there was no significant diarrhoea or cardiac toxicity (ESMO 2009 abstr P- 5073). Stage 2: (opening Q1 2010) will enroll 150 patients from European centres into a 3-arm randomized trial whose primary endpoint is pathological complete response. All patients will receive FEC-D before primary surgery: 3 cycles of FEC (without anti-HER2 therapy) followed by 3 cycles of D plus either Tz (conventional weekly schedule), monotherapy L, or the combination of Tz and L, using doses based on the EGF100161 dose-finding study in 1st line metastatic therapy of D+L+Tz. After surgery all patients will receive standard 3-weekly Tz, radiotherapy and endocrine therapy as per local guidelines.

Sagopilone (ZK-EPO, ZK 219477) for recurrent glioblastoma. A phase II multicenter trial by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Brain Tumor Group.

Background: Sagopilone (ZK 219477), a lipophylic and synthetic analog of epothilone B, that crosses the blood-brain barrier has demonstrated preclinical activity in glioma models.Patients and methods: Patients with first recurrence/progression of glioblastoma were eligible for this early phase II and pharmacokinetic study exploring single-agent sagopilone (16 mg/m(2) over 3 h every 21 days). Primary end point was a composite of either tumor response or being alive and progression free at 6 months. Overall survival, toxicity and safety and pharmacokinetics were secondary end points.Results: Thirty-eight (evaluable 37) patients were included. Treatment was well tolerated, and neuropathy occurred in 46% patients [mild (grade 1) : 32%]. No objective responses were seen. The progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months was 6.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-18.7], the median PFS was just over 6 weeks, and the median overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI 5.3-12.3), with a 1-year survival rate of 31.6% (95% CI 17.7-46.4). Maximum plasma concentrations were reached at the end of the 3-h infusion, with rapid declines within 30 min after termination.Conclusions: No evidence of relevant clinical antitumor activity against recurrent glioblastoma could be detected. Sagopilone was well tolerated, and moderate-to-severe peripheral neuropathy was observed in despite prolonged administration.

Oral Antibiotics for Fever in Low-Risk Neutropenic Patients With Cancer: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Multicenter Trial Comparing Single Daily Moxifloxacin With Twice Daily Ciprofloxacin Plus Amoxicillin/Clavulanic Acid Combination Therapy--EORTC Infectious Diseases Group Trial XV.

PURPOSE This double-blind, multicenter trial compared the efficacy and safety of a single daily oral dose of moxifloxacin with oral combination therapy in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Inclusion criteria were cancer, febrile neutropenia, low risk of complications as predicted by a Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score > 20, ability to swallow, and ≤ one single intravenous dose of empiric antibiotic therapy before study drug treatment initiation. Early discharge was encouraged when a set of predefined criteria was met. Patients received either moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily) monotherapy or oral ciprofloxacin (750 mg twice daily) plus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (1,000 mg twice daily). The trial was designed to show equivalence of the two drug regimens in terms of therapy success, defined as defervescence and improvement in clinical status during study drug treatment (< 10% difference). Results Among the 333 patients evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis, therapy success was observed in 80% of the patients administered moxifloxacin and in 82% of the patients administered combination therapy (95% CI for the difference, -10% to 8%, consistent with equivalence). Minor differences in tolerability, safety, and reasons for failure were observed. More than 50% of the patients in the two arms were discharged on protocol therapy, with 5% readmissions among those in either arm. Survival was similar (99%) in both arms. CONCLUSION Monotherapy with once daily oral moxifloxacin is efficacious and safe in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients identified with the help of the MASCC scoring system, discharged early, and observed as outpatients.

External irradiation with or without long-term androgen suppression for prostate cancer with high metastatic risk: 10-year results of an EORTC randomised study.

BACKGROUND: We did a randomised phase 3 trial assessing the benefit of addition of long-term androgen suppression with a luteinising-hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist to external irradiation in patients with prostate cancer with high metastatic risk. In this report, we present the 10-year results. METHODS: For this open-label randomised trial, eligible patients were younger than 80 years and had newly diagnosed histologically proven T1-2 prostatic adenocarcinoma with WHO histological grade 3 or T3-4 prostatic adenocarcinoma of any histological grade, and a WHO performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy plus immediate androgen suppression. Treatment allocation was open label and used a minimisation algorithm with institution, clinical stage of the disease, results of pelvic-lymph-node dissection, and irradiation fields extension as minimisation factors. Patients were irradiated externally, once a day, 5 days a week, for 7 weeks to a total dose of 50 Gy to the whole pelvis, with an additional 20 Gy to the prostate and seminal vesicles. The LHRH agonist, goserelin acetate (3·6 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks), was started on the first day of irradiation and continued for 3 years; cyproterone acetate (50 mg orally three times a day) was given for 1 month starting a week before the first goserelin injection. The primary endpoint was clinical disease-free survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00849082. FINDINGS: Between May 22, 1987, and Oct 31, 1995, 415 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups and were included in the analysis (208 radiotherapy alone, 207 combined treatment). Median follow-up was 9·1 years (IQR 5·1-12·6). 10-year clinical disease-free survival was 22·7% (95% CI 16·3-29·7) in the radiotherapy-alone group and 47·7% (39·0-56·0) in the combined treatment group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·42, 95% CI 0·33-0·55, p<0·0001). 10-year overall survival was 39·8% (95% CI 31·9-47·5) in patients receiving radiotherapy alone and 58·1% (49·2-66·0) in those allocated combined treatment (HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·45-0·80, p=0·0004), and 10-year prostate-cancer mortality was 30·4% (95% CI 23·2-37·5) and 10·3% (5·1-15·4), respectively (HR 0·38, 95% CI 0·24-0·60, p<0·0001). No significant difference in cardiovascular mortality was noted between treatment groups both in patients who had cardiovascular problems at study entry (eight of 53 patients in the combined treatment group had a cardiovascular-related cause of death vs 11 of 63 in the radiotherapy group; p=0·60) and in those who did not (14 of 154 vs six of 145; p=0·25). Two fractures were reported in patients allocated combined treatment. INTERPRETATION: In patients with prostate cancer with high metastatic risk, immediate androgen suppression with an LHRH agonist given during and for 3 years after external irradiation improves 10-year disease-free and overall survival without increasing late cardiovascular toxicity.

