Background: Patients with oesophageal/gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (EAC) not showing early metabolic response (EMR) to chemotherapy have poorer survival and histological response rates <5%. We investigated whether tailoring neoadjuvant therapy can improve outcomes in these patients. Patients and methods: Patients with resectable EAC were enrolled and randomised into two single-arm, multicentre phase II trials. After induction cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil (CF), all were assessed by day 15 positron emission tomography (PET). Patients with an EMR [maximum standardised uptake values (SUVmax) !35% reduction from baseline to day 15 PET] received a second CF cycle then oesophagectomy. Non-responders were randomised 1 : 1 to two cycles of CF and docetaxel (DCF, n ¼ 31) or DCF þ 45 Gy radiotherapy (DCFRT, n ¼ 35) then oesophagectomy. The primary end point was major histological response (<10% residual tumour) in the oesophagectomy specimen; secondary end points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and locoregional recurrence (LR). Results: Of 124 patients recruited, major histological response was achieved in 3/45 (7%) with EMR, 6/30 (20%) DCF, and 22/35 (63%) DCFRT patients. Grade 3/4 toxicities occurred in 12/45 (27%) EMR (CF), 13/31 (42%) DCF, and 25/35 (71%) DCFRT patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. LR by 3 years was seen in 5/45 (11%) EMR, 10/31 (32%) DCF, and 4/35 (11%) DCFRT patients. PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)] at 36 months was 47% (31% to 61%) for EMR, 29% (15% to 45%) for DCF, and 46% (29% to 61%) for DCFRT patients. OS (95% CI) at 60 months was 53% (37% to 67%) for EMR, 31% (16% to 48%) for DCF, and 46% (29% to 61%) for DCFRT patients. Conclusions: EMR is associated with favourable OS, PFS, and low LR. For non-responders, the addition of docetaxel augmented histological response rates, but OS, PFS, and LR remained inferior compared with responders. DCFRT improved histological response and PFS/LR outcomes, matching the EMR group. Early PET/CT has the potential to tailor therapy for patients not showing an early response to chemotherapy. Trial registration: ACTRN12609000665235.

BackgroundThe prevalence of complementary medicine use in pregnancy and lactation has been increasingly noted internationally. This systematic review aimed to determine the complementary medicine products (CMPs) used in pregnancy and/or lactation for the benefit of the mother, the pregnancy, child and/or the breastfeeding process. Additionally, it aimed to explore the resources women used, and to examine the role of maternal health literacy in this process.MethodsSeven databases were comprehensively searched to identify studies published in peer-reviewed journals (1995–2017). Relevant data were extracted and thematic analysis undertaken to identify key themes related to the review objectives.ResultsA total of 4574 articles were identified; 28 qualitative studies met the inclusion criteria. Quantitative studies were removed for a separate, concurrent review. Herbal medicines were the main CMPs identified (n = 21 papers) in the qualitative studies, with a smaller number examining vitamin and mineral supplements together with herbal medicines (n = 3), and micronutrient supplements (n = 3). Shared cultural knowledge and traditions, followed by women elders and health care professionals were the information sources most accessed by women when choosing to use CMPs. Women used CMPs for perceived physical, mental-emotional, spiritual and cultural benefits for their pregnancies, their own health, the health of their unborn or breastfeeding babies, and/or the breastfeeding process. Two over-arching motives were identified: 1) to protect themselves or their babies from adverse events; 2) to facilitate the normal physiological processes of pregnancy, birth and lactation. Decisions to use CMPs were made within the context of their own cultures, reflected in the locus of control regarding decision-making in pregnancy and lactation, and in the health literacy environment. Medical pluralism was very common and women navigated through and between different health care services and systems throughout their pregnancies and breastfeeding journeys.ConclusionsPregnant and breastfeeding women use herbal medicines and micronutrient supplements for a variety of perceived benefits to their babies’ and their own holistic health. Women access a range of CMP-related information sources with shared cultural knowledge and women elders the most frequently accessed sources, followed by HCPs. Culture influences maternal health literacy and thus women’s health care choices including CMP use.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12906-018-2283-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background The prevalence of complementary medicine product (CMP) use by pregnant or breastfeeding Australian mothers is high, however, there is limited data on factors influencing women’s decision-making to use CMPs. This study explored and described the factors influencing women’s decisions take a CMP when pregnant or breastfeeding. Methods Qualitative in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were held with 25 pregnant and/or breastfeeding women who currently used CMPs. Participants’ health literacy was assessed using a validated single-item health literacy screening question and the Newest Vital Sign. Interview and focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Results Participants were a homogenous group. Most had higher education, medium to high incomes and high health literacy skills. They actively sought information from multiple sources and used a reiterative collation and assessment process. Their decision-making to take or not to take CMPs was informed by the need to establish the safety of the CMPs, as well as possible benefits or harms to their baby’s or their own health that could result from taking a CMP. Their specific information needs included the desire to access comprehensive, consistent, clear, easy to understand, and evidence-based information. Women preferred to access information from reputable sources, namely, their trusted health care practitioners, and information linked to government or hospital websites and published research. A lack of comprehensive, clear, consistent, or evidence-based information often led to decisions not to take a CMP, as they felt unable to adequately establish its safety or benefits. Conversely, when the participants felt the CMPs information they collected was good quality and from reputable sources, it reassured them of the safety of the CMP in pregnancy and/or breastfeeding. If this confirmed a clear benefit to their baby or themselves, they were more likely to decide to take a CMP. Conclusions The participants’ demographic profile confirms previous research concerning Australian women who use CMPs during pregnancy and lactation. Participants’ high health literacy skills led them to engage in a reiterative, information-seeking and analysis process fuelled by the need to find clear information before making the decision to take, or not to take, a CMP. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-019-2396-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.