Skip header and navigation

Refine By

181 records – page 1 of 19.

The 2010 WHO classification of digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms: a critical appraisal four years after its introduction.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature260854
Source
Endocr Pathol. 2014 Jun;25(2):186-92
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2014
Author
G. Rindi
G. Petrone
F. Inzani
Source
Endocr Pathol. 2014 Jun;25(2):186-92
Date
Jun-2014
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Digestive System Neoplasms - classification
Humans
Neoplasm Grading - standards
Neoplasm Staging - standards
Neuroendocrine Tumors - classification
World Health Organization
Abstract
This paper briefly illustrates the basis, rules of application, and present outcome of the current World Health Organization (WHO) classification for neuroendocrine neoplasms. Established in 2010 upon the proposal from the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (ENETS), the WHO 2010 fostered some definitional changes (most notably the use of neuroendocrine tumor (NET) instead of carcinoid) and indicated the tools of grading and staging. Specific rules for its application were also defined. The data generated from the use of WHO 2010 classification substantially endorsed its rules and prognostic efficacy. In addition, the application demonstrated some issues, among which are the possible re-definition of the cutoff for grading G1 vs G2, as well as the possible identification of cases with somewhat different clinical behavior within the G3 neuroendocrine cancer class. Overall, since the recent introduction of WHO 2010 grading and staging, it appears wise to keep the current descriptors to avoid unnecessary confusion and to generate comparable data. Homogenous data on large series are ultimately needed to solve such issues.
PubMed ID
24699927 View in PubMed
Less detail

Accuracy of prostate biopsies for predicting Gleason score in radical prostatectomy specimens: nationwide trends 2000-2012.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature282854
Source
BJU Int. 2017 Jan;119(1):50-56
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2017
Author
Daniela Danneman
Linda Drevin
Brett Delahunt
Hemamali Samaratunga
David Robinson
Ola Bratt
Stacy Loeb
Pär Stattin
Lars Egevad
Source
BJU Int. 2017 Jan;119(1):50-56
Date
Jan-2017
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Biopsy, Needle
Humans
Male
Neoplasm Grading - trends
Predictive value of tests
Prostate - pathology
Prostatectomy - methods
Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology - surgery
Reproducibility of Results
Sweden
Time Factors
Abstract
To investigate how well the Gleason score in diagnostic needle biopsies predicted the Gleason score in a subsequent radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen before and after the 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) revision of Gleason grading, and if the recently proposed ISUP grades 1-5 (corresponding to Gleason scores 6, 3 + 4, 4 + 3, 8 and 9-10) better predict the RP grade.
All prostate cancers diagnosed in Sweden are reported to the National Prostate Cancer Register (NPCR). We analysed the Gleason scores and ISUP grades from the diagnostic biopsies and the RP specimens in 15 598 men in the NPCR who: were diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 with clinical stage T1-2 M0/X prostate cancer on needle biopsy; were aged =70 years; had serum PSA concentration of
PubMed ID
26918298 View in PubMed
Less detail

Active surveillance: the Canadian experience.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature125792
Source
Curr Opin Urol. 2012 May;22(3):222-30
Publication Type
Article
Date
May-2012
Author
Laurence Klotz
Author Affiliation
Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Laurence.klotz@sunnybrook.ca
Source
Curr Opin Urol. 2012 May;22(3):222-30
Date
May-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Biopsy
Canada
Disease Progression
Early Detection of Cancer
Humans
Male
Mass Screening - methods
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Grading
Patient Selection
Population Surveillance
Predictive value of tests
Prognosis
Prospective Studies
Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis - mortality - pathology - therapy
Risk assessment
Risk factors
Time Factors
Unnecessary Procedures
Watchful Waiting
Abstract
Active surveillance has evolved to become a standard of care for favorable-risk prostate cancer. This article is a summary of the rationale, method, and results of active surveillance beginning in 1995 with the first prospective trial of this approach.
This was a prospective, single arm cohort study. Patients were managed with an initial expectant approach. Definitive intervention was offered to those patients with a prostate specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of less than 3 years, Gleason score progression (to 4?+?3 or greater), or unequivocal clinical progression. Since November 1995, 450 patients have been managed with active surveillance. Median follow-up is 6.8 years (range 1-16 years). Overall survival is 78.6%. Ten-year prostate cancer actuarial survival is 97.2%. Five of 450 patients (1.1%) have died of prostate cancer. Thirty percent of patients have been reclassified as higher risk and offered definitive therapy. The commonest indication for treatment was a PSA doubling time less than 3 years (48%) or Gleason upgrading (26%). Of 117 patients treated radically, the PSA failure rate was 50%. This represents 13% of the total cohort. Most PSA failures occurred early; at 2 years, 44% of the treated patients had PSA failure. The hazard ratio for nonprostate cancer to prostate cancer mortality was 18.6 at 10 years.
We observed a very low rate of prostate cancer mortality in an intermediate time frame. Among the one-third of patients who were reclassified as higher risk and retreated, PSA failure was relatively common. However, other cause mortality accounted for almost all of the deaths. Further studies are warranted to improve the identification of patients who harbor more aggressive disease in spite of favorable clinical parameters at diagnosis.
PubMed ID
22453335 View in PubMed
Less detail

