GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)  (17)
  • 1
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 35, No. 12 ( 2017-04-20), p. 1341-1367
    Abstract: I am pleased to present Clinical Cancer Advances 2017, which highlights the most promising advances in patient-oriented cancer research over the past year. The report gives us an opportunity to reflect on what an exciting time it is for cancer research and how swiftly our understanding of cancer has improved. One year ago, the White House announced the national Cancer Moonshot program to accelerate progress against cancer. This shared vision of progress has reinvigorated the research community, identified new areas of scientific collaboration, and raised our ambitions regarding what may be possible beyond the progress we have already made. When I entered the field 35 years ago, I could not have imagined where we would be today. We can now detect cancer earlier, target treatments more effectively, and manage adverse effects more effectively to enable patients to live better, more fulfilling lives. Today, two of three people with cancer live at least 5 years after diagnosis, up from roughly one of two in the 1970s. This progress has resulted from decades of incremental advances that have collectively expanded our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of cancer. There is no better current example of this than ASCO’s 2017 Advance of the Year: Immunotherapy 2.0. Over the last year, there has been a wave of new successes with immunotherapy. Research has proven this approach can be effective against a wide range of hard-to-treat advanced cancers previously considered intractable. Researchers are now working to identify biologic markers that can help increase the effectiveness of treatment and determine who is most likely to benefit from immunotherapy. This knowledge will enable oncologists to make evidence-based decisions so as many patients as possible might benefit from this new type of treatment. Each successive advance builds on the previous hard work of generations of basic, translational, and clinical cancer researchers. Importantly, the advances described in this report would not have been possible without the individuals who volunteered to participate in clinical trials as part of their treatment. To turn the promising vision of a cancer moonshot into meaningful advances, we need sustained, robust federal funding for continued research and innovation. Approximately 30% of the research highlighted in this report was funded, at least in part, through federal dollars appropriated to the National Institutes of Health or the National Cancer Institute. Without this federal investment—unique internationally in scale, duration, and impact for decades—I fear we may lose the forward momentum needed to further the progress we see highlighted in this report. Federal lawmakers can further fuel progress by advancing initiatives that facilitate the use of big data to achieve the common good of high-quality care for all patients. Such programs, like ASCO’s CancerLinQ, will rapidly increase the pace of progress and dramatically expand the reach of treatment advances to the millions of patients who are living with cancer today or who will do so in the future. This investment will yield medical, scientific, economic, and societal benefits for years to come. Much work still lies ahead. Many questions remain about how cancer develops and spreads and how best to treat it. As you read through Clinical Cancer Advances 2017, I hope you are as inspired as I am by the gains the clinical cancer research community has made over the past year and by the promise of a new era of advances just over the horizon. Daniel F Hayes, MD, FASCO, FACP ASCO President, 2016 to 2017
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 37, No. 10 ( 2019-04-01), p. 834-849
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) ; 2012
    In:  Journal of Clinical Oncology Vol. 30, No. 27_suppl ( 2012-09-20), p. 138-138
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 30, No. 27_suppl ( 2012-09-20), p. 138-138
