scholarly journals Eponyms in Medical Oncology

Author(s):  
Priyanka Kumar ◽  
Danielle Brazel ◽  
David J. Benjamin ◽  
Elizabeth Brem
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (06) ◽  
pp. 316-317
Author(s):  
Katharina Arnheim

Zielgerichtete und Immuntherapien haben bei zahlreichen Tumoren, darunter auch für Patienten mit urogenitalen Malignomen, erhebliche Fortschritte gebracht. Bei der virtuellen Tagung der European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) wurden zahlreiche neue Studien vorgestellt.


2016 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
I. Pabinger ◽  
C. Ay

SummaryVenous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality, and its prevention is of major clinical importance. However, the VTE rates in the cancer population vary between 0.5% - 20%, depending on cancer-, treatment- and patient-related factors. The most important contributors to VTE risk are the tumor entity, stage and certain anticancer treatments. Cancer surgery represents a strong risk factor for VTE, and medical oncology patients are at increased risk of developing VTE, especially when receiving chemotherapy or immunomodulatory drugs. Also biomarkers have been investigated for their usefulness to predict risk of VTE (e.g. elevated leukocyte and platelet counts, soluble P-selectin, D-dimer, etc.). In order to identify cancer patients at high risk of VTE and to improve risk stratification, risk assessment models have been developed, which contain both clinical parameters and biomarkers. While primary thromboprophylaxis with lowmolecular- weight-heparin (LMWH) is recommended postoperatively for a period of up to 4 weeks after major cancer surgery, the evidence is less clear for medical oncology patients. Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical oncology patients is advocated, and is based on results of randomized controlled trials which evaluated the efficacy and safety of LMWH for prevention of VTE in hospitalized medically ill patients. In recent trials the benefit of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the ambulatory setting has been investigated. However, at the present stage primary thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE in these patients is still a matter of debate and cannot be recommended for all cancer outpatients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (13) ◽  
pp. 945-957
Author(s):  
Abdalla Aly ◽  
Courtney Johnson ◽  
Yunes Doleh ◽  
Rahul Shenolikar ◽  
Marc F Botteman ◽  
...  

Aim: To understand physician visit patterns among patients with stage IV (including nonmetastatic [M0] and metastatic [M1] disease) urothelial carcinoma (UC) and understand factors associated with a timely referral to a medical oncologist and systemic treatment. Patients & methods: Retrospective analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data. Results: First physician encounter was with a urologist (M0: 69%; M1: 53%) or primary care physician ([PCP]; M0: 19%, M1: 25%) for the majority of patients around UC diagnosis. After the index urologist encounter, most patients had a subsequent medical oncologist visit at a median of 52 days (M0: 69.5 days, M1: 33 days). In an adjusted model, older age, index PCP visit, higher comorbidities and M0 disease were negatively associated with a medical oncologist referral. Among those referred to a medical oncologist, older age, Hispanic or non-Hispanic Black race and not being married were negatively associated with subsequent chemotherapy receipt (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Many patients with advanced UC encounter multiple specialists during their disease course. Older patients or those with a first UC-related encounter with a PCP are less likely to be referred to medical oncology. Once referred to medical oncology, social determinants, including race and marital status, are relevant predictors of receiving chemotherapy.


1997 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-450
Author(s):  
Scott G. Lilly ◽  
Gilbert E. Lilly ◽  
Cindy L. Marek

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 908
Author(s):  
Alexandre Delpla ◽  
Thierry de Baere ◽  
Eloi Varin ◽  
Frederic Deschamps ◽  
Charles Roux ◽  
...  

Background: Consensus guidelines of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) (2016) provided recommendations for the management of lung metastases. Thermal ablation appears as a tool in the management of these secondary pulmonary lesions, in the same manner as surgical resection or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). Methods: Indications, technical considerations, oncological outcomes such as survival (OS) or local control (LC), prognostic factors and complications of thermal ablation in colorectal cancer lung metastases were reviewed and put into perspective with results of surgery and SABR. Results: LC rates varied from 62 to 91%, with size of the metastasis (<2 cm), proximity to the bronchi or vessels, and size of ablation margins (>5 mm) as predictive factors of LC. Median OS varied between 33 and 68 months. Pulmonary free disease interval <12 months, positive carcinoembryonic antigen, absence of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and uncontrolled extra-pulmonary metastases were poor prognostic factors for OS. While chest drainage for less than 48 h was required in 13 to 47% of treatments, major complications were rare. Conclusions: Thermal ablation of a selected subpopulation of patients with colorectal cancer lung metastases is safe and can provide excellent LC and delay systemic chemotherapy.


ESMO Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 100215
Author(s):  
P. Jiménez-Labaig ◽  
V. Pacheco-Barcia ◽  
A. Cebrià ◽  
F. Gálvez ◽  
B. Obispo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document