Search

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the relationship between negative lymph node (LNneg) size as a possible surrogate marker of the host antitumor immune response and overall survival (OS) in esophageal cancer (EC) patients.BACKGROUND: Lymph node (LN) status is a well-established prognostic factor in EC patients. An increased number of LNnegs is related to better survival in EC. Follicular hyperplasia in LNneg is associated with better survival in cancer-bearing mice and might explain increased LN size.METHODS: The long axis of 304 LNnegs was measured in hematoxylin-eosin stained sections from resection specimens of 367 OE02 trial patients (188 treated with surgery alone (S), 179 with neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (C+S)) as a surrogate of LN size. The relationship between LNneg size, LNneg microarchitecture, clinicopathological variables, and OS was analyzed.RESULTS: Large LNneg size was related to lower pN category (P = 0.01) and lower frequency of lymphatic invasion (P = 0.02) in S patients only. Irrespective of treatment, (y)pN0 patients with large LNneg had the best OS. (y)pN1 patients had the poorest OS irrespective of LNneg size (P < 0.001). Large LNneg contained less lymphocytes (P = 0.02) and had a higher germinal centers/lymphocyte ratio (P = 0.05).CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate LNneg size in EC patients randomized to neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery or surgery alone. Our pilot study suggests that LNneg size is a surrogate marker of the host antitumor immune response and a potentially clinically useful new prognostic biomarker for (y)pN0 EC patients. Future studies need to confirm our results and explore underlying biological mechanisms.

PURPOSE Docetaxel and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or prednisolone (AAP) both improve survival when commenced alongside standard of care (SOC) androgen deprivation therapy in locally advanced or metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. Thus, patient-reported quality of life (QOL) data may guide treatment choices. METHODS A group of patients within the STAMPEDE trial were contemporaneously enrolled with the possibility of being randomly allocated to receive either docetaxel + SOC or AAP + SOC. A mixed-model assessed QOL in those who had completed at least one QLQ-C30 + PR25 questionnaire. The primary outcome measure was difference in global-QOL (QLQ-C30 Q29&30) between patients allocated to docetaxel + SOC or AAP + SOC over the 2 years after random assignment, with a predefined criterion for clinically meaningful difference of > 4.0 points. Secondary outcome measures included longitudinal comparison of functional domains, pain, and fatigue, plus global-QOL at defined timepoints. RESULTS Five hundred fifteen patients (173 docetaxel + SOC and 342 AAP + SOC) were included. Baseline characteristics, proportion of missing data, and mean baseline global-QOL scores (docetaxel + SOC 77.8 and AAP + SOC 78.0) were similar. Over the 2 years following random assignment, the mean modeled global-QOL score was +3.9 points (95% CI, +0.5 to +7.2; P = .022) higher in patients allocated to AAP + SOC. Global-QOL was higher for patients allocated to AAP + SOC over the first year (+5.7 points, 95% CI, +3.0 to +8.5; P < .001), particularly at 12 (+7.0 points, 95% CI, +3.0 to +11.0; P = .001) and 24 weeks (+8.3 points, 95% CI, +4.0 to +12.6; P < .001). CONCLUSION Patient-reported QOL was superior for patients allocated to receive AAP + SOC, compared with docetaxel + SOC over a 2-year period, narrowly missing the predefined value for clinical significance. Patients receiving AAP + SOC reported clinically meaningful higher global-QOL scores throughout the first year following random assignment.

Low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) have a disproportionately high burden of cancer and cancer mortality. The unique barriers to optimum cancer care in these regions necessitate context-specific research. The conduct of research in LMICs has several challenges, not least of which is a paucity of formal training in research methods. Building capacity by training early career researchers is essential to improve research output and cancer outcomes in LMICs. The International Collaboration for Research methods Development in Oncology (CReDO) workshop is an initiative by the Tata Memorial Centre and the National Cancer Grid of India to address gaps in research training and increase capacity in oncology research. Since 2015, there have been five CReDO workshops, which have trained more than 250 oncologists from India and other countries in clinical research methods and protocol development. Participants from all oncology and allied fields were represented at these workshops. Protocols developed included clinical trials, comparative effectiveness studies, health services research, and observational studies, and many of these protocols were particularly relevant to cancer management in LMICs. A follow-up of these participants in 2020 elicited an 88% response rate and showed that 42% of participants had made progress with their CReDO protocols, and 73% had initiated other research protocols and published papers. In this Policy Review, we describe the challenges to research in LMICs, as well as the evolution, structure, and impact of CReDO and other similar workshops on global oncology research.

PURPOSEThe STAMPEDE trial recruits men with newly diagnosed, high-risk, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. To ascertain the feasibility of targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) and the prevalence of baseline genomic aberrations, we sequenced tumor and germline DNA from patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) starting long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT).METHODSIn a 2-stage approach, archival, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) prostate tumor core biopsy samples were retrospectively subjected to 2 tNGS assays. Prospective enrollment enabled validation using tNGS in tumor and germline DNA.RESULTSIn stage 1, tNGS data were obtained from 185 tumors from 287 patients (65%); 98% had de novo mPCa. We observed PI3K pathway aberrations in 43%, due to PTEN copy-number loss (34%) and/or activating mutations in PIK3 genes or AKT (18%) and TP53 mutation or loss in 33%. No androgen receptor ( AR) aberrations were detected; RB1 loss was observed in < 1%. In stage 2, 93 (92%) of 101 FFPE tumors (biopsy obtained within 8 months) were successfully sequenced prospectively. The prevalence of DNA damage repair (DDR) deficiency was 14% (somatic) and 5% (germline). BRCA2 mutations and mismatch repair gene mutations were exclusive to high-volume disease. Aberrant DDR (22% v 15%), Wnt pathway (16% v 4%), and chromatin remodeling (16% v 8%) were all more common in high-volume compared with low-volume disease, but the small numbers limited statistical comparisons.CONCLUSIONProspective genomic characterization is feasible using residual diagnostic tumor samples and reveals that the genomic landscapes of de novo high-volume mPCa and advanced metastatic prostate cancer have notable similarities (PI3K pathway, DDR, Wnt, chromatin remodeling) and differences ( AR, RB1). These results will inform the design and conduct of biomarker-directed trials in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

Background: There is a lack of large-scale randomised data evaluating the impact of sex and age in patients undergoing chemotherapy followed by potentially curative surgery for oesophagogastric cancer. Patients and methods: Individual patient data from four prospective randomised controlled trials were pooled using a two-stage meta-analysis. For survival analysis, hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for patients aged

Introduction: Which neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced thoracic oesophagus (TE) or gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma is best remains an open question. Randomised controlled trials variously accrued patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, making strong conclusions hard to obtain. The primary objective of this individual participant data meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (OS). Patients and methods: Eligible trials should have closed to accrual before 2016 and compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery (CS) to surgery alone. All relevant published and unpublished trials were identified via searches of electronic databases, conference proceedings and clinical trial registers. The main end-point was OS. Investigators were contacted to obtain the individual patient data, which was recorded, harmonised and checked. A random-effects Cox model, stratified by trial, was used for meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were preplanned. Results: 16 trials were identified as eligible. Individual patient data were obtained from 12 trial and 2478 patients. CS was associated with an improved OS versus surgery, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83 [0.72–0.96], p < 0.0001, translating to an absolute benefit of 5.7% at 5-years from 16.8% to 22.5%. Treatment effects did not vary substantially between adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.73 [0.62–0.87]) and squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.91 [0.76–1.08], interaction p = 0.26). A somewhat more pronounced effect was observed in gastro-oesophageal junction (HR = 0.68 [0.50–0.93]) versus TE (HR = 0.87 [0.75–1.00], interaction p = 0.07). CS was also associated with a greater disease-free survival (HR = 0.74 [0.64–0.85], p < 0.001). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy conferred a better OS than surgery alone and should be considered in all anatomical location and histological subtypes.

