EMUC15 - Resource Centre - Search Results

178 results (Loading...)

Video Filters×
  • organe

  • access

  • procedure

  • pathology

178 Abstracts

  • Introduction & ObjectivesThe introduction of new life-prolonging treatments including docetaxel (D), cabazitaxel (C), abiraterone (A) and enzalutamide (E) have revolutionised the outcomes of patients with mCRPC. Treatment sequences remain variable dependent on physicians’ choices. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients receiving cabazitaxel and its’ potential relevance on therapeutic sequencing.Material & MethodsA retrospective study of mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel after progression during or following docetaxel at one centre in England. Data on thirty three patients relating to patients’ characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were collected from the medical records and anonymised for analysis.ResultsThirty three patients analysed received a median (range) of 3 (2-4) different life-prolonging therapies. The median (interquartile range, IQR) age of patients commencing on cabazitaxel was 71.1 (67.4 – 75.1) years. Cabazitaxel was second line therapy after docetaxel in 22/33 (67%) patients. Median (IQR) time from mCRPC diagnosis to start of cabazitaxel was 1.5 (1.0-2.0) years.  Number of life-extending drugs Median [95% CI] OS from mCRPC diagnosis 2 DC: N=7, 29.4 months [21.4-80.1] 3 DAC: N=7, 26.2 months [22.1-40.4] DCA: N=15, 40.0 months [24.3-57.6] 4 N=4, 32.1 months [15.1-.] The tabulated data describes the number of treatment used with the following sequences: 7 patients received 2 therapies (DC); 22 patients received 3 therapies (DAC: n=7; DCA: n=15); 4 patients received 4 therapies (DCAE: n=1; DACE: n=1; DCEA: n=1; DAEC: n=1). Overall survival was longer, with a 14 months addition in patients receiving second-line cabazitaxel compared to third-line following docetaxel and abiraterone.ConclusionsBased on this one centre real-life practice sequencing data, there is evidence to suggest that cabazitaxel has optimal benefit on overall survival when used second line following docetaxel. This data is promising and may be the beginning to unlocking the sequencing conundrum. A multi-centre study is being carried out to validate this data further. Pan S., Kumar V., Charnley N., Parikh O., Birtle A. 7th European Multidisciplinary Meeting on Urological Cancers Rosemere Cancer Centre, Dept. of Oncology, Preston 58701 EMUC15-0198 P085
  • Introduction & ObjectivesThe introduction of new life-prolonging treatments including docetaxel (D), cabazitaxel (C), abiraterone (A) and enzalutamide (E) have revolutionised the outcomes of patients with mCRPC. Treatment sequences remain variable dependent on physicians’ choices. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients receiving cabazitaxel and its’ potential relevance on therapeutic sequencing.Material & MethodsA retrospective study of mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel after progression during or following docetaxel at one centre in England. Data on thirty three patients relating to patients’ characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were collected from the medical records and anonymised for analysis.ResultsThirty three patients analysed received a median (range) of 3 (2-4) different life-prolonging therapies. The median (interquartile range, IQR) age of patients commencing on cabazitaxel was 71.1 (67.4 – 75.1) years. Cabazitaxel was second line therapy after docetaxel in 22/33 (67%) patients. Median (IQR) time from mCRPC diagnosis to start of cabazitaxel was 1.5 (1.0-2.0) years.  Number of life-extending drugs Median [95% CI] OS from mCRPC diagnosis 2 DC: N=7, 29.4 months [21.4-80.1] 3 DAC: N=7, 26.2 months [22.1-40.4] DCA: N=15, 40.0 months [24.3-57.6] 4 N=4, 32.1 months [15.1-.] The tabulated data describes the number of treatment used with the following sequences: 7 patients received 2 therapies (DC); 22 patients received 3 therapies (DAC: n=7; DCA: n=15); 4 patients received 4 therapies (DCAE: n=1; DACE: n=1; DCEA: n=1; DAEC: n=1). Overall survival was longer, with a 14 months addition in patients receiving second-line cabazitaxel compared to third-line following docetaxel and abiraterone.ConclusionsBased on this one centre real-life practice sequencing data, there is evidence to suggest that cabazitaxel has optimal benefit on overall survival when used second line following docetaxel. This data is promising and may be the beginning to unlocking the sequencing conundrum. A multi-centre study is being carried out to validate this data further. Pan S., Kumar V., Charnley N., Parikh O., Birtle A. 7th European Multidisciplinary Meeting on Urological Cancers Rosemere Cancer Centre, Dept. of Oncology, Preston 58701 EMUC15-0198 P085
  • Introduction & ObjectivesThe introduction of new life-prolonging treatments including docetaxel (D), cabazitaxel (C), abiraterone (A) and enzalutamide (E) have revolutionised the outcomes of patients with mCRPC. Treatment sequences remain variable dependent on physicians’ choices. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients receiving cabazitaxel and its’ potential relevance on therapeutic sequencing.Material & MethodsA retrospective study of mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel after progression during or following docetaxel at one centre in England. Data on thirty three patients relating to patients’ characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were collected from the medical records and anonymised for analysis.ResultsThirty three patients analysed received a median (range) of 3 (2-4) different life-prolonging therapies. The median (interquartile range, IQR) age of patients commencing on cabazitaxel was 71.1 (67.4 – 75.1) years. Cabazitaxel was second line therapy after docetaxel in 22/33 (67%) patients. Median (IQR) time from mCRPC diagnosis to start of cabazitaxel was 1.5 (1.0-2.0) years.  