for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
The Lancet Oncology
Journal Prestige (SJR): 16.085
Citation Impact (citeScore): 10
Number of Followers: 203  
 
  Full-text available via subscription Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 1470-2045 - ISSN (Online) 1474-5488
Published by Elsevier Homepage  [3182 journals]
  • Post-operative salvage androgen deprivation and radiotherapy for prostate
           cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Anthony V D'Amico
       
  • Short-term androgen deprivation therapy combined with radiotherapy as
           salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer
           (GETUG-AFU 16): a 112-month follow-up of a phase 3, randomised trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Christian Carrie, Nicolas Magné, Patricia Burban-Provost, Paul Sargos, Igor Latorzeff, Jean-Léon Lagrange, Stéphane Supiot, Yazid Belkacemi, Didier Peiffert, Nedla Allouache, Bernard M Dubray, Stéphanie Servagi-Vernat, Jean-Philippe Suchaud, Gilles Crehange, Stéphane Guerif, Meryem Brihoum, Nicolas Barbier, Pierre Graff-Cailleaud, Alain Ruffion, Sophie DussartSummaryBackgroundRadiotherapy is the standard salvage treatment after radical prostatectomy. To date, the role of androgen deprivation therapy has not been formally shown. In this follow-up study, we aimed to update the results of the GETUG-AFU 16 trial, which assessed the efficacy of radiotherapy plus androgen suppression versus radiotherapy alone.MethodsGETUG-AFU 16 was an open-label, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial that enrolled men (aged ≥18 years) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, with histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate (but no previous androgen suppression or pelvic radiotherapy), stage pT2, T3, or T4a (bladder neck involvement only) and pN0 or pNx according to the tumour, node, metastasis (TNM) staging system, whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration increased from 0·1 ng/mL to between 0·2 ng/mL and 2·0 ng/mL after radical prostatectomy, without evidence of clinical disease. Patients were assigned through central randomisation (1:1) to short-term androgen suppression (subcutaneous injection of 10·8 mg goserelin on the first day of irradiation and 3 months later) plus radiotherapy (3D conformal radiotherapy or intensity modulated radiotherapy of 66 Gy in 33 fractions, 5 days a week for 7 weeks) or radiotherapy alone. Randomisation was stratified using a permuted block method (block sizes of two and four) according to investigational site, radiotherapy modality, and prognosis. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This post-hoc one-shot data collection done 4 years after last data cutoff included patients who were alive at the time of the primary analysis and updated long-term patient status by including dates for first local progression, metastatic disease diagnosis, or death (if any of these had occurred) or the date of the last tumour evaluation or last PSA measurement. Survival at 120 months was reported. Late serious adverse effects were assessed. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00423475.FindingsBetween Oct 19, 2006, and March 30, 2010, 743 patients were randomly assigned, 374 to radiotherapy alone and 369 to radiotherapy plus goserelin. At the time of data cutoff (March 12, 2019), the median follow-up was 112 months (IQR 102–123). The 120-month progression-free survival was 64% (95% CI 58–69) for patients treated with radiotherapy plus goserelin and 49% (43–54) for patients treated with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0·54, 0·43–0·68; stratified log-rank test p
       
  • Management of high-risk endometrial cancer: are we there yet'
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Marcus Randall
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1148–59
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1171–82
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1211–25
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1273–85
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: e417–33
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: e503–21
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s):
       
  • Erdafitinib for advanced urothelial carcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Tumour Treating Fields for mesothelioma: controversy versus opportunity
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 15 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Dean A Fennell
       
  • Palbociclib: a new partner for cetuximab'
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Garth W Strohbehn, Everett E Vokes
       
  • Targeted therapy for BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Ashray Gunjur
       
  • Combining PARP inhibition with PD-1 inhibitors
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Ulrik Lassen
       
  • Quality of life and CAR-T cell therapy in children, adolescents, and young
           adults with haematological malignancies
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Fabio Efficace, Marco Vignetti
       
  • Quality of life with durvalumab in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 7 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Amélie Anota, Virginie Westeel
       
  • Are neutralising anti-VEGF or VEGFR2 antibodies necessary in the treatment
           of EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 4 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Rafael Rosell, Carlos Pedraz-Valdunciel
       
