scholarly journals 462P A clinical nomogram and recursive partitioning analysis to determine five-year disease-free survival in patients with thoracic esophageal carcinoma after radical surgery

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. ix125
Author(s):  
S. Yu ◽  
Z. Xiao ◽  
W. Deng ◽  
W. Ni ◽  
J. Yang ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 768
Author(s):  
Monica Urbani ◽  
Marina Troian ◽  
Gabriele Bellio ◽  
Marina Bortul

Anorectal melanoma is a rare cause of anorectal malignancies affecting mainly elderly people without significant gender differences, although there seems to be a white predominance. Diagnosis is often challenging, since symptoms are frequently nonspecific. Radical surgery is the mainstay of treatment, while adjuvant therapies are generally of limited value. Thus, prognosis is still grim, with a 5-year survival rate of less than 20%. We report the case of a 75-year-old white female presenting with mild anal pain and blood in stools. Diagnosed with an ulcerated melanoma of the perianal area, she eventually underwent an abdominoperineal resection and bilateral inguinal lymphadenectomy. To date, she is currently alive and disease-free. Given the lack of adequate international guidelines, we recommend defining a tailored treatment by thorough multidisciplinary discussion, as well as taking into account the patient personal preference.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 391-391
Author(s):  
Dean F. Bajorin ◽  
Johannes Alfred Witjes ◽  
Jürgen Gschwend ◽  
Michael Schenker ◽  
Begoña P. Valderrama ◽  
...  

391 Background: The standard of care (SOC) for patients (pts) with MIUC is radical surgery ± cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (chemo), but many pts are cisplatin-ineligible. There is no conclusive evidence supporting adjuvant chemo in pts who did not receive neoadjuvant chemo and in those with residual disease after neoadjuvant cisplatin. This phase 3 trial of adjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) vs placebo (PBO) in pts with MIUC after radical surgery ± neoadjuvant cisplatin (CheckMate 274) aims to address an unmet need in these pts. We report the initial results. Methods: This is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial of NIVO vs PBO in pts with high-risk MIUC (bladder, ureter, or renal pelvis) after radical surgery. Pts were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 240 mg Q2W or PBO for ≤ 1 year of adjuvant treatment. Pts had radical surgery within 120 days ± neoadjuvant cisplatin or were ineligible/declined cisplatin-based chemo, evidence of UC at high risk of recurrence per pathologic staging, were disease-free by imaging, and ECOG PS ≤ 1. Primary endpoints: disease-free survival (DFS) in all randomized pts (ITT population) and in pts with tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1%. DFS was stratified by nodal status, prior neoadjuvant cisplatin, and PD-L1 status. Non–urothelial tract recurrence-free survival (NUTRFS) in ITT pts and in pts with PD-L ≥ 1% is a secondary endpoint. Safety is an exploratory endpoint. Results: In total, 353 pts were randomized to NIVO (PD-L1 ≥ 1%, n = 140) and 356 pts to PBO (PD-L1 ≥ 1%, n = 142). The primary endpoint of DFS was met in ITT pts (median follow-up, 20.9 mo for NIVO; 19.5 mo for PBO) and in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1%. DFS and NUTRFS were improved with NIVO vs PBO in both populations (Table). DFS improvement with NIVO was generally consistent across subgroups. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 17.9% and 7.2% of pts in the NIVO and PBO arms, respectively. Conclusions: NIVO demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in DFS vs PBO for MIUC after radical surgery, both in ITT pts and pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1%. AEs were manageable and consistent with previous reports. These results support adjuvant NIVO as a new SOC for pts with MIUC with high risk for recurrence despite neoadjuvant chemo or those ineligible for and/or declining cisplatin-based chemo. Clinical trial information: NCT02632409 . Research Sponsor: Bristol Myers Squibb[Table: see text]


