Time filter

Source Type

Rizal, Philippines

Wu Y.-L.,Guangdong Academy of Medical science | Lee J.S.,National Cancer Center | Thongprasert S.,Maharaj Nakorn Chiang Mai Hospital | Yu C.-J.,National Taiwan University Hospital | And 27 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2013

Background: The results of FASTACT, a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study, showed that intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. We undertook FASTACT-2, a phase 3 study in a similar patient population. Methods: In this phase 3 trial, patients with untreated stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by use of an interactive internet response system with minimisation algorithm (stratified by disease stage, tumour histology, smoking status, and chemotherapy regimen) to receive six cycles of gemcitabine (1250 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, intravenously) plus platinum (carboplatin 5 × area under the curve or cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, intravenously) with intercalated erlotinib (150 mg/day on days 15-28, orally; chemotherapy plus erlotinib) or placebo orally (chemotherapy plus placebo) every 4 weeks. With the exception of an independent group responsible for monitoring data and safety monitoring board, everyone outside the interactive internet response system company was masked to treatment allocation. Patients continued to receive erlotinib or placebo until progression or unacceptable toxicity or death, and all patients in the placebo group were offered second-line erlotinib at the time of progression. The primary endpoint was PFS in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883779. Findings: From April 29, 2009, to Sept 9, 2010, 451 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy plus erlotinib (n=226) or chemotherapy plus placebo (n=225). PFS was significantly prolonged with chemotherapy plus erlotinib versus chemotherapy plus placebo (median PFS 7·6 months [95% CI 7·2-8·3], vs 6·0 months [5·6-7·1], hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·47-0·69]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival for patients in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib and chemotherapy plus placebo groups was 18·3 months (16·3-20·8) and 15·2 months (12·7-17·5), respectively (HR 0·79 [0·64-0·99]; p=0·0420). Treatment benefit was noted only in patients with an activating EGFR gene mutation (median PFS 16·8 months [12·9-20·4] vs 6·9 months [5·3-7·6], HR 0·25 [0·16-0·39]; p<0·0001; median overall survival 31·4 months [22·2-undefined], vs 20·6 months [14·2-26·9], HR 0·48 [0·27-0·84]; p=0·0092). Serious adverse events were reported by 76 (34%) of 222 patients in the chemotherapy plus placebo group and 69 (31%) of 226 in the chemotherapy plus erlotinib group. The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events were neutropenia (65 [29%] patients and 55 [25%], respectively), thrombocytopenia (32 [14%] and 31 [14%], respectively), and anaemia (26 [12%] and 21 [9%], respectively). Interpretation: Intercalated chemotherapy and erlotinib is a viable first-line option for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation-positive disease or selected patients with unknown EGFR mutation status. Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

Mok T.,Chinese University of Hong Kong | Srimuninnimit V.,Siriraj Hospital | Sriuranpong V.,King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital | Yu C.-J.,National Taiwan University Hospital | And 9 more authors.
Lung Cancer | Year: 2016

Objectives: The FASTACT-2 study of intercalated erlotinib with chemotherapy in Asian patients found that EGFR mutations were the main driver behind the significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit noted in the overall population. Further exploratory biomarker analyses were conducted to provide additional insight. Materials and methods: This multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III study investigated intercalated first-line erlotinib or placebo with gemcitabine/platinum, followed by maintenance erlotinib or placebo, for patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Provision of samples for biomarker analysis was encouraged but not mandatory. The following biomarkers were analyzed (in order of priority): EGFR mutation by cobas® test, KRAS mutation by cobas® KRAS test, HER2 by immunohistochemistry (IHC), HER3 by IHC, ERCC1 by IHC, EGFR gene copy number by fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) and EGFR by IHC. All subgroups were assessed for PFS (primary endpoint), overall survival (OS), non-progression rate and objective response rate. Results: Overall, 256 patients provided samples for analysis. Considerable overlap was noted among biomarkers, except for EGFR and KRAS mutations, which are mutually exclusive. Other than EGFR mutations (p < 0.0001), no other biomarkers were significantly predictive of outcomes in a treatment-by-biomarker interaction test, although ERCC1 IHC-positive status was predictive of improved OS for the erlotinib arm versus placebo in EGFR wild-type patients (median 18.4 vs 9.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] HR = 0.32, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.14-0.69, p = 0.0024). Conclusion: Activating EGFR mutations were predictive for improved treatment outcomes with a first-line intercalated regimen of chemotherapy and erlotinib in NSCLC. ERCC1 status may have some predictive value in EGFR wild-type disease, but requires further investigation. © 2016 The Authors.