Background: DNA methylation signatures describing distinct histological subtypes of oesophageal cancer have been reported. We studied DNA methylation in samples from the MRC OE02 phase III trial, which randomised patients with resectable oesophageal cancer to surgery alone (S) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS).Aim: The aim of the study was to identify epigenetic signatures predictive of chemotherapy benefit in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) from the OE02 trial and validate the findings in an independent cohort.Methods: DNA methylation was analysed using the Illumina GoldenGate platform on surgically resected OAC specimens from patients in the OE02 trial. Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to select probes predictive of survival in the CS arm. Non-negative matrix factorisation was used to perform clustering and delineate DNA methylation signatures. The findings were validated in an independent cohort of patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Results: A total of 229 patients with OAC were analysed from the OE02 trial (118 in the CS arm and 111 in the S arm). There was no difference in DNA methylation status between the CS and S arms. A metagene signature was created by dichotomising samples into two clusters. In cluster 1, patients in the CS arm had significant overall survival (OS) benefit (median OS CS: 931 days vs. S: 536 days [HR: 1.54, P = 0.031]). In cluster 2, patients in the CS arm had similar (or worse) OS compared with patients in the S arm (CS: 348 days vs. S: 472 days [HR: 0.70, P = 0.1], and test of interaction was significant (p = 0.005). In the validation cohort (n = 13), there was no difference in DNA methylation status in paired pre- and post-treatment samples. When the epigenetic signature was applied, cluster 1 samples had better OS (median OS, cluster 1: 1174 days vs. cluster 2: 392 days, HR: 3.47, p = 0.059)Conclusions: This is the first and largest study of DNA methylation in patients with OAC uniformly treated in a randomised phase III trial. We identified an epigenetic signature that may serve as a predictive biomarker for chemotherapy benefit in OAC. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background The UK Medical Research Council ST03 trial compared perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab (B) in gastric and oesophagogastric junctional cancer. No difference in survival was noted between the arms of the trial. The present study reviewed the standards and performance of surgery in the context of the protocol-specified surgical criteria. Methods Surgical and pathological clinical report forms were reviewed to determine adherence to the surgical protocols, perioperative morbidity and mortality, and final histopathological stage for all patients treated in the study. Results Of 1063 patients randomized, 895 (84·2 per cent) underwent resection; surgical details were available for 880 (98·3 per cent). Postoperative assessment data were available for 873 patients; complications occurred in 458 (52·5 per cent) overall, of whom 71 (8·1 per cent) developed complications deemed to be life-threatening by the responsible clinician. The most common complications were respiratory (211 patients, 24·2 per cent). The anastomotic leak rate was 118 of 873 (13·5 per cent) overall; among those who underwent oesophagogastrectomy, the rate was higher in the group receiving ECX-B (23·6 per cent versus 9·9 per cent in the ECX group). Pathological assessment data were available for 845 patients. At least 15 nodes were removed in 82·5 per cent of resections and the median lymph node harvest was 24 (i.q.r. 17–34). Twenty-five or more nodes were removed in 49·0 per cent of patients. Histopathologically, the R1 rate was 24·9 per cent (208 of 834 patients). An R1 resection was more common for proximal tumours. Conclusion In the ST03 trial, the performance of surgery met the protocol-stipulated criteria. Registration number: NCT00450203 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Importance Perioperative chemotherapy and surgery are a standard of care for operable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Anti-HER2 therapy improves survival in patients with advanced HER2-positive disease. The safety and feasibility of adding lapatinib to perioperative chemotherapy should be assessed. Objectives To assess the safety of adding lapatinib to epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy and to establish a recommended dose regimen for a phase 3 trial. Design, Setting, and Participants Phase 2 randomized, open-label trial comparing standard ECX (sECX: 3 preoperative and 3 postoperative cycles of ECX with modified ECX plus lapatinib (mECX+L). This multicenter national trial was conducted in 29 centers in the United Kingdom in patients with histologically proven, HER2-positive, operable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Registration forERBB/HER2testing took place from February 25, 2013, to April 19, 2016, and randomization took place between May 24, 2013, and April 21, 2016. Data were analyzed May 10, 2017, to May 25, 2017. Interventions Patients were randomized 1:1 open-label to sECX (3 preoperative and 3 postoperative cycles of 50 mg/m2of intravenous epirubicin on day 1, 60 mg/m2intravenous cisplatin on day 1, 1250 mg/m2 of oral capecitabine on days 1 through 21) or mECX+L (ECX plus lapatinib days 1 through 21 in each cycle and as 6 maintenance doses). The first 10 patients in the mECX+L arm were treated with 1000 mg/m2of capecitabine and 1250 mg of lapatinib per day, after which preoperative toxic effects were reviewed according to predefined criteria to determine doses for subsequent patients. Main Outcomes and Measures Proportion of patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 diarrhea with mECX+L. A rate of 20% or less was considered acceptable. No formal comparison between arms was planned. Results Between February 2013, and April 2016, 441 patients underwent central HER2 testing and 63 (14%) were classified as HER2 positive. Forty-six patients were randomized; 44 (24 sECX, 20 mECX+L) are included in this analysis. Two of the first 10 patients in the mECX+L arm reported preoperative grade 3 diarrhea; thus, no dose increase was made. The primary endpoint of preoperative grade 3 or 4 diarrhea rates were 0 of 24 in the sECX arm (0%) and 4 of 20 in the mECX+L arm (21%). One of 24 in the sECX arm and 3 of 20 in the mECX+L arm stopped preoperative treatment early, and for 4 of 19 in the mECX+L arm, lapatinib dose was reduced. Postoperative complication rates were similar in each arm. Conclusions and Relevance Administration of 1250 mg of lapatinib per day in combination with ECX chemotherapy was feasible with some increase in toxic effects, which did not compromise operative management. Trial Registration ISRCTN.org identifier:46020948; clinicaltrialsregister.eu identifier:2006-000811-12

