MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of testicular cancer patients treated between January 2001 and February 2011. Their epidemiological data, clinical presentation, pathologic diagnosis, stage of disease and treatment were gathered and the overall survival rate of this cohort was analyzed.
RESULTS: Thirty-one patients were included in this study. The majority of them were of Malay ethnicity. The average age at presentation was 33.7 years. The commonest testicular cancer was non-seminomatous germ cell tumour, followed by seminoma, lymphoma and rhabdomyosarcoma. More than half of all testicular germ cell tumour (GCT) patients had some form of metastasis at diagnosis. All the patients were treated with radical orchidectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given to those with metastatic disease. Four seminoma patients received radiotherapy to the para-aortic lymph nodes. The 5-year survival rate for all testicular cancers in this cohort was 83.9%. The survival rate was 88.9% in 5 years when GCT were analyzed separately.
CONCLUSION: GCT affects patients in their third and fourth decades of life while lymphoma patients are generally older. Most of the patients treated for GCT are of Malay ethnicity. The majority have late presentation for treatment. The survival rate of GCT patients treated here is comparable to other published series in other parts of the world.
METHODS: This retrospective observational study was conducted in Penang General Hospital on 534 anemic solid cancer patients who were admitted between 2003 and 2009. The main statistical tests used were Chi-square test and Logistic regression test for categorical data. While for continues data the main statistical tests were Linear regression and correlation test. The significance of the result will be when the P<0.05, while the confidence interval for this study was 95%.
RESULTS: FEC, 5-FU+5-FU, Docetaxel and Cisplatin+ 5-FU regimen has strong association and correlation with anemia onset and severity. However the associations and correlations with anemia severity were stronger than those with the onset. Different doses of 5-FU, cyclophosphamide, docetaxel and cisplatin play a critical role in anemia onset and severity.
CONCLUSION: Monitoring and determination of hemoglobin levels for cancer patients treated with FEC, 5-FU+5-FU, Docetaxel, Cisplatin+ 5-FU specifically with high doses must be emphasized and a focus of particular attention.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with T3-4, N2 M0 breast cancer diagnosed between January 2005 and December 2008 and who received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible for this study. Thirty-four patients were identified from the Chemotherapy Daycare Records and their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. The neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen administered was at the discretion of the treating oncologist. Breast tumour size and nodal status was assessed at diagnosis, at each cycle and before surgery.
RESULTS: All 34 patients had invasive ductal cancer. The median age was 52 years (range 27-69). 65% had T4 disease and 76% were clinically lymph node positive at diagnosis. The median size of the breast tumour at presentation was 80 mm (range 42-200 mm). Estrogen and progesterone receptor positivity was seen in less than 40% and HER2 positivity, by immunohistochemistry, in 27%. The majority (85%) of patients had anthracycline based chemotherapy, without taxanes. The overall response rate (clinical CR+PR) was 67.6% and pathological complete responses were apparent in two (5.9%). 17.6% of patients defaulted part of their planned treatment. Recurrent disease was seen in 44.1% and the median time to relapse was 11.3 months. The three year disease free and overall survival rates were 52.5% and 58% respectively.
CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer in a Malaysian setting confers response and pCR rates comparable to published clinical trials. Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy are at risk of defaulting part of their treatment and therefore their concerns need to be identified proactively and addressed in order to improve outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined NPC patients between 1st January 2001 and 31st December 2005 in Penang General Hospital. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons between groups were made using the log-rank test. Important prognostic factors including patient demographics, tumour and treatment factors were analysed using the Cox proportional hazard model.
RESULTS: A total of 285 patients were identified with a median age of 51 years, 72.6% being males. The majority were Chinese (66%) followed by Malays (31.9%). Primary tumour stages (T stages) 3 and 4 were present in 18.6% and 34% of patients respectively, and nodal disease was present in 80.4%. On overall AJCC staging, 29.1% had stage III and 50.2% had stage IV disease. Some 39.6% of patients had WHO type 3 histology and 7.4% had WHO type 1-2 histology with the remainder having NPC with no subtype reported. Concurrent chemo-irradiation was the commonest treatment received by patients (51.9%) followed by radiotherapy alone (41.8%). The 5 year overall survival and cause specific survival were 33.3% and 42.7% respectively. Age group, T stage, N stage and WHO histological subtype were independent prognostic factors for overall survival on multivariate analysis. For cause specific survival they were T stage and N stage.
