Omitting radiotherapy in women >= 65 years with low-risk early breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant endocrine therapy is safe

Purpose: The aim of this study was to verify if radiotherapy (RT) safely can be omitted in older women treated for estrogen-receptor positive early breast cancer with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and endocrine therapy (ET). Patients and Methods: Eligibility criteria were: consecutive patients with age >= 65 years, BCS + sentinel node biopsy, clear margins, unifocal T1N0M0 breast cancer tumor, Elston-Ellis histological grade 1 or 2 and estrogen receptor-positive tumor. After informed consent, adjuvant ET for 5 years was prescribed. Primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Secondary endpoints were contralateral breast cancer and overall survival. Results: Between 2006 and 2012, 603 women were included from 14 Swedish centers. Median age was 71.1 years (range 65-90). After a median follow-up of 68 months 16 IBTR (cumulative incidence at five-year follow-up; 1.2%, 95% CI, 0.6% to 2.5%), 6 regional recurrences (one combined with IBTR), 2 distant recurrences (both without IBTR or regional recurrence) and 13 contralateral breast cancers were observed. There were 48 deaths. One death (2.1%) was due to breast cancer and 13 (27.1%) were due to other cancers (2 endometrial cancers). Five-year overall survival was 93.0% (95% CI, 90.5% to 94.9%). Conclusion: BCS and ET without RT seem to be a safe treatment option in women >= 65 years with early breast cancer and favorable histopathology. The risk of IBTR is comparable to the risk of contralateral breast cancer. Moreover, concurrent morbidity dominates over breast cancer as leading cause of death in this cohort with low-risk breast tumors. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Achievements and perspectives in prostate cancer phase 3 trials from genitourinary research groups in europe: introducing the prostate cancer consortium in europe.

CONTEXT: Phase 3 trials have made major contributions to advances in prostate cancer (PCa). However, funding limitations and excess bureaucracy are now making it difficult to conduct trials. OBJECTIVE: To describe the collaborative groups in Europe and their academic phase 3 PCa trials. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Leaders of collaborative groups from Scandinavia, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), France, Spain, the United Kingdom, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and Ireland were asked to provide information. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Approximately 40 academic European phase 3 trials focussing on PCa have been completed, and about 10 are accruing patients. Cross-border trials have been successfully conducted led by EORTC (11), Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (9), European Association of Urology (1), Systemic Therapy in Advancing or Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Evaluation of Drug Efficiency (STAMPEDE) (1), and the French Genito-Urinary Tumor Group (1). Among these studies were practise-changing trials showing the superiority of prostatectomy over watchful waiting in patients <65 yr of age, the benefits of combining androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with radiation therapy (RXT) in high-risk localised disease, the superiority of long-term versus short-term ADT, the benefit of RXT in men treated with ADT, and the role of adjuvant RXT. To bridge the numbers gap for phase 3 studies, the Prostate Cancer Consortium in Europe (PEACE) is a recently established initiative that aims to favour cross-border networks of investigators. PEACE 1 is testing the addition of abiraterone and that of RXT directed at the primary cancer in patients with de novo metastatic PCa treated with ADT. PEACE 2 is testing the addition of cabazitaxel and that of pelvic irradiation in patients with at least two criteria for high-risk localised PCa. CONCLUSIONS: European academic phase 3 trials have contributed to establishing the current standard treatment of PCa. The PEACE consortium was recently tasked with the goal of addressing unanswered questions and specific biology-related issues more efficiently. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Prostate Cancer Consortium in Europe was established to conduct comparative trials aiming at assessing new treatments for prostate cancer patients

Development of a standardised training curriculum for robotic surgery: a consensus statement from an international multidisciplinary group of experts

International audienceOBJECTIVES:To explore the views of experts about the development and validation of a robotic surgery training curriculum, and how this should be implemented.MATERIALS AND METHODS:An international expert panel was invited to a structured session for discussion. The study was of a mixed design, including qualitative and quantitative components based on focus group interviews during the European Association of Urology (EAU) Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) (2012), EAU (2013) and ERUS (2013) meetings. After introduction to the aims, principles and current status of the curriculum development, group responses were elicited. After content analysis of recorded interviews generated themes were discussed at the second meeting, where consensus was achieved on each theme. This discussion also underwent content analysis, and was used to draft a curriculum proposal. At the third meeting, a quantitative questionnaire about this curriculum was disseminated to attendees to assess the level of agreement with the key points.RESULTS:In all, 150 min (19 pages) of the focus group discussion was transcribed (21 316 words). Themes were agreed by two raters (median agreement κ 0.89) and they included: need for a training curriculum (inter-rater agreement κ 0.85); identification of learning needs (κ 0.83); development of the curriculum contents (κ 0.81); an overview of available curricula (κ 0.79); settings for robotic surgery training ((κ 0.89); assessment and training of trainers (κ 0.92); requirements for certification and patient safety (κ 0.83); and need for a universally standardised curriculum (κ 0.78). A training curriculum was proposed based on the above discussions.CONCLUSION:This group proposes a multi-step curriculum for robotic training. Studies are in process to validate the effectiveness of the curriculum and to assess transfer of skills to the operating room