Background Routinely collected electronic health records (EHRs) have the potential to enhance randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by facilitating recruitment and follow-up. Despite this, current EHR use is minimal in UK RCTs, in part due to ongoing concerns about the utility (reliability, completeness, accuracy) and accessibility of the data. The aim of this manuscript is to document the process, timelines and challenges of the application process to help improve the service both for the applicants and data holders. Methods This is a qualitative paper providing a descriptive narrative from one UK clinical trials unit (MRC CTU at UCL) on the experience of two trial teams’ application process to access data from three large English national datasets: National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service (NCRAS), National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) and NHS Digital to establish themes for discussion. The underpinning reason for applying for the data was to compare EHRs with data collected through case report forms in two RCTs, Add-Aspirin (ISRCTN 74358648) and PATCH (ISRCTN 70406718). Results The Add-Aspirin trial, which had a pre-planned embedded sub-study to assess EHR, received data from NCRAS 13 months after the first application. In the PATCH trial, the decision to request data was made whilst the trial was recruiting. The study received data after 8 months from NICOR and 15 months for NHS Digital following final application submission. This concluded in May 2020. Prior to application submission, significant time and effort was needed particularly in relation to the PATCH trial where negotiations over consent and data linkage took many years. Conclusions Our experience demonstrates that data access can be a prolonged and complex process. This is compounded if multiple data sources are required for the same project. This needs to be factored in when planning to use EHR within RCTs and is best considered prior to conception of the trial. Data holders and researchers are endeavouring to simplify and streamline the application process so that the potential of EHR can be realised for clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Androgen suppression is a central component of prostate cancer management but causes substantial long-term toxicity. Transdermal administration of oestradiol (tE2) circumvents first-pass hepatic metabolism and, therefore, should avoid the cardiovascular toxicity seen with oral oestrogen and the oestrogen-depletion effects seen with luteinising hormone releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa). We present long-term cardiovascular follow-up data from the Prostate Adenocarcinoma Transcutaneous Hormone (PATCH) trial programme. METHODS: PATCH is a seamless phase 2/3, randomised, multicentre trial programme at 52 study sites in the UK. Men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer were randomly allocated (1:2 from August, 2007 then 1:1 from February, 2011) to either LHRHa according to local practice or tE2 patches (four 100 μg patches per 24 h, changed twice weekly, reducing to three patches twice weekly if castrate at 4 weeks [defined as testosterone ≤1·7 nmol/L]). Randomisation was done using a computer-based minimisation algorithm and was stratified by several factors, including disease stage, age, smoking status, and family history of cardiac disease. The primary outcome of this analysis was cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Cardiovascular events, including heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, thromboembolic stroke, and other thromboembolic events, were confirmed using predefined criteria and source data. Sudden or unexpected deaths were attributed to a cardiovascular category if a confirmatory post-mortem report was available and as other relevant events if no post-mortem report was available. PATCH is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN70406718; the study is ongoing and adaptive. FINDINGS: Between Aug 14, 2007, and July 30, 2019, 1694 men were randomly allocated either LHRHa (n=790) or tE2 patches (n=904). Overall, median follow-up was 3·9 (IQR 2·4–7·0) years. Respective castration rates at 1 month and 3 months were 65% and 93% among patients assigned LHRHa and 83% and 93% among those allocated tE2. 157 events from 145 men met predefined cardiovascular criteria, with a further ten sudden deaths with no post-mortem report (total 167 events in 153 men). 26 (2%) of 1694 patients had fatal cardiovascular events, 15 (2%) of 790 assigned LHRHa and 11 (1%) of 904 allocated tE2. The time to first cardiovascular event did not differ between treatments (hazard ratio 1·11, 95% CI 0·80–1·53; p=0·54 [including sudden deaths without post-mortem report]; 1·20, 0·86–1·68; p=0·29 [confirmed group only]). 30 (34%) of 89 cardiovascular events in patients assigned tE2 occurred more than 3 months after tE2 was stopped or changed to LHRHa. The most frequent adverse events were gynaecomastia (all grades), with 279 (38%) events in 730 patients who received LHRHa versus 690 (86%) in 807 patients who received tE2 (p

Purpose of Review Repurposing established medicines for a new therapeutic indication potentially has important global and societal impact. The high costs and slow pace of new drug development have increased interest in more cost-effective repurposed drugs, particularly in the cancer arena. The conventional drug development pathway and evidence framework are not designed for drug repurposing and there is currently no consensus on establishing the evidence base before embarking on a large, resource intensive, potential practice changing phase III randomised controlled trial (RCT). Numerous observational studies have suggested a potential role for statins as a repurposed drug for cancer chemoprevention and therapy, and we review the strength of the cumulative evidence here. Recent Findings In the setting of cancer, a potential repurposed drug, like statins, typically goes through a cyclical history, with initial use for several years in another disease setting, prior to epidemiological research identifying a possible chemo-protective effect. However, further information is required, including review of RCT data in the initial disease setting with exploration of cancer outcomes. Additionally, more contemporary methods should be considered, such as Mendelian randomization and pharmaco-epidemiological research with “target” trial design emulation using electronic health records. Pre-clinical and traditional observational data potentially support the role of statins in the treatment of cancer; however, randomised trial evidence is not supportive. Evaluation of contemporary methods provides little added support for the use of statin therapy in cancer. Summary We provide complementary evidence of alternative study designs to enable a robust critical appraisal from a number of sources of the go/no-go decision for a prospective phase III RCT of statins in the treatment of cancer.

Background Low-dose aspirin therapy reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease and may have a positive effect on the prevention of colorectal cancer. We evaluated the population-level expected effect of regular low-dose aspirin use on cardiovascular disease (CVD), colorectal cancer (CRC), gastrointestinal bleeding, symptomatic peptic ulcers, and intracranial hemorrhage, using a microsimulation study design. Methods We used individual-level state transition modeling to assess the impact of aspirin in populations aged 50–59 or 60–69 years old indicated for low-dose aspirin usage for primary or secondary CVD prevention. Model parameters were based on data from governmental agencies from the UK or recent publications. Results In the 50–59 years cohort, a decrease in incidence rates (IRs per 100 000 person years) of non-fatal CVD (-203 and −794) and fatal CVD (-97 and-381) was reported in the primary and secondary CVD prevention setting, respectively. The IR reduction of CRC (-96 and −93) was similar for primary and secondary CVD prevention. The IR increase of non-fatal (116 and 119) and fatal safety events (6 and 6) was similar for primary and secondary CVD prevention. Similar results were obtained for the 60–69 years cohort. Conclusions The decrease in fatal CVD and CRC events was larger than the increase in fatal safety events and this difference was more pronounced when low-dose aspirin was used for secondary compared to primary CVD prevention. These results provide a comprehensive image of the expected effect of regular low-dose aspirin therapy in a UK population indicated to use aspirin for CVD prevention.

The lancet / Digital health 3(10), e654-e664 (2021). doi:10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00133-3, Published by The Lancet, London

Background Regular use of low-dose aspirin (LDA) has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Recent evidence indicates that regular LDA use also reduces the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Use of LDA has also been associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, peptic ulcers and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Purpose We aim to evaluate the population-level benefits and risks of daily and/or regular LDA among individuals taking LDA for primary or secondary CVD prevention in the United Kingdom (UK) accounting for the evidence on the reduced CRC risk. Methods Individual-level state transition modelling was used to predict the impact of LDA on CRC, CVD, safety events (GI bleeding, ICH and symptomatic peptic ulcers) and related deaths in a UK population. Individual event histories were simulated for hypothetical cohorts of 1 million adults aged 50–59 years and aged 60–69 years indicated to take LDA for primary or secondary CVD prevention. The QRISK CVD prediction score was used to simulate adults indicated to use LDA for CVD prevention. Model parameters were informed based on published scientific literature on CVD, CRC and safety outcomes mimicking the UK epidemiology and prevention guidelines. Monte Carlo simulation was used to account for parameter uncertainty. Results In the cohort of subjects for which low-dose aspirin use was initiated between 50–59 years, the decrease in incidence rates (IRs) (per 100,000person years) of non-fatal CVD was smaller when low-dose aspirin use was initiated for primary prevention compared to initiation for secondary prevention (−203 [95% UI, −277 to −115] versus −794 [95% UI, −997 to −536]). Similar results were obtained for fatal CVD (−97 [95% UI, −136 to −60] versus −381 [95% UI, −502 to −257]). Whether low-dose aspirin treatment was initiated for primary or secondary CVD prevention did not greatly influence the changes in the IR of the non-CVD outcomes. The changes in IR for fatal CRC were −46 [−69, −31] and −44 [−67, −26] for primary and secondary CVD prevention while the changes in IR for fatal bleeding were 5 [1, 9] and 5 [1, 10]. Similar results were obtained when low-dose aspirin use was initiated between 60–69 years. Conclusions In all simulation settings considered, low-dose aspirin related reductions in non-fatal and fatal CVD outcomes were larger in case of secondary CVD prevention compared to primary CVD prevention. These reductions were larger than the increases in fatal safety events. This favorable benefit-risk profile is more pronounced in the case of secondary CVD prevention. The results from the simulation model can be used to inform discussions with patients about the potential benefits and risk of LDA initiation. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Bayer AG