  • Real-time artificial intelligence for detection of upper gastrointestinal
           cancer by endoscopy: a multicentre, case-control, diagnostic study
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 4 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Huiyan Luo, Guoliang Xu, Chaofeng Li, Longjun He, Linna Luo, Zixian Wang, Bingzhong Jing, Yishu Deng, Ying Jin, Yin Li, Bin Li, Wencheng Tan, Caisheng He, Sharvesh Raj Seeruttun, Qiubao Wu, Jun Huang, De-wang Huang, Bin Chen, Shao-bin Lin, Qin-ming ChenSummaryBackgroundUpper gastrointestinal cancers (including oesophageal cancer and gastric cancer) are the most common cancers worldwide. Artificial intelligence platforms using deep learning algorithms have made remarkable progress in medical imaging but their application in upper gastrointestinal cancers has been limited. We aimed to develop and validate the Gastrointestinal Artificial Intelligence Diagnostic System (GRAIDS) for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal cancers through analysis of imaging data from clinical endoscopies.MethodsThis multicentre, case-control, diagnostic study was done in six hospitals of different tiers (ie, municipal, provincial, and national) in China. The images of consecutive participants, aged 18 years or older, who had not had a previous endoscopy were retrieved from all participating hospitals. All patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer lesions (including oesophageal cancer and gastric cancer) that were histologically proven malignancies were eligible for this study. Only images with standard white light were deemed eligible. The images from Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center were randomly assigned (8:1:1) to the training and intrinsic verification datasets for developing GRAIDS, and the internal validation dataset for evaluating the performance of GRAIDS. Its diagnostic performance was evaluated using an internal and prospective validation set from Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (a national hospital) and additional external validation sets from five primary care hospitals. The performance of GRAIDS was also compared with endoscopists with three degrees of expertise: expert, competent, and trainee. The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of GRAIDS and endoscopists for the identification of cancerous lesions were evaluated by calculating the 95% CIs using the Clopper-Pearson method.Findings1 036 496 endoscopy images from 84 424 individuals were used to develop and test GRAIDS. The diagnostic accuracy in identifying upper gastrointestinal cancers was 0·955 (95% CI 0·952–0·957) in the internal validation set, 0·927 (0·925–0·929) in the prospective set, and ranged from 0·915 (0·913–0·917) to 0·977 (0·977–0·978) in the five external validation sets. GRAIDS achieved diagnostic sensitivity similar to that of the expert endoscopist (0·942 [95% CI 0·924–0·957] vs 0·945 [0·927–0·959]; p=0·692) and superior sensitivity compared with competent (0·858 [0·832–0·880], p
       
  • Abemaciclib plus fulvestrant for breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • Veliparib for advanced ovarian cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Niraparib improves progression-free survival in ovarian cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • European Society of Medical Oncology 2019 Congress
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Cheryl Lai
       
  • Untapped potential: recognising CNS opportunities in early oncology drug
           development
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 October 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Tejas Patil, D Ross Camidge
       
  • Improving care for the overlooked in oncology: incarcerated patients
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Oluwadamilola T Oladeru, Subha Perni, Brie Williams
       
  • Unexpected pleural finding after a fall
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Chiara Giraudo, Anna Sara Fraia, Alice Bellini, Francesco Fortarezza, Federico Rea, Fiorella Calabrese
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1252–62
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 1171–82
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; 20: 408–19
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s):
       
  • High Z nanoparticles and radiotherapy: a critical view – Authors'
           reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Sylvie Bonvalot, Eva Wardelmann, Cécile Le Péchoux
       
  • High Z nanoparticles and radiotherapy: a critical view
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Florent Vilotte, Raphael Jumeau, Jean Bourhis
       
  • Pazopanib for progressive desmoid tumours: children, persistant effects,
           and cost – Author's reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Antoine Italiano
       
  • Pazopanib for progressive desmoid tumours: children, persistant effects,
           and cost
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Yoshihiro Nishida, Tomohisa Sakai, Hiroshi Koike, Kan Ito
       
  • A critique of the fragility index – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Joseph C Del Paggio, Ian F Tannock
       
  • A critique of the fragility index
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Tiago Machado, Gonçalo S Duarte, Nilza Gonçalves, Joaquim J Ferreira, João Costa
       
  • A critique of the fragility index
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Alexandra Desnoyers, Michelle B Nadler, Brooke E Wilson, Eitan Amir
       
  • A critique of the fragility index
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): David Bomze, Tomer Meirson
       
