小狗阅读会员会员
有解析的医学SCI阅读工具

扫码登录小狗阅读

阅读SCI医学文献

Wait-and-See Treatment Strategy Could be Considered for Lung Adenocarcinoma with Special Pleural Dissemination Lesions, and Low Genomic Instability Correlates with Better Survival.

对于具有特殊胸膜播散病灶的肺腺癌,可以考虑观望治疗策略,低基因组不稳定性与更好的生存率相关。

  • 影响因子:3.60
  • DOI:10.1245/s10434-020-08400-1
  • 作者列表:"Chen Y","Tang WF","Lin H","Bao H","Li W","Wang A","Wu X","Su J","Lin JS","Shao YW","Yang XN","Wu YL","Zhong WZ
  • 发表时间:2020-04-01
Abstract

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of a wait-and-see strategy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with special pleural dissemination lesions (r-pM1a and s-pM1a). Furthermore, the study characterized genomic alternations about disease progression. METHODS:For this study, 131 NSCLC patients with a diagnosis of pM1a were retrospectively selected. Survival differences were evaluated among patients treated with three different initial postoperative treatments: chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and wait-and-see strategy. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was performed on primary and metastatic tumors of 10 patients with dramatic progression and 13 patients with gradual progression. RESULTS:The wait-and-see group showed better progression-free survival (PFS) than the chemotherapy group (p < 0.001) but PFS similar to that of targeted group (p = 0.984). This pattern persisted in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-positive patients. For patients with EGFR-negative/unknown status, PFS was longer in the wait-and-see group than in the two treatment groups. Furthermore, better overall survival (OS) was observed for the patients who received chemotherapy or targeted therapy after the wait-and-see strategy than for those who received chemotherapy or targeted therapy immediately. Lymph node status was an independent prognostic factor for PFS and OS. Finally, WES analysis showed that a high genomic instability index (GIS) and chromosome 18q loss were more common in metastatic tumors, and low GIS was significantly associated with better PFS (p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS:The wait-and-see strategy could be considered for special pM1a patients without lymph nodes metastasis, and patients with a low GIS may be suitable for this strategy.

摘要

背景: 本研究旨在评估非小细胞肺癌 (NSCLC) 特殊胸膜播散病灶 (r-pM1a 和 s-pM1a) 患者观望策略的可行性。此外,该研究表征了关于疾病进展的基因组变化。 方法: 本研究回顾性选择 131 例诊断为 pM1a 的 NSCLC 患者。评估了接受三种不同术后初始治疗的患者的生存差异: 化疗、靶向治疗和观望策略。对 10 例进展明显的患者和 13 例进展逐渐的患者的原发性和转移性肿瘤进行全外显子组测序 (WES)。 结果: 观察组无进展生存期 (PFS) 优于化疗组 (p <0.001)。但 PFS 与靶向组相似 (p = 0.984)。这种模式在表皮生长因子受体 (EGFR) 阳性患者中持续存在。对于 EGFR 阴性/状态未知的患者,观望组的 PFS 长于两个治疗组。此外,观察到在观望策略后接受化疗或靶向治疗的患者总生存期 (OS) 优于立即接受化疗或靶向治疗的患者。淋巴结状态是 PFS 和 OS 的独立预后因素。最后,WES 分析表明,高基因组不稳定指数 (GIS) 和染色体 18q 丢失在转移性肿瘤中更常见,低 GIS 与较好的 PFS 显著相关 (p = 0.016)。 结论: 对于无淋巴结转移的特殊 pM1a 患者可考虑观望策略,低 GIS 患者可能适合该策略。

关键词:
阅读人数:2人
下载该文献
小狗阅读

帮助医生、学生、科研工作者解决SCI文献找不到、看不懂、阅读效率低的问题。提供领域精准的SCI文献,通过多角度解析提高文献阅读效率,从而使用户获得有价值研究思路。

相关文献
影响因子:1.13
发表时间:2020-01-01
DOI:10.1016/j.asjsur.2019.03.008
作者列表:["Esme H","Can A","Şehitogullari A"]

METHODS:BACKGROUND:The objectives of this study are to assess the chest drainage volumes of patients undergoing anatomic resection of non-small cell lung carcinoma and to determine the safety and effectiveness of administering enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis. METHODS:A total of 77 patients were included in the study. A study was conducted on the first group of 42 patients in which enoxaparin prophylaxis (enoxaparin, 40 mg) was subcutaneously injected once a day for a period of three days after the patients underwent anatomic pulmonary resection between March 2016 and March 2018. An enoxaparin-free group was identified and included 35 patients who received no enoxaparin prophylaxis after undergoing anatomic pulmonary resection between February 2013 and February 2016. We compared the changes in hemoglobin (Hb) levels, postoperative 3-day drainage volume, transfusion volume, pulmonary complications and length of stay between the two groups. RESULTS:No differences in postoperative Hb levels, chest drainage volume, transfusion volume, postoperative complications, and length of stay were observed between the two groups. Deep-vein thrombosis was noted in a patient in the enoxaparin-free group. No major bleeding was noted in either group. CONCLUSION:We found that for patients undergoing anatomic resection of primary lung cancer, the blood transfusion and chest drainage volumes did not differ, regardless of whether the patients were given enoxaparin. To the best of our knowledge, the impact of low-molecular-weight heparin on chest tube drainage volume for patients undergoing anatomic resection of non-small cell lung carcinoma has not been investigated before.