Drug repurposing is the application of an existing licenced drug for a new indication and potentially provides a faster and cheaper approach to developing new anti-cancer agents. Gynaecological cancers contribute significantly to the global cancer burden, highlighting the need for low cost, widely accessible therapies. A large body of evidence supports the role of aspirin as an anti-cancer agent, and a number of randomized trials are currently underway aiming to assess the potential benefit of aspirin in the treatment of cancer. This review summarizes the evidence underpinning aspirin use for the prevention of the development and recurrence of gynaecological cancers (ovarian, endometrial and cervical) and potential mechanisms of action.

Summary Despite the use of multimodal treatment, survival of esophageal cancer (EC) patients remains poor. One proposed explanation for the relatively poor response to cytotoxic chemotherapy is intratumor heterogeneity. The aim was to establish a statistical model to objectively measure intratumor heterogeneity of the proportion of tumor (IHPoT) and to use this newly developed method to measure IHPoT in the pretreatment biopsies from from EC patients recruited to the OE02 trial. A statistical mixed effect model (MEM) was established for estimating IHPoT based on variation in hematoxylin/eosin (HE) stained pretreatment biopsy pieces from the same individual in 218 OE02 trial patients (103 treated by chemotherapy and surgery (chemo+surgery); 115 patients treated by surgery alone). The relationship between IHPoT, prognosis, chemotherapy survival benefit, and clinicopathological variables was assessed. About 97 (44.5%) and 121 (55.5%) ECs showed high and low IHPoT, respectively. There was no significant difference in IHPoT between surgery (median [range], 0.1637 [0–3.17]) and chemo+surgery (median [range], 0.1692 [0–2.69]) patients (P = 0.43). Chemo+surgery patients with low IHPoT had a significantly longer survival than surgery patients (HR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.20–2.75, P = 0.005). There was no survival difference between chemo+surgery and surgery patients with high IHPoT (HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.72–1.81, P = 0.566). This is the first study suggesting that IHPoT measured in the pretreatment biopsy can predict chemotherapy survival benefit in EC patients. IHPoT may represent a clinically useful biomarker for patient treatment stratification. Future studies should determine if pathologists can reliably estimate IHPoT.

Aims: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) remains an important therapeutic option for advanced oesophageal cancer (OC). Pathological tumour regression grade (TRG) may offer additional information by directing adjuvant treatment and/or follow-up but its clinical value remains unclear. We analysed the prognostic value of TRG and associated pathological factors in OC patients enrolled in the Medical Research Council (MRC) OE02 trial.Methods and results: Histopathology was reviewed in 497 resections from OE02 trial participants randomised to surgery (S group; n = 244) or NAC followed by surgery [chemotherapy plus surgery (CS) group; n = 253]. The association between TRG groups [responders (TRG1-3) versus non-responders (TRG4-5)], pathological lymph node (LN) status and overall survival (OS) was analysed. One hundred and ninety-five of 253 (77%) CS patients were classified as 'non-responders', with a significantly higher mortality risk compared to responders [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05-2.24, P = 0.026]. OS was significantly better in patients without LN metastases irrespective of TRG [non-responders HR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.33-2.63, P Conclusion: Lymph node status post-NAC is the most important prognostic factor in patients with resectable oesophageal cancer, irrespective of TRG. Potential clinical implications, e.g. adjuvant treatment or intensified follow-up, reinforce the importance of LN dissection for staging and prognostication.

Background: Previous studies suggested a relationship between aspirin use and mortality reduction. The mechanism for the effect of aspirin on cancer outcomes remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate aspirin use and survival in patients with gastrointestinal tract cancer. Methods: Patients with gastrointestinal tract cancer diagnosed between 1998 and 2011 were included. The population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry was linked to drug-dispensing data from the PHARMO Database Network. The association between aspirin use after diagnosis and overall survival was analysed using Cox regression models. Results: In total, 13 715 patients were diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer. A total of 1008 patients were identified as aspirin users, and 8278 patients were identified as nonusers. The adjusted hazard ratio for aspirin users vs nonusers was 0.52 (95% CI 0.44–0.63). A significant association between aspirin use and survival was observed for patients with oesophageal, hepatobiliary and colorectal cancer. Conclusions: Post-diagnosis use of aspirin in patients with gastrointestinal tract malignancies is associated with increased survival in cancers with different sites of origin and biology. This adds weight to the hypothesis that the anti-cancer effects of aspirin are not tumour-site specific and may be modulated through the tumour micro-environment.

PURPOSE In the CLASSIC and MAGIC trials, microsatellite instability (MSI)–high status was a favorable prognostic and potential negative predictive factor for neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy in resectable gastric cancer (GC). Given the low prevalence of MSI-high status in GC and its association with other positive prognostic variables, large data sets are needed to draw robust evidence of its prognostic/predictive value. PATIENTS AND METHODS We performed a multinational, individual-patient-data meta-analysis of the prognostic/predictive role of MSI in patients with resectable GC enrolled in the MAGIC, CLASSIC, ARTIST, and ITACA-S trials. Prognostic analyses used multivariable Cox models (MVM). The predictive role of MSI was assessed both in an all-comer population and in MAGIC and CLASSIC trials by MVM testing of the interaction of treatment (chemotherapy plus surgery v surgery) with MSI. RESULTS MSI status was available for 1,556 patients: 121 (7.8%) had MSI-high status; 576 were European, and 980 were Asian. In MSI-high versus MSI-low/microsatellite stable (MSS) comparisons, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 71.8% (95% CI, 63.8% to 80.7%) versus 52.3% (95% CI, 49.7% to 55.1%); the 5-year overall survival (OS) was 77.5% (95% CI, 70.0% to 85.8%) versus 59.3% (95% CI, 56.6% to 62.1%). In MVM, MSI was associated with longer DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.28 to 2.76; P < .001) and OS (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.17 to 2.73; P = .008), as were pT, pN, ethnicity, and treatment. Patients with MSI-low/MSS GC benefitted from chemotherapy plus surgery: the 5-year DFS compared with surgery only was 57% versus 41% (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79), and the 5-year OS was 62% versus 53% (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.94). Conversely, those with MSI-high GC did not: the 5-year DFS was 70% versus 77% (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.53 to 3.04), and the 5-year OS was 75% versus 83% (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.55 to 4.12). CONCLUSION In patients with resectable primary GC, MSI is a robust prognostic marker that should be adopted as a stratification factor by clinical trials. Chemotherapy omission and/or immune checkpoint blockade should be investigated prospectively in MSI-high GCs according to clinically and pathologically defined risk of relapse.

