Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Tipo de estudo
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Front Oncol ; 11: 710585, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34568037

RESUMO

Background: Treatment of malignant melanoma has undergone a paradigm shift with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies. However, access to ICI is limited in low-middle income countries (LMICs). Patients and Methods: Histologically confirmed malignant melanoma cases registered from 2013 to 2019 were analysed for pattern of care, safety, and efficacy of systemic therapies (ST). Results: There were 659 patients with a median age of 53 (range 44-63) years; 58.9% were males; 55.2% were mucosal melanomas. Most common primary sites were extremities (36.6%) and anorectum (31.4%). Nearly 10.8% of the metastatic cohort were BRAF mutated. Among 368 non-metastatic patients (172 prior treated, 185 de novo, and 11 unresectable), with a median follow-up of 26 months (0-83 months), median EFS and OS were 29.5 (95% CI: 22-40) and 33.3 (95% CI: 29.5-41.2) months, respectively. In the metastatic cohort, with a median follow up of 24 (0-85) months, the median EFS for BSC was 3.1 (95% CI 1.9-4.8) months versus 3.98 (95% CI 3.2-4.7) months with any ST (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92; P = 0.011). The median OS was 3.9 (95% CI 3.3-6.4) months for BSC alone versus 12.0 (95% CI 10.5-15.1) months in any ST (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.28-0.50; P < 0.001). The disease control rate was 51.55%. Commonest grade 3-4 toxicity was anemia with chemotherapy (9.5%) and ICI (8.8%). In multivariate analysis, any ST received had a better prognostic impact in the metastatic cohort. Conclusions: Large real-world data reflects the treatment patterns adopted in LMIC for melanomas and poor access to expensive, standard of care therapies. Other systemic therapies provide meaningful clinical benefit and are worth exploring especially when the standard therapies are challenging to administer.

2.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 113(9): 1228-1237, 2021 Sep 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33606023

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care (EPC) is an important aspect of cancer management but, to our knowledge, has never been evaluated in patients with head and neck cancer. Hence, we performed this study to determine whether the addition of EPC to standard therapy leads to an improvement in the quality of life (QOL), decrease in symptom burden, and improvement in overall survival. METHODS: Adult patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck region planned for palliative systemic therapy were allocated 1:1 to either standard systemic therapy without or with comprehensive EPC service referral. Patients were administered the revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy for head and neck cancer (FACT-H&N) questionnaire at baseline and every 1 month thereafter for 3 months. The primary endpoint was a change in the QOL measured at 3 months after random assignment. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Ninety patients were randomly assigned to each arm. There was no statistical difference in the change in the FACT-H&N total score (P = .94), FACT-H&N Trial Outcome Index (P = .95), FACT-general total (P = .84), and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale scores at 3 months between the 2 arms. The median overall survival was similar between the 2 arms (hazard ratio for death = 1.01, 95% confidence interval = 0.74 to 1.35). There were 5 in-hospital deaths in both arms (5.6% for both, P = .99). CONCLUSIONS: In this phase III study, the integration of EPC in head and neck cancer patients did not lead to an improvement in the QOL or survival.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...