1
|
Lorenz R, Paasch C, Stechemesser B, Reinpold W, Niebuhr H, Fortelny RH, Mayer F, Köckerling F, Mantke R. Long-term evaluation of the Hernia Compact course of the German Hernia School. Hernia 2024; 28:621-628. [PMID: 38393496 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-024-02966-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2023] [Accepted: 01/11/2024] [Indexed: 02/25/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Since 2011, the German Hernia Society has developed the German Hernia School (GHS) as a standardized hernia surgery training program for younger surgeons, consisting of the Hernia Compact basic module. It is a standardized three day training program (cadaver workshop, ultrasound simulation training, and hands-on training). After 12 years of experience, a survey was conducted to evaluate the long term effect of this training. METHOD Using an anonymous online-questionnaire, we contacted from September 2023 to October 2023 the Hernia Compact course participants via the congress organizer "Weitmeer" and the German Hernia Society. This online questionnaire contains 18 multiple choice questions regarding participants' age, gender, professional experience, participation in other modules of the German Hernia School, the effect of the course on their daily practice and their specific interest in hernia and abdominal wall surgery. RESULTS A total of 146 participants responded to the anonymous online questionnaire. A majority of 132 of 146 participants (90.42%) responded that this course improved the quality of surgical and hernia training (n = 146, no missing data). 141 of 146 individuals (96.58%) recommended the course to surgical colleagues (n = 146, no missing data). There were 89.73% of participants, (n = 146, no missing data) that developed a specific interest in hernia and abdominal wall surgery after the course. For 78.08% (n = 146, no missing data) of participants hernia and abdominal wall surgery was one of the most important activities in their daily surgical practice. CONCLUSION The standardized Hernia Compact basic course of the German Hernia School appears to have a huge impact on the quality of hernia surgery training in Germany and Austria. It might also help generate a specific interest in hernia surgery among participants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Lorenz
- 3+CHIRURGEN Hernia Center, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany.
- Department of General and Abdominal Surgery, Clinic for General and Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel, Hochstrasse 29, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.
| | - C Paasch
- Department of General and Abdominal Surgery, Clinic for General and Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel, Hochstrasse 29, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| | - B Stechemesser
- Hernia Center Cologne, PAN-Klinik, Zeppelinstrasse 1, 50667, Cologne, Germany
| | - W Reinpold
- Hamburger Hernien Centrum, Harburg (an der Helios Mariahilf Klinik), Stader Str. 203c, 21075, Hamburg, Germany
| | - H Niebuhr
- Hamburger Hernien Centrum, Eppendorf, Eppendorfer Baum 8, 20249, Hamburg, Germany
| | - R H Fortelny
- Department of General Surgery, Klinik Ottakring, Montleartstraße 37, 1160, Vienna, Austria
- Medical Faculty, Sigmund Freud University, Freudplatz 3, 1020, Vienna, Austria
| | - F Mayer
- Department of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, University Hospital, Müllner Hauptstrasse 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria
| | - F Köckerling
- Vivantes Humboldt Hospital Berlin, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charite' University Medicine, Am Nordgraben 2, 13509, Berlin, Germany
| | - R Mantke
- Department of General and Abdominal Surgery, Clinic for General and Abdominal Surgery, University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel, Hochstrasse 29, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
- Faculty of Medicine, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg, Germany
- Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Paasch C, Kobelt E, Lünse S, Heisler S, Lorenz R, Hunger R, Mantke R. How often is prophylactic parastomal mesh placement performed after rectal resection without sphincter preservation? An analysis of German nationwide hospital discharge data among 41,697 patients. Hernia 2024; 28:9-15. [PMID: 37843603 PMCID: PMC10891180 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-023-02887-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 10/17/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The European Hernia Society guidelines of parastomal hernias, published in 2017, strongly recommend prophylactic synthetic non-absorbable mesh upon the construction of a permanent end colostomy to reduce the incidence of parastomal hernias. This study aims to evaluate the implementation of the guidelines in Germany. METHODS This is a retrospective multicentric analysis conducted in December 2022 at the University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel. Anonymous data on rectal resection without sphincter preservation in the period 2010-2020 were extracted from the German nationwide hospital discharge data set. Individuals with a hernia and < 18 years old were excluded. Another exclusion criterion was a performed colectomy or proctocolectomy with an ileoanal pouch and placement of an absorbable mesh. The primary endpoint was the annual rate of prophylactic parastomal mesh placement following rectal resection without sphincter preservation in Germany. Cases reporting both non-absorbable mesh placement and rectal resection without sphincter preservation were considered prophylactic mesh insertions. RESULTS A total of 41,697 patients received a rectal resection without sphincter preservation and without non-absorbable mesh placement. Among these individuals, 27,089 were male and 14,608 were female. The rate of reoperations (3.1%) and the length of hospital stay (25.3 days ± 19.32) remained almost constant during these 10 years. The rate of prophylactic mesh placement was increasing from 0.2% (n = 8) in 2010 to 6.4% (n = 198) in 2020. CONCLUSIONS Currently, only the minority of patients who have undergone rectal resection without sphincter preservation receive prophylactic mesh insertion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Paasch
- Department of Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany.
- Clinic for General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Brandenburg an der Havel, Brandenburg Medical University, Hochstraße 29, 14770, Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany.
| | - E Kobelt
- Faculty of Health Science Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
| | - S Lünse
- Department of Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
| | - S Heisler
- Department of Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- Department of Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
- Hernia Center 3+CHIRURGEN, Berlin, Germany
| | - R Hunger
- Faculty of Health Science Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
| | - R Mantke
- Department of Surgery, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
- Faculty of Health Science Brandenburg, Brandenburg Medical School, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, 14770, Brandenburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Harbeck N, Kates R, Schinköthe T, Schumacher J, Wuerstlein R, Degenhardt T, Lüftner D, Räth P, Hoffmann O, Lorenz R, Decker T, Reinisch M, Göhler T, Staib P, Gluz O, Fasching PA, Schmidt M. Favorable impact of therapy management by an interactive eHealth system on severe adverse events in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer treated by palbociclib and endocrine therapy. Cancer Treat Rev 2023; 121:102631. [PMID: 37862832 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2023.102631] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2023] [Revised: 09/29/2023] [Accepted: 10/02/2023] [Indexed: 10/22/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oral cancer medications offer advantages but also pose challenges for therapy management and adherence. An eHealth-based platform such as CANKADO can help to support therapy management by probing the patient's quality of life (QoL) continuously throughout the course of treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS AGO-B WSG PreCycle (NCT03220178) is a multicenter, randomized phase IV intergroup trial evaluating the impact of eHealth-based Patient-Reported Outcome (ePRO) assessment on QoL in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR + )/HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer treated with palbociclib and endocrine therapy. Patients were randomized (2:1) to CANKADO-active arm (supported by CANKADO PRO-React) or CANKADO-inform arm (drug intake documentation only) This exploratory analysis reports the impact of CANKADO PRO-React on safety. Time to first serious adverse event (SAE) was estimated taking competing risks into account. RESULTS While distributions of adverse events (AEs) were similar by arm overall, patients in the CANKADO-active arm had a favorable hazard ratio of 0.67 (95%CI 0.46-0.97; p = 0.04) for time to first SAE and were significantly less likely overall to suffer an SAE than patients in the inform arm. At 24 months, 22.9% [17.9%-27.8%] of patients in CANKADO-active had suffered an SAE vs. 30.3% [22.6%-38.0%] in CANKADO-inform. AE-related dose reductions affected approximately 20% of patients (CANKADO-active: 18.2%, CANKADO-inform: 21.1%). CONCLUSION Exploratory safety analysis of PreCycle demonstrates for the first time in a randomized prospective trial that interactive autonomous eHealth-based support has a substantial favorable impact on the risk of SAEs and mitigates their severity for patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer on oral tumor therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and CCC Munich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany; West German Study Group, Moenchengladbach, Germany.
| | - Ronald Kates
- West German Study Group, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - Timo Schinköthe
- CANKADO GmbH, Ottobrunn, Germany; Research Center Smart Digital Health, University of the Bundeswehr Munich, Neubiberg, Germany
| | | | - Rachel Wuerstlein
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and CCC Munich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany; West German Study Group, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - Tom Degenhardt
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and CCC Munich, LMU University Hospital, Munich, Germany; Hausarztpraxis Wolfratshausen, Wolfratshausen, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Immanuel Hospital Märkische, Schweiz Buckow, Germany; Immanuel Hospital Rüdersdorf and Medical University of Brandenburg Theodor Fontane, Germany
| | | | | | - Ralf Lorenz
- Studien GbR Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Thomas Decker
- Onkologie Ravensburg, Hematology / Oncology, Ravensburg, Germany
| | - Mattea Reinisch
- Breast Center, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Department of Gynecology with Breast Center, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Peter Staib
- St.-Antonius Hospital gGmbH, Clinic for Hematology and Oncology, Eschweiler, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- West German Study Group, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - Peter A Fasching
- University Hospital Erlangen, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Decker T, Lüdtke-Heckenkamp K, Melnichuk L, Hirmas N, Lübbe K, Zahn MO, Schmidt M, Denkert C, Lorenz R, Müller V, Zahm DM, Mundhenke C, Bauer S, Thill M, Seropian P, Filmann N, Loibl S. Anti-hormonal maintenance treatment with the CDK4/6 inhibitor ribociclib after 1st line chemotherapy in hormone receptor positive / HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer: A phase II trial (AMICA). Breast 2023; 72:103575. [PMID: 37690320 PMCID: PMC10507224 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2023.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2023] [Revised: 08/30/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/12/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This phase II study evaluated the impact of adding ribociclib to maintenance endocrine therapy (ET) treatment of physicians' choice following the first palliative chemotherapy in pre- and post-menopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor 2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS The initial randomized study design was later amended into a single-arm study, and all subsequent patients received ribociclib and ET. The primary end point was locally assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate (CBR), safety, compliance, and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS A total of 43 patients received ribociclib + ET and 10 patients received ET only. Median PFS was 12.4 months [95% CI 8.7-24.4] for patients who received ribociclib + ET and 4.75 months [95% CI 1.0-10.3] for those who received ET only. Median OS was not reached for patients who received ribociclib + ET, and 28 (65.1%) patients experienced clinical benefit [95% CI 49.1-79.0]. For patients who received ribociclib + ET, grade 3-4 hematological adverse events (AEs) occurred in 25 (58.1%) patients, and grade 3-4 non-hematological AEs occurred in 17 (39.5%) patients. During the study, 15 patients died - 14 of whom due to tumor-related reasons, and one patient due to pneumonia, which was not treatment-related. CONCLUSION The results of the AMICA study show a promising efficacy and safety of maintenance treatment with ribociclib added to ET after at least stable disease following the first metastatic chemotherapy in patients with HR+/HER2-mBC. TRIAL REGISTRATION Anti-hormonal Therapy With Ribociclib in HR-positive/HER2- Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer (AMICA), NCT03555877, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03555877.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Nader Hirmas