Background\ud \ud STAMPEDE has previously reported that the use of upfront docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report on long-term outcomes stratified by metastatic burden for M1 patients.\ud \ud \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud We randomly allocated patients in 2 : 1 ratio to standard-of-care (SOC; control group) or SOC + docetaxel. Metastatic disease burden was categorised using retrospectively-collected baseline staging scans where available. Analysis used Cox regression models, adjusted for stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time where hazards were non-proportional.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Between 05 October 2005 and 31 March 2013, 1086 M1 patients were randomised to receive SOC (n = 724) or SOC + docetaxel (n = 362). Metastatic burden was assessable for 830/1086 (76%) patients; 362 (44%) had low and 468 (56%) high metastatic burden. Median follow-up was 78.2 months. There were 494 deaths on SOC (41% more than the previous report). There was good evidence of benefit of docetaxel over SOC on OS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.95, P = 0.009) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P = 0.827). Analysis of other outcomes found evidence of benefit for docetaxel over SOC in failure-free survival (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57–0.76, P 0.5 in each case). There was no evidence that docetaxel resulted in late toxicity compared with SOC: after 1 year, G3-5 toxicity was reported for 28% SOC and 27% docetaxel (in patients still on follow-up at 1 year without prior progression).\ud \ud \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud The clinically significant benefit in survival for upfront docetaxel persists at longer follow-up, with no evidence that benefit differed by metastatic burden. We advocate that upfront docetaxel is considered for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients regardless of metastatic burden.

Repurposing drugs as anticancer therapeutics could shorten the conventional investigational pathway and open multiple new avenues of investigation [1]. Evidence of potential anticancer effects can be collated from in vitro and in vivo models, taking into account whether biologically/ clinically relevant concentrations or doses of the drug have been evaluated. With drugs already in widespread use for an alternative indication, data on cancer incidence and mortality may be available from epidemiological studies or preferably randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the drug in the alternate situation. Anticancer effects of the candidate drug may be subtle, requiring prolonged use, as major short-term effects should have been previously identified. To show an effect in a prospective trial requires a population with a low cancer burden but high event rate who can receive the therapy for sufficient time to see a therapeutic benefit. For these reasons adjuvant trials are attractive. Aspirin, developed for its analgesic/antiinflammatory properties was repurposed once as a cardiovascular drug and is now under investigation as an anticancer agent [2] after meta-analyses of cardio/cerebrovascular trials showed a reduction in cancer incidence, cancers presenting with metastases and cancer deaths in patients on aspirin [3,4]. Add-Aspirin is an RCT designed to assess the potential benefits of aspirin after primary curative therapy for non-metastatic cancer [5]. Attention has now turned to further opportunities for repurposing agents in the adjuvant setting.

14 Background: Docetaxel (DOC) and abiraterone (ABI) both improve overall survival (OS) in men with locally advanced or metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) but no head to head trials compare the 2 agents. STAMPEDE, a multi-arm multi-stage platform trial, recruited patients (pts) to treatments including DOC or ABI between Nov-11 and Mar-13. There was no evidence OS differed between DOC or ABI, thus quality of life (QOL) may increasingly inform treatment options. Methods: QOL scores were analysed in pts contemporaneously randomised to receive DOC or ABI, in addition to standard of care treatment. Self-assessment QOL questionnaires EORTC QLQ C30 and PR25 were completed during treatment and follow-up. These analyses focus on average global QOL over the first 2 years after randomisation, using repeated measures analysis, plus cross-sectional analyses at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. A score difference of ≥4 points was pre-defined as clinically meaningful. Results: 173 men randomised to DOC and 342 men randomised to ABI participated in the QOL sub-study and contributed to this analysis. Baseline characteristics and proportion of missing data were similar between groups. Baseline global QOL scores were similar (mean (sd): DOC 77.8 (20) and ABI 78.0 (19.3)). Average global QOL over 2 years was higher in pts randomised to ABI than DOC, although the difference was statistically significant it did not meet the pre-defined clinical parameter (+3.9, 95%CI 0.6 to 7.1, p=0.021). Cross-sectional analyses showed clinically meaningful superior QOL in the ABI group at 3 and 6 months (+6.6, 95%CI 2.6 to 10.7, p=0.001; +8.0, 95%CI 3.6 to 12.3, p

There are limited research and literature on the trial management challenges encountered in running adaptive platform trials. This trial design allows both (1) the seamless addition of new research comparisons when compelling clinical and scientific research questions emerge, and (2) early stopping of accrual to individual comparisons that do not show sufficient activity without affecting other active comparisons. Adaptive platform design trials also offer many potential benefits over traditional trials, from faster time to accrual to contemporaneously recruiting multiple research comparisons, added flexibility to focus on more promising research comparisons via pre-planned interim analyses and potentially shorter time to primary results. We share here our experiences from a trial management perspective, highlighting the challenges and successes. We evaluated the operational aspects of making changes to these adaptive platform trials and identified both common and trial-specific challenges. The operational steps and challenges linked to both the addition of new research comparisons and stopping recruitment following pre-planned interim analysis were considered in our evaluation. Specific operational challenges in these adaptive platform protocols, additional to those in traditional two-arm trials, were identified. Key lessons are presented describing some of the solutions and considerations over conducting these trials. Careful consideration on the practicality of the protocol structure (modular versus single protocol), the longevity and continuity of trial oversight committees, and having clear clinical and scientific criteria for the addition of new research comparisons were identified as some of the most common challenges. Understanding the operational complexities associated with running adaptive platform protocols is paramount for their conduct, adaptive platform trials offer an efficient model to run randomised controlled trials and we are continuing to work to reduce further the effort required from an operational perspective. FOCUS4: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN90061546 . Registered on 16 October 2013. STAMPEDE: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN78818544 . Registered on 2 February 2004.

The incidence of esophagogastric cancer is rapidly rising but only a minority of patients derive durable benefit from current therapies. Chemotherapy as well as anti-HER2 and PD-1 antibodies are standard treatments. To identify predictive biomarkers of drug sensitivity and mechanisms of resistance, we implemented prospective tumor sequencing of metastatic esophagogastric cancer patients. There was no association between HRD defects and response to platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients with MSI-H tumors were intrinsically resistant to chemotherapy but more likely to achieve durable responses to immunotherapy. The single EBV+ patient achieved a durable, complete response to immunotherapy. The level of ERBB2 amplification as determined by sequencing was predictive of trastuzumab benefit. Selection for a tumor subclone lacking ERBB2 amplification, deletion of ERBB2 exon 16, and co-mutations in the receptor tyrosine kinase, RAS, PI3K pathways were associated with intrinsic and/or acquired trastuzumab resistance. Prospective genomic profiling can identify patients most likely to derive durable benefit to immunotherapy and trastuzumab, and guide strategies to overcome drug resistance.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains a cornerstone of the management of prostate cancer. The addition of ADT to radiotherapy improves disease-free and overall survival in the locally advanced setting and ADT forms the backbone onto which additional treatments may be added (either initially at first presentation or sequentially at disease progression). ADT is most commonly achieved with Gonadotrophin Releasing Hormone analogues (GnRHa) that act through the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis to prevent testicular production of testosterone. However, the therapeutic benefits of ADT are partially offset by its side-effects which include long-term This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Background Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable gastroesophageal cancer, lymph node metastasis is the only validated prognostic variable; however, within lymph node groups there is still heterogeneity with risk of relapse. We hypothesized that gene profiles from neoadjuvant chemotherapy treated resection specimens from gastroesophageal cancer patients can be used to define prognostic risk groups to identify patients at risk for relapse. Patients and methods The Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial (n = 202 with high quality RNA) samples treated with perioperative chemotherapy were profiled for a custom gastric cancer gene panel using the NanoString platform. Genes associated with overall survival (OS) were identified using penalized and standard Cox regression, followed by generation of risk scores and development of a NanoString biomarker assay to stratify patients into risk groups associated with OS. An independent dataset served as a validation cohort. Results Regression and clustering analysis of MAGIC patients defined a seven-Gene Signature and two risk groups with different OS [hazard ratio (HR) 5.1; P

Importance: Mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency (MMRD) and microsatellite instability (MSI) are prognostic for survival in many cancers and for resistance to fluoropyrimidines in early colon cancer. However, the effect of MMRD and MSI in curatively resected gastric cancer treated with perioperative chemotherapy is unknown.Objective: To examine the association among MMRD, MSI, and survival in patients with resectable gastroesophageal cancer randomized to surgery alone or perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil chemotherapy in the Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial.Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary post hoc analysis of the MAGIC trial included participants who were treated with surgery alone or perioperative chemotherapy plus surgery for operable gastroesophageal cancer from July 1, 1994, through April 30, 2002. Tumor sections were assessed for expression of the MMR proteins mutL homologue 1, mutS homologue 2, mutS homologue 6, and PMS1 homologue 2. The association among MSI, MMRD, and survival was assessed.Main Outcomes and Measures: Interaction between MMRD and MSI status and overall survival (OS).Results: Of the 503 study participants, MSI results were available for 303 patients (283 with microsatellite stability or low MSI [median age, 62 years; 219 males (77.4%)] and 20 with high MSI [median age, 66 years; 14 males (70.0%)]). A total of 254 patients had MSI and MMR results available. Patients treated with surgery alone who had high MSI or MMRD had a median OS that was not reached (95% CI, 11.5 months to not reached) compared with a median OS among those who had neither high MSI nor MMRD of 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.7-27.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.15-1.15; P = .09). In contrast, patients treated with chemotherapy plus surgery who had either high MSI or MMRD had a median OS of 9.6 months (95% CI, 0.1-22.5 months) compared with a median OS among those who were neither high MSI nor MMRD of 19.5 months (95% CI, 15.4-35.2 months; hazard ratio, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.08-4.42; P = .03).Conclusions and Relevance: In the MAGIC trial, MMRD and high MSI were associated with a positive prognostic effect in patients treated with surgery alone and a differentially negative prognostic effect in patients treated with chemotherapy. If independently validated, MSI or MMRD determined by preoperative biopsies could be used to select patients for perioperative chemotherapy.

Background STAMPEDE previously reported that adding upfront docetaxel (Doc) improved overall survival (OS) for locally advanced and metastatic patients (pts) starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We report the long-term outcomes for M0 pts using metastatic progression-free survival (mPFS) as primary outcome, previously shown to be a surrogate for OS in M0 pts. Methods Standard-of-care (SOC) was ADT +/- radical radiotherapy (RT) to the prostate. 460 SOC and 230 SOC+Doc pts were recruited with 2:1 randomised stratified allocation. Standard survival intention-to-treatment analysis methods used Cox regression models adjusted for all stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time (RMST) for non-proportional (non-PH) hazards. There was 70% power (2-sided α = 0.05) to detect HR = 0.70 for mPFS (= new metastases, skeletal related events or PCa death). Secondary outcome measures included failure free survival (FFS) and progression free survival (PFS = mPFS or locoregional progression). Results Median follow-up was ∼6.5yr compared to ∼3.5yr when last reported, with 142 mPFS events (a 54% increase) on SOC. There was no good evidence of an advantage of SOC+Doc over SOC on mPFS (HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.66-1.19, P = 0.425); with 5yr mPFS 82% in SOC+Doc vs. 77% SOC. Secondary outcomes showed evidence that SOC+Doc improved FFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.55-0.88, P = 0.002) and PFS (non-PH P = 0.033, RMST difference=5.8 months, 95% CI 0.5-11.2, P = 0.031). There was no good evidence of a benefit of SOC+Doc on OS (125 SOC deaths; HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.64-1.21, P = 0.442). There was no evidence that SOC+Doc increased late toxicity compared to SOC: after 1yr, G3-5 toxicity reported for 29% SOC and 30% SOC+Doc. The impact of SOC RT (nominated prior to randomisation) with and without SOC+Doc will also be detailed by subgroup. Conclusions There is robust evidence SOC+Doc improves FFS and PFS (which we have previously shown increases Quality Adjusted Life Years). There is however no good evidence that this translates into benefit for longer-term outcomes (OS or mPFS). The benefits of upfront SOC+Doc for improved FFS and PFS with no excess late toxicity may contribute to treatment discussions. Clinical trial identification NCT00268476. Legal entity responsible for the study University College London. Funding Cancer Research UK; Sanofi; MRC; Astellas; Clovis; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer. Disclosure N.D. James: Advisory / Consultancy: Sanofi; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Janssen. N.W. Clarke: Advisory / Consultancy: Janssen. G. Attard: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Astellas; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Medivation; Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy: Millennium Pharmaceuticals; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Abbott Laboratories; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Essa Pharmaceuticals; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Takeda; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Sanofi-Aventis; Research grant / Funding (self): AstraZeneca; Research grant / Funding (self): Arno Therapeutics; Research grant / Funding (self): Innocrin Pharma; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Janssen; Advisory / Consultancy: Veridex; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Roche/Ventana; Advisory / Consultancy, Non-remunerated activity/ies: Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (self), I was an employee of the ICR, where abiraterone acetate was developed, up to 8 January 2018. : The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR). W. Cross: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Janssen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Bayer. D. Dearnaley: Research grant / Funding (institution), Financial Support for Trial Recruitment: UK National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network (NIHR CRN); Research grant / Funding (institution): The Institute of Cancer Research (ICR); Research grant / Funding (self), C46/A3976, C46/A10588 and C33589/A19727. : Cancer Research UK; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Takeda; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Amgen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Astellas; Advisory / Consultancy, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Sandoz; Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Janssen. R. Jones: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Janssen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Astellas; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Sanofi; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Novartis. M.D. Mason: Honoraria (self), Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Sanofi; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Janssen; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Bayer. C. Parker: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy, Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self): Bayer; Honoraria (self): AAA; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Janssen. M.K.B. Parmar: Research grant / Funding (self), Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (self), Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Clovis Oncology; Research grant / Funding (self), Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Novartis; Research grant / Funding (self), Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (self), Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Sanofi. M.R. Sydes: Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies, Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies, Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Clovis Oncology; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies, Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Novartis; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies, Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Pfizer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Eli Lilly; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (self), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses, Non-remunerated activity/ies, Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Janssen; Research grant / Funding (self), Non-remunerated activity/ies, Unrestricted grant to contribute to STAMPEDE overall: Sanofi. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

4022 Background: No large scale randomised data exists evaluating the impact of age and sex in patients (pts) undergoing potentially curative surgery and CTx for OG cancer. However, differences in age and sex may be contributing factors to variability in CTx dose-response and toxicity which could also impact survival. Methods: Data from four prospective randomised controlled trials were pooled using a two-stage meta-analysis. For survival data, hazard ratios were calculated for pts

