Displaying publications 1 - 20 of 28 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Devi BC, Tang TS, Corbex M
    Ann Oncol, 2008 Dec;19(12):2061-6.
    PMID: 18641007 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdn422
    The provision of palliative care (PC) and opioids is difficult to ensure in remote areas in low- and middle-income countries. We describe here the set up of a home-care program in Sarawak (the Malaysian part of the Borneo Island), where half the population lives in villages that are difficult to access.
  2. Wu YL, Zhou C, Liam CK, Wu G, Liu X, Zhong Z, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2015 Sep;26(9):1883-1889.
    PMID: 26105600 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdv270
    BACKGROUND: The phase III, randomized, open-label ENSURE study (NCT01342965) evaluated first-line erlotinib versus gemcitabine/cisplatin (GP) in patients from China, Malaysia and the Philippines with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

    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).

  3. Muro K, Lordick F, Tsushima T, Pentheroudakis G, Baba E, Lu Z, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2019 01 01;30(1):34-43.
    PMID: 30475943 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy498
    The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of oesophageal cancer was published in 2016, and covered the management and treatment of local/locoregional disease, limited disease, locally advanced disease and the management of advanced/metastatic disease. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the JSMO Annual Meeting in 2018. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic oesophageal cancer in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic oesophageal cancer representing the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (CSCO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.
  4. Muro K, Van Cutsem E, Narita Y, Pentheroudakis G, Baba E, Li J, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2019 01 01;30(1):19-33.
    PMID: 30475956 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy502
    The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of gastric cancer (GC) was published in 2016, and covered the management and treatment of local, locoregional, locally advanced and metastatic disease. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and The Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the JSMO Annual Meeting in 2018. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic GC in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic GC representing the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (CSCO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.
  5. Yoshino T, Arnold D, Taniguchi H, Pentheroudakis G, Yamazaki K, Xu RH, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2018 01 01;29(1):44-70.
    PMID: 29155929 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx738
    The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) consensus guidelines for the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) was published in 2016, identifying both a more strategic approach to the administration of the available systemic therapy choices, and a greater emphasis on the use of ablative techniques, including surgery. At the 2016 ESMO Asia Meeting, in December 2016, it was decided by both ESMO and the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology (JSMO) to convene a special guidelines meeting, endorsed by both ESMO and JSMO, immediately after the JSMO 2017 Annual Meeting. The aim was to adapt the ESMO consensus guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences relating to the toxicity as well as other aspects of certain systemic treatments in patients of Asian ethnicity. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with mCRC identified by the Presidents of the oncological societies of Japan (JSMO), China (Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology), Korea (Korean Association for Clinical Oncology), Malaysia (Malaysian Oncological Society), Singapore (Singapore Society of Oncology) and Taiwan (Taiwan Oncology Society). The voting was based on scientific evidence and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the individual participating Asian countries.
  6. Wu YL, Planchard D, Lu S, Sun H, Yamamoto N, Kim DW, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2019 02 01;30(2):171-210.
    PMID: 30596843 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy554
    The most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was published in 2016. At the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2017 it was decided by both ESMO and the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) to convene a special guidelines meeting immediately after the Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group Annual Meeting 2018, in Guangzhou, China. The aim was to adapt the ESMO 2016 guidelines to take into account the ethnic differences associated with the treatment of metastatic NSCLC cancer in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC representing the oncological societies of China (CSCO), Japan (JSMO), Korea (KSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of both the current treatment practices and the drug availability and reimbursement situations in the six participating Asian countries. During the review process, the updated ESMO 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines for metastatic NSCLC were released and were also considered, during the final stages of the development of the Pan-Asian adapted Clinical Practice Guidelines.
  7. Smith Byrne K, Appleby PN, Key TJ, Holmes MV, Fensom GK, Agudo A, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2019 06 01;30(6):983-989.
    PMID: 31089709 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdz121
    BACKGROUND: Microseminoprotein-beta (MSP), a protein secreted by the prostate epithelium, may have a protective role in the development of prostate cancer. The only previous prospective study found a 2% reduced prostate cancer risk per unit increase in MSP. This work investigates the association of MSP with prostate cancer risk using observational and Mendelian randomization (MR) methods.

    PATIENTS AND METHODS: A nested case-control study was conducted with the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) with 1871 cases and 1871 matched controls. Conditional logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the association of pre-diagnostic circulating MSP with risk of incident prostate cancer overall and by tumour subtype. EPIC-derived estimates were combined with published data to calculate an MR estimate using two-sample inverse-variance method.

    RESULTS: Plasma MSP concentrations were inversely associated with prostate cancer risk after adjusting for total prostate-specific antigen concentration [odds ratio (OR) highest versus lowest fourth of MSP = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.84, Ptrend = 0.001]. No heterogeneity in this association was observed by tumour stage or histological grade. Plasma MSP concentrations were 66% lower in rs10993994 TT compared with CC homozygotes (per allele difference in MSP: 6.09 ng/ml, 95% CI 5.56-6.61, r2=0.42). MR analyses supported a potentially causal protective association of MSP with prostate cancer risk (OR per 1 ng/ml increase in MSP for MR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.95-0.97 versus EPIC observational: 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99). Limitations include lack of complete tumour subtype information and more complete information on the biological function of MSP.

    CONCLUSIONS: In this large prospective European study and using MR analyses, men with high circulating MSP concentration have a lower risk of prostate cancer. MSP may play a causally protective role in prostate cancer.

  8. AbdulAziz A, MdSalleh M, Mohamad I, Bhavaraju V, Gan S, Ankathil R
    Ann Oncol, 2017 Oct;28 Suppl 9:ix79.
    PMID: 32120675 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx697.022
  9. Park YH, Senkus-Konefka E, Im SA, Pentheroudakis G, Saji S, Gupta S, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2020 04;31(4):451-469.
    PMID: 32081575 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.01.008
    In view of the planned new edition of the most recent version of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of primary breast cancer published in 2015, it was decided at the ESMO Asia Meeting in November 2018, by both the ESMO and the Korean Society of Medical Oncology (KSMO), to convene a special face-to-face guidelines meeting in 2019 in Seoul. The aim was to adapt the latest ESMO 2019 guidelines to take into account the ethnic and geographical differences associated with the treatment of early breast cancer in Asian patients. These guidelines represent the consensus opinions reached by experts in the treatment of patients with early breast cancer representing the oncology societies of Korea (KSMO), China (CSCO), India (ISMPO) Japan (JSMO), Malaysia (MOS), Singapore (SSO) and Taiwan (TOS). The voting was based on scientific evidence, and was independent of both the current treatment practices, and the drug availability and reimbursement situations, in the individual participating Asian countries.
  10. Tan CK, Beh SP, Lee RY, Pei Jye V, Damoderam S, Mohd Naseri NI, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2018 Nov;29 Suppl 9:ix98.
    PMID: 32178214 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy438.016
  11. Dalvi R, Li CK, Yonemori K, Ariffin H, Lyu CJ, Farid M, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2018 Nov;29 Suppl 9:ix121.
    PMID: 32177767 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy442.001
  12. Elhusseiny KM, Abd-Elhay FA, Kamel MG, Abd El Hamid Hassan HH, Muhammad El Tanany HH, Hong HT, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2018 Nov;29 Suppl 9:ix104.
    PMID: 32177708 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy438.035
  13. Yoon SYY, Ahmad Bashah NS, Wong SW, Mariapun S, Padmanabhan H, Hassan T, et al.
    Ann Oncol, 2018 Nov;29 Suppl 9:ix176.
    PMID: 32177935 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy483.004
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (tengcl@gmail.com)

External Links