American Journal of Clinical Oncology

Journal Information
ISSN / EISSN : 0277-3732 / 1537-453X
Total articles ≅ 5,802
Current Coverage
SCOPUS
SCIE
MEDICUS
MEDLINE
PUBMED
Archived in
SHERPA/ROMEO
Filter:

Latest articles in this journal

, Shantanu Banerji, Julian O. Kim, Shrinivas Rathod, David E. Dawe
American Journal of Clinical Oncology; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000867

Abstract:
Central nervous system (CNS) metastasis will develop in 50% of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients throughout disease course. Development of CNS metastasis poses a particular treatment dilemma due to the accompanied cognitive changes, poor permeability of the blood-brain barrier to systemic therapy and relatively advanced state of disease. Survival of patients with untreated SCLC brain metastases is generally <3 months with whole brain radiotherapy used as first-line management in most SCLC patients. To prevent development of CNS metastasis prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) is recommended in limited stage disease, after response to chemotherapy and radiation, while PCI may be considered in extensive stage disease after favorable response to upfront treatment. Neurocognitive toxicity with whole brain radiotherapy and PCI is a concern and remains difficult to predict. The mechanism of toxicity is likely multifactorial, but a potential mechanism of injury to the hippocampus has led to hippocampal sparing radiation techniques. Treatment of established non–small cell lung cancer CNS metastases has increasingly focused on using stereotactic radiotherapy (SRS) and it is tempting to extrapolate these results to SCLC. In this review, we explore the evidence surrounding the prediction, prevention, detection, and treatment of CNS metastases in SCLC. We further review whether existing evidence supports extrapolating less toxic treatments to SCLC patients with CNS metastases and discuss trials that may shed more light on this question.
, Andre G. Gouveia, Alexandre A. Jacinto, Fabio Y. Moraes
American Journal of Clinical Oncology; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000869

Abstract:
Objectives: To provide an overview of the achievements and future research with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in prostate cancer. Methods: SBRT publications for prostate cancer were retrieved from the Web of Science and Dimension database. Bibliometric analyses were performed using VOSviewer and Prism graph. Analysis of variance test was used to compare the publication, citation, and the mean citation between specialty journals. Network maps were produced to identify authors’ and countries’ collaboration clusters. Results: Between 2006 and 2020, 574 publications fulfilling the inclusion criteria were identified, and a significant growth trend in publication (P<0.0001) and citation (P=0.001) number was recognized over the period. The United States was the most productive country with 253 (44.2%) articles. The RED Journal had the highest number of publications (14%) and citations (19%). Urology journals published (P=0.01) and cited significantly less than radiation oncology journals (P=0.01). All open access and non–open access number of publications increased over time, with a significant difference between non–open access and open access journals (P<0.0001). Two author clusters were identified, in the United States with the collaboration of Canadian and British authors, and in Italy with the participation of European authors. Conclusion: The number of publications and citations on SBRT for prostate cancer has grown linearly in the last decades. The United States is the leading country in this research field, and the use of SBRT in oligometastatic disease, reirradiation, and salvage seems to be hot topics in this research field.
, Kelsey C. Stoltzfus, Brianna M. Jones, Niraj J. Gusani, Vonn Walter, Ming Wang, Daniel M. Trifiletti, Shankar Siva, Alexander V. Louie, Nicholas G. Zaorsky
American Journal of Clinical Oncology; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000866

Abstract:
Objectives: Metastatic cancer has historically been considered fatal; however, there is a paucity of evidence characterizing the epidemiology of incidence, treatment, and outcomes in these patients. Materials and Methods: Incidence rates, annual percent change (APC), descriptive epidemiological statistics, and odds ratios for survival were calculated using registry data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and the National Cancer Database (NCDB), 1998 to 2015. Results: There were a total of 1,055,860 patients with metastatic cancer. The most frequent primary cancers were lung (42.6%), colorectal (9.5%), and ovarian (5.5%). Metastatic lung and colorectal cancer incidence decreased, APC: −1.57 (P<0.001) and APC: −1.48 (P<0.001), respectively; metastatic pancreatic cancer incidence increased, APC: 0.62 (P=0.001). The use of local therapies decreased for almost all sites, and the use of systemic therapies increased across multiple sites: single-agent chemotherapy in kidney (2.54% increase/year), female breast (1.14% increase/year), and prostate cancer (1.08% increase/year); multiagent chemotherapy, most notably in pancreas (2.23% increase/year), uterus (1.81% increase/year), and colorectal cancer (1.54% increase/year). Increased utilization of immunotherapy was observed across the majority of sites, most notably in melanoma (2.14% increase/year). Patients diagnosed from 2006 to 2010 had 17.4% higher odds of surviving at least 60 months compared with 1998 to 2002. Conclusions: In this study, metastatic disease has been shown to have unique epidemiological patterns, and survival has improved. Continued research on metastatic disease is important in understanding and addressing the distinct health concerns of this population.
Elham Rahimy, Sara A. Dudley, Rie von Eyben, Erqi L. Pollom, Kira Seiger, Leslie Modlin, Jacob Wynne, Dylann Fujimoto, Lisa R. Jacobs, Steven D. Chang, et al.
American Journal of Clinical Oncology; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000868

