Search

Objectives: To explore the effects of a 'Rebuilding Myself' intervention on enhancing the adaptability of cancer patients to return to work. Methods: A single-center, single-blind, randomized controlled trial design was used. Eligible patients who were receiving routine hospital treatment were recruited from the university-affiliated hospital in our city. Patients in the control group only received usual care, while patients in the intervention group received additional 'Rebuilding Myself' intervention. Adaptability to return to work, self-efficacy of returning to work, mental resilience, quality of life and work ability were measured at baseline, the 6th and 12th of the intervention. The general estimation equations were used to compare the overall changes of each outcome index between the two groups at different time points. Considering that there may be patient shedding and rejection, Per-Protocol and Intention-to-Treat analysis were used to analyze the data in this study. Results: There were statistically significant differences between the two groups of patients in the cancer patients' adaptability to return to work, self-efficacy to return to work, mental resilience, work abilities, the physical, emotional, cognitive function, fatigue, insomnia and overall health status dimensions of quality of life (P < 0.05). And no significant difference was found in other dimensions (P > 0.05). The group effect, time effect, and interaction effect of patients' return to work adaptability and return to work self-efficacy were statistically significant in both groups (P < 0.05). Mental resilience, working ability, and quality of life had obvious time effect and interaction effect (P < 0.05). Conclusion: This intervention could improve cancer patients' adaptability to return to work, self-efficacy to return to work, mental resilience, work abilities and quality of life. And it can be further expanded to improve the adaptability of patients to return to work, then to help patients achieve comprehensive rehabilitation. Implications for cancer survivors: The application of 'Rebuilding Myself' interventions can effectively improve the adaptability of cancer patients returning to work. Trial registration: This study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR2200057943) on 23 March, 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy (OIPN) in general and painful OIPN in particular is a debilitating late effect that severely affects cancer survivors' quality of life and causes premature cessation of potentially lifesaving treatment. No preventive treatments and no effective treatment for chronic OIPN exist despite many attempts. One of several suggested mechanisms includes neuroinflammation as a contributing factor to OIPN. Fish oil containing long-chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 LCPUFAs) are precursors to specialized proresolving mediators that mediate the resolution of inflammation. Our primary hypothesis is that a high supplementation of n-3 LCPUFAs will lower the prevalence and severity of OIPN. Methods: The OxaNeuro project is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study. We will include 120 patients eligible to receive adjuvant oxaliplatin after colorectal cancer surgery. Patients will receive fish oil capsules containing n-3 LCPUFAs or corn oil daily for 8 months. The primary endpoint is the prevalence of OIPN at 8 months defined as relevant symptoms, including one of the following: abnormal nerve conduction screening, abnormal vibration threshold test, abnormal skin biopsy, or abnormal pinprick test. Additional endpoints include the intensity and severity of OIPN-related neuropathic pain, patient-reported OIPN symptoms, quality of life, mental health symptoms, body composition, and cognitive evaluation. Furthermore, we will evaluate inflammatory biomarkers in blood samples and skin biopsies, including the potential OIPN biomarker neurofilament light protein (NfL) which will be measured before each cycle of chemotherapy. Discussion: If readily available fish oil supplementation alleviates OIPN prevalence and severity, it will significantly improve the lives of both cancer survivors and palliative cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin; it will improve their quality of life, optimize chemotherapeutic treatment plans by lowering the need for dose reduction or premature cessation, and potentially increase survival. Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT05404230 Protocol version: 1.2, April 25th. 2023 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Though our previous study has demonstrated that the single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1) is safe and feasible for sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer and has better short-term outcomes compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), the long-term outcomes of SILS + 1 remains uncertain and are needed to evaluated by an RCT. Methods: Patients with clinical stage T1-4aN0-2M0 rectosigmoid cancer were enrolled. The participants were randomly assigned to either SILS + 1 (n = 99) or CLS (n = 99). The 3-year DFS, 5-year OS, and recurrence patterns were analyzed. Results: Between April 2014 and July 2016, 198 patients were randomly assigned to either the SILS + 1 group (n = 99) or CLS group (n = 99). The median follow-up in the SILS + 1 group was 64.0 months and in CLS group was 65.0 months. The 3-year DFS was 87.8% (95% CI, 81.6–94.8%) in SILS + 1 group and 86.9% (95% CI, 81.3–94.5%) in CLS group (hazard ratio: 1.09 (95% CI, 0.48–2.47; P = 0.84)). The 5-year OS was 86.7% (95% CI,79.6–93.8%) in the SILS + 1 group and 80.5% (95% CI,72.5–88.5%) in the CLS group (hazard ratio: 1.53 (95% CI, 0.74–3.18; P = 0.25)). There were no significant differences in the recurrence patterns between the two groups. Conclusions: We found no significant difference in 3-year DFS and 5-year OS of patients with sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer treated with SILS + 1 vs. CLS. SILS + 1 is noninferior to CLS when performed by expert surgeons. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02117557 (registered on 21/04/2014). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Psycho-oncological treatment is recommended in cancer rehabilitation as it improves fatigue, anxiety, depression, and quality of life in breast cancer patients. The aim of our study was to compare a structured short-term psychotherapy and a non-specific group discussion provided during breast cancer rehabilitation. Methods: Breast cancer patients were randomly assigned to structured group short-term psychotherapy or a non-specific group discussion during breast cancer rehabilitation. The patients completed questionnaires at the beginning and end of rehabilitation and three months after rehabilitation. The primary outcome was anxiety. Secondary outcomes were depression, distress, fatigue and health-related quality of life domains. Results: In total, 160 patients (80 in both groups) were recruited and included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between both groups in the primary outcome anxiety at the end of rehabilitation (difference = -0.2; 95% CI -1.2 to 0.7) and three months after rehabilitation (difference = 0.2; 95% CI -0.9 to 1.3) and in any secondary outcome. Patients in the short-term psychotherapy group with high anxiety levels at baseline reported fewer depressive symptoms at the end of rehabilitation. Conclusions: Our study showed no difference between structured short-term psychotherapy and a non-specific group discussion. Patients with high baseline anxiety levels were more likely to benefit from short-term structured psychotherapy. Early identification of this subgroup and symptoms of mental illness should occur after initial treatment in breast cancer patients in order to offer a structured treatment for anxiety and depressive symptoms during rehabilitation. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00017571; 08/07/2019). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach. Methods: This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized. Discussion: The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. Trial registration: Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer patients with newly created ostomies face complications that reduce quality of life (QOL) and increase morbidity and mortality. This proof-of-concept study examined the feasibility, usability, acceptability, and initial efficacy of an eHealth program titled the "Patient Reported Outcomes-Informed Symptom Management System" (PRISMS) during post-ostomy creation care transition. Methods: We conducted a 2-arm pilot randomized controlled trial among 23 patients who received surgical treatment with curative intent for bladder and colorectal cancer and their caregivers. After assessing QOL, general symptoms, and caregiver burden at baseline, participants were randomly assigned to PRISMS (n = 16 dyads) or usual care (UC) (n = 7 dyads). After a 60-day intervention period, participants completed a follow-up survey and post-exit interview. We used descriptive statistics and t-tests to analyze the data. Results: We achieved an 86.21% recruitment rate and a 73.91% retention rate. Among the PRISMS participants who used the system and biometric devices (n = 14, 87.50%), 46.43% used the devices for ≥ 50 days during the study period. Participants reported PRISMS as useful and acceptable. Compared to their UC counterparts, PRISMS patient social well-being scores decreased over time and had an increased trend of physical and emotional well-being; PRISMS caregivers experienced a greater decrease in caregiver burden. Conclusions: PRISMS recruitment and retention rates were comparable to existing family-based intervention studies. PRISMS is a useful and acceptable multilevel intervention with the potential to improve the health outcomes of cancer patients needing ostomy care and their caregivers during post-surgery care transition. A sufficiently powered RCT is needed to test its effects. Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT04492007. Registration date: 30/07/2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Though behavioral activation (BA) has been shown to be effective for depression, evidence in patients with advanced cancer has not been established. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of a BA program on depression in this population. Methods: A randomized controlled trial with a wait-list control group (waiting group) of 38 patients with advanced cancer and depression will be conducted at three sites in Japan. The BA program consists of seven sessions. Outcome measures will be evaluated at three times in the intervention group; at the entry, at the end of the intervention and 4 months after the end of the intervention and four times in the waiting group: at the entry, before the intervention, at the end of the intervention, and 4 months after the end of the intervention. Primary outcome is Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) score. To examine the main effect of the intervention, two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) will be conducted, with timing and intervention status as the independent variables and BDI-II score as the dependent variable. One-way repeated measures ANOVA will be conducted to combine data from the intervention and control groups and examine changes in BDI-II scores by timing in both groups. Secondary endpoints (anxiety, quality of life, spirituality, degree of behavioral activation, value, and pain) will be evaluated with rating scales. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA will be conducted to examine whether there are differences between the groups before and after the intervention, with timing and intervention status as the independent variables and scores on each rating scale as the dependent variables. Discussion: This multicenter randomized controlled trial is the first study to assess the effectiveness of BA on depression in patients with advanced cancer. Our findings will provide evidence about the effectiveness of BA on depression and provide an intervention option that is acceptable and feasible for the treatment of depression in this population. The results of this study will lead to improved mood and rebuilding to regain life purpose and value in this vulnerable population. Trial Registration Number: jRCT, jRCT1030210687, Registered 22 March 2022, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCT1030210687. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Polypharmacy is very common in older cancer patients and these patients are particularly vulnerable to drug-drug interactions and adverse drug reactions because they often receive chemotherapy and symptom-relieving agents. Methods: The primary aim of the randomized, controlled Optimization of Polypharmacy in Geriatric Oncology (OPTIMAL) trial is to test whether an advisory letter with the results of a comprehensive medication review conducted with the Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA) list to the caring physician in rehabilitation clinics improves the quality of life (QoL) of older cancer patients exposed to polypharmacy more than usual care. The FORTA list detects medication overuse, underuse, and potentially inappropriate drug use among older adults. In the oncology departments of approximately 10 German rehabilitation clinics, we aim to recruit 514 cancer patients (22 common cancers; diagnosis or recurrence requiring treatment in the last 5 years; all stages) who are ≥ 65 years old, regularly take ≥ 5 drugs, and have ≥ 1 medication-related problem. All necessary information about the patients will be provided to a pharmacist at the coordinating center (German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg), who will perform randomization (1:1) and conduct the medication review with the FORTA list. For the intervention group only, the results are sent by letter to the treating physician in the rehabilitation clinics, who shall discuss medication changes with the patient at the discharge visit, as well as implement them afterwards and disclose them in the discharge letter to the general practitioner. The control group gets the usual care provided in German rehabilitation clinics, which usually does not include a comprehensive medication review but can include medication changes. Patients will be blinded, as they cannot know whether proposed medication changes were part of the study or part of usual care. Study physicians cannot be blinded. The primary endpoint will be the EORTC-QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL score, assessed via self-administered questionnaires 8 months after baseline. Discussion: If the planned study shows that a medication review with the FORTA list improves the QoL of older cancer patients in oncological rehabilitation more than usual care, it would provide the necessary evidence to translate the trial's findings into routine care. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00031024. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancer survivors often experience decline in physical performance and poor quality of life after surgery and during adjuvant therapies. In these patients, preserving skeletal muscle mass and high-quality nourishment are essential to reduce postoperative complications and improve quality of life and cancer-specific survival. Digital therapeutics have emerged as an encouraging tool for cancer survivors. However, to the best of our knowledge, randomized clinical trials applying personalized mobile application and smart bands as a supportive tool to several colorectal patients remain to be conducted, intervening immediately after the surgical treatment. Methods: This study is a prospective, multi-center, single-blinded, two-armed, randomized controlled trial. The study aims to recruit 324 patients from three hospitals. Patients will be randomly allocated to two groups for one year of rehabilitation, starting immediately after the operation: a digital healthcare system rehabilitation (intervention) group and a conventional education-based rehabilitation (control) group. The primary objective of this protocol is to clarify the effect of digital healthcare system rehabilitation on skeletal muscle mass increment in patients with colorectal cancer. The secondary outcomes would be the improvement in quality of life measured by EORTC QLQ C30 and CR29, enhanced physical fitness level measured by grip strength test, 30-sec chair stand test and 2-min walk test, increased physical activity measured by IPAQ-SF, alleviated pain intensity, decreased severity of the LARS, weight, and fat mass. These measurements will be held on enrollment and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months thereafter. Discussion: This study will compare the effect of personalized treatment stage-adjusted digital health interventions on immediate postoperative rehabilitation with that of conventional education-based rehabilitation in patients with colorectal cancer. This will be the first randomized clinical trial performing immediate postoperative rehabilitation in a large number of patients with colorectal cancer with a tailored digital health intervention, modified according to the treatment phase and patient condition. The study will add foundations for the application of comprehensive digital healthcare programs focusing on individuality in postoperative rehabilitation of patients with cancer. Trial registration: NCT05046756. Registered on 11 May 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of adjuvant radiation in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of gemcitabine combined with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) as adjuvant therapy for resected stage II PDAC.Methods: In this single-center randomized controlled trial, patients with stage II PDAC that underwent margin-negative resection were randomly assigned to gemcitabine-alone adjuvant chemotherapy or adjuvant SBRT followed by gemcitabine chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints included locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of adverse events.Results: Forty patients were randomly assigned to treatment between Sep 1, 2015 and Mar 31, 2018. Of these, 38 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (20 in gemcitabine arm and 18 in gemcitabine plus SBRT arm). The median RFS and OS were 9.70, 28.0 months in the gemcitabine arm and 5.30, 15.0 months in the gemcitabine plus SBRT arm (RFS, P = 0.53; OS, P = 0.20), respectively. The median LRFS in both arms was unreached (P = 0.81). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were all comparable between the two arms. Evaluation of data from the enrolled patients indicated that the addition of adjuvant SBRT was not associated with either better local disease control or recurrence-free survival.Conclusions: Adjuvant SBRT neither provided a survival benefit nor improved local disease control in resected stage II PDAC.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02461836 . Registered 03/06/2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men worldwide. The standard non-surgical approach for localized PCa is radiotherapy (RT), but one of the limitations of high-dose RT is the potential increase in gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities. We present the protocol of the Microstyle study, a multicentre randomized two-arm crossover clinical trial. The primary outcome will be assessed at the end of 6-month intervention, by measuring the change in adherence to a healthy lifestyle score. The hypothesis is that modifying lifestyle we change microbiome and improve quality of life and decrease side effects of RT.Methods: Study participants will be recruited among men undergoing RT in two Italian centers (Milan and Naples). We foresee to randomize 300 patients in two intervention arms: Intervention Group (IG) and Control Group (CG). Participants allocated to the IG will meet a dietitian and a physiotherapist before RT to receive personalized diet and exercise recommendations, according to their health status, to improve overall lifestyle and reduce side effects (bowel and/or urinary problems). Dietitian and physiotherapist will work together to set individualized goals to reduce or eliminate side effects and pain according to their health status. All participants (IG) will be given a pedometer device (steps counter) in order to monitor and to spur participants to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior. Participants included in the CG will receive baseline general advice and materials available for patients undergoing RT. According to the cross-over design, the CG will cross to the intervention approach after 6-month, to actively enhance compliance towards suggested lifestyle recommendations for all patients.Discussion: This trial is innovative in its design because we propose a lifestyle intervention during RT, that includes both dietary and physical activity counselling, as well as monitoring changes in microbiome and serum biomarkers. The promotion of healthy behaviour will be initiated before initiation of standard care, to achieve long lasting effects, controlling side effects, coping with feelings of anxiety and depression and improve efficacy of RT.Trial Registration: ClincalTrial.gov registration number: NCT05155618 . Retrospectively registered on December 13, 2021. The first patient was enrolled on October 22, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men worldwide. The standard non-surgical approach for localized PCa is radiotherapy (RT), but one of the limitations of high-dose RT is the potential increase in gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicities. We present the protocol of the Microstyle study, a multicentre randomized two-arm crossover clinical trial. The primary outcome will be assessed at the end of 6-month intervention, by measuring the change in adherence to a healthy lifestyle score. The hypothesis is that modifying lifestyle we change microbiome and improve quality of life and decrease side effects of RT. Methods: Study participants will be recruited among men undergoing RT in two Italian centers (Milan and Naples). We foresee to randomize 300 patients in two intervention arms: Intervention Group (IG) and Control Group (CG). Participants allocated to the IG will meet a dietitian and a physiotherapist before RT to receive personalized diet and exercise recommendations, according to their health status, to improve overall lifestyle and reduce side effects (bowel and/or urinary problems). Dietitian and physiotherapist will work together to set individualized goals to reduce or eliminate side effects and pain according to their health status. All participants (IG) will be given a pedometer device (steps counter) in order to monitor and to spur participants to increase physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior. Participants included in the CG will receive baseline general advice and materials available for patients undergoing RT. According to the cross-over design, the CG will cross to the intervention approach after 6-month, to actively enhance compliance towards suggested lifestyle recommendations for all patients. Discussion: This trial is innovative in its design because we propose a lifestyle intervention during RT, that includes both dietary and physical activity counselling, as well as monitoring changes in microbiome and serum biomarkers. The promotion of healthy behaviour will be initiated before initiation of standard care, to achieve long lasting effects, controlling side effects, coping with feelings of anxiety and depression and improve efficacy of RT. Trial registration: ClincalTrial.gov registration number: NCT05155618. Retrospectively registered on December 13, 2021. The first patient was enrolled on October 22, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In most previous studies, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) was feasible and safe in the short term. However, long-term oncologic outcomes remain uncertain, as only a few studies contained long-term survival data. SILS for CRC is still in the early stages of research. Further studies, particularly large-scale, prospective randomized controlled trials, are necessary to assess the value of SILS for CRC.Methods: This study is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, noninferiority, parallel-group randomized controlled trial that investigates the long-term oncologic outcomes of SILS compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for CRC. A total of 710 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to the SILS group or the CLS group at a 1:1 ratio using a central, dynamic, and stratified block randomization method. Patients with ages ranging from 18 to 85 years old, of both sexes, with CRC above the peritoneal reflection diagnosed as cT1-4aN0-2M0 and a tumour size no larger than 5 cm will be considered for the study. The primary endpoint is 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary endpoints include: intraoperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, postoperative pain assessment, pathological outcomes, early morbidity and mortality rate, cosmetic effects, quality of life, 3-year overall survival (OS), incidence of incisional hernia, 5-year DFS and 5-year OS. The first two follow-up visits will be scheduled at one month and three months postoperatively, then every three months for the first two years and every six months for the next three years.Discussion: Currently, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been designed to investigate the long-term oncologic outcomes of SILS for CRC. This study is expected to provide clinical evidence of the oncologic outcomes of SILS compared to CLS for CRC to promote its widespread use.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov:  NCT04527861 (registered on August 27, 2020). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) has become the cornerstone of treatment for patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies and toxicities of different CCRT regimens in the treatment of LA-NSCLC by adopting a network meta-analysis (NMA).Methods: An exhaustive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) was conducted to identify relevant studies from inception to October 1, 2020. Direct and indirect evidence was combined to calculate the odds radios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), as well as to plot the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curves. Cluster analyses were adopted to compare the efficacies and toxicities of different CCRT regimens according to the similarity of 2 variables. Publication bias was detected by comparison-adjusted funnel plots.Results: Twenty-two studies were enrolled in this NMA, including 18 regimens: CCRT (cisplatin + etoposide), CCRT (carboplatin + paclitaxel), CCRT (pemetrexed + carboplatin), CCRT (pemetrexed + cisplatin), CCRT (docetaxel + cisplatin), CCRT (S-1 + cisplatin), CCRT (mitomycin + vindesine + cisplatin), CCRT (cisplatin + vinorelbine), CCRT (cisplatin), CCRT (etoposide + cisplatin + amifostine), RT, CCRT (5-FU), CCRT (paclitaxel + cisplatin), CCRT (irinotecan + carboplatin), CCRT (nedaplatin), CCRT (carboplatin + etoposide), CCRT (paclitaxel), and CCRT (carboplatin). The results indicated that the regimens with CCRT (cisplatin + etoposide), CCRT (carboplatin + paclitaxel), CCRT (pemetrexed + cisplatin), CCRT (S-1 + cisplatin), and CCRT (cisplatin + vinorelbine) had relatively better efficacies compared with other regimens. As for toxicities of different CCRT regimens, the CCRT (carboplatin + paclitaxel), CCRT (pemetrexed + cisplatin), and CCRT (docetaxel + cisplatin) were relatively lower.Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that CCRT (pemetrexed + cisplatin) and CCRT (carboplatin + paclitaxel) might be the best options for the treatment of LA-NSCLC, and CCRT (pemetrexed + cisplatin) had the highest 3-year overall survival (OS) rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Integrative medicine is used frequently alongside chemotherapy treatment in pediatric oncology, but little is known about the influence on toxicity. This German, multi-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial assessed the effects of complementary treatments on toxicity related to intensive-phase chemotherapy treatment in children aged 1-18 with the primary outcome of the toxicity sum score. Secondary outcomes were chemotherapy-related toxicity, overall and event-free survival after 5 years in study patients.Methods: Intervention and control were given standard chemotherapy according to malignancy & tumor type. The intervention arm was provided with anthroposophic supportive treatment (AST); given as anthroposophic base medication (AMP), as a base medication for all patients and additional on-demand treatment tailored to the intervention malignancy groups. The control was given no AMP. The toxicity sum score (TSS) was assessed using NCI-CTC scales.Results: Data of 288 patients could be analyzed. Analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences between the AST and the control group for the primary endpoint or the toxicity measures (secondary endpoints). Furthermore, groups did not differ significantly in the five-year overall and event-free survival follow up.Discussion: In this trial findings showed that AST was able to be safely administered in a clinical setting, although no beneficial effects of AST between group toxicity scores, overall or event-free survival were shown. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The current standard treatment for elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma is surgery followed by short-course radiotherapy with temozolomide. In recent studies, 40 Gy in 15 fractions vs. 60 Gy in 30 fractions, 34 Gy in 10 fractions vs. 60 Gy in 30 fractions, and 40 Gy in 15 fractions vs. 25 Gy in 5 fractions have been reported as non-inferior. The addition of temozolomide increased the survival benefit of radiotherapy with 40 Gy in 15 fractions. However, the optimal regimen for radiotherapy plus concomitant temozolomide remains unresolved.Methods: This multi-institutional randomized phase III trial was commenced to confirm the non-inferiority of radiotherapy comprising 25 Gy in 5 fractions with concomitant (150 mg/m2/day, 5 days) and adjuvant temozolomide over 40 Gy in 15 fractions with concomitant (75 mg/m2/day, every day from first to last day of radiation) and adjuvant temozolomide in terms of overall survival (OS) in elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. A total of 270 patients will be accrued from 51 Japanese institutions in 4 years and follow-up will last 2 years. Patients 71 years of age or older, or 71-75 years old with resection of less than 90% of the contrast-enhanced region, will be registered and randomly assigned to each group with 1:1 allocation. The primary endpoint is OS, and the secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, frequency of adverse events, proportion of Karnofsky performance status preservation, and proportion of health-related quality of life preservation. The Japan Clinical Oncology Group Protocol Review Committee approved this study protocol in April 2020. Ethics approval was granted by the National Cancer Center Hospital Certified Review Board. Patient enrollment began in August 2020.Discussion: If the primary endpoint is met, short-course radiotherapy comprising 25 Gy in 5 fractions with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide will be a standard of care for elderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.Trial Registration: Registry number: jRCTs031200099 . Date of Registration: 27/Aug/2020. Date of First Participant Enrollment: 4/Sep/2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), such as gefitinib, have achieved good efficacy in EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, but eventual drug resistance is inevitable. Thus, new TKI-based combination therapies should be urgently explored to extend the overall survival time of these patients. CD8 + CD56+ natural killer T (NKT) cells are a natural and unique subset of lymphocytes in humans that present characteristics of T and NK cells and exert cytotoxicity on tumour cells in a granzyme B-dependent manner. The aim of this trial was to explore the efficacy and safety of CD8 + CD56+ NKT cell immunotherapy combined with gefitinib in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC.Methods: The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label, phase I/II trial that includes 30 patients with EGFR mutation-positive stage III/IV NSCLC. All patients will be randomized in blocks at a 1:1 ratio and treated with gefitinib 250 mg/day monotherapy or combination therapy with allogeneic CD8 + CD56+ NKT cell infusions twice per month for 12 cycles or until disease progression occurs. The effectiveness of this treatment will be evaluated based on by progression-free survival (PFS), the time to progression (TTP), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and overall survival (OS). The safety of the trail is being assessed based on adverse events (AEs). Recruitment and data collection, which started in December 2017, are ongoing.Discussion: Although immunotherapy, including programmed death-1/programmed death-1 ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) immunotherapy, has been used for NSCLC treatment with or without EGFR-TKIs, its clear efficacy still has not been shown. Assessing the safety and therapeutic potential of allogeneic CD8 + CD56+ NKT killer cells in combination with EGFR-TKIs in NSCLC will be of great interest.Trial Registration: This trial (Phase I/II Trails of NKT Cell in Combination With Gefitinib For Non Small Cell Lung Cancer) was registered on 21 November 2017 with www.chictr.org.cn , ChiCTR-IIR-17013471 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients.Methods: This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up.Discussion: The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.Trial Registration: Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer-related fatigue represents one major cause of reduced quality of life in cancer patients and can seriously affect the physical, emotional, and cognitive functioning impeding coping with the disease. Options for effective treatment of cancer-related fatigue are limited, consisting only of non-pharmacologic interventions like physical activity, psychosocial, and mind-body interventions. Recent evidence suggests that vitamin D3 supplementation might alleviate cancer-related fatigue. However, confirmation in a randomized controlled trial is needed.Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 456 colorectal cancer (CRC) patients aged 18 years and older are being recruited in three German rehabilitation clinics. Study inclusion requires hospitalization of at least 3 weeks at such a clinic, a diagnosis of non-metastatic CRC (stage I-III), surgical removal of the tumor within the past 9 months, and season-adapted vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency. Eligible patients are randomly assigned to a personalized regimen of vitamin D3 or placebo for 12 weeks. In the intervention group, a loading dose of 20,000 or 40,000 IU vitamin D3 will be administered daily during the first 11 days, followed by a maintenance dose of 2000 IU daily. Patients will complete questionnaires for secondary outcomes (fatigue subdomains, quality of life and subdomains, depression, functional well-being, and infection frequency). Blood and urine samples will be collected for analyses of safety parameters (hypervitaminosis D, hypercalcemia, hypercalciuria, and renal impairment) and efficacy biomarkers (25-hydroxyvitamin D, HbA1c, white blood cell count, leukocyte subtype counts, serum C-reactive protein, uric acid, creatinine, triglycerides, total, low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol).Discussion: This trial tests whether a personalized vitamin D3 dosing regimen reduces or prevents fatigue among non-metastatic CRC patients by treating the underlying vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency. If efficacy can be confirmed, personalized vitamin D3 supplementation could be used as a tertiary prevention measure in addition to non-pharmacological treatments of cancer-related fatigue in CRC patients. We expect to detect an effect of vitamin D3 supplementation on secondary outcomes like quality of life, depression, functional well-being, infections, inflammatory biomarkers, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia.Trial Registration: European Clinical Trials Database: EudraCT-No: 2019-000502-30, January 21, 2019; German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00019907 , April 30, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Up to 75% of women diagnosed with breast cancer report chemotherapy-related cognitive changes (CRCC) during treatment, including decreased memory, attention, and processing speed. Though CRCC negatively impacts everyday functioning and reduces overall quality of life in women diagnosed with breast cancer, effective interventions to prevent and/or manage CRCC are elusive. Consequently, women seldom receive advice on how to prevent or manage CRCC. Aerobic exercise is associated with improved cognitive functioning in healthy older adults and adults with cognitive impairments. Accordingly, it holds promise as an intervention to prevent and/or manage CRCC. However, evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) supporting a beneficial effect of aerobic exercise on CRCC is limited. The primary aim of the ACTIVATE trial is to evaluate the impact of supervised aerobic exercise on CRCC in women receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.Methods: The ACTIVATE trial is a two-arm, two-centre RCT. Women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer and awaiting neo-adjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy are recruited from hospitals in Ottawa (Ontario) and Vancouver (British Columbia), Canada. Recruits are randomized to the intervention group (aerobic exercise during chemotherapy) or the wait-list control group (usual care during chemotherapy and aerobic exercise post-chemotherapy). The primary outcome is cognitive functioning as measured by a composite cognitive summary score (COGSUM) of several neuropsychological tests. Secondary outcomes are self-reported cognitive functioning, quality of life, and brain structure and functioning (measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/functional MRI and electroencephalography). Assessments take place pre-chemotherapy (pre-intervention), mid-way through chemotherapy (mid-intervention/mid-wait period), end of chemotherapy (post-intervention/post-wait period; primary endpoint), 16-weeks post-chemotherapy, and at 1-year post-baseline.Discussion: Aerobic exercise is a promising intervention for