- German Breast Group (GBG) Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg, Germany
| | - Kristina Lübbe
- Diakovere Henriettenstift, Breast Center, Hannover, Germany
| | | | | | - Carsten Denkert
- Institut für Pathologie, Philipps Universität Marburg und Universitätsklinikum Marburg (UKGM), Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Frauenärztliche Gemeinschaftspraxis Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | - Stefan Bauer
- Gemeinschaftspraxis für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Lebach, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | - Natalie Filmann
- German Breast Group (GBG) Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg, Germany
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group (GBG) Forschungs GmbH, Neu-Isenburg, Germany; Centre for Haematology and Oncology/Bethanien Frankfurt/M Freudenstadt, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tzschaschel M, Friedl TWP, Schochter F, Schütze S, Polasik A, Fehm T, Pantel K, Schindlbeck C, Schneeweiss A, Schreier J, Tesch H, Lorenz R, Aivazova-Fuchs V, Häberle L, Fasching P, Janni W, Rack BK, Fink V. Association Between Obesity and Circulating Tumor Cells in Early Breast Cancer Patients. Clin Breast Cancer 2023:S1526-8209(23)00132-5. [PMID: 37336651 DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2023.05.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 05/17/2023] [Accepted: 05/21/2023] [Indexed: 06/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Obesity and the presence of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) before and/or after chemotherapy are associated with poor outcome in breast cancer (BC) patients. The activation of oncogenic pathways in fatty tissue leads to cell proliferation, suggesting a possible link between obesity and CTCs. MATERIALS AND METHODS In the phase III SUCCESS A trial, 3754 patients with early BC were randomized to 3 cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by 3 cycles of docetaxel with or without gemcitabine. Data of 1088 patients with CTC assessments (CellSearch-System; Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Italy) and body mass index (BMI) measurements both before and after chemotherapy were available. Patients were classified according to the WHO's international definitions as underweight, normal weight, overweight, or obese, and according to their weight-change during chemotherapy into a weight-loss group (> 5% decrease), stable-weight group (≤ 5% weight-change) or weight-gain group (>5% increase). Associations between CTC positivity and, BMI or weight-change group were analyzed using frequency-table methods. RESULTS At study entry, 47.4% patients were underweight or normal weight, 33.6% were overweight and 18.9% were obese. Before and after chemotherapy, CTCs were detected in 20.1% and 22.6% of patients, respectively. There was no association between CTC positivity and BMI before (P = 0.104) or after (P = 0.051) chemotherapy. Furthermore, there was no association between weight-change group and CTC status before/after chemotherapy (P = 0.332). CONCLUSIONS According to our analysis, the risk factors obesity and prevalence of CTCs are not associated and may represent independent prognostic factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marie Tzschaschel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
| | - Thomas W P Friedl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Fabienne Schochter
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Sabine Schütze
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Arkadius Polasik
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Klaus Pantel
- Department of Tumor Biology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Hans Tesch
- Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker und Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany
| | | | - Lothar Häberle
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, ComprehensiveCancer Center Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter Fasching
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, ComprehensiveCancer Center Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Brigitte Kathrin Rack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
| | - Visnja Fink
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Harbeck N, Fasching PA, Würstlein R, Degenhardt T, Lüftner D, Kates RE, Schumacher J, Räth P, Hoffmann O, Lorenz R, Decker T, Reinisch M, Göhler T, Staib P, Gluz O, Schinköthe T, Schmidt M. Significantly longer time to deterioration of quality of life due to CANKADO PRO-React eHealth support in HR+ HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients receiving palbociclib and endocrine therapy: Primary outcome analysis of the multicenter randomized AGO-B WSG PreCycle trial. Ann Oncol 2023:S0923-7534(23)00684-1. [PMID: 37201751 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2023.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2023] [Revised: 05/05/2023] [Accepted: 05/07/2023] [Indexed: 05/20/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The multicenter, randomized phase IV intergroup AGO-B WSG PreCycle trial (NCT03220178) evaluated the impact of CANKADO-based ePRO (electronic patient-reported outcomes) assessment on quality of life (QoL) in HR+ HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients receiving palbociclib (P) and an aromatase inhibitor or P+fulvestrant. CANKADO PRO-React, an EU-registered medical device, is an interactive autonomous application reacting to patient self-reported observations. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between 2017 and 2021, 499 patients (median age 59 years) from 71 centers were randomized (2:1, stratified by therapy line) between an active version of CANKADO PRO-React (CANKADO-active arm) or a version with limited functionality (CANKADO-inform arm). 412 patients (271 CANKADO-active; 141 CANKADO-inform) were available for analysis of the primary endpoint, time to deterioration (TTD) of QoL (10-point drop on FACT-G), using an Aalen-Johansen estimator for cumulative incidence function of TTD DQoL with 95% pointwise confidence intervals (CI). Secondary endpoints included PFS, OS, and DQoL (QoL deterioration). RESULTS In all pts (ITT-ePRO), cumulative incidence of DQoL was significantly more favorable (lower) in the CANKADO-active arm (HR=0.698, 95%CI [0.506 - 0.963]). Among 1stL patients (n=295), the corresponding HR was 0.716 (0.484-1.060; p=0.09), and in 2ndL patients (n=117) it was 0.661 (0.374-1.168; p=0.2). Absolute patient numbers declined in later visits; FACT-G completion rates were 80% and higher until about visit 30; mean FACT-G scores showed steady decline from baseline and an offset in favor of CANKADO-active. No significant differences in clinical outcome were observed between arms: Median PFS (ITT population) was 21.4 (95%CI 19.4-23.7) (CANKADO-active) and 18.7 (15.1-23.5) months (CANKADO-inform); median OS was not reached (CANKADO-active) and 42.6 months (CANKADO-inform). CONCLUSIONS PreCycle is the first multicenter randomized eHealth trial demonstrating a significant benefit for MBC patients receiving oral tumor therapy when using an interactive autonomous patient empowerment application.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and CCC Munich LMU, University Hospital, Munich, Germany; West German Study Group, Statistics, Moenchengladbach, Germany.
| | - P A Fasching
- University Hospital Erlangen, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen, Germany
| | - R Würstlein
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and CCC Munich LMU, University Hospital, Munich, Germany; West German Study Group, Statistics, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - T Degenhardt
- Breast Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and CCC Munich LMU, University Hospital, Munich, Germany; Hausarztpraxis Wolfratshausen, Wolfratshausen, Germany
| | - D Lüftner
- Immanuel Hospital Märkische Schweiz Buckow, Germany; Immanuel Hospital Rüdersdorf and Medical University of Brandenburg Theodor Fontane, Germany
| | - R E Kates
- West German Study Group, Statistics, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | | | - P Räth
- palleos healthcare GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - O Hoffmann
- University Hospital Essen, Breast Center, Essen, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- Studien GbR Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - T Decker
- Hematology / Oncology, Ravensburg, Germany
| | - M Reinisch
- Breast Center, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Essen, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Department of Gynecology with Breast Center, Berlin, Germany
| | - T Göhler
- Oncocenter Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - P Staib
- St.-Antonius Hospital gGmbH, Clinic for Hematology and Oncology, Eschweiler, Germany
| | - O Gluz
- West German Study Group, Statistics, Moenchengladbach, Germany
| | - T Schinköthe
- CANKADO Service GmbH, Kirchheim, Germany; Research Center Smart Digital Health, University of the Bundeswehr, Neubiberg, Germany
| | - M Schmidt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Niebuhr H, Köckerling F, Fortelny R, Hoffmann H, Conze J, Holzheimer RG, Koch A, Köhler G, Krones C, Kukleta J, Kuthe A, Lammers B, Lorenz R, Mayer F, Pöllath M, Reinpold W, Schwab R, Stechemesser B, Weyhe D, Wiese M, Zarras K, Meyer HJ. [Inguinal hernia operations-Always outpatient?]. Chirurgie (Heidelb) 2023; 94:230-236. [PMID: 36786812 PMCID: PMC9950173 DOI: 10.1007/s00104-023-01818-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
Inguinal hernia operations represent the most frequent operations overall with 300,000 interventions annually in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (DACH region). Despite the announced political willingness and the increasing pressure from the legislator to avoid costly inpatient treatment by carrying out as many outpatient operations as possible, outpatient treatment has so far played a subordinate role in the DACH region. The Boards of the specialist societies the German Hernia Society (DHG), the Surgical Working Group Hernia (CAH of the DHG), the Austrian Hernia Society (ÖHG) and the Swiss Working Group Hernia Surgery (SAHC) make inroads into this problem, describe the initial position and assess the current situation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- H Niebuhr
- Hamburger Hernien Centrum, Eppendorfer Baum 8, 20249, Hamburg, Deutschland.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Posiolova LV, Lognonné P, Banerdt WB, Clinton J, Collins GS, Kawamura T, Ceylan S, Daubar IJ, Fernando B, Froment M, Giardini D, Malin MC, Miljković K, Stähler SC, Xu Z, Banks ME, Beucler É, Cantor BA, Charalambous C, Dahmen N, Davis P, Drilleau M, Dundas CM, Durán C, Euchner F, Garcia RF, Golombek M, Horleston A, Keegan C, Khan A, Kim D, Larmat C, Lorenz R, Margerin L, Menina S, Panning M, Pardo C, Perrin C, Pike WT, Plasman M, Rajšić A, Rolland L, Rougier E, Speth G, Spiga A, Stott A, Susko D, Teanby NA, Valeh A, Werynski A, Wójcicka N, Zenhäusern G. Largest recent impact craters on Mars: Orbital imaging and surface seismic co-investigation. Science 2022; 378:412-417. [DOI: 10.1126/science.abq7704] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
Two >130-meter-diameter impact craters formed on Mars during the later half of 2021. These are the two largest fresh impact craters discovered by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter since operations started 16 years ago. The impacts created two of the largest seismic events (magnitudes greater than 4) recorded by InSight during its 3-year mission. The combination of orbital imagery and seismic ground motion enables the investigation of subsurface and atmospheric energy partitioning of the impact process on a planet with a thin atmosphere and the first direct test of martian deep-interior seismic models with known event distances. The impact at 35°N excavated blocks of water ice, which is the lowest latitude at which ice has been directly observed on Mars.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - P. Lognonné
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
| | - W. B. Banerdt
- Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
| | - J. Clinton
- Swiss Seismological Service, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - G. S. Collins
- Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - T. Kawamura
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
| | - S. Ceylan
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - I. J. Daubar
- Department of Earth, Environmental, and Planetary Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - B. Fernando
- Department of Earth Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - M. Froment
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
- Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA
| | - D. Giardini
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - M. C. Malin
- Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - K. Miljković
- Space Science and Technology Centre, School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - S. C. Stähler
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Z. Xu
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
| | - M. E. Banks
- NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA
| | - É. Beucler
- Nantes Université, Université Angers, Le Mans Université, CNRS, UMR 6112, Laboratoire de Planétologie et Géosciences, Nantes, France
| | | | - C. Charalambous
- Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - N. Dahmen
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - P. Davis
- Department of Earth, Planetary, and Space Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - M. Drilleau