翻译标题与摘要 下载文献
影响因子:1.84
发表时间:2020-01-01
来源期刊:Oncology letters
DOI:10.3892/ol.2019.11149
作者列表:["Das SK","Huang YY","Li B","Yu XX","Xiao RH","Yang HF"]

METHODS::The aim of the present study was to compare the safety and efficacy of cryoablation (CA) and microwave ablation (MWA) as treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC treated with CA (n=45) or MWA (n=56) were enrolled in the present study. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) time and adverse events (AEs). The median PFS times between the two groups were not significantly different (P=0.36): CA, 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5-12.4] vs. MWA, 11 months (95% CI, 9.5-12.4). The OS times between the two groups were also not significantly different (P=0.07): CA, 27.5 months (95% CI, 22.8-31.2 months) vs. MWA, 18 months (95% CI, 12.5-23.5). For larger tumors (>3 cm), patients treated with MWA had significantly longer median PFS (P=0.04; MWA, 10.5 months vs. CA, 7.0 months) and OS times (P=0.04; MWA, 24.5 months vs. CA, 14.5 months) compared patients treated with CA. However, for smaller tumors (≤3 cm), median PFS (P=0.79; MWA, 11.0 months vs. CA, 13.0 months) and OS times (P=0.39; MWA, 30.0 months vs. CA, 26.5 months) between the two groups did not differ significantly. The incidence rates of AEs were similar in the two groups (P>0.05). The number of applicators, tumor size and length of the lung traversed by applicators were associated with a higher risk of pneumothorax and intra-pulmonary hemorrhage in the two groups. Treatment with CA resulted in significantly less intraprocedural pain compared with treatment with MWA (P=0.001). Overall, the present study demonstrated that CA and MWA were comparably safe and effective procedures for the treatment of small tumors. However, treatment with MWA was superior compared with CA for the treatment of large tumors.

翻译标题与摘要 下载文献
影响因子:8.44
发表时间:2020-02-01
DOI:10.1016/j.annonc.2019.10.022
作者列表:["Mazieres J","Cropet C","Montané L","Barlesi F","Souquet PJ","Quantin X","Dubos-Arvis C","Otto J","Favier L","Avrillon V","Cadranel J","Moro-Sibilot D","Monnet I","Westeel V","Le Treut J","Brain E","Trédaniel J","Jaffro M","Collot S","Ferretti GR","Tiffon C","Mahier-Ait Oukhatar C","Blay JY"]

METHODS:BACKGROUND:BRAF mutations occurring in 1%-5% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are therapeutic targets for these cancers but the impact of the exact mutation on clinical activity is unclear. The French National Cancer Institute (INCA) launched the AcSé vemurafenib trial to assess the efficacy and safety of vemurafenib in cancers with various BRAF mutations. We herein report the results of the NSCLC cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS:Tumour samples were screened for BRAF mutations in INCA-certified molecular genetic centres. Patients with BRAF-mutated tumours progressing after ≥1 line of treatment were proposed vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. Between October 2014 and July 2018, 118 patients were enrolled in the NSCLC cohort. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR) assessed every 8 weeks (RECIST v1.1). A sequential Bayesian approach was planned with an inefficacy bound of 10% for ORR. If no early stopping occurred, the treatment was of interest if the estimated ORR was ≥30% with a 90% probability. Secondary outcomes were tolerance, response duration, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS:Of the 118 patients enrolled, 101 presented with a BRAFV600 mutation and 17 with BRAFnonV600 mutations; the median follow-up was 23.9 months. In the BRAFnonV600 cohort, no objective response was observed and this cohort was stopped. In the BRAFV600 cohort, 43/96 patients had objective responses. The mean Bayesian estimated success rate was 44.9% [95% confidence intervals (CI) 35.2%-54.8%]. The ORR had a 99.9% probability of being ≥30%. Median response duration was 6.4 months, median PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI 3.8-6.8), and OS was 10 months (95% CI 6.8-15.7). The vemurafenib safety profile was consistent with previous publications. CONCLUSION:Routine biomarker screening of NSCLC should include BRAFV600 mutations. Vemurafenib monotherapy is effective for treating patients with BRAFV600-mutated NSCLC but not those with BRAFnonV600 mutations. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02304809.

翻译标题与摘要 下载文献
方向

复制标题
发送后即可在该邮箱或我的下载查看该文献
发送
该文献默认存储到我的下载

科研福利

报名咨询

建议反馈
问题标题:
联系方式:
电子邮件:
您的需求: