PURPOSE We analysed the cohort of paediatric patients with metastatic non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft tissue sarcomas (NRSTS) treated in the BERNIE protocol, i.e. open-label, multicentre, randomised phase II study evaluating the role of bevacizumab (BO20924/ITCC-006; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00643565). METHODS Eligible patients were randomised 11 to add or not add bevacizumab to nine courses of intensive multi-drug chemotherapy, followed by 12-month maintenance chemotherapy (plus surgery and radiotherapy). The primary end-point was event-free survival (EFS); secondary objectives were objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS From 2008 and 2013, 49 NRSTS patients (out of 154 cases) were treated, 26 in the standard arm and 23 in the bevacizumab arm. ORR was seen in 10 out of 36 evaluable cases (27.7%), i.e. 4/18 standard arm cases and 6/18 bevacizumab arm cases. Two-year EFS was 27.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.9-42.5) for all NRSTS patients, i.e. 34.9% (95% CI 14.6-56.2) for bevacizumab arm and 22.9% (95% CI 7.1-43.9) for standard arm (p-value = 0.19). Three-year OS (median follow-up 48.6 months) was 35.2%, with no differences in the two arms. Time to event and time to death were 16.3 and 17.2 months for bevacizumab arm and 2.1 and 7.6 months for standard arm, respectively. Patients not receiving any local treatment on primary disease had a worse outcome as compared to others. Treatment results were better for patients receiving surgical resection and worse for those who did not receive any specific treatment. CONCLUSION The addition of the anti-angiogenic agent to the standard chemotherapy did not show statistically significant improvement in survival in metastatic NRSTS. BACKGROUND Recent therapeutic strategies, particularly MAP kinase pathway inhibitors (BRAF, MEK) and immune checkpoint blockers (CTLA-4, PD-1), have been put on the test for their differential impact on long-term survival of metastatic melanoma patients. Various agents, dose regimens and combinations have been tested against each other vigorously within these two therapy groups. However, results from prospective head-to-head comparative trials comparing both strategies against each other are still lacking. METHODS We performed an exploratory analysis of survival data from selected clinical trials representative for these two treatment strategies in advanced metastatic melanoma. 84 Kaplan-Meier survival curves from 26 trials were digitised and grouped by therapy strategy and treatment line. For each of these groups, mean survival curves were generated for progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by weighted averaging. RESULTS Survival curves grouped together by therapy strategy revealed a high concordance, with a larger extent in the first-line setting compared to higher treatment lines. In first-line therapy, the averaged 3-year OS proportions were 41.3% for BRAF plus MEK inhibition, 49.9% for PD-1 inhibition, and 58.4% for CTLA-4 plus PD-1 inhibition. Comparison of the mean PFS and OS curves of kinase inhibition and checkpoint blockade revealed a superiority of combined BRAF plus MEK inhibition within the first 12 months, later changing to a superiority of PD-1 blockers alone or in combination with CTLA-4 blockade. In second-line or higher, BRAF plus MEK inhibition was superior to anti-PD-1 monotherapy throughout the first three years; averaged 3-year OS proportions were 42.4% for BRAF plus MEK inhibition, and 40.1% for PD-1 inhibition. CONCLUSIONS and relevance These results need confirmation by head-to-head comparative randomised clinical trials. BACKGROUND Regarding the comparison between primary debulking surgery (PDS) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for stage III/IV ovarian, tubal and peritoneal cancers, EORTC55971 and CHORUS studies demonstrated noninferiority of NACT. Previously, we reported reduced invasiveness of NACT in JCOG0602. This is a final analysis including the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS). METHODS Patients were randomised to PDS (PDS followed by 8x paclitaxel and carboplatin, i.e. TC regimen) or NACT (4x TC, interval debulking surgery [IDS], 4x TC). The primary endpoint was OS. The noninferiority hazard ratio (HR) margin for NACT compared with PDS was 1·161. selleck inhibitor The planned sample size was 300. FINDINGS Between 2006 and 2011, 301 patients were randomised, 149 to PDS and 152 to NACT. The median OS was 49·0 and 44·3 months in the PDS and NACT. HR for NACT was 1·052 [90·8% confidence interval (CI) 0·835-1·326], and one-sided noninferiority p-value was 0·24. Median progression-free survival was 15·1 and 16·4 months in the PDS and NACT (HR 0·96 [95%CI 0·75-1·23]). In the PDS arm, 147/149 underwent PDS and 49/147 underwent IDS. In the NACT arm 130/152 underwent IDS. Complete resection was achieved in 12% (17/147) of PDS and 31% (45/147) of PDS ± IDS in the PDS arm and in 64% (83/130) of IDS in the NACT arm. Optimal surgery (residual tumour  2000 an institution with low study activity was advantageous, whereas clear/mucinous histology was disadvantageous for OS. INTERPRETATION The noninferiority of NACT was not confirmed. NACT may not always be a substitute for PDS. However, as our study had smaller numbers, the noninferiority of the previous studies cannot be denied. FUNDING Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan and the National Cancer Center, Japan. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION UMIN000000523. BACKGROUND The implementation of quality of life (QoL) concepts in routine care, is still an open matter. We followed the Medical Research Council framework for complex interventions to implement a model of QoL diagnosis and therapeutic options, and investigated its effectiveness in patients with colorectal cancer. METHODS This randomised, single-blind, multicentre, clinical trial enrolled patients diagnosed with primary colorectal cancer aged 18 years or older who were surgically treated in one of four recruiting hospitals in Germany. All patients received aftercare from one of 178 coordinating practitioners (CPs) who had access to 75 healthcare professionals providing tailored therapies. QoL was measured (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29) in all patients after surgery (baseline) and during aftercare (3, 6, 12, 18 months). Patients were randomised (11) into two groups a care pathway, including QoL-profiles consisting of 13 QoL scales plus specific therapeutic recommendations forwarded to the patient’s CP or standard postoperative care adhering to the German national guideline for colorectal cancer (control).