- Institut Supérieur de l’Aéronautique et de l’Espace ISAE-SUPAERO, Toulouse, France
| | - C. M. Dundas
- U.S. Geological Survey, Astrogeology Science Center, Flagstaff, AZ, USA
| | - C. Durán
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - F. Euchner
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - R. F. Garcia
- Institut Supérieur de l’Aéronautique et de l’Espace ISAE-SUPAERO, Toulouse, France
| | - M. Golombek
- Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
| | - A. Horleston
- School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - C. Keegan
- Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - A. Khan
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Physik-Institut, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - D. Kim
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Geology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA
| | - C. Larmat
- Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA
| | - R. Lorenz
- Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD, USA
| | - L. Margerin
- Institut de Recherche en Astrophysique et Planétologie, Université Toulouse III Paul Sabatier, CNRS, CNES, Toulouse, France
| | - S. Menina
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
| | - M. Panning
- Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
| | - C. Pardo
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
| | - C. Perrin
- Nantes Université, Université Angers, Le Mans Université, CNRS, UMR 6112, Laboratoire de Planétologie et Géosciences, Nantes, France
| | - W. T. Pike
- Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - M. Plasman
- Université Paris Cité, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France
| | - A. Rajšić
- Space Science and Technology Centre, School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - L. Rolland
- Université Côte d’Azur, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, CNRS, IRD, Géoazur, Valbonne, France
| | - E. Rougier
- Earth and Environmental Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA
| | - G. Speth
- Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - A. Spiga
- Laboratoire de Météorologie Dynamique/IPSL, Sorbonne Université, CNRS, Ecole Normale Supérieure, PSL Research University, Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, France
| | - A. Stott
- Institut Supérieur de l’Aéronautique et de l’Espace ISAE-SUPAERO, Toulouse, France
| | - D. Susko
- Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - N. A. Teanby
- School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - A. Valeh
- Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - A. Werynski
- Malin Space Science Systems, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - N. Wójcicka
- Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - G. Zenhäusern
- Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Sehouli J, Oskay-Öczelik G, Zocholl D, Klemt AS, Bangemann N, Albrecht O, Strittmatter HJ, Wimberger P, Kaczerowsky A, Lorenz R, Ruhwedel W, Fehm T, Zahn A, Tome O, Markert M, Hager D, Zorr A, Keller M, Rittmeister H, Grabowski J. 1573P Developing a patient-related predictive model for the occurrence of CINV (NOGGO-EMRISK trial): Prospective, multicentre study in Germany. Ann Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.1666] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/01/2022] Open
|
10
|
Trapp EK, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Schneeweiss A, Mueller V, Harbeck N, Lorenz R, Schumacher C, Heinrich G, Schochter F, de Gregorio A, Tzschaschel M, Rack B, Janni W, Friedl TWP. Does the Presence of Circulating Tumor Cells in High-Risk Early Breast Cancer Patients Predict the Site of First Metastasis—Results from the Adjuvant SUCCESS A Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14163949. [PMID: 36010945 PMCID: PMC9406108 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14163949] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2022] [Revised: 08/03/2022] [Accepted: 08/09/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Due to recent advances in breast cancer detection and treatment strategies, the number of breast cancer survivors has increased over the past decades. However, breast cancer follow-up guidelines have not changed for years. The presence of CTCs detected during follow-up has been shown to indicate poor prognosis in high-risk breast cancer patients. Here, we evaluated if the presence of CTCs also indicates the site of metastatic disease by analyzing CTC status and metastatic location in 206 patients with distant recurrence from the large adjuvant breast cancer trial SUCCESS A. Patients who were CTC-positive both before and after chemotherapy were more likely to show bone-only first distant disease (37.5% vs. 21.0%) and first distant disease at multiple sites (31.3% vs. 12.6%) than patients without CTCs. These data indicate that CTCs might serve as a liquid biopsy surveillance-marker enabling risk-stratification for deciding on further adjuvant add-on-treatment. Abstract The prognostic relevance of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in breast cancer is well established. However, little is known about the association of CTCs and site of first metastasis. In the SUCCESS A trial, 373 out of 3754 randomized high-risk breast cancer patients developed metastatic disease. CTC status was assessed by the FDA-approved CellSearch®-System (Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Bologna, Italy) in 206 of these patients before chemotherapy and additionally in 159 patients after chemotherapy. CTCs were detected in 70 (34.0%) of 206 patients before (median 2 CTCs, 1–827) and in 44 (27.7%) of 159 patients after chemotherapy (median 1 CTC, 1–124); 16 (10.1%) of 159 patients were CTC-positive at both timepoints. The site of first distant disease was bone-only, visceral-only, and other-site-only in 44 (21.4%), 60 (29.1%), and 74 (35.9%) patients, respectively, while 28 (13.6%) patients had multiple sites of first metastatic disease. Patients with CTCs at both timepoints more often showed bone-only first distant disease (37.5% vs. 21.0%) and first distant disease at multiple sites (31.3% vs. 12.6%) than patients without CTCs before and/or after chemotherapy (p = 0.027). In conclusion, the presence of CTCs before and after chemotherapy is associated with multiple-site or bone-only first-distant disease and may trigger intensified follow-up and perhaps further treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth K. Trapp
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Graz, 8036 Graz, Austria
- Correspondence:
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Volkmar Mueller
- Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Breast Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics and CCC Munich, LMU University Hospital, 81337 München, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gynecologic Practice Dr. Lorenz, N. Hecker, Dr. Kreiss-Sender, 38100 Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Claudia Schumacher
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, St. Elisabeth’s Hospital, 50935 Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Fabienne Schochter
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| | - Amelie de Gregorio
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| | - Marie Tzschaschel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| | - Brigitte Rack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| | - Thomas W. P. Friedl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, 89081 Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Sehouli J, Oskay-Özcelik G, Zocholl D, Klemt AS, Bangemann N, Albrecht O, Strittmatter HJ, Wimberger P, Kaczerowsky A, Lorenz R, Ruhwedel W, Fehm TN, Zahn A, Tome O, Markert M, Hager D, Zorr A, Keller M, Rittmeister H, Grabowski JP. Prospective, multicenter study on non-pharmacological, patient related predictive factors of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): A NOGGO-EMRISK trial. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.e24107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
e24107 Background: Despite many years of clinical research and development, nausea and vomiting remain challenging toxicities related to chemotherapy. The aim of our study was assessment of non-pharmacological, patient-related risk factors for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and development of unique predictive score in patients with gynaecological malignancies planned for chemotherapy. Methods: A research-based questionnaire of 27 risk factors was generated and provided to patients diagnosed with gynaecological malignancies prior to indicated chemotherapy. The data on nausea and vomiting from at least 3 cycles therapy was collected. Variable selection via stepwise and LASSO regression combined with patients history was used to identify a small set of questions with high predictive power. As risk prediction model, a Bayesian logistic regression was implemented with a cut-off chosen to yield a sensitivity of 80%. Area under the curve analysis (AUC) was conducted, and accuracy of prediction was calculated. Results: In total 191 patients were enrolled. The most frequent diagnosis and chemotherapy was ovarian cancer (69%) and carboplatinum/paclitaxel combination (57.7%), respectively. Six factors (emetogenic potential of the therapy, educational status, nausea and vomiting due to other medication, motion sickness, anxiety from therapy in general and anxiety from nausea due to therapy) were identified as most important predictive factors. All questions were answered by 132 (69.1%) patients. Among those 97 (68%) reported nausea or vomiting. The AUC of the predictive score consisting mentioned factors was 0.741, with a sensitivity of 80.4%, specificity of 51.4% and an overall accuracy of 72.7%. Conclusions: Patients related risk factors are missing in selection of the antiemetic prophylaxis in patients under chemotherapy. Presented predictive score showed very promising predictive power and is going to be validated in further phase of the trial. Clinical trial information: DRKS-ID: DRKS00015151.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jalid Sehouli
- North-Eastern German Society of Gynaecological Oncology (NOGGO) and Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Charité-University Medicine of Berlin, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | - Gülten Oskay-Özcelik
- North-Eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology (NOGGO) and Praxis für Krebsheilkunde, Berlin, Germany
| | - Dario Zocholl
- Charité - University Medicine of Berlin, corporate member of Free University of Berlin and Humboldt University of Berlin, Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Pauline Wimberger
- North-Eastern German Society of Gynecological Oncology (NOGGO) and Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | | | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz-Hecker-Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany
| | | | - Tanja N. Fehm
- University Hospital Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | | | | | - Miriam Markert
- ViDia Karlsruhe Diakonissenkrankenhaus, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Dietrich Hager
- Thüringer Kliniken “Georgius Agricola”, Saalfeld, Germany
| | | | - Maren Keller
- North-Eastern German Society of Gynaecological Oncology (NOGGO), Berlin, Germany
| | - Hannah Rittmeister
- Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Charité-University Medicine of Berlin, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Germany, Berlin, Germany
| | - Jacek P. Grabowski
- North-Eastern German Society of Gynaecological Oncology (NOGGO) and Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Charité-University Medicine of Berlin, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Germany, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Matthias K, Lorenz R, De Santis KK. The application of AMSTAR 2 in overviews of systematic reviews shows a need for improvement. Eur J Public Health 2021. [DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckab164.647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Overviews of systematic reviews (SR) summarise and appraise the quality of research relevant for evidence-based decision-making. ‘A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews' (AMSTAR 2) is a valid and moderately reliable appraisal instrument with 16 items that can be used to derive the overall confidence rating (OCR). OCR (high, moderate, low or critically low) can be derived based on the original algorithm with 7/9 critical/non-critical items. We aimed to assess the methods for deriving OCR in overviews of SRs of clinical interventions.
Methods
Our cross-sectional study was conducted using 45 overviews of SRs with at least 20 AMSTAR 2 appraisals selected by two authors from a title/abstract search for ‘AMSTAR 2' in Medline, Epistemonikos and CINAHL in 09/2020. One author coded the data. OCR methods and outcomes were compared using descriptive and univariate statistics.
Results
The 45 overviews were published in 2018-2020 by 2-16 authors. The overviews appraised on average 44 SRs (range: 20-158). OCRs of 1.412 SRs were derived in 41 overviews (91%). OCR were derived according to the original algorithm (22; 54%), own algorithm (9; 22%), unspecified algorithm (9; 22%) or AMSTAR 2 website (1; 2%). The OCR were high (190; 13%), moderate (182; 13%), low (267, 19%) or critically low (773; 55%). The original algorithm was more likely to generate the critically low+low ratings than either own algorithms (OR = 2.28, 95% CI [1.66-3.13]) or unclear algorithms (OR = 3.78 [2.81-5.09]).
Conclusions
High quality SRs are needed for making public health decisions. AMSTAR 2 assigns mostly low and critically low OCR to SRs in various clinical areas. These SRs should not be relied on as a source of accurate evidence. Furthermore, our results show that SR reporting guidelines need to be better followed and that AMSTAR 2 users should explicitly report their OCR methods.