Cilengitide combined with standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (CENTRIC EORTC 26071-22072 study): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cilengitide is a selective αvβ3 and αvβ5 integrin inhibitor. Data from phase 2 trials suggest that it has antitumour activity as a single agent in recurrent glioblastoma and in combination with standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (particularly in tumours with methylated MGMT promoter). We aimed to assess cilengitide combined with temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study, we investigated the efficacy of cilengitide in patients from 146 study sites in 25 countries. Eligible patients (newly diagnosed, histologically proven supratentorial glioblastoma, methylated MGMT promoter, and age ≥18 years) were stratified for prognostic Radiation Therapy Oncology Group recursive partitioning analysis class and geographic region and centrally randomised in a 1:1 ratio with interactive voice response system to receive temozolomide chemoradiotherapy with cilengitide 2000 mg intravenously twice weekly (cilengitide group) or temozolomide chemoradiotherapy alone (control group). Patients and investigators were unmasked to treatment allocation. Maintenance temozolomide was given for up to six cycles, and cilengitide was given for up to 18 months or until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We analysed survival outcomes by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00689221. FINDINGS: Overall, 3471 patients were screened. Of these patients, 3060 had tumour MGMT status tested; 926 patients had a methylated MGMT promoter, and 545 were randomly assigned to the cilengitide (n=272) or control groups (n=273) between Oct 31, 2008, and May 12, 2011. Median overall survival was 26·3 months (95% CI 23·8-28·8) in the cilengitide group and 26·3 months (23·9-34·7) in the control group (hazard ratio 1·02, 95% CI 0·81-1·29, p=0·86). None of the predefined clinical subgroups showed a benefit from cilengitide. We noted no overall additional toxic effects with cilengitide treatment. The most commonly reported adverse events of grade 3 or worse in the safety population were lymphopenia (31 [12%] in the cilengitide group vs 26 [10%] in the control group), thrombocytopenia (28 [11%] vs 46 [18%]), neutropenia (19 [7%] vs 24 [9%]), leucopenia (18 [7%] vs 20 [8%]), and convulsion (14 [5%] vs 15 [6%]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of cilengitide to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy did not improve outcomes; cilengitide will not be further developed as an anticancer drug. Nevertheless, integrins remain a potential treatment target for glioblastoma. FUNDING: Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

An EORTC phase I itudy of bortezomib in combination with oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

The combination of oxaliplatin, leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFOX-4) is still a reference regimen in advanced colorectal cancer; however, the addition of new biologic compounds represents a significant way forward. Bortezomib is an inhibitor of proteasome, a multicatalytic enzyme complex that degrades several intracellular proteins. In this study, escalating doses of Bortezomib were administered along with the standard FOLFOX-4 doses, in order to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), toxicity profile and activity of the combination. Patients with advanced colorectal cancer, unpretreated for metastatic disease, were enroled in the study. Bortezomib starting dose was 1.3mg/m(2), which was to be escalated in the subsequent steps according to the toxicities observed after first cycle. Exploratory pharmacogenetics research was conducted by analysing the association between clinical outcomes and polymorphisms in candidate genes for response to each of the used drugs. Correlation between tumour marker changes and response was also investigated. One mg/m(2) (DL-1) was defined as being the maximum tolerated dose since only 1 DLT was observed in 6 patients. The main toxicities were haematologic, neuropathy, diarrhoea and fatigue. Amongst 13 evaluable patients, five had a partial response, five had a stable disease and three patients progressed. Two patients are long-term survivors after a combined chemosurgical approach. Further trials of the current combination may be justified.

Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial.

BACKGROUND: In 2004, a randomised phase III trial by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC) reported improved median and 2-year survival for patients with glioblastoma treated with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide and radiotherapy. We report the final results with a median follow-up of more than 5 years. METHODS: Adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were randomly assigned to receive either standard radiotherapy or identical radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide followed by up to six cycles of adjuvant temozolomide. The methylation status of the methyl-guanine methyl transferase gene, MGMT, was determined retrospectively from the tumour tissue of 206 patients. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00006353. FINDINGS: Between Aug 17, 2000, and March 22, 2002, 573 patients were assigned to treatment. 278 (97%) of 286 patients in the radiotherapy alone group and 254 (89%) of 287 in the combined-treatment group died during 5 years of follow-up. Overall survival was 27.2% (95% CI 22.2-32.5) at 2 years, 16.0% (12.0-20.6) at 3 years, 12.1% (8.5-16.4) at 4 years, and 9.8% (6.4-14.0) at 5 years with temozolomide, versus 10.9% (7.6-14.8), 4.4% (2.4-7.2), 3.0% (1.4-5.7), and 1.9% (0.6-4.4) with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0.6, 95% CI 0.5-0.7; p<0.0001). A benefit of combined therapy was recorded in all clinical prognostic subgroups, including patients aged 60-70 years. Methylation of the MGMT promoter was the strongest predictor for outcome and benefit from temozolomide chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Benefits of adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy lasted throughout 5 years of follow-up. A few patients in favourable prognostic categories survive longer than 5 years. MGMT methylation status identifies patients most likely to benefit from the addition of temozolomide. FUNDING: EORTC, NCIC, Nélia and Amadeo Barletta Foundation, Schering-Plough.