MATERIALS AND METHODS: Paraffin blocks of 133 CRCs were retrieved from the Department of Pathology, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Immunostaining was done using antibody to clusterin. Staining expression in 10% of malignant cells was used as a cut-off to determine low immunostaining and high immunostaining. Statistical tests were used to evaluate the association of clusterin immunostaining with clinicopathological parameters.
RESULTS: Immunohistochemical results showed clusterin low immunostaining in CRC and nodal metastases. No association was found between clusterin immunostaining and tumour grade, age, tumour invasiveness, distant metastases, vascular invasion, nodal metastases, relapse, and survival.
CONCLUSION: Our study showed low clusterin immunostaining in CRC with lack of association with prognostic indicators in CRC. These results raise the controversy of understanding the role of clusterin in CRC. Further molecular studies are required to explore more about possible mechanisms of clusterin association with tumorigenicity, apoptosis, tumour growth progression, local and vascular invasion, and metastasis of CRC.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults with advanced/metastatic EGFR-mutant NSCLC, acquired resistance to first-/second-generation EGFR inhibitors, and MET gene copy number (GCN) ≥5, MET:CEP7 ≥2, or MET IHC 2+/3+ were randomized to tepotinib 500 mg (450 mg active moiety) plus gefitinib 250 mg once daily, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). MET-amplified subgroup analysis was preplanned.
RESULTS: Overall (N = 55), median PFS was 4.9 months versus 4.4 months [stratified HR, 0.67; 90% CI, 0.35-1.28] with tepotinib plus gefitinib versus chemotherapy. In 19 patients with MET amplification (median age 60.4 years; 68.4% never-smokers; median GCN 8.8; median MET/CEP7 2.8; 89.5% with MET IHC 3+), tepotinib plus gefitinib improved PFS (HR, 0.13; 90% CI, 0.04-0.43) and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.10; 90% CI, 0.02-0.36) versus chemotherapy. Objective response rate was 66.7% with tepotinib plus gefitinib versus 42.9% with chemotherapy; median duration of response was 19.9 months versus 2.8 months. Median duration of tepotinib plus gefitinib was 11.3 months (range, 1.1-56.5), with treatment >1 year in six (50.0%) and >4 years in three patients (25.0%). Seven patients (58.3%) had treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events with tepotinib plus gefitinib and five (71.4%) had chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Final analysis of INSIGHT suggests improved PFS and OS with tepotinib plus gefitinib versus chemotherapy in a subgroup of patients with MET-amplified EGFR-mutant NSCLC, after progression on EGFR inhibitors.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred sixty-nine children with favorable-risk BCP-ALL (age 1-9 years, no extramedullary disease, and no high-risk genetics) who cleared minimal residual disease (≤0.01%) at the end of remission induction were enrolled into Ma-Spore (MS) ALL trials. One hundred sixty-seven standard-risk (SR) patients (34% of Malaysia-Singapore ALL 2003 study [MS2003]) were treated with the MS2003-SR protocol and received 120 mg/m2 of anthracyclines during delayed intensification while 202 patients (42% of MS2010) received an anthracycline-free successor protocol. The primary outcome was a noninferiority margin of 1.15 in 6-year event-free survival (EFS) between the MS2003-SR and MS2010-SR cohorts.
RESULTS: The 6-year EFS of MS2003-SR and MS2010-SR (anthracycline-free) cohorts was 95.2% ± 1.7% and 96.5% ± 1.5%, respectively (P = .46). The corresponding 6-year overall survival was 97.6% and 99.0% ± 0.7% (P = .81), respectively. The cumulative incidence of relapse was 3.6% and 2.6%, respectively (P = .42). After adjustment for race, sex, age, presenting WBC, day 8 prednisolone response, and favorable genetic subgroups, the hazard ratio for MS2010-SR EFS was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.14; P = .79), confirming noninferiority. Compared with MS2003-SR, MS2010-SR had significantly lower episodes of bacteremia (30% v 45.6%; P = .04) and intensive care unit admissions (1.5% v 9.5%; P = .004).
