Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
Breast ; 60: 177-184, 2021 Oct 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34655887


BACKGROUND: Young (≤40 years) breast cancers (YBC) are uncommon, inadequately represented in trials and have unique concerns and merit studying. METHODS: The YBC treated with a curative intent between 2015 and 2016 at our institute were analysed. RESULTS: There were 1228 patients with a median age of 36 (12-40) years; 38 (3.1%) had Stage I, 455 (37.1%) - II, 692 (56.3%) -III, and remaining 43 (3.5%) Stage IV (oligo-metastatic) disease; 927 (75.5%) were node positive; 422 (34.4%) were Triple negatives (TNBC), 331 (27%) were HER-2 positive. There were 549 (48.2%) breast conservations and 591 (51.8%) mastectomies of which 62 (10.4%) underwent breast reconstruction. 1143 women received chemotherapy, 617 (53.9%) received as neoadjuvant and 142 (23.1%) had pathological complete response; 934 (81.9%) received adjuvant radiotherapy. At the median follow-up of 48 (0-131) months, 5-year overall and disease-free survival was 79.6% (76.8-82.5) and 59.1% (55.8-62.6). For stage I, II, III and IV, the 5-year overall-survival was 100%, 86.7% (82.8-90.6), 77.3% (73.4-81.2), 69.7% (52.5-86.9) and disease-free survival was 94% (85.9-100), 65.9% (60.3-71.5), 55% (50.5-59.5), and 29.6% (14-45.2) respectively. On multivariate analysis, TNBC and HER-2+ subgroups had poorer survival (p = 0.0035). 25 patients had BRCA mutations with a 5-year DFS of 65.1% (95% CI:43.6-86.6). Fertility preservation was administered in 104 (8.5%) patients; seven women conceived and 5 had live births. Significant postmenopausal symptoms were present in 153 (13%) patients. CONCLUSION: More than half of the YBC in India were diagnosed at an advanced stage with aggressive features leading to suboptimal outcomes. Awareness via national registry and early diagnosis is highly warranted. Menopausal symptoms and fertility issues are prevalent and demand special focus.

PLoS One ; 16(7): e0253722, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34292933


BACKGROUND: There is scant data from India on efficacy and safety of palbociclib and ribociclib in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective, observational, single institution study included patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative metastatic breast cancers, who received palbociclib or ribociclib with any partner endocrine therapy in any line of treatment between January 2016 and June 2019. Data were analyzed for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: The study included 101 female patients with median age of 57 (IQR 48-62) years, of whom 80 (79.2%) were postmenopausal, 79 (78.2%) received palbociclib or ribociclib in second- or later-line treatment, 59 (58.4%) received fulvestrant and 41 (40.6%) received an aromatase inhibitor. In first-line treatment, at a median follow-up of 21.7 (0.5-41.9) months, median PFS and OS were 21.1 (95%CI 16.36-not estimable) months and not reached, respectively. In second- or later-line setting, at a median follow-up of 17.2 (0.5-43.7) months, median PFS and OS were 5.98 (95%CI 4.96-7.89) months and 20.2 (95%CI 14.1-not estimable) months, respectively. Grade 3-4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were seen in 45 (45.0%) and 9 (9.0%) patients, respectively while dose reduction was required in 32 (31.7%) patients. In multivariable Cox regression analysis, first-line setting (HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.25-0.97, p = 0.043) and ECOG performance status 1 (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.20-0.91, p = 0.028) were significantly associated with PFS while only ECOG PS 1 was significantly associated (HR 0.04, 95%CI 0.008-0.206, p = 0.000) with OS. CONCLUSION: Palbociclib and ribociclib, when used in routine clinical practice in first or subsequent lines of treatment, resulted in efficacy and toxicity outcomes in concordance with those expected from pivotal trials.

Aminopiridinas/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias da Mama , Piperazinas/administração & dosagem , Purinas/administração & dosagem , Piridinas/administração & dosagem , Receptor ErbB-2/metabolismo , Receptores de Estrogênio/metabolismo , Receptores de Progesterona/metabolismo , Idoso , Aminopiridinas/efeitos adversos , Neoplasias da Mama/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias da Mama/metabolismo , Neoplasias da Mama/mortalidade , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Bases de Dados Factuais , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Piperazinas/efeitos adversos , Purinas/efeitos adversos , Piridinas/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida
South Asian J Cancer ; 9(4): 245-249, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34141686


Purpose The objective of this study was to assess the proportion of patients developing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) after receiving chemotherapy for gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, despite receiving antiemetic prophylaxis (AEP) as per the standard guidelines. Patients and Methods Between April 2019 and March 2020, all patients planned for chemotherapy were eligible for enrolment in the study. The primary endpoint of the study was the assessment of complete response (CR) rates. Results Overall, 1,276 consecutive patients were screened for this study, while 738 patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria were included. A total of 23.2% of the whole cohort failed to achieve CR. Also, 28.2, 16.9, and 16.6% of patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), low emetogenic chemotherapy (LEC), and high emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), respectively, failed to achieve CR. The differences in failure to achieve CR was statistically significant between MEC and HEC ( p < 0.001) groups. Among MEC group, there was no difference between those who received oxaliplatin (27.8%) versus nonoxaliplatin regimens (25.8%) in terms of failure rates ( p = 0.613). Conclusion Approximately one-fourth of patients failed to achieve a complete response from CINV in GI cancers despite using guideline-based AEP. Patients receiving MEC had the highest failure rates suggesting a need to improve AEP in these patients.