RESUMEN
Background: Despite an increasing number of female oncologists, disparities persist in authorship representation of women, especially in high-impact journals. Objective: This study aimed to investigate gender differences in authorship within select high-impact Indian oncology journals over a 5-year period, assessing trends in the gender gap. Methods: Six high-impact Indian oncology journals were selected for analysis. Data on original articles, reviews and editorials published between 2017 and 2022 were collected, including authors' gender, their role as first author or corresponding author and name of the journal. Gender determination was validated through web searches. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data and to study the prevalence of female authorship across journals. Results: A total of 2,235 articles were included. Across all journals, 30.4% of authors were female, with Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment exhibiting the highest proportion of female authors (948/2,507; 37.8%). Female authorship increased over time, with first authors rising from 33% to 41%, and corresponding authors from 29.4% to 36.4%. However, disparities persisted, and certain journals exhibited fluctuating trends. Female authorship was higher in original articles (30.9%) compared to reviews (27.8%) and editorials (24.5%). Women comprised 3.5%-24.4% of the editorial boards of the six journals. Conclusion: Female representation, both as authors and editorial board members of Indian oncology journals is disproportionately low. Proactive measures are necessary to address these disparities and promote gender equity in academic publishing.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for locally advanced esophageal/gastroesophageal junction squamous cancer (LAEGSC), 5-fluorouracil (5FU)+platinum, is toxic and logistically challenging; alternative regimens are needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase III randomized open-label non-inferiority trial at Tata Memorial Center, India, in resectable LAEGSC. Patients were randomized 1:1 to three cycles of 3-weekly platinum (cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin AUC 6) with paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (day 1) or 5FU 1000 mg/m2 continuous infusion (days 1-4), followed by surgery. RESULTS: Between August 2014 and June 2022, we enrolled 420 patients; 210 to each arm. Significantly more patients on paclitaxel + platinum (194 (92.3%)] received all 3 chemotherapy cycles than on 5FU+platinum (170 [85.9%]), P = .009. 5FU + platinum caused more grade ≥ 3 toxicities (124 [69.7%]) than paclitaxel + platinum (97 [51.9%]), P = .001. Surgery was performed in 131 (62.4%) patients on 5FU + platinum vs 139 (66.2%) on paclitaxel + platinum, P = .415. Paclitaxel + platinum resulted in higher pathologic primary tumor clearance (33 [25.8%]) vs 17 [15%]; P = .04), and pathologic complete responses in 21.9% compared to 12.4% from 5FU + platinum, P = .053. Median OS was 27.5 months (95% CI, 18.6-43.5) from paclitaxel + platinum, which was non-inferior to 27.1 months (95% CI, 18.8-40.7) from 5FU + platinum; HR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.72-1.09); P = .346. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant paclitaxel + platinum chemotherapy is safer, and results in similar R0 resections, higher pathologic tumor clearance and non-inferior survival, compared to 5FU + platinum. Paclitaxel + platinum should replace 5FU + platinum as NACT for resectable LAEGSC. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY INDIA NUMBER: CTRI/2014/04/004516.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) with TPF (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5FU) is one of the treatment options in very locally advanced oral cancer with a survival advantage over PF (cisplatin and 5FU). TP (docetaxel and cisplatin) has shown promising results with a lower rate of adverse events but has never been compared to TPF. METHODS: In this phase 3 randomized superiority study, adult patients with borderline resectable locally advanced oral cancers were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either TP or TPF. After the administration of 2 cycles, patients were evaluated in a multidisciplinary clinic and further treatment was planned. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. RESULTS: 495 patients were randomized in this study, 248 patients in TP arm and 247 in TPF arm. The 5-year OS was 18.5% (95% CI 13.8-23.7) and 23.9% (95% CI 18.1-30.1) in TP and TPF arms, respectively (Hazard ratio 0.778; 95% CI 0.637-0.952; P = 0.015). Following NACT, 43.8% were deemed resectable, but 34.5% underwent surgery. The 5-year OS was 50.7% (95% CI 41.5-59.1) and 5% (95%CI 2.9-8.1), respectively, in the surgically resected versus unresected cohort post NACT (P < 0.0001). Grade 3 or above adverse events were seen in 97 (39.1%) and 179 (72.5%) patients in the TP and TPF arms, respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: NACT with TPF has a survival benefit over TP in borderline resectable oral cancers, with an increase in toxicity which is manageable. Patients who undergo surgery achieve a relatively good, sustained survival.