MyMedR

Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Roles of cancer registries in enhancing oncology drug access in the Asia-Pacific region

Soon SS, Lim HY, Lopes G, Ahn J, Hu M, Ibrahim HM, et al.

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2013;14(4):2159-65.
PMID: 23725106

Cancer registries help to establish and maintain cancer incidence reporting systems, serve as a resource for investigation of cancer and its causes, and provide information for planning and evaluation of preventive and control programs. However, their wider role in directly enhancing oncology drug access has not been fully explored. We examined the value of cancer registries in oncology drug access in the Asia-Pacific region on three levels: (1) specific registry variable types; (2) macroscopic strategies on the national level; and (3) a regional cancer registry network. Using literature search and proceedings from an expert forum, this paper covers recent cancer registry developments in eight economies in the Asia-Pacific region - Australia, China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand - and the ways they can contribute to oncology drug access. Specific registry variables relating to demographics, tumor characteristics, initial treatment plans, prognostic markers, risk factors, and mortality help to anticipate drug needs, identify high-priority research area and design access programs. On a national level, linking registry data with clinical, drug safety, financial, or drug utilization databases allows analyses of associations between utilization and outcomes. Concurrent efforts should also be channeled into developing and implementing data integrity and stewardship policies, and providing clear avenues to make data available. Less mature registry systems can employ modeling techniques and ad-hoc surveys while increasing coverage. Beyond local settings, a cancer registry network for the Asia-Pacific region would offer cross-learning and research opportunities that can exert leverage through the experiences and capabilities of a highly diverse region.
Fulltext Optimizing outcomes for patients with metastatic prostate cancer: insights from South East Asia Expert Panel

Schutz FAB, Sirachainan E, Kuppusamy S, Hoa NTT, Dejthevaporn T, Bahadzor B, et al.

Ther Adv Med Oncol, 2021;13:1758835920985464.
PMID: 33747148 DOI: 10.1177/1758835920985464

AIMS: Clinical decision making is challenging in men with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), as heterogeneity in treatment options and patient characteristics have resulted in multiple scenarios with little or no evidence. The South East Asia Expert Panel 2019 addressed some of these challenges.
METHODS: Based on evidence in the literature and expert interviews, 19 statements were formulated for key challenges in the treatment of men with castration-sensitive and -resistant prostate cancer in clinical practice. A modified Delphi process was used to reach consensus among experts in the panel and develop clinical practice recommendations.
RESULTS: The majority of the panel preferred a risk-based stratification and recommended abiraterone or enzalutamide as first-line therapy for symptomatic chemotherapy naïve patients. Abiraterone is preferred over enzalutamide as a first-line treatment in these patients. However, the panel did not support the use of abiraterone in high risk lymph-node positive only (N+M0) or in non-metastatic (N0M0) patients. In select patients, low dose abiraterone with food may be used to optimize clinical outcomes. Androgen receptor gene splice variant status may be a useful guide to therapy. In addition, generic versions of approved therapies may improve access to treatment to a broader patient population. The choice of treatment, as well as sequencing are guided by both patient and disease characteristics, preferences, drug access, cost, and compliance.
CONCLUSION: Expert recommendations are key to guidance for the optimal management of mPC. Appropriate choice, timing, and sequence of treatment options can help to tailor therapy to maximize outcomes in men with mPC.
A new era of the Asian clinical research network: a report from the ATLAS international symposium

Terada M, Nakamura K, Matsuda T, Okuma HS, Sudo K, Yusof A, et al.

Jpn J Clin Oncol, 2023 Jun 29;53(7):619-628.
PMID: 37099440 DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyad033

