for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
help
Journal Cover
The Lancet Oncology
Journal Prestige (SJR): 16.085
Citation Impact (citeScore): 10
Number of Followers: 156  
 
  Full-text available via subscription Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 1470-2045 - ISSN (Online) 1474-5488
Published by Elsevier Homepage  [3159 journals]
  • New triple-negative breast cancer risk genes identified
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Brentuximab vedotin-based salvage treatment in Hodgkin's lymphoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Umberto Vitolo, Annalisa Chiappella
       
  • Blood-based tumour mutational burden analysis in NSCLC
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Advancing haematological research and clinical practice: a call for papers
           for ASH 2018
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 16 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): David Collingridge, Jiaying Tan, Vania Wisdom
       
  • Concurrent chemotherapy improves outcomes in HNSCC
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Can radiomics personalise immunotherapy'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 14 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Issam El Naqa, Randall K Ten Haken
       
  • Bevacizumab therapy for recurrent gliomas: another disappointment'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 13 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Jens Gempt, Bernhard Meyer
       
  • Venetoclax in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a possible cure'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 13 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Avyakta Kallam, James O Armitage
       
  • Adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancer—the CRITICS trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Jingwen Wang, Chao Li, Xiaodong Zhu, Ji Zhu
       
  • One-stage direct-to-implant breast reconstruction using acellular dermal
           matrix
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 10 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): John R Benson
       
  • Gastrointestinal cancer risk in cystic fibrosis: more exploration is
           needed
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Li Yao, Wenquan Niu
       
  • Treatment of platinum refractory or resistant ovarian cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Gabriella Ferrandina, Giacomo Corrado
       
  • HPV status and oesophageal adenocarcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • Problems in Medicare hospice provision
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • CCR4-targeted therapy in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Robert Gniadecki
       
  • Sorafenib plus topotecan versus placebo plus topotecan for
           platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (TRIAS): a multicentre, randomised,
           double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 9 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Radoslav Chekerov, Felix Hilpert, Sven Mahner, Ahmed El-Balat, Philipp Harter, Nikolaus De Gregorio, Claudius Fridrich, Susanne Markmann, Jochem Potenberg, Ralf Lorenz, Guelten Oskay-Oezcelik, Marcus Schmidt, Petra Krabisch, Hans-Joachim Lueck, Rolf Richter, Elena Ioana Braicu, Andreas du Bois, Jalid Sehouli, Werner Lichtenegger, Isil YalcinkayaSummaryBackgroundAntiangiogenic therapy has known activity in ovarian cancer. The investigator-initiated randomised phase 2 TRIAS trial assessed the multi-kinase inhibitor sorafenib combined with topotecan and continued as maintenance therapy for platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer.MethodsWe did a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial at 20 sites in Germany. Patients (≥18 years) with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer previously treated with two or fewer chemotherapy lines for recurrent disease were stratified (first vs later relapse) in block sizes of four and randomly assigned (1:1) using a web-generated response system to topotecan (1·25 mg/m2 on days 1–5) plus either oral sorafenib 400 mg or placebo twice daily on days 6–15, repeated every 21 days for six cycles, followed by daily maintenance sorafenib or placebo for up to 1 year in patients without progression. Investigators and patients were masked to allocation of sorafenib or placebo; topotecan treatment was open label. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01047891.FindingsBetween Jan 18, 2010, and Sept 19, 2013, 185 patients were enrolled, 174 of whom were randomly assigned: 85 to sorafenib and 89 to placebo. Two patients in the sorafenib group had serious adverse events before treatment and were excluded from analyses. 83 patients in the sorafenib group and 89 in the placebo group started treatment. Progression-free survival was significantly improved with sorafenib versus placebo (hazard ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·43–0·83; p=0·0018). Median progression-free survival was 6·7 months (95% CI 5·8–7·6) with sorafenib versus 4·4 months (3·7–5·0) with placebo. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were leucopenia (57 [69%] of 83 patients in the sorafenib group vs 47 [53%] of 89 in the placebo group), neutropenia (46 [55%] vs 48 [54%]), and thrombocytopenia (23 [28%] vs 20 [22%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 49 (59%) of 83 sorafenib-treated patients and 45 (51%) of 89 placebo-treated patients. Of these, events were fatal in four patients (5%) in the sorafenib group (dyspnoea and poor general condition, septic shock, ascites and dyspnoea, and sigma perforation) and seven (8%) in the placebo group (pulmonary embolism in two patients, disease progression in two patients, and one case each of sepsis with fever, pleural effusion, and tumour cachexia). Sorafenib was associated with increased incidences of grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (three [13%] vs 0 patients) and grade 2 alopecia (24 [29%] vs 12 [13%]).InterpretationSorafenib, when given orally in combination with topotecan and continued as maintenance therapy, showed a statistically and clinically significant improvement in progression-free survival in women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. These encouraging results support the crucial role of antiangiogenesis as the treatment backbone in combination with chemotherapy, making this approach attractive for further assessment with other targeted strategies.FundingBayer, Amgen, and GlaxoSmithKline.
       