Key messages
The methodological quality of the majority of systematic reviews (SRs) in various clinical fields is disappointing, highlighting the requirement for better adherence to reporting guidelines. There is a need for improvement on reporting how AMSTAR 2 is applied in overviews of SRs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Matthias
- Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Applied Sciences Stralsund, Stralsund, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- Lise-Meitner Group for Environmental Neuroscience, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany
| | - KK De Santis
- Prevention and Evaluation Department, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology- BIPS, Bremen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Friedl TWP, Fehm T, Müller V, Lichtenegger W, Blohmer J, Lorenz R, Forstbauer H, Fink V, Bekes I, Huober J, Jückstock J, Schneeweiss A, Tesch H, Mahner S, Brucker SY, Heinrich G, Häberle L, Fasching PA, Beckmann MW, Coleman RE, Janni W, Rack B. Prognosis of Patients With Early Breast Cancer Receiving 5 Years vs 2 Years of Adjuvant Bisphosphonate Treatment: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2021; 7:1149-1157. [PMID: 34165508 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.1854] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Importance Bisphosphonate treatment in patients with early breast cancer has become part of care, but the optimal treatment duration is still unclear. Objective To compare 2 vs 5 years of zoledronate treatment following adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants The SUCCESS A phase 3 multicenter randomized open-label clinical trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design enrolled 3754 patients from September 21, 2005, to March 12, 2007 (last patient out, May 7, 2014). Final data analysis was conducted from September 2019 to October 2020. In 250 German study centers, patients were eligible for participation in the SUCCESS A trial if they had either node-positive or high-risk node-negative (defined as at least 1 of the following: tumor size ≥ pT2, histologic grade 3, negative hormone receptor status, or age ≤35 years) primary invasive breast cancer. Interventions Patients were first randomized to adjuvant chemotherapy with 3 cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide followed by 3 cycles of docetaxel with or without gemcitabine (not presented in this report). After chemotherapy, patients underwent a second randomization of 5 years of zoledronate treatment (4 mg intravenously every 3 months for 2 years, followed by 4 mg intravenously every 6 months for 3 years) vs 2 years of zoledronate treatment (4 mg intravenously every 3 months for 2 years). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point of the study was disease-free survival; secondary end points were overall survival, distant disease-free survival, and the incidence of skeletal-related adverse events. Survival times were measured from 2 years after the start of zoledronate treatment (landmark analysis). Results Overall, data on 2987 patients were available for analysis; median age was 53 (range, 21-86) years. Disease-free survival, overall survival, and distant disease-free survival did not differ significantly between the 2 treatment arms (5 vs 2 years) as shown by adjusted multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models (disease-free survival: hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.75-1.25; P = .81; overall survival: HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.67-1.42; P = .90; distant disease-free survival: HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65-1.18; P = .38). Adverse events were observed more often in the 5-year (46.2%) vs 2-year (27.2%) zoledronate treatment arm, which was particularly true for the skeletal-related events bone pain (5 years, 8.3% vs 2 years, 3.7%) and arthralgia (5 years, 5.1% vs 2 years, 3.1%). Conclusions and Relevance The results of this phase 3 randomized clinical trial indicate that extending the zoledronate treatment beyond 2 years does not improve the prognosis of high-risk patients with early breast cancer receiving chemotherapy, suggesting that the currently recommended bisphosphonate treatment duration of 3 to 5 years could be reduced. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02181101.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas W P Friedl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Duesseldorf, Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Department of Gynecology, University Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Jens Blohmer
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gynecologic Practice Dres Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Helmut Forstbauer
- Hemato-Oncological Practice Dres Forstbauer and Ziske, Troisdorf, Germany
| | - Visnja Fink
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Inga Bekes
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Julia Jückstock
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hans Tesch
- Department of Oncology, Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Sven Mahner
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Sara Y Brucker
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | | | - Lothar Häberle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Matthias W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
| | - Robert E Coleman
- Sheffield Cancer Research Centre, Weston Park Hospital, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Brigitte Rack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Köckerling F, Lorenz R, Stechemesser B, Conze J, Kuthe A, Reinpold W, Niebuhr H, Lammers B, Zarras K, Fortelny R, Mayer F, Hoffmann H, Kukleta JF, Weyhe D. Comparison of outcomes in rectus abdominis diastasis repair-which data do we need in a hernia registry? Hernia 2021; 25:891-903. [PMID: 34319466 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-021-02466-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 07/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Rectus abdominis diastasis (RAD) ± concomitant hernia is a complex hernia entity of growing significance in everyday clinical practice. Due to a multitude of described surgical techniques, a so far missing universally accepted classification and hardly existing comparative studies, there are no clear recommendations in guidelines. Therefore, "RAD ± concomitant hernia" will be documented as a separate hernia entity in the Herniamed Registry in the future. For this purpose, an appropriate case report form will be developed on the basis of the existing literature. METHODS A systematic search of the available literature was performed in March 2021 using Medline, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, Springer Link, and the Cochrane Library. 93 publications were identified as relevant for this topic. RESULTS In total 45 different surgical techniques for the repair of RAD ± concomitant hernia were identified in the surgical literature. RAD ± concomitant hernia is predominantly repaired by plastic but also by general surgeons. Classification of RAD ± concomitant hernia is based on a proposal of the German Hernia Society and the International Endohernia Society. Surgical techniques are summarized as groups subject to certain aspects: Techniques with abdominoplasty, open techniques, mini-less-open and endoscopic sublay techniques, mini-less-open and endoscopic subcutaneous/preaponeurotic techniques and laparoscopic techniques. Additional data impacting the outcome are also recorded as is the case for other hernia entities. Despite the complexity of this topic, documentation of RAD ± concomitant hernia has not proved to be any more cumbersome than for any of the other hernia entities when using this classification. CONCLUSION Using the case report form described here, the complex hernia entity RAD ± concomitant hernia can be recorded in a registry for proper analysis of comparative treatment options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Köckerling
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany.
| | - R Lorenz
- Hernia Center 3+CHIRURGEN, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany
| | - B Stechemesser
- Pan Hospital, Hernia Center, Zeppelinstraße 1, 50667, Köln, Germany
| | - J Conze
- UM Hernia Center, Arabellastr. 17, 81925, München, Germany
| | - A Kuthe
- DRK-Krankenhaus Clementinenhaus, Lützerodestr. 1, 30161, Hannover, Germany
| | - W Reinpold
- Hernia Center Hamburg, Helios Mariahilf Klinik, Stader Str. 203C, 21075, Hamburg, Germany
| | - H Niebuhr
- Hanse Hernia Center, Alte Holstenstr. 16, 21031, Hamburg, Germany
| | - B Lammers
- Department of Surgery I-Section Coloproctology and Hernia Surgery, Lukas Hospital, Preussenstr. 84, 41464, Neuss, Germany
| | - K Zarras
- Marien Hospital Düsseldorf, Rochusstraße 2, 40479, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - R Fortelny
- Medical Faculty Austria, Private Hospital Confraternitaet, Sigmund Freud Private University Vienna, 1080, Vienna, Austria
| | - F Mayer
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Müllner Hauptstraße 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria
| | - H Hoffmann
- ZweiChirurgen GmbH-Center for Hernia Surgery and Proctology, St. Johanns-Vorstadt 44, 4056, Basel, Switzerland
- University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, 4001, Basel, Switzerland
| | - J F Kukleta
- Klinik Im Park Zurich (Hirslanden Group), Grossmuensterplatz 9, 8001, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - D Weyhe
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Pius Hospital, University Hospital of Visceral Surgery, Georgstrasse 12, 26121, Oldenburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Köckerling F, Brunner W, Fortelny R, Mayer F, Adolf D, Niebuhr H, Lorenz R, Reinpold W, Zarras K, Weyhe D. Treatment of small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias: guidelines and current trends from the Herniamed Registry. Hernia 2020; 25:605-617. [PMID: 33237505 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02345-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/11/2020] [Accepted: 11/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Based on meta-analyses and registry data, the European Hernia Society and the Americas Hernia Society have published guidelines for the treatment of umbilical hernias. These recommend that umbilical hernia should generally be treated by placing a non-absorbable (permanent) flat mesh into the preperitoneal space with an overlap of the hernia defect of 3 cm. Suture repair should only be considered for small hernia defects of less than 1 cm. Hence, the use of a mesh in general is subject to controversial debate particularly for small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias. This analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry now presents data on the treatment of small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias over the past 10 years. METHODS Herniamed is an Internet-based hernia registry in which hospitals and surgical centers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland can voluntarily enter data on their routine hernia operations. Between 2010 and 2019, data were entered into the Herniamed Registry by 737 hospitals/surgery centers on a total of 111,765 patients with primary elective umbilical hernia repair. The prospective data were analyzed retrospectively for each year and statistically compared. Due to a higher number of cases, the years 2013 and 2019 were compared for the perioperative outcome and the years 2013 and 2018 for 1-year follow-up. Fisher's exact test was applied for unadjusted analyses between the years, using a significance level of alpha = 5%. For post hoc tests of single categories, a Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing was implemented. RESULTS A mesh technique was used to treat 45.4% of all umbilical hernias. The proportion of small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias in the total collective of umbilical hernias was 55.6%. Suture repair was used consistently over the 10-year period to treat around 75% of all small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias. Preperitoneal mesh placement as recommended in the guidelines was used only in 1.8% of cases. Between 2013 and 2019, stable values of 2 and 0.7% were observed for the postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations, respectively, with no relevant effect identified for the surgical technique. At 1-year follow-up, significantly higher rates of pain at rest (2.6 vs. 3.3), pain on exertion (5.7 vs. 6.6), and recurrences (1.3 vs. 1.8) (all p < 0.05) were identified for 2018 compared with 2013. CONCLUSIONS A suture technique is still used to treat 75% of patients with small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernias. The pain and recurrence rates are significantly less favorable for 2018 compared with 2013.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Köckerling
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany.
| | - W Brunner
- Department of Surgery, Kantonspital St. Gallen, Rorschacher Str. 95, CH-9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - R Fortelny
- Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Sigmund Freud University, Freudplatz 3, 1020, Vienna, Austria
| | - F Mayer
- Department of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, University Hospital of Salzburg, Müllner Hauptstrasse 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria
| | - D Adolf
- StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - H Niebuhr
- Hansechirurgie, Niebuhr Marleschki & Partner, Alte Holstenstr. 16, 21031, Hamburg, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- Hernia Center 3+CHIRURGEN, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany
| | - W Reinpold
- Wilhelmsburger Hospital Gross-Sand, Gross-Sand 3, 21107, Hamburg, Germany
| | - K Zarras
- Marien Hospital Düsseldorf, Rochusstrasse 2, 40479, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - D Weyhe
- University Hospital of Visceral Surgery, Pius Hospital Oldenburg, Georgstrasse 12, 26121, Oldenburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
de Gregorio A, Häberle L, Fasching PA, Müller V, Schrader I, Lorenz R, Forstbauer H, Friedl TWP, Bauer E, de Gregorio N, Deniz M, Fink V, Bekes I, Andergassen U, Schneeweiss A, Tesch H, Mahner S, Brucker SY, Blohmer JU, Fehm TN, Heinrich G, Lato K, Beckmann MW, Rack B, Janni W. Gemcitabine as adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with high-risk early breast cancer-results from the randomized phase III SUCCESS-A trial. Breast Cancer Res 2020; 22:111. [PMID: 33097092 PMCID: PMC7583247 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-020-01348-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2020] [Accepted: 10/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background When chemotherapy is indicated in patients with early breast cancer, regimens that contain anthracyclines and taxanes are established standard treatments. Gemcitabine has shown promising effects on the response and prognosis in patients with metastatic breast cancer. The SUCCESS-A trial (NCT02181101) examined the addition of gemcitabine to a standard chemotherapy regimen in high-risk early breast cancer patients. Methods A total of 3754 patients with at least one of the following characteristics were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment arms: nodal positivity, tumor grade 3, age ≤ 35 years, tumor larger than 2 cm, or negative hormone receptor status. The treatment arms received either three cycles of 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide, followed by three cycles of docetaxel (FEC → Doc); or three cycles of FEC followed by three cycles of docetaxel and gemcitabine (FEC → Doc/Gem). The primary study aim was disease-free survival (DFS), and the main secondary objectives were overall survival (OS) and safety. Results No differences were observed in the 5-year DFS or OS between FEC → Doc and FEC → Doc/Gem. The hazard ratio was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.78 to 1.12; P = 0.47) for DFS and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.74 to 1.19; P = 0.60) for OS. For patients treated with FEC → Doc and FEC → Doc/Gem, the 5-year probabilities of DFS were 86.6% and 87.2%, and the 5-year probabilities of OS were 92.8% and 92.5%, respectively. Conclusion Adding gemcitabine to a standard chemotherapy does not improve the outcomes in patients with high-risk early breast cancer and should therefore not be included in the adjuvant treatment setting. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02181101 and EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT 2005-000490-21. Registered September 2005.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amelie de Gregorio
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany.
