A randomized trial of hypofractionated schedules of palliative radiotherapy in the management of bladder carcinoma: results of medical research council trial BA09

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and toxicity of two hypofractionated radiotherapy schedules for the improvement of local symptoms from muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A multicenter randomized trial was conducted comparing the efficacy and toxicity of two radiotherapy schedules (35 Gy in 10 fractions and 21 Gy in 3 fractions) for symptomatic improvement in patients considered unsuitable for curative treatment through disease stage or comorbidity. The primary outcome measures were overall symptomatic improvement of bladder-related symptoms at 3 months and changes in bladder- and bowel-related symptoms from pretreatment to end-of-treatment and 3-month assessments. Overall symptomatic improvement was defined prospectively as the improvement in one bladder-related symptom of at least one grade at 3 months, with no deterioration in any other bladder-related symptom.

RESULTS

Five hundred patients were recruited, but data on symptomatic improvement at 3 months was only available on 272 patients. Of these, 68% achieved symptomatic improvement (71% for 35 Gy, 64% for 21 Gy), with no evidence of a difference in efficacy or toxicity between the two arms. There was no evidence of a difference in survival between the two schedules (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.99, 95% CI 0.82-1.21, p = 0. 933).

CONCLUSION

This is the largest prospective trial to date in the palliative treatment of bladder cancer, and provides baseline data against which other results may be compared. The use of 21 Gy in 3 fractions appears as effective as 35 Gy in 10 fractions, although modest differences in survival, symptomatic improvement rates, and toxicity can not be reliably excluded.

Preoperative radiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma. Oeosphageal Cancer Collaborative Group

BACKGROUND

The existing randomized evidence has failed to conclusively demonstrate the benefit or otherwise of preoperative radiotherapy in treating patients with potentially resectable esophageal carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether there is benefit from adding radiotherapy prior to surgery and whether or not any pre-defined patient subgroups benefit more or less from preoperative radiotherapy

SEARCH STRATEGY

Medline and CancerLit searches were supplemented by information from trial registers and by hand searching relevant meeting proceedings and by discussion with relevant trialists, organisations and industry.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis provided they randomized patients with potentially resectable carcinoma of the esophagus (of any histological type) to receive radiotherapy or no radiotherapy prior to surgery. Trials must have used a randomization method which precluded prior knowledge of treatment assignment and completed accrual by December 1993, to ensure sufficient follow-up by the time of the first analysis (September 1995).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A quantitative meta-analysis using updated data from individual patients from all properly randomized trials (published or unpublished) comprising 1147 patients (971 deaths) from five randomized trials. This approach was used to assess whether preoperative radiotherapy improves overall survival and whether it is differentially effective in patients defined by age, sex and tumour location.

MAIN RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 9 years, in a group patients with mostly squamous carcinomas, the hazard ratio (HR) of 0.89 (95% CI 0.78-1.01) suggests an overall reduction in the risk of death of 11% and an absolute survival benefit of 3% at 2 years and 4% at 5 years. This result is not conventionally statistically significant (p=0.062). No clear differences in the size of the effect by sex, age or tumor location were apparent.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Based on existing trials, there was no clear evidence that preoperative radiotherapy improves the survival of patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer. These results indicate that if such preoperative radiotherapy regimens do improve survival, then the effect is likely to be modest with an absolute improvement in survival of around 3 to 4%. Trials or a meta-analysis of around 2000 patients (90% power, 5% significance level) would be needed to reliably detect such an improvement (from 15 to 20%).

Physical and psychological symptoms of quality of life in the CHART randomized trial in head and neck cancer: short-term and long-term patient reported symptoms. CHART Steering Committee. Continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy

The randomized multicentre trial of continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) versus conventional radiotherapy in patients with advanced head and neck cancer showed no good evidence of a difference in any of the major clinical outcomes of survival, freedom from metastases, loco-regional control and disease-free survival. Therefore an assessment of the effect of treatment on physical and psychological symptoms is vital to balance the costs and benefits of the two treatments. A total of 615 patients were asked to complete a Rotterdam Symptom Checklist and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, which cover a variety of physical and psychological symptoms, at a total of ten time points. The data consisted of short-term data (the initial 3 months) and long-term data (1 and 2 years). The short-term data was split into an exploratory data set and a confirmatory data set, and analysed using subject-specific and group-based methods. Differences were only claimed if hypotheses generated in the exploratory data set were confirmed in the confirmatory data set. The long-term data was not split into two data sets and was analysed using a group-based approach. There was evidence of significantly worse symptoms of pain at day 21 in those treated with CHART and significantly worse symptoms of cough and hoarseness at 6 weeks in those treated conventionally. There was also evidence to suggest a higher degree of decreased sexual interest at 1 year and sore muscles at 2 years in those treated with conventional radiotherapy. There is no clear indication that one regimen is superior to the other in terms of 'quality of life', generally the initially more severe reaction in the CHART group being offset by the longer duration of symptoms in the conventionally treated group.