  • Changing geographical patterns and trends in cancer incidence in children
           and adolescents in Europe, 1991–2010 (Automated Childhood Cancer
           Information System): a population-based study
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 8 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Eva Steliarova-Foucher, Miranda M Fidler, Murielle Colombet, Brigitte Lacour, Peter Kaatsch, Marion Piñeros, Isabelle Soerjomataram, Freddie Bray, Jan Willem Coebergh, Rafael Peris-Bonet, Charles A Stiller, Monika Hackl, Anna Zborovskaya, Nadya Dimitrova, Zdravka Valerianova, Ladislav Dušek, Margit Mägi, Alain Monnereau, Jacqueline Clavel, Michel VeltenSummaryBackgroundA deceleration in the increase in cancer incidence in children and adolescents has been reported in several national and regional studies in Europe. Based on a large database representing 1·3 billion person-years over the period 1991–2010, we provide a consolidated report on cancer incidence trends at ages 0–19 years.MethodsWe invited all population-based cancer registries operating in European countries to participate in this population-based registry study. We requested a listing of individual records of cancer cases, including sex, age, date of birth, date of cancer diagnosis, tumour sequence number, primary site, morphology, behaviour, and the most valid basis of diagnosis. We also requested population counts in each calendar year by sex and age for the registration area, from official national sources, and specific information about the covered area and registration practices. An eligible registry could become a contributor if it provided quality data for all complete calendar years in the period 1991–2010. Incidence rates and the average annual percentage change with 95% CIs were reported for all cancers and major diagnostic groups, by region and overall, separately for children (age 0–14 years) and adolescents (age 15–19 years). We examined and quantified the stability of the trends with joinpoint analyses.FindingsFor the years 1991–2010, 53 registries in 19 countries contributed a total of 180 335 unique cases. We excluded 15 162 (8·4%) of 180 335 cases due to differing practices of registration, and considered the quality indicators for the 165 173 cases included to be satisfactory. The average annual age-standardised incidence was 137·5 (95% CI 136·7–138·3) per million person-years and incidence increased significantly by 0·54% (0·44–0·65) per year in children (age 0–14 years) with no change in trend. In adolescents, the combined European incidence was 176·2 (174·4–178·0) per million person-years based on all 35 138 eligible cases and increased significantly by 0·96% (0·73–1·19) per year, although recent changes in rates among adolescents suggest a deceleration in this increasing trend. We observed temporal variations in trends by age group, geographical region, and diagnostic group. The combined age-standardised incidence of leukaemia based on 48 458 cases in children was 46·9 (46·5–47·3) per million person-years and increased significantly by 0·66% (0·48–0·84) per year. The average overall incidence of leukaemia in adolescents was 23·6 (22·9–24·3) per million person-years, based on 4702 cases, and the average annual change was 0·93% (0·49–1·37). We also observed increasing incidence of lymphoma in adolescents (average annual change 1·04% [0·65–1·44], malignant CNS tumours in children (average annual change 0·49% [0·20–0·77]), and other tumours in both children (average annual change 0·56 [0·40–0·72]) and adolescents (average annual change 1·17 [0·82–1·53]).InterpretationImprovements in the diagnosis and registration of cancers over time could partly explain the observed increase in incidence, although some changes in underlying putative risk factors cannot be excluded. Cancer incidence trends in this young population require continued monitoring at an international level.FundingFederal Ministry of Health of the Federal German Government, the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme, and International Agency for Research on Cancer.
       
