Medical subspecialties continue to have extremely low numbers of racial and ethnic minority faculty, and their resistance to diversification can impede the success of minority hires. But there are ...ways to cultivate the retention and promotion of such faculty members.
The role of postoperative therapy in extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) or gallbladder carcinoma (GBCA) is unknown. S0809 was designed to estimate 2-year survival (overall and after R0 or R1 ...resection), pattern of relapse, and toxicity in patients treated with this adjuvant regimen.
Eligibility criteria included diagnosis of EHCC or GBCA after radical resection, stage pT2-4 or N+ or positive resection margins, M0, and performance status 0 to 1. Patients received four cycles of gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8) and capecitabine (1,500 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 14) every 21 days followed by concurrent capecitabine (1,330 mg/m(2) per day) and radiotherapy (45 Gy to regional lymphatics; 54 to 59.4 Gy to tumor bed). With 80 evaluable patients, results would be promising if 2-year survival 95% CI were > 45% and R0 and R1 survival estimates were ≥ 65% and 45%, respectively.
A total of 79 eligible patients (R0, n = 54; R1, n = 25; EHCC, 68%; GBCA, 32%) were treated (86% completed). For all patients, 2-year survival was 65% (95% CI, 53% to 74%); it was 67% and 60% in R0 and R1 patients, respectively. Median overall survival was 35 months (R0, 34 months; R1, 35 months). Local, distant, and combined relapse occurred in 14, 24, and nine patients. Grade 3 and 4 adverse effects were observed in 52% and 11% of patients, respectively. The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were neutropenia (44%), hand-foot syndrome (11%), diarrhea (8%), lymphopenia (8%), and leukopenia (6%). There was one death resulting from GI hemorrhage.
This combination was well tolerated, has promising efficacy, and provides clinicians with a well-supported regimen. Our trial establishes the feasibility of conducting national adjuvant trials in EHCC and GBCA and provides baseline data for planning future phase III trials.
Despite tremendous gains in the molecular understanding of exocrine pancreatic cancer, the prognosis for this disease remains very poor, largely because of delayed disease detection and limited ...effectiveness of systemic therapies. Both incidence rates and mortality rates for pancreatic cancer have increased during the past decade, in contrast to most other solid tumor types. Recent improvements in multimodality care have substantially improved overall survival, local control, and metastasis‐free survival for patients who have localized tumors that are amenable to surgical resection. The widening gap in prognosis between patients with resectable and unresectable or metastatic disease reinforces the importance of detecting pancreatic cancer sooner to improve outcomes. Furthermore, the developing use of therapies that target tumor‐specific molecular vulnerabilities may offer improved disease control for patients with advanced disease. Finally, the substantial morbidity associated with pancreatic cancer, including wasting, fatigue, and pain, remains an under‐addressed component of this disease, which powerfully affects quality of life and limits tolerance to aggressive therapies. In this article, the authors review the current multidisciplinary standards of care in pancreatic cancer with a focus on emerging concepts in pancreatic cancer detection, precision therapy, and survivorship.
Escalating healthcare costs are necessitating the practice of value-based oncology. It is crucial to critically evaluate the economic impact of influential but expensive therapies such as immune ...checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To date, no systematic assessment of the cost-effectiveness (CE) of ICIs has been performed.
PRISMA-guided systematic searches of the PubMed database were conducted. Studies of head/neck (n = 3), lung (n = 5), genitourinary (n = 4), and melanoma (n = 8) malignancies treated with ICIs were evaluated. The reference willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was $100,000/QALY.
Nivolumab was not cost-effective over chemotherapy for recurrent/metastatic head/neck cancers (HNCs). For non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), nivolumab was not cost-effective for a general cohort, but increased PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in CE. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for both previously treated and newly-diagnosed metastatic NSCLC. For genitourinary cancers (GUCs, renal cell and bladder cancers), nivolumab and pembrolizumab were not cost-effective options. Regarding metastatic/unresected melanoma, ipilimumab monotherapy is less cost-effective than nivolumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab, and pembrolizumab. The addition of ipilimumab to nivolumab monotherapy was not adequately cost-effective. Pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy offered comparable CE profiles.