Active surveillance: the Canadian experience with an "inclusive approach".

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature117780
Source
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012 Dec;2012(45):234-41
Publication Type
Article
Date
Dec-2012
Author
Laurence Klotz
Author Affiliation
Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Division of Urology, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, Ontario. Laurence.klotz@sunnybrook.ca
Source
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012 Dec;2012(45):234-41
Date
Dec-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Canada
Cohort Studies
Disease Progression
Humans
Male
Neoplasm Grading
Prospective Studies
Prostate-Specific Antigen - blood
Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnosis - mortality - therapy
Risk
Survival
Survival Analysis
Watchful Waiting
Abstract
Active surveillance has evolved to become a standard of care for favorable-risk prostate cancer. This is a summary of the rationale, method, and results of active surveillance beginning in 1995 with the first prospective trial of this approach. This was a prospective, single-arm cohort study. Patients were managed with an initial expectant approach. Definitive intervention was offered to those patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) doubling time of less than 3 years, Gleason score progression (to 4+3 or greater), or unequivocal clinical progression. Survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard model were applied to the data. Since November 1995, 450 patients have been managed with active surveillance. The cohort included men under 70 with favorable-risk disease and men of age more than 70 with favorable- or intermediate-risk cancer (Gleason score 3+4 or PSA 10-15). Median follow-up is 6.8 years (range 1-16 years). Overall survival is 78.6%. Ten-year prostate cancer actuarial survival is 97.2%. Five of 450 patients (1.1%) have died of prostate cancer. Thirty percent of patients have been reclassified as higher-risk patients and offered definitive therapy. The commonest indication for treatment was a PSA doubling time less than 3 years (48%) or Gleason upgrading (26%). Of 117 patients treated radically, the PSA failure rate was 50%. This represents 13% of the total cohort. Most PSA failures occurred early; at 2 years, 44% of the treated patients had PSA failure. The hazard ratio for non-prostate cancer mortality to prostate cancer mortality was 18.6 at 10 years. In conclusion, we observed a very low rate of prostate cancer mortality in an intermediate time frame. Among the one-third of patients who were reclassified as higher risk and retreated, PSA failure was relatively common. However, other-cause mortality accounted for almost all of the deaths. Further studies are warranted to improve the identification of patients who harbor more aggressive disease in spite of favorable clinical parameters at diagnosis [reproduced from Klotz (1) with permission from Wolters Kluwer Health].
Notes
Cites: J Urol. 2002 Apr;167(4):1664-911912384
Cites: Curr Opin Urol. 2012 May;22(3):222-3022453335
Cites: Urology. 1994 Jan;43(1):11-218284869
Cites: J Urol. 1994 Nov;152(5 Pt 2):1753-67933233
Cites: JAMA. 2005 Jul 27;294(4):433-916046649
Cites: J Urol. 2005 Oct;174(4 Pt 1):1256-60; discussion 1260-1; author reply 126116145388
Cites: J Clin Oncol. 2005 Nov 10;23(32):8165-916278468
Cites: J Urol. 2006 Oct;176(4 Pt 1):1392-7; discussion 1397-816952640
Cites: Int J Cancer. 2007 Jan 1;120(1):170-417013897
Cites: Eur Urol. 2007 May;51(5):1244-50; discussion 125117161520
Cites: J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2359-64; discussion 2364-517936806
Cites: BJU Int. 2008 Jan;101(2):165-917850361
Cites: Eur Urol. 2008 Dec;54(6):1297-30518342430
Cites: JAMA. 2009 Sep 16;302(11):1202-919755699
Cites: J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jan 1;28(1):126-3119917860
Cites: J Clin Oncol. 2010 Mar 1;28(7):1117-2320124165
Cites: BJU Int. 2010 Apr;105(7):956-6219817747
Cites: J Urol. 2010 Jul;184(1):131-520478589
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):56921830972
Cites: JAMA. 2004 Jun 9;291(22):2713-915187052
PubMed ID
23271779 View in PubMed
Less detail

Adherence to treatment guidelines in stage II/III rectal cancer in Alberta, Canada.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature132600
Source
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2012 Feb;24(1):e9-17
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-2012
Author
N Sharaf Eldin
Y. Yasui
A. Scarfe
M. Winget
Author Affiliation
School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Alberta, Canada. marcy.winget@albertahealthservices.ca
Source
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2012 Feb;24(1):e9-17
Date
Feb-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adenocarcinoma - pathology - therapy
Aged
Alberta
Antineoplastic Agents - therapeutic use
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
Digestive System Surgical Procedures
Female
Guideline Adherence - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Male
Medical Oncology - standards - statistics & numerical data
Middle Aged
Neoadjuvant Therapy
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Staging
Practice Guidelines as Topic - standards
Radiotherapy
Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
Rectal Neoplasms - pathology - therapy
Referral and Consultation
Socioeconomic Factors
Abstract
Evidence suggests that pre- and/or postoperative treatment benefits patients with stage II/III rectal cancer. This study aimed to quantify treatment patterns and adherence to treatment guidelines, and to identify barriers to having a consultation with an oncologist and barriers to receiving treatment in stage II/III rectal cancer, in a publicly funded medical care system.
Patients with surgically treated stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma, diagnosed from 2002 to 2005 in Alberta, a Canadian province with a population of 3 million, were included. Demographic and treatment information from the Alberta Cancer Registry were linked to data from electronic medical records, hospital discharge data and the 2001 Canadian Census. The study outcomes were 'not having an oncologist consultation' and 'not receiving guideline-based treatment'. The relative risks of the two outcomes in association with patient characteristics were estimated using multivariable log-binomial regression.
Of a total of 910 surgically treated stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma patients, 748 (82%) had a consultation with an oncologist and 414 (45.5%) received treatment. Pre-/post-surgical treatment modalities and timing varied; 96 (10.5%) received neoadjuvant treatment only, 389 (42.7%) received adjuvant treatment only, 119 (13.1%) received both, and 306 (33.6%) had surgery alone. Factors related to not having a consultation with an oncologist included older age, co-morbidities, cancer stage II and region of residence. Older age was the most significantly associated factor with not receiving treatment (relative risk=2.23; 95% confidence interval: 1.89, 2.64).
Disparities exist in the receipt of treatment in stage II/III rectal cancer. Factors such as age, region of residence and stage should not be barriers to consulting an oncologist to discuss or receive treatment. The reasons for these disparities need to be identified and addressed.
PubMed ID
21802914 View in PubMed
Less detail

Adjuvant capecitabine, docetaxel, cyclophosphamide, and epirubicin for early breast cancer: final analysis of the randomized FinXX trial.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature129460
Source
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1;30(1):11-8
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-1-2012
Author
Heikki Joensuu
Pirkko-Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen
Riikka Huovinen
Arja Jukkola-Vuorinen
Minna Tanner
Riitta Kokko
Johan Ahlgren
Päivi Auvinen
Outi Paija
Leena Helle
Kenneth Villman
Paul Nyandoto
Greger Nilsson
Marjo Pajunen
Raija Asola
Paula Poikonen
Mika Leinonen
Vesa Kataja
Petri Bono
Henrik Lindman
Author Affiliation
Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4, PO Box 180, FIN-00029 Helsinki, Finland. heikki.joensuu@hus.fi
Source
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1;30(1):11-8
Date
Jan-1-2012
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic - administration & dosage
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - therapeutic use
Breast Neoplasms - chemistry - drug therapy - mortality - pathology - surgery
Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast - drug therapy - pathology
Carcinoma, Lobular - drug therapy - pathology
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
Cyclophosphamide - administration & dosage
Deoxycytidine - administration & dosage - analogs & derivatives
Disease-Free Survival
Drug Administration Schedule
Epirubicin - administration & dosage
Female
Finland
Fluorouracil - administration & dosage - analogs & derivatives
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Lymphatic Metastasis
Mastectomy - methods
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Staging
Prospective Studies
Survival Analysis
Taxoids - administration & dosage
Treatment Outcome
Tumor Markers, Biological - analysis
Abstract
Capecitabine is an active agent in the treatment of breast cancer. It is not known whether integration of capecitabine into an adjuvant regimen that contains a taxane, an anthracycline, and cyclophosphamide improves outcome in early breast cancer.
Women with axillary node-positive or high-risk node-negative breast cancer were randomly assigned to receive either three cycles of docetaxel and capecitabine (TX) followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and capecitabine (CEX; n = 753) or three cycles of docetaxel (T) followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF; n = 747). The primary end point was recurrence-free survival (RFS).
During a median follow-up time of 59 months, 214 RFS events occurred (local or distant recurrences or deaths; TX/CEX, n = 96; T/CEF, n = 118). RFS was not significantly different between the groups (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.04; P = .087; 5-year RFS, 86.6% for TX/CEX v 84.1% for T/CEF). Fifty-six patients assigned to TX/CEX died during the follow-up compared with 75 of patients assigned to T/CEF (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.04; P = .080). In exploratory analyses, TX/CEX improved breast cancer-specific survival (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.95; P = .027) and RFS in women with triple-negative disease and in women who had more than three metastatic axillary lymph nodes at the time of diagnosis. We detected little severe late toxicity.
Integration of capecitabine into a regimen that contains docetaxel, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide did not improve RFS significantly compared with a similar regimen without capecitabine.
Notes
Comment In: J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1;30(1):1-222105825
PubMed ID
22105826 View in PubMed
Less detail

Advanced prostate cancer treated with intermittent or continuous androgen deprivation in the randomised FinnProstate Study VII: quality of life and adverse effects.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature121987
Source
Eur Urol. 2013 Jan;63(1):111-20
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jan-2013
Author
Arto J Salonen
Kimmo Taari
Martti Ala-Opas
Jouko Viitanen
Seppo Lundstedt
Teuvo L J Tammela
Author Affiliation
Department of Urology, Kuopio University Hospital, Finland. arto.salonen@kuh.fi
Source
Eur Urol. 2013 Jan;63(1):111-20
Date
Jan-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Aged
Analysis of Variance
Androgen Antagonists - administration & dosage - adverse effects
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal - administration & dosage - adverse effects
Chi-Square Distribution
Drug Administration Schedule
Finland
Goserelin - administration & dosage - adverse effects
Humans
Kallikreins - blood
Male
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Staging
Neoplasms, Hormone-Dependent - blood - drug therapy - pathology
Prostate-Specific Antigen - blood
Prostatic Neoplasms - blood - drug therapy - pathology
Quality of Life
Questionnaires
Testosterone - antagonists & inhibitors - blood
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Abstract
Intermittent dosing may reduce the adverse events (AEs) of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT).
To compare intermittent androgen deprivation (IAD) and continuous androgen deprivation (CAD) with regard to health-related quality of life (QoL).
A total of 852 men with advanced prostate cancer (PCa) were enrolled to receive goserelin acetate 3.6 mg every 28 d for 24 wk. A total of 554 patients whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decreased to 20 ng/ml or above baseline.
QoL was monitored with a validated Cleary 30-item questionnaire and analysed by the Mann-Whitney U test, 0.5 standard deviation rule, and repeated measures analysis of variance. AEs and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were analysed by the chi-square test.
Median follow-up was 65 mo. Significant differences in QoL emerged in activity limitation, physical capacity, and sexual functioning, favouring IAD. No significant differences emerged in the prevalence of AEs: 87 patients in the IAD arm (31.8%) and 95 in the CAD arm (33.9%) had cardiovascular (CV) AEs (p=0.59), with 25 (9.1%) and 29 (10.4%) withdrawn (p=0.62), and 21 (7.7%) and 24 (8.6%) dying because of a CV event (p=0.70), respectively; bone fractures occurred in 19 (6.9%) and 15 (5.4%) patients (p=0.44), respectively. Hot flushes or night sweats were the most common ADRs (47.1% vs 50.4%; p=0.44). Erectile dysfunction (15.7% vs 7.9%; p=0.042) and depressed mood (2.2 vs 0%; p=0.032) were more common in the IAD arm.
IAD showed benefits in the treatment of advanced PCa with respect to QoL. The prevalence of AEs was not significantly lower with IAD.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00293670.
Notes
Comment In: Eur Urol. 2013 Jan;63(1):121-2; discussion 123-422921963
PubMed ID
22857983 View in PubMed
Less detail

Analysis of the association of polymorphic loci rs917997 in IL18RAP gene and rs187238 in IL18 gene with the risk for non-Hodgkin's malignant lymphomas in Novosibirsk population.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature260655
Source
Bull Exp Biol Med. 2014 May;157(1):66-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
May-2014
Author
M N Surovtseva
A S Vainer
O V Berezina
V S Ovchinnikov
E N Voropaeva
T I Pospelova
M L Filipenko
Source
Bull Exp Biol Med. 2014 May;157(1):66-9
Date
May-2014
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Alleles
Case-Control Studies
Female
Gene Frequency
Genetic Loci
Genotype
Humans
Interleukin-18 - genetics - immunology
Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin - genetics - immunology - pathology
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Grading
Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide
Receptors, Interleukin-18 - genetics - immunology
Risk
Siberia
Abstract
We analyzed the association of polymorphic variants of rs917997 (G/A) locus in IL18RAP gene and rs187238 (G/C) locus in IL18 gene with the risk of malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphomas in Novosibirsk population. Allele and genotype frequencies of the above loci were determined in patients (243 persons) and control group (371 persons) and compared using ?(2) test. None of the analyzed loci showed statistically significant association with the risk of malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphomas.
PubMed ID
24909718 View in PubMed
Less detail

Androgen receptor expression and breast cancer mortality in a population-based prospective cohort.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature292708
Source
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Oct; 165(3):645-657
Publication Type
Journal Article
Date
Oct-2017
Author
Karin Elebro
Pär-Ola Bendahl
Helena Jernström
Signe Borgquist
Author Affiliation
Division of Oncology and Pathology, Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Karin.Elebro@med.lu.se.
Source
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Oct; 165(3):645-657
Date
Oct-2017
Language
English
Publication Type
Journal Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Biomarkers, Tumor
Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology - genetics - mortality - pathology
Cause of Death
Combined Modality Therapy
Female
Gene Expression
Humans
Immunohistochemistry
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Staging
Population Surveillance
Prognosis
Receptors, Androgen - genetics - metabolism
Sweden - epidemiology
Abstract
The increase in clinical trials with androgen receptor (AR)-targeting drugs emphasizes the need of clarifying the role of AR expression in different breast cancer subtypes. AR confers good prognosis in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer, but its role in ER-negative (ER-) breast cancer is unclear. The aim of this study was to elaborate on previous findings of a differential prognostic role for AR depending on ER status, using breast cancer mortality (BCM) as endpoint, in a population-based cohort from the Malmö Diet and Cancer Study.
Immunohistochemical AR expression was assessed in 910 women with invasive breast cancer diagnosed 1991-2010, supplemented with clinicopathological information, vital status, and cause of death, with the last follow-up in December 2014 (median 10 years). Survival analyses according to AR status and AR/ER combinations were performed.
AR expression was available for 671 tumors. AR+ (n = 573, 85%) was associated with favorable established tumor markers and lower BCM in univariable analysis, especially during the first 5 years following diagnosis [HR 0.4; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.2-0.7]. Multivariable analysis for short-term follow-up indicated higher BCM among patients with AR+ER- tumors (HR 3.5; 95% CI 1.4-9.1) than other AR and ER combinations.
AR expression added prognostic information to ER expression with respect to short-term prognosis. The worst prognosis was seen for patients with AR+/ER- tumors in short-term follow-up, supporting the pre-specified hypothesis. However, larger cohorts are needed for further characterization of the role of AR expression in ER- breast cancer.
Notes
Cites: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Jan;106(1):djt319 PMID 24273215
Cites: Cancer Res. 2009 Aug 1;69(15):6131-40 PMID 19638585
Cites: J Clin Invest. 2011 Jul;121(7):2750-67 PMID 21633166
Cites: Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Jun 1;23 (11):2702-2712 PMID 28151718
Cites: Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Jan;22(1):82-9 PMID 25145503
Cites: J Intern Med. 1993 Jan;233(1):45-51 PMID 8429286
Cites: J Breast Cancer. 2015 Jun;18(2):134-42 PMID 26155289
Cites: Breast Cancer Res. 2014 Jan 22;16(1):R7 PMID 24451109
Cites: Endocr Relat Cancer. 2016 Oct;23(10):R485-98 PMID 27528625
Cites: Ann Oncol. 2016 May;27(5):812-8 PMID 27052658
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 May;133(1):311-20 PMID 22231421
Cites: Lancet. 1998 May 16;351(9114):1451-67 PMID 9605801
Cites: Br J Cancer. 2016 Feb 2;114(3):248-55 PMID 26742006
Cites: Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1;19(19):5533-40 PMID 23948975
Cites: J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Nov;62(11):1202-9 PMID 19364635
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 May;121(1):1-11 PMID 19533338
Cites: Histopathology. 1991 Nov;19(5):403-10 PMID 1757079
Cites: Endocr Relat Cancer. 2014 Aug;21(4):T161-81 PMID 24951107
Cites: Mol Cancer Ther. 2017 Jul;16(7):1389-1400 PMID 28468774
Cites: Eur J Cancer Prev. 2001 Dec;10(6):489-99 PMID 11916347
Cites: Breast Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 01;15(5):R92 PMID 24286369
Cites: Oncogene. 2005 Jul 7;24(29):4660-71 PMID 15897907
Cites: Oncotarget. 2016 Jul 5;7(27):41285-41293 PMID 27285752
Cites: Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Oct 1;19(19):5505-12 PMID 23965901
Cites: Cancer. 2017 May 15;123(10 ):1686-1688 PMID 28406524
Cites: Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Apr 1;17(7):1867-74 PMID 21325075
Cites: Scand J Public Health. 2002;30(2):103-12 PMID 12028859
Cites: Acta Oncol. 2009;48(1):27-33 PMID 18767000
Cites: Am J Cancer Res. 2012;2(4):434-45 PMID 22860233
Cites: Oncogene. 2006 Jun 29;25(28):3994-4008 PMID 16491124
Cites: Int J Cancer. 2008 Sep 1;123(5):1146-53 PMID 18528862
Cites: Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2016 Jun;23(3):249-56 PMID 26945136
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 Nov;100(2):229-35 PMID 16932852
Cites: Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Aug 15;21(16):3640-50 PMID 25904752
Cites: Mol Cancer Res. 2016 Nov;14 (11):1054-1067 PMID 27565181
Cites: Horm Cancer. 2015 Dec;6(5-6):206-13 PMID 26201402
Cites: Endocr Relat Cancer. 2015 Jun;22(3):R87-R106 PMID 25722318
Cites: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013 Oct 2;105(19):1504-11 PMID 24029245
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015 Nov;154(2):225-37 PMID 26487496
Cites: Ann Oncol. 2010 Mar;21(3):488-92 PMID 19887463
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 Oct;147(3):473-85 PMID 25178514
Cites: Mol Cancer Ther. 2015 Mar;14(3):769-78 PMID 25713333
PubMed ID
28643022 View in PubMed
Less detail

An oral cavity carcinoma nomogram to predict benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature113828
Source
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013 Jun;139(6):554-9
Publication Type
Article
Date
Jun-2013
Author
Samuel J Wang
Snehal G Patel
Jatin P Shah
David P Goldstein
Jonathan C Irish
Andre L Carvalho
Luiz P Kowalski
Jennifer L Lockhart
John M Holland
Neil D Gross
Author Affiliation
Department of Radiation Medicine, KPV4, Oregon Health&Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR 97239-3098, USA. wangsa@ohsu.edu
Source
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013 Jun;139(6):554-9
Date
Jun-2013
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Brazil - epidemiology
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - pathology - radiotherapy - surgery
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Mouth Neoplasms - pathology - radiotherapy - surgery
Neoplasm Grading
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Neoplasm Staging
New York - epidemiology
Nomograms
Ontario - epidemiology
Predictive value of tests
Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
Risk factors
Smoking - epidemiology
Survival Rate
Abstract
After surgical resection for oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma, adjuvant radiotherapy may be recommended for patients at higher risk for locoregional recurrence, but it can be difficult to predict whether a particular patient will benefit.
To construct a model to predict which patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma would benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy.
We constructed several types of survival models using a set of 979 patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. Covariates were age, sex, tobacco use, stage, grade, margins, and subsite. The best performing model was externally validated on a set of 431 patients.
The model was based on a set of 979 patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma, including 563 from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, and 416 from the Hospital AC Camargo, São Paulo, Brazil. The validation set consisted of 431 patients from Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
The primary outcome measure of interest was locoregional recurrence-free survival.
The lognormal model showed the best performance per the Akaike information criterion. An online nomogram was built from this model that estimates locoregional failure-free survival with and without postoperative radiotherapy.
A web-based nomogram can be used as a decision aid for adjuvant treatment decisions for patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma.
PubMed ID
23680917 View in PubMed
Less detail

181 records – page 1 of 19.