Number of life-extending drugs Median [95% CI] OS from mCRPC diagnosis 2 DC: N=7, 29.4 months [21.4-80.1] 3 DAC: N=7, 26.2 months [22.1-40.4] DCA: N=15, 40.0 months [24.3-57.6] 4 N=4, 32.1 months [15.1-.] The tabulated data describes the number of treatment used with the following sequences: 7 patients received 2 therapies (DC); 22 patients received 3 therapies (DAC: n=7; DCA: n=15); 4 patients received 4 therapies (DCAE: n=1; DACE: n=1; DCEA: n=1; DAEC: n=1). Overall survival was longer, with a 14 months addition in patients receiving second-line cabazitaxel compared to third-line following docetaxel and abiraterone.ConclusionsBased on this one centre real-life practice sequencing data, there is evidence to suggest that cabazitaxel has optimal benefit on overall survival when used second line following docetaxel. This data is promising and may be the beginning to unlocking the sequencing conundrum. A multi-centre study is being carried out to validate this data further. Pan S., Kumar V., Charnley N., Parikh O., Birtle A. 7th European Multidisciplinary Meeting on Urological Cancers Rosemere Cancer Centre, Dept. of Oncology, Preston 58701 EMUC15-0198 P085
  • Introduction & ObjectivesThe introduction of new life-prolonging treatments including docetaxel (D), cabazitaxel (C), abiraterone (A) and enzalutamide (E) have revolutionised the outcomes of patients with mCRPC. Treatment sequences remain variable dependent on physicians’ choices. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients receiving cabazitaxel and its’ potential relevance on therapeutic sequencing.Material & MethodsA retrospective study of mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel after progression during or following docetaxel at one centre in England. Data on thirty three patients relating to patients’ characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were collected from the medical records and anonymised for analysis.ResultsThirty three patients analysed received a median (range) of 3 (2-4) different life-prolonging therapies. The median (interquartile range, IQR) age of patients commencing on cabazitaxel was 71.1 (67.4 – 75.1) years. Cabazitaxel was second line therapy after docetaxel in 22/33 (67%) patients. Median (IQR) time from mCRPC diagnosis to start of cabazitaxel was 1.5 (1.0-2.0) years.  Number of life-extending drugs Median [95% CI] OS from mCRPC diagnosis 2 DC: N=7, 29.4 months [21.4-80.1] 3 DAC: N=7, 26.2 months [22.1-40.4] DCA: N=15, 40.0 months [24.3-57.6] 4 N=4, 32.1 months [15.1-.] The tabulated data describes the number of treatment used with the following sequences: 7 patients received 2 therapies (DC); 22 patients received 3 therapies (DAC: n=7; DCA: n=15); 4 patients received 4 therapies (DCAE: n=1; DACE: n=1; DCEA: n=1; DAEC: n=1). Overall survival was longer, with a 14 months addition in patients receiving second-line cabazitaxel compared to third-line following docetaxel and abiraterone.ConclusionsBased on this one centre real-life practice sequencing data, there is evidence to suggest that cabazitaxel has optimal benefit on overall survival when used second line following docetaxel. This data is promising and may be the beginning to unlocking the sequencing conundrum. A multi-centre study is being carried out to validate this data further. Pan S., Kumar V., Charnley N., Parikh O., Birtle A. 7th European Multidisciplinary Meeting on Urological Cancers Rosemere Cancer Centre, Dept. of Oncology, Preston 58701 EMUC15-0198 P085
  • Introduction & ObjectivesThe introduction of new life-prolonging treatments including docetaxel (D), cabazitaxel (C), abiraterone (A) and enzalutamide (E) have revolutionised the outcomes of patients with mCRPC. Treatment sequences remain variable dependent on physicians’ choices. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes in patients receiving cabazitaxel and its’ potential relevance on therapeutic sequencing.Material & MethodsA retrospective study of mCRPC patients treated with cabazitaxel after progression during or following docetaxel at one centre in England. Data on thirty three patients relating to patients’ characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were collected from the medical records and anonymised for analysis.ResultsThirty three patients analysed received a median (range) of 3 (2-4) different life-prolonging therapies. The median (interquartile range, IQR) age of patients commencing on cabazitaxel was 71.1 (67.4 – 75.1) years. Cabazitaxel was second line therapy after docetaxel in 22/33 (67%) patients. Median (IQR) time from mCRPC diagnosis to start of cabazitaxel was 1.5 (1.0-2.0) years.  Number of life-extending drugs Median [95% CI] OS from mCRPC diagnosis 2 DC: N=7, 29.4 months [21.4-80.1] 3 DAC: N=7, 26.2 months [22.1-40.4] DCA: N=15, 40.0 months [24.3-57.6] 4 N=4, 32.1 months [15.1-.] The tabulated data describes the number of treatment used with the following sequences: 7 patients received 2 therapies (DC); 22 patients received 3 therapies (DAC: n=7; DCA: n=15); 4 patients received 4 therapies (DCAE: n=1; DACE: n=1; DCEA: n=1; DAEC: n=1). Overall survival was longer, with a 14 months addition in patients receiving second-line cabazitaxel compared to third-line following docetaxel and abiraterone.ConclusionsBased on this one centre real-life practice sequencing data, there is evidence to suggest that cabazitaxel has optimal benefit on overall survival when used second line following docetaxel. This data is promising and may be the beginning to unlocking the sequencing conundrum. A multi-centre study is being carried out to validate this data further. Pan S., Kumar V., Charnley N., Parikh O., Birtle A. 7th European Multidisciplinary Meeting on Urological Cancers Rosemere Cancer Centre, Dept. of Oncology, Preston 58701 EMUC15-0198 P085
×