    Abstract: 138 Background: Despite improved survival with adjuvant chemotherapy among older women, it is less often recommended for fear they cannot complete therapy or will have excessive toxicity. Analytic morphometrics uses objective imaging measurements such as muscle size, bone mineral density (BMD) and body composition to improve risk stratification. We examined whether morphometrics might help predict toxicity of chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Methods: Our prospective IRB-approved breast cancer database was queried for all patients who underwent adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and had CT scans of the chest, abdomen and pelvis prior to chemo. Complications of chemotherapy were graded according to the NCI-CTC. CT scans were processed using semi-automated algorithms (MATLAB v13.0) to measure psoas area (PA) and density (PD), BMD and subcutaneous fat (SF), visceral fat (VF), and total body area (TBA. Outcome (DFS and OS) was assessed by K-M, and logistic regression models and ANOVA were used for toxicity events. Results: We identified 129 patients, ranging in age from 24 to 83 (median 52). 105 (81%) received AC/T while 19% received alternate regimens, all full weight based. T-stage, nodal status and HER2 expression were significantly associated with measures of obesity, except BMI, but not sarcopenia. After adjusting for stage and Her-2, BMI remained a significant predictor of DFS (OR 1.07 (95%CI 1.01, 1.13)) and OS (OR 1.06 (95% CI 1.00, 1.12)).After controlling for age, PD and VF were predictors of chemotherapy completion. The OR for completing chemotherapy decreased 0.95 (95% CI: 0.90, 1.01, p=0.08) for every increase of 1000 in VF and increased 1.08 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.15, p=0.03) for every unit increase in PD. Sarcopenia was associated with an increased risk of pulmonary complications (p=0.01) and anemia (p=0.06). Conclusions: Although age is a significant predictor of increased toxicity and inability to complete chemotherapy, sarcopenia is an objective, independent predictor of chemotherapy completion. Psoas density, easily obtainable from a pre-treatment CT scan, can help the clinician older breast cancer patients for adjuvant chemotherapy.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 38, No. 29_suppl ( 2020-10-10), p. 176-176
    Abstract: 176 Background: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common side effect that manifests in the hands or feet primarily as numbness or tingling but can also have motor or painful components. CIPN monitoring is typically conducted by patients self-reporting symptoms during appointments or via questionnaires. Objective CIPN testing may improve early detection but is not typical during treatment, perhaps due to the need for specialized equipment and personnel. The objective of this pilot study was to conduct initial testing of a smartphone app that collects patient-reported and objective CIPN data. Methods: NeuroDetect V1.0 (available in iOS app store) includes a patient-reported CIPN questionnaire (EORTC CIPN20) and two functional assessments available within ResearchKit, the Gat and Balance and 9-Hole Peg tests. Patients who had completed neurotoxic chemotherapy were enrolled to complete NeuroDetect assessments one time. Study participants were classified as CIPN cases if they answered ≥ 3 for at least one of the first four CIPN20 questions, which ask about numbness or tingling in the hands or feet on a 1-4 scale. User acceleration data features were extracted with two open source tools, mhealthtools and pdkit. The results of the functional assessments were compared between CIPN cases and controls in principal component analysis and partial least squares discriminant analysis. Results: Twenty-four patients who had completed neurotoxic chemotherapy enrolled and completed the NeuroDetect assessments. Integration across all 87 features measured in the gait and balance test explained 42% of the difference between CIPN cases (n = 14) and controls (n = 10) and 9 individual features were significantly different between cases and controls (all p 〈 0.05). In the 9-hole Peg Test, hand speed explained 77% of the difference between CIPN cases and controls. CIPN cases took longer to complete the 9-hole peg test though the difference was not statistically significant (dominant hand mean 407.3 vs. 406.2 ms, p = 0.075). Conclusions: App-based functional assessment may detect evidence of CIPN. We are developing additional CIPN functional assessments for NeuroDetect V2.0 to test CIPN detection in a longitudinal study of patients undergoing neurotoxic chemotherapy.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 38, No. 10 ( 2020-04-01), p. 1081-