  • Increasing incidence of cancer in children and competing risks
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 8 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Philippe Autier
       
  • Apatinib and etoposide: surprising efficacy of an oral combination
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 3 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Charlie Gourley
       
  • Routine blood tests have low utility in lymphoma surveillance
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 2 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Monitoring asparaginase activity in middle-income countries
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 2 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Daiane Keller Cecconello, Isabel Cristina Ribas Werlang, Ana Paula Alegretti, Monique Cabral Hahn, Mariana Rodrigues de Magalhães, Ana Paula Battistel, Priscila Pini Zenatti, Jose Andres Yunes, Caroline Cabreira-Cagliari, Ciliana Rechenmacher, Marcelo Zubaran Goldani, Liane Esteves Daudt, Mariana Bohns Michalowski
       
  • Intensified treatment for IKZF1-deleted childhood leukaemia
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 2 August 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Cancerland: A Medical Memoir, David Scadden, Michael D'Antonio. Thomas
           Dunne Books (2018), 320, ISBN: 978-1250092755
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Robert Stirrups
       
  • A virtual musician quartet with vestibular schwannoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Constantin Tuleasca, Marc Levivier
       
  • Breast cancer in a Renaissance Book of the Dead
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Emma Nicholls
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2018; 19: 1019–20
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2018; 19: e386
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2018; 19: 1040–50
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2018; 19: 953–64
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s):
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy – Authors'
           reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Fabio Conforti, Laura Pala, Vincenzo Bagnardi, Tommaso De Pas, Martinetti Marco, Giuseppe Viale, Richard Gelber, Aron Goldhirsch
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Hyunwoo Kwon, Ching Ying Lin, Dongjun Chung, Xue Li, Zihai Li
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Fei Liang
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Brian Claggett, Lu Tian, Zachary R McCaw, Masahiro Takeuchi, Lee-Jen Wei
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Jennifer L McQuade, Carrie R Daniel, Kenneth R Hess, Michael A Davies
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Cristina Carrera, Miriam Potrony, Susana Puig
       
  • Sex as a predictor of response to cancer immunotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Tao Zhang, Huixun Jia, Zhenyu Wu
       
  • [177Lu]-PSMA-617 radionuclide therapy in patients with metastatic
           castration-resistant prostate cancer – Author's reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Michael S Hofman, John Violet, Rodney J Hicks, Shahneen Sandhu
       
  • [177Lu]-PSMA-617 radionuclide therapy in patients with metastatic
           castration-resistant prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Thorsten Derlin, Sebastian Schmuck
       
  • [177Lu]-PSMA-617 radionuclide therapy in patients with metastatic
           castration-resistant prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Kambiz Rahbar, Hojjat Ahmadzadehfar, Robert Seifert, Martin Boegemann
       
  • CXCR4-targeted therapy in breast cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Thorsten Derlin, Katja Hueper
       
  • Gastrointestinal cancers in patients with cystic fibrosis – Authors'
           reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Akihiro Yamada, Yuga Komaki, Fukiko Komaki, Dejan Micic, Samantha Zullow, Atsushi Sakuraba
       
  • Gastrointestinal cancers in patients with cystic fibrosis
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Patrick Maisonneuve, Albert B Lowenfels, Denis Hadjiliadis, Alexander Khoruts, Bruce C Marshall
       
  • Omitting radiosurgery in melanoma brain metastases: a drastic and
           dangerous de-escalation – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Georgina V Long, Victoria Atkinson, Angela Hong, Grant A McArthur, Alexander M Menzies
       
  • Omitting radiosurgery in melanoma brain metastases: a drastic and
           dangerous de-escalation
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Tim J Kruser, Vinai Gondi, Paul W Sperduto, Paul D Brown, Minesh P Mehta
       
  • Knowledge-based drug discovery intensifies private appropriation of
           publicly financed research
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Wolfgang Link
       
  • Lung cancer in the UK: addressing geographical inequality and late
           diagnosis
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Sara C Hiom, Harpal S Kumar, Charles Swanton, David R Baldwin, Michael D Peake
       
  • A roadmap for restoring trust in Big Data
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Mark Lawler, Andrew D Morris, Richard Sullivan, Ewan Birney, Anna Middleton, Lydia Makaroff, Bartha M Knoppers, Denis Horgan, Alexander Eggermont
       