  • Night shift work and its carcinogenicity
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Yin Zhang, Kyriaki Papantoniou
       
  • Access to radiotherapy among circumpolar Inuit populations
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): Jessica Chan, Jeppe Friborg, Mikhail Chernov, Mikhail Cherkashin, Cai Grau, Michael Brundage, Ben SlotmanSummaryCancer is a substantial health burden for Inuit populations, an Indigenous peoples who primarily inhabit the circumpolar regions of Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and Russia. Access to radiotherapy is lacking or absent in many of these regions, despite it being an essential component of cancer treatment. This Review presents an overview of factors influencing radiotherapy delivery in each of the four circumpolar Inuit regions, which include population and geography, health-systems infrastructure, and cancer epidemiology. This Review also provides insight into the complex patient pathways needed to access radiotherapy, and on radiotherapy use. The unique challenges in delivering radiotherapy to circumpolar Inuit populations are discussed, which, notably, include geographical and cultural barriers. Recommendations include models of care that have successfully addressed these barriers, and highlight the need for increased collaboration between circumpolar referral centres in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and Russia to ultimately allow for better delivery of cancer treatment.
       
  • Vaping-related lung illnesses: time to act
    • Abstract: Publication date: October 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 10Author(s): The Lancet Oncology
       
  • Time-to-progression after front-line fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and
           rituximab chemoimmunotherapy for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a
           retrospective, multicohort study
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Carmen D Herling, Kevin R Coombes, Axel Benner, Johannes Bloehdorn, Lynn L Barron, Zachary B Abrams, Tadeusz Majewski, Jolanta E Bondaruk, Jasmin Bahlo, Kirsten Fischer, Michael Hallek, Stephan Stilgenbauer, Bogdan A Czerniak, Christopher C Oakes, Alessandra Ferrajoli, Michael J Keating, Lynne V AbruzzoSummaryBackgroundFludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) has become a gold-standard chemoimmunotherapy regimen for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, the question remains of how to treat treatment-naive patients with IGHV-unmutated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We therefore aimed to develop and validate a gene expression signature to identify which of these patients are likely to achieve durable remissions with FCR chemoimmunotherapy.MethodsWe did a retrospective cohort study in two cohorts of treatment-naive patients (aged ≥18 years) with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. The discovery and training cohort consisted of peripheral blood samples collected from patients treated at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA), who fulfilled the diagnostic criteria of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, had received at least three cycles of FCR chemoimmunotherapy, and had been treated between Oct 10, 2000, and Oct 26, 2006 (ie, the MDACC cohort). We did transcriptional profiling on samples obtained from the MDACC cohort to identify genes associated with time to progression. We did univariate Cox proportional hazards analyses and used significant genes to cluster IGHV-unmutated samples into two groups (intermediate prognosis and unfavourable prognosis). After using cross-validation to assess robustness, we applied the Lasso method to standardise the gene expression values to find a minimum gene signature. We validated this signature in an external cohort of treatment-naive patients with IGHV-unmutated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia enrolled on the CLL8 trial of the German Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia Study Group who were treated between July 21, 2003, and April 4, 2006 (ie, the CLL8 cohort).FindingsThe MDACC cohort consisted of 101 patients and the CLL8 cohort consisted of 109 patients. Using the MDACC cohort, we identified and developed a 17-gene expression signature that distinguished IGHV-unmutated patients who were likely to achieve a long-term remission following front-line FCR chemoimmunotherapy from those who might benefit from alternative front-line regimens (hazard ratio 3·83, 95% CI 1·94–7·59; p
       
  • Refining prognosis after first-line fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and
           rituximab chemoimmunotherapy in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Lukáš Smolej
       
  • Changes in e-cigarette policies worldwide
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Nivolumab for previously treated squamous oesophageal carcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth C Smyth, Florian Lordick
       
  • Quality of life considerations in the treatment of metastatic
           hormone-sensitive prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 29 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Suzanne K Chambers, Mark Frydenberg, Jeff Dunn
       
  • CDK4/6 inhibitors in breast cancer: a role in triple-negative disease'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Shom Goel, Sara M Tolaney
       
  • Metronomic chemotherapy option for advanced oral cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 26 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Can pegylated IL-10 add to a backbone of PD-1 inhibition for solid
           tumours'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 25 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Sumanta Pal, Siwen Hu-Lieskovan, Neeraj Agarwal
       