| | - Lothar Häberle
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center EMN, Erlangen, Germany.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Biostatistics Unit, Erlangen University Hospital, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Department of Gynecology, University Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gynecologic Practice Dr. Lorenz, N. Hecker, Dr. Kreiss-Sender, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Helmut Forstbauer
- Hemato-Oncological Practice Dres Forstbauer and Ziske, Troisdorf, Germany
| | - Thomas W P Friedl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Emanuel Bauer
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Nikolaus de Gregorio
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Miriam Deniz
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Visnja Fink
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Inga Bekes
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Ulrich Andergassen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Division of Gynecologic Oncology and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Hans Tesch
- Department of Oncology, Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Sven Mahner
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Sara Y Brucker
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tübingen University Hospital, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Jens-Uwe Blohmer
- Department of Gynecology and Breast Center, Charité University Hospital Campus Charité-Mitte, Berlin, Germany
| | - Tanja N Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Düsseldorf University Hospital, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Georg Heinrich
- Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany
| | - Krisztian Lato
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Matthias W Beckmann
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center EMN, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Brigitte Rack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Prittwitzstrasse 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Wiessner R, Lorenz R, Gehring A, Kleber T, Benz C, Sander M, Richter DU, Philipp M. Alterations in the mechanical, chemical and biocompatibility properties of low-cost polyethylene and polyester meshes after steam sterilization. Hernia 2020; 24:1345-1359. [PMID: 32975699 PMCID: PMC7701087 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02272-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2020] [Accepted: 07/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Introduction In Africa and other Low Resource Settings (LRS), the guideline-based and thus in most cases mesh-based treatment of inguinal hernias is only feasible to a very limited extent. This has led to an increased use of low cost meshes (LCMs, mostly mosquito meshes) for patients in LRS. Most of the LCMs used are made of polyethylene or polyester, which must be sterilized before use. The aim of our investigations was to determine changes in the biocompatibility of fibroblasts as well as mechanical and chemical properties of LCMs after steam sterilization. Material and methods Two large-pored LCMs made of polyester and polyethylene in a size of 11 x 6 cm were cut and steam sterilized at 100, 121 and 134 °C. These probes and non-sterile meshes were then subjected to mechanical tensile tests in vertical and horizontal tension, chemical analyses and biocompatibility tests with human fibroblasts. All meshes were examined by stereomicroscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), LDH (cytotoxicity) measurement, viability testing, pH, lactate and glycolysis determination. Results Even macroscopically, polyethylene LCMs showed massive shrinkage after steam sterilization, especially at 121 and 134 °C. While polyester meshes showed no significant changes after sterilization with regard to deformation and damage as well as tensile force and stiffness, only the unsterile polyethylene mesh and the mesh sterilized at 100 °C could be tested mechanically due to the shrinkage of the other specimen. For these meshes the tensile forces were about four times higher than for polyester LCMs. Chemical analysis showed that the typical melting point of polyester LCMs was between 254 and 269 °C. Contrary to the specifications, the polyethylene LCM did not consist of low-density polyethylene, but rather high-density polyethylene and therefore had a melting point of 137 °C, so that the marked shrinkage described above occurred. Stereomicroscopy confirmed the shrinkage of polyethylene LCMs already after sterilization at 100 °C in contrast to polyester LCMs. Surprisingly, cytotoxicity (LDH measurement) was lowest for both non-sterile LCMs, while polyethylene LCMs sterilized at 100 and 121 °C in particular showed a significant increase in cytotoxicity 48 hours after incubation with fibroblasts. Glucose metabolism showed no significant changes between sterile and non-sterile polyethylene and polyester LCMs. Conclusion The process of steam sterilization significantly alters mechanical and structural properties of synthetic hernia mesh implants. Our findings do not support a use of low-cost meshes because of their unpredictable properties after steam sterilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reiko Wiessner
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Bodden-Kliniken Ribnitz-Damgarten, Sandhufe 2, 18311, Ribnitz-Damgarten, Germany.
| | - R Lorenz
- 3+ Chirurgen, Berlin-Spandau, Germany
| | - A Gehring
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Bodden-Kliniken Ribnitz-Damgarten, Sandhufe 2, 18311, Ribnitz-Damgarten, Germany
| | - T Kleber
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Helios Klinikum Bad Saarow, Bad Saarow, Germany
| | - C Benz
- Institute of Structural Mechanics (StM), University of Rostock, Albert-Einstein-Str. 2, 18059, Rostock, Germany
| | - M Sander
- Institute of Structural Mechanics (StM), University of Rostock, Albert-Einstein-Str. 2, 18059, Rostock, Germany
| | - D-U Richter
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - M Philipp
- Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Petersen K, Morrison J, Oprea V, Grischkan D, Koch A, Lorenz R, Bendavid R, Iakovlev V. Necessary duration of follow-up to assess complications of mesh in hernia surgery: a time-lapse study based on 460 explants. Hernia 2020; 25:1239-1251. [PMID: 32960368 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02297-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2020] [Accepted: 09/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Risk of complications following hernia repair is the key parameter to assess risk/benefit ratio of a technique. As mesh devices are permanent, their risks are life-long. Too many reports in the past assessed mesh safety prematurely after short follow-ups. We aimed to explore what length of follow up would reveal the full extent of complications. METHODS Time lapses between implantation and excision were analyzed in 460 cases of meshes excised for complications after hernia repair. Patterns of percentage growth and time lapses at 50th and 95th percentiles were used to compare groups of different hernia type, age, gender and reason for excision. RESULTS The 50th and 95th case percentiles in the dataset were at 3.75 and 15.0 years between mesh implantation and excision. For hernia types, the longest time lapses were for groin hernias (4.0 and 16.11 years at 50th and 95th percentiles). The shortest were for umbilical hernias (2.16 and 9.68 years). Males had later excisions than females (4.11 and 16.1 vs. 2.47 and 9.79 years). Younger patients (< 45 y.o.) had later excisions than older patients (4.12 and 17.68 vs. 3.37 and 10.0 years). Out of all subgroups, the longest time lapses were for groin hernias in younger males (4.77 and 18.89 years) and for mesh erosion into organs (4.67 and 17.0 years). CONCLUSIONS Follow-up of more than 15 years is needed to fully assess complications after mesh hernia repair. Especially longer periods are needed to detect mesh erosion into organs and complications in younger males. Presently, short observations and lack of reporting standard in the literature prohibit accurate assessment of complication risks. We propose to use cumulative incidence for standardized risk reporting (y% risk at x years). This will show time-dependent patterns and allow comparisons between different techniques and studies of variable duration. Standardization will also help to predict long-term risks beyond shorter (practical) follow-ups and facilitate real-time monitoring during surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - J Morrison
- Chatham Kent Health Alliance, Chatham, Ontario, Canada
| | - V Oprea
- Military Hospital of Cluj, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, Romania
| | | | - A Koch
- Day Surgery and Hernia Center, Cottbus, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- , Hernia Center 3+CHIRURGEN, Berlin, Germany
| | - R Bendavid
- Department of Surgery, Shouldice Hospital, Thornhill, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - V Iakovlev
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, St. Michael's Hospital, Keenan Research Centre of the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Köckerling F, Brunner W, Mayer F, Fortelny R, Adolf D, Niebuhr H, Lorenz R, Reinpold W, Zarras K, Weyhe D. Assessment of potential influencing factors on the outcome in small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernia repair: a registry-based multivariable analysis of 31,965 patients. Hernia 2020; 25:587-603. [PMID: 32951104 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02305-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION How best to treat a small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernia continues to be the subject of controversial debate. The recently published guidelines for treatment of umbilical hernias from the European Hernia Society and Americas Hernia Society recommend open mesh repair for defects ≥ 1 cm. Since the quality of evidence is limited for hernias with defect sizes smaller than 1 cm, suture repair can be considered. To date, little is known about the potential influencing factors on the outcome in small (< 2 cm) umbilical hernia repair. This multivariable analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry now aims to assess these factors. METHODS The data of patients with primary elective umbilical hernia repair and defect size < 2 cm entered into the Herniamed Registry from September 1, 2009 to December 31, 2018 were analyzed to assess through multivariable analysis all confirmatory pre-defined potential influencing factors on the primary outcome criteria intraoperative and postoperative complications, general complications, complication-related reoperations, recurrence rate and rates of pain at rest, pain on exertion and chronic pain requiring treatment at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS 31,965 patients (60%) met the inclusion criteria. The proportion of suture repairs was 78.6% (n = 25,119), of open mesh repairs 15.2% (n = 4853), and of laparoscopic mesh repairs 6.2% (n = 1993). Compared with open mesh repair, suture repair had a highly significantly unfavorable association with the recurrence rate (OR = 1.956 [1.463; 2.614]; p < 0.001). Female gender also had an unfavorable relation to the recurrence rate (OR = 1.644 [1.385; 1.952]; p < 0.001). Compared with open mesh repair, open suture repair had a highly significantly favorable association with the rate of postoperative complications (OR = 0.583 [0.484; 0.702]; p < 0.001) and complication-related reoperations (OR = 0.567 [0.397; 0.810]; p = 0.002).While laparoscopic IPOM showed a favorable relationship with the postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations, it demonstrated an unfavorable association with the intraoperative complications, general complications, recurrence rate and pain rates. CONCLUSION Suture repair continues to be used for 78% of umbilical hernias with a defect < 2 cm. While suture repair has a favorable influence on the rates of postoperative complications and complication-related reoperations, it has a higher risk of recurrence. Female gender also has an unfavorable influence on the recurrence rate. Laparoscopic IPOM appears to be indicated only in settings of obesity (BMI ≥ 30).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Köckerling
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany.
| | - W Brunner
- Department of General, Visceral, Endocrine and Transplant Surgery, Rorschacher Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Str. 95, 9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - F Mayer
- Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Müllner Hauptstrasse 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria
| | - R Fortelny
- Department of General Surgery, Hospital Ottakring, Montleartstrasse 37, 1160, Vienna, Austria.,Sigmund Freud University Vienna, Medical Faculty, Schnirchgasse 9a, 1030, Vienna, Austria
| | - D Adolf
- StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - H Niebuhr
- Hansechirurgie, Niebuhr Marleschki & Partner, Alte Holstenstr. 16, 21031, Hamburg, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- Hernia Center 3 + CHIRURGEN, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany
| | - W Reinpold
- Wilhelmsburger Hospital Gross-Sand, Gross-Sand 3, 21107, Hamburg, Germany
| | - K Zarras
- Marien Hospital Düsseldorf, Rochusstrasse 2, 40479, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - D Weyhe
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Pius Hospital Oldenburg, University Hospital of Visceral Surgery, Georgstraße 12, 26121, Oldenburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Köckerling F, Hantel E, Adolf D, Kuthe A, Lorenz R, Niebuhr H, Stechemesser B, Marusch F. Differences in the outcomes of scrotal vs. lateral vs. medial inguinal hernias: a multivariable analysis of registry data. Hernia 2020; 25:1169-1181. [PMID: 32748006 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02281-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2020] [Accepted: 07/24/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION There are hardly any studies on the outcome of scrotal compared with medial and lateral inguinal hernias. Therefore, this present multivariable analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry compared the outcome of scrotal vs. lateral vs. medial inguinal hernias and explored the relationship between hernia localization and outcomes. METHODS Included in the analysis were all primary elective unilateral inguinal hernias in men with scrotal, lateral or medial defect localization whose details had been entered into the Herniamed Registry by 712 participating institutions (status February 1, 2019). The relation of the hernia localization with the outcome parameters adjusted for pre-defined confounding patient- and procedure-related variables was analyzed via multivariable binary logistic models. RESULTS Details of 98,321 patients were thus available for multivariable analysis. These related to 65,932 (67.1%) lateral, 29,697 (30.2%) medial and 2,710 (2.7%) scrotal inguinal hernias. Scrotal hernias were associated with higher patient age, higher BMI, higher ASA score, larger defect, more risk factors and more frequent use of Lichtenstein repair. On the other hand, scrotal hernias were associated less commonly with preoperative pain. Multivariable analysis revealed that scrotal hernias had a highly significantly unfavorable association with postoperative complications, complication-related reoperations and general complications. But scrotal hernias had a highly significantly favorable relation with the pain rates at 1-year follow-up. Medial hernias were the hernia type most often related with recurrence and also had an unfavorable association with the pain rates at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSION Scrotal inguinal hernias demonstrated a very unfavorable relation with the postoperative complication rate, the rate of complication-related reoperations and the rate of general complications. But a very favorable association with chronic pain rates was identified at 1-year follow-up. Medial inguinal hernia had an unfavorable relation with the recurrence and pain rates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Köckerling
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching, Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany.
