http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Alice T. Shaw (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Gadgeel, Shirish M.,Shaw, Alice T.,Govindan, Ramaswamy American Society of Clinical Oncology 2016 Journal of clinical oncology Vol.34 No.34
<P>Purpose Alectinib has shown activity in the CNS in phase I and II studies. To further evaluate this activity, we pooled efficacy and safety data from two single-arm phase II studies (NP28761 and NP28673; ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01871805 and NCT01801111, respectively) in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods Both studies included patients with ALK-positive NSCLC who had previously received crizotinib; all patients received alectinib 600 mg twice per day. The primary end point in both studies was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed objective response rate (ORR; by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors [ RECIST] version 1.1). Additional end points (all by IRC) included CNS ORR (CORR), CNS disease control rate (CDCR), and CNS duration of response (CDOR). Results One hundred thirty-six patients had baseline CNS metastases (60% of the overall study populations); 50 patients (37%) had measurable CNS disease at baseline. Ninety-five patients (70%) had prior CNS radiotherapy; 55 patients completed the CNS radiotherapy more than 6 months before starting alectinib. Median follow-up time was 12.4 months (range, 0.9 to 19.7 months). For patients with baseline measurable CNS disease, IRC CORR was 64.0% (95% CI, 49.2% to 77.1%), CDCR was 90.0% (95% CI, 78.2% to 96.7%), and median CDOR was 10.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 14.1 months). For patients with measurable and/or nonmeasurable baseline CNS disease, IRC CORR was 42.6% (95% CI, 34.2% to 51.4%), CDCR was 85.3% (95% CI, 78.2% to 90.8%), and median CDOR was 11.1 months (95% CI, 10.3 months to not evaluable). CORR was 35.8% (95% CI, 26.2% to 46.3%) for patients with prior radiotherapy (n = 95) and 58.5% (95% CI, 42.1% to 73.7%) for patients without prior radiotherapy (n = 41). As previously reported, alectinib was well tolerated, regardless of baseline CNS disease. Conclusion Alectinib showed good efficacy against CNS metastases, in addition to systemic activity, in crizotinib-refractory ALK-positive NSCLC. (C) 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology</P>
-
Makoto Nishio,김동완,Yi-Long Wu,Kazuhiko Nakagawa,Benjamin J. Solomon,Alice T. Shaw,Satoshi Hashigaki,Emiko Ohki,Tiziana Usari,Jolanda Paolini,Anna Polli,Keith D. Wilner,Tony Mok 대한암학회 2018 Cancer Research and Treatment Vol.50 No.3
Purpose Crizotinib has demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rates (ORRs) versus chemotherapy in previously treated and untreated patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We report the safety and efficacy of crizotinib in Asian subpopulations of two global phase III trials. Materials and Methods This analysis evaluated previously treated and untreated patients in two randomized, openlabel phase III trials of crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive advanced NSCLC in second-line (PROFILE 1007) and first-line settings (PROFILE 1014). Efficacy and safety were analyzed by race in the intention-to-treat and “as-treated” populations for efficacy and safety endpoints, respectively. Results In previously treated (n=157) and untreated (n=157) Asian patients, PFS was statistically significantly longer with crizotinib versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio for PFS, 0.526; 95% confidence interval, 0.363 to 0.762; p < 0.001 and hazard ratio, 0.442; 95% confidence interval, 0.302 to 0.648; p < 0.001, respectively). Similar antitumor activity was seen in the non-Asian and overall populations. ORRs were statistically significantly higher with crizotinib versus chemotherapy in both Asian and non-Asian previously treated and untreated patients (p < 0.05). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade) with crizotinib were vision disorder, diarrhea, and nausea, which were observed at a comparable incidence across Asian and non-Asian populations, irrespective of previous treatment status. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. Conclusion These data, currently the only analysis showing Asian and non-Asian populations in the same study, support the efficacy and safety of crizotinib in Asian patients with previously treated or untreated ALK-positive advanced NSCLC.
-
Blackhall, Fiona,Kim, Dong-Wan,Besse, Benjamin,Nokihara, Hiroshi,Han, Ji-Youn,Wilner, Keith D.,Reisman, Arlene,Iyer, Shrividya,Hirsh, Vera,Shaw, Alice T. Elsevier 2014 JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY Vol.9 No.11
<P>Introduction: The main objective of the current post hoc analysis was to compare patient-reported outcomes between crizotinib (N = 172) and chemotherapy subgroups (pemetrexed [N = 99] and docetaxel [N = 72]) in previously treated patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, in PROFILE 1007 study (Pfizer; NCT0093283). Methods: Patient-reported outcomes were assessed at baseline, day 1 of each cycle, and end of treatment. General health status was measured using the EuroQol-5D visual analog scale and health utility index scores were assessed using the EuroQol-5D descriptive system. Functioning, lung cancer symptoms, and global quality of life (QOL) were assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and the QLQ-LC13 lung cancer module. Repeated measures mixed-effects analyses compared overall scores and change from baseline scores, controlling for baseline scores. Results: The overall mean EQ-5D health utility index scores (95% CI) on treatment were significantly greater (p < 0.05) for crizotinib (0.82 [0.79-0.85]) than for chemotherapy (0.73 [0.70-0.77]; 0.74 [0.70-0.79] for pemetrexed and 0.66 [0.58-0.74] for docetaxel). A significantly greater improvement from baseline was observed with crizotinib versus pemetrexed and versus docetaxel treatment groups for general health status, physical functioning, global QOL, dyspnea, fatigue, and pain. Improvement rates for fatigue, cough, pain, dyspnea, and global QOL were significantly greater on crizotinib compared with pemetrexed and docetaxel, respectively. Worsening rates for diarrhea and constipation were higher with crizotinib. Conclusion: The benefits of crizotinib in improving symptoms and QOL are demonstrated regardless of whether the comparator is pemetrexed or docetaxel.</P>
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