Abstract:
Objectives: We investigated differences in quality of life (QoL) in patients enrolled on a phase I/II dose-escalation study of 3-fraction resection cavity stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for large brain metastases. Methods: Eligible patients had 1 to 4 brain metastases, one of which was a resection cavity 4.2 to 33.5 cm3. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaires core-30 (QLQ-30) and brain cancer specific module (QLQ-BN20) were obtained before SRS and at each follow-up. Nine scales were analyzed (global health status; physical, social, and emotional functioning; motor dysfunction, communication deficit, fatigue, insomnia, and future uncertainty). QoL was assessed with mixed effects models. Differences ≥10 points with q-value (adjusted P-value to account for multiplicity of testing) <0.10 were considered significant. Results: Between 2009 and 2014, 50 enrolled patients completed 277 QoL questionnaires. Median questionnaire follow-up was 11.8 months. After SRS, insomnia demonstrated significant improvement (q=0.032, −17.7 points at 15 mo post-SRS), and future uncertainty demonstrated significant worsening (q=0.018, +9.9 points at 15 mo post-SRS). Following intracranial progression and salvage SRS, there were no significant QoL changes. The impact of salvage whole brain radiotherapy could not be assessed because of limited data (n=4 patients). In the 28% of patients that had adverse radiation effect, QoL had significant worsening in 3 metrics (physical functioning, q=0.024, emotional functioning q=0.001, and future uncertainty, q=0.004). Conclusions: For patients treated with 3-fraction SRS for large brain metastasis cavities, 8 of 9 QoL metrics were unchanged or improved after initial SRS. Intracranial tumor progression and salvage SRS did not impact QoL. Adverse radiation effect may be associated with at least short-term QoL impairments, but requires further investigation.
Kathryn R.K. Benson, Navjot Sandhu, Carrie Zhang, Ryan Ko, Diego A.S. Toesca, Phoebe E. Lee, Rie Von Eyben, Maximilian Diehn, Michael Gensheimer, Peter G. Maxim, et al.
American Journal of Clinical Oncology; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000864

Abstract:
Purpose: The aim of this study was to report local failure (LF) outcomes and associated predictors in patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with CRC metastases to the brain, liver, spine, or lung treated with SABR between 2001 and 2016. Time to LF was summarized using cumulative incidence of LF curves with death as a competing risk. Results: The analysis included a total of 130 patients and 256 lesions. Of the metastases treated, 129 (50%) were brain, 50 (20%) liver, 49 (19%) spine, and 28 (11%) lung. Median gross tumor volume was 24 mL for liver metastases, 2 mL for brain metastases, 4 mL for spine metastases, and 1 mL for lung metastases. The overall 1, 2, and 3-year cumulative incidence of LF rates were 21.6% (16.5, 27.1), 28.2% (22.3, 34.4), and 31.5% (25.2, 38.0), respectively. LF was highest among the liver metastases (1 y: 26.0%, 2 y: 38.5%), followed by spine (1 y: 25.1%, 2 y: 31.1%), brain (1 y: 20%, 2 y: 25.2%), and lung (1 y: 13.7%, 2 y: insufficient data). Metastases from right-sided primary CRC were significantly more likely to have LF (P=0.0146, HR=2.23). Biologically effective dose>70 Gy, defined using a standard linear quadratic model using α/β ratio of 10 on the individual lesion level, and pre-SABR chemotherapy were also significant predictors of LF (P= 0.0009 and 0.018, respectively). Conclusions: CRC metastases treated with SABR had significantly higher rates of LF if they originated from right-sided primary CRC, compared with left-sided. Liver metastases had the highest rates of LF compared with other metastatic sites. Thus, CRC liver metastases and metastases from right-sided CRC may benefit from more aggressive radiotherapy.
, Jacqueline M. Ferguson, Allison Kurian, Melissa Bondy, Manali I. Patel
American Journal of Clinical Oncology; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000865