TPS3624 Background: There is now a body of evidence indicating a potential role for aspirin in colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. In cardiovascular trials, effects on incidence of cancer metastases and short-term mortality suggest further possible roles in the treatment setting, supported by observational studies of aspirin use after cancer diagnosis. In the prevention setting, aspirin use has been limited by toxicity concerns, particularly of serious bleeding. In the adjuvant setting, benefits associated with reducing recurrence and subsequent treatment may outweigh these risks. The Add-Aspirin trial will investigate this, and will also consider possible mechanisms of action for aspirin effects, including the impact of PIK3CA mutations, where there are currently several theories and conflicting data. Methods: Add-Aspirin (ISRCTN74358648) is an international, phase III, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial recruiting patients who have undergone surgery and relevant adjuvant treatment for stage II or III CRC, as well as those with completely resected CRC liver metastases. Parallel randomised cohorts will address the question in breast, gastro-oesophageal and prostate cancer. Participants take aspirin 100mg daily for an 8-week run-in, to assess adherence and toxicity, and those suitable to proceed are randomised (1:1:1) to aspirin 100mg, aspirin 300mg or placebo daily for at least 5 years. A number of measures – including blood pressure control and PPI use where relevant - are in place to reduce bleeding risk. The primary outcome is disease-free survival (target hazard ratio = 0.8, n = 2600 in 5 years) with a long term analysis of survival planned across the tumour groups. Translational work includes a sub-study monitoring urinary thromboxane B2 as a marker of platelet activation in a subgroup (n = 500) to investigate mechanisms of action. Add-Aspirin opened in 2015 and recruited 1505 CRC patients during the first 3 years from 137 UK centres. 1282 (85%) proceeded to randomisation. A pre-planned feasibility analysis of run-in data (n = 2253 across all 4 tumour groups) provided reassuring data on safety, tolerability and adherence, and recruitment continues with centres in India and Republic of Ireland recently joining. Clinical trial information: 74358648.

5019 Background: The STAMPEDE trial recruits men with high risk prostate cancer commencing first line systemic therapy. In a pilot study to ascertain the feasibility of tNGS and the prevalence of common genomic aberrations, we tested a commercial clinically-accredited assay on tumor blocks and present data obtained in the largest cohort of treatment-naïve M1 CSPC to date. Methods: Archival FFPE blocks were retrieved from trial participants and a single block submitted for sequencing by a Foundation Medicine. Inc. tNGS assay that includes 395 genes. Results: We successfully obtained tNGS data on 115 (62%) of 186 patients enrolled between Nov-2011 and April-2017 at 15 UK participating centers. The median age was 70 years (IQR 44-85); 97% had de novo M1 disease and 83% Gleason score ≥8. We observed PTEN deficiency (34%) due to copy-number loss (25%) or mutation (9%); TP53 mutation or loss (33%) and aberrations in PI3K signaling (16%), genes involved in DNA repair (14%), Wnt signaling (14%) and cell cycle control (6%). In total, these aberrations were observed in 76% of patients, with 35% harboring two or more. No androgen receptor ( AR) mutations were detected. Conclusions: The prevalence of PTEN deficiency is comparable with that observed in mCRPC consistent with this being a feature of metastatic disease. In contrast, AR mutations are not observed in this treatment-naïve group. The prevalence of DNA repair deficiency is less than observed in mCRPC but more than reported in prostatectomy cohorts. Although it is possible to use FFPE biopsies for tNGS, the test failure-rate poises challenges to evaluating treatments in low prevalence biomarker-defined groups. These data will inform the design and conduct of biomarker-directed trials.

43 Background: Platinum and 5-Fluorouracil (5FU) neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery is one of the standard approaches for patients with resectable EAC. To date, there are no predictive biomarkers of chemotherapy benefit. We hypothesize that DNA methylation of genes in key biologic and oncogenic pathways predict for chemotherapy benefit in EAC. Methods: In the OE02 trial, 802 patients with resectable esophageal carcinoma were randomised to surgery alone (S) versus two cycles of cisplatin and 5FU chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS). DNA was extracted from 213 EAC resection specimens (110 from the (CS) arm, 103 from the (S) arm). DNA methylation was analyzed at 1505 CpG sites within 807 genes using the Illumina GoldenGate platform. Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to identify predictive markers of survival in (CS) arm; non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) was used to delineate methylation signatures. Results: Methylation status of 1505 CpG sites had no statistical difference between the (CS) and (S) arms. In the (CS) arm, 87 (5.7%) CpG sites were initially identified as promising candidates in univariate analysis (p < 0.05 cutoff). NMF generated a 4 CpG site signature which divided patients into poor risk and good risk. Genes involved in the signature include RUNX1T1, CCND2, MST1R and MMP14. Survival was significantly different between poor risk and good risk in (CS) arm (HR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.52, p < 0.0001). No difference in survival was detected in the surgery arm (HR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.80, p = 0.48), suggesting the signature served as a predictive and not prognostic biomarker. Methylation signature remained an independent predictor of survival in multivariate analysis with clinicopathologic factors (along with age and vascular invasion). Conclusions: Chemotherapy does not appear to change methylation status of EAC. Hypermethylation of RUNX1T1, CCND2 and hypomethylation of MST1R and MMP14 leads to significantly decreased benefit from chemotherapy in EA. We describe an epigenetic signature which may serve as a predictive biomarker for chemotherapy benefit using data form the largest bank of DNA methylation in EA reported to date.

66 Background: In CLASSIC and MAGIC, MSI was a good prognostic factor, and adjuvant/perioperative chemotherapy had null/detrimental effect. Given the low prevalence of MSI in GCs and its association with other good prognostic variables, larger datasets are needed to draw more robust evidences on its specific prognostic/predictive impact. Methods: This was a multinational IPD meta-analysis of resectable GC pts enrolled in MAGIC, CLASSIC, ARTIST, ITACA-S. Data on pts’ demographics (age, sex, and race), primary site (stomach versus junctional), histotype (intestinal vs. other), T/N stage (7th TNM), treatment received (multimodal therapy vs. surgery alone) and MSI were pooled. Univariable and multivariable associations with disease-free survival (DFS)/overall survival (OS) were assessed. The predictive role of MSI according to treatment received was assessed overall and in the 2 RCTs with a surgery alone arm (MAGIC+CLASSIC). Results: We pooled 1,552 pts with available MSI status: 121 (7,8%) were MSI, 572 Caucasian/980 Asian. In MSI versus MSS subgroups, 5-y DFS was 71.8% (95% CI: 63.8-80.7%) versus 52.3% (49.6-55.0%) (HR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.72; p < 0.001); 5-y OS 77.4% (69.9-85.8%) versus 59.2% (56.6-62.0%) (HR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0-74; p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, MSI was independently associated with DFS (HR = 0.48 [0.33-0.70]; p < 0.001) and OS (HR = 0.48 [0.29-0.81]; p = 0.005), as T/N/race/treatment. Conclusions: In resectable primary GC, MSI is an independent good prognostic marker that should be adopted as stratification factor in future RCTs. Chemotherapy omission and/or immune checkpoint blockade should be prospectively investigated in MSI-high GCs according to the clinically-defined risk of relapse. [Table: see text]

BACKGROUND: Perioperative epirubicin, cisplatin and fluorouracil (ECF) chemotherapy improves survival in operable oesophago-gastric cancer [Adjuvant Gastric Cancer Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial HR 0.75 (0.6-0.93)]. HER2 amplification is reported to predict enhanced benefit from anthracyclines in breast cancer. We sought to define whether HER2 predicts benefit from ECF in oesophago-gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Diagnostic biopsies and/or resection specimens were collected from 415 of 503 MAGIC trial patients (82.5%). HER2 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and brightfield dual in situ hybridisation (BDISH) in tissue microarrays. The prognostic and predictive impact of HER2 status was investigated. RESULTS: Concordance between HER2 over-expression (IHC3+) and amplification was 96%. Results of HER2 assessment in biopsy and resection specimens were concordant in 92.9% (145/156). HER2 positive rate (IHC3+, or IHC2+/BDISH positive) was 10.9% in the whole cohort and 10.4% in resection specimens. A further 4.0% of resections were IHC negative/BDISH positive. HER2 status was neither prognostic, nor (in pre-treatment biopsies) predicted enhanced benefit from chemotherapy [HER2 positive HR 0.74 (0.14-3.77); HER2 negative HR 0.58 (0.41-0.82), interaction P = 0.7]. However, the power of the predictive analysis was limited by the small number of HER2 positive pre-treatment biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: HER2 status is not an independent prognostic biomarker in early oesophago-gastric adenocarcinoma.