  • Low risk of brainstem necrosis with PBS-PT
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 19 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Expansion of bulk-buy drug programme in China
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 12 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Susan Rahimi
       
  • Metformin plus EGFR TKIs for lung adenocarcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 12 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • Targeting lineage plasticity in prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Emmanuel S Antonarakis
       
  • CDK4/6 inhibitors: taking the place of chemotherapy'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 4 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Azadeh Nasrazadani, Adam M Brufsky
       
  • Health-related quality of life and neurocognitive functioning with
           lomustine–temozolomide versus temozolomide in patients with newly
           diagnosed, MGMT-methylated glioblastoma (CeTeG/NOA-09): a randomised,
           multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 2 September 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Johannes Weller, Theophilos Tzaridis, Frederic Mack, Joachim Peter Steinbach, Uwe Schlegel, Peter Hau, Dietmar Krex, Oliver Grauer, Roland Goldbrunner, Oliver Bähr, Martin Uhl, Clemens Seidel, Ghazaleh Tabatabai, Stefanie Brehmer, Lars Bullinger, Norbert Galldiks, Christina Schaub, Sied Kebir, Walter Stummer, Matthias SimonSummaryBackgroundThe CeTeG/NOA-09 trial showed significantly longer overall survival with combined lomustine–temozolomide therapy compared with standard temozolomide for patients with glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. The trial also aimed to investigate the effect of lomustine–temozolomide therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and neurocognitive function, which we report here.MethodsIn this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial, newly diagnosed, chemoradiotherapy-naive patients with MGMT-methylated glioblastoma, aged 18–70 years, with a Karnofsky performance score of 70% or higher, were recruited and enrolled at 17 university hospitals in Germany. Patients received standard radiotherapy (60 Gy) and were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by centre by allocating complete blocks of six to a centre, without masking) to either six 6-week courses of oral combined lomustine (100 mg/m2 on day 1) plus temozolomide (100–200 mg/m2 on days 2–6) or standard oral temozolomide (75 mg/m2 daily during radiotherapy plus six 4-week courses of temozolomide [150–200 mg/m2] on days 1–5, every 4 weeks). The primary endpoint was overall survival. HRQOL, assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire core-30 and the EORTC brain cancer module (BN20); and neurocognitive function, assessed using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), plus a neurocognitive test battery (NOA-07), including Trail Making Test A and B (TMT-A and B), working memory tests, and tests for lexical (Controlled Oral Word Association [COWA]) and semantic verbal fluency, were secondary endpoints analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (mITT; all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study chemotherapy). We used linear mixed-model analyses to investigate differences between treatment groups regarding HRQOL (clinically relevant ≥10 points) and MMSE scores (clinically relevant ≥3 points). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01149109.FindingsBetween June 17, 2011 and April 8, 2014, 141 patients were randomly assigned and 129 patients began treatment and were included in the mITT population (63 in the temozolomide and 66 in the lomustine–temozolomide group). Median follow-up for HRQOL (the item global health) was 19·4 months (IQR 7·8–38·6), for MMSE was 15·3 months (4·1–29·6), and for COWA was 11·0 months (0–27·5). We found no significant impairment regarding any item of HRQOL in the lomustine–temozolomide group (difference between the groups for global health 0·30 [95% CI −0·23 to 0·83]; p=0·26). Differences in MMSE were in favour of the temozolomide group (difference −0·11 [95% CI −0·19 to −0·03]; p=0·0058) but were not clinically relevant (1·76/30 points over 4 years). We found no significant difference between the groups in any subtest of the neurocognitive test battery (difference for COWA 0·04 [95% CI −0·01 to 0·09]; p=0·14).InterpretationThe absence of systematic and clinically relevant changes in HRQOL and neurocognitive function combined with the survival benefit of lomustine–temozolomide versus temozolomide alone suggests that a long-term net clinical benefit exists for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter and supports the use of lomustine–temozolomide as a treatment option for these patients.FundingGerman Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
       
  • Chemoimmunotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer –
           Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Federico Cappuzzo, Howard West
       
  • Chemoimmunotherapy for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Dipesh Uprety
       
  • MRI versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women with familial
           risk (FaMRIsc)
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Steven A Narod
       
  • Collection of routine cancer data from private health-care providers
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Katie Spencer, Eva Morris
       