With limited data and from the reference WTP, nivolumab was not cost-effective for HNCs. Pembrolizumab was cost-effective for NSCLC; although not the case for nivolumab, applying PD-L1 cutoffs resulted in adequate CE. Most data for nivolumab and pembrolizumab in GUCs did not point towards adequate CE. Contrary to ipilimumab, either nivolumab or pembrolizumab is cost-effective for melanoma. Despite these conclusions, it cannot be overstated that careful patient selection is critical for CE. Future publication of CE investigations and clinical trials (along with longer follow-up of existing data) could substantially alter conclusions from this analysis.
Contemporary radiotherapy: present and future Chandra, Ravi A; Keane, Florence K; Voncken, Francine E M ...
The Lancet (British edition),
07/2021, Letnik:
398, Številka:
10295
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Oncology care is increasingly a multidisciplinary endeavour, and radiation therapy continues to have a key role across the disease spectrum in nearly every cancer. However, the field of radiation ...oncology is still one of the most poorly understood of the cancer disciplines. In this Review, we attempt to summarise and contextualise developments within the field of radiation oncology for the non-radiation oncologist. We discuss advancements in treatment technologies and imaging, followed by an overview of the interplay with advancements in systemic therapy and surgical techniques. Finally, we review new frontiers in radiation oncology, including advances within the metastatic disease continuum, reirradiation, and emerging types of radiation therapy.
To survey image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) practice patterns, as well as IGRT's impact on clinical workflow and planning treatment volumes (PTVs).
A sample of 5979 treatment site-specific ...surveys was e-mailed to the membership of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), with questions pertaining to IGRT modality/frequency, PTV expansions, method of image verification, and perceived utility/value of IGRT. On-line image verification was defined as images obtained and reviewed by the physician before treatment. Off-line image verification was defined as images obtained before treatment and then reviewed by the physician before the next treatment.
Of 601 evaluable responses, 95% reported IGRT capabilities other than portal imaging. The majority (92%) used volumetric imaging (cone-beam CT CBCT or megavoltage CT), with volumetric imaging being the most commonly used modality for all sites except breast. The majority of respondents obtained daily CBCTs for head and neck intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), lung 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or IMRT, anus or pelvis IMRT, prostate IMRT, and prostatic fossa IMRT. For all sites, on-line image verification was most frequently performed during the first few fractions only. No association was seen between IGRT frequency or CBCT utilization and clinical treatment volume to PTV expansions. Of the 208 academic radiation oncologists who reported working with residents, only 41% reported trainee involvement in IGRT verification processes.
Consensus guidelines, further evidence-based approaches for PTV margin selection, and greater resident involvement are needed for standardized use of IGRT practices.
An international database was collected to inform the 8th edition of the anatomic classification of lung cancer. The present analyses concern its primary tumor (T) component.
From 1999 to 2010, ...77,156 evaluable patients, 70,967 with non–small-cell lung cancer, were collected; and 33,115 had either a clinical or a pathological classification, known tumor size, sufficient T information, and no metastases. Survival was measured from date of diagnosis or surgery for clinically and pathologically staged tumors. Tumor-size cutpoints were evaluated by the running log-rank statistics. T descriptors were evaluated in a multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, histological type, and geographic region.
The 3-cm cutpoint significantly separates T1 from T2. From 1 to 5 cm, each centimeter separates tumors of significantly different prognosis. Prognosis of tumors greater than 5 cm but less than or equal to 7 cm is equivalent to T3, and that of those greater than 7 cm to T4. Bronchial involvement less than 2 cm from carina, but without involving it, and total atelectasis/pneumonitis have a T2 prognosis. Involvement of the diaphragm has a T4 prognosis. Invasion of the mediastinal pleura is a descriptor seldom used.
Recommended changes are as follows: to subclassify T1 into T1a (⩽1 cm), T1b (>1 to ⩽2 cm), and T1c (>2 to ⩽3 cm); to subclassify T2 into T2a (>3 to ⩽4 cm) and T2b (>4 to ⩽5 cm); to reclassify tumors greater than 5 to less than or equal to 7 cm as T3; to reclassify tumors greater than 7 cm as T4; to group involvement of main bronchus as T2 regardless of distance from carina; to group partial and total atelectasis/pneumonitis as T2; to reclassify diaphragm invasion as T4; and to delete mediastinal pleura invasion as a T descriptor.
PDF