    Abstract: Each year Clinical Cancer Advances: ASCO’s Annual Report on Progress Against Cancer highlights the most important clinical research advances of the past year, including the Advance of the Year, and identifies priority areas where ASCO believes research efforts should be focused moving forward. In 2020, ASCO names the Refinement of Surgical Treatment of Cancer as the Advance of the Year. Years of progress in developing new systemic cancer therapies has not only improved patient survival and quality of life but is now transforming surgical approaches to cancer treatment. The emergence of novel systemic therapies combined in new and better ways is significantly changing the role of cancer surgery. ASCO’s selection of Refinement of Surgical Treatment of Cancer as the 2020 Advance of the Year recognizes recent strides seen in the effectiveness of these treatments in reducing the amount of surgery, and even the need for it, while increasing the number of patients who can undergo surgery when needed. Other advances highlighted in the report include progress in cancer prevention, molecular diagnostics, and cancer treatment—surgery, radiotherapy, combination therapy, immunotherapy, and other types of therapies. The report also features ASCO's 2020 list of Research Priorities to Accelerate Progress Against Cancer. These priorities represent promising areas of research that have the potential to significantly improve the knowledge base for clinical decision-making and address vital unmet needs in cancer care. A MESSAGE FROM ASCO’S PRESIDENT Shortly before I was elected President of ASCO, I attended the 65th birthday party of a current patient. She had been diagnosed 10 years earlier with metastatic breast cancer and hadn’t been sure she wanted to move forward with further treatment. With encouragement, she elected to participate in a clinical trial of an investigational drug that is now widely used to treat breast cancer. Happily, here we were, celebrating with her now-married daughters, their husbands, and three beautiful grandchildren, ages 2, 4, and 8. Such is the importance of clinical trials and promising new therapies. Clinical research is about saving and improving the lives of individuals with cancer. It’s a continuing story that builds on the efforts of untold numbers of researchers, clinicians, caregivers, and patients. ASCO’s Clinical Cancer Advances report tells part of this story, sharing the most transformative research of the past year. The report also includes our latest thinking on the most urgent research priorities in oncology. ASCO’s 2020 Advance of the Year—Refinement of Surgical Treatment of Cancer—highlights how progress drives more progress. Surgery has played a fundamental role in cancer treatment. It was the only treatment available for many cancers until the advent of radiation and chemotherapy. The explosion in systemic therapies since then has resulted in significant changes to when and how surgery is performed to treat cancer. In this report, we explore how treatment successes have led to less invasive approaches for advanced melanoma, reduced the need for surgery in renal cell carcinoma, and increased the number of patients with pancreatic cancer who can undergo surgery. Many research advances are made possible by federal funding. With the number of new US cancer cases set to rise by roughly a third over the next decade, continued investment in research at the national level is crucial to continuing critical progress in the prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer. While clinical research has translated to longer survival and better quality of life for many patients with cancer, we can’t rest on our laurels. With ASCO’s Research Priorities to Accelerate Progress Against Cancer, introduced last year and updated this year, we’ve identified the critical gaps in cancer prevention and care that we believe to be most pressing. These priorities are intended to guide the direction of research and speed progress. Of course, the effectiveness or number of new treatments is meaningless if patients don’t have access to them. High-quality cancer care, including clinical trials, is out of reach for too many patients. Creating an infrastructure to support patients is a critical part of the equation, as is creating connections between clinical practices and research programs. We have much work to do before everyone with cancer has equal access to the best treatments and the opportunity to participate in research. I know that ASCO and the cancer community are up for this challenge. Sincerely, Howard A. “Skip” Burris III, MD, FACP, FASCO ASCO President, 2019-2020
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) ; 2020
    In:  Journal of Clinical Oncology Vol. 38, No. 20 ( 2020-07-10), p. 2329-2340
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 38, No. 20 ( 2020-07-10), p. 2329-2340
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) ; 2014
    In:  Journal of Clinical Oncology Vol. 32, No. 15_suppl ( 2014-05-20), p. 9088-9088
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 32, No. 15_suppl ( 2014-05-20), p. 9088-9088
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) ; 2008
    In:  Journal of Clinical Oncology Vol. 26, No. 25 ( 2008-09-01), p. 4060-4062
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 26, No. 25 ( 2008-09-01), p. 4060-4062
