scholarly journals Concordance Rate between Clinicians and Watson for Oncology among Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer: Early, Real-World Experience in Korea

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youn I Choi ◽  
Jun-won Chung ◽  
Kyoung Oh Kim ◽  
Kwang An Kwon ◽  
Yoon Jae Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Treatment Option ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Concordance Rate ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Recommended Level

Backgrounds/Aims. Watson for Oncology (WFO) is a cognitive technology that processes medical information by analyzing the latest evidence and guidelines. However, studies of the concordance rate between WFO and clinicians for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are lacking.Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 65 patients with AGC who consulted WFO and the Gachon Gil Medical Center multidisciplinary team (GMDT) in 2016 and 2017. The recommendations of WFO were compared with the opinions of the GMDT. WFO provided three treatment options: recommended (first treatment option), for consideration (second treatment option), and not recommended.Results. In total, 65 patients (mean age 61.0 years; 44 males and 21 females) were included in the study. The concordance rate between WFO and the GMDT was 41.5% (27/65) at the recommended level and 87.7% (57/65) at the for consideration level. The main causes of discordance between WFO and the GMDT were as follows. First, WFO did not consider the medical history. Second, WFO recommended the use of agents that are considered outdated in Korea. Third, some patients wanted to be involved in a clinical trial. Fourth, some patients refused to use the biologic agents recommended by WFO for financial reasons as they were not covered by medical insurance.Conclusions. The concordance rate at the recommended level was relatively low but was higher at the for consideration level. Discordances arose mainly from the different medical circumstances at the Gachon Gil Medical Center (GMC) and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), the main WFO consulting center. The utility of WFO as a tool for supporting clinical decision making could be further improved by incorporating regional guidelines.

Advance care planning preferences in Hispanic population with cancer in the Bronx.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6-6
Author(s):  
Jhosselini Cardenas Mori
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Hispanic Patients ◽  
Disclosure Of Diagnosis

6 Background: We aim to explore medical information-sharing and decision-making preferences of Hispanic patients in the Bronx. Methods: We are recruiting cancer patients who self-identify as Hispanic and are waiting at the oncology clinic at Montefiore Medical Center Cancer Center before an appointment. Results: To date we have interviewed 110 patients. The majority (60, 52.6%) preferred shared decision-making with their doctors, families or both, while 45 (39.5%) had an active decision-making style. A minority (9, 7.9%) had a passive decision-making style, deferring to their families and only 1 (0.9%) had a passive decision-making style deferring to the physician. The only demographic characteristic that was associated with decision-making preference was language; those who are English-speaking were more likely to endorse an active decision-making style (Chi2 = 7.06, p = 0.029) and less likely to endorse shared decision-making (Chi2 = 6.33, p = 0.042). The majority of patients agreed or strongly agreed that they wanted to hear all of the information regarding their diagnosis, treatment options, treatment expectation and treatment risks and benefits. Conclusions: These results confirm our hypothesis that most Hispanic patients prefer either an active or shared decision-making process rather than a passive decision-making process. Most patients prefer disclosure of diagnosis, prognosis and plan.

Treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer: experience from an Indian tertiary cancer center

2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bhawna Sirohi ◽  
Sameer Rastogi ◽  
Shaheenah Dawood ◽  
S. Talole ◽  
Mukta Ramadwar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Experience ◽  
Tertiary Cancer Center

scholarly journals An Exploration of Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Combination with Irinotecan in Patients with Pretreated Advanced Gastric Cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takuro Mizukami ◽  
Keiko Minashi ◽  
Hiroki Hara ◽  
Tomohiro Nishina ◽  
Yusuke Amanuma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
Pretreated Patients ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Recommended Phase Ii Dose

Abstract Background: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) and irinotecan are treatment options for heavily pretreated patients with advanced gastric cancer but with limited efficacies. We investigated the combination of FTD/TPI and irinotecan for such patients.Methods: Patients who refractory to fluoropyrimidine, platinum and taxane were enrolled into four cohorts (Level 1A/1B/2A/2B) used an escalated dose of irinotecan [100 (Level 1) or 125 mg/m2 (Level 2) on days 1 and 15] with 2 schedules of FTD/TPI 35 mg/m2/dose: twice daily, on days 1-5 and 8-12 (Level A) or on days 1-5 and days 15-19 (Level B) of a 28-day cycle. The primary and secondary objectives were determination of maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) , and evaluation of disease control rate (DCR), respectively. Results: Eleven patients were enrolled; 2 at Level 1A, 3 at Level 1B and 6 at Level 2B. DLTs occurred in 2/2 patient at Level 1A, and 2/6 patients at Level 2B. Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (90.9%), leukopenia (54.5%), anemia (45.5%) and febrile neutropenia (18.2%). One patient at Level 2B achieved partial response and the DCR was 72.7% (95% CI 39.0- 94.0%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival was 3.0 months (95% CI 0.92- not reached) and 10.2 months (95% CI 2.2- not reached), respectively.Conclusion: The RP2D of FTD/TPI combined with irinotecan was determined to be Level 1B with manageable hematologic toxicities and feasible non-hematologic toxicities. Further evaluation for its efficacy in the RP2D is necessary. Mini-abstract: A phases Ib study of trifluridine/tipiracil in combination with irinotecan for advanced gastric cancer determined the recommended dose with manageable hematologic toxicities and feasible non-hematologic toxicities.

