Clinical outcomes from an innovative protocol using serial ultrasound imaging and a single MR image to guide brachytherapy for locally advanced cervix cancer

Brachytherapy ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 817-824 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia van Dyk ◽  
Kailash Narayan ◽  
David Bernshaw ◽  
Srinivas Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan ◽  
Pearly Khaw ◽  
...  
1995 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 181-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.R.H. Christie ◽  
C.A. Bull ◽  
V. Gebski ◽  
A.O. Langlands

2011 ◽  
Vol 120 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo Henrique Zanvettor ◽  
Deraldo F. Filho ◽  
Adson R. Neves ◽  
Maria Jose N. Amorim ◽  
Sonia M. Medeiros ◽  
...  

Liver Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Xin Hui Chew ◽  
Rehena Sultana ◽  
Eshani N. Mathew ◽  
David Chee Eng Ng ◽  
Richard H.G. Lo ◽  
...  

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Real-world management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is crucially challenging in the current rapidly evolving clinical environment which includes the need for respecting patient preferences and autonomy. In this context, regional/national treatment guidelines nuanced to local demographics have increasing importance in guiding disease management. We report here real-world data on clinical outcomes in HCC from a validation of the Consensus Guidelines for HCC at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS). <b><i>Method:</i></b> We evaluated the NCCS guidelines using prospectively collected real-world data, comparing the efficacy of treatment received using overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Treatment outcomes were also independently evaluated against 2 external sets of guidelines, the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) and Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC). <b><i>Results:</i></b> Overall treatment compliance to the NCCS guidelines was 79.2%. Superior median OS was observed in patients receiving treatment compliant with NCCS guidelines for early (nonestimable vs. 23.5 months <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.0001), locally advanced (28.1 vs. 22.2 months <i>p</i> = 0.0216) and locally advanced with macrovascular invasion (10.3 vs. 3.3 months <i>p</i> = 0.0013) but not for metastatic HCC (8.1 vs. 6.8 months <i>p</i> = 0.6300), but PFS was similar. Better clinical outcomes were seen in BCLC C patients who received treatment compliant with NCCS guidelines than in patients with treatment only allowed by BCLC guidelines (median OS 14.2 vs. 7.4 months <i>p</i> = 0.0002; median PFS 6.1 vs. 4.0 months <i>p</i> = 0.0286). Clinical outcomes were, however, similar for patients across all HKLC stages receiving NCCS-recommended treatment regardless of whether their treatment was allowed by HKLC. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The high overall compliance rate and satisfactory clinical outcomes of patients managed according to the NCCS guidelines confirm its validity. This validation using real-world data considers patient and treating clinician preferences, thus providing a realistic analysis of the usefulness of the NCCS guidelines when applied in the clinics.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21524-e21524
Author(s):  
Michele Guida ◽  
Annarita Fanizzi ◽  
Davide Quaresmini ◽  
Annalisa Nardone ◽  
Andrea Armenio ◽  
...  

e21524 Background: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) is the second most common skin cancer. Although representing less than 5% of all CSCCs, advanced stages are difficult to treat. Cemiplimab, an antiPD-1 monoclonal antibody, is the first approved immunotherapy in the US and EU for patients with locally advanced (laCSCC) or metastatic (mCSCC) CSCC. Phase I-II studies showed high antitumor activity and good tolerability, but few data are still available regarding cemiplimab in real life experience in non-selected patients. Methods: We recruited 30 consecutive patients with laCSCC (25 pts) and mCSCC (5 pts) treated with cemiplimab from August 2019 to November 2020 at our Institution. Median age was 81 years (range 36-95); 24 males; median ECOG PS 1 (range 0-2). Five patients had an immunosuppressive condition including 3 patients with stable hematologic malignancies and two patients on immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation and Crohn’s disease, respectively. The majority of patients had comorbidities (median 3). Cemiplimab was administered at the flat dose of 350 mg i.v. every 21 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In all patients we evaluated clinical outcomes, toxicity, and associations between clinical outcomes and peripheral blood parameters. Results: We reported 23 responses (ORR 76.7%) with CR in 5 patients (16.7%). One patient had SD for 5 months. The global DCR was 80%. The median duration of response and PFS was not reached at a median follow-up of 6 months. We observed a higher ORR in head and neck primary tumours (87% vs. 42.9% of others, p = 0.016) and in patients with haemoglobin level > 12 g/dL (87.5% vs. 64.3%). No significative difference in ORR was observed with respect to the median age (81.3% in >81 years vs. 71.4% in < 81 years). Among the 5 patients with immunosuppressive status, a response was obtained in 4 patients (80%), including 1 CR. Nine patients died, 7 for PD and 2 for causes unrelated to the disease. Twenty patients (67.7%) still have an ongoing response. The treatment was well tolerated by the majority of patients. The most common adverse events were fatigue in 7 patients (23.3%) and skin toxicity in 10 patients (33.3%) including pruritus in 6 patients, rash in 3 patients, bullous erythema in 1 patient. Only 3 (10%) patients experienced severe (grade 3/4) toxicity. Three responder patients interrupted treatment (2 for toxicity after 7 and 9 cycles, and one for pre-existing dementia) but maintaining their response. Conclusions: In our real-life experience cemiplimab showed high antitumor activity with acceptable safety profile similar to those in selected patients of trials. Moreover, its antitumor activity resulted not impaired in very elderly patients or in those with immunocompromized status.


2021 ◽  
Vol 161 ◽  
pp. S1071
Author(s):  
R. Autorino ◽  
V. Lancellotta ◽  
M. Campitelli ◽  
A. Nardangeli ◽  
M.G. Ferrandina ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. W. Hegazy ◽  
R. I. Mahmood ◽  
I. A. Al-Badawi ◽  
B. Moftah ◽  
H. AlHusaini

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document