First trial restored under new initiative casts doubt on repeat bowel cancer surgery

A trial that remained unpublished for 20 years casts doubt on the survival benefit of repeat—'second look'—surgery for bowel cancer.

The trial is published in the online journal BMJ Open today. It is the first to be restored under the restoring invisible and abandoned (RIAT) initiative that allows third parties to publish previously abandoned studies when the original researchers or sponsors fail to do so.

The initiative was announced last year by editors of The BMJ and PLOS Medicine as a way to complete and correct the scientific record, so that doctors and patients have access to accurate information to make decisions about treatments.

On bmj.com today, Professor Tom Treasure and colleagues tell the story behind the trial and discuss what it means today.

The trial started in 1982 and examined the use of a tumour marker (carcinoembryonic antigen or CEA) to detect cancer recurrence early and prompt second look surgery. The researchers wanted to see whether this would result in better survival.

Nearly 1,500 patients who had already had surgery took part in the trial. Those with high CEA levels, suggesting their cancer had returned, were randomised to further surgery (active arm) or to continued review (control arm).

But the trial was stopped early in 1993 when it was found that there were more deaths in the active arm than the control arm.

Although there was a clear intention to publish the results, various factors led to the trial team breaking up and the data were thought to be irretrievably lost.

When the RIAT initiative was announced, Professor Tom Treasure at University College London and colleagues at the University of Sussex and Imperial College London had already retrieved the archived files and were in the process of analysing the data.

Spurred on by the initiative, their updated analysis confirms that there is no hint of a survival advantage associated with knowledge of the CEA.

They acknowledge that methods of detection, imaging, and surgical resection have changed over the intervening 20 years, but they do not believe that the findings can be readily discounted.

They say the new evidence "should fuel uncertainty about present day second look for colorectal in its various forms and hope that it will give some encouragement to undertake the randomised trials that are needed."

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Follow-up tests improve colorectal cancer recurrence detection

Jan 14, 2014

Among patients who had undergone curative surgery for primary colorectal cancer, the screening methods of computed tomography and carcinoembryonic antigen each provided an improved rate of surgical treatment of cancer recurrence ...

Unexpected results in cancer drug trial

Apr 08, 2014

Research from the University of Southampton has shown a drug, used in combination with chemotherapy to treat advanced colorectal cancer, is not effective in some settings, and indeed may result in more rapid cancer progression.

Recommended for you

Cancer: Tumors absorb sugar for mobility

9 hours ago

Cancer cells are gluttons. We have long known that they monopolize large amounts of sugar. More recently, it became clear that some tumor cells are also characterized by a series of features such as mobility or unlikeliness ...

Early hormone therapy may be safe for women's hearts

18 hours ago

(HealthDay)—Healthy women at low risk of cardiovascular disease may be able to take hormone replacement therapy soon after menopause for a short time without harming their hearts, according to a new study.

Low yield for repeat colonoscopy in some patients

19 hours ago

(HealthDay)—Repeat colonoscopies within 10 years are of little benefit to patients who had no polyps found on adequate examination; however, repeat colonoscopies do benefit patients when the baseline examination was compromised, ...

User comments