scholarly journals One Size Does Not Fit All: An Overview of Personalized Treatment in Cancer

Author(s):  
Sohini Kulavi ◽  
Chandreyi Ghosh ◽  
Moumita Saha ◽  
Sirshendu Chatterjee

The last few decades have witnessed 'one size fits all' kind of conventional treatment strategy i.e. a similar line of treatment or usage of the same drug to treat a particular disease. This approach is not associated with specific personal characteristics but with individual genetic constitutions. Precision oncology holds great opportunities to improve prediction, treatment and follow-up care for the benefit of cancer patients. In this study, many pieces of literature and various clinical data have been surveyed to understand how multiple genes are responsible for a particular cancer type and tabulate them. Having the genetic information of a patient and knowing the genes that are susceptible to mutation can help in the diagnosis. That in turn help to get the most tailored medicines, which will decrease the chances of treatment failure, which is quite common in cancer therapies. This review focuses on providing an idea of the genes whose mutation directly or indirectly can lead to cancer and other diseases also, and hence might be helpful to design separate treatment strategies for each individual in future.

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Urquhart ◽  
L. Lethbridge

Background Primary care–led follow-up is a safe and acceptable alternative to oncologist-led follow-up. We sought to investigate patterns of primary care use during cancer follow-up care. Methods We identified all persons in Nova Scotia, diagnosed with an invasive breast, prostate, colorectal, or gyne­cologic cancer between January 2006 and December 2013. We linked this dataset to cancer centre, hospital discharge abstracts, physicians’ billing, and census data. We identified a survivor cohort (n = 12,201), then descriptively examined primary care use during follow-up care. Multivariate Poisson and negative binomial regression, respectively, were used to examine primary care use for two outcomes: total number of primary care provider (pcp) visits (all reasons) and total number of cancer-specific pcp visits. Results The mean numbers of pcp visits (all reasons) and cancer-specific pcp visits per year for survivors who did not receive cancer centre follow-up (cc-fup) were 8.12 and 0.43 visits, respectively, and for survivors who continued to receive cc-fup were 8.75 and 0.63 visits, respectively. Age, cancer type, stage at diagnosis, comorbidity scores, year of diagnosis, and receipt of cc-fup were associated with both outcomes. Compared with prostate cancer survivors, breast, colorec­tal, and gynecologic cancer survivors had, respectively, 56%, 69%, and 56% fewer expected cancer-specific PCP visits. Receipt of cc-fup increased the expected number of pcp visits (all reasons) by 12% and cancer-specific pcp visits by 50%. Conclusions Primary care use was higher in survivors who continued to visit their oncology teams for follow-up. This suggests that survivors who remain with their oncology teams after treatment continue to have high needs not met by these teams alone.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumana Srivatsa ◽  
Hesam Montazeri ◽  
Gaia Bianco ◽  
Mairene Coto-Llerena ◽  
Charlotte KY Ng ◽  
...  

Despite the progress in precision oncology, development of cancer therapies is limited by the dearth of suitable drug targets1. Novel candidate drug targets can be identified based on the concept of synthetic lethality (SL), which refers to pairs of genes for which an aberration in either gene alone is non-lethal, but co-occurrence of the aberrations is lethal to the cell. We developed SLIdR (Synthetic Lethal Identification in R), a statistical framework for identifying SL pairs from large-scale perturbation screens. SLIdR successfully predicts SL pairs even with small sample sizes while minimizing the number of false positive targets. We applied SLIdR to Project DRIVE data2 and found both established and novel pan-cancer and cancer type-specific SL pairs. We identified and experimentally validated a novel SL interaction between AXIN1 and URI1 in hepatocellular carcinoma, thus corroborating the potential of SLIdR to identify new SL-based drug targets.


Author(s):  
Bhawana Singh ◽  
Shyam Sundar ◽  
Ashish Shukla

Thyroid dysfunctions represent the most common endocrine disorders and a major healthcare issue throughout the globe. The drawbacks associated with the conventional treatment approaches calls upon for the need to explore alternative treatment strategies. Herbal medicinal approach has been used since ages; however, it is not acceptable by the clinicians. Currently, there is no scientific evidence for the efficacy of herbal medicines in patient management. The necessity to fight against adverse drug events, high treatment costs, and compliance issues is forcing the scientists to look upon for traditional herbal medicinal approaches. This chapter provides an overview of the efficacy of different herbal medicines and scientific evidence that necessitates their usage for improving thyroid functions. There remains a need for a careful and routine follow-up as a mandatory parameter before establishing herbal medicine as a global treatment approach.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 138-138
Author(s):  
Ding Quan Ng ◽  
Kimberly Ann Miller ◽  
Stefanie Marie Thomas ◽  
David R. Freyer ◽  
Joel Milam ◽  
...  

