Journal Cover
The Lancet Oncology
Journal Prestige (SJR): 16.085
Citation Impact (citeScore): 10
Number of Followers: 196  
 
  Full-text available via subscription Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 1470-2045 - ISSN (Online) 1474-5488
Published by Elsevier Homepage  [3184 journals]
  • Echoes of a failure: what lessons can we learn'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Vernon K Sondak, Nikhil I Khushalani
       
  • Underdiagnosis is the main challenge in breast cancer screening
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Christiane K Kuhl
       
  • New radiotracer shows impressive diagnostic potential
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 13 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Machine versus man in skin cancer diagnosis
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 11 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Daniela Massi, Marco Laurino
       
  • Combined treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 6 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Night shift work and breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 6 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • 2019 ASCO Annual Meeting
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 6 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Yaiza del Pozo Martín
       
  • Oral targeted agent versus chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukaemia
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 4 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Christoph Röllig, Wolfgang E Berdel
       
  • Neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma: is it ready for prime time'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 June 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Beth Helmink, Jennifer A Wargo
       
  • Cediranib for alveolar soft part sarcoma: a randomised study in relation
           to clinical practice
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 31 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Sandro Pasquali, Silvia Stacchiotti
       
  • American Pain Society forced to close due to opioid scandal
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 31 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Combined treatment for multiple myeloma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 31 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Key considerations when reviewing subsequent primary cancers following
           radiotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Amar U Kishan, Chenyang Wang, Michael L Steinberg, Daniel E Spratt
       
  • Meningeal melanocytosis: a challenging diagnosis
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Carolina Noronha, Luis Rocha
       
  • Novel prognostic clinical factors and biomarkers for outcome prediction in
           head and neck cancer: a systematic review
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Volker Budach, Ingeborg TinhoferSummaryCurrent algorithms for the clinical management of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) are based on a stage-dependent strategy where all patients at the same TNM stage receive the same treatment. Patient outcomes might be substantially improved by biomarker-guided treatment selection based on individual differences in the genetic and biological characteristics of tumours. Rapid technical advances enabling fast and affordable comprehensive molecular characterisation of tumours have led to increased knowledge of the molecular pathways involved in neoplastic transformation and disease progression in HNSCC. Despite notable successes in other tumour entities, the exploitation of molecular data for the improvement of tumour staging, prognosis, and individual treatment selection for patients with HNSCC has not yet become clinical routine. In this Review, we discuss and merge existing and new information on prognostic biomarkers for HNSCC, with the potential to improve clinical management of patients in the near future.
       
  • International myeloma working group consensus recommendations on imaging
           in monoclonal plasma cell disorders
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Jens Hillengass, Saad Usmani, S Vincent Rajkumar, Brian G M Durie, María-Victoria Mateos, Sagar Lonial, Cristina Joao, Kenneth C Anderson, Ramón García-Sanz, Eloísa Riva Serra, Juan Du, Niels van de Donk, Jesús G Berdeja, Evangelos Terpos, Elena Zamagni, Robert A Kyle, Jesús San Miguel, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Sergio Giralt, Shaji KumarSummaryRecent advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma have increased the need for accurate diagnosis of the disease. The detection of bone and bone marrow lesions is crucial in the investigation of multiple myeloma and often dictates the decision to start treatment. Furthermore, detection of minimal residual disease is important for prognosis determination and treatment planning, and it has underscored an unmet need for sensitive imaging methods that accurately assess patient response to multiple myeloma treatment. Low-dose whole-body CT has increased sensitivity compared with conventional skeletal survey in the detection of bone disease, which can reveal information leading to changes in therapy and disease management that could prevent or delay the onset of clinically significant morbidity and mortality as a result of skeletal-related events. Given the multiple options available for the detection of bone and bone marrow lesions, ranging from conventional skeletal survey to whole-body CT, PET/CT, and MRI, the International Myeloma Working Group decided to establish guidelines on optimal use of imaging methods at different disease stages. These recommendations on imaging within and outside of clinical trials will help standardise imaging for monoclonal plasma cell disorders worldwide to allow the comparison of results and the unification of treatment approaches for multiple myeloma.
       
