+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Dexamethasone and supportive care with or without whole brain radiotherapy in treating patients with non-small cell lung cancer with brain metastases unsuitable for resection or stereotactic radiotherapy (QUARTZ): results from a phase 3, non-inferiority, randomised trial


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) and dexamethasone are widely used to treat brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), although there have been no randomised clinical trials showing that WBRT improves either quality of life or overall survival. Even after treatment with WBRT, the prognosis of this patient group is poor. We aimed to establish whether WBRT could be omitted without a significant effect on survival or quality of life.


          The Quality of Life after Treatment for Brain Metastases (QUARTZ) study is a non-inferiority, phase 3 randomised trial done at 69 UK and three Australian centres. NSCLC patients with brain metastases unsuitable for surgical resection or stereotactic radiotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to optimal supportive care (OSC) including dexamethasone plus WBRT (20 Gy in five daily fractions) or OSC alone (including dexamethasone). The dose of dexamethasone was determined by the patients' symptoms and titrated downwards if symptoms improved. Allocation to treatment group was done by a phone call from the hospital to the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London using a minimisation programme with a random element and stratification by centre, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), gender, status of brain metastases, and the status of primary lung cancer. The primary outcome measure was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). QALYs were generated from overall survival and patients' weekly completion of the EQ-5D questionnaire. Treatment with OSC alone was considered non-inferior if it was no more than 7 QALY days worse than treatment with WBRT plus OSC, which required 534 patients (80% power, 5% [one-sided] significance level). Analysis was done by intention to treat for all randomly assigned patients. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN3826061.


          Between March 2, 2007, and Aug 29, 2014, 538 patients were recruited from 69 UK and three Australian centres, and were randomly assigned to receive either OSC plus WBRT (269) or OSC alone (269). Baseline characteristics were balanced between groups, and the median age of participants was 66 years (range 38–85). Significantly more episodes of drowsiness, hair loss, nausea, and dry or itchy scalp were reported while patients were receiving WBRT, although there was no evidence of a difference in the rate of serious adverse events between the two groups. There was no evidence of a difference in overall survival (hazard ratio 1·06, 95% CI 0·90–1·26), overall quality of life, or dexamethasone use between the two groups. The difference between the mean QALYs was 4·7 days (46·4 QALY days for the OSC plus WBRT group vs 41·7 QALY days for the OSC group), with two-sided 90% CI of −12·7 to 3·3.


          Although the primary outcome measure result includes the prespecified non-inferiority margin, the combination of the small difference in QALYs and the absence of a difference in survival and quality of life between the two groups suggests that WBRT provides little additional clinically significant benefit for this patient group.


          Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, and the National Health and Medical Research Council in Australia.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012.

          Estimates of the worldwide incidence and mortality from 27 major cancers and for all cancers combined for 2012 are now available in the GLOBOCAN series of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. We review the sources and methods used in compiling the national cancer incidence and mortality estimates, and briefly describe the key results by cancer site and in 20 large "areas" of the world. Overall, there were 14.1 million new cases and 8.2 million deaths in 2012. The most commonly diagnosed cancers were lung (1.82 million), breast (1.67 million), and colorectal (1.36 million); the most common causes of cancer death were lung cancer (1.6 million deaths), liver cancer (745,000 deaths), and stomach cancer (723,000 deaths). © 2014 UICC.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life.

              In the course of developing a standardised, non-disease-specific instrument for describing and valuing health states (based on the items in Table 1), the EuroQol Group (whose members are listed in the Appendix) conducted postal surveys in England, The Netherlands and Sweden which indicate a striking similarity in the relative valuations attached to 14 different health states. The data were collected using a visual analogue scale similar to a thermometer. The EuroQol instrument is intended to complement other quality-of-life measures and to facilitate the collection of a common data set for reference purposes. Others interested in participating in the extension of this work are invited to contact the EuroQol Group.

                Author and article information

                Lancet (London, England)
                22 October 2016
                22 October 2016
                : 388
                : 10055
                : 2004-2014
                [a ]Northern Centre for Cancer Care, Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
                [b ]Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, London, UK
                [c ]Queen's Centre for Oncology and Haematology, Castle Hill Hospital, Hull, UK
                [d ]Institute of Cancer Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
                [e ]Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, Bristol, UK
                [f ]Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit and Institute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
                [g ]Wales Cancer Research Network, Cardiff UK
                [h ]The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Greater Glasgow Health Board and Clyde, Glasgow, UK
                [i ]Patient representative, Manchester, UK
                [j ]Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group, Waratah, NSW, Australia
                [k ]University of Queensland, QLD, Australia
                [l ]Nottingham University Hospital, Nottingham, UK
                [m ]Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
                [n ]Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Kings Lynn, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence to: Prof Ruth Langley, Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, London WC2B 6NH, UKCorrespondence to: Prof Ruth LangleyMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College LondonInstitute of Clinical Trials and MethodologyLondonWC2B 6NHUK ruth.langley@ 123456ucl.ac.uk
                © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY license

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).




                Comment on this article