Abstract:
Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic abruptly disrupted cancer care. The impact of these disruptions on patient experiences remain relatively understudied. The objective of this study was to assess patients’ perspectives regarding the impact of COVID-19 on their experiences, including their cancer care, emotional and mental health, and social determinants of health, and to evaluate whether these outcomes differed by cancer stage. Materials and Methods: We conducted a survey among adults with cancer across the United States from April 1, 2020 to August 26, 2020 using virtual snowball sampling strategy in collaboration with professional organizations, cancer care providers, and patient advocacy groups. We analyzed data using descriptive statistics, χ2 and t tests. Results: Three hundred twelve people with cancer participated and represented 38 states. The majority were non-Hispanic White (n=183; 58.7%) and female (n=177; 56.7%) with median age of 57 years. Ninety-one percent spoke English at home, 70.1% had health insurance, and 67% had access to home internet. Breast cancer was the most common diagnosis (n=67; 21.5%). Most had Stage 4 disease (n=80; 25.6%). Forty-six percent (n=145) experienced a change in their care due to COVID-19. Sixty percent (n=187) reported feeling very or extremely concerned that the pandemic would affect their cancer and disproportionately experienced among those with advanced cancer stages compared with earlier stages (P<0.001). Fifty-two percent (n=162) reported impact of COVID-19 on 1 or more aspects of social determinants of health with disproportionate impact among those with advanced cancer stages compared with earlier stages. Conclusions: COVID-19 impacted the care and well-being of patients with cancer and this impact was more pronounced among people with advanced cancer stages. Future work should consider tailored interventions to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer.
Lynn E. Nooijen, Lotte C. Franken, Ali Belkouz, Ikrame Oulad Abdennabi, Marc G. Besselink, Olivier R. Busch, Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg, Heinz-Josef Klümpen,
American Journal of Clinical Oncology, Volume 44, pp 526-532; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000861

Abstract:
Background: In this retrospective cohort study, the potential of gemcitabine (gem)/cisplatin (cis) chemotherapy as future preoperative therapy for patients with unresectable locally advanced or borderline resectable intrahepatic, perihilar, and mid-cholangiocarcinoma was investigated. Methods: All patients with intrahepatic, perihilar, and mid-cholangiocarcinoma presented at Amsterdam UMC between January 2016 and October 2019 were included. The radiologic response after 3 and/or 6 cycles of gem/cis chemotherapy in patients with unresectable locally advanced or borderline resectable disease was derived from the original radiologic reports and subsequently re-evaluated for surgical exploration by consensus reading of 2 HPB surgeons and 1 radiologist. Results: Overall, 65 of 364 patients had a locally advanced or borderline resectable disease. Twenty-eight patients were treated with palliative chemotherapy, including 25 (89.3%) patients who received more than 3 cycles. Twenty-two patients (88.0%) and 13 patients (46.4%) showed RECIST stable disease or partial response after 3 and 6 cycles of chemotherapy, respectively. Three patients experienced grade 3 adverse events. Consensus reading concluded that exploration could have been reconsidered in 7 of 28 patients (25.0%). Conclusion: Gem/cis may be a safe and feasible preoperative treatment in initially unresectable locally advanced or borderline resectable cholangiocarcinoma. In addition, the findings of this study support to always rediscuss patients with stable or responsive disease in multidisciplinary team meetings to reconsider resection. Besides, prospective studies are needed to investigate this effect further and, based on these preliminary data, seem feasible in this setting.
Ritu Arya, Mihai Giurcanu, Jessica M. Jutzy, Pamela Peters, Ellen W. Daily, Daniel W. Golden, Anne R. McCall, Andrew R. Howard, Yasmin Hasan,
American Journal of Clinical Oncology, Volume 44, pp 565-571; https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000863

Abstract:
Objective: Historically, external beam parametrial boost (EBPB) has been used in locally advanced cervical cancers to supplement radiation dose. However, it has become controversial in the era of image-guided brachytherapy. Modern 3D imaging and brachytherapy techniques have improved delineation and coverage of tumor. Outcomes with and without parametrial boost were analyzed. Methods: Women with cervical cancer involving the parametria (clinically or radiographically) diagnosed between 2001 and 2017 were identified. Clinicopathologic and treatment features, survival and patterns of failure data were collected. Univariate and multivariable data analysis was performed to evaluate association of these variables, including parametrial boost, with local failure-free survival and overall survival. Competing risks analysis was performed for cumulative incidence of local failure, with death and other failures treated as competing events. Results: A total of 100 women were identified (median follow-up 26.8 mo). Forty-one (41%) received EBPB; these patients were less likely to have received magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, interstitial, or high-dose rate brachytherapy. Magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography, dose rate, and treatment era were highly correlated (Cramer’s V: 0.43 to 0.68, P<0.01). Two-year overall survival and local failure were 78% and 12% for the entire cohort. While the use of EBPB was not associated with any outcome on multivariable analysis, treatment year after 2009 was highly associated with improved outcomes in all models. Conclusions: In this study, omission of EBPB did not compromise local control or survival in the modern era, supporting a decreased need for standardized use of parametrial boost.
Back to Top Top