preventing and/or managing CRCC and enhancing quality of life among women diagnosed with breast cancer. The ACTIVATE trial tests several novel hypotheses, including that aerobic exercise can prevent and/or mitigate CRCC and that this effect is mediated by the timing of intervention delivery (i.e., during versus post-chemotherapy). Findings may support prescribing exercise during (or post-) chemotherapy for breast cancer and elucidate the potential role of aerobic exercise as a management strategy for CRCC in women with early-stage breast cancer.Trial Registration: The trial was registered with the ClinicalTrials.gov database ( NCT03277898 ) on September 11, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: For loco-regionally advanced, but transorally resectable oropharyngeal cancer (OPSCC), the current standard of care includes surgical resection and risk-adapted adjuvant (chemo) radiotherapy, or definite chemoradiation with or without salvage surgery. While transoral surgery for OPSCC has increased over the last decade for example in the United States due to transoral robotic surgery, this treatment approach has a long history in Germany. In contrast to Anglo-Saxon countries, transoral surgical approaches have been used frequently in Germany to treat patients with oro-, hypopharyngeal and laryngeal cancer. Transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) has had a long tradition since its introduction in the early 70s. To date, the different therapeutic approaches to transorally resectable OPSCC have not been directly compared to each other in a randomized trial concerning disease control and survival. The goal of this study is to compare initial transoral surgery to definitive chemoradiation for resectable OPSCC, especially with regards to local and regional control.Methods: TopROC is a prospective, two-arm, open label, multicenter, randomized, and controlled comparative effectiveness study. Eligible patients are ≥18 years old with treatment-naïve, histologically proven OPSCC (T1, N2a-c, M0; T2, N1-2c, M0; T3, N0-2c, M0 UICC vers. 7) which are amenable to transoral resection. Two hundred eighty patients will be randomly assigned (1:1) to surgical treatment (arm A) or chemoradiation (arm B). Standard of care treatment will be performed according to daily routine practice. Arm A consists of transoral surgical resection with neck dissection followed by risk-adapted adjuvant therapy. Patients treated in arm B receive standard chemoradiation, residual tumor may be subject to salvage surgery. Follow-up visits for 3 years are planned. Primary endpoint is time to local or locoregional failure (LRF). Secondary endpoints include overall and disease free survival, toxicity, and patient reported outcomes. Approximately 20 centers will be involved in Germany. This trial is supported by the German Cancer Aid and accompanied by a scientific support program.Discussion: This study will shed light on an urgently-needed randomized comparison of the strategy of primary chemoradiation vs. primary surgical approach. As a comparative effectiveness trial, it is designed to provide data based on two established regimens in daily clinical routine.Trial Registration: NCT03691441 Registered 1 October 2018 - Retrospectively registered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In its 2006 report, From cancer patient to cancer survivor: lost in transition, the U.S. Institute of Medicine raised the need for a more coordinated and comprehensive care model for cancer survivors. Given the ever increasing number of cancer survivors, in general, and prostate cancer survivors, in particular, there is a need for a more sustainable model of follow-up care. Currently, patients who have completed primary treatment for localized prostate cancer are often included in a specialist-based follow-up care program. General practitioners already play a key role in providing continuous and comprehensive health care. Studies in breast and colorectal cancer suggest that general practitioners could also consider to provide survivorship care in prostate cancer. However, empirical data are needed to determine whether follow-up care of localized prostate cancer survivors by the general practitioner is a feasible alternative.Methods: This multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority study will compare specialist-based (usual care) versus general practitioner-based (intervention) follow-up care of prostate cancer survivors who have completed primary treatment (prostatectomy or radiotherapy) for localized prostate cancer. Patients are being recruited from hospitals in the Netherlands, and randomly (1:1) allocated to specialist-based (N = 195) or general practitioner-based (N = 195) follow-up care. This trial will evaluate the effectiveness of primary care-based follow-up, in comparison to usual care, in terms of adherence to the prostate cancer surveillance guideline for the timing and frequency of prostate-specific antigen assessments, the time from a biochemical recurrence to retreatment decision-making, the management of treatment-related side effects, health-related quality of life, prostate cancer-related anxiety, continuity of care, and cost-effectiveness. The outcome measures will be assessed at randomization (≤6 months after treatment), and 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment.Discussion: This multicenter, prospective, randomized study will provide empirical evidence regarding the (cost-) effectiveness of specialist-based follow-up care compared to general practitioner-based follow-up care for localized prostate cancer survivors.Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Registry, Trial NL7068 (NTR7266). Prospectively registered on 11 June 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adjuvant treatment for malignant tumors, event-free survival (EFS) is considered the most acceptable surrogate for overall survival (OS). However, even though EFS has repeatedly been selected as a primary endpoint in RCTs of Ewing sarcoma (ES), the surrogacy of EFS for OS has not been investigated. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between EFS and OS in RCTs of chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ES using a meta-analytic approach.Methods: We identified seven RCTs of newly diagnosed ES through a systematic review, and a meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events associated with chemotherapy for previously untreated ES. The correlation between EFS and OS was investigated using weighted linear regression analysis and Spearman rank correlation coefficients (ρ). The strength of the correlation was evaluated using the coefficient of determination (R2).Results: A total of 3612 patients were randomly assigned to 17 treatment arms in the eligible RCTs. The meta-analysis revealed that the hazard ratios for OS and EFS showed significantly better results in the experimental treatment groups with increasing toxicities. The correlation between the hazard ratios for EFS and OS was good (R2 = 0.747, ρ = 0.683), and the correlation tended to be more favorable in cases of localized ES (R2 = 0.818, ρ = 0.929).Conclusions: Overall, the trial-level correlation between EFS and OS was good for newly diagnosed ES and was very good in cases of localized disease. EFS may be a useful endpoint in RCTs of ES chemotherapy, and it is worth verifying using individual patient data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Self-management is becoming essential for breast cancer survivors, but evidence about the effectiveness of self-management support (SMS) intervention is lacking. To address this issue, we developed a theory-based SMS intervention, the 'EMPOWER', aimed at empowering breast cancer survivors. Here we describe the rationale of the intervention and its development.Methods: The conceptual framework of this study is the Chronic Care Model, which posits that SMS can influence patient-provider relationships and ultimately improve health outcomes. We will conduct a multi-center, 2-armed randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of EMPOWER among post-treatment breast cancer survivors in South Korea. The trial will include 94 women who completed primary breast cancer treatment within the last 6 months. Participants will be randomly assigned to the intervention group or the wait-list control group (1:1). The intervention group will receive a 7-week partnership-based and needs-tailored SMS intervention via telephone counseling. The primary outcome is empowerment. The secondary outcomes include self-efficacy for post-treatment self-management behaviors, mental adjustment, psychological distress, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Data will be collected by self-reported questionnaire at baseline, post-intervention, and 3-month follow-up.Discussion: We believe that the EMPOWER intervention could improve HRQOL of post-treatment breast cancer survivors by enhancing their empowerment. If found successful, it could aid clinicians engaged in the long-term care of breast cancer survivors.Trial Registration: Clinical Research Information Service, KCT0004794. Registered 5 March 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cognitive therapy has been shown to reduce fear of cancer recurrence (FCR), mainly in breast cancer survivors. The accessibility of cognitive behavioural interventions could be further improved by Internet delivery, but self-guided interventions have shown limited efficacy. The aim of this study is to test the efficacy of a therapist guided internet-delivered intervention (TG-iConquerFear) vs. augmented treatment as usual (aTAU) in Danish colorectal cancer survivors.Methods/design: A population-based randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing TG-iConquerFear with aTAU (1:1) in n = 246 colorectal cancer survivors who suffer from clinically significant FCR (Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory Short Form (FCRI-SF) ≥ 22 and semi-structured interview). Evaluation will be conducted at 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months post-treatment and between-group differences will be evaluated. Long-term effects will be evaluated after one year. Primary outcome will be post-treatment FCR (FCRI-SF). Secondary outcomes are global overall health and global quality of life (Visual Analogue Scales 0-100), bodily distress syndrome (BDS checklist), health anxiety (Whiteley-6), anxiety (SCL4-anx), depression (SCL6-dep) and sickness absence and health expenditure (register data). Explanatory outcomes include: Uncertainty in illness (Mishels uncertainty of illness scale, short form, MUIS), metacognitions (MCQ-30 negative beliefs about worry subscale), and perceived risk of cancer recurrence (Visual analogue Scale 1-100).Discussion: This RCT will provide valuable information on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of TG-iConquerFear vs. aTAU for CRC survivors with clinical FCR, as well as explanatory variables that may act as outcome moderators or mediators.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04287218, registered 25.02.2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT04287218&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with human papillomavirus-positive (HPV+) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPC) have substantially better treatment response and overall survival (OS) than patients with HPV-negative disease. Treatment options for HPV+ OPC can involve either a primary radiotherapy (RT) approach (± concomitant chemotherapy) or a primary surgical approach (± adjuvant radiation) with transoral surgery (TOS). These two treatment paradigms have different spectrums of toxicity. The goals of this study are to assess the OS of two de-escalation approaches (primary radiotherapy and primary TOS) compared to historical control, and to compare survival, toxicity and quality of life (QOL) profiles between the two approaches.Methods: This is a multicenter phase II study randomizing one hundred and forty patients with T1-2 N0-2 HPV+ OPC in a 1:1 ratio between de-escalated primary radiotherapy (60 Gy) ± concomitant chemotherapy and TOS ± de-escalated adjuvant radiotherapy (50-60 Gy based on risk factors). Patients will be stratified based on smoking status (< 10 vs. ≥ 10 pack-years). The primary endpoint is OS of each arm compared to historical control; we hypothesize that a 2-year OS of 85% or greater will be achieved. Secondary endpoints include progression free survival, QOL and toxicity.Discussion: This study will provide an assessment of two de-escalation approaches to the treatment of HPV+ OPC on oncologic outcomes, QOL and toxicity. Results will inform the design of future definitive phase III trials.