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2008
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 30, No. 27_suppl ( 2012-09-20), p. 15-15
    Abstract: 15 Background: Nodal evaluation of the elderly breast cancer patient remains controversial, and some have suggested that selected older women with breast cancer may not require sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Methods: An IRB-approved database was queried for patients undergoing SLNB for invasive breast cancer from 2000-2006. We compared 8 cohorts: age 〈 40 years, 40-44, 45-49, 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, and 〉 70 years. Logistic regression and chi-square test were used. Results: Procedure success rate was above 95% for all groups in a total sample size of 1268 patients. Patients 〉 70 years had lower grade tumors than patients 〈 40 years (Grade 1: 25% vs. 7%; Grade 2: 53% vs. 47%; Grade 3: 17% vs. 40%, p 〈 0.0001) and higher ER expression (ER+: 83% vs. 59%, p 〈 0.0005). Patients 〈 40 years also had a higher proportion of multifocal disease (21% vs. 9%, p 〈 0.002), lymphovascular invasion (20% vs. 10%, p 〈 0.007), and number of positive sentinel lymph nodes (PSLN) removed (mean: 3.7 vs. 2.7, p 〈 0.028). Upon multivariate analysis, the odds of a PSLN decrease 9% for every 5-year increase in age (OR 0.91, p 〈 0.003), but increase significantly with certain tumor characteristics (ER+ vs. ER-: OR 1.7, p=0.002), larger size (0.5 cm increase: OR 1.26, p 〈 0.0001), and higher grade (Grades 2-3: OR 1.99, p 〈 0.0007). The predicted probability of a PSLN for patients age 35, 55, and 70 years is 27%, 22%, and 16%, assuming each had a ER+, low grade, 2 cm tumor. Conclusions: Older breast cancer patients have more favorable pathology, and the chance of a PSLN decreases as age increases. However, the odds of a PSLN are significantly higher in patients with certain tumor characteristics, which are known prior to definitive surgery. Given recent reports that older patients are less likely to receive standard treatment for breast cancer and prognosis may worsen as a result, tumor size and characteristics rather than age should dictate the decision to perform SLNB, and we should continue appropriate, aggressive staging of the older breast cancer patient.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 30, No. 34_suppl ( 2012-12-01), p. 237-237
    Abstract: 237 Background: Registry studies suggest underuse of RT for breast cancer, especially after mastectomy. Because radiation oncology is referral-based, knowledge and attitudes of upstream providers may influence patients’ RT decisions, including whether they even consider it. Methods: We surveyed a random sample of 750 medical oncologists (MO) and 750 surgeons (S) drawn from the AMA Masterfile in 2012; 895 responded. We analyzed responses to scenarios in which RT should be considered from the 766 (403 S, 363 MO) who had seen breast cancer patients in the past year. Results: Mean age was 52; 36% worked in a practice with an academic affiliation. 84% of MO and 64% of S saw more than 10 breast cancer patients in the previous year (p 〈 0.001). 44% participated in multidisciplinary breast clinics. In a 45 yo T1cN0 ER+/PR+/HER2- patient receiving lumpectomy and tamoxifen, half of respondents substantially underestimated the 10-year risk of locoregional recurrence without RT. 19% of MO and 38% of S did not know that guidelines recommend RT in that case, but reassuringly, almost all would refer the patient to radiation oncology (97%). Referral to radiation oncology was less common for node-positive patients after mastectomy; however, in a T1cN1 patient with 2/20 nodes s/p mastectomy (in whom guidelines state that RT should be strongly considered), only 53% of MO and 34% of S recommend RT; 29% of MO and 43% of S would not refer to radiation oncology. If 4/20 nodes were involved (where RT is clearly guideline-recommended), 94% of MO but only 79% of S would recommend RT, and 9% of S would not refer to radiation oncology. The majority (53% of MO, 68% of S) substantially underestimated the risk of LRR in a patient with pN2 disease after mastectomy without RT. Fewer than half knew that the EBCTCG meta-analysis revealed a survival benefit from RT after lumpectomy (45%) or mastectomy (47% of MO, 32% of S, p 〈 0.001). Only 66% of MO and 54% of S recognized the 10-year risk of RT-induced second malignancy to be 〈 1%. Conclusions: Many MO and S who treat breast cancer patients have misconceptions relevant to RT decision-making. Educational interventions targeted towards referring providers may improve the quality of care received by breast cancer patients.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...