Intravesical chemotherapy with epirubicin: a dose response study

PURPOSE

We determined the difference in response to high and standard doses of intravesical epirubicin for treatment of superficial bladder cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 122 patients were entered into a randomized trial to compare the response of a marker tumor at 3 months, time to first recurrence and recurrence rates for 2 years after intravesical chemotherapy for superficial (pTa/pT1) bladder cancer. Patients were randomized to receive treatment for 1 hour with 1 (standard dose) or 2 mg./ml. (high dose) epirubicin (50 or 100 mg./50 ml. solution).

RESULTS

There was no difference in the marker tumor response rate in 24 of 52 patients treated with the standard dose compared with 21 of 50 treated with the higher dose of epirubicin (p = 0.67). Similarly, the higher dose was not superior in regard to time to first recurrence, with a hazard ratio of 1.46 (p = 0.14, 95% confidence intervals 0.88 to 2.42). Considering the upper end of the confidence interval, we can reliably exclude an absolute difference of greater than 4% at 1 year for time to first recurrence in favor of higher dose chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Epirubicin at double the standard dose for intravesical chemotherapy of superficial bladder cancer is not superior in regard to marker tumor response, time to first recurrence or recurrence rate.

Advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: 1998 consensus statements

BACKGROUND

During an international workshop held in September 1998, a group of specialists in the field of ovarian cancer reached consensus on a number of issues with implications for standard practice and for research of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Five groups of experts considered several issues which included: biologic factors, prognostic factors, surgery, initial chemotherapy, second-line treatment, the use of CA 125, investigational drugs, intra-peritoneal treatment and high-dose chemotherapy. The group attempted to arrive at answers to questions such as: Are there prognostic factors, which help to identify patients who will not do well with current therapy? What is the current best therapy for advanced ovarian carcinoma? What directions should research take in advanced ovarian cancer? These issues were discussed in a plenary meeting.

RESULTS

One of the major conclusions drawn by the consensus committee was that in previously untreated advanced ovarian cancer, cisplatin plus paclitaxel has been shown to be superior to previous standard therapy with cisplatin plus cyclophosphamide (level I evidence). However, for many patients, carboplatin plus paclitaxel is a reasonable alternative because of toxicity and convenience considerations. Most participants felt that the benefits in terms of toxicity for the paclitaxel-carboplatin are such that its widespread adoption at this stage is justified. Until mature survival data are available a minority of investigators would recommend continued use of cisplatin plus paclitaxel, specifically for those patients with advanced disease with the best prognostic characteristics. For future clinical research in this area, new end points for randomised clinical trials, together with a new Trials Network, are proposed.

Randomised trials in ovarian cancer: trial design considerations

Randomised clinical trials are considered the definitive source of evidence for guiding decisions in clinical practice. The concept of a clinical trial is based on sound scientific, ethical, and practical principles. The strength of evidence that an individual trial provides is assessed on the manner in which these principles are incorporated into the design and execution of the trial. Since the way these principles are incorporated into a trial is judgmental, the strength of evidence from an individual trial is a matter of degree. The purpose of this paper is to present some of the scientific, ethical and practical considerations surrounding the selection of endpoints and determination of sample size for trials in ovarian cancer.

Intergroup collaboration in ovarian cancer: a giant step forward

The rather slow evolution of so-called "optimal chemotherapy" for ovarian cancer is the result of suboptimal randomised clinical trials, not having the statistical power to identify truly superior regimens, and of the lack of systematic comparisons of new agents with relevant control arms. There is little doubt that we need international collaboration to move the field forward in a timely and coherent manner. European and transatlantic collaboration represents the beginning of the process and point to the success that can await us if the drive to work together remains strong. A similar organisation as for breast cancer (Breast International Group, BIG) needs to be established for ovarian cancer.

Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints

Meta-analyses aim to provide a full and comprehensive summary of related studies which have addressed a similar question. When the studies involve time to event (survival-type) data the most appropriate statistics to use are the log hazard ratio and its variance. However, these are not always explicitly presented for each study. In this paper a number of methods of extracting estimates of these statistics in a variety of situations are presented. Use of these methods should improve the efficiency and reliability of meta-analyses of the published literature with survival-type endpoints.

Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints

Meta-analyses aim to provide a full and comprehensive summary of related studies which have addressed a similar question. When the studies involve time to event (survival-type) data the most appropriate statistics to use are the log hazard ratio and its variance. However, these are not always explicitly presented for each study. In this paper a number of methods of extracting estimates of these statistics in a variety of situations are presented. Use of these methods should improve the efficiency and reliability of meta-analyses of the published literature with survival-type endpoints.

Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints

Meta-analyses aim to provide a full and comprehensive summary of related studies which have addressed a similar question. When the studies involve time to event (survival-type) data the most appropriate statistics to use are the log hazard ratio and its variance. However, these are not always explicitly presented for each study. In this paper a number of methods of extracting estimates of these statistics in a variety of situations are presented. Use of these methods should improve the efficiency and reliability of meta-analyses of the published literature with survival-type endpoints.

Can the published data tell us about the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced cancer of the uterine cervix?

The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on survival of patients with locally advanced cervical cancer was investigated by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published data. Of the 21 randomised trials that we identified, only 15 were published. Furthermore, 2-year survival data could be extracted from only seven trial reports and 3-year survival from only nine trial reports. Meta-analyses of the published data at 2 and 3 years are neither clearly in favour of neoadjuvant chemotherapy nor control (2 years: odds ratio (OR) = 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.83-1.45, P = 0.37; 3 years: OR = 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.73-1.25, P = 0.45). Being restricted to only some of the data from a relatively small fraction of the randomised trials, these analyses potentially suffer from a number of biases and are therefore inconclusive. The only reliable way to judge the value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in this disease is to perform a meta-analysis of centrally collected, updated, individual data on all patients from all known randomised trials. Such an analysis is currently being carried out by an international collaborative group.

Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints

Meta-analyses aim to provide a full and comprehensive summary of related studies which have addressed a similar question. When the studies involve time to event (survival-type) data the most appropriate statistics to use are the log hazard ratio and its variance. However, these are not always explicitly presented for each study. In this paper a number of methods of extracting estimates of these statistics in a variety of situations are presented. Use of these methods should improve the efficiency and reliability of meta-analyses of the published literature with survival-type endpoints.

First-line chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer: paclitaxel, cisplatin and the evidence

As of June 1998, four randomized trials have been completed comparing the combination of paclitaxel and cisplatin with a cisplatin-based control arm. The results of three of these trials are available; one has been published as a full paper, the other two in abstract form only. Two of the reported trials (GOG-111 and the Intergroup trial) provide clear evidence that cisplatin combined with paclitaxel is a more effective regimen than one using the same dose of cisplatin combined with cyclophosphamide. The results of the third reported trial (GOG-132) are rather different, suggesting that a higher dose of single-agent cisplatin may be as effective as the paclitaxel/cisplatin combination tested in the other two trials. A number of explanations for these unexpected results have been proposed: false-positive results in GOG-111 and the Intergroup trial; false-negative results in GOG-132; high crossover in GOG-132 (including crossover before progression); the cyclophosphamide in the control arm of GOG-111 and the Intergroup trial had a negative impact on outcome in the control group in these trials; the higher dose of cisplatin when used as a single agent in GOG-132 had a positive impact on outcome for the control group in this trial. These explanations are discussed in detail, and their implications explored.

A randomized trial comparing methotrexate and vinblastine (MV) with cisplatin, methotrexate and vinblastine (CMV) in advanced transitional cell carcinoma: results and a report on prognostic factors in a Medical Research Council study. MRC Advanced Bladder Cancer Working Party