  • Trebananib or placebo plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line
           treatment for advanced ovarian cancer (TRINOVA-3/ENGOT-ov2/GOG-3001): a
           randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Ignace Vergote, Giovanni Scambia, David M O'Malley, Ben Van Calster, Sang-Yoon Park, Josep M del Campo, Werner Meier, Aristotelis Bamias, Nicoletta Colombo, Robert M Wenham, Al Covens, Christian Marth, Mansoor Raza Mirza, Judith R Kroep, Haijun Ma, Cheryl A Pickett, Bradley J Monk, Ignace Vergote, Giovanni Scambia, Sang Yoon ParkSummaryBackgroundAngiopoietin 1 and 2 regulate angiogenesis and vascular remodelling by interacting with the tyrosine kinase receptor Tie2, and inhibition of angiogenesis has shown promise in the treatment of ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess whether trebananib, a peptibody that inhibits binding of angiopoietin 1 and 2 to Tie2, improved progression-free survival when added to carboplatin and paclitaxel as first-line therapy in advanced epithelial ovarian, primary fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer in a phase 3 clinical trial.MethodsTRINOVA-3, a multicentre, multinational, phase 3, double-blind study, was done at 206 investigational sites (hospitals and cancer centres) in 14 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with biopsy-confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III to IV epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) using a permuted block method (block size of six patients) to receive six cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (area under the serum concentration-time curve 5 or 6) every 3 weeks, plus weekly intravenous trebananib 15 mg/kg or placebo. Maintenance therapy with trebananib or placebo continued for up to 18 additional months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, as assessed by the investigators, in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01493505, and is complete.FindingsBetween Jan 30, 2012, and Feb 25, 2014, 1164 patients were screened and 1015 eligible patients were randomly allocated to treatment (678 to trebananib and 337 to placebo). After a median follow-up of 27·4 months (IQR 17·7–34·2), 626 patients had progression-free survival events (405 [60%] of 678 in the trebananib group and 221 [66%] of 337 in the placebo group). Median progression-free survival did not differ between the trebananib group (15·9 months [15·0–17·6]) and the placebo group (15·0 months [12·6–16·1]) groups (hazard ratio 0·93 [95% CI 0·79–1·09]; p=0·36). 512 (76%) of 675 patients in the trebananib group and 237 (71%) of 336 in the placebo group had grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events; of which the most common events were neutropenia (trebananib 238 [35%] vs placebo 126 [38%]) anaemia (76 [11%] vs 40 [12%]), and leucopenia (81 [12%] vs 35 [10%]). 269 (40%) patients in the trebananib group and 104 (31%) in the placebo group had serious adverse events. Two fatal adverse events in the trebananib group were considered related to trebananib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin (lung infection and neutropenic colitis); two were considered to be related to paclitaxel and carboplatin (general physical health deterioration and platelet count decreased). No treatment-related fatal adverse events occurred in the placebo group.InterpretationTrebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not improve progression-free survival as first-line treatment for advanced ovarian cancer. The combination of trebananib plus carboplatin and paclitaxel did not produce new safety signals. These results show that trebananib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is minimally effective in this patient population.FundingAmgen.
       
  • A white disease—the experience of cancer for black and ethnic
           minority women
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Catherine Lucas
       
  • Should we stop investing in chemoprevention trials in oncology'
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): David Weller, Richard C Wender
       
  • Social networks for young patients with cancer: the time for system
           agility
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Irit Ben-Aharon, Tal Goshen-Lago, Elisa Fontana, Elizabeth Smyth, Marianne Guren Carmela Caballero, Florian Lordick
       