| | - E Hantel
- Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Ernst Von Bergmann Hospital, Charlottenstrasse 72, 14467, Potsdam, Germany
| | - D Adolf
- StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - A Kuthe
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, DRK-Krankenhaus Clementinenhaus, Lützerodestr. 1, 30161, Hannover, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- 3+Chirurgen, Klosterstrasse 34/35 Spandau, 13581, Berlin, Germany
| | - H Niebuhr
- Hansechirurgie, Niebuhr Marleschki and Partner, Alte Holstenstr. 16, 21031, Hamburg, Germany
| | - B Stechemesser
- Hernia Center, Pan Hospital, Zeppelinstrasse 1, 50667, Cologne, Germany
| | - F Marusch
- Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Ernst Von Bergmann Hospital, Charlottenstrasse 72, 14467, Potsdam, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Köckerling F, Hantel E, Adolf D, Stechemesser B, Niebuhr H, Lorenz R, Zarras K, Marusch F. Do drains have an impact on the outcome after primary elective unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men? Hernia 2020; 24:1083-1091. [PMID: 32566993 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02254-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2020] [Accepted: 06/15/2020] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The use of drains continues to be a controversial topic in surgery. In a review of that topic for incisional hernia it was not possible to find sufficient evidence of the need for a drain. Likewise, for inguinal hernia surgery the data available are insufficient. METHODS In a multivariable analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry for 98,321 patients with primary elective unilateral inguinal hernia repair in men, the role of a drain was investigated. RESULTS A drain was used in 24.7% (n = 24,287/98,321) of patients. These patients were on average older, had higher BMI, longer operating time and received a smaller mesh. Drains were also used more often for patients with higher ASA score, risk factors, larger defects and scrotal hernia localization as well as for Lichtenstein, TEP and suture repair. The use of drains was highly significantly associated with intra- and postoperative complications as well as with complication-related reoperations. Hence, drains are used selectively in inguinal hernia repair for patients at higher risk of perioperative complications. Despite the use of drains, the outcome in this risk group is less favorable. It remains unclear if drains prevent further complications in high-risk patients. CONCLUSION Drains are used selectively in high-risk men with primary elective unilateral inguinal hernia repair. Drains are associated with intra- and postoperative complications rates and complication-related reoperation rate. Drains can serve as an indicator for early detection of complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Köckerling
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany.
| | - E Hantel
- Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Ernst Von Bergmann Hospital, Charlottenstrasse 72, 14467, Potsdam, Germany
| | - D Adolf
- StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - B Stechemesser
- Hernia Center, Pan Hospital, Zeppelinstraße 1, 50667, Köln, Germany
| | - H Niebuhr
- Hanse-Hernienzentrum, Eppendorfer Baum 8, 20249, Hamburg, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- 3+Chirurgen, Klosterstraße 34/35, 13581, Berlin-Spandau, Germany
| | - K Zarras
- Department of Visceral, Minimally Invasive and Oncologic Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of University of Düsseldorf, Marien Hospital, Rochusstraße 2, 40479, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - F Marusch
- Department of General, Visceral, Vascular and Thoracic Surgery, Ernst Von Bergmann Hospital, Charlottenstrasse 72, 14467, Potsdam, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
McGuire K, Lorenz R. 0229 Exploring the Relationships Between Sleep, Stress, and Performance in Simulation-Based Learning. Sleep 2020. [DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Sleep deprivation and stress may affect performance among students. Simulation-based learning (SBL) in undergraduate nursing programs provides the opportunity for students to practice critical decision-making without fear of patient harm; however, students still report experiencing stress during SBL. Current research is unclear on the effect of sleep deprivation combined with stress on performance in SBL. The purpose of this study was to explore the association between stress, functional outcomes of sleep, and performance in SBL.
Methods
Elements of the Theory of Stress, Appraisal, and Coping and the National League for Nursing Jeffries Nursing Education Simulation Framework guided this study. Baccalaureate nursing students consented to participate in a 1-hour SBL experience that included the collection of one hair and 4 saliva samples for cortisol concentration. Participants completed the Functional Outcomes of Sleep- Short Form and the Perceived Stress Questionnaire. An experienced faculty member evaluated student performance using the Creighton Competency Evaluation Inventory.
Results
Participants (N=35) were mainly female (n=32, 91.4%), white (n=29, 82.9%), with ages ranging between 18–22 years (n=32, 91.4%), and employed outside of nursing school (n=32, 91.4%). Other ethnicities represented include Asian and African American. Kendall’s Tau correlations revealed a significant relationship between functional outcomes of sleep and perceived stress (r=-.281, p=.020). Although not significant, a small relationship was observed between functional outcomes of sleep and performance (r=.145, p=.236). No significant relationship between performance and perceived stress (r=-.099, p=.423) was identified.
Conclusion
This study suggests that daytime dysfunction related to sleep is related to perceived stress and performance in undergraduate nursing students during participation in SBL. Due likely to small sample size, the relationship between sleep and performance was unable to achieve significance. These findings support the need for future research exploring the effects of sleep on stress and performance with larger more heterogeneous samples of students.
Support
This researcher would like to acknowledge and thank the following funding sources for their generous support of this work: Marion Bender Scholarship (Saint Louis University School of Nursing), Dissertation Award from Sigma Theta Tau International-Epsilon Eta Chapter, and Southern Illinois University Edwardsville School of Nursing Faculty Scholar Award.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K McGuire
- Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, Edwardsville, IL
| | - R Lorenz
- State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Lorenz R, Oppong C, Frunder A, Lechner M, Sedgwick DM, Tasi A, Wiessner R. Improving surgical education in East Africa with a standardized hernia training program. Hernia 2020; 25:183-192. [PMID: 32157505 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-020-02157-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2019] [Accepted: 02/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Inguinal hernias are among the most common surgical diseases in Africa. The current International HerniaSurge Guidelines recommend mesh-based surgical techniques in Low Resource Settings (LRS). This recommendation is currently unachievable in large parts of Africa due to the unaffordability of mesh and lack of appropriate training of the few available surgeons. There is, therefore, a need for formal training in mesh surgery. There is an experience in Hernia Repair for the Underserved in Central and South America, however, inadequate evidence of structured training in Africa. MATERIAL AND METHODS Since 2016, the aid Organizations, Surgeons for Africa and Operation Hernia have developed and employed a structured hernia surgical training program for postgraduate surgical trainees and medical doctors in Rwanda. This course consists of lectures on relevant aspects of hernia surgery and hands-on training in operating theatres. The lectures emphasize anatomy and surgical technique. All parts of the training were evaluated. Formal pre-course evaluation was conducted to assess the personal surgical experience of the trainees. RESULTS Over a 3-year period, a structured hernia training programme was employed to train a total of 36 surgical trainees in both mesh and also non mesh hernia surgery. The key principle in this course is the continuous competence assessment and feedback. Evidence is provided to demonstrate improvement in surgical skills as well as knowledge of surgical anatomy which is essential to acquiring surgical competency. With self-assessment, expressed on a Likert scale, the participants could improve the theoretical knowledge about hernias from median 4.4 (on a scale of 1-10) before training to 8.4 after the training. The specific knowledge about anatomy could be improved in the same assessment from 4.8 before training to 8.1. after the training. After training course 12 of the 36 participants (33.33%) were able to carry out both suture- and mesh-based operations of simple inguinal hernias completely and independently. 20 of the 36 participants (55.55%) required only minimal supervision and only four participants (11.11%) required surgical supervision even after the completion of the course. CONCLUSION We have demonstrated that, medical personnel in Africa can be trained in mesh and non-mesh hernia surgery using a structured training programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Lorenz
- 3+CHIRURGEN, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany.
| | - C Oppong
- University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust, Derriford Road, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK
| | - A Frunder
- Lorettoklinik Tübingen, Katharinenstraße 10, 72072, Tübingen, Germany
| | - M Lechner
- Department of Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Müllner Hauptstraße 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria
| | | | - A Tasi
- Asklepios Klinik Barmbek, Rübenkamp 220, 22307, Hamburg, Germany
| | - R Wiessner
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Bodden-Kliniken Ribnitz-Damgarten, Sandhufe 2, 18311, Ribnitz-Damgarten, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Trapp EK, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Schneeweiss A, Mueller V, Harbeck N, Lorenz R, Schumacher C, Heinrich G, deGregorio deGregorio A, Tzschaschel M, Bekes I, Scholz C, Rack B, Janni W, Friedl TWP. Abstract P4-01-01: Presence of circulating tumor cells in high-risk early breast cancer do not predict site of metastatic lesions - Results of the SUCCESS A trial. Cancer Res 2020. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs19-p4-01-01] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: The prognostic relevance of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) during adjuvant breast cancer treatment and follow up has been well established. However, little information is available regarding CTC-detection and its association to site of first metastatic disease. Methods: The adjuvant phase III SUCCESS A trial, an open label, randomized, multicenter study, compared chemotherapy with three cycles of epirubicin, fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide followed by either three cycles of docetaxel or three cycles of docetaxel plus gemcitabine in patients with early high-risk breast cancer. Following chemotherapy, patients were randomized to two or five years of zoledronate treatment. CTC status was assessed before and after chemotherapy using the FDA-approved CellSearch® System (Menarini Silicon Biosystems; Bologna, Italy). The association between the presence of CTCs and the site of first distant disease was assessed using Chi Square tests. Findings: Of 3754 SUCCESS A patients, 373 developed metastatic disease. 206 of these patients participated in the translational research program of the trial so the CTC status at baseline was assessed. These patients were included into the analysis. At least one CTC before chemotherapy was detected in 70 (34.0%) of patients (median 2 CTCs, range 1 - 827 CTCs). For 159 patients, CTC status after chemotherapy could also be evaluated. Disease progression in terms of first distant disease occurred in 44 patients (21.4 %) in the bones, in 60 (29.1 %) in visceral sites (lung, liver), in 23 (11.2 %) in the brain or neural system, and in 51 patients (24.7 %) in other sites. In 28 patients (13.6 %), more than one site of metastatic disease was overt at the time of first distant recurrence. The median time to metastatic disease (measured from date of randomization) was 33.0 months (range 0.7 - 92.4 months). Overall, patients with bone-only first distant disease were numerically most likely to be CTC positive before chemotherapy (40.9 %); however, there was no significant association between site of first metastatic disease (bones, visceral, other) and the presence of CTCs before chemotherapy (p.224). Adding CTC status after chemotherapy did not change the results. However, patients with persistently positive CTCs were significantly more likely to show first distant disease at multiple sites than patients with a negative CTC status before and/or after chemotherapy. Interpretation: Although the presence of CTCs predicts poor prognosis in early breast cancer, no association of positive CTC status before and after chemotherapy with the site of metastatic disease was found. Therefore, a positive CTC status should trigger routine diagnostic intervention depending on clinical evaluation.