Summary Background Luteinising-hormone-releasing-hormone agonists (LHRHa) to treat prostate cancer are associated with long-term toxic effects, including osteoporosis. Use of parenteral oestrogen could avoid the long-term complications associated with LHRHa and the thromboembolic complications associated with oral oestrogen. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, we enrolled men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer scheduled to start indefinite hormone therapy. Randomisation was by minimisation, in a 2:1 ratio, to four self-administered oestrogen patches (100 μg per 24 h) changed twice weekly or LHRHa given according to local practice. After castrate testosterone concentrations were reached (1·7 nmol/L or lower) men received three oestrogen patches changed twice weekly. The primary outcome, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, was analysed by modified intention to treat and by therapy at the time of the event to account for treatment crossover in cases of disease progression. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00303784. Findings 85 patients were randomly assigned to receive LHRHa and 169 to receive oestrogen patches. All 85 patients started LHRHa, and 168 started oestrogen patches. At 3 months, 70 (93%) of 75 receiving LHRHa and 111 (92%) of 121 receiving oestrogen had achieved castrate testosterone concentrations. After a median follow-up of 19 months (IQR 12–31), 24 cardiovascular events were reported, six events in six (7·1%) men in the LHRHa group (95% CI 2·7–14·9) and 18 events in 17 (10·1%) men in the oestrogen-patch group (6·0–15·6). Nine (50%) of 18 events in the oestrogen group occurred after crossover to LHRHa. Mean 12-month changes in fasting glucose concentrations were 0·33 mmol/L (5·5%) in the LHRHa group and −0·16 mmol/L (−2·4%) in the oestrogen-patch group (p=0·004), and for fasting cholesterol were 0·20 mmol/L (4·1%) and −0·23 mmol/L (−3·3%), respectively (p

Over 30% of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) develop brain metastases. If inoperable, optimal supportive care (OSC), including steroids, and whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) are generally considered to be standard care, although there is no randomised evidence demonstrating that the addition of WBRT to OSC improves survival or quality of life.QUARTZ is a randomised, non-inferiority, phase III trial comparing OSC + WBRT versus OSC in patients with inoperable brain metastases from NSCLC. The primary outcome measure is quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). QUARTZ was threatened with both loss of funding and early closure due to poor accrual. A lack of preliminary randomised data supporting the trial's hypotheses was thought to underlie the poor accrual, so, with no knowledge of the data, the independent trial steering committee agreed to the unusual step of releasing interim data.Between March 2007 and April 2010, 151 (of the planned 534) patients were randomised (75 OSC + WBRT, 76 OSC). Participants' baseline demographics included median age 67 years (interquartile range 62-73), 60% male, 50% with a Karnofsky performance status70; steroid usage was similar in the two groups; 64/75 (85%) received WBRT (20 Gy in five fractions). Median survival was: OSC + WBRT 49 days (95% confidence interval 39-61), OSC 51 days (95% confidence interval 27-57) - hazard ratio 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.80-1.53) in favour of WBRT. Quality of life assessed using EQ-5D showed no evidence of a difference. The estimated mean QALYs was: OSC + WBRT 31 days and OSC 30 days, difference -1 day (95% confidence interval -12.0 to +13.2 days).These interim data indicate no early evidence of detriment to quality of life, overall survival or QALYs for patients allocated to OSC alone. They provide key information for discussing the trial with patients and strengthen the argument for continuing QUARTZ to definitively answer this important clinical question.

Objectives\ud \ud To compare quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes at 6 months between men with advanced prostate cancer receiving either transdermal oestradiol (tE2) or luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa) for androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT).\ud \ud Patients and methods\ud \ud Men with locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer participating in an ongoing randomised, multicentre UK trial comparing tE2 versus LHRHa for ADT were enrolled into a QoL sub-study. tE2 was delivered via three or four transcutaneous patches containing oestradiol 100 μg/24 h. LHRHa was administered as per local practice. Patients completed questionnaires based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire 30-item core (EORTC QLQ-C30) with prostate-specific module QLQ PR25. The primary outcome measure was global QoL score at 6 months, compared between randomised arms.\ud \ud Results\ud \ud In all, 727 men were enrolled between August 2007 and October 2015 (412 tE2, 315 LHRHa) with QoL questionnaires completed at both baseline and 6 months. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between arms: median (interquartile range) age of 74 (68–79) years and PSA level of 44 (19–119) ng/mL, and 40% (294/727) had metastatic disease. At 6 months, patients on tE2 reported higher global QoL than those on LHRHa (mean difference +4.2, 95% confidence interval 1.2–7.1; P = 0.006), less fatigue, and improved physical function. Men in the tE2 arm were less likely to experience hot flushes (8% vs 46%), and report a lack of sexual interest (59% vs 74%) and sexual activity, but had higher rates of significant gynaecomastia (37% vs 5%). The higher incidence of hot flushes among LHRHa patients appear to account for both the reduced global QoL and increased fatigue in the LHRHa arm compared to the tE2 arm.\ud \ud Conclusion\ud \ud Patients receiving tE2 for ADT had better 6-month self-reported QoL outcomes compared to those on LHRHa, but increased likelihood of gynaecomastia. The ongoing trial will evaluate clinical efficacy and longer term QoL. These findings are also potentially relevant for short-term neoadjuvant ADT.

Patients with colorectal cancer with mutated PIK3CA, identified from two large observational cohorts, had increased cancer-specific and overall survival if they used aspirin regularly after diagnosis compared to non-users. No effect of aspirin was seen in patients with wild-type PIK3CA. Mutated PIK3CA might be a useful biomarker to select patients who would benefit from adjuvant aspirin therapy.

We read with interest the editorial by Tsao (1), and thank the author for this well considered response to our recent paper describing the results of the QUARTZ trial of whole brain radiotherapy for patients with inoperable brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (2). We continue to be encouraged by the amount of discussion taking place surrounding treatment options for these patients.

Aspirin inhibits the enzyme cyclooxygenase (Cox), and there is a significant body of epidemiological evidence demonstrating that regular aspirin use is associated with a decreased incidence of developing cancer. Interest focussed on selective Cox-2 inhibitors both as cancer prevention agents and as therapeutic agents in patients with proven malignancy until concerns were raised about their toxicity profile. Aspirin has several additional mechanisms of action that may contribute to its anti-cancer effect. It also influences cellular processes such as apoptosis and angiogenesis that are crucial for the development and growth of malignancies. Evidence suggests that these effects can occur through Cox-independent pathways questioning the rationale of focussing on Cox-2 inhibition alone as an anti-cancer strategy. Randomised studies with aspirin primarily designed to prevent cardiovascular disease have demonstrated a reduction in cancer deaths with long-term follow-up. Concerns about toxicity, particularly serious haemorrhage, have limited the use of aspirin as a cancer prevention agent, but recent epidemiological evidence demonstrating regular aspirin use after a diagnosis of cancer improves outcomes suggests that it may have a role in the adjuvant setting where the risk:benefit ratio will be different.