scholarly journals The impact of primary tumor site on outcomes of treatment with etoposide and cisplatin in grade 3 gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (14) ◽  
pp. 3140-3144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sang Eun Yoon ◽  
Jung Hoon Kim ◽  
Su Jin Lee ◽  
Jeeyun Lee ◽  
Se Hoon Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuroendocrine Carcinoma ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
The Impact

The impact of primary tumor site on outcomes of treatment with etoposide and cisplatin in grade 3 gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 213-213
Author(s):  
Sang Eun Yoon ◽  
Jung Hoon Kim ◽  
Joon Young Hur ◽  
Su Jin Lee ◽  
Jeeyun Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Neuroendocrine Carcinoma ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact

213 Background: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (GEP-NEC) is a heterogeneous disease in terms of embryonic origin, aggressiveness, prognosis, and genomic profiling. Data regarding the efficacy of etoposide and cisplatin (EP) as a standard treatment of the primary tumor site in GEP-NEC are limited. Methods: We analyzed 64 patients with histopathologically confirmed metastatic GEP-NEC who received EP at Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, between January 2010 and January 2018. Based on primary tumor site, outcome of treatment with EP was evaluated. Results: Primary sites included 22 foregut-derived GEP-NECs (stomach, n = 6; duodenum, n = 4; pancreas, n = 12), 4 midgut-derived GEP-NECs, 5 hindgut-derived GEP-NECs of the rectum, 25 GEP-NECs originating from the hepatobiliary (HB) tract, and 12 GEP-NECs involving only intra-abdominal lymph nodes. No patient had a complete response (CR) and 17 had a partial response (PR), resulting in a 27.9% response rate (RR). When evaluating the efficacy of EP based on primary tumor site, the RR was most favorable in GEP-NECs involving only intra-abdominal lymph nodes, followed by GEP-NECs originating from foregut, midgut, HB, and hindgut. However, no statistically significant difference was observed for RR based on primary tumor site (p = 0.821). Similarly, no significant differences were found for progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with GEP-NECs arising from various primary tumor sites. Conclusions: Results from this study showed thatRR and PFS associated with EP treatment were not different based on the primary tumor site in patients with advanced or metastatic GEP-NEC.

scholarly journals The impact of primary tumor site and anti-VEGF therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. iii115
Author(s):  
Ana Pissarra ◽  
Mariana Malheiro ◽  
Andreia Coelho ◽  
Ana Plácido ◽  
Ana Martins
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Anti Vegf ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Clinical, Biologic, and Prognostic Differences on the Basis of Primary Tumor Site in Neuroblastoma: A Report From the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group Project

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (28) ◽  
pp. 3169-3176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kieuhoa T. Vo ◽  
Katherine K. Matthay ◽  
John Neuhaus ◽  
Wendy B. London ◽  
Barbara Hero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Primary Site ◽  
Adrenal Tumors ◽  
Mycn Amplification ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
The Impact

PurposeNeuroblastoma (NB) is a heterogeneous tumor arising from sympathetic tissues. The impact of primary tumor site in influencing the heterogeneity of NB remains unclear.Patients and MethodsChildren younger than age 21 years diagnosed with NB or ganglioneuroblastoma between 1990 and 2002 and with known primary site were identified from the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group database. Data were compared between sites with respect to clinical and biologic features, as well as event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsAmong 8,369 children, 47% had adrenal tumors. All evaluated clinical and biologic variables differed statistically between primary sites. The features that were > 10% discrepant between sites were stage 4 disease, MYCN amplification, elevated ferritin, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, and segmental chromosomal aberrations, all of which were more frequent in adrenal versus nonadrenal tumors (P < .001). Adrenal tumors were more likely than nonadrenal tumors (adjusted odds ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.67 to 2.63; P < .001) and thoracic tumors were less likely than nonthoracic tumors (adjusted odds ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.39; P < .001) to have MYCN amplification after controlling for age, stage, and histologic grade. EFS and OS differed significantly according to the primary site (P < .001 for both comparisons). After controlling for age, MYCN status, and stage, patients with adrenal tumors had higher risk for events (hazard ratio, 1.13 compared with nonadrenal tumors; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.23; P = .008), and patients with thoracic tumors had lower risk for events (HR, 0.79 compared with nonthoracic; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.92; P = .003).ConclusionClinical and biologic features show important differences by NB primary site, with adrenal and thoracic sites associated with inferior and superior survival, respectively. Future studies will need to investigate the biologic origin of these differences.