Citation Format: Elisabeth Katharina Trapp, Peter A Fasching, Tanja Fehm, Andreas Schneeweiss, Volkmar Mueller, Nadia Harbeck, R. Lorenz, Claudia Schumacher, Georg Heinrich, Amelie deGregorio deGregorio, Marie Tzschaschel, Inga Bekes, Christoph Scholz, Brigitte Rack, Wolfgang Janni, Thomas WP Friedl. Presence of circulating tumor cells in high-risk early breast cancer do not predict site of metastatic lesions - Results of the SUCCESS A trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-01-01.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Peter A Fasching
- 2Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- 3Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- 4National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Volkmar Mueller
- 5Department of Gynecology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- 6Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany
| | - R. Lorenz
- 7Private Practice for Gynaecology Casparistreet, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Claudia Schumacher
- 8Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology St. Elisabeth's Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Georg Heinrich
- 9Private Practice for Gynaecology, Fürstenwalde, Germany
| | | | - Marie Tzschaschel
- 10Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Inga Bekes
- 10Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Christoph Scholz
- 10Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Brigitte Rack
- 10Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- 10Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Thomas WP Friedl
- 10Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Wöckel A, Basiora P, Bohlmann M, Decker T, Falbrede J, Fasching P, Forstbauer H, Hesse T, Hoffmann O, Jackisch C, Kaczerowsky A, Lorenz R, Lüdtke-Heckenkamp K, Lüftner D, Marmé F, Mueller T, Mundhenke C, Nusch A, Petersen V, Prange-Krex G, Reimer T, Resch T, Roos C, Tomé O, Weishap A. Abstract P1-19-33: Real-world efficacy of ribociclib + aromatase inhibitor, or endocrine monotherapy, or chemotherapy as first-line treatment in postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: Second interim analysis from the RIBANNA study. Cancer Res 2020. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs19-p1-19-33] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: Ribociclib (RIB, a selective CDK4/6 inhibitor) plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant (FUL) is approved for the treatment of premenopausal and postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (aBC). Real-world evidence for the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of RIB + AI/FUL in routine clinical practice is needed to support the use of this combination. Methods: RIBANNA is a noninterventional study ongoing in Germany since October 2017. Premenopausal and postmenopausal patients (N=3020) treated with RIB + AI/FUL, or endocrine monotherapy (ET), or chemotherapy (CT) as first-line treatment for HR+/HER2- aBC in accordance with German guidelines were included. Data are being collected from clinical practice in all 3 cohorts. Further lines of treatment are noted to examine outcomes of sequential therapy. Results: For the first interim analysis, 461 patients were enrolled until October 9, 2018, while full analysis set comprised 282 patients (Table 1). The first-line mean daily dose of RIB was 382 mg including and 540 mg excluding dose interruptions, respectively. RIB was prescribed mainly in combination with letrozole (83%), anastrozole (8%), and exemestane (7%); ET included nonsteroidal AI (64%), selective estrogen receptor degrader (25%), selective estrogen receptor modulator (7%), and steroidal AI (5%); CT included taxane-based monotherapy (30%) or combination therapy (27%), other monotherapy (23%) or other combination therapy (13%), and anthracycline-based combination therapy (5%). Conclusion: RIBANNA study showed diverse population characteristics among patients who received RIB treatment in a real-world setting. Based on the baseline demographics data, RIB (CDK4/6 inhibitor) treatment was found to be very well adopted among premenopausal and postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- aBC. The second interim analysis is planned for October 2019. Updated baseline data of approximately 1200 to 1300 patients and information on safety and dose modification for first-line patients from all cohorts will be presented.
Table 1. Baseline demographic characteristicsTotal (N = 282)RIB + AI (n = 216)Endocrine therapy (n = 26)Chemotherapy (n = 40)Mean age, years (SD)67 (11)67 (10)71 (12)62 (10)Mean time since initial diagnosis, years5.45.56.53.9T stage at initial diagnosis, n (%)T0+T161 (100)48 (79)6 (10)7 (11)T2-T4198 (100)149 (75)17 (9)32 (16)N stage at initial diagnosis, n (%)N0+N1186 (100)144 (77)16 (9)26 (14)N2+N364 (100)48 (75)5 (8)11 (17)M stage at initial diagnosis, n (%)M0156 (100)121 (78)14 (9)21 (13)M1101 (100)75 (74)9 (9)17 (17)Locally advanced, n (%)101 (100)73 (72)9 (9)19 (19)Metastatic, n (%)101 (100)75 (74)9 (9)17 (17)Metastatic location, n (%)CNS, liver, lungs119 (100)96 (81)1 (1)22 (18)Bone only84 (100)62 (74)17 (20)5 (6)Skin, lymph nodes, other52 (100)37 (71)6 (11)9 (17)
Citation Format: Achim Wöckel, Pawel Basiora, Michael Bohlmann, Thomas Decker, Jörg Falbrede, Peter Fasching, Helmut Forstbauer, Tobias Hesse, Oliver Hoffmann, Christian Jackisch, Anna Kaczerowsky, Ralf Lorenz, Kerstin Lüdtke-Heckenkamp, Diana Lüftner, Frederik Marmé, Thomas Mueller, Christoph Mundhenke, Arnd Nusch, Volker Petersen, Gabriele Prange-Krex, Toralf Reimer, Thomas Resch, Christian Roos, Oliver Tomé, Anja Weishap. Real-world efficacy of ribociclib + aromatase inhibitor, or endocrine monotherapy, or chemotherapy as first-line treatment in postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: Second interim analysis from the RIBANNA study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-19-33.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Achim Wöckel
- 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Pawel Basiora
- 2Department of General Medicine and Hematology and Oncology, Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis Lohne, Lohne, Germany
| | - Michael Bohlmann
- 3Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Mannheim University Hospital, Mannheim, Germany
| | | | - Jörg Falbrede
- 5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lukaskrankenhaus Neuss, Neuss, Germany
| | - Peter Fasching
- 6Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Helmut Forstbauer
- 7Department of Internal Medicine, Practice Network Hematology and Internal Oncology, Troisdorf, Germany
| | - Tobias Hesse
- 8Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Agaplesion Diakonieklinikum Rotenburg, Rotenburg Wümme, Germany
| | - Oliver Hoffmann
- 9Department of Gynecology, Essen University Hospital, Essen, Germany
| | - Christian Jackisch
- 10Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany
| | - Anna Kaczerowsky
- 11Department of Gynecology, Katholisches Marienkrankenhaus, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- 12Gynecologic Oncology, Frauenärztliche Gemeinschaftspraxis Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
| | | | - Diana Lüftner
- 14Department of Hematology, Oncology and Tumor Immunology, Charité University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - Frederik Marmé
- 15Department of Gynecologic Oncology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Christoph Mundhenke
- 17Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Arnd Nusch
- 18Practice for Hematology and Medical Oncology Velbert, Velbert, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Thomas Resch
- 22Frauenarztpraxis Resch & Kollegen, Brandenburg A. D. Havel, Havel, Germany
| | | | - Oliver Tomé
- 24Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vincentius-Diakonissen-Kliniken, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Anja Weishap
- 25Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kreiskrankenhaus Gummersbach, Gummersbach, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Henriksen NA, Montgomery A, Kaufmann R, Berrevoet F, East B, Fischer J, Hope W, Klassen D, Lorenz R, Renard Y, Garcia Urena MA, Simons MP. Guidelines for treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias from the European Hernia Society and Americas Hernia Society. Br J Surg 2020; 107:171-190. [PMID: 31916607 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 136] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2019] [Revised: 10/31/2019] [Accepted: 12/02/2019] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Umbilical and epigastric hernia repairs are frequently performed surgical procedures with an expected low complication rate. Nevertheless, the optimal method of repair with best short- and long-term outcomes remains debatable. The aim was to develop guidelines for the treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias. METHODS The guideline group consisted of surgeons from Europe and North America including members from the European Hernia Society and the Americas Hernia Society. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) critical appraisal checklists, and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument were used. A systematic literature search was done on 1 May 2018, and updated on 1 February 2019. RESULTS Literature reporting specifically on umbilical and epigastric hernias was limited in quantity and quality, resulting in a majority of the recommendations being graded as weak, based on low-quality evidence. The main recommendation was to use mesh for repair of umbilical and epigastric hernias to reduce the recurrence rate. Most umbilical and epigastric hernias may be repaired by an open approach with a preperitoneal flat mesh. A laparoscopic approach may be considered if the hernia defect is large, or if the patient has an increased risk of wound morbidity. CONCLUSION This is the first European and American guideline on the treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias. It is recommended that symptomatic umbilical and epigastric hernias are repaired by an open approach with a preperitoneal flat mesh.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N A Henriksen
- Department of Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, Koege, Denmark
| | - A Montgomery
- Department of Surgery, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden
| | - R Kaufmann
- Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Tergooi, Hilversum, the Netherlands
| | - F Berrevoet
- Department of General and Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - B East
- Third Department of Surgery at Motol University Hospital, First and Second Faculty of Medicine at Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - J Fischer
- University of Pennsylvania Health System, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - W Hope
- New Hanover Regional Medical Center, Wilmington, North Carolina, USA
| | - D Klassen
- Department of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - R Lorenz
- Praxis 3+ Chirurgen, Berlin, Germany
| | - Y Renard
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Robert Debré University Hospital, Reims, France
| | - M A Garcia Urena
- Henares University Hospital, Faculty of Health Sciences, Francisco de Vitoria University, Madrid, Spain
| | - M P Simons
- Department of Surgery, OLVG Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Henriksen NA, Kaufmann R, Simons MP, Berrevoet F, East B, Fischer J, Hope W, Klassen D, Lorenz R, Renard Y, Garcia Urena MA, Montgomery A. EHS and AHS guidelines for treatment of primary ventral hernias in rare locations or special circumstances. BJS Open 2020; 4:342-353. [PMID: 32207571 PMCID: PMC7093793 DOI: 10.1002/bjs5.50252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2019] [Accepted: 11/26/2019] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Rare locations of hernias, as well as primary ventral hernias under certain circumstances (cirrhosis, dialysis, rectus diastasis, subsequent pregnancy), might be technically challenging. The aim was to identify situations where the treatment strategy might deviate from routine management. Methods The guideline group consisted of surgeons from the European and Americas Hernia Societies. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used in formulating the recommendations. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) critical appraisal checklists were used to evaluate the quality of full‐text papers. A systematic literature search was performed on 1 May 2018 and updated 1 February 2019. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was followed. Results Literature was limited in quantity and quality. A majority of the recommendations were graded as weak, based on low quality of evidence. In patients with cirrhosis or on dialysis, a preperitoneal mesh repair is suggested. Subsequent pregnancy is a risk factor for recurrence. Repair should be postponed until after the last pregnancy. For patients with a concomitant rectus diastasis or those with a Spigelian or lumbar hernia, no recommendation could be made for treatment strategy owing to lack of evidence. Conclusion This is the first European and American guideline on the treatment of umbilical and epigastric hernias in patients with special conditions, including Spigelian and lumbar hernias. All recommendations were weak owing to a lack of evidence. Further studies are needed on patients with rectus diastasis, Spigelian and lumbar hernias.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N A Henriksen