138 Background: Childhood cancer survivors (CCS) are often impacted by cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI), requiring long-term follow-up care. It is unknown whether survivors reporting CRCI are at higher likelihood to suffer from adverse lifestyle behaviors such as smoking and vaping. Using the Project Forward cohort, we analyzed the prevalence of CRCI and its association with substance abuse. Methods: The Project Forward study surveyed adolescent and young adult CCS between 2015 to 2018 to evaluate the quality of cancer follow-up care. Associations between self-reported CRCI and adverse lifestyle behaviors were examined in multivariable logistic regressions, adjusting for covariates: cancer type, treatment intensity, race/ethnicity, gender, and age at diagnosis. Stratified analysis by recency of latest cancer follow-up care was performed to examine its impact on the risk of substance abuse among CRCI patients. Results: The cohort comprised 1,106 CCS, with median ages of 25.5 years (IQR: 22, 29) at survey completion and 13 years (IQR: 7, 16) at diagnosis, with over half (n = 570, 51.5%) were being Hispanic. A total of 144 (13%) patients self-reported CRCI, with the highest prevalence observed among brain cancer (25.4%) and leukemia (13.3%) survivors. Cancer-related follow-ups were more frequently observed among survivors reporting CRCI, comparing to non-CRCI survivors (66.7% vs 56.9%, p = 0.030). After adjusting for confounders, survivors reporting CRCI were at higher odds to vape with e-cigarettes than those without CRCI (OR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.24–4.09, p = 0.008). Among those who did not engage any recent cancer follow-up care (n = 455), CRCI was associated with 2.9 times the odds of vaping with e-cigarettes (OR = 2.9, 95% CI = 1.07–7.88, p = 0.037). No association was observed between CRCI and the use of cigarettes, alcohol, or marijuana. Conclusions: Vaping is more prevalent among CCS reporting CRCI, especially those who are less likely to attend follow-up care. Our data suggests the importance of encouraging long-term follow-ups to monitor adverse lifestyle behaviors in CCS experiencing cognitive symptoms and provide timely interventions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 12064-12064
Author(s):  
Deanna J. Attai ◽  
Matthew S. Katz ◽  
Elani Streja ◽  
Jui-Ting Hsiung ◽  
Beverly A Zavaleta ◽  
...  

12064 Background: Nearly 17 million cancer survivors live in the United States. Workforce shortages are projected to diminish the number of available medical oncologists (MOs) to care for newly diagnosed patients with cancer and for the growing number of cancer survivors. Models of survivorship care include oncologist-led, primary care-led, and shared care approaches. Recent proposals recommend a risk-stratified approach to care, guided by individual and cancer-specific factors, but there is little evidence regarding patient preferences for non-oncologist survivorship care. Methods: We developed a survey in partnership with patient advocates. The primary endpoints were patient-reported comfort with survivorship care by a primary care provider (PCP) or in a dedicated survivorship clinic. We distributed the survey to online, cancer-specific patient communities from June to August 2020. Logistic regression analyses were adjusted for patient age, race and ethnicity, insurance, and cancer type and stage. Results: Of 1166 responses, 975 surveys were complete and available for analysis. Respondents were primarily women (91%), white (92%), and US residents (73%); 78% had a college or graduate degree. Two-thirds had private insurance. Thirty-six different cancer types were reported; 61% of respondents had breast cancer, and 25% were treated for more than one type of cancer. Most respondents (83%) had nonmetastatic disease, 74% reported experiencing late effects of cancer therapy, and almost all (93%) had a PCP. Only 21% of respondents were comfortable seeing a PCP (versus MO) for survivorship care, including cancer follow-up, side effect management, and monitoring for recurrence or progression. About half (55%) were comfortable with follow-up in a survivorship clinic instead of with their MO. Multivariable analyses showed no significant associations between age, race or ethnicity, insurance, cancer type, or stage at diagnosis and comfort with follow-up care from a PCP or in a survivorship clinic. In analyses restricted to the 439 respondents with a history of early-stage breast cancer, the 239 (54%) who were within 1 to 5 years of diagnosis were less comfortable with PCP versus MO follow-up, compared with the 52 (12%) who were > 15 years from diagnosis (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.20–0.75; p= 0.004). In this sub-analysis, time from diagnosis was not associated with comfort being seen in a survivorship clinic. Conclusions: In our study, most patients with a history of cancer were not comfortable receiving follow-up care from their PCP. It is often recommended that survivors of early-stage breast cancer transition to primary care for follow-up and surveillance, but our study revealed comfort with this approach only many years after diagnosis. While both PCP survivorship training and patient confidence in PCP follow up is needed, preferences of cancer survivors should be considered in designing new models of survivorship care.


2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abbey Diaz ◽  
Joan Cunningham ◽  
Daniel Lindsay ◽  
Emily Callander ◽  
Aaron Sverdlov ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cancer survivors are at increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease, partially due to cardiotoxic anti-cancer therapies and elevated CV risk factor exposure. We describe the prevalence of adverse CV events in Queensland cancer survivors. Methods The Queensland Cancer Registry (QCR) identified all Queensland residents diagnosed with cancer, July 2012-June 2015. Individuals were included at their first tumour and excluded if diagnosis basis was unknown/post-mortem. The QCR, containing demographic and clinical information, was linked to Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data Collection records to evaluate pre-cancer CV comorbidity and post-cancer adverse CV events. All individuals had three years follow-up time. Results 79,377 people with cancer were included. Median diagnosis age was 67 years (IQR 56-76), 44.6% were women, 5.3% had CV comorbidity and the most common cancers were prostate (19.8%), breast (17.3%), and colorectal (15.2%). 10.7% of people had an adverse CV event during follow-up; median time to first event was 362 days (IQR 124-706). Adverse CV events were most common in those aged >35 years vs ≤ 35 (11.0% vs 2%), men vs women (12.3% vs 8.7%), those with vs without CV comorbidity (29.7% vs 9.6%), and in bladder (14.7%), lung (13.1%), or colorectal (12.4%) cancer patients. Conclusions One in ten Queensland cancer patients are hospitalised for adverse CV events in the first three years after cancer diagnosis, associated with CV comorbidity, older age, male sex, and cancer type. Key messages There is urgent need for strategies to identify and deliver optimal care to cancer patients at high CV risk.


2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
BRUCE K. DIXON
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document