SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Extended search

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Verheij Joanne) "

Search: WFRF:(Verheij Joanne)

  • Result 1-3 of 3
Sort/group result
   
EnumerationReferenceCoverFind
1.
  • Stoop, Thomas F., et al. (author)
  • Pathological complete response in patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma after preoperative chemotherapy
  • 2024
  • In: JAMA Network Open. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2574-3805. ; 7:6
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Importance: Preoperative chemo(radio)therapy is increasingly used in patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma, leading to pathological complete response (pCR) in a small subset of patients. However, multicenter studies with in-depth data about pCR are lacking.Objective: To investigate the incidence, outcome, and risk factors of pCR after preoperative chemo(radio)therapy.Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational, international, multicenter cohort study assessed all consecutive patients with pathology-proven localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent resection after 2 or more cycles of chemotherapy (with or without radiotherapy) in 19 centers from 8 countries (January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018). Data collection was performed from February 1, 2020, to April 30, 2022, and analyses from January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2023. Median follow-up was 19 months.Exposures: Preoperative chemotherapy (with or without radiotherapy) followed by resection.Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of pCR (defined as absence of vital tumor cells in the sampled pancreas specimen after resection), its association with OS from surgery, and factors associated with pCR. Factors associated with overall survival (OS) and pCR were investigated with Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models, respectively.Results: Overall, 1758 patients (mean [SD] age, 64 [9] years; 879 [50.0%] male) were studied. The rate of pCR was 4.8% (n = 85), and pCR was associated with OS (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.83). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 95%, 82%, and 63% in patients with pCR vs 80%, 46%, and 30% in patients without pCR, respectively (P < .001). Factors associated with pCR included preoperative multiagent chemotherapy other than (m)FOLFIRINOX ([modified] leucovorin calcium [folinic acid], fluorouracil, irinotecan hydrochloride, and oxaliplatin) (odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.87), preoperative conventional radiotherapy (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.00-4.10), preoperative stereotactic body radiotherapy (OR, 8.91; 95% CI, 4.17-19.05), radiologic response (OR, 13.00; 95% CI, 7.02-24.08), and normal(ized) serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 after preoperative therapy (OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.79-7.89).Conclusions and Relevance: This international, retrospective cohort study found that pCR occurred in 4.8% of patients with resected localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma after preoperative chemo(radio)therapy. Although pCR does not reflect cure, it is associated with improved OS, with a doubled 5-year OS of 63% compared with 30% in patients without pCR. Factors associated with pCR related to preoperative chemo(radio)therapy regimens and anatomical and biological disease response features may have implications for treatment strategies that require validation in prospective studies because they may not universally apply to all patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
  •  
2.
  • Vali, Yasaman, et al. (author)
  • Enhanced liver fibrosis test for the non-invasive diagnosis of fibrosis in patients with NAFLD : A systematic review and meta-analysis
  • 2020
  • In: Journal of Hepatology. - : Elsevier. - 0168-8278 .- 1600-0641. ; 73:2, s. 252-262
  • Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) test is a non-invasive biomarker, suggested as an appropriate test for advanced liver fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This systematic review aimed to provide summary estimates of the accuracy of this test against biopsy.METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, for studies included NAFLD patients and undertook both liver biopsy as the reference standard and the ELF test. Two authors independently screened the references, extracted the data and assessed the quality of included studies. Due to the variation in reported thresholds, we used a multiple thresholds random effects model for meta-analysis (diagmeta R-package).RESULTS: The meta-analysis of 11 studies reporting advanced fibrosis and five studies reporting significant fibrosis showed sensitivity of >0.90 of the ELF test for excluding fibrosis at threshold of 7.7. However, as a diagnostic test at high thresholds, the test showed specificity and positive predictive value >0.80, only in very high-prevalence settings (>50%). Desiring specificity of 0.90 for advanced and significant fibrosis resulted in thresholds of 10.18 (sensitivity: 0.57) and 9.86 (sensitivity: 0.55), respectively.CONCLUSION: The ELF test showed high sensitivity but limited specificity to exclude advanced and significant fibrosis at low cutoffs. The diagnostic performance of the test at higher thresholds was found to be more limited in low prevalence settings. We conclude that clinicians should carefully consider the likely disease prevalence in their practice setting and adopt suitable test thresholds to achieve the desired test performance.
  •  
3.
  • van Hilst, Jony, et al. (author)
  • Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA) : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
  • 2021
  • In: Trials. - : BMC. - 1745-6215. ; 22:1
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • Background: Recently, the first randomized trials comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for non-malignant and malignant disease showed a 2-day reduction in time to functional recovery after MIDP. However, for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), concerns have been raised regarding the oncologic safety (i.e., radical resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival) of MIDP, as compared to ODP. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial comparing MIDP and ODP in PDAC regarding oncological safety is warranted. We hypothesize that the microscopically radical resection (R0) rate is non-inferior for MIDP, as compared to ODP. Methods/design: DIPLOMA is an international randomized controlled, patient- and pathologist-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 38 pancreatic centers in Europe and the USA. A total of 258 patients with an indication for elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy because of proven or highly suspected PDAC of the pancreatic body or tail will be randomly allocated to MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the microscopically radical resection margin (R0, distance tumor to pancreatic transection and posterior margin >= 1 mm), which is assessed using a standardized histopathology assessment protocol. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (alpha), 80% power (1-beta), expected R0 rate in the open group of 58%, expected R0 resection rate in the minimally invasive group of 67%, and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. Secondary outcomes include time to functional recovery, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, and conversion to open surgery), other histopathology findings (e.g., lymph node retrieval, perineural- and lymphovascular invasion), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications, hospital stay, and administration of adjuvant treatment), time and site of disease recurrence, survival, quality of life, and costs. Follow-up will be performed at the outpatient clinic after 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. Discussion: The DIPLOMA trial is designed to investigate the non-inferiority of MIDP versus ODP regarding the microscopically radical resection rate of PDAC in an international setting.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Result 1-3 of 3

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view