Social isolation: Impact on treatment and survival in patients with advanced cancer.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 156-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Moore ◽  
Bonnie Leung ◽  
Alan Bates ◽  
Cheryl Ho
Keyword(s):  
Social Support ◽  
Social Isolation ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Socially Isolated ◽  
The Impact

156 Background: Social relationships are an important determinant of health, with impacts on morbidity and mortality in the general population. The influence of social isolation in patients with metastatic cancer is less clear, as are the potential mechanisms of its effect. We sought to examine patient-reported social support in a large unselected population, and explore the impact on outcome. Methods: A retrospective review was completed of all patients with metastatic cancer referred to BC Cancer from 2011-2016 who completed a psychological screen within six months of diagnosis. Social isolation was defined as a positive response to any of five questions about social support: live alone, recently lost spouse/partner, no regular contact with friends/relatives, no one to assist with IADLs, no emotional support. An isolation score was calculated as the number of positive responses. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Results: 7,699 patients were included in the study. Baseline characteristics: median age 68, 57% male, 60% received systemic therapy, primary tumor site 4% breast / 37% lung / 28% GI / 13% GU / 18% other. 5191 (67%) patients reported no isolation, and 2,538 (33%) were socially isolated. Patients with social isolation were more likely older (median age 70 vs. 67), female (50% vs. 40%), ECOG ≥2 (34% vs. 30%), and receive no systemic therapy (46% vs. 35%). Median OS was inferior in socially isolated patients at 10.1 m compared to those with no isolation at 13.5 m (p<0.001). In a multivariate model including age, sex, ECOG, systemic therapy, and primary tumor site, the impact of social isolation on OS remained significant (HR 1.06, p=0.04). In an exploratory analysis, increasing levels of social isolation were correlated with reduced systemic therapy uptake (score 0=65% received systemic therapy, 1=56%, 2=53%, 3=47%, ≥4=43%, p<0.001). Conclusions: Socially isolated patients with metastatic cancer have inferior survival, which may be influenced by the reduced use of systemic therapy. Increasing patient social support should be explored as a means to improve the uptake of systemic therapy and its benefits on survival in patients with advanced cancer.

Comparison of treatment regimens for pediatric lymphoblastic non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a Childrens Cancer Group study.

1995 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1368-1376 ◽  
Author(s):  
D G Tubergen ◽  
M D Krailo ◽  
A T Meadows ◽  
J Rosenstock ◽  
M Kadin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Hodgkin’S Lymphoma ◽  
Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Hodgkin's Lymphoma ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Non Hodgkin’S Lymphoma ◽  
Non Hodgkin's Lymphoma ◽  
Localized Disease ◽  
Extent Of Disease

PURPOSE Patients with lymphoblastic non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (LB NHL) were randomized to treatment with either modified LSA2L2 or ADCOMP, which added daunorubicin (DAUN) and asparaginase (L-ASP) to the methotrexate (MTX), cyclophosphamide (CYT), vincristine (VCR), and prednisone (PRED) (COMP) regimen, in a clinical trial to determine the relative effectiveness and toxicity of the two regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with LB NHL were eligible for this randomized study if they were less than 22 years of age at diagnosis and had < or = 25% blasts in the bone marrow. Of 307 patients registered, 281 were fully eligible and assessable. Patients were stratified by extent of disease at diagnosis. RESULTS The 5-year event-free survival (EFS) rate for patients with localized disease was 84%, and for patients with disseminated disease, 67%. There were four relapses in 28 patients with localized disease. Two hundred six patients had mediastinal primary tumors and despite local radiation, 34 of 63 failures in these patients involved the primary tumor site with or without other involvement. After adjusting for extent of disease at diagnosis, the regimens did not differ significantly with respect to risk for adverse events. The acute toxicity was primarily neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, with greater initial toxicity in patients on the LSA2L2 regimen. Three patients developed acute myelogenous leukemia. CONCLUSION Long-term EFS in children with LB NHL can be achieved in the majority of patients. Disease progression, which includes recurrence at the primary tumor site, is a major cause of treatment failure in patients with mediastinal presentations. Addition of DAUN and L-ASP to the COMP regimen does not produce a more effective treatment than LSA2L2.