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03210103. Date of registration: July 6, 2017, Current version: 1.3 on March 15, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Blended cognitive behaviour therapy (bCBT) is an effective treatment for fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) in curatively-treated breast, colorectal and prostate cancer survivors with high FCR. However, long-term outcomes are unknown. This study investigated the long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness of bCBT compared with care as usual (CAU).Methods: Eighty-eight cancer survivors with high FCR (Cancer Worry Scale ≥14) were randomly assigned to bCBT (n = 45) or CAU (n = 43). Data were collected at baseline and at three, nine and fifteen months from baseline and analysed by modified intention-to-treat. Efficacy was investigated with linear mixed-effects models. Cost-effectiveness was investigated from a societal perspective by comparing costs with quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).Results: Participants who received bCBT reported significantly lower FCR compared with CAU (mean difference of - 1.787 [95% CI -3.251 to - 0.323, p = 0.017] at 15 months follow-up), and proportionally greater self-rated and clinically significant improvement at each follow-up measurement. Total QALYs were non-significantly different between conditions when adjusted for utility score baseline differences (0.984 compared to 0.957, p = 0.385), while total costs were €631 lower (95% CI -1737 to 2794, p = 0.587). Intervention costs of bCBT were €466. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio amounted to an additional €2049 per QALY gained, with a 62% probability that bCBT is cost-effective at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of €20,000 per QALY. Results were confirmed in sensitivity analyses.Conclusions: bCBT for cancer survivors with FCR is clinically and statistically more effective than CAU on the long-term. In addition, bCBT is a relatively inexpensive intervention with similar costs and QALYs as CAU.Trial Registration: The RCT was registered in the Dutch National Trial Register ( NTR4423 ) on 12-Feb-2014. This abstract was previously presented at the International Psycho-Oncology Society conference of 2018 and published online. (Psycho-oncology, 27(S3):8-55; 2018). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of definitive radiotherapy for elderly patients with esophageal and esophagogastric-junction cancer is pronounced. However, little is known in terms of the best way to combine radiotherapy with other treatment options. This study aims to compare the efficiency of SIB radiotherapy alone with SIB radiotherapy concurrent and consolidated with S-1 for elderly patients. Comprehensive geriatric assessment is also incorporated in the procedure of treatment.Methods/design: The study is a two arm, open, randomized multicenter Phase III trial with patients over 70 years old with stage IIA-IVB (UICC 2002, IVB only with metastasis to supraclavicular or celiac lymph nodes) squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. A total of 300 patients will be randomized using a 1:1 allocation ratio stratified by disease stage and study site. Patients allocated to the SIB arm will receive definitive SIB radiotherapy (95%PTV/PGTV 50.4Gy/59.92Gy/28f) while those randomized to SIB + S-1 arm will receive definitive SIB radiotherapy concurrent and consolidated with S-1. The primary endpoint of the trial is 1-year overall survival. Secondary objectives include progression-free survival, recurrence-free survival (local-regional and distant), disease failure pattern, toxicity profile as well as quality of life. Besides, detailed radiotherapy protocol and quality assurance procedure have been incorporated into this trial.Discussion: The proportion of elderly patients in esophageal cancer is now growing, but there is a lack of evidence in term of treatment standard for this group of patients, which is what we aim to obtain through this prospective phase III study.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02979691 . Registered November 22, 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Upfront cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC (CRS-HIPEC) is the standard treatment for isolated resectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (PM) in the Netherlands. This study investigates whether addition of perioperative systemic therapy to CRS-HIPEC improves oncological outcomes.Methods: This open-label, parallel-group, phase II-III, randomised, superiority study is performed in nine Dutch tertiary referral centres. Eligible patients are adults who have a good performance status, histologically or cytologically proven resectable PM of a colorectal adenocarcinoma, no systemic colorectal metastases, no systemic therapy for colorectal cancer within six months prior to enrolment, and no previous CRS-HIPEC. Eligible patients are randomised (1:1) to perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC (experimental arm) or upfront CRS-HIPEC alone (control arm) by using central randomisation software with minimisation stratified by a peritoneal cancer index of 0-10 or 11-20, metachronous or synchronous PM, previous systemic therapy for colorectal cancer, and HIPEC with oxaliplatin or mitomycin C. At the treating physician's discretion, perioperative systemic therapy consists of either four 3-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of capecitabine with oxaliplatin (CAPOX), six 2-weekly neoadjuvant and adjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), or six 2-weekly neoadjuvant cycles of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) followed by four 3-weekly (capecitabine) or six 2-weekly (5-fluorouracil/leucovorin) adjuvant cycles of fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. Bevacizumab is added to the first three (CAPOX) or four (FOLFOX/FOLFIRI) neoadjuvant cycles. The first 80 patients are enrolled in a phase II study to explore the feasibility of accrual and the feasibility, safety, and tolerance of perioperative systemic therapy. If predefined criteria of feasibility and safety are met, the study continues as a phase III study with 3-year overall survival as primary endpoint. A total of 358 patients is needed to detect the hypothesised 15% increase in 3-year overall survival (control arm 50%; experimental arm 65%). Secondary endpoints are surgical characteristics, major postoperative morbidity, progression-free survival, disease-free survival, health-related quality of life, costs, major systemic therapy related toxicity, and objective radiological and histopathological response rates.Discussion: This is the first randomised study that prospectively compares oncological outcomes of perioperative systemic therapy and CRS-HIPEC with upfront CRS-HIPEC alone for isolated resectable colorectal PM.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov/ NCT02758951 , NTR/ NTR6301 , ISRCTN/ ISRCTN15977568 , EudraCT/ 2016-001865-99 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors are at increased risk for late and long-term effects post-treatment. The post-treatment phase of care is often poorly coordinated and survivors navigate follow-up care with minimal information or guidance from their healthcare team. This manuscript describes the Extended Cancer Education for Longer-term Survivors (EXCELS) in Primary Care protocol. EXCELS is a randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of patient-level self-management educational strategies on adherence to preventative health service use and cancer survivorship follow-up guidelines.Methods: The EXCELS trial compares four conditions: (1) EXCELS-website (e.g., a mobile-optimized technology platform); (2) EXCELS-health coaching; (3) EXCELS-website and health coaching; and (4) a print booklet. Approximately 480 breast, colorectal, and prostate survivors will be recruited through the New Jersey Primary Care Research Network (NJPCRN) and New Jersey State Cancer Registry (NJSCR). Eligible survivors (diagnosed stages 1-3) must have completed active treatment, access to a phone and a computer, smartphone or tablet with internet access, and be able to speak and read English. Patient assessments occur at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months. The primary outcomes are increased engagement in preventive health services and monitoring for cancer recurrence and treatment-related late effects.Discussion: The EXCELS trial is the first to test cancer survivorship educational self-management interventions for cancer survivors in a primary care context. Findings from this trial will inform successful implementation and engagement strategies for longer-term, post-treatment cancer survivors managed in primary care settings.Trial Registration: Registered August 1, 2017 at ClinicalTrials.gov , trial # NCT03233555. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: KLASS (the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study) is a time-honored study group that has established laparoscopic surgery for gastrointestinal disease in Korea and has performed some important studies for the rationale of laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery. A multi-center RCT (randomized controlled trial) to compare the quality of life (QOL) of patients undergoing totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for gastric cancer, named as KLASS 07, has been currently prepared in Korea.Methods: Patients diagnosed as gastric cancer, with clinical stage IA (T1N0M0) or IB (T1N1M0 / T2N0M0) according to the 7th edition of the Americal Joint Committee on Cancer System, were randomized to receive either TLDG or LADG. For surgical quality control, the surgeons participating in this trial had to have performed at least 50 gastrectomies and at least 30 gastrectomies annually (regardless of open or laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer). The patients who are allocated to TLDG group undergo intracorporeal anastomosis and those who are assigned to LADG undergo extracorporeal anastomosis for gastrointestinal reconstruction.Discussion: Thirty-one surgeons from 26 institutions were engaged in this trial. The primary endpoint is 30-day morbidity, and secondary endpoint is QOL assessed by the questionnaire score. The KLASS 07 trial is the first multi-center RCT to investigate whether there are significant and quantifiable differences between the QOL of TLDG and LADG. The findings from this trial are expected to be the critical clues for designing the detailed procedures during laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer.Trial Registration: The protocol of KLASS 07 (CKLASS 01) was registered in http://register.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03393182 (Date of registration: January 2nd, 2018.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Overall survival is the true endpoint for most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of malignant tumors, whereas progression-free survival (PFS) is considered the most reliable surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS). The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between surrogate endpoints and OS in randomized trials of first-line chemotherapy with doxorubicin (DOX), the standard treatment for advanced and metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (ASTS), using a meta-analytic approach.Methods: In a systematic review, we identified RCTs of first-line chemotherapy for ASTS that compared single-agent doxorubicin (DOX) with other chemotherapy regimens, and were published in English during January 1974-December 2017. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of first-line treatments for ASTS. Surrogacy of the intermediate endpoints for OS was investigated using weighted linear regression analysis. Correlation strength was examined using the coefficient of determination (R2).Results: Twenty-seven randomized trials, comprising 6156 patients (3371 patients in the experimental arm and 2785 patients in the DOX arm) were identified. The hazard ratios for OS and PFS showed that the efficacy of treatment for ASTS was not significantly different between standard DOX and experimental treatments. The median OS was significantly prolonged in RCTs published after 2012 when pazopanib was approved for treating ASTS. The median PFS, however, did not differ significantly. The correlation between PFS and OS was moderate (R2 = 0.557), but better than that between OS and 3-month PFS, 6-month PFS, and response rate (R2 = 0.200, 0.073, and 0.278, respectively). The correlation between PFS and OS tended to be more favorable in RCTs published after 2012 (R2 = 0.586 and 0.459, respectively).Conclusions: The trial-level correlation between PFS and OS was only modest; it tended to be better in RCTs published after 2012. While the effective lines of chemotherapy and the introduction of new drugs prolonged OS but not PFS, PFS is a better surrogate than other intermediate endpoints in the first-line ASTS trials even in the post-pazopanib era. Although this does not negate the need for more reliable surrogate endpoints for OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Existing evidence demonstrates that 1:1 personal training (PT) improves many adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Whether less resource-intensive exercise delivery models are as effective remains to be established. We determined the feasibility of conducting a multi-center non-inferiority randomized controlled trial comparing PT with supervised group (GROUP) and home-based (HOME) exercise programs, and obtained preliminary efficacy estimates for GROUP and HOME compared to PT on quality of life (QOL) and physical fitness.Methods: Men with prostate cancer on ADT were recruited from one of two experienced Canadian centres and randomized 1:1:1 to PT, GROUP, or HOME. Randomization was stratified by length of ADT use and site. Participants completed moderate intensity aerobic and resistance exercises 4-5 days per week for 6 months with a target 150 min per week of exercise. Exercise prescriptions were individualized and progressed throughout the trial. Feasibility endpoints included recruitment, retention, adherence, and participant satisfaction. The efficacy endpoints QOL, fatigue, and fitness (VO2 peak, grip strength, and timed chair stands) in GROUP and HOME were compared for non-inferiority to PT. Descriptive analyses were used for feasibility endpoints. Between-group differences for efficacy endpoints were examined using Bayesian linear mixed effects models.Results: Fifty-nine participants (mean age 69.9 years) were enrolled. The recruitment rate was 25.4% and recruitment was slower than projected. Retention was 71.2%. Exercise adherence as measured through attendance was high for supervised sessions but under 50% by self-report and accelerometry. Satisfaction was high and there was no difference in this measure between all three groups. Between-group differences (comparing both GROUP and HOME to PT) were smaller than the minimum clinically important difference on most measures of QOL, fatigue, and fitness. However, two of six outcomes for GROUP and four of six outcomes for HOME had a > 20% probability of being inferior for GROUP.Conclusions: Feasibility endpoints were generally met. Both GROUP and HOME interventions in men with PC on ADT appeared to be similar to PT for multiple efficacy outcomes, although conclusions are limited by a small sample size and cost considerations have not been incorporated. Efforts need to be targeted to improving recruitment and adherence. A larger trial is warranted.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02046837 . Date of registration: January 20, 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is commonly used to treat prostate cancer. However, side effects of ADT often lead to reduced quality of life and physical function. Existing evidence demonstrates that exercise can ameliorate multiple treatment-related side effects for men on ADT, yet adherence rates are often low. The method of exercise delivery (e.g., supervised group in-centre vs. individual home-based) may be important from clinical and economic perspectives; however, few studies have compared different delivery models. Additionally, long-term exercise adherence and an understanding of predictors of adherence are critical to achieving sustained benefits, but such data are lacking. The primary aim of this multi-centre phase III non-inferiority randomized controlled trial is to determine whether a home-based delivery model is non-inferior to a group-based delivery model in terms of benefits in fatigue and fitness in this population. Two other key aims include examining cost-effectiveness and long-term adherence.Methods: Men diagnosed with prostate cancer of any stage, starting or continuing on ADT for at least 6 months, fluent in English, and living close to a study centre are eligible. Participants complete five assessments over 12 months (baseline and every 3 months during the 6-month intervention and 6-month follow-up phases), including a fitness assessment and self-report questionnaires. Biological outcomes are collected at baseline, 6, and 12 months. A total of 200 participants will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to supervised group training or home-based training supported by smartphones, health coaches, and Fitbit technology. Participants are asked to complete 4 to 5 exercise sessions per week, incorporating aerobic, resistance and flexibility training. Outcomes include fatigue, quality of life, fitness measures, body composition, biological outcomes, and program adherence. Cost information will be obtained using patient diary-based self-report and utilities via the EQ-5D.Discussion: To disseminate publicly funded exercise programs widely, clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness have to be demonstrated. The goals of this trial are to provide these data along with an increased understanding of adherence to exercise among men with prostate cancer receiving ADT.Trial Registration: The trial has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (Registration # NCT02834416 ). Registration date was June 2, 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for the treatment of gastric cancer remains lack of clinical evidence. The Chinese Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (CLASS) Group recently launched a multicenter randomized clinical trial (CLASS02-01) to compare the safety of LTG for clinical stage I gastric cancer with the conventional open total gastrectomy (OTG).Methods: This CLASS02-01 trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open, and non-inferiority trial. Two hundred patients who met the inclusion criteria and did not accord with the exclusion criteria will be randomly divided into LTG group (n = 100) and OTG group (n = 100). The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the early operative morbidity and mortality of LTG compared with OTG for clinical stage I gastric adenocarcinoma. The second purpose is to evaluate the recovery course and compare the postoperative hospital stay of the patients enrolled in this study.Discussion: This CLASS02-01 trial is the first prospective randomized two-arm controlled study to determine the safety of LTG compared with OTG. Through this trial, we hope to show that experienced surgeons can safely perform LTG with lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03007550 . December 30, 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most prevalent and distressing long-term complaints reported by (non-) Hodgkin survivors. To date there has been no standard treatment for CRF in this population. A novel and promising approach to treat CRF is exposure to bright white light therapy. Yet, large scale randomized controlled trials testing its efficacy in these patients and research on potential mechanisms is lacking. The objective of the current study is to investigate the efficacy of light therapy as a treatment for CRF and to explore potential mechanisms.Methods/design: In a multicenter, randomized controlled trial we are evaluating the efficacy of two intensities of light therapy in reducing CRF complaints and restrictions caused by CRF in survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Secondary outcomes include sleep quality, depression, anxiety, quality of life, cognitive complaints, cancer worries, fatigue catastrophizing, self-efficacy to handle fatigue, biological circadian rhythms of melatonin, cortisol and activity, and biomarkers of inflammation. We will recruit 128 survivors, with fatigue complaints, from academic and general hospitals. Survivors are randomized to either an intervention (exposure to bright white light) or a comparison group (exposure to dim white light). The longitudinal design includes four measurement points at baseline (T0), post-intervention at 3.5 weeks (T1), 3 months post-intervention (T2) and 9 months post-intervention (T3). Each measurement point includes self-reported questionnaires and actigraphy (10 days). T0 and T1 measurements also include collection of blood and saliva samples.Discussion: Light therapy has the potential to be an effective treatment for CRF in cancer survivors. This study will provide insights on its efficacy and potential mechanisms. If proven to be effective, light therapy will provide an easy to deliver, low-cost and low-burden intervention, introducing a new era in the treatment of CRF.Trial Registration: The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on August 8th 2017( NCT03242902 ). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Approximately one third of the colorectal cancer survivors (CRCS) experience high levels of psychological distress. Common concerns experienced by CRCS include distress related to physical problems, anxiety, fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) and depressive symptoms. However, psychological interventions for distressed CRCS are scarce. Therefore, a blended therapy was developed, combining face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) with online self-management activities and telephone consultations. The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of this blended therapy in reducing psychological distress in CRCS.Methods/design: The CORRECT study is a two-arm multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT). A sample of 160 highly distressed CRCS (a score on the Distress Thermometer of 5 or higher) will be recruited from several hospitals in the Netherlands. CRCS will be randomized to either the intervention condition (blended CBT) or the control condition (care as usual). The blended therapy covers approximately 14 weeks and combines five face-to-face sessions and three telephone consultations with a psychologist, with access to an interactive self-management website. It includes three modules which are individually-tailored to patient concerns and aimed at decreasing: 1) distress caused by physical consequences of CRC, 2) anxiety and FCR, 3) depressive symptoms. Patients can choose between the optional modules. The primary outcome is general distress (Brief Symptom Inventory-18). Secondary outcomes are quality of life and general psychological wellbeing. Assessments will take place at baseline prior to randomization, after 4 and 7 months.Discussion: Blended CBT is an innovative and promising approach for providing tailored supportive care to reduce high distress in CRCS. If the intervention proves to be effective, an evidence-based intervention will become available for implementation in clinical practice.Trial Registration: This trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register ( NTR6025 ) on August 3, 2016. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Beyond survival of nowadays >80%, modern childhood cancer treatment strives to preserve long-term health and quality of life. However, the majority of today's survivors suffer from short- and long-term adverse effects such as cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases, obesity, osteoporosis, fatigue, depression, and reduced physical fitness and quality of life. Regular exercise can play a major role to mitigate or prevent such late-effects. Despite this, there are no data on the effects of regular exercise in childhood cancer survivors from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Primary outcome of the current RCT is therefore the effect of a 12-months exercise program on a composite cardiovascular disease risk score in childhood cancer survivors. Secondary outcomes are single cardiovascular disease risk factors, glycaemic control, bone health, body composition, physical fitness, physical activity, quality of life, mental health, fatigue and adverse events (safety).Methods: A total of 150 childhood cancer survivors aged ≥16 years and diagnosed ≥5 years prior to the study are recruited from Swiss paediatric oncology clinics. Following the baseline assessments patients are randomized 1:1 into an intervention and control group. Thereafter, they are seen at month 3, 6 and 12 for follow-up assessments. The intervention group is asked to add ≥2.5 h of intense physical activity/week, including 30 min of strength building and 2 h of aerobic exercises. In addition, they are told to reduce screen time by 25%. Regular consulting by physiotherapists, individual web-based activity diaries, and pedometer devices are used as motivational tools for the intervention group. The control group is asked to keep their physical activity levels constant.Discussion: The results of this study will show whether a partially supervised exercise intervention can improve cardiovascular disease risk factors, bone health, body composition, physical activity and fitness, fatigue, mental health and quality of life in childhood cancer survivors. If the program will be effective, all relevant information of the SURfit physical activity intervention will be made available to interested clinics that treat and follow-up childhood cancer patients to promote exercise in their patients.Trial Registration: Prospectively registered in clinicaltrials.gov [ NCT02730767 ], registration date: 10.12.2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of replacing standard intravenous therapy (taxane) with oral S-1 therapy for first-line metastatic breast cancer treatment.Methods: This cost-effectiveness analysis was based on data from a randomized phase III trial (SELECT BC). As cost-effectiveness was a secondary endpoint of the SELECT BC trial, some of the randomized patients participated in an EQ-5D survey (N = 391) and health economic survey (N = 146). The EQ-5D responses, claims, and prescription data were collected for as long as possible until death. The expected quality-adjusted life years (QALY) obtained from each treatment were calculated using patient-level EQ-5D data, and the expected cost was calculated using patient-level claim data. The analysis was performed from the perspective of public healthcare payers.Results: The estimated EQ-5D least-square means and 95% CI up to 48 months were 0.764 (95% CI, 0.741-0.782) and 0.742 (95% CI, 0.720-0.764) in the S-1 and taxane arms, respectively. The expected QALY was 2.11 for the S-1 arm and 2.04 for the taxane arm, with expected costs of JPY 5.13 million (USD 46,600) and JPY 5.56 million (USD 50,500), respectively. These results show that S-1 is cost-saving. According to probabilistic sensitivity analysis, S-1 was dominant with a probability of 63%. When the willingness to pay (WTP) value was JPY 5 million (USD 45,500) per QALY, the probability of being cost-effective was 92%.Conclusions: Our results show that the introduction of oral S-1 therapy for metastatic breast cancer is highly likely to be cost-effective.Trial Registration: UMIN CTR C000000416 . Registered on May 10, 2006. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Both enzalutamide and abiraterone have demonstrated improved radiographic progression-free and overall survival for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) compared with placebo controls before docetaxel treatment in phase III studies. These oral agents target androgen and androgen receptor signaling and are thought to be less toxic than chemotherapy. Cross-resistance to these agents was recently reported because of their similar mechanism of action, and it is important to assess which agent is more effective to use initially for CRPC.Methods/design: The present study is a phase III, investigator-initiated, multicenter, head-to-head, randomized controlled trial investigating enzalutamide vs. abiraterone as a first-line treatment for CRPC patients. Patients will be randomly assigned to an enzalutamide or an abiraterone treatment group. The primary endpoint is the time to prostate-specific antigen progression. The target sample size is set at 100 patients per group (total, 200 patients). The study duration is 5 years, and the duration for recruitment is 2 years and 6 months.Discussion: Thus far, there have been no prospective head-to-head studies comparing enzalutamide and abiraterone. This ENABLE study will clarify which agent should be prioritized for CRPC patients and enable clinicians to decide the appropriate treatment before chemotherapy.Trial Registration: University hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Center identifier UMIN000015529 . Registrated 11/1/2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer patients experience pain that has physiological, sensory, affective, cognitive, behavioral, and sociocultural dimensions. Opioids are used in treatment of pain in patients with various types of cancer. We previously showed that the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) genotype is related to the plasma level of morphine and the required dose of morphine in an exploratory prospective study. The findings showed that a group of patients with a GG single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs4680 in COMT required a significantly higher dose of morphine than a non-GG group. A biomarker for selection of opioids for cancer pain relief would be particularly useful clinically, and therefore we have planned a randomized comparative study of morphine and oxycodone, using the COMT rs4680 SNP as a biomarker. This study is aimed at verifying the assumption that patients in the GG group require an increased morphine dose for pain relief.Methods: The RELIEF study is a randomized, multi-institutional, open-label trial with a primary endpoint of the proportion of subjects requiring high-dose opioids, as calculated from the dose of a rescue preparation administered on day 0. Secondary endpoints include the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Short form McGill Pain Questionnaire-2, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and adverse events, Eligibility criteria are patients with advanced carcinoma with non-daily use of opioids in initial screening for registration; and cancer pain targeted for daily opioid treatment, NSAIDs or acetaminophen, NRS ≥3(average over 24 h), opioid-treatment naive within 30 h, no chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or bisphosphonate administration newly started within 2 weeks, and written informed consent at the time of second registration. Between November 2014 and June 2017, an estimated 110 patients from two sites in Japan were randomized (1:1) to morphine or oxycodone in GG and non-GG groups.Discussion: A method for selection of appropriate opioids in cancer patients is a high unmet medical need. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of different opioids in patients with cancer based on gene polymorphism, as the first potential multi-institutional registration trial to be conducted in cancer patients with pain.Trial Registration: UMIN000015579 Date of registration: 4 November 2014. It is updated once every six months, the latest update is 30 June 2017. Trial status. The enrollment started in November 2014. At the time of manuscript submission (July 2017), Three-quarters of patients have participated. We thus expect to complete the recruitment by March 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Central venous access device (CVAD) associated complications are a preventable source of patient harm, frequently resulting in morbidity and delays to vital treatment. Dressing and securement products are used to prevent infectious and mechanical complications, however current complication rates suggest customary practices are inadequate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of launching a full-scale randomized controlled efficacy trial of innovative dressing and securement products for pediatric tunneled CVAD to prevent complication and failure.Methods: An external, pilot, four-group randomized controlled trial of standard care (bordered polyurethane dressing and suture), in comparison to integrated securement-dressing, suture-less securement device, and tissue adhesive was undertaken across two large, tertiary referral pediatric hospitals in Australia. Forty-eight pediatric participants with newly inserted tunneled CVADs were consecutively recruited. The primary outcome of study feasibility was established by elements of eligibility, recruitment, attrition, protocol adherence, missing data, parent and healthcare staff satisfaction and acceptability, and effect size estimates for CVAD failure (cessation of function prior to completion of treatment) and complication (associated bloodstream infection, thrombosis, breakage, dislodgement or occlusion). Dressing integrity, product costs and site complications were also examined.Results: Protocol feasibility was established. CVAD failure was: 17% (2/12) integrated securement-dressing; 8% (1/13) suture-less securement device; 0% tissue adhesive (0/12); and, 0% standard care (0/11). CVAD complications were: 15% (2/13) suture-less securement device (CVAD associated bloodstream infection, and occlusion and partial dislodgement); 8% (1/12) integrated securement-dressing (partial dislodgement); 0% tissue adhesive (0/12); and, 0% standard care (0/11). One CVAD-associated bloodstream infection occurred, within the suture-less securement device group. Overall satisfaction was highest in the integrated securement-dressing (mean 8.5/10; standard deviation 1.2). Improved dressing integrity was evident in the intervention arms, with the integrated securement-dressing associated with prolonged time to first dressing change (mean days 3.5).Conclusions: Improving the security and dressing integrity of tunneled CVADs is likely to improve outcomes for pediatric patients. Further research is necessary to identify novel, effective CVAD securement to reduce complications, and provide reliable vascular access for children.Trial Registration: ACTRN12614000280606 ; prospectively registered on 17/03/2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Previous studies have investigated the protective effect of vitamin D serum levels, at diagnosis and during the follow-up period after treatment, on melanoma outcome. In the present study we assess whether vitamin D supplementation, in the follow-up period after diagnosis and surgical resection of the primary tumor, has a protective effect on relapse of cutaneous malignant melanoma and whether this protective effect correlates with vitamin D levels in serum and Vitamin D Receptor immunoreactivity in the primary tumor.Methods/design: This study is a multicenter randomized double blind placebo- controlled phase III trial. Patients between the age of 18 and 80 years diagnosed and treated surgically for a melanoma stage IB-III are eligible for randomization in a 1:1 ratio to active treatment or placebo. The study drug is taken each month and consists of either 100,000 International Unit cholecalciferol or arachidis oleum raffinatum used as a placebo. The primary endpoint is relapse free survival. The secondary endpoints are 25 hydroxyvitamin D3 serum levels at diagnosis and at 6 month intervals, melanoma subtype, melanoma site and stage of melanoma at diagnosis according to the 2009 American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging and classification. At randomization a bloodsample is taken for DNA analysis. The study is approved by the local Ethics Committees.Discussion: If we can confirm our hypothesis that vitamin D supplementation after removal of the tumor has a protective effect on relapse of cutaneous malignant melanoma we may reduce the burden of CMM at several levels. Patients, diagnosed with melanoma may have a better clinical outcome and improved quality of life. There will be a decrease in health care costs related to treatment of metastatic disease and there will be a decrease in loss of professional years, which will markedly reduce the economic burden of the disease.Trial Registration: Clinical Trial.gov, NCT01748448 , 05/12/2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Following esophagectomy, esophageal cancer patients experience a clinically relevant deterioration of health-related quality of life, both on the short- and long-term. With the currently growing number of esophageal cancer survivors, the burden of disease- and treatment-related complaints and symptoms becomes more relevant. This emphasizes the need for interventions aimed at improving quality of life. Beneficial effects of post-operative physical exercise have been reported in several cancer types, but so far comparable evidence in esophageal cancer patients is lacking. The aim of this study is to investigate effects of physical exercise on health-related quality of life in esophageal cancer patients following surgery.Methods: The Physical ExeRcise Following Esophageal Cancer Treatment (PERFECT) study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial including 150 esophageal cancer patients after surgery with curative intent. Patients are randomly allocated to an exercise group or usual care group. The exercise group participates in a 12-week combined aerobic and resistance exercise program, supervised by a physiotherapist near the patient's home-address. In addition, participants in the exercise group are requested to be physically active for at least 30 min per day, every day of the week. Participants allocated to the usual care group are asked to maintain their habitual physical activity pattern. The primary outcome is health-related quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30). Secondary outcomes include esophageal cancer specific quality of life, fatigue, anxiety and depression, sleep quality, work-related factors, cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2peak), muscle strength, physical activity, malnutrition risk, anthropometry, blood markers, recurrence of disease and survival. All questionnaire outcomes, diaries and accelerometers are assessed at baseline, post-intervention (12 weeks post-baseline) and 24 weeks post-baseline. Physical fitness, anthropometry and blood markers are assessed at baseline and post-intervention. In addition, adherence and safety are monitored throughout the exercise program.Discussion: This randomized controlled trial investigates effects of physical exercise versus usual care in esophageal cancer patients after surgery. As the design of the exercise program closely