METHODS: We built two models, for ER+ (ModelER+) and ER- tumors (ModelER-), respectively, in 281,330 women (51% postmenopausal at recruitment) from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort. Discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration (the agreement between predicted and observed tumor risks) were assessed both internally and externally in 82,319 postmenopausal women from the Women's Health Initiative study. We performed decision curve analysis to compare ModelER+ and the Gail model (ModelGail) regarding their applicability in risk assessment for chemoprevention.
RESULTS: Parity, number of full-term pregnancies, age at first full-term pregnancy and body height were only associated with ER+ tumors. Menopausal status, age at menarche and at menopause, hormone replacement therapy, postmenopausal body mass index, and alcohol intake were homogeneously associated with ER+ and ER- tumors. Internal validation yielded a C-statistic of 0.64 for ModelER+ and 0.59 for ModelER-. External validation reduced the C-statistic of ModelER+ (0.59) and ModelGail (0.57). In external evaluation of calibration, ModelER+ outperformed the ModelGail: the former led to a 9% overestimation of the risk of ER+ tumors, while the latter yielded a 22% underestimation of the overall BC risk. Compared with the treat-all strategy, ModelER+ produced equal or higher net benefits irrespective of the benefit-to-harm ratio of chemoprevention, while ModelGail did not produce higher net benefits unless the benefit-to-harm ratio was below 50. The clinical applicability, i.e. the area defined by the net benefit curve and the treat-all and treat-none strategies, was 12.7 × 10- 6 for ModelER+ and 3.0 × 10- 6 for ModelGail.
CONCLUSIONS: Modeling heterogeneous epidemiological risk factors might yield little improvement in BC risk prediction. Nevertheless, a model specifically predictive of ER+ tumor risk could be more applicable than an omnibus model in risk assessment for chemoprevention.
METHODS: We extracted sales volume data for 39 anti-cancer medicines from the IQVIA database. We divided the total quantity sold by the reference defined daily dose to estimate the total number of defined daily doses sold, per country per year, for three types of anti-cancer therapies (traditional chemotherapy, targeted therapy and endocrine therapy). We adjusted these data by the number of new cancer cases in each country for each year.
FINDINGS: We observed an increase in sales across all types of anti-cancer therapies in all countries. The largest number of defined daily doses of traditional chemotherapy per new cancer case was sold in Thailand; however, the largest relative increase per new cancer case occurred in Indonesia (9.48-fold). The largest absolute and relative increases in sales of defined daily doses of targeted therapies per new cancer case occurred in Kazakhstan. Malaysia sold the largest number of adjusted defined daily doses of endocrine therapies in 2017, while China and Indonesia more than doubled their adjusted sales volumes between 2007 and 2017.
CONCLUSION: The use of sales data can fill an important knowledge gap in the use of anti-cancer medicines, particularly during periods of insurance coverage expansion. Combined with other data, sales volume data can help to monitor efforts to improve equitable access to essential medicines.
METHODS: In this open-label, multicentre phase 2 trial, we recruited patients aged 21 years or older with relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma who had received at least one previous line of systemic therapy from five tertiary hospitals in Singapore, Malaysia, and South Korea. Patients received 20 mg oral panobinostat three times a week and 1·3 mg/m(2) intravenous bortezomib two times a week, both for 2 of 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response in accordance with the International Working Group revised response criteria; analyses were by intention to treat. The study is completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00901147.
FINDINGS: Between Nov 9, 2009, and Nov 26, 2013, we enrolled 25 patients with various histological subtypes of peripheral T-cell lymphoma. Of 23 patients assessable for responses, ten (43%, 95% CI 23-63) patients had an objective response, of which five were complete responses. Serious adverse events were reported in ten (40%) of 25 patients. Common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events included thrombocytopenia (17 [68%]), neutropenia (ten [40%]), diarrhoea (five [20%]), and asthenia or fatigue (two [8%]). We recorded peripheral neuropathy of any grade in ten (40%) patients.
INTERPRETATION: Combined proteasome and histone deacetylase inhibition is safe and feasible and shows encouraging activity for patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma. Our findings validate those of preclinical studies showing synergism in the combination and represent a rational way forward in harnessing the full potential of novel agents in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.
FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Singhealth Foundation.