Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Wink K.C.J.,Maastricht University | Belderbos J.S.A.,Netherlands Cancer Institute | Dieleman E.M.T.,Amsterdam Medical Center | Rossi M.,Netherlands Cancer Institute | And 7 more authors.
Radiotherapy and Oncology | Year: 2016

Background and purpose The aim was to investigate whether the use of metformin during concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) improved treatment outcome. Material and methods A total of 682 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study (59 metformin users, 623 control patients). All received cCRT in one of three participating radiation oncology departments in the Netherlands between January 2008 and January 2013. Primary endpoint was locoregional recurrence free survival (LRFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and distant metastasis free survival (DMFS). Results No significant differences in LRFS or OS were found. Metformin use was associated with an improved DMFS (74% versus 53% at 2 years; p = 0.01) and PFS (58% versus 37% at 2 years and a median PFS of 41 months versus 15 months; p = 0.01). In a multivariate cox-regression analysis, the use of metformin was a statistically significant independent variable for DMFS and PFS (p = 0.02 and 0.03). Conclusions Metformin use during cCRT is associated with an improved DMFS and PFS for locally advanced NSCLC patients, suggesting that metformin may be a valuable treatment addition in these patients. Evidently, our results merit to be verified in a prospective trial. © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Source


Bokhorst L.P.,Erasmus Medical Center | Kranse R.,Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization | Venderbos L.D.F.,Erasmus Medical Center | Salman J.W.,Erasmus Medical Center | And 4 more authors.
European Urology | Year: 2015

Screening for prostate cancer (PCa) results in a favorable stage shift. However, even if screening did not result in a clinically apparent lower stage or grade, it might still lead to less disease recurrence after treatment with curative intent (radical prostatectomy [RP] and radiation therapy [RT]) because the tumor had less time to develop outside the prostate. The outcome after treatment could also differ because of variations in treatment quality (eg, radiation dosage/adjuvant hormonal therapy). To test these hypotheses, we compared differences in the treatment quality of the screening and control arms of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) Rotterdam and disease-free survival (DFS) after curative treatment in PCa patients with similar stage and grade. A total of 2595 men were initially treated with RP or RT. In the control arm, RT was more often combined with hormonal therapy; treatment dosage was often ≥69 Gy. This most likely resulted from changes over time in treatment that coincided with the later detection in the control arm. DFS was higher in the screening arm in all risk groups. After correction for lead time, these differences were minimal, however. We concluded that treatment quality differed between the screening and control arms of the ERSPC Rotterdam. RT quality was especially superior in the control arm with higher dosages and more often RT in combination with hormonal therapy. Despite these differences favoring the control arm, DFS differences were minimal. Patient summary We looked at differences in prostate cancer (PCa) treatment and outcome after PCa treatment in men diagnosed after screening and men diagnosed after normal clinical practice. Treatment differed with superior treatment given to men diagnosed in normal clinical practice. We propose a likely explanation for this apparently counterintuitive finding (progressive insight combined with, on average, a later detection of tumors in unscreened men). Although unscreened men received better treatment, this advantage seemed to be outweighed by the advantage associated with the earlier detection, on average, of the tumor in screened men. Trial registration ISRCTN49127736 © 2014 European Association of Urology. Source


Visser O.,Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization | Ardanaz E.,Navarre Public Health Institute | Ardanaz E.,CIBER ISCIII | Botta L.,Evaluative Epidemiology Unit | And 3 more authors.
European Journal of Cancer | Year: 2015

Background Primary malignant brain tumours are rare but represent a serious health burden due to their poor survival. This manuscript describes the survival of malignant brain tumours in adults diagnosed 2000-2007 in Europe. Methods For this study we analysed patients archived in 86 European population-based cancer registries, followed up to 31st December 2008. Only primary malignant neuroepithelial brain tumours (with pathological confirmation) and primary malignant unspecified brain tumours without pathological confirmation were included. We estimated 1-year and 5-year relative survival (RS) weighted by age group and country. We also estimated country-specific and age-specific survival, together with survival differences between time periods (for 1999-2001, 2002-2004 and 2005-2007). Results Glioblastoma represents 49% of all brain tumours, followed by other/unspecified astrocytoma (18%), oligodendroglioma/oligoastrocytoma (9%), ependymoma (1.5%) and embryonal tumours (1%). Five-year RS was 20% for all tumours combined, but ranged from 58% for ependymoma to only 6% for glioblastoma and sharply decreased with increasing age. Differences between countries were relatively small, but generally RS in Ireland/United Kingdom (UK) and Eastern Europe was below the average. An increase in 1-year RS (up to 10-12%) was noted over time, being largest in Central and Northern Europe in patients between 45 and 74 years of age. Conclusions Despite an increase in 1-year RS in most European regions, the survival of primary malignant brain tumours is still poor. Disparities between countries were evident, being even larger at the end of the study period than at the beginning, suggesting differences in availability of the latest treatment modalities. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Source