  • Advisory Group recommendations on priorities for the IARC Monographs
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): M Matilde Marques, Amy Berrington de Gonzalez, Frederick A. Beland, Patience Browne, Paul A Demers, Dirk W Lachenmeier, Tina Bahadori, Dinesh K. Barupal, Fiorella Belpoggi, Pietro Comba, Min Dai, Robert D Daniels, Catterina Ferreccio, Oleg A Grigoriev, Yun-Chul Hong, Robert N. Hoover, Jun Kanno, Manolis Kogevinas, Gérard Lasfargues, Reza Malekzadeh
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 849–61
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 297–310
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: e262–73
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 1061–75
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 747–56
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s):
       
  • Key considerations when reviewing subsequent primary cancers following
           radiotherapy – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Osama Mohamad, Takahiro Tabuchi, Toshitaka Morishima, Hirokazu Makishima, Isao Miyashiro, Hiroshi Tsuji
       
  • Mapping a route to Indigenous engagement in cancer genomic research
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Kimiora L Henare, Kate E Parker, Helen Wihongi, Cherie Blenkiron, Rawiri Jansen, Papaarangi Reid, Michael P Findlay, Benjamin Lawrence, Maui Hudson, Cristin G PrintSummaryPrecision oncology guided by genomic research has an increasingly important role in the care of people with cancer. However, substantial inequities remain in cancer outcomes of Indigenous peoples, including Indigenous Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand (New Zealand). These inequities will be perpetuated unless deliberate steps are taken to include Indigenous peoples in all parts of cancer research—as research participants, in research leadership, and in research governance. This approach is especially important when there have been historical breaches of trust that have discouraged their participation in health research. This Personal View describes a precision oncology research roadmap for neuroendocrine tumour research, which seeks to reflect the values of New Zealand's Indigenous Māori people. This roadmap includes facilitating ongoing dialogue, Māori leadership, reciprocity, agreed kawa (guiding principles), tikanga (cultural protocols), and honest monitoring of what is and what is not being achieved. We challenge cancer researchers worldwide to generate locally appropriate roadmaps that honestly assess their practices to benefit Indigenous people internationally.
       
  • Use of the Child-Pugh score in anticancer drug dosing decision making:
           proceed with caution – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Stefanie D Krens, Gerben Lassche, Frank G A Jansman, Ingrid M E Desar, Nienke A G Lankheet, David M Burger, Carla M L van Herpen, Nielka P van Erp
       
  • Use of the Child-Pugh score in anticancer drug dosing decision making:
           proceed with caution
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Carlo Palmieri, Iain Macpherson
       
  • Genetic risk classifier to predict localised renal cell carcinoma
           recurrence – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Jia-Xing Zhang, Yi-Hui Pan, Jun Lu, Guan-Nan Shu, Pei-Xing Li, Cai-Xia Li, Jun-Hang Luo
       
  • Genetic risk classifier to predict localised renal cell carcinoma
           recurrence
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Shufang Liu, Jieping Lei
       
  • Performance of BCRAT in high-risk patients with breast cancer –
           Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Mary Beth Terry, Yuyan Liao, John L Hopper, Robert J MacInnis
       
  • Performance of BCRAT in high-risk patients with breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Mitchell H Gail
       
  • Cancer hospital advertising and outcomes: trust the messenger'
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Allison Lipitz-Snyderman, Laura Vater, Michael Curry, Diane Li, David M Rubin, Mark Radzyner, Elaine Duck, Peter B Bach, Yael Schenker
       
  • The liquid biopsy: towards standardisation in preparation for prime time
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Karen Page, Jacqueline A Shaw, David S Guttery
       
  • India's new health scheme: what does it mean for cancer care'
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Carlo Caduff, Christopher M Booth, C S Pramesh, Richard Sullivan
       
  • Multidisciplinary care in tenosynovial giant cell tumours
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): William D Tap
       
  • MEK and PD-L1 inhibition in colorectal cancer: a burning blaze turning
           into a flash in the pan
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Francesco Sclafani
       
  • Clinical trial registry reporting: a transparent solution needed
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): The Lancet Oncology
       