  • Disability in cancer care: time for change'
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): The Lancet Oncology
       
  • A European paediatric cancer mission: aspiration or reality'
    • Abstract: Publication date: September 2019Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 20, Issue 9Author(s): Pamela R Kearns, Gilles Vassal, Ruth Ladenstein, Martin Schrappe, Andrea Biondi, Patricia Blanc, Angelika Eggert, Anita Kienesberger, Olga Kozhaeva, Rob Pieters, Kjeld Schmiegelow
       
  • Pyrotinib versus lapatinib in HER2-positive breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Nelfinavir with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in NSCLC
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Selinexor–dexamethasone for refractory multiple myeloma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • Chemotherapy-free, but not quite free chemotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 29 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): John O Schorge
       
  • The many roads to universal health care in the USA
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Greg Jones, Hagop KantarjianSummaryHealth-care systems in different countries have evolved along different paths, with some countries offering private insurance, some universal health care, and some a mixture between the two. In most high-income countries, health care is considered a human right and is provided universally, typically free at the point-of-care. The USA has developed a fractured for-profit system that is substantially more expensive than those of its European counterparts and delivers poorer outcomes than the health-care systems in other high-income countries, while leaving a substantial proportion of Americans without health coverage. This Personal View discusses the current health-care system in the USA and offers a roadmap towards the achievement of universal health care for the USA. Three key components of the roadmap are: support and improve the Affordable Care Act; maintain the existing private insurance system; offer in parallel a government-sponsored health-care insurance, or gradually expand Medicare to more people, and ultimately to all Americans not covered under existing health-care insurances.
       
  • Solid organ transplantations in childhood cancer survivors: an unrealised
           research potential
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 27 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Jeanette F Winther, Ida Maria Schmidt, Emilio D Poggio
       
  • Solid organ transplantation after treatment for childhood cancer: a
           retrospective cohort analysis from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 27 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Andrew C Dietz, Kristy Seidel, Wendy M Leisenring, Daniel A Mulrooney, Jean M Tersak, Richard D Glick, Cathy A Burnweit, Daniel M Green, Lisa R Diller, Susan A Smith, Rebecca M Howell, Marilyn Stovall, Gregory T Armstrong, Kevin C Oeffinger, Leslie L Robison, Amanda M TermuhlenSummaryBackgroundSerious chronic medical conditions occur in childhood cancer survivors. We aimed to investigate incidence of and risk factors for end-organ damage resulting in registration on a waiting list for or receiving a solid organ transplantation and 5-year survival following these procedures.MethodsThe Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) is a retrospective cohort of individuals who survived at least 5 years after childhood cancer diagnosed at younger than 21 years of age, between Jan 1, 1970, and Dec 31, 1986, at one of 25 institutions in the USA. We linked data from CCSS participants treated in the USA diagnosed between Jan 1, 1970, and Dec 31, 1986 (without solid organ transplantation before cohort entry) to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network—a database of all US organ transplants. Eligible participants had been diagnosed with leukaemia, lymphoma, malignant CNS tumours, neuroblastoma, Wilms' tumours, and bone and soft tissue sarcomas. The two primary endpoints for each type of organ transplant were date of first registration of a transplant candidate on the waiting list for an organ and the date of the first transplant received. We also calculated the cumulative incidence of being placed on a waiting list or receiving a solid organ transplantation, hazard ratios (HRs) for identified risk factors, and 5-year survival following transplantation.FindingsOf 13 318 eligible survivors, 100 had 103 solid organ transplantations (50 kidney, 37 heart, nine liver, seven lung) and 67 were registered on a waiting list without receiving a transplant (21 kidney, 25 heart, 15 liver, six lung). At 35 years after cancer diagnosis, the cumulative incidence of transplantation or being on a waiting list was 0·54% (95% CI 0·40–0·67) for kidney transplantation, 0·49% (0·36–0·62) for heart, 0·19% (0·10–0·27) for liver, and 0·10% (0·04–0·16) for lung. Risk factors for kidney transplantation were unilateral nephrectomy (HR 4·2, 95% CI 2·3–7·7), ifosfamide (24·9, 7·4–83·5), total body irradiation (6·9, 2·3–21·1), and mean kidney radiation of greater than 15 Gy (>15–20 Gy, 3·6 [1·5–8·5];>20 Gy 4·6 [1·1–19·6]); for heart transplantation, anthracycline and mean heart radiation of greater than 20 Gy (dose-dependent, both p
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2019; published online Aug 16.
           http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30413-9
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 21 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s):
       