CONCLUSION: The 5 years overall survival rate was 33.3%. This low figure is primarily due to late presentation. Efforts to detect NPC at earlier stages in Malaysia are urgently needed. These should include public education to increase awareness of the prevalence of this highly treatable disease.
METHODS: This retrospective study of Stage III breast cancer patients was conducted over a 5 year period from 1998 to 2002. The survival data were obtained from the National Registry of Births and Deaths with the end-point of the study in April 2006. The Kaplan Meier method was applied for survival analysis. Cox regression analysis by stepwise selection was performed to identify important prognostic factors.
RESULTS: Out of a 155 evaluable patients, 74 (47.7%) had primary surgery, 62 (40%) had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 10 patients (6.5%) were given Tamoxifen as the primary treatment, while 9 patients (5.8%) defaulted any form of treatment. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 9 patients defaulted further treatment, leaving 53 evaluable patients. Out of these 53 evaluable patients, 5 patients (9.4%) had complete pathological response, 5 (9.4%) a complete clinical response, and 26 (49.1%) had partial response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The 5-year survival in the primary surgery group was 56.7 % compared to 44.7% in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy group (p<0.01). The important prognostic factors were race, size of tumour, nodal status, estrogen receptor status and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
CONCLUSION: Patients who had primary surgery had better survival than those who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which may be due to bias in the selection of patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Out of a total of 155 patients, 25.1% defaulted part of the treatment, or did not receive optimal treatment, emphasizing the importance of psychosocial support and counselling for this group of patients.
METHODS: This retrospective observational study, conducted in a government hospital on Penang island included 341 cancer patients with thrombocytopenia who were admitted in the period between 2003 to 2009. The main statistical tests used were Chi-square test and Logistic regression test. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05.
RESULTS: Of the total of 341, 21 (6.2%) showed thrombocytopenia before receiving chemotherapy and the remaining 320 (93.8%) after chemotherapy. The majority suffered from moderate thrombocytopenia (n=172; 53.8%), followed by mild a (n=97; 30.3%) and finally severe (n=51; 15.9%). For treatment, chemotherapy was delayed/ reduced (n=223; 65.4%) or platelets were transfused (n=51; 34.6%). However, thrombocytopenia problems were only temporarily solved.
CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of thrombocytopenia treatment guidelines was found to be insufficient. It is advisable that thrombopoietin be used as a cornerstone even for patients who suffer from moderate thrombocytopenia and platelets transfusion should be used just for emergency cases when thrombocytopenia leads to a critical situation.
METHODS: We carried a review of medical records of breast and lung cancer patients hospitalized in years 2003 and 2009 at Penang General Hospital, a public tertiary care center in Penang Island, north of Malaysia. Patients with hypercalcemia (defined as a calcium level above 10.5 mg/dl) at the time of cancer diagnosis or during cancer treatment had their medical history abstracted, including presence of metastasis, chemotherapy types and doses, calcium levels throughout cancer treatment, and other co-morbidity. The mean calcium levels at first hospitalization before chemotherapy were compared with calcium levels at the end of or at the latest chemotherapy treatment. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Chi-square test for categorical data, logistic regression test for categorical variables, and Spearman correlation test, linear regression and the paired sample t tests for continuous data.
RESULTS: Of a total 1,023 of breast cancer and 814 lung cancer patients identified, 292 had hypercalcemia at first hospitalization or during cancer treatment (174 breast and 118 lung cancer patients). About a quarter of these patients had advanced stage cancers: 26.4% had mild hypercalcemia (10.5-11.9 mg/dl), 55.5% had moderate (12-12.9 mg/dl), and 18.2% severe hypercalcemia (13-13.9; 14-16 mg/dl). Chemotherapy lowered calcium levels significantly both in breast and lung cancer patients with hypercalcemia; in particular with chemotherapy type 5-flurouracil+epirubicin+cyclophosphamide (FEC) for breast cancer, and gemcitabine+cisplatin in lung cancer.
CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy decreases calcium levels in breast and lung cancer cases with hypercalcemia at cancer diagnosis, probably by reducing PTHrP levels.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here we reported the initial experience of aflibercept / FOLFIRI in combination. We evaluated treatment-related adverse events (AEs), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: The majority of the patients experienced gastrointestinal toxicity (grade 1-2), with diarrhea (52%), mucositis (52%), and nausea/vomiting (20%) being largely observed. Neutropenia (16%) and febrile neutropenia (8%) were common grade 3-4 hematological events. Aflibercept-related toxicity was managed as per practice guidelines. No grade 5 event was reported. Median PFS was 6.12 months (95% CI, 4.80-7.20) and OS was 12 months (95% CI, 9.80-14.18). The partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD) rates were 25% (95% CI: 23.4-27.0), 37.5% (95% CI: 31.6-43.3), and 37.5% (95% CI: 22.5-52.5), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Aflibercept/FOLFIRI can be administered safely in a second line setting to Malaysian patients with mCRC, as the AEs experienced were generally reversible and manageable. The safety and efficacy outcomes were consistent with those observed in Western populations.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study on NDMM patients diagnosed between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2022 in a single academic center. Patients' demographic and treatment details were included for analysis of progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-six NDMM patients with a median age of 64.0 years (ranged from 38 to 87 years old) were included. Bortezomib-containing regimens were the most commonly used induction agent, followed by thalidomide. Almost half of the patients (47.1%) achieved very good partial response (VGPR) or complete remission (CR), while 31.6% achieved partial response (PR). Bortezomib containing regimen was associated with significantly deeper and more rapid response, (p=0.001 and p=0.017, respectively) when compared to other agents. Only 22.8% of these patients proceeded to upfront autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The median OS and PFS were 60.0 months and 25.0 months, respectively. Best initial response and upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) were significantly associated with better PFS.
CONCLUSION: Achieving at least a VGPR significantly associated with better outcome in NDMM patients. In a resource constrain country, we recommend incorporating bortezomib in the induction therapy followed with an upfront ASCT.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared a prospectively collected group of 48 patients undergoing oxaliplatin/irinotecan-based perioperative systemic chemotherapy (s-CT) with targeted agents, and cytoreductive surgery (CRS) (no-HIPEC group) with 48 controls undergoing the same perioperative s-CT and CRS/HIPEC (HIPEC group). Patients were matched (1:1) according to the Peritoneal Surface Disease Severity Score, completeness of cytoreduction, history of extraperitoneal disease (EPD), and Peritoneal Cancer Index.
RESULTS: The groups were comparable, except for a higher number of patients in the HIPEC group with World Health Organization performance status 0, pN2 stage primary tumor, and treated with preoperative s-CT. Forty-one patients in the no-HIPEC group and 43 patients in the HIPEC group had optimal comprehensive treatment (P = 0.759), defined as complete cytoreduction of PM and margin-negative EPD resection. Median follow-up was 31.6 months in the no-HIPEC group and 39.9 months in the HIPEC group. Median overall survival was 39.3 months in the no-HIPEC group and 34.8 months in the HIPEC group (P = 0.702). In the two groups, severe morbidity occurred in 14 (29.2%) and 13 (27.1%) patients, respectively (P = 1.000), with no operative deaths. On multivariate analysis, left-sided primary and curative treatment independently correlated with better survival while HIPEC did not (hazard ratio 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.15; P = 0.178).
CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirmed that, in selected patients, perioperative s-CT and surgical treatment of CRC-PM resulted in unexpectedly high survival rates. Mitomycin C-based HIPEC did not increase morbidity but did not impact prognosis.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients ≥18 years old with histologically/cytologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 were randomized 1:1 to receive erlotinib (oral; 150 mg once daily until progression/unacceptable toxicity) or GP [G 1250 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1 and 8 (3-weekly cycle); P 75 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1, (3-weekly cycle) for up to four cycles]. Primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Other end points include objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety.
RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were randomized: 110 to erlotinib and 107 to GP. Investigator-assessed median PFS was 11.0 months versus 5.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22-0.51; log-rank P < 0.0001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed median PFS was consistent (HR, 0.42). Median OS was 26.3 versus 25.5 months, erlotinib versus GP, respectively (HR, 0.91, 95% CI 0.63-1.31; log-rank P = .607). ORR was 62.7% for erlotinib and 33.6% for GP. Treatment-related serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 2.7% versus 10.6% of erlotinib and GP patients, respectively. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were rash (6.4%) with erlotinib, and neutropenia (25.0%), leukopenia (14.4%), and anemia (12.5%) with GP.
CONCLUSION: These analyses demonstrate that first-line erlotinib provides a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus GP in Asian patients with EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC (NCT01342965).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-122 was an open-label, randomized study conducted at 29 sites, globally. Participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to pembrolizumab or chemotherapy with capecitabine, gemcitabine, or docetaxel. Randomization was stratified by liver metastasis (present versus absent). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), analyzed in the intention-to-treat population using the stratified log-rank test (superiority threshold, one-sided P = 0.0187). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population.
RESULTS: Between 5 May 2016 and 28 May 2018, 233 participants were randomly assigned to treatment (pembrolizumab, n = 117; chemotherapy, n = 116); Most participants (86.7%) received study treatment in the second-line or later setting. Median time from randomization to data cut-off (30 November 2020) was 45.1 months (interquartile range, 39.0-48.8 months). Median OS was 17.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.7-22.9 months] with pembrolizumab and 15.3 months (95% CI 10.9-18.1 months) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio, 0.90 (95% CI 0.67-1.19; P = 0.2262)]. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12 of 116 participants (10.3%) with pembrolizumab and 49 of 112 participants (43.8%) with chemotherapy. Three treatment-related deaths occurred: 1 participant (0.9%) with pembrolizumab (pneumonitis) and 2 (1.8%) with chemotherapy (pneumonia, intracranial hemorrhage).
CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab did not significantly improve OS compared with chemotherapy in participants with platinum-pretreated recurrent and/or metastatic NPC but did have manageable safety and a lower incidence of treatment-related adverse events.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mCRPC were prospectively identified as HRR+ with/without BRCA1/2 alterations and randomized 1 : 1 to niraparib (200 mg orally) plus AAP (1000 mg/10 mg orally) or placebo plus AAP. At IA2, secondary endpoints [time to symptomatic progression, time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy, overall survival (OS)] were assessed.
RESULTS: Overall, 212 HRR+ patients received niraparib plus AAP (BRCA1/2 subgroup, n = 113). At IA2 with 24.8 months of median follow-up in the BRCA1/2 subgroup, niraparib plus AAP significantly prolonged radiographic progression-free survival {rPFS; blinded independent central review; median rPFS 19.5 versus 10.9 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.78]; nominal P = 0.0007} consistent with the first prespecified interim analysis. rPFS was also prolonged in the total HRR+ population [HR = 0.76 (95% CI 0.60-0.97); nominal P = 0.0280; median follow-up 26.8 months]. Improvements in time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy were observed with niraparib plus AAP. In the BRCA1/2 subgroup, the analysis of OS with niraparib plus AAP demonstrated an HR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.58-1.34; nominal P = 0.5505); the prespecified inverse probability censoring weighting analysis of OS, accounting for imbalances in subsequent use of poly adenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase inhibitors and other life-prolonging therapies, demonstrated an HR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.33-0.90; nominal P = 0.0181). No new safety signals were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: MAGNITUDE, enrolling the largest BRCA1/2 cohort in first-line mCRPC to date, demonstrated improved rPFS and other clinically relevant outcomes with niraparib plus AAP in patients with BRCA1/2-altered mCRPC, emphasizing the importance of identifying this molecular subset of patients.