  • Biological material collection to advance translational research and
           treatment of children with CNS tumours: position paper from the SIOPE
           Brain Tumour Group
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Stefan Rutkowski, Piergiorgio Modena, Daniel Williamson, Kornelius Kerl, Karsten Nysom, Barry Pizer, Ute Bartels, Stephanie Puget, François Doz, Antony Michalski, Katja von Hoff, Mathilde Chevignard, Shivaram Avula, Matthew J Murray, Stefan Schönberger, Thomas Czech, Antoinette Y N Schouten-van Meeteren, Uwe Kordes, Christof M Kramm, Dannis G van VuurdenSummaryPaediatric CNS tumours are the most common cause of childhood cancer-related morbidity and mortality, and improvements in their diagnosis and treatment are needed. New genetic and epigenetic information about paediatric CNS tumours is transforming the field dramatically. For most paediatric CNS tumour entities, subgroups with distinct biological characteristics have been identified, and these characteristics are increasingly used to facilitate accurate diagnoses and therapeutic recommendations. Future treatments will be further tailored to specific molecular subtypes of disease, specific tumour predisposition syndromes, and other biological criteria. Successful biomaterial collection is a key requirement for the application of contemporary methodologies for the validation of candidate prognostic factors, the discovery of new biomarkers, the establishment of appropriate preclinical research models for targeted agents, a quicker clinical implementation of precision medicine, and for other therapeutic uses (eg, for immunotherapies). However, deficits in organisational structures and interdisciplinary cooperation are impeding the collection of high-quality biomaterial from CNS tumours in most centres. Practical, legal, and ethical guidelines for consent, storage, material transfer, biobanking, data sharing, and funding should be established by research consortia and local institutions to allow optimal collection of primary and subsequent tumour tissue, body fluids, and normal tissue. Procedures for the collection and storage of biomaterials and related data should be implemented according to the individual and organisational structures of the local institutions.
       
  • When treatment does not work: failure to understand failure
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Leonard H Wexler
       
  • Digital oncology apps: revolution or evolution'
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): The Lancet Oncology
       
  • Adrenocortical carcinoma misdiagnosed as hepatocellular carcinoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Hao-Wei Chen, Yu-Chen Chen, Ming-Yen Hsieh, Yung-Shun Juan
       
  • Cognitive functioning and health-related quality of life in patients with
           newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma: a systematic review
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Matthijs van der Meulen, Linda Dirven, Esther J J Habets, Martin J van den Bent, Martin J B Taphoorn, Jacoline E C BrombergSummaryIncidence of primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL) is increasing, while prognosis is improving as treatments advance. However, declined cognitive functioning remains a major challenge in the treatment of PCNSL. This cognitive decline, in conjunction with other symptoms caused by the disease or its treatment, or both, can compromise health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The aim of this Review was to give a comprehensive overview on cognitive functioning and HRQOL for patients with PCNSL, including an evaluation of patient-related and treatment-related factors that can influence cognitive functioning and HRQOL. We reviewed the literature for studies on cognitive functioning and HRQOL in newly diagnosed adult patients with PCNSL using MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, PsycINFO, CINAHL EBSCO, and Google Scholar, up to Jan 4, 2018. Articles were selected using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria; 42 articles were eligible for inclusion. Findings show that the tumour itself has a great effect on cognitive functioning and HRQOL. Initially, induction chemotherapy results in improvement of cognition and HRQOL in most patients. In the long-term, the addition of whole-brain radiotherapy has a negative effect on cognitive functioning, but the magnitude of this effect is not always clinically relevant. HRQOL scores were worse compared with controls, and worse after combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy when compared with chemotherapy only, particularly in the long term. Therefore, combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy seems to have a negative effect on HRQOL and cognition in patients with PCNSL. Although prolonged progression-free survival is achieved with combined treatment, information on its effect on cognition and HRQOL should be included in clinical decision-making.
       