CONCLUSION: In comparison with MS2003-SR, the anthracycline-free MS2010-SR protocol is not inferior and was less toxic as treatment for favorable-risk childhood BCP-ALL.
METHODS: Patients confirmed by transrectal-ultrasonographic-guided-biopsy performed from 2002 to 2008 were enrolled and analysed according to ethnicity, age, PSA level, Gleason score, stage of disease and survival.
RESULTS: Among 83 patients, there were 38 Malay, 40 Chinese, 3 Indians and 2 others. Median age at diagnosis was 69.9 (range: 59-93), 43 patients (51.8%) being diagnosed before the age of 70. The median PSA level upon diagnosis was 574 ng/ml (range: 1-8632) and the median Gleason score was 7 (range: 2-10). Over half were already in Stage 4 when diagnosed. The most common site of metastasis was the bone. As a result the commonest prescribed treatment was hormonal manipulation. Five patients underwent radical prostatectomy and a further thirteen patients had radical radiotherapy (stage I: 1 patient, stage II: 7 patients and stage III: 5 patients). Ten patients defaulted follow-up. The median disease-specific survival was 21.9 months (range: 1-53).
CONCLUSIONS: Prostatic carcinoma is a disease of the elderly and it is frequently diagnosed late in Malaysia. Greater efforts should be made to educate Malaysians regarding prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997 to 1999, 55 patients with FIGO stage Ib1 lymph nodes-negative cervical carcinoma limited to the cervix were prescribed RT following radical surgery, based on their RS, as follows: RS <40, RT is omitted; RS >40 to <120, modified (smaller) field RT; and RS >120, standard field pelvic RT. Their incidence and site of recurrence were compared with a similar cohort of 40 patients who were treated prior to 1997.
RESULTS: Prior to 1997, of the 40 patients, 10 patients were given standard field RT. There were 2 (5%) recurrent diseases. The mean duration of follow-up was 61.6 months (range, 1 to 103 months). The RS of 23 of the 30 patients who were not given RT were available. The mean RS was 22 with 5 patients having a score of >40. From 1997 onwards, of the 55 patients, 28 (51%) did not require RT, 13 (23%) were treated with modified (smaller) field RT and 14 (26%) were given standard field RT. There were 2 (3.6%) cases of relapse. The mean duration of follow-up was 36.4 months (range, 5 to 60 months). All patients with a RS of <40 did not suffer any relapse. Their survival outcomes were better when compared to patients who did not have any RT in the GOG Study.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicated that postoperative adjuvant RT given to patients with a high GOG RS of >120, significantly improved their 5-year recurrence rate and disease-free survival, as compared with the similar group of patients who were without adjuvant therapy in the GOG study. Patients with a GOG risk-score of <40 may be safely spared from adjuvant pelvic RT. The current treatment protocol did not compromise the outcome in patients, compared with the use of a less precise treatment protocol in the past.
METHODS: This hospital-based prospective cohort study will comprise patients with breast cancer (18 years and above), managed in the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC). We aim to recruit 1000 cancer survivors over a 6-year period. Data collection will occur at baseline (within 3 months of diagnosis), 6 months, and 1, 3 and 5 years following diagnosis. The primary outcomes are disease-free survival and overall survival, and secondary outcome is QoL. Factors measured are demographic and socioeconomic factors, lifestyle factors (eg, dietary intake, physical activity), anthropometry measurements (eg, height, weight, waist, hip circumference, body fat analysis), psychosocial aspects, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) usage.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by the UMMC Ethical Committee in January 2012. All participants are required to provide written informed consent. The findings from our cohort study will be disseminated via scientific publication as well as presentation to stakeholders including the patients, clinicians, the public and policymakers, via appropriate avenues.