The diagnosis and management of gastric cancer: expert discussion and recommendations from the 12th ESMO/World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2010

Cutsem, Éric Van; Dicato, Mario; Geva, Ravit; Arber, Nadir; Bang, Yung Jue; Benson, Al B.; Cervantes, Andrés; Díaz-Rubio, Eduardo; Ducreux, Michel; Glynne-Jones, R.; Grothey, Axel; Haller, Daniel G.; Haustermans, Karin; Kerr, D J; Nordlinger, Bernard; Marshall, John L.; Minsky, B. D.; Kang, Yoon Koo; Labianca, Roberto; Lordick, Florian; Ohtsu, Atsushi; Pavlidis, N.; Roth, Arnaud; Rougier, Philippe; Schmoll, H.-J.; Sobrero, Alberto; Tabernero, Josep; Velde, Cornelis van de; Zalcberg, John

doi:10.1093/annonc/mdr284

Cited by 121 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nationwide clinical guidelines have become more and more indispensable for the definition, implementation and maintenance of healthcare system-specific diagnostic and therapeutic standards [1][2][3][4][5][6]. These recommendations are increasingly being used in everyday clinical practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Clinical guidelines are essential in implementing and maintaining nationwide stage-specific diagnostic and therapeutic standards. In 2011, the first German expert consensus guideline defined the evidence for diagnosis and treatment of early and locally advanced esophagogastric cancers. Here, we compare this guideline with other national guidelines as well as current literature.Methods The German S3-guideline used an approved development process with de novo literature research, international guideline adaptation, or good clinical practice. Other recent evidence-based national guidelines and current references were compared with German recommendations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Europe, the estimated 2012 incidence of gastric cancer is 139,595 cases, with 107,268 projected deaths [2]. The standard treatment approach in patients with localized disease is surgical resection with perioperative chemotherapy, while palliative chemotherapy is used in patients with locally advanced inoperable disease and in those with metastatic disease [3][4][5]. No single chemotherapy regimen has yet emerged as a global standard in gastric cancer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No single chemotherapy regimen has yet emerged as a global standard in gastric cancer. At the present time, double and triple combinations including 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), cisplatin ± anthracyclines as well as docetaxel-containing or irinotecan-containing regimens are considered the most active treatments [3,4,6,7]. In patients with HER-2 overexpression, the addition of trastuzumab to cisplatin/ fluoropyrimidine has been shown to be superior to chemotherapy alone [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemotherapy treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Potentially myelosuppressive doublet and triplet chemotherapy combination regimens are considered the most active treatments in gastric cancer. This multicenter prospective observational study was designed to gain insight into the chemotherapy regimens being used in Europe and to evaluate neutropenia management in patients identified as at high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN). Methods Eligible patients had gastric cancer, were scheduled for C 3 cycles of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and had an investigator-assessed overall FN risk C 20 %. Data were collected for up to ten cycles. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who received granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) primary prophylaxis (defined as G-CSF initiated on days 1-7 of cycle 1). Secondary endpoints included FN incidence, chemotherapy administration, and G-CSF use. Results Of 199 patients who met the eligibility criteria and started at least one cycle of chemotherapy, mean age was 63 years, 76 % were men, 83 % had an ECOG score of 0 or 1, 54 % had metastatic disease, and 24 % had received prior chemotherapy. A total of 27 different backbone regimens were given; the most common regimen was modified docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (DCF). Despite all patients having been identified as having a C 20 % FN risk, only 70 (35 %) received G-CSF primary prophylaxis. FN occurred in 14 patients overall (7 %). Most FN events occurred in patients who received DCF/modified DCF (9/14 events, 64 %). Conclusions The results of this study reveal a high use of myelotoxic treatment regimens in gastric cancer in Europe and low adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the use of primary and secondary G-CSF prophylaxis for FN.

show abstract

“…Eligible articles were identified based on the following detailed inclusion criteria: 1) only cohort studies that discussed the association between CTHRC1 protein expression and cancer were included; 2) all patients diagnosed with cancer were confirmed by histopathology indicating invasion occurrence as described (Van Cutsem et al, 2011); 3) the number of cancer cases included was provided; 4) the number of cases were more than 35; and 5) sufficient data for tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, lymph node (LN) metastasis, and tumor size were provided. The following studies were excluded: 1) those on hereditary tumors; 2) those on haplotypes only; 3) those with patients who had been treated with anti-tumor therapy; and 4) case-control studies.…”

Section: Selection Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical significance of CTHRC1 protein expression in human cancers: a meta-analysis

Wang

Yin

et al. 2016

Genet. Mol. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the overall diagnostic and prognostic values of CTHRC1 expression in human cancer development. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 8 cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. The data were extracted, and analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Summary odds ratios (ORs) and effect sizes (ESs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the strength of the associations. A total of 1065 cancer patients from the 8 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results revealed a positive correlation of CTHRC1 protein expression in tumors with tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage and with lymph node (LN) metastasis (TNM: OR = 2.98, 95%CI = 1.48-6.00, P = 0.002; LN: OR = 4.26, 95%CI = 1.88-9.67, P = 0.001). CTHRC1 expression was higher in tumors with sizes ≥5 cm than in tumors with sizes <5 cm (OR = 2.39, 95%CI = 1.12-5.09, P = 0.024). Patients with higher CTHRC1 expression had decreased overall survival (OS) (ES = 1.78, 95%CI = 1.23-2.33, P < 0.001) and poorer disease-free survival (DFS) (ES = 1.71, 95%CI = 1.11-2.31, P < 0.001). Disease-stratified analyses yielded significantly different estimates of CTHRC1 levels in the majority of the subgroups (all P < 0.05). In conclusion, increased CTHRC1 expression is associated with advanced TNM stage, increased LN metastasis and tumor size, and decreased OS and DFS, indicating that CTHRC1 may be a biomarker for prognosis of cancer patients.

show abstract

The diagnosis and management of gastric cancer: expert discussion and recommendations from the 12th ESMO/World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2010

Cited by 121 publications

References 95 publications

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus

International comparison of the German evidence-based S3-guidelines on the diagnosis and multimodal treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer, including adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus

Chemotherapy treatment patterns and neutropenia management in gastric cancer

Clinical significance of CTHRC1 protein expression in human cancers: a meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About