2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 1303-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dae Woo Lee ◽  
Keun Ho Lee ◽  
Jung Won Lee ◽  
Sung Taek Park ◽  
Jong Sup Park ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThe primary objective of the study was to compare the survival rate of patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with that of patients who had received radiation therapy for stage IIB cervical cancer. The secondary objective was to analyze the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on pathological prognostic factors.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who had received therapy for stage IIB cervical cancer. Based on the primary therapy, 192 patients were divided into 2 groups; patients in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group (n =103) underwent a type III radical hysterectomy after completion of the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the other group (n = 89) were treated with radiation alone or a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy.ResultsAfter neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the level of squamous cell carcinoma antigen, tumor size, lymph node involvement, and parametrium involvement were significantly decreased. However, 90.3% of the patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy needed to have adjuvant therapy after radical surgery because of poor pathological prognostic factors. The rate of disease-free survival did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. However, the overall survival rate was significantly lower in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group for patients who were 60 years or older (P = 0.03). The rates of disease-free survival and overall survival for patients who had a good (complete or partial) response to the neoadjuvant chemotherapy were not significantly higher than the rates for patients in the radiation therapy group.ConclusionsAlthough neoadjuvant chemotherapy improved pathological prognostic factors in patients with stage IIB cervical cancer, it was not sufficiently effective to decrease adjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy also did not improve the rate of patient survival compared to the rate of patient survival in the radiation therapy group.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Singh ◽  
V. Goel ◽  
V. Talwar ◽  
S. Raina ◽  
S. Mitra ◽  
...  

Background: Cervical cancer is ranked as the most common cancer in Indian women, second most common cancer worldwide and the leading cause of death in the developing countries. In the developing countries majority of the patients are diagnosed at locally advanced stages. The standard treatment of locally advanced cervical cancer is concomitant chemoradiation (CTRT) using platinum based chemotherapy. However, some randomized studies have shown improved results for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by surgical resection in comparison to patient receiving radiation alone. The present study was designed to compare response to the treatment and survival of and NACT followed by radical surgery (RS) with CTRT in the patients of uterine cervix of a tertiary cancer care centre. Patients and Methods: Retrospective study was performed in locally advanced/advance stage patients of cervix UTERI registered in the institute between years 2009 to 2013. Patients were included in the two groups, group A consists of 89 patients who have received NACT + RS and 67 patients in group B who have received CTRT. Clinical records were reviewed with particular reference to presenting complaint, clinical stage, response to the therapy, disease free survival and overall survival. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 22. Results: In the neoadjuvant group (group A) (n=89) the median age of patients was 53 years (range 31-80 years), most of the patients (70%) were presented with complaint of postmenopausal bleeding. Of the total patients, 69 (77.5%) underwent to radical surgery and 5 (8.5%) received radiotherapy after NACT. From 69 patients, who had undergone to surgery, 54 (78.3%) had also received radiation. The overall response to induction chemotherapy was 84%. In the chemo radiation group (group B) (n=65) median age was 56 years (33-75 years). Vaginal bleeding (34%) followed by postmenopausal bleeding (32%) was major presenting complaint in this group. Overall response to the complete treatment was 91%. The median follow up time was 14.3 months in group A and 12.2 months in group B. The disease free survival for NACT group was 32 months (95% CI 26.8-36.5) whereas for CTRT group it was 28 months (95% CI 23.5-33) with 12 and 13 recurrences per group (p = .226). In NACT group overall survival was 46.2 months (95% CI 44-48.3) and for CTRT group it was 38.3 months (95%CI 36.6-40) with 3 and 2 deaths per group (p=.883). Conclusion: Present study shows comparable results, with no difference in survival between both the groups. However, NACT + RS group had showed better disease free and overall survival than another group. Further studies should be performed with larger number of patients and longer duration of follow up.


2011 ◽  
Vol 141 (5) ◽  
pp. 1196-1206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul C. Lee ◽  
Farooq M. Mirza ◽  
Jeffrey L. Port ◽  
Brendon M. Stiles ◽  
Subroto Paul ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document