  • Renal cell carcinoma treatment after first-line combinations
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Camillo Porta, Manuela Schmidinger
       
  • Should we use combination therapy for all advanced renal cell
           carcinoma'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Giuseppe Procopio, Pierangela Sepe, Melanie Claps, Filippo de Braud, Elena Verzoni
       
  • Four-year survival with nivolumab in patients with previously treated
           advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 14 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Scott J Antonia, Hossein Borghaei, Suresh S Ramalingam, Leora Horn, Javier De Castro Carpeño, Adam Pluzanski, Marco A Burgio, Marina Garassino, Laura Q M Chow, Scott Gettinger, Lucio Crinò, David Planchard, Charles Butts, Alexander Drilon, Joanna Wojcik-Tomaszewska, Gregory A Otterson, Shruti Agrawal, Ang Li, John R Penrod, Julie BrahmerSummaryBackgroundPhase 3 clinical data has shown higher proportions of patients with objective response, longer response duration, and longer overall survival with nivolumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to evaluate the long-term benefit of nivolumab and the effect of response and disease control on subsequent survival.MethodsWe pooled data from four clinical studies of nivolumab in patients with previously treated NSCLC (CheckMate 017, 057, 063, and 003) to evaluate survival outcomes. Trials of nivolumab in the second-line or later setting with at least 4 years follow-up were included. Comparisons of nivolumab versus docetaxel included all randomised patients from the phase 3 CheckMate 017 and 057 studies. We did landmark analyses by response status at 6 months to determine post-landmark survival outcomes. We excluded patients who did not have a radiographic tumour assessment at 6 months. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab.FindingsAcross all four studies, 4-year overall survival with nivolumab was 14% (95% CI 11–17) for all patients (n=664), 19% (15–24) for those with at least 1% PD-L1 expression, and 11% (7–16) for those with less than 1% PD-L1 expression. In CheckMate 017 and 057, 4-year overall survival was 14% (95% CI 11–18) in patients treated with nivolumab, compared with 5% (3–7) in patients treated with docetaxel. Survival subsequent to response at 6 months on nivolumab or docetaxel was longer than after progressive disease at 6 months, with hazard ratios for overall survival of 0·18 (95% 0·12–0·27) for nivolumab and 0·43 (0·29–0·65) for docetaxel; for stable disease versus progressive disease, hazard ratios were 0·52 (0·37–0·71) for nivolumab and 0·80 (0·61–1·04) for docetaxel. Long-term data did not show any new safety signals.InterpretationPatients with advanced NSCLC treated with nivolumab achieved a greater duration of response compared with patients treated with docetaxel, which was associated with a long-term survival advantage.FundingBristol-Myers Squibb.
       
  • Immune checkpoint inhibitors: a game changer for metastatic non-small-cell
           lung cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 14 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Pierre-Jean Souquet, Sébastien Couraud
       
  • Choosing surgery or radiotherapy for oropharyngeal squamous cell
           carcinoma: is the issue definitely settled'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 12 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Vincent Grégoire, Piero Nicolai
       
  • A new screening tool for FGFR inhibitor treatment'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Aung Naing
       
  • Overcoming endocrine resistance in neoadjuvant endocrine therapy for early
           breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 8 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Christian Jackisch
       
  • Cancer control in small island nations: too often overlooked
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 5 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Katherine Gourd, David Collingridge
       
  • Radical surgery for cervical cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 2 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Francesco Raspagliesi, Giorgio Bogani
       
  • US Government targets foreign researchers
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 1 August 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Bryant Furlow
       
  • The emerging role of PET-CT scan after radical prostatectomy: still a long
           way to go
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 30 July 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Nicola Fossati, Giorgio Gandaglia, Alberto Briganti, Francesco Montorsi
       
  • Global burden of childhood cancer: growing, but controllable
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 29 July 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Charles A Stiller
       
  • 5-year results for pembrolizumab treatment of advanced melanoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 22 July 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Jessica C Hassel
       
  • Fusion gene-oriented precision medicine in soft tissue sarcoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 19 July 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Nobuhito Araki
       
  • The necessity for rigour in rare disease study design
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 19 July 2019Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Laurence H Baker
       
 
 
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: 18.208.187.169
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-