<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org">
<title>Journal of Clinical Oncology Last Three Issues</title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org</link>
<description>Journal of Clinical Oncology RSS feed -- recent issues</description>
<prism:eIssn>1527-7755</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>Journal of Clinical Oncology</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0732-183X</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/2?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/6?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/9?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/11?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/16?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/24?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/31?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/38?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/45?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/52?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/61?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/70?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/78?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/85?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/92?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/100?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/106?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/114?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/120?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/127?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/146?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/150?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/154?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/155?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/156?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/157?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/158?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/159?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/160?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/160-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/162?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/163?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5831?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5840?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5841?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5843?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5845?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5849?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5855?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5863?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5870?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5877?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5884?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5890?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5896?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5904?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5910?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5918?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5923?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5930?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5936?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5943?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5950?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5957?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5965?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5972?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5980?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5988?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5994?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6001?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6003?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6005?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6007?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6009?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6010?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6011?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6012?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6012-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6013?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6015?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6015-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6017?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6021?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/6021-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5662?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5664?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5666?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5668?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5671?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5679?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5684?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5689?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5697?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5705?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5713?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5721?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5728?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5735?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5742?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5748?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5755?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5761?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5767?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5775?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5783?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5789?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5797?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5802?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5813?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5814?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5817?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5820?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5823?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5824?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5825?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5825-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5826?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5827?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5827-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5828?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5829?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/35/5829-a?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/icons/banner/logo.jpg" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/icons/banner/logo.jpg">
<title>Journal of Clinical Oncology</title>
<url>http://jco.ascopubs.org/icons/banner/logo.jpg</url>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Clinical Trials Registration: Will Your Study Be Publishable?]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Haller]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.9382</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Clinical Trials Registration: Will Your Study Be Publishable?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>1</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorials</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/2?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Quo Vadis With Targeted Drugs in the 21st Century?]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/2?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bergh]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Angiogenesis]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.8342</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Quo Vadis With Targeted Drugs in the 21st Century?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>2</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorials</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/6?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Resection of Some--But Not All--Clinically Uninvolved Adjacent Viscera As Part of Surgery for Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcomas]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/6?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pisters]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Surgery, Surgical Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.7138</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Resection of Some--But Not All--Clinically Uninvolved Adjacent Viscera As Part of Surgery for Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcomas]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>8</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>6</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorials</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/9?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Comments and Controversies] Seduction by Induction?]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/9?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beitler, Cooper]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.5875</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Comments and Controversies] Seduction by Induction?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>10</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>9</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Comments and Controversies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/11?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Phase II Trial of Sorafenib in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Exposed to Anthracyclines or Taxanes: North Central Cancer Treatment Group and Mayo Clinic Trial N0336]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/11?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>We conducted a cooperative group phase II study to assess antitumor activity and toxicity of sorafenib in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who had received prior treatment for their disease.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patient and Methods</ST> 
<P>Patients were eligible if they had measurable disease and had previously received an anthracycline and/or a taxane in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or metastatic setting. The primary end point of the study was tumor response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). The study was designed in two stages. Sorafenib was administered as 400 mg twice daily on days 1 through 28 of each 4-week cycle.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Twenty-three patients were enrolled with a median age of 54 years (range, 37 to 70 years). Twenty-two (96%) had prior anthracycline treatment and 16 (70%) had prior taxane treatment. Patients received sorafenib for a median of two cycles (range, one to 15 cycles) with a median follow-up of 2.4 years (range, 2.2 to 2.6 years). There were no grade 4 toxicities and few grade 3 toxicities. Among the 20 patients eligible for efficacy analysis, no patients experienced a partial response or complete response per RECIST criteria. Thus, the trial stopped at the end of the first stage per study design. Two patients (10%; 90% CI, 1.8% to 28.3%) achieved stable disease lasting longer than 6 months.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Sorafenib as a single agent, although well tolerated, did not exhibit activity when measured by tumor shrinkage in patients with MBC who had received prior treatment. Further research should focus on combinations with standard therapy and end points more sensitive to effects of targeted agents, such as disease stabilization.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Moreno-Aspitia, Morton, Hillman, Lingle, Rowland, Wiesenfeld, Flynn, Fitch, Perez]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Angiogenesis]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.5242</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Phase II Trial of Sorafenib in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Exposed to Anthracyclines or Taxanes: North Central Cancer Treatment Group and Mayo Clinic Trial N0336]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>15</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>11</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/16?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Intervals Longer Than 20 Weeks From Breast-Conserving Surgery to Radiation Therapy Are Associated With Inferior Outcome for Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Who Are Not Receiving Chemotherapy]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/16?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To determine the interval from breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to radiation therapy (RT) that affects local control or survival.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>The 10-year Kaplan-Meier (KM) local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and breast cancer&ndash;specific survival (BCSS) were computed for 6,428 women who had T1 to 2, N0 to 1, M0 breast cancer that was diagnosed in British Columbia between 1989 and 2003, and who were treated with BCS and RT without chemotherapy. Intervals from BCS to RT were grouped by weeks as follows: &le; 4 (n = 83), greater than 4 to 8 (n = 2,288; reference group); greater than 8 to 12 (n = 2,606); greater than 12 to 16 (n = 961); greater than 16 to 20 (n = 358); and greater than 20 weeks (n = 132). Cox proportional hazards models and matching were used to control for confounding variables.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>The median follow-up time was 7.5 years. The 10-year KM outcomes were as follows: LRFS, 95.4%; DRFS, 90.5%; and BCSS, 92.5%. Compared with the greater than 4 to 8 weeks group, hazard ratios (HR) were not significantly different for any outcome among patients who were treated up to 20 weeks after BCS. However, LRFS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.00; <I>P</I> = .15), DRFS (HR, 1.86; <I>P</I> = .02) and BCSS (HR, 2.15; <I>P</I> = .009) were inferior for women with BCS-to-RT intervals greater than 20 weeks compared with those greater than 4 to 8 weeks. The matched analysis yielded similar results.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Outcomes were statistically similar for BCS-to-RT intervals up to 20 weeks, but they were inferior for intervals beyond 20 weeks. Time can be reasonably allowed for the breast to heal and for patients to consider treatment options, but RT should start within 20 weeks of BCS.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Olivotto, Lesperance, Truong, Nichol, Berrang, Tyldesley, Germain, Speers, Wai, Holloway, Kwan, Kennecke]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Radiation, Radiation Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.1891</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Intervals Longer Than 20 Weeks From Breast-Conserving Surgery to Radiation Therapy Are Associated With Inferior Outcome for Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer Who Are Not Receiving Chemotherapy]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>23</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>16</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/24?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Sarcomas] Aggressive Surgical Policies in a Retrospectively Reviewed Single-Institution Case Series of Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma Patients]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/24?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To explore whether the adoption of a systematic attempt to perform wider resections may lead to prognostic improvements in retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma (RSTS).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Two hundred eighty-eight consecutive patients who were surgically treated at a single referral center were analyzed. Because a shift toward a systematic, more aggressive surgical approach (ie, liberal en bloc resection of adjacent organs) was in place from 2002 onward, patients were divided in two groups accordingly. Overall survival, crude cumulative incidence (CCI) of local recurrence, and distant metastases were estimated. Univariable and multivariable analyses were carried out.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Patients who underwent operation in the early period had a 5-year local recurrence rate of 48% compared with 28% for patients who were treated in the recent period. The number of distant metastases was greater in the recent group (22% <I>v</I> 13%), and overall survival was similar. In addition to the period of treatment, important independent determinants for local recurrence-free survival were histologic grade, histologic subtype, and radiation therapy. Overall, liposarcomas and grades 1 to 2 tumors had the greatest local benefit at 5 years.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>In a single institution, the adoption of a policy of more liberal visceral en bloc resections was paralleled by greater local control. This benefit might translate into a prognostic improvement only on a longer follow-up for patients with a more indolent disease, whereas systemic failures seem to be the main problem in high-grade tumors. Radiation therapy could add some additional benefit to local outcome and possibly to survival.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gronchi, Lo Vullo, Fiore, Mussi, Stacchiotti, Collini, Lozza, Pennacchioli, Mariani, Casali]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Combined Modality, Surgical Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.8871</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Sarcomas] Aggressive Surgical Policies in a Retrospectively Reviewed Single-Institution Case Series of Retroperitoneal Soft Tissue Sarcoma Patients]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>30</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>24</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Sarcomas</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/31?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Sarcomas] Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: A Multivariate Analysis of Surgical Factors Associated With Local Control]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/31?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To define the optimal initial management and the best extent of surgery that would optimize margins on primary retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>A total of 382 patients with primary RPS were analyzed. Sixty-five patients had a simple resection of the tumor, 120 patients had a complete compartmental resection (systematic resection of noninvolved contiguous organs), 130 patients had a contiguously involved organ resection, 21 patients had a systematic re-excision, 38 patients had an incomplete gross resection, and eight patients had a biopsy alone. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy were administered to 121 and 145 patients, respectively.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>One, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 86% (95% CI, 0.82 to 0.89), 66% (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.71), and 57% (95% CI, 0.51 to 0.62), respectively. Median overall survival was 6 years. In the multivariate analysis, high grade, tumor rupture, gross residual disease, and positive margins were associated with decreased OS. Low grade, no tumor rupture, negative histologic margins, a high number of patients undergoing operation per center, and compartmental resection compared with standard procedures were associated with decreased abdominal recurrences. Compartmental resection is a significant variable, predicting a 3.29-fold lower rate of abdominal recurrence compared with simple complete resection.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Complete compartmental surgery without tumor rupture should be performed when possible to achieve clear margins. This surgery should be performed in a high-volume center. The role of adjuvant treatments should be evaluated in a randomized trial in association with this optimal surgery.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bonvalot, Rivoire, Castaing, Stoeckle, Le Cesne, Blay, Laplanche]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery, Rhabdo & Other Soft Tissue Sarcomas:]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.0802</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Sarcomas] Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: A Multivariate Analysis of Surgical Factors Associated With Local Control]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>37</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>31</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Sarcomas</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/38?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Melanoma] Prognostic Significance of Serum S100B Protein in High-Risk Surgically Resected Melanoma Patients Participating in Intergroup Trial ECOG 1694]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/38?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>We evaluated adjuvant trial E1694 to more precisely define the prognostic significance of serum S100B in patients with high-risk resected melanoma.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Sera from 670 E1694 patients banked at baseline and three additional time points were tested for S100B protein using chemiluminescence.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>S100B testing results showed that the higher the S100B level is, the higher the risk of relapse and death, regardless of the cutoff value. Univariate analysis showed that baseline S100B &ge; 0.15 &micro;g/L is significantly correlated with overall survival (OS; <I>P</I> = .01). Multivariate analysis was performed adjusting for significant prognostic factors (ulceration and lymph node status) and treatment. Baseline S100B was a significant prognostic factor for survival (hazard ratio = 1.39; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.92; <I>P</I> = .043). S100B values measured at later time points over 1 year were also demonstrated to be significant prognostic factors for relapse-free survival (RFS) and OS. Lower S100B values at baseline and during follow-up were associated with longer survival. A changing S100B from low at baseline to high on follow-up seemed to be associated with the worst RFS and OS.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>For patients with high-risk surgically resected melanoma, a high baseline or increasing serum S100B is an independent prognostic marker of risk for mortality that may allow us to refine the application of adjuvant therapy in the future.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tarhini, Stuckert, Lee, Sander, Kirkwood]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Translational Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1777</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Melanoma] Prognostic Significance of Serum S100B Protein in High-Risk Surgically Resected Melanoma Patients Participating in Intergroup Trial ECOG 1694]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>44</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>38</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Melanoma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/45?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Epidemiology] Cause-Specific Survival for Women Diagnosed With Cancer During Pregnancy or Lactation: A Registry-Based Cohort Study]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/45?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To assess if cancers diagnosed during pregnancy or lactation are associated with increased risk of cause-specific death.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>In this population-based cohort study using data from the Cancer Registry and the Medical Birth Registry of Norway, 42,511 women, age 16 to 49 years and diagnosed with cancer from 1967 to 2002, were eligible. They were grouped as not pregnant (reference), pregnant, or lactating at diagnosis. Cause-specific survival for all sites combined, and for the most frequent malignancies, was investigated using a Cox proportional hazards model. An additional analysis with time-dependent covariates was performed for comparison of women with and without a postcancer pregnancy. The multivariate analyses were adjusted for age at diagnosis, extent of disease, and diagnostic periods.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>For all sites combined, no intergroup differences in cause-specific death were seen, with hazard ratio (HR) of 1.03 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.22) and HR 1.02 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.22) for the pregnant and lactating groups, respectively. Patients with breast (HR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.36 to 2.78) and ovarian cancer (HR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.05 to 4.73) diagnosed during lactation had an increased risk of cause-specific death. Diagnosis of malignant melanoma during pregnancy slightly increased this risk. For all sites combined, the risk of cause-specific death was significantly decreased for women who had postcancer pregnancies.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>In general, the diagnosis of most cancer types during pregnancy or lactation does not increase the risk of cause-specific death. Breast and ovarian cancer diagnosed during lactation represents an exception. We confirmed the "healthy mother effect" for women with a postcancer pregnancy.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stensheim, Moller, van Dijk, Fossa]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Epidemiology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.4110</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Epidemiology] Cause-Specific Survival for Women Diagnosed With Cancer During Pregnancy or Lactation: A Registry-Based Cohort Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>51</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>45</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Epidemiology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/52?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Epidemiology] Long-Term Smoking Cessation Outcomes Among Childhood Cancer Survivors in the Partnership for Health Study]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/52?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Partnership for Health (PFH) was found to increase smoking cessation among smokers in the Childhood Cancer Survivors Study (CCSS) at the 8- and 12-month postbaseline follow-up. This report provides outcomes at 2 to 6 years postbaseline; the primary outcome is a four-category smoking status variable (quit at all follow-ups, quit at final follow-up only, smoker at all follow-ups, and smoker at final follow-up only); quit attempts among those who reported smoking at the final follow-up is a secondary outcome.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Methods</ST> 
<P>PFH was a randomized control trial with two conditions, peer phone counseling (PC) and self-help (SH), that involved smokers (n = 796) enrolled in the CCSS cohort.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Long-term quit rates were higher in PC versus SH participants. Long-term smoking cessation outcomes were lower among those who were nicotine dependent, of lower educational levels, and among men, and were higher among those who used nicotine replacement therapy and who had higher levels of situational self-efficacy. There were no significant differences in relapse rates between conditions or in quit attempts among continued smokers.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Cessation rates continue to be significantly higher among participants in the PC condition versus SH, although the differences were not large. This article highlights differences in long-term engagement with smoking cessation among those who received the intervention.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Emmons, Puleo, Mertens, Gritz, Diller, Li]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Behavioral and Lifestyle Risk Factors, Outcomes Research, Epidemiology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.13.0880</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Epidemiology] Long-Term Smoking Cessation Outcomes Among Childhood Cancer Survivors in the Partnership for Health Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>60</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>52</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Epidemiology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/61?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplantation] Age-Related Risk Profile and Chemotherapy Dose Response in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Study by the German Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cooperative Group]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/61?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>The purpose of the study was to assess the contribution of age and disease variables to the outcome of untreated patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving varying intensive induction chemotherapy.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Patients 16 to 85 years of age with primary AML, known karyotype, and uniform postremission chemotherapy enrolled onto two consecutive trials were eligible and were randomly assigned to induction either with a standard-dose (cytarabine, daunorubicin, and 6-thioguanine) and a high-dose (cytarabine and mitoxantrone) combination, or with two courses of the high-dose combination. Subgroups were defined by karyotype, nucleophosmin and <I>FLT3</I> mutation, WBC count, serum lactate dehydrogenase, and residual blasts.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>In 1,284 patients, the overall survival at 4 years in those younger and older than 60 years was 37% versus 16% (<I>P</I> &lt; .001) and the ongoing remission duration was 46% versus 22% (<I>P</I> &lt; .001). Similar age-related differences in outcome were found for all defined subgroups. No difference in outcome according to randomly assigned treatment regimen was observed in any age group or prognostic subset. Regarding prognostic subgroups, molecular factors were also considered.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Under harmonized conditions, older and younger patients with AML show modest differences in their risk profiles and equally no dose response to intensified chemotherapy. Their observed fundamental difference in outcome across all subgroups remains unexplained. Further molecular investigation may elucidate the age effect in AML and identify new targets.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Buchner, Berdel, Haferlach, Haferlach, Schnittger, Muller-Tidow, Braess, Spiekermann, Kienast, Staib, Gruneisen, Kern, Reichle, Maschmeyer, Aul, Lengfelder, Sauerland, Heinecke, Wormann, Hiddemann]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.4245</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplantation] Age-Related Risk Profile and Chemotherapy Dose Response in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Study by the German Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cooperative Group]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>69</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>61</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplantation</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/70?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Supportive Care and Quality of Life] Does a Patient-Held Quality-of-Life Diary Benefit Patients With Inoperable Lung Cancer?]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/70?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To examine the effect of weekly completion of a patient-held quality-of-life (QOL) diary in routine oncology practice for palliative care patients.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>In a pragmatic randomized controlled trial, 115 patients with inoperable lung cancer were randomly assigned to receive either standard care or a structured QOL diary (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the related lung cancer module LC13) that they completed at home each week for 16 weeks. Patients were encouraged to share the QOL information with health professionals involved in their care. Changes in QOL over time (measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy&ndash;Lung questionnaire and the Palliative Care Quality of Life Index), discussion of patient problems, and satisfaction with communication and general care were assessed at baseline and at 2 and 4 months after baseline.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Analysis of QOL indicated a small but consistent difference between patients in the diary group and the standard care group. The diary group had a poorer QOL in many domains. Two different QOL summary scores (total and overall QOL) indicated a statistically significant between-group difference. No effects were found in relation to satisfaction with care, communication, or the discussion of patient problems.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The regular completion of a QOL questionnaire without appropriate feedback to health care professionals and without the provision of appropriate support may have a negative impact on inoperable lung cancer patients. Further research should focus on identifying features such as feedback loops that are required for the successful and meaningful use of QOL questionnaires in routine patient care.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mills, Murray, Johnston, Cardwell, Donnelly]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Outcomes Research, Quality of Life, Palliative Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.5687</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Supportive Care and Quality of Life] Does a Patient-Held Quality-of-Life Diary Benefit Patients With Inoperable Lung Cancer?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>77</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>70</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Supportive Care and Quality of Life</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/78?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Supportive Care and Quality of Life] Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Extensive Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Short-Term Health-Related Quality of Life and Patient Reported Symptoms--Results of an International Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial by the EORTC Radiation Oncology and Lung Cancer Groups]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/78?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) leads to significantly fewer symptomatic brain metastases and improved survival. Detailed effects of PCI on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) are reported here.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Patients (age, 18 to 75 years; WHO &le; 2) with ED-SCLC, and any response to chemotherapy, were randomly assigned to either observation or PCI. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and patient-reported symptoms were secondary end points. The European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer core HRQOL tool (Quality of Life Questionnaire C30) and brain module (Quality of Life Questionnaire Brain Cancer Module) were used to collect self-reported patient data. Six HRQOL scales were selected as primary HRQOL end points: global health status; hair loss; fatigue; and role, cognitive and emotional functioning. Assessments were performed at random assignment, 6 weeks, 3 months, and then 3-monthly up to 1 year and 6-monthly thereafter.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Compliance with the HRQOL assessment was 93.7% at baseline and dropped to 60% at 6 weeks. Short-term results up to 3 months showed that there was a negative impact of PCI on selected HRQOL scales. The largest mean difference between the two arms was observed for fatigue and hair loss. The impact of PCI on global health status as well as on functioning scores was more limited. For global health status, the observed mean difference was eight points on a scale 0 to 100 at 6 weeks (<I>P</I> = .018) and 3 months (<I>P</I> = .055).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>PCI should be offered to all responding ED SCLC patients. Patients should be informed of the potential adverse effects from PCI. Clinicians should be alert to these; monitor their patients; and offer appropriate support, clinical, and psychosocial care.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Slotman, Mauer, Bottomley, Faivre-Finn, Kramer, Rankin, Snee, Hatton, Postmus, Collette, Senan]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Quality of Life, Small Cell, Radiation]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.0746</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Supportive Care and Quality of Life] Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Extensive Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Short-Term Health-Related Quality of Life and Patient Reported Symptoms--Results of an International Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial by the EORTC Radiation Oncology and Lung Cancer Groups]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>84</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>78</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Supportive Care and Quality of Life</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/85?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Pediatric Oncology] Phase I Study of ch14.18 With Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor and Interleukin-2 in Children With Neuroblastoma After Autologous Bone Marrow Transplantation or Stem-Cell Rescue: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/85?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Recurrence of high-risk neuroblastoma is common despite multimodality therapy. ch14.18, a chimeric human/murine anti-G<SUB>D2</SUB> antibody, lyses neuroblastoma cells. This study determined the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) and toxicity of ch14.18 given in combination with interleukin-2 (IL-2) after high-dose chemotherapy (HDC)/stem-cell rescue (SCR). Biologic correlates including ch14.18 levels, soluble IL-2 receptor levels, and human antichimeric antibody (HACA) activity were evaluated.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Patients were given ch14.18 for 4 days at 28-day intervals. Patients received IL-2 during the second and fourth courses of ch14.18 and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) during the first, third, and fifth courses. The MTD was determined based on toxicities occurring with the second course. After the determination of the MTD, additional patients were treated to confirm the MTD and to clarify appropriate supportive care.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Twenty-five patients were enrolled. The MTD of ch14.18 was determined to be 25 mg/m<SUP>2</SUP>/d for 4 days given concurrently with 4.5 <FONT FACE="arial,helvetica">x</FONT> 10<SUP>6</SUP> U/m<SUP>2</SUP>/d of IL-2 for 4 days. IL-2 was also given at a dose of 3 <FONT FACE="arial,helvetica">x</FONT> 10<SUP>6</SUP> U/m<SUP>2</SUP>/d for 4 days starting 1 week before ch14.18. Two patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity due to ch14.18 and IL-2. Common toxicities included pain, fever, nausea, emesis, diarrhea, urticaria, mild elevation of hepatic transaminases, capillary leak syndrome, and hypotension. No death attributable to toxicity of therapy occurred. No additional toxicity was seen when <I>cis</I>-retinoic acid (cis-RA) was given between courses of ch14.18. No patient treated at the MTD developed HACA.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>ch14.18 in combination with IL-2 was tolerable in the early post-HDC/SCR period. cis-RA can be administered safely between courses of ch14.18 and cytokines.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gilman, Ozkaynak, Matthay, Krailo, Yu, Gan, Sternberg, Hank, Seeger, Reaman, Sondel]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Neuroblastoma]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2006.10.3564</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Pediatric Oncology] Phase I Study of ch14.18 With Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor and Interleukin-2 in Children With Neuroblastoma After Autologous Bone Marrow Transplantation or Stem-Cell Rescue: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>91</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>85</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Pediatric Oncology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/92?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] Cardiovascular Mortality After Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: RTOG 85-31]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/92?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists are associated with greater risk of coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction in men with prostate cancer, but little is known about potential impact on cardiovascular mortality. We assessed the relationship between GnRH agonists and cardiovascular mortality in a large randomized phase III trial of men treated with or without adjuvant goserelin after radiation therapy (RT) for locally advanced prostate cancer.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Between 1987 and 1992, 945 men with locally advanced prostate cancer were randomly assigned to RT and adjuvant goserelin or RT alone. Fine and Gray's regression was used to evaluate treatment effect on cardiovascular mortality. Covariates included age, prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD), hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM), body mass index, race, Gleason score, stage, acid phosphatase level, prostatectomy history, and nodal involvement.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 117 cardiovascular-related deaths but no treatment-related increase in cardiovascular mortality. At 9 years, cardiovascular mortality for men receiving adjuvant goserelin was 8.4% <I>v</I> 11.4% for men treated without adjuvant goserelin (Gray's <I>P</I> = .17). In multiple regression analyses, treatment arm was not significantly associated with increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.47 to 1.15; <I>P</I> = .16; when censoring at time of salvage goserelin therapy, HR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.69; <I>P</I> = .97). Traditional cardiac risk factors, including prevalent CVD and DM, were significantly associated with greater cardiovascular mortality.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>GnRH agonists do not seem to increase cardiovascular mortality in men with locally advanced prostate cancer. Further studies are warranted to evaluate adverse effects of GnRH agonists in men with lower cancer-specific mortality.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Efstathiou, Bae, Shipley, Hanks, Pilepich, Sandler, Smith]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Radiation, Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.12.3752</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] Cardiovascular Mortality After Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Locally Advanced Prostate Cancer: RTOG 85-31]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>99</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>92</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Genitourinary Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/100?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] Role of Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Node-Positive Prostate Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/100?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To determine the impact of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for patients who have node-positive prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We used linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data to construct a cohort of men who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) between 1991 and 1999 and who had positive regional lymph nodes. We classified men as receiving adjuvant ADT if they received ADT within 120 days of RP, and we compared them to the men who had not received adjuvant ADT. We used propensity scores to balance potential confounders of receiving adjuvant ADT (ie, tumor characteristics, extent of nodal disease, demographics, receipt of radiation therapy) and Cox proportional hazard methods to measure the impact of adjuvant ADT on overall survival (OS), stratified by propensity score quintile. We conducted a sensitivity analysis that used 90, 150, 180, and 365 days as the definition for adjuvant ADT.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>A total of 731 men were identified, 209 of whom received ADT within 120 days of RP. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between the adjuvant ADT and non-ADT group (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.27). There was no statistically significant survival difference with 90, 150, 180, and 365 days as the adjuvant ADT definition.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Deferring immediate ADT in men with positive lymph nodes after RP may not significantly compromise survival. Because observational studies should be considered hypothesis-generating studies, these results should be validated in a prospective fashion in a similar patient population.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wong, Freedland, Egleston, Hudes, Schwartz, Armstrong]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.2042</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] Role of Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Node-Positive Prostate Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>105</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>100</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Genitourinary Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/106?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Lymphoma and Myeloma] Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation As First-Line Therapy in Peripheral T-Cell Lymphomas: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Study]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/106?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) are rare malignancies with poor outcome after conventional chemotherapy. The role of myeloablative therapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation (autoSCT) is still unclear. Therefore, we initiated the first prospective multicenter study on upfront autoSCT in PTCL and recently reported good feasibility and efficacy of this approach. Here, we present the final analysis of the study.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>The treatment regimen consisted of four to six cycles of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone followed by mobilizing therapy with either the dexamethasone, carmustine, melphalan, etoposide, and cytarabine protocol or the etoposide, methylprednisolone, cytarabine, and cisplatin protocol and stem-cell collection. Patients in complete remission (CR) or partial remission (PR) underwent myeloablative chemoradiotherapy (fractionated total-body irradiation and high-dose cyclophosphamide) and autoSCT.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>From June 2000 to April 2006, 83 patients were enrolled onto the study. Main subgroups were PTCL not specified (n = 32) and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n = 27). Fifty-five (66%) of the 83 patients received transplantation. The main reason for not receiving autoSCT was progressive disease. In an intent-to-treat analysis, the overall response rate after myeloablative therapy was 66% (56% CR and 8% PR). With a median follow-up time of 33 months, 43 patients are alive; the estimated 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates for patients in CR (calculated from CR to the date of relapse) and 3-year progression-free survival rate were 48%, 53%, and 36%, respectively.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The results of this prospective study suggest a substantial impact on outcome for upfront autoSCT in PTCL and should be further evaluated in randomized trials. Pretransplantation treatment needs to be improved to increase the transplantation rate.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Reimer, Rudiger, Geissinger, Weissinger, Nerl, Schmitz, Engert, Einsele, Muller-Hermelink, Wilhelm]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Lymphoma, Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.4870</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Lymphoma and Myeloma] Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation As First-Line Therapy in Peripheral T-Cell Lymphomas: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>113</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>106</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Lymphoma and Myeloma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/114?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Lymphoma and Myeloma] Natural History of CNS Relapse in Patients With Aggressive Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A 20-Year Follow-Up Analysis of SWOG 8516--The Southwest Oncology Group]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/114?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To investigate the incidence, natural history, and risk factors predictive of CNS relapse in patients with de novo aggressive lymphomas and to evaluate the efficacy of CNS prophylaxis in patients with initial bone marrow (BM) involvement.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We conducted an analysis of CNS events from 20-year follow-up data on 899 eligible patients with aggressive lymphoma treated on Southwest Oncology Group protocol 8516, a randomized trial of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone), MACOP-B (methotrexate, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone, and bleomycin), ProMACE (prednisone, methotrexate, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide)-CytaBOM (cytarabine, bleomycin, vincristine, methotrexate), and m-BACOD (methotrexate, bleomycin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide). Patients with BM involvement randomly assigned to receive ProMACE-CytaBOM (63 patients) or m-BACOD (58 patients) were to receive CNS prophylaxis, whereas those randomly assigned to receive CHOP or MACOP-B did not.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>CNS relapse is uncommon (25 of 899 patients), with a cumulative incidence of 2.8%. CNS relapse occurs early (median time to relapse, 5.4 months from diagnosis). Indeed, 20 of 25 patients with CNS relapse relapsed during chemotherapy, or within 6 months of completion. The number of extranodal sites and the International Prognostic Index were predictive of CNS relapse. There was no significant benefit of CNS prophylaxis in patients with BM involvement at diagnosis; however, given the small number of events, the power of this analysis is limited.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The early occurrence of CNS events suggests that these patients had subclinical disease at initial diagnosis. As such, strategies to better detect and treat patients with subclinical CNS disease at diagnosis would be anticipated to result in a decrease in the incidence of CNS relapse, without subjecting those patients not destined for CNS relapse to unnecessary and potentially toxic prophylaxis strategies.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bernstein, Unger, LeBlanc, Friedberg, Miller, Fisher]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.8021</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Lymphoma and Myeloma] Natural History of CNS Relapse in Patients With Aggressive Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A 20-Year Follow-Up Analysis of SWOG 8516--The Southwest Oncology Group]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>119</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>114</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Lymphoma and Myeloma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/120?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Review Article] Update on Treatment Recommendations From the Fourth International Workshop on Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/120?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<P>Waldenstr&ouml;m macroglobulinemia (WM) is a distinct B-cell lymphoproliferative disorder characterized by lymphoplasmacytic bone marrow infiltration along with an immunoglobulin M (IgM) monoclonal gammopathy. Patients with disease-related cytopenias, bulky adenopathy or organomegaly, symptomatic hyperviscosity, severe neuropathy, amyloidosis, cryoglobulinemia, cold agglutinin disease, or evidence of disease transformation should be considered for immediate therapy. Initiation of therapy should not be based on serum IgM levels alone, and asymptomatic patients should be observed. Individual patient considerations should be considered when deciding on a first-line agent including the presence of cytopenias, need for rapid disease control, age, and candidacy for autologous transplantation. Therapeutic outcomes should be evaluated using updated criteria. As part of the Fourth International Workshop on Waldenstr&ouml;m's Macroglobulinemia, a consensus panel updated its recommendations on both first-line and salvage therapy in view of recently published and ongoing clinical trials. The panel considered encouraging results from recent studies of first-line combinations such as rituximab with nucleoside analogs with or without alkylating agents or with cyclophosphamide-based therapies (eg, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone or cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) or the combination of rituximab with thalidomide. Such therapeutic approaches are likely to yield responses at least as good as, if not better than, monotherapy with any of the alkylating agents, nucleoside analogs, or rituximab. In the salvage setting, reuse of a first-line regimen or use of a different regimen should be considered along with bortezomib, alemtuzumab, autologous transplantation, and, in selected circumstances, allogeneic transplantation. Finally, the panel reaffirmed its encouragement of the active enrollment of patients with WM onto innovative clinical trials whenever possible.</P>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dimopoulos, Gertz, Kastritis, Garcia-Sanz, Kimby, LeBlond, Fermand, Merlini, Morel, Morra, Ocio, Owen, Ghobrial, Seymour, Kyle, Treon]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Non-ASCO Guidelines, Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.7865</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Review Article] Update on Treatment Recommendations From the Fourth International Workshop on Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>126</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>120</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Review Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/127?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[ASCO Special Article] American Society of Clinical Oncology 2008 Clinical Practice Guideline Update: Use of Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy Protectants]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/127?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To update a clinical practice guideline on the use of chemotherapy and radiation therapy protectants for patients with cancer.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Methods</ST> 
<P>An update committee reviewed literature published since the last guideline update in 2002.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Thirty-nine reports met the inclusion criteria: palifermin and dexrazoxane, three reports (two studies) each; amifostine, 33 reports (31 studies); and mesna, no published randomized trials identified since 2002.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Recommendations</ST> 
<P>Dexrazoxane is not recommended for routine use in breast cancer (BC) in adjuvant setting, or metastatic setting with initial doxorubicin-based chemotherapy. Consider use with metastatic BC and other malignancies, for patients who have received more than 300 mg/m<SUP>2</SUP> doxorubicin who may benefit from continued doxorubicin-containing therapy. Cardiac monitoring should continue in patients receiving doxorubicin. Amifostine may be considered for prevention of cisplatin-associated nephrotoxicity, reduction of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (alternative strategies are reasonable), and to decrease acute and late xerostomia with fractionated radiation therapy alone for head and neck cancer. It is not recommended for protection against thrombocytopenia, prevention of platinum-associated neurotoxicity or ototoxicity or paclitaxel-associated neuropathy, prevention of radiation therapy&ndash;associated mucositis in head and neck cancer, or prevention of esophagitis during concurrent chemoradiotherapy for non&ndash;small-cell lung cancer. Palifermin is recommended to decrease severe mucositis in autologous stem-cell transplantation (SCT) for hematologic malignancies with total-body irradiation (TBI) conditioning regimens, and considered for patients undergoing myeloablative allogeneic SCT with TBI-based conditioning regimens. Data are insufficient to recommend use in the non-SCT setting.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hensley, Hagerty, Kewalramani, Green, Meropol, Wasserman, Cohen, Emami, Gradishar, Mitchell, Thigpen, Trotti, von Hoff, Schuchter]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[ASCO Guidelines, Quality of Life, Quality of Care, Radiation Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.2627</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[ASCO Special Article] American Society of Clinical Oncology 2008 Clinical Practice Guideline Update: Use of Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy Protectants]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>145</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>127</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>ASCO Special Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/146?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Art of Oncology] Between Utter Despair and Essential Hope]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/146?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Renz, Koeberle, Cerny, Strasser]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[End of life issues]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.2203</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Art of Oncology] Between Utter Despair and Essential Hope]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>149</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>146</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Art of Oncology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/150?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Diagnosis in Oncology] Primary Gastric Plasmacytoma and Helicobacter pylori Infection]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/150?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stasi, Evangelista, Brunetti, Bussa, Maritati, Gallo, Turrini, Taccogna, Crescenzi, Angelini]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Diagnosis & Staging, Diagnosis & Staging, Biology & Immunology, Diagnosis & Staging, Biological Therapy, Biology & Immunology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.8341</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Diagnosis in Oncology] Primary Gastric Plasmacytoma and Helicobacter pylori Infection]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>153</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>150</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Diagnosis in Oncology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/154?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Measuring Granulocyte and Monocyte Accumulation at Malignant Lymphoma Sites]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/154?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Juweid, Weiner, Link, Horning, Wiseman]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.2393</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Measuring Granulocyte and Monocyte Accumulation at Malignant Lymphoma Sites]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>155</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>154</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/155?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Teenager With Hairy Cell Leukemia: 30-Year Follow-Up]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/155?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kilbridge, Kadin]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.3372</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Teenager With Hairy Cell Leukemia: 30-Year Follow-Up]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>156</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>155</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/156?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Erythema Multiforme/Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis in Lenalidomide-Treated Patients]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/156?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Castaneda, Brandenburg, Bwire, Burton, Zeldis]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.3737</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Erythema Multiforme/Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis in Lenalidomide-Treated Patients]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>157</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>156</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/157?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Cultural Challenges in Caring for Our Patients in Advanced Stages of Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/157?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Biasco, Surbone]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.9455</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Cultural Challenges in Caring for Our Patients in Advanced Stages of Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>158</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>157</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/158?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] KRAS Mutations and Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Therapy in Colorectal Cancer With Lymph Node Metastases]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/158?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Velho, Oliveira, Seruca]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.1525</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] KRAS Mutations and Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Therapy in Colorectal Cancer With Lymph Node Metastases]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>159</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>158</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/159?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] In Reply]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/159?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sartore-Bianchi, Artale, Veronese, Gambacorta, Siena]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2358</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] In Reply]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>159</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>159</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/160?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Blood-Based Early Detection of Malignant Mesothelioma]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/160?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Park, Thomas, Creaney, Johnson, Robinson, Yates]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.3839</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Blood-Based Early Detection of Malignant Mesothelioma]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>160</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>160</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/160-a?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] In Reply]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/160-a?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Simon, Verschragen, Janne, Langer, Dowlati, Gadgeel, Kelly, Kalemkerian, Traynor, Peng, Gill, Obasaju, Kindler]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.4688</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] In Reply]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>162</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>160</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/162?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy Resistance: Complexity, Reality, and Promise]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/162?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ajani, Izzo, Lee]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.7566</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy Resistance: Complexity, Reality, and Promise]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>163</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>162</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/163?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] In Reply]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/1/163?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Glynne-Jones, Harrison, Mawdsley]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-29</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.8739</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Correspondence] In Reply]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>164</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-01-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>163</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Correspondence</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5831?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Acknowledgment of Reviewers] Acknowledgment of Reviewers, 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5831?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.4511</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Acknowledgment of Reviewers] Acknowledgment of Reviewers, 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5839</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5831</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Acknowledgment of Reviewers</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5840?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Commentary] The Next 25 Years]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5840?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Haller]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.21.0120</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Commentary] The Next 25 Years]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5840</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5840</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Commentary</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5841?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Gene Testing to Predict Tamoxifen-Induced Hot Flashes: New Biological Insights]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5841?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Crandall]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Menopausal Symptoms]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.5040</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Gene Testing to Predict Tamoxifen-Induced Hot Flashes: New Biological Insights]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5842</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5841</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorials</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5843?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Practical Model for Prognostication in Advanced Cancer Patients: Is Less More?]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5843?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruera, Hui]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Prognostic Studies]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.7772</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Editorials] Practical Model for Prognostication in Advanced Cancer Patients: Is Less More?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5844</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5843</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Editorials</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5845?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Comments and Controversies] Sorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Separating the Hype From the Hope]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5845?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kelley, Venook]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.19.7996</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Comments and Controversies] Sorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Separating the Hype From the Hope]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5848</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5845</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Comments and Controversies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5849?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Estrogen Receptor Genotypes Influence Hot Flash Prevalence and Composite Score Before and After Tamoxifen Therapy]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5849?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Hot flashes are common and frequently lead to drug discontinuation among women prescribed tamoxifen. We determined whether genetic polymorphisms in estrogen receptors (ESRs)  and &beta; (ESR1 and ESR2, respectively) are associated with tamoxifen-induced hot flashes.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We determined ESR1 PvuII and XbaI and ESR2-02 genotypes in 297 women who were initiating tamoxifen. One-week hot flash diaries were collected to calculate a hot flash score (frequency <FONT FACE="arial,helvetica">x</FONT> severity) before and 1, 4, 8, and 12 months after starting tamoxifen.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Approximately 80% of 297 participants reported hot flashes before or during the first year of tamoxifen. After 4 months of tamoxifen, premenopausal women who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy had a four-fold increase in hot flash score (from 5.9 to 23.6; <I>P</I> = .003) compared with a 1.17-fold increase (from 19.6 to 23; <I>P</I> = .34) in those who received chemotherapy. In premenopausal women, increased number of ESR1 PvuII and XbaI CG alleles was associated with higher baseline hot flash scores compared with those who had other haplotypes (<I>P</I> = .0026). At 4 months, postmenopausal women with ESR1 PvuII CC and ESR2-02 GG genotypes had 4.6 times increases in hot flash scores than other postmenopausal women (56 <I>v</I> 12; <I>P</I> = .0007). Women who had the ESR2-02 AA genotype were significantly less likely to experience tamoxifen-induced hot flashes than women who carried at least one ESR-02 G allele (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.63; <I>P</I> = .001).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Knowledge of menopausal status, prior chemotherapy, and ESR genotype may help predict which women are most likely to suffer hot flashes during tamoxifen treatment.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jin, Hayes, Li, Robarge, Skaar, Philips, Nguyen, Schott, Hayden, Lemler, Storniolo, Flockhart, Stearns]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Hormonal Therapy, Menopausal Symptoms]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.8377</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Estrogen Receptor Genotypes Influence Hot Flash Prevalence and Composite Score Before and After Tamoxifen Therapy]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5854</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5849</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5855?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Managing Symptoms Among Patients With Breast Cancer During Chemotherapy: Results of a Two-Arm Behavioral Trial]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5855?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>In this study, we compare symptom response and times to response among patients with breast cancer who were assigned to either a cognitive behavioral Nurse-Administered Symptom Management intervention or an Automated Telephone Symptom Management (ATSM) intervention.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Patients with breast cancer were identified from a larger trial. Baseline equivalence existed between arms, and there was no differential attrition by arm. Anchor-based definition of response using mild, moderate, and severe categories of symptom severity were used. Responses and times to response for 15 symptoms were investigated in relation to trial arm, comorbid conditions, treatment protocols, and metastatic versus localized disease.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>The ATSM arm was more effective among patents with metastatic disease. Compared with patients receiving combination chemotherapy protocols, those treated with single agents had greater response and shorter time to response.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>An educational information intervention delivered via an automated voice response system that assesses symptoms and refers patients to a Symptom Management Guide is more effective than a complex cognitive behavioral approach in terms of producing greater symptom responses in shorter time intervals among patients with metastatic disease.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Given, Sikorskii, Tamkus, Given, You, McCorkle, Champion, Decker]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.8872</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Breast Cancer] Managing Symptoms Among Patients With Breast Cancer During Chemotherapy: Results of a Two-Arm Behavioral Trial]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5862</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5855</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5863?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Predictive Model for Survival in Patients With Advanced Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5863?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To derive and validate a simple predictive model for survival of patients with metastatic cancer attending a palliative radiotherapy clinic.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We described previously a model predicting survival of patients referred for palliative radiotherapy using six prognostic factors: primary cancer site, site of metastases, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), and the fatigue, appetite, and shortness of breath subscales from the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Here we simplified the model to include only three factors: primary cancer site, site of metastases, and KPS. Each factor was assigned a value proportional to its prognostic weight, and the weighted scores for each patient were summed to obtain a survival prediction score (SPS). Patients were also grouped according to their number of risk factors (NRF): nonbreast cancer, metastases other than bone, and KPS &le; 60. The three- and six- variable models were evaluated for their ability to predict survival in patients referred during a different time period and of those referred to a different cancer center.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>A training set of 395 patients, a temporal validation set of 445 patients, and an external validation set of 467 patients were used. The ability of the three- and six-variable models to separate patients into three prognostic groups and to predict their survival was similar using both SPS and NRF methods in the training, temporal, and external validation data sets. There was no statistically significant difference in the performance of the models.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The three-variable NRF model is preferred because of its relative simplicity.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chow, Abdolell, Panzarella, Harris, Bezjak, Warde, Tannock]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[End of Life, Palliative Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1363</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Predictive Model for Survival in Patients With Advanced Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5869</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5863</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Palliative and Supportive Care</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5870?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Unresolved Grief in a National Sample of Bereaved Parents: Impaired Mental and Physical Health 4 to 9 Years Later]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5870?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To assess unresolved parental grief, the associated long-term impact on mental and physical health, and health service use.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>This anonymous, mail-in questionnaire study was performed as a population-based investigation in Sweden between August 2001 and October 2001. Four hundred forty-nine parents who lost a child as a result of cancer 4 to 9 years earlier completed the survey (response rate, 80%). One hundred ninety-one (43%) of the bereaved parents were fathers, and 251 (56%) were mothers. Bereaved parents were asked whether or not, and to what extent, they had worked through their grief. They were also asked about their physical and psychological well-being. For outcomes of interest, we report relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs as well as unadjusted odds ratios and adjusted odds ratios.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Parents with unresolved grief reported significantly worsening psychological health (fathers: RR, 3.6; 95% CI, 2.0 to 6.4; mothers: RR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.9 to 4.4) and physical health (fathers: RR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.8 to 4.4; mothers: RR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6 to 3.3) compared with those who had worked through their grief. Fathers with unresolved grief also displayed a significantly higher risk of sleep difficulties (RR, 6.7; 95% CI, 2.5 to 17.8). Mothers, however, reported increased visits with physicians during the previous 5 years (RR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.6) as well as a greater likelihood of taking sick leave when they had not worked through their grief (RR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.2 to 3.5).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Parents who have not worked through their grief are at increased risk of long-term mental and physical morbidity, increased health service use, and increased sick leave.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lannen, Wolfe, Prigerson, Onelov, Kreicbergs]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Supportive Care, Supportive Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.6738</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Unresolved Grief in a National Sample of Bereaved Parents: Impaired Mental and Physical Health 4 to 9 Years Later]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5876</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5870</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Palliative and Supportive Care</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5877?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Multinational Study of Cancer Patients and Their Children: Factors Associated With Family Functioning]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5877?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>This study examined factors associated with family functioning in cancer patients&rsquo; families with dependent children.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>A sample of 381 families (639 parents and 489 children) was recruited simultaneously in six European countries. Patients and family members completed a background questionnaire, the Family Assessment Device (FAD), the Beck Depression Inventory, and the short form version of the Medical Outcomes Health Survey. Descriptive statistics and a multilevel model that allowed a multi-informant design were used. Analyses were carried out with all participants, and separately with parent-rated and children-rated FAD scores.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>In descriptive analyses, children reported more impairment in family functioning than parents, but the difference was not significant. Depression prevalence was 35% for ill mothers and 28% for ill fathers. In the multilevel analyses with all participants (ie, adults and children) the ill parent's depression was significantly associated with impaired family functioning on five of seven FAD subscales. In analyses with only children, the perception of impairment of family functioning was not associated with parental depression. Additionally, poorer physical status of the ill parent was significantly associated with impairment on roles and communication.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The ill parent's depression was the most significant factor associated with impairment in family functioning. Screening for depression, active diagnostics, and appropriate treatment of cancer patient's and partner's depression may be important to protect their children from mental disorders. Therefore, support systems need to be more family-oriented and child-centered in their approaches to cancer psychosocial care.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Schmitt, Piha, Helenius, Baldus, Kienbacher, Steck, Thastum, Watson, Romer]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Quality of Life, Supportive Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.12.8132</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Multinational Study of Cancer Patients and Their Children: Factors Associated With Family Functioning]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5883</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5877</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Palliative and Supportive Care</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5884?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Impact of Caring for a Child With Cancer on Parents' Health-Related Quality of Life]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5884?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To compare the health-related quality of life (QOL) of parents of children who are undergoing treatment for cancer with that of Canadian population norms and to identify important parent and child predictors of parental QOL.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>A total of 411 respondents of 513 eligible parents were recruited from five pediatric oncology centers in Canada between November 2004 and February 2007. Parents were asked to complete a questionnaire booklet that included a measure of adult QOL (SF-36), a measure of child health status (functional status IIR), and questions to assess health-promoting self-care actions (eg, sleep, diet, and exercise habits) and characteristics of the child with cancer (eg, relapse status, time since diagnosis, prognosis, treatment intensity).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Compared with population norms, parents of children with cancer reported poorer physical and psychosocial QOL in all psychosocial domains (effect sizes range, &ndash;0.71 to &ndash;1.58) and in most physical health domains (effect sizes range, &ndash;0.08 to &ndash;0.63). Parent characteristics associated with better parental QOL included better eating, exercise and sleep habits, younger age, and higher income. Child characteristics associated with better parental QOL included better child health status (functional status IIR scores), lower treatment intensity, and longer time since diagnosis.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Parents of children with cancer report poorer QOL compared with population norms. Interventions directed at parents should be included as part of the treatment plan for a child with cancer. Modifiable variables associated with poorer parental QOL, such as sleep quality and diet and exercise habits, indicate those parents most likely to experience poor QOL and may be potential areas for intervention.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Klassen, Klaassen, Dix, Pritchard, Yanofsky, O'Donnell, Scott, Sung]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Quality of Life]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.2835</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Impact of Caring for a Child With Cancer on Parents' Health-Related Quality of Life]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5889</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5884</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Palliative and Supportive Care</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5890?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Depression in Family Caregivers of Cancer Patients: The Feeling of Burden As a Predictor of Depression]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5890?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>The purpose of this study was to explore the prevalence of and to identify the predictors of depression in family caregivers of cancer patients.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We enrolled 310 caregivers of cancer patients from the National Cancer Center, Korea, on this study and obtained demographic information for both patients and caregivers. To assess caregiver depression and its predictors, we used the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the Caregiver Quality of Life Index&ndash;Cancer, and the Family Impact Questionnaire. We used logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors of caregiver depression.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>The majority (67%) of caregivers had high depression scores (BDI &gt; 13), and 35% had very high depression scores (BDI &gt; 21). In a multiple logistic regression model, caregivers who were women, the spouse of the patient, in poor health, feeling burdened, adapting poorly, unable to function normally, or caring for a patient with poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were more likely to experience depression (<I>P</I> &lt; .01 for all values).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Depression was highly prevalent among cancer patient family caregivers, and care burden was its best predictor. Interventions aimed at reducing the psychiatric effects of cancer should focus not only on the patient but also on the caregiver.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rhee, Yun, Park, Shin, Lee, Yoo, Kim, Kim, Lee, Lee, Kim]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Quality of Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.3957</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Palliative and Supportive Care] Depression in Family Caregivers of Cancer Patients: The Feeling of Burden As a Predictor of Depression]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5895</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5890</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Palliative and Supportive Care</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5896?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Immunotherapy] Phase I Trial of Interleukin-12 Plasmid Electroporation in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5896?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Gene-based immunotherapy for cancer is limited by the lack of safe, efficient, reproducible, and titratable delivery methods. Direct injection of DNA into tissue, although safer than viral vectors, suffers from low gene transfer efficiency. In vivo electroporation, in preclinical models, significantly enhances gene transfer efficiency while retaining the safety advantages of plasmid DNA.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>A phase I dose escalation trial of plasmid interleukin (IL)-12 electroporation was carried out in patients with metastatic melanoma. Patients received electroporation on days 1, 5, and 8 during a single 39-day cycle, into metastatic melanoma lesions with six 100-&micro;s pulses at a 1,300-V/cm electric field through a penetrating six-electrode array immediately after DNA injection. Pre- and post-treatment biopsies were obtained at defined time points for detailed histologic evaluation and determination of IL-12 protein levels.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Twenty-four patients were treated at seven dose levels, with minimal systemic toxicity. Transient pain after electroporation was the major adverse effect. Post-treatment biopsies showed plasmid dose proportional increases in IL-12 protein levels as well as marked tumor necrosis and lymphocytic infiltrate. Two (10%) of 19 patients with nonelectroporated distant lesions and no other systemic therapy showed complete regression of all metastases, whereas eight additional patients (42%) showed disease stabilization or partial response.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>This report describes the first human trial, to our knowledge, of gene transfer utilizing in vivo DNA electroporation. The results indicated this modality to be safe, effective, reproducible, and titratable.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daud, DeConti, Andrews, Urbas, Riker, Sondak, Munster, Sullivan, Ugen, Messina, Heller]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-22</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Phase I and Clinical Pharmacology, Translational Oncology, Melanoma]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.6794</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Immunotherapy] Phase I Trial of Interleukin-12 Plasmid Electroporation in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5903</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-22</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5896</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Immunotherapy</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5904?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Cancer-Related Complications] Natural History of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Patients With Multiple Myeloma]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5904?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>To evaluate the natural history of bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in patients with multiple myeloma.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Ninety-seven patients with myeloma from the United States (n = 37) and Greece (n = 60) were observed prospectively for a minimum 3.2 years after ONJ. Patients characteristics were similar with regard to age, bisphosphonate use, and myeloma therapy, except more autologous transplantations were performed on patients in the United States than in Greece (73% <I>v</I> 28%; <I>P</I> &lt; .0001).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>ONJ resolved in 60 patients (62%), resolved and recurred in 12 patients (12%), and did not heal in 25 patients (26%). Dental procedures preceded ONJ in 46 patients (47%) and were more common in those with single episodes (35 of 60, 58%) than recurrent or nonhealing (11 of 37, 30%; <I>P</I> = .007). Recurrent ONJ followed reinitiation of bisphosphonates in six of 12 patients. Greek patients had more bone pain than United States patients (60% <I>v</I> 30%, <I>P</I> = .001) and were less likely to restart bisphosphonates (5% <I>v</I> 35%, <I>P</I> &lt; .0002). Myeloma relapses were more common in patients with recurrent/nonhealing than single-episode ONJ (84% <I>v</I> 62%; <I>P</I> = .02). Median overall survival from myeloma diagnosis was 10.8 years (95% CI; 9.3 years to not reached) and did not differ between patients with single, recurrent, and nonhealing ONJ (<I>P</I> = .2).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>ONJ healed in 75% of patients. Patients with spontaneous ONJ have a higher risk of nonhealing and recurrence. Reinitiating bisphosphonates after healing of ONJ is a reasonable option in patients experiencing relapse who are at risk of skeletal complications. Further studies of the pathogenesis and healing of ONJ are needed.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Badros, Terpos, Katodritou, Goloubeva, Kastritis, Verrou, Zervas, Baer, Meiller, Dimopoulos]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Supportive Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.9300</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Cancer-Related Complications] Natural History of Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Patients With Multiple Myeloma]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5909</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5904</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Cancer-Related Complications</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5910?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Gastrointestinal Cancer] Efficacy of Oxaliplatin Plus Capecitabine or Infusional Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5910?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Six randomized phase II and III trials have investigated the role of oxaliplatin (OX) in combination with capecitabine (CAP) or infusional fluorouracil (FU) in metastatic colorectal cancer. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of CAP/OX compared with infusional FU/OX.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>This analysis compared all published CAP/OX versus infusional FU/OX regimens. A total of 3,494 patients (FU, n = 1,737; CAP, n = 1,757) were analyzed for response rate (RR), progression-free (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>The fixed-effect pooled estimate for RR showed higher RR for FU-based regimens (Odds ratio [OR] = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97; <I>P</I> = .02) whereas the analysis of chemotherapy-only trials, excluding the bevacizumab containing NO16966 and TREE 2 trials, led to an OR of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.92; <I>P</I> = .007). However, for PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.12; <I>P</I> = .17) and OS (HR = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.12; <I>P</I> = .41) all models suggested similar outcome within the range of noninferiority. Grade 3/4 toxicities (thrombocytopenia&mdash;HR = 2.07, 95% CI, 1.42 to 3.03; <I>P</I> &lt; .0002; diarrhea&mdash;HR = 1.34; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.66; <I>P</I> &lt; .0009; and grade 2/3 hand-foot-syndrome [HFS]&mdash;HR = 3.54; 95% CI, 2.07 to 6.05; <I>P</I> &lt; .00001) were less prominent with FU-based regimens whereas neutropenia (HR = 0.15; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.19; <I>P</I> &lt; .00001) was lower in the CAP regimens.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The combination of CAP and OX resulted in lower RR, but this did not affect PFS and OS, which were similar in both treatment arms. The toxicity analysis showed the characteristic toxicity of each of the different FU schedules, with thrombocytopenia and HFS consistently more prominent in the CAP regimens.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arkenau, Arnold, Cassidy, Diaz-Rubio, Douillard, Hochster, Martoni, Grothey, Hinke, Schmiegel, Schmoll, Porschen]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.7759</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Gastrointestinal Cancer] Efficacy of Oxaliplatin Plus Capecitabine or Infusional Fluorouracil/Leucovorin in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Trials]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5917</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5910</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Gastrointestinal Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5918?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Gastrointestinal Cancer] Postresection CA 19-9 Predicts Overall Survival in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer Treated With Adjuvant Chemoradiation: A Prospective Validation by RTOG 9704]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5918?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>CA 19-9 is an important tumor marker in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A secondary end point of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 9704 was prospective evaluation of the ability of postresectional CA 19-9 to predict survival.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Methods</ST> 
<P>CA 19-9 expression was analyzed as a dichotomized variable (&lt; 180 <I>v</I> &ge; 180) or (&le; 90 <I>v</I> &gt; 90). Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to identify the impact of CA 19-9 expression on overall survival (OS). Actuarial estimates for OS were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Three hundred eighty-five patients patients had assessable CA 19-9 levels. The majority had a CA 19-9 level lower than 180 or &le; 90 (n = 220 and 200, respectively), while 34% were Lewis Antigen negative and 33 (9%) and 53 (14%) patients had levels higher than 180 and higher than 90. When CA 19-9 was analyzed as a dichotomized variable, there was a significant survival difference favoring patients with CA 19-9 lower than 180 (hazard ratio [HR], 3.53; <I>P</I> &lt; .0001). This corresponds to a 72% reduction in the risk of death for patients with a CA 19-9 lower than 180. This was also true for patients with CA 19-9 &le; 90 (HR, 3.4; <I>P</I> &lt; .0001). Multivariate analyses confirmed that CA 19-9, when analyzed as both a continuous and a dichotomized variable, is a highly significant predictor of OS in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>To our knowledge, this is the first phase III trial to perform prospective analysis of CA 19-9 levels in patients treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. It definitively confirms the prognostic importance of postresectional CA 19-9 levels after surgery with curative intent in patients with pancreatic cancer.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Berger, Garcia, Hoffman, Regine, Abrams, Safran, Konski, Benson, MacDonald, Willett]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Combined Modality, Radiation Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.6288</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Gastrointestinal Cancer] Postresection CA 19-9 Predicts Overall Survival in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer Treated With Adjuvant Chemoradiation: A Prospective Validation by RTOG 9704]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5922</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5918</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Gastrointestinal Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5923?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Epidemiology] Plasma Isoflavones and Subsequent Risk of Prostate Cancer in a Nested Case-Control Study: The Japan Public Health Center]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5923?