scholarly journals Recent Advances in the Diagnosis, Staging, Treatment, and Prognosis of Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Literature Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi-da Chen ◽  
Peng-fei Zhang ◽  
Hong-qing Xi ◽  
Bo Wei ◽  
Lin Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Malignant Tumors ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Radical Resection ◽  
Recent Advances ◽  
Drug Choice ◽  
Advanced Stages

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cause of cancer related deaths worldwide which results in malignant tumors in the digestive tract. The only radical treatment option available is surgical resection. Recently, the implementation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy resulted in 5-year survival rates of 95% for early gastric cancer. The main reason of treatment failure is that early diagnosis is minimal, with many patients presenting advanced stages. Hence, the greatest benefit of radical resection is missed. Consequently, the main therapeutic approach for advanced gastric cancer is combined surgery with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy. In this review, we will discuss the various treatment options for advanced gastric cancer. Clinical practice and clinical research is the most practical way of reaching new advents in terms of patients' characteristics, optimum drug choice, and better prognosis. With the recent advances in gastric cancer diagnosis, staging, treatment, and prognosis, we are evident that the improvement of survival in this patient population is just a matter of time.

Oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and cetuximab in advanced gastric cancer. First efficacy results of a multicenter phase II trial (AGMT Gastric-2) of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Medikamentoese Tumortherapie (AGMT)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4538-4538
Author(s):  
E. Woell ◽  
R. Greil ◽  
W. Eisterer ◽  
M. Fridrik ◽  
B. Grünberger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Multicenter Phase ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Setting

4538 Background: Patients (pts.) suffering from advanced gastric cancer have still a poor prognosis and treatment options are limited. In our previous phase II trial (AGMT-Gastric-1) we could show that the combination of oxaliplatin and irinotecan was well tolerated and showed an objective response rate of 58% (Anticancer Res 28:2901–2906, 2008). This chemotherapy regimen was tested in combination with cetuximab in a multicenter phase II trial. Methods: Oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 biweekly and irinotecan 125 mg/m2 biweekly were combined with cetuximab 400 mg/m2 loading dose and subsequently weekly 250 mg/m2. 51 patients with histological proven unresectable and/or metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma were treated in a first line setting. Median age: 62 years (range 19–79 years), PS 0: 25 patients, PS 1+2 26 patients, single metastatic site: 24 patients, multiple metastases: 27 patients. Results: Frequently reported adverse events (more than 20% of pts.) were predominantly grade 1 or 2 and included neutropenia (35% of pts.), thrombocytopenia (33%), anemia (73%), nausea (45%), diarrhea (57%), alopecia (22%), and fatigue (37%). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities included neutropenia in 9/1 pts., thrombocytopenia in 1/0 pts., anemia in 3/1 pts., nausea in 2/0 pts., and diarrhea in 7/2 pts. Sensory neuropathy occurred mostly as grade 1 and 2 in 37% of pts., in 7 pts. grade 3 neurotoxicity was observed. Acneiform skin rash grade 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 was reported in 31% / 20% / 6% / 2% of pts. respectively. 16 pts. went off-study due to neutropenia (n=5), nausea/vomiting (n=1), diarrhea (n=1), progressive disease (n=3), toxic colon (n=2), and allergic reaction to cetuximab at first (n=2), second (n=1) or third infusion (n=1). 35 patients are assessable for response with 1 pt. (3%) showing a CR, 21 pts. (60%) a PR, 7 pts. (20%) a SD and PD in 6 pts. (17%). A disease control rate was achieved in 83%. Median time to progression was 24.8 weeks (n=29), median overall survival 38.1 weeks (n=32). Conclusions: The combination of oxaliplatin and irinotecan with cetuximab is feasible, safe and active in advanced gastric cancer. [Table: see text]