This report summarizes the presentations and discussions in the first Asian Clinical Trials Network for Cancers (ATLAS) international symposium that was held on 24 April 2022, in Bangkok, Thailand, and hosted by the National Cancer Center Hospital (NCCH), co-hosted by the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), Clinical Research Malaysia (CRM) and the Thai Society of Clinical Oncology (TSCO), and supported by Embassy of Japan in Thailand. Since 2020, the NCCH has conducted the ATLAS project to enhance research environments and infrastructures to facilitate international clinical research and cancer genomic medicine in the Asian region. The purpose of the symposium was to discuss what we can achieve under the ATLAS project, to share the latest topics and common issues in cancer research and to facilitate mutual understanding. Invitees included stakeholders from academic institutions, mainly at ATLAS collaborative sites, as well as Asian regulatory authorities. The invited speakers discussed ongoing collaborative research, regulatory perspectives to improve new drug access in Asia, the status of phase I trials in Asia, the introduction of research activities at the National Cancer Center (NCC) and the implementation of genomic medicine. As the next steps after this symposium, the ATLAS project will foster increased cooperation between investigators, regulatory authorities and other stakeholders relevant to cancer research, and establish a sustainable pan-Asian cancer research group to increase the number of clinical trials and deliver novel drugs to patients with cancer in Asia.
Fulltext Efficacy, Tolerability, and Biomarker Analyses of Once-Every-2-Weeks Cetuximab Plus First-Line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in Patients With KRAS or All RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Phase 2 APEC Study

Cheng AL, Cornelio G, Shen L, Price T, Yang TS, Chung IJ, et al.

Clin Colorectal Cancer, 2017 06;16(2):e73-e88.
PMID: 27780749 DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2016.08.005

BACKGROUND: In patients with KRAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), outcomes with first-line chemotherapies are improved by adding weekly cetuximab. The APEC study investigated first-line once-every-2-weeks cetuximab plus chemotherapy for patients with KRAS wt mCRC; additional biomarker subgroups were also analyzed.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: APEC was a nonrandomized phase 2 trial conducted in the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (n = 289) received once-every-2-weeks cetuximab with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI). The primary end point was best confirmed overall response rate (BORR); progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were secondary end points. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) were also evaluated.
RESULTS: In the KRAS wt population, BORR was 58.8%, median PFS 11.1 months, and median OS 26.8 months. Expanded RAS mutational analysis revealed that patients with RAS wt mCRC had better outcomes (BORR = 64.7%; median PFS = 13.0 months; median OS = 28.4 months). The data suggest that ETS and DpR may be associated with survival outcomes in the RAS wt population. Although this study was not designed to formally assess differences in outcome between treatment subgroups, efficacy results appeared similar for patients treated with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI. There were no new safety findings; in particular, grade 3/4 skin reactions were within clinical expectations.
CONCLUSION: The observed activity and safety profile is similar to that reported in prior first-line pivotal studies involving weekly cetuximab, suggesting once-every-2-weeks cetuximab is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy and may represent an alternative to weekly administration.
Gemcitabine, carboplatin, and Epstein Barr virus-specific autologous cytotoxic T lymphocytes for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: VANCE, an international randomized Phase 3 trial

Toh HC, Yang MH, Wang HM, Hsieh CY, Chitapanarux I, Ho KF, et al.

Ann Oncol, 2024 Sep 04.
PMID: 39241963 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.08.2344

BACKGROUND: Epstein-Barr virus-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (EBV-CTL) is an autologous adoptive T cell immunotherapy generated from the blood of individuals and manufactured without genetic modification. In a previous Phase 2 trial of locally recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer (R/M NPC) patients, first-line gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) and EBV-CTL combination demonstrated objective anti-tumor EBV-CTL activity and a favorable safety profile. The present study explored whether this combined first-line chemo-immunotherapy strategy would produce superior clinical efficacy and better quality of life compared to conventional chemotherapy treatment.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, Phase 3 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of GC followed by EBV-CTL vs. GC alone as first-line treatment for R/M NPC patients. Thirty clinical sites in Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, and the United States (US) were included. Subjects were randomized to first-line GC (4 cycles) and EBV-CTL (6 cycles) or GC (6 cycles) in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, quality of life, and safety.
CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT02578641.
RESULTS: 330 subjects with NPC were enrolled. Most subjects in both treatment arms received ≥4 cycles of chemotherapy and most subjects in the GC+EBV-CTL group received ≥2 infusions of EBV-CTL. The central Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) facility produced sufficient EBV-CTL for 94% of GC+EBV-CTL subjects. The median OS was 25.0 months in the GC+EBV-CTL group and 24.9 months in the GC group (hazard ratio = 1.19; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.56; P = 0.194). Only 1 subject experienced a Grade 2 serious adverse event related to EBV-CTL.
CONCLUSION: GC+EBV-CTL in subjects with R/M NPC demonstrated a favorable safety profile but no overall improvement in OS vs. chemotherapy. This is the largest adoptive T cell therapy trial reported in solid tumors to date.