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>The incidence of prostate cancer is much lower in Japanese than Western populations. Given the preventive effects of isoflavones on carcinogenesis in the prostate in many nonhuman studies and the high consumption of isoflavones in Japanese, this low incidence may be partly due to the effects of soy.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We conducted a nested case-control study within the Japan Public Health Center&ndash;based Prospective Study. A total of 14,203 men aged 40 to 69 years who had returned the baseline questionnaire and provided blood samples were observed from 1990 to 2005. During a mean of 12.8 years of follow-up, 201 newly diagnosed prostate cancers were identified. Two matched controls for each case were selected from the cohort. Conditional logistic regression model was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for prostate cancer in relation to plasma levels of isoflavone.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Plasma genistein level tended to be inversely associated with the risk of total prostate cancer. Although plasma daidzein showed no association, the highest tertile for plasma equol, a metabolite of daidzein, was significantly associated with a decreased risk of total prostate cancer (OR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.99; <I>P</I><SUB>trend</SUB> = .04). These inverse associations were strengthened after analysis was confined to localized cases, with ORs in the highest group of plasma genistein and equol compared with the lowest of 0.54 (95% CI, 0.29 to 1.01; <I>P</I><SUB>trend</SUB> = .03) and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.22 to 0.82; <I>P</I><SUB>trend</SUB> = .02), respectively. Plasma isoflavone levels were not statistically significantly associated with the risk of advanced prostate cancer.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Isoflavones may prevent the development of prostate cancer.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kurahashi, Iwasaki, Inoue, Sasazuki, Tsugane]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Behavioral and Lifestyle Risk Factors]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.8807</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Epidemiology] Plasma Isoflavones and Subsequent Risk of Prostate Cancer in a Nested Case-Control Study: The Japan Public Health Center]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5929</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5923</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Epidemiology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5930?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumors After Chemotherapy: The German Multicenter Positron Emission Tomography Study Group]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5930?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>In patients with metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell cancer (NSGCT), residual masses after chemotherapy (CTX) can consist of vital carcinoma, mature teratoma, or necrosis. This prospective trial has evaluated the accuracy of [<SUP>18</SUP>F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for the prediction of histology compared with computed tomography (CT) and serum tumor markers (STM).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>A total of 121 patients with stage IIC or III NSGCT scheduled for secondary resection after cisplatin-based CTX were included. FDG-PET was performed after completion of CTX. All results were confirmed by histopathology and correlated to STM and CT.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Prediction of tumor viability with FDG-PET was correct in 56%, which did not reach the expected clinically relevant level of 70%, and was not better than the accuracy of CT (55%) or STM (56%). Sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET were 70% and 48%. The positive predictive values were not significantly different (55%, 61%, and 59% for CT, STM, and PET, respectively). Judging only vital carcinoma as a true malignant finding, the negative predictive value increased to 83% for FDG-PET.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>The presence of vital carcinoma and mature teratoma is common (55%) in residual masses in patients with NSGCT, and CT and STM cannot reliably predict absence of disease. In contrast to prior studies, this prospective trial, which is the only with histologic confirmation in all patients, demonstrated that FDG-PET is unable to give a clear additional clinical benefit to the standard diagnostic procedures, CT and STM, in the prediction of tumor viability in residual masses.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Oechsle, Hartmann, Brenner, Venz, Weissbach, Franzius, Kliesch, Mueller, Krege, Heicappell, Bares, Bokemeyer, de Wit]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Diagnosis & Staging]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1157</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Nonseminomatous Germ Cell Tumors After Chemotherapy: The German Multicenter Positron Emission Tomography Study Group]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5935</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5930</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Genitourinary Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5936?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] Phase III Trial of Androgen Ablation With or Without Three Cycles of Systemic Chemotherapy for Advanced Prostate Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5936?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>We conducted a phase III trial in patients with previously untreated metastatic prostate cancer to test the hypothesis that three 8-week cycles of ketoconazole and doxorubicin alternating with vinblastine and estramustine, given in addition to standard androgen deprivation, would delay the appearance of castrate-resistant disease.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Eligible patients had metastatic prostate cancer threatening enough to justify sustained androgen ablation and were fit enough for chemotherapy. The primary end point was time to castrate-resistant progression as shown by increasing prostate-specific antigen, new radiographic lesions, worsening cancer-related symptoms, or receipt of any other systemic therapy.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Three hundred six patients were registered; 286 are reported. Median time to progression was 24 months (95% CI, 18 to 39 months) in the standard therapy arm, and 35 months (95% CI, 26 to 44 months) in the chemohormonal group (<I>P</I> = .39). At median follow-up of 6.4 years, overall survival was 5.4 years (95% CI, 4.7 to 7.8 years) in the standard therapy arm versus 6.1 years (95% CI, 5.1 to 10.1 years; <I>P</I> = .41). Prostate-specific antigen kinetics at the time of androgen ablation and the nadir after hormone treatment were strongly correlated with survival. Chemotherapy significantly increased the burden of therapy, with 51% of patients experiencing an adverse event of grade 3 or worse, especially thromboembolic events.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>There is no role for ketoconazole and doxorubicin alternating with vinblastine and estramustine before emergence of a castrate-resistant phenotype.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Millikan, Wen, Pagliaro, Brown, Moomey, Do, Logothetis]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.9830</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Genitourinary Cancer] Phase III Trial of Androgen Ablation With or Without Three Cycles of Systemic Chemotherapy for Advanced Prostate Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5942</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5936</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Genitourinary Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5943?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplantation] Relationship of Treatment-Related Cytopenias and Response to Lenalidomide in Patients With Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5943?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) often require treatment with growth factors (GFs) or non-GF therapies. One non-GF drug, lenalidomide, is particularly effective at achieving transfusion independence (TI) in patients with lower-risk MDS with the del(5q) cytogenetic abnormality. However, approximately half of del(5q) patients and one quarter of non&ndash;del(5q) patients treated with lenalidomide experience significant cytopenias. Lenalidomide-induced cytopenias occurring early in treatment may serve as a surrogate marker of clonal suppression and, therefore, may be predictive of a TI response.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>We analyzed 362 low-risk, transfusion-dependent patients with MDS, with or without the del(5q) abnormality, enrolled in two phase II studies (MDS-003 and MDS-002) to determine whether treatment-related cytopenias are correlated with lenalidomide response. Cytopenias were assessed during the first 8 weeks of therapy, and response was defined as TI; response predictors were explored in univariate and multivariate analyses.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Among patients with del(5q), 70% of those whose platelet count decreased by &ge; 50% achieved TI, as compared with 42% of those whose platelet count remained stable or declined by less than 50% (<I>P</I> = .01). Among patients without baseline neutropenia, 82% of those whose absolute neutrophil count (ANC) decreased by &ge; 75% achieved TI, as compared with 51% whose ANC remained stable or decreased by less than 75% (<I>P</I> = .02). These relationships were consistent in multivariate analyses. No relationship between the development of cytopenias and response could be established for lower-risk patients with MDS without del(5q).</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>These findings support the hypothesis that a direct cytotoxic effect of lenalidomide specific to the del(5q) clone may be indicative of a TI response.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sekeres, Maciejewski, Giagounidis, Wride, Knight, Raza, List]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.5770</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplantation] Relationship of Treatment-Related Cytopenias and Response to Lenalidomide in Patients With Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5949</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5943</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplantation</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5950?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Melanoma] Phase I/II Study of Ipilimumab for Patients With Metastatic Melanoma]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5950?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>The primary objective of this phase I/II study was to determine the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of either transfectoma- or a hybridoma-derived ipilimumab. Secondary objectives included determination of a maximum-tolerated dose and assessment of clinical activity.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Patients and Methods</ST> 
<P>Eighty-eight patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma with at least one measurable lesion were treated. Mean age was 59 years, with 65% male and 35% female patients, and 79% of patients had received prior systemic therapy. Single doses of ipilimumab up to 20 mg/kg (group A, single dose), multiple doses up to 5 mg/kg (group A, multiple dose), and multiple doses up to 10 mg/kg (group B) were administered.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Results</ST> 
<P>Single dosing up to 20 mg/kg of transfectoma antibody was well tolerated, as were multiple doses up to 10 mg/kg without a maximum-tolerated dose. In group B, dose-limiting toxicity was seen in six of 23 melanoma patients. Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were observed in 14% of patients (12 of 88 patients), and grade 1 or 2 irAEs were seen in an additional 58%. The half-life of ipilimumab was 359 hours. In group B, there was one partial response (23+ months), one complete response (21+ months), and seven patients with stable disease (SD), for a disease control rate of 39%. Two patients in group B with SD had slow, steady decline in tumor burden that was ongoing at 1 year of observation.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Conclusion</ST> 
<P>Ipilimumab has activity in patients with metastatic melanoma. Late responses were observed in patients with prolonged SD.</P>
</SEC>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Weber, O'Day, Urba, Powderly, Nichol, Yellin, Snively, Hersh]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-12-18</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Immunology/Immunobiology, Phase I and Clinical Pharmacology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.1927</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[[Melanoma] Phase I/II Study of Ipilimumab for Patients With Metastatic Melanoma]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>36</prism:number>
<prism:volume>26</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5956</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-12-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5950</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Melanoma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5957?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[[Neurooncology] Polymorphism in the Microglial Cell-Mobilizing CX3CR1 Gene Is Associated With Survival in Patients With Glioblastoma]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/26/36/5957?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ 
<SEC> 
<ST>Purpose</ST> 
<P>Few reliable prognostic molecular markers have been characterized for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), considered the deadliest of human cancers. We hypothesized that genetic polymorphisms in chemokines and their receptors, which together control microglial cell mobilization, may influence survival.</P>
</SEC>
 
<SEC> 
<ST>Methods</ST> 
<P>Distributions of one polymorphism of the chemokine CCL2 (&ndash;2518A&lt;G) and two poly