Gastric cancer: Clinical differences among Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites at the John Theurer Cancer Center (JTCC), Hackensack University Medical Center.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1613-1613
Author(s):  
Narjust Perez-Florez ◽  
Larysa Jessica Gromko ◽  
Andrew Jennis ◽  
Zubin M. Bamboat ◽  
Donald A. McCain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Cancer Center

Clinical outcomes of patients with gastric cancer according to pre and post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) expression.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16569-e16569
Author(s):  
Heber Salvador de Castro Ribeiro ◽  
Wilson Luiz da Costa ◽  
Maria Dirlei de Souza Begnami ◽  
Celso Abdon Lopes Mello ◽  
Tatiane Neotti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Surgical Specimen ◽  
Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

e16569 Background: The incidence, prognostic and predictive impacts of PD-L1 expression in locally advanced gastric cancer is unknown. We aimed to determine the expression of PD-L1 by CPS in the pre-treatment biopsy and surgical specimens of patients (pts) with gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy and its association with pathological response and survival outcomes. Methods: Retrospective cohort of pts treated at a cancer center from 2007 to 2017. Pts with confirmed gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant treatment and curative-intent D2 surgery were included. Gastric stump tumors and those who had a total esophagectomy were excluded. Clinical data were obtained from medical charts. Biopsy samples and a tissue microarray with the most representative areas of the surgical specimen were used to detect PD-L1 IHC expression with 22C3 phamDx antibody. Results were analyzed using the CPS score. Overall and DFS survival included the Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimator in an ITT analysis and a Cox regression was used to obtain crude and adjusted HR for prognostic factors. Results: 270 pts were included: median age was 58.9 years, most (51.5%) had cT3-T4N+ stages, 45% had diffuse histology and 87.8% completed the preoperative regimen. 13% had a pCR, while 53% had minimal tumor regression. With a median follow-up of 60.3 months (CI 95% 54.7 – 65.8), the median OS and DFS were not reached. 11.4% of biopsies and 18.6% of surgical specimens had positive CPS, with a median score of 3 (IQR 2,0 – 7,5) and 9 (IQR 5.0 – 20.0) respectively. In 18.9% of paired samples the PD-L1 expression was found to be negative in the biopsy sample and positive in the surgical specimen. PD-L1 expression was neither associated with pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, nor with survival outcomes. Conclusions: PD-L1 expression on the setting of locally advanced gastric cancer was low and it was different when biopsy and surgical specimens were compared. No impact on survival results could be detected. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Advanced Gastric Cancer: Current Treatment Landscape and a Future Outlook for Sequential and Personalized Guide: Swiss Expert Statement Article

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Alexander R. Siebenhüner ◽  
Sara De Dosso ◽  
Daniel Helbling ◽  
Christoforos Astaras ◽  
Petr Szturz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systemic Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Her 2 ◽  
The Impact

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Gastric cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Several treatment possibilities have been investigated, but only a few show clinically meaningful results. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> Systemic treatment options for advanced gastric cancer (aGC) have evolved over the recent years, implementing the growing molecular knowledge of this heterogeneous disease. Molecular profiling (at least for HER-2-expression, microsatellite instability status, <i>Epstein-Barr virus</i> expression, and programmed death ligand-1 expression/combined positive score [CPS]) is recommended for all therapy-fit patients prior to the start of a systemic treatment and is crucial for decisions on treatment strategy and drug selection. Various examples like the application of trastuzumab in the HER-2-positive subgroup underline the benefits of this approach starting from the first-line setting. A combination of platinum and fluoropyrimidine remains the first-line chemotherapy backbone in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. Triplet combinations adding taxanes to the doublet regimen are reserved for certain scenarios. Unfortunately, almost all patients who receive first-line treatment (with or without anti-HER-2 blockade) progress and &#x3c;70% are eligible for a second-line therapy. The addition of monoclonal antibodies has substantially improved outcomes in this setting. As such, ramucirumab has led to significant and clinically meaningful advancements in the second-line treatment. Furthermore, immuno-oncology with checkpoint inhibition and immune stimulation has evolved in the field of aGC. Recent first-line data show a significant survival benefit in aGC patients with a CPS ≥ 5 under immunochemotherapy. Nonetheless, the impact of immunotherapy combinations and immunochemotherapy remains an area of investigation. <b><i>Key Message:</i></b> In this review, we highlight recent improvements in the treatment landscape of advanced gastric cancer, the heterogeneity of this disease, and possible personalized targets.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document