Abstract The words cure and hope are important terms in oncology, reflecting a balance of aspirations and realism for physicians and patients. Yet, some have suggested that oncologists are reluctant to use these terms. We tested this hypothesis by performing a bibliometric analysis of the frequency of use of these words in JAMA Oncology (JAMA Oncol) and the Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO). The text of all articles in 3 categories—primary research, editorials, and narrative essays—appearing in JCO from 2000 to 2018 and in JAMA Oncol from 2015 to 2019 was analyzed. These analyses compared, across these categories, the proportion of articles containing the words cure and hope, as well as the proportion of total sentences containing these words. There were statistically significant differences in frequency of the use of the terms cure and hope as a function of the type of article published in the JCO and JAMA Oncol (2-sided P values ranging from .005 to <.001). Results were similar for both journals, with minor exceptions. Both hope and cure were used in a greater number of articles and sentences in the narrative and editorial categories than in primary research. Moreover, hope was used more often in narrative essays than in editorials. The relative reluctance to use these terms in more scientifically oriented original reports, despite concomitant improvements in oncologic outcomes, may reflect a bias worthy of future exploration.
Results of the NRG Oncology/RTOG 0848 Adjuvant Chemotherapy Question—Erlotinib+Gemcitabine for Resected Cancer of the Pancreatic Head
Purpose: NRG/RTOG 0848 was designed to determine whether adjuvant radiation with fluoropyrimidine sensitization improved survival following gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resected pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. In step 1 of this protocol, patients were randomized to adjuvant gemcitabine versus the combination of gemcitabine and erlotinib. This manuscript reports the final analysis of these step 1 data. Methods: Eligibility—within 10 weeks of curative intent pancreaticoduodenectomy with postoperative CA19-9<180. Gemcitabine arm—6 cycles of gemcitabine. Gemcitabine+erlotinib arm—gemcitabine and erlotinib 100 mg/d. Two hundred deaths provided 90% power (1-sided α=0.15) to detect the hypothesized OS signal (hazard ratio=0.72) in favor of the arm 2. Results: From November 17, 2009 to February 28, 2014, 163 patients were randomized and evaluable for arm 1 and 159 for arm 2. Median age was 63 (39 to 86) years. CA19-9 ≤90 in 93%. Arm 1: 32 patients (20%) grade 4 and 2 (1%) grade 5 adverse events; arm 2, 27 (17%) grade 4 and 3 (2%) grade 5. GI adverse events, arm 1: 22% grade ≥3 and arm 2: 28%, ( P =0.22). The median follow-up (surviving patients) was 42.5 months (min-max: <1 to 75). With 203 deaths, the median and 3-year OS (95% confidence interval) are 29.9 months (21.7, 33.4) and 39% (30, 45) for arm 1 and 28.1 months (20.7, 30.9) and 39% (31, 47) for arm 2 (log-rank P =0.62). Hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) comparing OS of arm 2 to arm 1 is 1.04 (0.79, 1.38). Conclusions: The addition of adjuvant erlotinib to gemcitabine did not provide a signal for increased OS in this trial.
Results of the randomized phase II portion of NRG Oncology/RTOG 0848 evaluating the addition of erlotinib to adjuvant gemcitabine for patients with resected pancreatic head adenocarcinoma.
4007 Background: NRG/RTOG 0848 is a 2-step study designed to determine whether erlotinib (E) added to gemcitabine (G) (randomized Ph II) &/or adjuvant radiation with concurrent 5-FU or capecitabine following 6 months of systemic chemotherapy (Ph III), improve survival in patients (pts) with resected pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. The erlotinib results are reported here. Methods: Eligible pts include those with resected pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, pathologic stage T1-T3, N0-1, M0; PS 0-1, & CA19-9 ≤ 180 IU/L. Pts in Arms 1 & 2 received G 1 gm/m2 weekly for 3 weeks in a 28-day cycle for 6 cycles. Pts in Arm 2 also received E 100 mg/day. The primary hypothesis for the E portion was that G+E would increase overall survival (OS) compared to G alone. With a 1-sided alpha of 0.15, 200 OS events provide 80%/90% power to detect a signal for an increase in median OS from 22 to 28.8/30.6 months (mos). OS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method & arms compared using the log rank test. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze treatment effect. Results: 336 pts were randomized from 11/17/2009 to 2/28/2014, with 163 pts evaluable for G and 159 for G+E. Median age was 63 years (39-86). Most pts had pathologic T3 disease (78%) & CA19-9 ≤ 90 (93%). There are 32 pts (20%) with grade 4 adverse events (AEs) & 2 pts (1%) with grade 5 AEs on G and 27 (17%) & 3 (2%) on G+E arm, respectively. There are fewer grade ≥ 3 GI AEs on the G arm (22%) as compared to the G+E arm (28%), and 110 (69.2%) & 93 (59.6%) pts received at least 85% of planned G dose for the G & G+E arms, respectively. 58% of E pts received at least 85% of planned E dose. The median follow-up for alive pts is 42.5 mos (min-max: < 1-75). With 203 deaths, median & 3-yr OS (95% CI) are 29.9 mos (21.7-33.4) & 39% (30, 45) for G and 28.1 mos (20.7-30.9) & 39% (31, 47) for G+E; log-rank p = 0.62. The hazard ratio (95% CI) comparing OS of G+E to G is 1.04 (0.79- 1.38). Conclusions: The addition of adjuvant E to G did not provide a signal for increased OS in pts with resected pancreatic head cancer compared to G alone. Accrual to the trial is continuing to answer the Ph III radiation question. Clinical trial information: NCT01013649.