Mok T.,Chinese University of Hong Kong | Wu Y.-L.,Guangdong Academy of Medical science | Lee J.S.,National Cancer Center | Yu C.-J.,National Taiwan University Hospital | And 15 more authors.
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2015

Purpose: Blood-based circulating-free (cf) tumor DNA may be an alternative to tissue-based EGFR mutation testing in NSCLC. This exploratory analysis compares matched tumor and blood samples from the FASTACT-2 study. Experimental Design: Patients were randomized to receive six cycles of gemcitabine/platinum plus sequential erlotinib or placebo. EGFR mutation testing was performed using the cobas tissue test and the cobas blood test (in development). Blood samples at baseline, cycle 3, and progression were assessed for blood test detection rate, sensitivity, and specificity; concordance with matched tumor analysis (n = 238), and correlation with progressionfree survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Concordance between tissue and blood tests was 88%, with blood test sensitivity of75%and a specificity of 96%. Median PFS was 13.1 versus 6.0 months for erlotinib and placebo, respectively, for those with baseline EGFR mut+ cfDNA [HR, 0.22; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.14-0.33, P < 0.0001] and 6.2 versus 6.1 months, respectively, for the EGFR mut- cfDNA subgroup (HR, 0.83;95%CI, 0.65-1.04, P=0.1076). For patients with EGFR mut+ cfDNA at baseline, median PFS was 7.2 versus 12.0 months for cycle 3 EGFR mut+ cfDNA versus cycle 3 EGFR mut- patients, respectively (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.21-0.48, P < 0.0001); median OS by cycle 3 status was 18.2 and 31.9 months, respectively (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31-0.84, P = 0.0066). Conclusions: Blood-based EGFR mutation analysis is relatively sensitive and highly specific. Dynamic changes in cfDNA EGFR mutation status relative to baseline may predict clinical outcomes. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

Sankaranarayanan R.,International Agency for Research on Cancer | Swaminathan R.,Cancer Institute WIA | Brenner H.,German Cancer Research Center | Chen K.,Tianjin Medical University | And 25 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2010

Background: Population-based cancer survival data, a key indicator for monitoring progress against cancer, are not widely available from countries in Africa, Asia, and Central America. The aim of this study is to describe and discuss cancer survival in these regions. Methods: Survival analysis was done for 341 658 patients diagnosed with various cancers from 1990 to 2001 and followed up to 2003, from 25 population-based cancer registries in 12 countries in sub-Saharan Africa (The Gambia, Uganda), Central America (Costa Rica), and Asia (China, India, Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, Turkey). 5-year age-standardised relative survival (ASRS) and observed survival by clinical extent of disease were determined. Findings: For cancers in which prognosis depends on stage at diagnosis, survival was highest in China, South Korea, Singapore, and Turkey and lowest in Uganda and The Gambia. 5-year ASRS ranged from 76-82% for breast cancer, 63-79% for cervical cancer, 71-78% for bladder cancer, and 44-60% for large-bowel cancers in China, Singapore, South Korea, and Turkey. Survival did not exceed 22% for any cancer site in The Gambia; in Uganda, survival did not exceed 13% for any cancer site except breast (46%). Variations in survival correlated with early detection initiatives and level of development of health services. Interpretation: The wide variation in cancer survival between regions emphasises the need for urgent investments in improving awareness, population-based cancer registration, early detection programmes, health-services infrastructure, and human resources. Funding: Association for International Cancer Research (AICR; St Andrews, UK), Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (ARC, Villejuif, France), and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (Seattle, USA). © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Esteban D.B.,Rizal Medical Center
IARC scientific publications | Year: 2011

The department of health-Rizal cancer registry (DOH-RCR) was the first population-based cancer registry in the Philippines, established in 1974. Even though cancer is reportable by legislation, cancer registration is pursued by active methods. Data on survival from cancer of the breast registered in 1996-1997 are reported. Followup was carried out by passive and active methods. The proportion of cases with a histological confirmation of cancer diagnosis was 90%; death certificates only (DCOs) constituted 6%; 81% of the total registered were included for the survival analysis. Complete follow-up at five years from the incidence date was 30%. Relative survival rates at one, three and five years were 89%, 56% and 37%, respectively. Five-year age-standardized relative survival was 35%. Five-year relative survival by age group did not display any pattern or trend, and was fluctuating. A majority of cases were diagnosed with a regional spread of disease (44%) followed by localized stage (17%). Five-year absolute survival ratesby extent of disease were localized (65%), regional (35%), distant metastasis (12%) and unknown (35%). Thetrend of 5-year survival for breast cancer decreased from 46% in 1987 to 37% in 1996-1997.

Discover hidden collaborations