Transitional cell carcinomas may arise at any site within the urinary tract and are a source of considerable morbidity and mortality. In particular, patients with metastatic disease have a poor prognosis, with less than 5% alive at 5 years. A multicentre randomized trial comparing methotrexate and vinblastine (MV) with cisplatin, methotrexate and vinblastine (CMV) in advanced or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma was conducted in the UK. From April 1991 to June 1995, 214 patients were entered by 16 centres, 108 randomized to CMV and 106 to MV. A total of 204 patients have died. The hazard ratio (relative risk of dying) was 0.68 (95% CI 0.51-0.90, P-value = 0.0065) in favour of CMV. This translates to an absolute improvement in 1-year survival of 13%, 16% in MV and 29% in CMV. The median survival for CMV and MV was 7 months and 4.5 months respectively. Two hundred and eight patients objectively progressed or died. The hazard ratio was 0.55 (95% CI 0.41-0.73, P-value = 0.0001) in favour of CMV. Two hundred and nine patients symptomatically progressed or died. The hazard ratio was 0.48 (95% CI 0.36-0.64, P-value = 0.0001) in favour of CMV. The most important pretreatment factors influencing overall survival were WHO performance status and extent of disease. These two factors were used to derive a prognostic index which could be used to categorize patients into three prognostic groups. We conclude that the addition of cisplatin to methotrexate and vinblastine should be considered in patients with transitional cell carcinoma, taking into account the increased toxicity.

Patient-reported short-term and long-term physical and psychologic symptoms: results of the continuous hyperfractionated accelerated [correction of acclerated] radiotherapy (CHART) randomized trial in non-small-cell lung cancer. CHART Steering Committee

PURPOSE

The randomized multicenter trial of continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) versus conventional radiotherapy for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) showed a significant survival benefit to CHART (29% v 20% at 2 years, P=.004). However, an assessment of the effect on physical and psychologic symptoms is vital to balance the costs and benefits of the two treatments.

METHODS

A total of 356 patients in the United Kingdom completed the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at 10 time points. The principal aim of the analyses was to keep the methods simple, so as to allow the presentation and interpretation of the results to be as clear as possible. This was achieved by (1) considering individual symptoms rather than symptom subscales or domains, (2) assessing short-term effects (up to 3 months) and long-term effects (at 1 and 2 years) separately, and (3) for the short-term analyses, (a) splitting the data randomly into an exploratory data set and a confirmatory data set, and (b) using two different methods of analysis: a subject-specific approach, which used the area under the curve (AUC) as a summary measure, and a group-based method, which plotted the percent of patients with moderate or severe symptoms over time.

RESULTS

The results indicate that apart from CHART causing transient pain on swallowing and heartburn, there was little difference between the regimens in the short or long-term.

CONCLUSION

Combining the results of the patient-assessed symptom comparisons with the clinical results indicates that CHART confers a major benefit without serious morbidity.

Preoperative radiotherapy in esophageal carcinoma: a meta-analysis using individual patient data (Oesophageal Cancer Collaborative Group)

PURPOSE

The existing randomized evidence has failed to conclusively demonstrate the benefit or otherwise of preoperative radiotherapy in treating patients with potentially resectable esophageal carcinoma. This meta-analysis aimed to assess whether there is benefit from adding radiotherapy prior to surgery.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

This quantitative meta-analysis included updated individual patient data from all properly randomized trials (published or unpublished) comprising 1147 patients (971 deaths) from five randomized trials.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 9 years, the hazard ratio (HR) of 0.89 (95% CI 0.78-1.01) suggests an overall reduction in the risk of death of 11% and an absolute survival benefit of 3% at 2 years and 4% at 5 years. This result is not conventionally statistically significant (p = 0.062). No clear differences in the size of the effect by sex, age, or tumor location were apparent.

CONCLUSION

Based on existing trials, there was no clear evidence that preoperative radiotherapy improves the survival of patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer. These results indicate that if such preoperative radiotherapy regimens do improve survival, then the effect is likely to be modest with an absolute improvement in survival of around 3 to 4%. Trials or a meta-analysis of around 2000 patients would be needed to reliably detect such an improvement (15-->20%).

Survey of the Administration of quality of life (QL) questionnaires in three multicentre randomised trials in cancer. The Medical Research Council Lung Cancer Working Party the CHART Steering Committee

We surveyed centres collaborating in two trials in lung cancer (LU12, LU13) and one in lung and head and neck cancer (CHART) to find out how QL questionnaires were being administered, with the aim of standardising procedures and improving compliance. Dedicated local trials staff were funded for CHART but not for the other trials. In all three trials, patients completed a Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) and a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at specified times. 17 of 22 LU12 centres, 9 of 11 LU13 and all 10 CHART centres returned survey forms. In LU12 and LU13, the category of staff responsible for questionnaires varied widely; in CHART, only research staff were involved. This led to more consistency in CHART centres in the administration and collection of questionnaires, and more frequent checking of forms. However, even the CHART administration, although better than in the other two trials, could not be regarded as standardised. All centres were equally affected by logistical problems. These embraced organisational deficits (e.g. unavailability of staff, lack of questionnaires) and patient-related factors (e.g. patient deemed to be too ill, had difficulty reading or left before completing the form). Patient refusals were an uncommon reason for non-compliance and patients were considered to be generally in favour of QL assessment. As a result of these findings, a number of measures have been put in place to increase standardisation of procedures and improve compliance. These include publishing guidelines for protocol writing, providing centres with guidelines for QL administration and information leaflets for patients, together with introducing staff training.