Short delay in initiation of radiotherapy for patients with glioblastoma-effect of concurrent chemotherapy: a secondary analysis from the NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group database
Abstract A110: EGFRvIII expression is associated with shorter progression-free and overall survival in glioblastoma patients treated with standard-of-care temozolomide and radiation: A report from the RTOG-0525 trial.
Abstract Background: Glioblastomas (GBMs) are aggressive primary brain tumors with high levels of genomic heterogeneity impacting prognosis and treatment response. A recurrent in-frame deletion within the extracellular domain of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR variant III, or vIII) is found in a substantial fraction of GBMs. Methods: The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0525 trial of temozolomide dosing in newly-diagnosed GBM enrolled 1174 patients. Of these, 494 eligible GBMs were analyzed for EGFRvIII expression by RT-PCR. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of GBMs expressing EGFRvIII with those not expressing EGFRvIII. Results: 142 of 494 tested GBMs (29%) had expressed EGFRvIII. There were no significant differences in PFS or OS between patients whose tumors did (494) or did not (631) undergo EGFRvIII expression analysis. EGFRvIII expression was significantly associated with age (p=0.005), Karnofsky performance status (p=0.02), and RTOG recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class (p=0.005). EGFRvIII expression analyzed in the entire study population did not reveal an association with PFS or OS. In a univariate subgroup analysis of patients treated on the standard-of-care arm of RTOG-0525, EGFRvIII expression was was significantly associated with worse PFS (HR=1.43, 95% CI: [1.05, 1.96], p=0.025), and worse OS (HR 1.45, 95% CI:[1.03, 2.05], p=0.032). However, in multivariate models, when adjusted for RPA class and MGMT methylation status, EGFRvIII was not an independent predictor of either PFS or OS. Conclusion: For GBMs treated with standard-of-care therapy in RTOG-0525, EGFRvIII expression was associated with worse PFS and OS. However, well-established stratification metrics such as age, KPS, and RPA override this prognostic association, suggesting that trials of therapeutic modalities directed against EGFRvIII should utilize these standard prognostic variables when survival is being analyzed or compared. Project Support: This project was supported by RTOG grant U10 CA21661, and CCOP grant U10 CA37422 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Schering-Plough Corporation. Citation Information: Mol Cancer Ther 2013;12(11 Suppl):A110. Citation Format: Daniel P. Cahill, Asha George, Mark R. Gilbert, Arnab Chakravarti, Roger Stupp, Monika Hegi, Paul Brown, Kurt A. Jaeckle, Benjamin Corn, Erik P. Sulman, Luis Souhami, Maria Werner-Wasik, Bethany M. Anderson, Minesh Mehta, Kenneth D. Aldape. EGFRvIII expression is associated with shorter progression-free and overall survival in glioblastoma patients treated with standard-of-care temozolomide and radiation: A report from the RTOG-0525 trial. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference: Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2013 Oct 19-23; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2013;12(11 Suppl):Abstract nr A110.
Short Delay in Initiation of Radiotherapy May Not Affect Outcome of Patients With Glioblastoma: A Secondary Analysis From the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Database
Purpose To analyze the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) database of patients with glioblastoma and appraise whether outcome was influenced by time to initiation of radiation therapy (RT). Patients and Methods From 1974 through 2003, adult patients with histologically confirmed supratentorial glioblastoma were enrolled onto 16 RTOG studies. Of 3,052 enrolled patients, 197 patients (6%) were either initially rendered ineligible or had insufficient chronologic data, leaving a cohort of 2,855 patients for the present analysis. We selected four patient groups based on the interval from surgery to the start of RT: ≤ 2 weeks, 2 to 3 weeks, 3 to 4 weeks, more than 4 weeks to the protocol eligibility limit of 6 weeks. Survival times were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis incorporated variables of time interval, recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) class, and treatment regimen. Results No decrement in survival could be identified with increasing time to initiation of RT. Among our four temporal groupings, median survival time was unexpectedly and significantly greater in the group with the longest interval (> 4 weeks) than in those with the shortest delay (≤ 2 weeks): respectively, 12.5 months versus 9.2 months (P < .0001). On multivariate analysis, with overall survival as the end point, time interval more than 4 weeks and lower RPA class were both significant predictors of improved outcome. Treatment regimen was not a significant factor. Conclusion There is no evident reduction in survival by delaying initiation of RT within the relatively narrow constraint of 6 weeks. An unanticipated yet significantly superior outcome was identified for patients for whom RT was delayed beyond 4 weeks from surgery.