A phase II/III randomized double-blind study of octreotide acetate LAR with axitinib versus octreotide acetate LAR with placebo in patients with advanced G1-G2 NETs of non-pancreatic origin (AXINET trial-GETNE-1107).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 360-360
Author(s):  
Rocio Garcia-Carbonero ◽  
Marta Benavent ◽  
Paula Jiménez Fonseca ◽  
Daniel Castellano ◽  
Teresa Alonso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Progression ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Study Entry ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Primary Tumor Site ◽  
Octreotide Lar ◽  
Octreotide Acetate

360 Background: Angiogenesis plays an important role in NET development and progression. Axitinib is a potent and selective VEGFR-1,2,3 inhibitor, with proven activity against several vascular-dependent solid tumors. The aim of this randomized, double-blind phase II/III study was to assess the efficacy of axitinib in patients with advanced G1-2 extra-pancreatic NETs. Methods: Eligible pts were randomized (1:1) to receive octreotide LAR (30 mg IM q4w) with axitinib (5 mg BID) or placebo BID until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pteswere stratified by time from diagnosis to study entry ( > or < 12m), primary tumor site (GI tract vs non-GI) and Ki-67 index (< 5% vs > 5%). Prior therapy with SSA, IFN and up to 2 lines of systemic treatment was allowed, but not prior VEGF- or VEGFR-targeted drugs. Clinical and/or radiological disease progression within 12 months prior to study entry was required. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), time to progression, overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, biochemical response and safety. Results: 256 pts were randomized (106 in the Phase II part, and 150 additional pts in the Phase III part), 126 to axitinib and 130 to placebo. The main characteristics of the study population were: median age 61 years (range: 21-85), 52% male, PS 0-1 (64-35%), G1-2 (29%-71%), primary tumor site GI (40%)-Lung (17%)-Other (32%). Prior therapies included: SSA (46%), everolimus (13%), chemotherapy (13%), TACE (5%) and PRRT (2%). ORR was significantly higher in axitinib- vs placebo-treated patients (17.5% vs 3.8%, p = 0.0004). PFS per investigator assessment also favored axitinib vs placebo-treated patients, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (median PFS 17.2 vs 12.3 months, respectively, HR 0.816, p = 0.169). Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs occurred more frequently in the axitinib vs placebo arm (52% vs 13.8%), and included hypertension (21% vs 6 %), cardiac disorders (3.2% vs 0.7%), diarrhoea (13% vs 1.5 %), asthenia (9% vs 3%) and nausea&vomiting (2% vs 0.7%). There were 3 treatment-related deaths, 1 in the axitinib arm (cardiac failure) and 2 in the placebo arm (myocardial infarction and hepatorenal syndrome). Conclusions: Although the study failed to demonstrate a significant PFS benefit per investigator assessment, axitinib in combination with octreotide LAR demonstrated activity and had a tolerable safety profile in patients with advanced G1-2 extra-pancreatic NETs. Data base cleaning and central blinded radiological PFS assessment are currently ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01744249.

Mucoepidermoid carcinoma: Evaluating the prognostic impact of primary tumor site

Oral Oncology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. 105602
Author(s):  
Ximena Mimica ◽  
Avery Yuan ◽  
Ashley Hay ◽  
Nora Katabi ◽  
Daniella Karassawa Zanoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Tumor Site ◽  
Primary Tumor Site
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document