Survey on the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in England and Wales

As an adjunct to a meta-analysis of chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a survey was conducted in England and Wales of clinicians' views on the role of chemotherapy in NSCLC and the benefits it would have to offer to lead them to change their practice. Radiotherapists, medical oncologists, surgeons and physicians specializing in thoracic medicine, and physicians of palliative medicine were asked their views on the treatment of three case histories of 65 yr old men: Case 1, resected tumour involving a hilar lymph node (tumour (T)2, node (N)1, metastasis (M)0); Case 2, tumour that had spread to mediastinal lymph nodes bilaterally (T2, N3, M0); and Case 3, metastatic cancer (M1) accompanied by minor haemoptysis. Six hundred and ninety eight (85%) of the 821 clinicians responded. For Case 1, 74% would not recommend any adjuvant treatment, 24% would recommend radiotherapy, and <1% chemotherapy, and there was little expectation that adjuvant treatment would improve survival. For Case 2, 68% would recommend radiotherapy, 11% chemotherapy, and 1% surgery, 7% recommending a combination. Adjuvant treatment, regardless of modality, was expected to improve survival. For Case 3, only 11% would recommend chemotherapy, but 26% if the patient was aged < or = 50 yrs. There was little expectation of survival beyond 1 yr, or of improving survival with chemotherapy. For all three cases, most of those not recommending chemotherapy would require it to achieve substantially improved survival for them to use it routinely. Surgery alone is currently considered sufficient for resectable non-small cell lung cancer. Chemotherapy is rarely recommended for disease of any stage.

Tutorial in biostatistics Bayesian data monitoring in clinical trials

Many clinical trials organizations use regular interim analyses to monitor the accruing results in large clinical trials. In disease areas such as cancer, where survival is usually a major outcome variable, ethical considerations may lead to a stipulated requirement for data monitoring of mortality. This monitoring has frequently taken the form of limiting interim analyses to be few in number, and specifying an extreme p-value of, for example, p < 0.001 or p < 0.01 as grounds for early termination of the trial. Group-sequential methods are also used. However, none of these approaches formally assesses the impact that the results of a clinical trial may have upon clinical practice. Thus a trial might be terminated early because of apparent treatment benefits, but might fail to influence sceptical clinicians to modify their future treatment policy. We discuss the application of Bayesian methods, including the use of uninformative, sceptical and enthusiastic priors, and demonstrate that the necessary calculations are both straightforward to perform and easy to interpret statistically and clinically. Methods are illustrated with interim analyses of a clinical trial in oesophageal cancer.

Tutorial in biostatistics Bayesian data monitoring in clinical trials

Many clinical trials organizations use regular interim analyses to monitor the accruing results in large clinical trials. In disease areas such as cancer, where survival is usually a major outcome variable, ethical considerations may lead to a stipulated requirement for data monitoring of mortality. This monitoring has frequently taken the form of limiting interim analyses to be few in number, and specifying an extreme p-value of, for example, p < 0.001 or p < 0.01 as grounds for early termination of the trial. Group-sequential methods are also used. However, none of these approaches formally assesses the impact that the results of a clinical trial may have upon clinical practice. Thus a trial might be terminated early because of apparent treatment benefits, but might fail to influence sceptical clinicians to modify their future treatment policy. We discuss the application of Bayesian methods, including the use of uninformative, sceptical and enthusiastic priors, and demonstrate that the necessary calculations are both straightforward to perform and easy to interpret statistically and clinically. Methods are illustrated with interim analyses of a clinical trial in oesophageal cancer.

Evaluation and follow-up of patients with N1-3 M0 or NXM1 prostate cancer in phase III trials

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this discussion is to review the design and conduct of phase III trials in metastatic prostate cancer, to seek ways of improving their study design, accuracy, relevance to clinical practice, acceptability to patients, and ease of participation by clinicians. We also aim to try to set uniform definitions for the evaluation of the different endpoints used in clinical trials on metastasized prostate cancer.

METHODS

The work was started by correspondence between the participants in the group for the year before the consensus meeting. Two comprehensive questionnaires were circulated and the answers were distributed to all the members of the group. The statements were finalized during the consensus meeting.