resembles daily practice, this study can contribute both to evidence on effects of exercise in esophageal cancer patients, and to potential implementation strategies.Trial Registration: Trial registration:Netherlands Trial Registry NTR5045 Date of trial registration: January 19th, 2015 Date and version study protocol: February 2017, version 1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer-related fatigue is a common problem in persons with cancer, influencing health-related quality of life and causing a considerable challenge to society. Current evidence supports the beneficial effects of physical exercise in reducing fatigue, but the results across studies are not consistent, especially in terms of exercise intensity. It is also unclear whether use of behaviour change techniques can further increase exercise adherence and maintain physical activity behaviour. This study will investigate whether exercise intensity affects fatigue and health related quality of life in persons undergoing adjuvant cancer treatment. In addition, to examine effects of exercise intensity on mood disturbance, adherence to oncological treatment, adverse effects from treatment, activities of daily living after treatment completion and return to work, and behaviour change techniques effect on exercise adherence. We will also investigate whether exercise intensity influences inflammatory markers and cytokines, and whether gene expressions following training serve as mediators for the effects of exercise on fatigue and health related quality of life.Methods/design: Six hundred newly diagnosed persons with breast, colorectal or prostate cancer undergoing adjuvant therapy will be randomized in a 2 × 2 factorial design to following conditions; A) individually tailored low-to-moderate intensity exercise with or without behaviour change techniques or B) individually tailored high intensity exercise with or without behaviour change techniques. The training consists of both resistance and endurance exercise sessions under the guidance of trained coaches. The primary outcomes, fatigue and health related quality of life, are measured by self-reports. Secondary outcomes include fitness, mood disturbance, adherence to the cancer treatment, adverse effects, return to activities of daily living after completed treatment, return to work as well as inflammatory markers, cytokines and gene expression.Discussion: The study will contribute to our understanding of the value of exercise and exercise intensity in reducing fatigue and improving health related quality of life and, potentially, clinical outcomes. The value of behaviour change techniques in terms of adherence to and maintenance of physical exercise behaviour in persons with cancer will be evaluated.Trial Registration: NCT02473003 , October, 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors are at increased risk of developing the disease again. Surveillance guidelines are aimed at maximising the early detection of recurring or new cancers and pre-cancerous polyps. The frequency and type of surveillance recommended depends on the type of treatment for the initial CRC, the extent of colonoscopic investigation prior to treatment and the results of previous surveillance tests. This paper aimed to test the effect of a paper-based educational intervention to improve adherence to colonoscopy following treatment for colorectal cancer.Methods: People with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer within the last 10 months, aged ≥18 and English speaking were recruited through a population-based cancer registry in Australia. Participants were randomly allocated to either the intervention or control. Participants completed an interview at baseline. Self-reported participation in colonoscopy was obtained at 12 month followup by survey. Those allocated to the control received a generic pamphlet on colorectal cancer treatment; while intervention participants received a letter which provided specific information about guideline recommendations for surveillance colonoscopy. Rates of guideline adherence were compared between groups. The guideline recommendations for the timing of surveillance colonoscopy changed part way through the study. This change occurred after all intervention materials had been sent, but prior to all participants completing the 12 month follow up. Post hoc analyses were conducted to assess adherence to the new guidelines.Results: Of the 767 participants, 604 (79%) had had surgery, had stage I - III disease and completed the baseline interview within 12 months of diagnosis (intervention = 305; control = 299). There was no significant difference between those adherent to surveillance colonoscopy guidelines, in the control (67, 27%) and intervention groups (80, 31%) at followup (difference = 4.3% (95%CI:-3.7%, 12%), χ 2(1df) = 1.09, P = 0.296). Overall, 246 (49%) participants were adherent to the new guidelines, compared to 147 (29%) adherent to the old guidelines.Conclusions: Results indicate the paper-based educational intervention is not effective in improving adherence to colorectal cancer surveillance guidelines for colonoscopy.Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12609000628246 Registration date: 28/07/2009. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Menopausal symptoms are common and may be particularly severe in younger women who undergo treatment-induced menopause. Medications to reduce menopausal symptoms are either contra-indicated or have bothersome side effects. Previous studies have demonstrated that face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is effective in alleviating menopausal symptoms in women with breast cancer. However, compliance with face-to-face CBT programs can be problematic. A promising approach is to use the Internet to make this form of CBT more accessible and feasible for patients. This study is evaluating the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an Internet-based CBT program, with or without therapist guidance, in alleviating or reducing the severity of menopausal symptoms. Methods/design: In a multicenter, randomized controlled trial we are evaluating the efficacy of two Internet-based CBT programs in alleviating or reducing the impact of menopausal symptoms, and particularly hot flushes and night sweats, in breast cancer survivors who have experienced a treatment-induced menopause. Secondary outcomes include sexual functioning, sleep quality, hot flush frequency, psychological distress, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. We will recruit 248 women who will be randomized to either a therapist guided or a self-management version of the 6-week Internet-based CBT program, or to a usual care, waiting list control group. Self-administered questionnaires are completed at baseline (T0), and at 10 weeks (T1) and 24 weeks (T2) postrandomization. Discussion: Internet-based CBT is a potentially useful treatment for reducing menopausal symptoms in breast cancer survivors. This study will provide evidence on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of such an Internet-based CBT program, with or without therapist support. If demonstrated to be efficacious and cost-effective, the availability of such structured supportive intervention programs will be a welcome addition to standard medical treatment offered to cancer patients with treatment-induced menopause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Standard radiotherapy is the treatment of first choice in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases, but is only moderately effective. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is increasingly used to treat spinal metastases, without randomized evidence of superiority over standard radiotherapy. The VERTICAL study aims to quantify the effect of stereotactic radiation therapy in patients with metastatic spinal disease. Background: Standard radiotherapy is the treatment of first choice in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases, but is only moderately effective. Stereotactic body radiation therapy is increasingly used to treat spinal metastases, without randomized evidence of superiority over standard radiotherapy. The VERTICAL study aims to quantify the effect of stereotactic radiation therapy in patients with metastatic spinal disease. Discussion: This study is designed to quantify the treatment response after (stereotactic) radiation therapy in patients with symptomatic spinal metastases. This is the first randomized study in palliative care following the cohort multiple Randomized Controlled Trial design. This design addresses common difficulties associated with classic pragmatic randomized controlled trials, such as disappointment bias in patients allocated to the control arm, slow recruitment, and poor generalizability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Approximately 20% of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients diagnosed in the early stages may benefit from potentially curative ablative therapies such as surgical resection, transplantation or radiofrequency ablation. For patients not eligible for such options, prognosis is poor. Sorafenib and Selective Internal Radiation Therapy (SIRT) are clinically proven treatment options in patients with unresectable HCC, and this study aims to assess overall survival following either SIRT or Sorafenib therapy for locally advanced HCC patients. Methods: This investigator-initiated, multi-centre, open-label, randomized, controlled trial will enrol 360 patients with locally advanced HCC, as defined by Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or stage C, without distant metastases, and which is not amenable to immediate curative treatment. Exclusion criteria include previous systemic therapy, metastatic disease, complete occlusion of the main portal vein, or a Child-Pugh score of >7. Eligible patients will be randomised 1:1 and stratified by centre and presence or absence of portal vein thrombosis to receive either a single administration of SIRT using yttrium-90 resin microspheres (SIR-Spheres®, Sirtex Medical Limited, Sydney, Australia) targeted at HCC in the liver by the trans-arterial route or continuous oral Sorafenib (Nexavar®, Bayer Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany) at a dose of 400 mg twice daily until disease progression, no further response, complete regression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients for both the Sorafenib and SIRT arms will be followed-up every 4 weeks for the first 3 months and 12 weekly thereafter. Overall survival is the primary endpoint, assessed for the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints are tumour response rate, time-to-tumour progression, progression free survival, quality of life and down-staging to receive potentially curative therapy. Discussion: Definitive data comparing these two therapies will help to determine clinical practice in the large group of patients with locally advanced HCC and improve outcomes for such patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current surgical and ablative treatment options for prostate cancer (PCa) may result in a high incidence of (temporary) incontinence, erectile dysfunction and/or bowel damage. These side effects are due to procedure related effects on adjacent structures including blood vessels, bowel, urethra and/or neurovascular bundle. Ablation with irreversible electroporation (IRE) has shown to be effective and safe in destroying PCa cells and also has the potential advantage of sparing surrounding tissue and vital structures, resulting in less impaired functional outcomes and maintaining men's quality of life.Methods/design: In this randomized controlled trial (RCT) on IRE in localized PCa, 200 patients with organ-confined, unilateral (T1c-T2b) low- to intermediate-risk PCa (Gleason sum score 6 and 7) on transperineal template-mapping biopsies (TTMB) will be included. Patients will be randomized into focal or extended ablation of cancer foci with IRE. Oncological efficacy will be determined by multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound imaging if available, TTMP and Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) follow-up. Patients will be evaluated up to 5 years on functional outcomes and quality of life with the use of standardized questionnaires.Discussion: There is critical need of larger, standardized RCTs evaluating long-term oncological and functional outcomes before introducing IRE and other focal therapy modalities as an accepted and safe therapeutic option for PCa. This RCT will provide important short- and long-term data and elucidates the differences between focal or extended ablation of localized, unilateral low- to intermediate-risk PCa with IRE.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov database registration number NCT01835977. The Dutch Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects registration number NL50791.018.14. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]