  • Master protocols in clinical trials: a universal Swiss Army knife'
    • Abstract: Publication date: June 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 6Author(s): Thomas Sudhop, Nikolai Constantin Brun, Claudia Riedel, Aldana Rosso, Karl Broich, Thomas SenderovitzSummaryMaster protocols combine several sub-trials, each with their own research objectives, which is usually presented as one single clinical trial application. Master protocols have become increasingly popular in oncology and haematology, as either basket, umbrella, or platform trials. Although master protocols are intended to accelerate drug development and to reduce futility, their use poses challenges to ethics committees, patients, study investigators, and competent authorities during the review and authorisation process of a clinical trial application. In this Personal View, we review the experiences of clinical trial applications from two European medical regulators—the Danish Medicines Agency and the German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices. We view master protocols as a good opportunity to identify new treatment options more quickly, particularly for patients with cancer. However, the complexity of trial documentation, the amount of information resulting from sub-trials, and the volume of changes and amendments made to clinical trial applications can cause issues during trial supervision, and during the analysis and review of a corresponding application for marketing authorisation. We draw attention to the potential issues arising from these trial concepts and propose possible solutions to avoid problems during clinical trial authorisation and trial conduct.
       
  • Selumetinib in paediatric low-grade glioma: a new era'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Eric Bouffet
       
  • Scale-up of radiotherapy for cervical cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Umesh M Mahantshetty
       
  • Gaps in US laws leave some vulnerable to workplace discrimination
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 24 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Bryant Furlow
       
  • GM1 for taxane-induced neuropathy in breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 23 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Alpelisib plus fulvestrant for PIK3CA-mutated breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 23 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • Quantifying survival disparities among children diagnosed with cancer on a
           global scale
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 22 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Philip J Lupo
       
  • Global childhood cancer survival estimates and priority-setting: a
           simulation-based analysis
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 22 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Zachary J Ward, Jennifer M Yeh, Nickhill Bhakta, A Lindsay Frazier, Fabio Girardi, Rifat AtunSummaryBackgroundAccurate childhood cancer survival estimates are crucial for policy makers and clinicians for priority-setting and planning decisions. However, observed survival estimates are lacking for many countries, and when available, wide variation in outcomes is reported. Understanding the barriers to optimising survival can help improve childhood cancer outcomes. We aimed to provide estimates of global childhood cancer survival, accounting for the impact of multiple factors that affect cancer outcomes in children.MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model to simulate childhood cancer survival for 200 countries and territories worldwide, accounting for clinical and epidemiologic factors, including country-specific treatment variables, such as availability of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. To ensure model results were consistent with reported survival data, we calibrated the model to estimates from the CONCORD-2 and CONCORD-3 studies using an Approximate Bayesian Computation approach. We estimated 5-year net survival for diagnosed cases of childhood cancer in each country and territory and estimated potential survival gains of seven policy interventions focused on improving treatment availability and delivery (ie, increasing the availability of chemotherapy, radiation, general surgery, neurosurgery, or ophthalmic surgery, reducing treatment abandonment, and improving the quality of care to the mean of high-income countries) implemented in isolation or as packages.FindingsOur model estimated that, for diagnosed cases, global 5-year net childhood cancer survival is currently 37·4% (95% uncertainty interval 34·7–39·8), with large variation by region, ranging from 8·1% (4·4–13·7) in eastern Africa to 83·0% (81·6–84·4) in North America. Among the seven policy interventions modelled, each individually provided small gains, increasing global 5-year net survival to between 38·4% (35·8–40·9) and 44·6% (41·7–47·4). 5-year net survival increased more substantially when policy interventions were bundled into packages that improved service delivery (5-year net survival 50·2% [47·3–53·0]) or that expanded treatment access (54·1% [50·1–58·5]). A comprehensive systems approach consisting of all policy interventions yielded superadditive gains with a global 5-year net survival of 53·6% (51·5–55·6) at 50% scale-up and 80·8% (79·5–82·1) at full implementation.InterpretationChildhood cancer survival varies widely by region, with especially poor survival in Africa. Although expanding access to treatment (chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery) and addressing financial toxicity are essential, investments that improve the quality of care, at both the health-system and facility level, are needed to improve childhood cancer outcomes globally.FundingBoston Children's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard Medical School, National Cancer Institute, SickKids, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Union for International Cancer Control, Children with Cancer UK Davidson and O'Gorman Fellowship.
       