RESULTS

There were some differing opinions concerning the methods of evaluation of endpoints for follow-up, such as time to tumor progression and time to treatment failure. After the consensus conference, there were no major disagreements within the group.

CONCLUSIONS

The aim of phase III trials is to influence clinical management. To obtain a credible result they require a sound statistical basis with appropriate power and encompassing patients from small urologic practices as well as large or academic institutions. However, deviation from routine practice may affect the accrual rate, and the trial procedure should therefore be as similar as possible to routine management. Trials inevitably involve extra work and cost. Both should be kept to a minimum to encourage participation and hasten a timely conclusion. It is mandatory to create uniform ways of designing and evaluating clinical trials in prostate cancer.

Thirty years of Medical Research Council randomized trials in solid tumours

This paper reviews the survival outcome from the randomized Phase III trials in solid tumours published on behalf of, or in collaboration with, the Cancer Therapy Committee (CTC) of the British Medical Research Council over a 30-year period to 31 December 1995. We review briefly the innovations in statistical methodology that have occurred over the period. We also note the ways in which standards of reporting the trials have improved, with more recent publications including, for example, estimates of the size of effect and confidence intervals. In all, 32 trials, involving over 5000 deaths in more than 8000 patients, have been published. Tumour types have included bladder, bone, brain, cervix, colon and rectum, head and neck, kidney, lung, ovary, prostate and skin. This paper presents a bibliography of these trials and gives details of the treatment comparisons made, the numbers of patients randomized and included in the analysis for each treatment arm, the observed numbers of deaths, and an estimate of the hazard ratio with associated 95% confidence intervals. The bibliography also indicates the main endpoint of each trial, whether recurrence-free survival or survival, and whether the trial was aimed at finding a difference or showing equivalence. The MRC trials have made an impact on both clinical practice and research activities. For example, the lung cancer programme has helped to establish the role of chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer and has developed better palliative treatment for non-small cell lung cancer. Trials of the radiosensitizer misonidazole have demonstrated that it has no role in the treatment of a number of cancers, trials of hyperbaric oxygen have defined the biological activity of this approach, and the appropriate dose of radiotherapy in patients with brain tumours has been found. The individual trials recruited between 44 and 824 patients (median 213). A better measure of the information in a trial is the number of deaths reported, which varied from 28 to 661 (median 145). A large proportion of the comparisons (8/29 or 28%) anticipating a survival difference, demonstrated such a difference at the 5% level of significance. Despite this, it is concluded that some of the trials should have been larger. In such cases, hindsight suggests either that an overoptimistic view of the anticipated survival benefit was taken at the design stage, or, for equivalence trials, the planned confidence interval was too wide for definitive statements to be made. As a consequence, the current CTC profolio of ongoing randomized trials open to patient accrual at 1 January 1996 have a projected median size of 600 and range from 120 to 2000 patients.

A combined analysis of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, and Medical Research Council randomized clinical trials for the prophylactic treatment of stage TaT1 bladder cancer. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Genitourinary Tract Cancer Cooperative Group and the Medical Research Council Working Party on Superficial Bladder Cancer

PURPOSE

The use of prophylactic agents after primary resection can decrease the incidence of tumor recurrence in patients with stage TaT1 bladder cancer. However, the long-term impact on progression to muscle invasive disease as well as on duration of survival is unknown. A combined analysis of individual patient data from previously performed European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and Medical Research Council (MRC) randomized clinical trials was done in an attempt to answer these crucial questions. We compared immediate versus no adjuvant prophylactic treatment after transurethral resection with respect to disease-free interval, time to progression to muscle invasive disease, time to appearance of distant metastases, duration of survival and progression-free survival.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All EORTC and MRC prophylactic, randomized phase III trials with primary or recurrent, stage TaT1 transitional cell bladder cancer that compared transurethral resection alone or with adjuvant prophylactic treatment were included in the study. Four EORTC and 2 MRC trials using intravesical chemotherapy or oral agents and including a total of 2,535 patients were studied.

RESULTS

A statistically significant effect of adjuvant treatment over no adjuvant treatment was found in terms of the duration of the disease-free interval (p < 0.01). No clear advantage of adjuvant treatment was shown with respect to progression to invasive disease, time to appearance of distant metastases or duration of survival and progression-free survival. Median survival followup was 7.8 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite prologation of the disease-free-interval adjuvant treatment has no apparent long-term impact on the evolution of stage TaTi bladder cancer.