Saadatmand S.,Erasmus Medical Center | Bretveld R.,Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization | Siesling S.,Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization | Siesling S.,University of Twente | Tilanus-Linthorst M.M.A.,Erasmus Medical Center
BMJ (Online) | Year: 2015

Objectives: To assess the influence of stage at breast cancer diagnosis, tumour biology, and treatment on survival in contemporary times of better (neo-)adjuvant systemic therapy. Design: Prospective nationwide population based study. Setting: Nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Participants: Female patients with primary breast cancer diagnosed between 1999 and 2012 (n=173 797), subdivided into two time cohorts on the basis of breast cancer diagnosis: 1999-2005 (n=80 228) and 2006-12 (n=93 569). Main outcomemeasures: Relative survival was compared between the two cohorts. Influence of traditional prognostic factors on overall mortality was analysed with Cox regression for each cohort separately. Results: Compared with 1999-2005, patients from 2006-12 had smaller (≤T1 65% (n=60 570) v 60% (n=48 031); P<0.001), more often lymph node negative (N0 68% (n=63 544) v 65% (n=52 238); P<0.001) tumours, but they received more chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, and targeted therapy (neo-adjuvant/adjuvant systemic therapy 60% (n=56 402) v 53% (n=42 185); P<0.001). Median follow-up was 9.8 years for 1999-2005 and 3.9 years for 2006-12. The relative five year survival rate in 2006-12 was 96%, improved in all tumour and nodal stages compared with 1999-2005, and 100% in tumours ≤1 cm. In multivariable analyses adjusted for age and tumour type, overall mortality was decreased by surgery (especially breast conserving), radiotherapy, and systemic therapies. Mortality increased with progressing tumour size in both cohorts (2006-12 T1c v T1a: hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.33 to 1.78), but without a significant difference in invasive breast cancers until 1 cm (2006-12 T1b v T1a: hazard ratio 1.04, 0.88 to 1.22), and independently with progressing number of positive lymph nodes (2006-12 N1 v N0:1.25, 1.17 to 1.32). Conclusions: Tumour stage at diagnosis of breast cancer still influences overall survival significantly in the current era of effective systemic therapy. Diagnosis of breast cancer at an early tumour stage remains vital. © BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2015. Source


Vos E.L.,Netherlands Cancer Institute | Voogd A.C.,Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization | Voogd A.C.,Maastricht University | Verhoef C.,Netherlands Cancer Institute | And 4 more authors.
British Journal of Surgery | Year: 2015

Background: Although evidence for the benefits of preoperative MRI in breast cancer is lacking, use of MRI is increasing and characterized by large interhospital variation. The aim of the study was to evaluate MRI use and surgical outcomes retrospectively. Methods: Women with invasive breast cancer (pT1–3) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), diagnosed in 2011–2013, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and subdivided into the following groups: invasive cancer, high-grade DCIS, non-palpable cancer, age 40 years or less, and invasive lobular cancer. Associations between preoperative MRI use and initial mastectomy, resection margin after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), re-excision after BCS, and final mastectomy were analysed. Results: In total, 5514 women were included in the study; 1637 (34·1 per cent) of 4801 women with invasive cancer and 150 (21·0 per cent) of 713 with DCIS had preoperative MRI. Positive resection margins were found in 18·1 per cent women who had MRI and in 15·1 per cent of those who did not (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·20, 95 per cent c.i. 1·00 to 1·45), with no differences in subgroups. Re-excision rates were 9·8 per cent in the MRI group and 7·2 per cent in the no-MRI group (adjusted OR 1·33, 1·04 to 1·70), with no differences in subgroups. In the MRI group, 38·8 per cent of patients ultimately underwent mastectomy, compared with 24·2 per cent in the no-MRI group (adjusted OR 2·13, 1·87 to 2·41). This difference was not found for patients aged 40 years or less, or for those diagnosed with lobular cancer. Conclusion: No subgroup was identified in which preoperative MRI influenced the risk of margin involvement or re-excision rate after BCS. MRI was significantly associated with more extensive surgery, except in patients aged 40 years or less and those with invasive lobular cancer. These results suggest that use of preoperative MRI should be more targeted, and that general, widespread use be discouraged. © 2015 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd Source

Discover hidden collaborations