  • Developing institutions for cancer care in low-income and middle-income
           countries: from cancer units to comprehensive cancer centres
    • Abstract: Publication date: August 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 8Author(s): Bhawna Sirohi, Kalipso Chalkidou, C S Pramesh, Benjamin O Anderson, Patrick Loeher, Omar El Dewachi, Omar Shamieh, Shailesh V Shrikhande, R Venkataramanan, Groesbeck Parham, Mulindi Mwanahamuntu, Tim Eden, Audrey Tsunoda, Arnie Purushotham, Susannah Stanway, Goura K Rath, Richard SullivanSummaryGlobal cancer centres operate across different sizes, scales, and ecosystems. Understanding the essential aspects of the creation, organisation, accreditation, and activities within these settings is crucial for developing an affordable, equitable, and quality cancer care, research, and education system. Robust guidelines are scarce for cancer units, cancer centres, and comprehensive cancer centres in low-income and middle-income countries. However, some robust examples of the delivery of complex cancer care in centres in emerging economies are available. Although it is impossible to create an optimal system to fit the unique needs of all countries for the delivery of cancer care, we summarise what has been published about the development and management of cancer centres in low-income and middle-income countries so far and highlight the need for clinical and political leadership.
       
  • No survival benefit of induction chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy for
           head and neck cancers
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 26 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Priya Venkatesan
       
  • No benefit of guideline-based therapy for rectal cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 20 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Pelvic IMRT reduces toxicity vs standard radiotherapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 20 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Clinical and genomic features of a subtype of prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 20 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Priya Venkatesan
       
  • Pre-diagnosis and post-diagnosis use of common analgesics and ovarian
           cancer prognosis (NHS/NHSII): a cohort study
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 18 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Melissa A Merritt, Megan S Rice, Mollie E Barnard, Susan E Hankinson, Ursula A Matulonis, Elizabeth M Poole, Shelley S TworogerSummaryBackgroundOvarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death among women in the USA. In this study, our objective was to determine whether modifiable exposures to common analgesics outside of standard treatment influence prognosis in patients with ovarian cancer.MethodsThe Nurses' Health Study (NHS) and Nurses' Health Study II (NHSII) are ongoing prospective studies of 121 700 and 116 429 US nurses who have completed biennial questionnaires since 1976 and 1989, respectively. We retrieved information from medical records, death certificates, or linkage to a state or Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry on ovarian cancer cases. Eligible participants had confirmed invasive, stage I–III epithelial ovarian cancer, and had data available on analgesic use. The primary objective was to determine whether self-reported regular use (≥2 days per week) of aspirin, non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or paracetamol before and after ovarian cancer diagnosis, was associated with ovarian cancer-specific survival. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for these associations, adjusting for age and year of diagnosis, disease stage, and histology.FindingsBetween June 1, 1976, and May 31, 2012, for the NHS and between June 1, 1989, and May 31, 2013, for NHSII, 1789 participants of the NHS and NHSII studies were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer and 1143 (64%) were eligible to be included in this study; 1031 (90%) of 1143 cases were included in the pre-diagnosis exposure analysis and 964 cases (84%) in the post-diagnosis exposure analysis. Compared with never-users, participants who reported recent (current use in the past 2 years) post-diagnosis use of aspirin (HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·52–0·89]) and non-aspirin NSAIDs (HR 0·67 [95% CI 0·51–0·87]) had an improved ovarian cancer-specific survival. Any type of analgesic use pre-diagnosis, and post-diagnosis use of paracetamol, were not positively associated with ovarian cancer-specific survival. In analyses of change in analgesic use from pre-diagnosis to post-diagnosis, those participants who became recent users of aspirin (HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·26–0·74]) or became recent users of non-aspirin NSAIDs (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·29–0·73]) post-diagnosis had a lower risk of ovarian cancer-specific death than never-users.InterpretationRecent use of aspirin or non-aspirin NSAIDs, defined as current use in the past 2 years, after diagnosis appears to improve ovarian cancer-specific survival. If these results are confirmed in further studies, further research should explore potential synergistic effects of anti-inflammatory medications used in combination with standard ovarian cancer therapies to improve the prognosis for patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer.FundingNational Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, The Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research.
       
  • Does aspirin have a role in management of ovarian cancer'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 18 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Penelope M Webb
       
