| 51. |
- Bergerot, Cristiane Decat, et al.
(författare)
-
Frustration and distress during treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - Univ Fed Sao Paulo UNIFESP, Sao Paulo, Brazil. KCCure, Alexandria, VA USA. City Hope Comprehens Canc Ctr, Monrovia, CA USA. Duke Univ, Durham, NC USA. Johns Hopkins Univ, Sidney Kimmel Comprehens Canc Ctr, Baltimore, MD USA. Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Houston, TX 77030 USA. Umea Univ, Umea, Sweden. Netherlands Canc Inst, Amsterdam, Netherlands. City Hope Comprehens Canc Ctr, Duarte, CA USA. Ludwig Maximilians Univ Munchen, Univ Hosp Munich Grosshadern, Munich, Germany. City Hope Natl Med Ctr, Duarte, CA USA. : AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 36:34
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 52. |
|
|
| 53. |
- Bergh, Jonas C. S., et al.
(författare)
-
Docetaxel, trastuzumab, pertuzumab versus trastuzumab emtansine as neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer : results from the Swedish PREDIX HER2 trial identifying a new potential de-escalation standard?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : American Society of Clinical Oncology. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 37:15, s. 501-501
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Neoadjuvant therapy produces high rates of pathological complete response (pCR) and is the standard of care in HER2 positive breast cancer; however, the optimal treatment regimen remains to be established. Methods: In this randomized phase II study patients ≥18 years with HER2 positive breast cancer > 20mm or verified lymph node metastases were randomized to 6 courses of docetaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (DTP, group A) or trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1, group B), q 21 days. The protocol allowed switch to the competing treatment upon lack of response or drug-related severe toxicity. Patients received postoperative epirubicin+cyclophosphamide, trastuzumab for a total of one year and endocrine therapy. Accrual was completed in October 2018 after randomization of 202 patients, data on pCR were available for 190 at the time for this abstract submission. Median age, 52 years (26-74), menopausal status, histological type and grade were well balanced between the treatment groups. 62.6% of the tumors were hormone receptor (HR) positive. Results: Primary endpoint was pathological objective response. 190 patients completed the protocol-specified preoperative treatment. pCR was achieved in 45.3% of patients, 46.4% in patients treated with DTP and 44.1% with T-DM1 (chi-sq., p = 0.75). In HR-positive tumors, pCR was obtained in 35.3% of patients, 35.9% in group A vs. 34.6% in group B (p = 0.87); in HR-negative tumors, the overall pCR rate was 62.0%, 66.7% in group A vs. 57.9% in group B (p = 0.45). Severe (grade 3/4) toxicity was reported at 68 occasions related to DTP, compared with 16 related to T-DM1, 26 vs. 3 caused by febrile neutropenia. Significantly better quality of life was reported by patients treated with T-DM1. Conclusions: Our data on TDM-1 demonstrates similar efficacy and less toxicity, in particular for patients with HER2 and HR positive cancers, being a potential new standard for neoadjuvant therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02568839.
|
|
| 54. |
- Bergh, Jonas, et al.
(författare)
-
FACT : An Open-Label Randomized Phase III Study of Fulvestrant and Anastrozole in Combination Compared With Anastrozole Alone as First-Line Therapy for Patients With Receptor-Positive Postmenopausal Breast Cancer
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - Alexandria, VA : American Society of Clinical Oncology. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 30:16, s. 1919-1925
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: To compare the effect of therapy with anastrozole versus a combination of fulvestrant and anastrozole in women in first relapse of endocrine-responsive breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal women, or premenopausal women receiving a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, with estrogen receptor– and/or progesterone receptor–positive disease at first relapse after primary treatment of localized disease were open-label randomly assigned to a fulvestrant loading dose (LD) regimen followed by monthly injection plus 1 mg of anastrozole daily or to 1 mg of anastrozole daily alone. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). Results: In all, 514 women were randomly assigned to fulvestrant plus anastrozole (experimental arm; n = 258) or anastrozole (standard arm; n = 256). Approximately two thirds had received adjuvant antiestrogens, but only eight individuals had received an aromatase inhibitor. Median TTP was 10.8 and 10.2 months in the experimental versus standard arm, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.20; P = .91); median overall survival was 37.8 and 38.2 months, respectively (HR = 1.0; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.32; P = 1.00). Incidences of prespecified adverse events (AEs) were similar. Hot flashes were more common in the experimental arm: 63 patients (24.6%) versus 35 patients (13.8%) in the standard arm (P = .0023). Death owing to AEs was reported in 11 (4.3%) and five patients (2.0%) in the experimental versus standard arm, respectively. Conclusion: Fulvestrant (250 mg + LD regimen) in combination with anastrozole offered no clinical efficacy advantage over anastrozole monotherapy in this population of individuals with a relatively high proportion of previous adjuvant antiestrogen exposure.
|
|
| 55. |
|
|
| 56. |
|
|
| 57. |
|
|
| 58. |
|
|
| 59. |
|
|
| 60. |
- Bernhard, Jürg, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical benefit and quality of life in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine plus capecitabine versus gemcitabine alone : a randomized multicenter phase III clinical trial--SAKK 44/00-CECOG/PAN.1.3.001
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 26:22, s. 3695-3701
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: To compare clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (Cap) versus single-agent Gem for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral Cap 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks or until progression. CBR criteria and QOL indicators were assessed over this period. CBR was defined as improvement from baseline for >or= 4 consecutive weeks in pain (pain intensity or analgesic consumption) and Karnofsky performance status, stability in one but improvement in the other, or stability in pain and performance status but improvement in weight. RESULTS: Of 319 patients, 19% treated with GemCap and 20% treated with Gem experienced a CBR, with a median duration of 9.5 and 6.5 weeks, respectively (P < .02); 54% of patients treated with GemCap and 60% treated with Gem had no CBR (remaining patients were not assessable). There was no treatment difference in QOL (n = 311). QOL indicators were improving under chemotherapy (P < .05). These changes differed by the time to failure, with a worsening 1 to 2 months before treatment failure (all P < .05). CONCLUSION: There is no indication of a difference in CBR or QOL between GemCap and Gem. Regardless of their initial condition, some patients experience an improvement in QOL on chemotherapy, followed by a worsening before treatment failure.
|
|