  • The second wave of checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy for advanced
           non-small-cell lung cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 20 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Yangqiu Li, Yi-Long Wu
       
  • Hepatic arterial chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Australia's election could bring down cancer costs for patients
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Chris McCall
       
  • NICE guidance on enzalutamide for non-metastatic, hormone-relapsed
           prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 15 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Adam Brooke, Ahmed Elsada, Amanda Adler
       
  • NICE guidance on nivolumab with ipilimumab for untreated advanced renal
           cell carcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 15 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Amanda I Adler, Adam Brooke, Ahmed Elsada, Linda Landells
       
  • Targeted therapies make room, anti-CD79b agents are coming
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 14 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Andrés J M Ferreri
       
  • Redefining the treatment paradigm for multiple myeloma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 13 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Francesca Gay, Roberto Mina
       
  • New treatment for relapsed or refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • CAR T-cell therapy for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • Using blockchain technology to recycle cancer drugs
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Saffya Benniche
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; published online April 29.
           http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30088-9
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; published online April 29.
           http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30292-X
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s):
       
  • Breast cancer screening by visually impaired women
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Ryan Varatharajah
       
  • Tomosynthesis in breast screening: great expectations'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 8 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Sophia Zackrisson
       
  • Personalised management of alveolar soft part sarcoma: a promising phase 2
           study
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 8 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Nicolas Penel, Yves-Marie Robin, Jean-Yves Blay
       
  • Global chemotherapy demands: a prelude to equal access
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 8 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Melina Arnold, Isabelle Soerjomataram
       
  • Ovarian cancer: time to move beyond one size fits all
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 7 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Angeles Alvarez Secord
       
  • Single-fraction radiotherapy for bone metastases
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Promising results with tagraxofusp in BPDCN
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 May 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Fulvestrant plus anastrozole for metastatic breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Do not use robotic surgery in oncology patients when conventional surgical
           approaches are equally effective – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): C S Pramesh, Richard Sullivan, Christopher M Booth
       
  • Towards global elimination of cervical cancer in all groups of women
           – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Kate T Simms, Julia Steinberg, Michael Caruana, Megan A Smith, Jie-Bin Lew, Isabelle Soerjomataram, Philip E Castle, Freddie Bray, Karen Canfell
       
  • Towards global elimination of cervical cancer in all groups of women
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Lisa J Whop, Joan Cunningham, Gail Garvey, John R Condon
       
  • Towards global elimination of cervical cancer in all groups of women
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Prabhat Kumar, Shilpi Gupta, Ankan Mukherjee Das, Bhudev C Das
       
  • Denosumab in early-stage breast cancer – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Michael Gnant, Georg Pfeiler, Sophie Frantal, Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group
       
  • Denosumab in early-stage breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Mariana Brandão, Márcio Debiasi, Evandro de Azambuja
       
  • Denosumab in early-stage breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): Elena Gonzalez Rodriguez, Bérengère Aubry-Rozier, Delphine Stoll, Olivier Lamy
       
  • SABR versus conventional fractionation regimens in NSCLC – Authors'
           reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: May 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 5Author(s): David Ball, Alan Herschtal
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2018; 19: 1530–42
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 29 April 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s):
       
  • A new player in the treatment of HER2-positive tumours
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 29 April 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Gaia Giannone, Filippo Montemurro
       
  • Genetics to epigenetics: targeting histone deacetylases in hormone
           receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 27 April 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Seth A Wander, Laura M Spring, Aditya Bardia
       
  • Idelalisib and rituximab for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 27 April 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
 
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
 
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Customise
APIs
Your IP address: 34.228.194.177
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-