4 9 5What ' s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Men with prostate cancer have higher rates of non-cancer mortality and CV morbidity and some of that excess risk has been attributed to the treatment they receive. ADT is an established treatment option for men with locally-advanced and metastatic prostate cancer and, although it has been shown to confer a disease-free survival advantage, it has also been associated with an increased incidence of CV disease and the metabolic syndrome (characterized by a cluster of CV risk factors, including insulin resistance). The benefi ts of the insulin sensitizer metformin and lifestyle intervention for reducing the incidence of metabolic syndrome have been shown in patients with impaired glucose tolerance.At the time of writing, the present study is the fi rst to use metformin and lifestyle intervention in men with prostate cancer with the aim of reducing the risk of developing ADT-related CV morbidity and the metabolic syndrome. The study shows that lifestyle changes and metformin may indeed reduce the complications of androgen suppression in these men. Although further investigations are needed to establish which of the two interventions may be most benefi cial, the favourable effects of a combination of these interventions on patients ' quality of life and the potential for improved overall survival are of clinical signifi cance. OBJECTIVE• To investigate the effects of metformin and lifestyle changes on the development of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)-related metabolic syndrome. PATIENTS AND METHODS• Men with prostate cancer due to receive ADT were recruited and randomized.• Controls received ADT alone.• Men in the intervention arm received ADT with 6 months of metformin, a low glycaemic index diet and an exercise programme.• All patients were investigated pretreatment and at 6 months for the metabolic syndrome, as well as for related biochemical and physical parameters. RESULTS• In total, 40 men were recruited and randomized (20 to each arm).• After 6 months, signifi cant improvements in abdominal girth ( P = 0.05), weight ( P < 0.001), body mass index ( P < 0.001) and systolic blood pressure ( P = 0.01) were seen in the intervention arm compared to controls.• Biochemical markers of insulin resistance did not differ signifi cantly. CONCLUSIONS• The present study shows the potential benefi ts of metformin and lifestyle changes in ADT-treated men.• Further studies will aim to determine which intervention is most important, and may show that overall survival can be improved. KEYWORDSandrogen deprivation therapy , insulin resistance , metabolic syndrome X , metformin , prostatic neoplasms Study Type -Therapy (RCT) Level of Evidence 1b

Bevacizumab has promising tolerability. Longer follow-up is needed to identify an effect on the primary endpoint of overall survival at 5 years.

BackgroundBevacizumab is a recombinant humanised monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor shown to improve survival in advanced solid cancers. We evaluated the role of adjuvant bevacizumab in melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence.Patients and methodsPatients with resected AJCC stage IIB, IIC and III cutaneous melanoma were randomised to receive either adjuvant bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg i.v. 3 weekly for 1 year) or standard observation. The primary end point was detection of an 8% difference in 5-year overall survival (OS) rate; secondary end points included disease-free interval (DFI) and distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI). Tumour and blood were analysed for prognostic and predictive markers.ResultsPatients (n=1343) recruited between 2007 and 2012 were predominantly stage III (73%), with median age 56 years (range 18–88 years). With 6.4-year median follow-up, 515 (38%) patients had died [254 (38%) bevacizumab; 261 (39%) observation]; 707 (53%) patients had disease recurrence [336 (50%) bevacizumab, 371 (55%) observation]. OS at 5 years was 64% for both groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.16, P = 0.78). At 5 years, 51% were disease free on bevacizumab versus 45% on observation (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.74–0.99, P = 0.03), 58% were distant metastasis free on bevacizumab versus 54% on observation (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78–1.07, P = 0.25). Forty four percent of 682 melanomas assessed had a BRAFV600 mutation. In the observation arm, BRAF mutant patients had a trend towards poorer OS compared with BRAF wild-type patients (P = 0.06). BRAF mutation positivity trended towards better OS with bevacizumab (P = 0.21).ConclusionsAdjuvant bevacizumab after resection of high-risk melanoma improves DFI, but not OS. BRAF mutation status may predict for poorer OS untreated and potential benefit from bevacizumab.Clinical Trial InformationISRCTN 81261306; EudraCT Number: 2006-005505-64

3018 Background: Since publication of the registration trial in 2010 (Hodi et al, NEJM 2010;363:711-23), real world use of ipilimumab (Ipi) in previously treated advanced melanoma patients has extended beyond the specific trial entry criteria of ECOG PS 0-1. We undertook a review of UK patients (pts) treated in the international EAP prior to European licensing of Ipi in August 2011, to compare real world survival outcomes. Methods: UK clinicians registered in the EAP provided anonymised data using pre-specified variable fields for all pts. The EAP stipulated pts should have previously treated, unresectable stage III or IV metastatic melanoma and receive Ipi 3 mg/kg, 3 weekly IV, for up to 4 cycles. Response using RECIST criteria was assessed 12 weekly. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) using CTCAE v3.0 were collected. Results: To date, information on 162 pts has been received from 16 UK sites. Primary sites were: 78% cutaneous, 4% ocular, 1% mucosal, 17% unknown. 78% pts had M1c disease, 14% had brain metastases. No prior therapies ranged from 0-4, 72% pts received 1 prior therapy. Median age was 60 years, men>women (1.6:1). ECOG PS was: 38% 0, 47% 1, 14% 2, 1% 3. BRAF status was known in 38% cases and WT in 75% of these. 19% pts were on steroids at baseline. No cycles delivered was 4 in 52%, 3 in 13%, 2 in 16%, 1 in 17% pts. Most frequent reason for stopping early was clinical evidence of disease progression (71%), death (16%) or unacceptable AE (12%). 32% pts experienced a grade ≥3 AE, the most common being diarrhoea (13%) and fatigue (8%). Complete and partial responses were reported in 1% and 21% of treated pts. At median follow-up of 17 months, median progression free survival and overall survival (OS) were 2.8 and 5.7 months, 1 year OS was 30%. Comparing outcomes of various pt subgroups, the strongest prognostic factor for OS was ECOG PS at the start of treatment (p<0.0001). For pts with PS 0 or 1, median OS was 8.8 months (compared with 10 months in the registration trial). More detailed safety and efficacy data on pt subgroups will be presented. Conclusions: This review, representing the largest Ipi EAP UK dataset, reports overall poorer survival outcomes than in the registration trial, but pts with similar characteristics to the trial population lived longer.

Background: Sorafenib is the current standard treatment for advanced hepatocellular