  • Health-related quality of life and patient-centred outcomes with olaparib
           maintenance after chemotherapy in patients with platinum-sensitive,
           relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation (SOLO2/ENGOT Ov-21): a
           placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomised trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Michael Friedlander, Val Gebski, Emma Gibbs, Lucy Davies, Ralph Bloomfield, Felix Hilpert, Lari B Wenzel, Daniel Eek, Manuel Rodrigues, Andrew Clamp, Richard T Penson, Diane Provencher, Jacob Korach, Tomasz Huzarski, Laura Vidal, Vanda Salutari, Clare Scott, Maria Ornella Nicoletto, Kenji Tamura, David EspinozaSummaryBackgroundIn the phase 3 SOLO2 trial (ENGOT Ov-21), maintenance therapy with olaparib tablets significantly prolonged progression-free survival (primary endpoint) compared with placebo in patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation and platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer who had received two or more lines of previous chemotherapy. The most common subjective adverse effects included fatigue, nausea, and vomiting, which were typically low grade and self-limiting. Our a-priori hypothesis was that maintenance olaparib would not negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and additionally that the prolongation of progression-free survival with olaparib would be underpinned by additional patient-centred benefits.MethodsIn SOLO2, 196 patients were randomly assigned to olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) and 99 to placebo. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (>6–12 vs>12 months). The prespecified primary HRQOL analysis evaluated the change from baseline in the Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score during the first 12 months of the study. To be assessable, patients had to have an evaluable score at baseline and at least one evaluable follow-up form. Secondary planned quality-of-life (QOL) analyses included the duration of good quality of life (defined as time without significant symptoms of toxicity [TWiST] and quality-adjusted progression-free survival [QAPFS]). Efficacy and QOL outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients (the full analysis set), and safety outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is closed to new participants.FindingsThe adjusted average mean change from baseline over the first 12 months in TOI was −2·90 (95% CI −4·13 to −1·67) with olaparib and −2·87 (–4·64 to −1·10) with placebo (estimated difference −0·03; 95% CI −2·19 to 2·13; p=0·98). Mean QAPFS (13·96 [SD 10·96] vs 7·28 [5·22] months; difference 6·68, 95% CI 4·98–8·54) and mean duration of TWiST (15·03 [SD 12·79] vs 7·70 [6·42] months; difference 7·33, 95% CI 4·70–8·96) were significantly longer with olaparib than with placebo.InterpretationOlaparib maintenance therapy did not have a significant detrimental effect on HRQOL compared with placebo. There were clinically meaningful patient-centred benefits in both TWiST and QAPFS despite the adverse effects associated with olaparib. These patient-centred endpoints support the improvement in progression-free survival, the primary endpoint in SOLO2, and should be included in future trials of maintenance therapies.FundingAstraZeneca.
       
  • Systemic therapy after IFRT for follicular lymphoma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Priya Venkatesan
       
  • Growing pains for US proton therapy
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Bryant Furlow
       
  • PARP inhibitors and quality of life in ovarian cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Daisuke Aoki, Tatsuyuki Chiyoda
       
  • Much ado about robotic versus open radical prostatectomy
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Vidit Sharma, R Jeffrey Karnes
       
  • Cervical HPV testing versus cytology
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 17 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Non-invasive image-guided targeted drug delivery
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 11 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Dieter Haemmerich
       
  • Targeting VEGF and EGFR: a combination worth re-exploring'
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 11 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Vatche Tchekmedyian, Eric J Sherman
       
  • Refametinib in RAS-mutated hepatocellular cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 5 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Enzalutamide and metastasis risk in prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 5 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Fruquintinib for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 5 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Talha Khan Burki
       
  • Building evidence-based treatment recommendations for advanced anal
           cancer: the time is now
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 2 July 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Francesco Sclafani
       
  • Addendum to Lancet Oncol 2005; 6: 751–56
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s):
       
  • Correction to Lancet Oncol 2017; 18: 1061–75
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s):
       
  • How economic sanctions compromise cancer care in Iran
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Mehdi Aloosh
       
  • Gastrointestinal cancer risk in cystic fibrosis: more exploration is
           needed – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Akihiro Yamada, Yuga Komaki, Fukiko Komaki, Dejan Micic, Samantha Zullow, Atsushi Sakuraba
       
  • Adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancer—the CRITICS trial
           – Authors' reply
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Annemieke Cats, Karolina Sikorska, Marcel Verheij
       
  • Adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancer—the CRITICS trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Frank Lohr, Daniel Buergy, Giuseppina de Marco, Judit Boda-Heggemann, Elisa D'Angelo
       
  • Adjuvant therapy in resectable gastric cancer—the CRITICS trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: July 2018Source: The Lancet Oncology, Volume 19, Issue 7Author(s): Amol Patel, Vineet Govinda Gupta
       
  • Carcinogenicity of isobutyl nitrite, β-picoline, and some acrylates
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Hans Kromhout, Melissa Friesen, M Mathilde Marques, Consolato Maria Sergi, Mohamed Abdallah, Geza Benke, Mark Cesta, Dori Germolec, Keith Houck, Gaku Ichihara, Charles William Jameson, Jun Kanno, Igor Pogribny, Camilla Svendsen, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Kathryn Z Guyton, Yann Grosse, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Véronique Bouvard, Amy Hall
       
  • SRS is non-inferior to WBRT for brain metastases
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Priya Venkatesan
       
  • Mammography deficiencies: the result of poor positioning
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 28 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Optimising surveillance for relapse of Wilms' tumour
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 27 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Harold N Lovvorn
       
  • Addition of dose-intensified doxorubicin to standard chemotherapy for
           rhabdomyosarcoma (EpSSG RMS 2005): a multicentre, open-label, randomised
           controlled, phase 3 trial
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 22 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Gianni Bisogno, Meriel Jenney, Christophe Bergeron, Soledad Gallego Melcón, Andrea Ferrari, Odile Oberlin, Modesto Carli, Michael Stevens, Anna Kelsey, Angela De Paoli, Mark N Gaze, Helene Martelli, Christine Devalck, Johannes H Merks, Myriam Ben-Arush, Heidi Glosli, Julia Chisholm, Daniel Orbach, Veronique Minard-Colin, Gian Luca De SalvoSummaryBackgroundRhabdomyosarcoma is an aggressive tumour that can develop in almost any part of the body. Doxorubicin is an effective drug against rhabdomyosarcoma, but its role in combination with an established multidrug regimen remains controversial. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the possible benefit of early dose intensification with doxorubicin in patients with non-metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma.MethodsWe did a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled, phase 3 trial involving 108 hospitals from 14 countries. We included patients older than 6 months but younger than 21 years with a pathologically proven diagnosis of rhabdomyosarcoma. We assigned each patient to a specific subgroup according to the EpSSG stratification system. Those with embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma incompletely resected and localised at unfavourable sites with or without nodal involvement, or those with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma without nodal involvement were considered at high risk of relapse. These high-risk patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either nine cycles of IVA (ifosfamide 3 g/m2 given as a 3-h intravenous infusion on days 1 and 2, vincristine 1·5 mg/m2 weekly during the first 7 weeks then only on day 1 of each cycle [given as a single intravenous injection], and dactinomycin 1·5 mg/m2 on day 1 given as a single intravenous injection) or four cycles of IVA with doxorubicin 30 mg/m2 given as a 4-h intravenous infusion on days 1 and 2 followed by five cycles of IVA. The interval between cycles was 3 weeks. Randomisation was done using a web-based system and was stratified (block sizes of four) by enrolling country and risk subgroup. Neither investigators nor patients were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was 3-year event-free survival assessed by the investigator at each centre in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were considered in the safety analysis. In agreement with the independent data monitoring committee, the study was closed to patient entry on Dec 16, 2013, after futility analysis. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2005-000217-35, and is currently in follow-up.FindingsBetween Oct 1, 2005, and Dec 16, 2013, 484 patients were randomly assigned to receive each chemotherapy regimen (242 in the IVA group and 242 in the IVA plus doxorubicin group). Median follow-up was 63·9 months (IQR 44·6–78·9). The 3-year event-free survival was 67·5% (95% CI 61·2–73·1) in the IVA plus doxorubicin group and 63·3% (56·8–69·0) in the IVA group (hazard ratio 0·87, 95% CI 0·65–1·16; p=0·33). Grade 3–4 leucopenia (232 [93%] of 249 patients in the IVA plus doxorubicin group vs 194 [85%] of 227 in the IVA group; p=0·0061), anaemia (195 [78%] vs 111 [49%]; p
       
  • New genetic discoveries in prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 21 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Elizabeth Gourd
       
  • Urologists reduce overtreatment in prostate cancer
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 21 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Manjulika Das
       
  • Convection-enhanced delivery: chemosurgery in diffuse intrinsic pontine
           glioma
    • Abstract: Publication date: Available online 18 June 2018Source: The Lancet OncologyAuthor(s): Dannis G van Vuurden
       
 
 
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: 54.167.243.214
 
About JournalTOCs
API
Help
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-