- Department of Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, Koege, Denmark
| | - R Kaufmann
- Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Tergooi, Hilversum, the Netherlands
| | - M P Simons
- Department of Surgery, OLVG Hospital, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F Berrevoet
- Department of General and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Gent University Hospital, Gent, Belgium
| | - B East
- Third Department of Surgery, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.,First and Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - J Fischer
- University of Pennsylvania Health System, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - W Hope
- New Hanover Regional Medical Center, Wilmington, North Carolina, USA
| | - D Klassen
- Department of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada
| | - R Lorenz
- Praxis 3+CHIRURGEN, Berlin, Germany
| | - Y Renard
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Robert Debré University Hospital, Reims, France
| | - M A Garcia Urena
- Henares University Hospital, Faculty of Health Sciences, Francisco de Vitoria University, Madrid, Spain
| | - A Montgomery
- Department of Surgery, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden
| | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Loibl S, Sinn BV, Karn T, Untch M, Sinn HP, Weber KE, Hanusch C, Huober JB, Staib P, Lorenz R, Blohmer JU, Marmé F, Schmitt WD, Rhiem K, van Mackelenbergh M, Fasching PA, Wu S, Higgs BW, Schneeweiss A, Denkert C. Exome analysis of oncogenic pathways and tumor mutational burden (TMB) in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): Results of the translational biomarker program of the neoadjuvant double-blind placebo controlled GeparNuevo trial. J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
509 Background: GeparNuevo (G9) showed a numerical increase in pCR rate of 53% vs 44%; p = 0.287 compared to placebo in TNBC with the addition of the anti-PD-L1 antibody durvalumab (D) to a neoadjuvant anthracycline-taxane containing chemotherapy (Loibl S et al. ASCO 2018). Somatic mutations in malignant cells manifest over the evolutionary history of a tumor. Reports in selected tumor types suggest that TMB may predict clinical outcomes on immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The clinical relevance of TMB in breast cancer has not been studied widely. Here, we investigated the hypothesis that TMB predicts response to ICI. Methods: Whole exome sequencing was conducted on patient-matched fresh-frozen core biopsies and blood samples with Illumina (n = 149/174). SNVs and indels were called with Mutect and pureCN was used for copy number calls. Mutational signatures were identified as described by Alexandrov et al. (Cell Rep. 3, 2013). Data from G9 were compared to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) TNBC cohort. Results: A similar genomic landscape was observed between G9 and TCGA with primary mutations in TP53 (69%), c-MYC (26%), BRCA1 (13%), BRCA2 (6%), PIK3CA (11%) and PTEN (11%). Median TMB was 1.52 mut/MB. TMB in G9 was slightly lower than TCGA TNBC. TMB correlated with older age, higher mutation rates in BRCA2, ARID1A, and TP53, and higher burden in variant signatures such as DDR, HRD, GFRs, APOBEC and Alexandrov’s signatures 3 and 6. Continuous TMB predicted pCR in univariate (OR = 1.62, 95%-CI: 1.20 - 2.20, p = 0.0018) and multivariate (OR = 2.06, 95%-CI: 1.33 - 3.20, p = 0.0012) logistic regression models, but did not predict a D effect. After dichotomisation of TMB at the top tertile, 50 patients had high TMB and 29 of these (58%) achieved a pCR, while 99 had low TMB and only 38 of these (38%) had a pCR (p = 0.0242). Conclusions: Results show that TMB may predict pCR in primary TNBC. The trial was financially supported by Astra Zeneca and Celgene. Clinical trial information: NCT02685059.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group (GBG) and Centre for Haematology and Oncology Bethanien, Frankfurt, Neu-Isenburg, Germany
| | | | - Thomas Karn
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Jens Bodo Huober
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | | | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz-Hecker-Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Jens Uwe Blohmer
- Department of Gynecology/Breast Center of the Charité, Berlin, Germany
| | - Frederik Marmé
- Allgemeine Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Wolfgang D Schmitt
- Institut für Pathologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Center for Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer and Center for Integrated Oncology (CIO), Medical Faculty, University of Cologne and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Carsten Denkert
- Institut für Pathologie, Philipps-Universität Marburg und Universitätsklinikum Marburg, Marburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Wiessner R, Gehring A, Kleber T, Ekwelle N, Lorenz R, Richter DU. An in vitro study on the biocompatibility of fibroblasts in sterile and non-sterile low-cost and commercial meshes. Hernia 2019; 23:1163-1174. [PMID: 30949894 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-019-01932-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2018] [Accepted: 03/18/2019] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Despite several successful studies with low-cost meshes (LCM) for the treatment of inguinal hernias in India and Africa, a nationwide application has not been possible for a variety of reasons. One problem is the special preparation and sterilization of these meshes-naturally, they should comply with international standards and demands, which is often difficult to achieve in Africa. Our primary approach was to determine whether there are differences in the biocompatibility of fibroblasts between non-sterile and sterile LCMs and commercial meshes (CM). MATERIALS AND METHODS Two polyester CMs with different pore size and a polyester LCM were examined as both sterile and non-sterile. LCM was plasma sterilized at 60 °C and steam sterilized at 134 °C. Sterile and non-sterile meshes were soaked with an antibiotic (penicillin/streptomycin) and antimycotic solution (amphotericin B). Human fibroblasts from healthy subcutaneous tissue were used. Various tests for evaluating the growth behavior and cell morphology of human fibroblasts were conducted. Semiquantitative (light microscopy) and qualitative (scanning electron microscopy) analyses were performed after 1 week and again after 12 weeks. The metabolism of fibroblasts was checked by pH measurements and glucose analyses. Biocompatibility of fibroblasts on sterile and non-sterile meshes was carried out by luminescence methods (cell viability and apoptosis) as well as calorimetric methods for proliferation determination (BrDU assay) and cytotoxicity (LDH assay). RESULTS Light and electron microscopy revealed a moderate growth of fibroblasts on all investigated mesh types. The results of glycolysis and the pH value were within the normal range for all sterile and non-sterile meshes. In biocompatibility studies, no elevated level of apoptosis was detected. The viability measurement of mitochondrial activity of fibroblasts showed a 50% inhibition of mitochondria in all nets, with the exception of non-sterile CM, whereas mitochondrial activity was increased in the non-sterile CM. A proliferation measurement (BrdU test) revealed different growth inhibition in the sterile and non-sterile meshes. This growth inhibition was significantly stronger, particularly for non-sterile CM light meshes, than it was for the non-sterile LCM. CONCLUSION Again, our studies show no significant differences in biocompatibility of fibroblasts between expensive and low-cost meshes. In addition, we detected fibroblast growth even in sterile meshes, independent of the mesh group. To our knowledge, the present study is the first of its kind in terms of qualitative equivalence of sterile and non-sterile in vitro mesh samples. We do not wish to create future patient studies with non-sterilized meshes saturated with antibiotics/antimycotics. However, perhaps we can prove in future studies that under semi-sterile conditions with certain LCMs, wound infection rates can be acceptable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Wiessner
- Department of General an Visceral Surgery, Bodden-Kliniken Ribnitz-Damgarten, Ribnitz-Damgarten, Germany.
| | - A Gehring
- Department of General an Visceral Surgery, Bodden-Kliniken Ribnitz-Damgarten, Ribnitz-Damgarten, Germany
| | - T Kleber
- Heart und Vascular Center, Albertinen Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
| | - N Ekwelle
- Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Hospital Märkisch Oberland, Wriezen, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- 3+ Chirurgen, Berlin-Spandau, Germany
| | - D-U Richter
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Janni W, Rack BK, Friedl TW, Müller V, Lorenz R, Rezai M, Tesch H, Heinrich G, Andergassen U, Harbeck N, Schochter F, De Gregorio A, Tzschaschel M, Huober J, Hepp P, Fehm TN, Schneeweiss A, Lichtenegger W, Blohmer J, Hauner D, Beckmann MW, Häberle L, Fasching PA, Hauner H. Abstract GS5-03: Lifestyle Intervention and Effect on Disease-free Survival in Early Breast Cancer Pts: Interim Analysis from the Randomized SUCCESS C Study. Cancer Res 2019. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs18-gs5-03] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background:
Recent trials have provided evidence that obesity and a low level of physical activity are not only associated with a higher risk of developing breast cancer, but also with an increased risk for recurrence and reduced survival in breast cancer patients (pts). The SUCCESS C study is the first randomized Phase III trial to evaluate the effect of an intensive lifestyle intervention program, focusing on both physical activity and healthy diet following adjuvant chemotherapy on disease-free survival in women with early breast cancer.
Methods:
SUCCESS C is a German multicenter, 2×2 factorial design, randomized phase III study comparing disease-free survival (DFS) in pts with HER2-negative early breast cancer treated with either 3 cycles of epirubicine, fluorouracil, cyclophosphamide chemotherapy followed by 3 cycles of docetaxel (FEC-D) or 6 cycles of docetaxel-cyclophosphamide (DC). The second randomization compares DFS in pts with a body mass index (BMI) of 24—40 kg/m2 receiving either a telephone-based individualized lifestyle intervention (LI) program aiming at moderate weight loss for 2 years (LI arm) or general recommendations for a healthy lifestyle alone (non-LI arm). DFS according to lifestyle intervention was analyzed using both univariable cox regressions and multivariable cox regressions adjusted for age (years, continuous), BMI (kg/m2, continuous), menopausal status (premenopausal, postmenopausal), tumor size (pT1, pT2, pT3/pT4), nodal stage (pN0, pN1, pN2, pN3), hormone receptor status (positive, negative), grading (G1, G2, G3), histological type (ductal, lobular, other) and chemotherapy randomization (FEC-D, DC). Median follow-up was 64.2 months.
Results:
Overall, 2292 of the 3643 pts recruited for the SUCCESS C study were randomized for the lifestyle intervention program (1146 pts in both the non-LI arm and the LI arm). The Intention-to-treat analysis revealed no difference in DFS between the two treatment arms (LI vs. non-LI) in univariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 — 1.28, p = 0.922) and in adjusted multivariable cox regression (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.70 — 1.18, p = 0.48). At the 2-year follow up, pts in the LI arm lost on average 1.0 kg weight compared to the start of the LI program, while pts in the non-LI arm gained on average 0.95 kg (p < 0.001). Overall, 1477 pts completed the 2-year LI program (non-LI arm: 80.7%, 925 of 1146 pts; LI arm: 48.2%, 552 of 1146 pts; p < 0.001). Pts that completed the 2-year LI program had a significant better DFS than non-completers (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.27 — 0.45, p < 0.001). Among completers, pts in the LI arm had a significantly better DFS than pts in the non-LI arm both in univariable analysis (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35 — 0.82, p = 0.004) and in adjusted multivariable cox regression (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.33 — 0.78, p = 0.002).
Conclusions:
This explorative and non-planned interim analysis indicates that the completion of a systematic telephone life style intervention program may positively impact patient outcome in early breast cancer.
Citation Format: Janni W, Rack BK, Friedl TW, Müller V, Lorenz R, Rezai M, Tesch H, Heinrich G, Andergassen U, Harbeck N, Schochter F, De Gregorio A, Tzschaschel M, Huober J, Hepp P, Fehm TN, Schneeweiss A, Lichtenegger W, Blohmer J, Hauner D, Beckmann MW, Häberle L, Fasching PA, Hauner H. Lifestyle Intervention and Effect on Disease-free Survival in Early Breast Cancer Pts: Interim Analysis from the Randomized SUCCESS C Study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS5-03.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Janni
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - BK Rack
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - TW Friedl
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - V Müller
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - R Lorenz
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - M Rezai
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - H Tesch
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - G Heinrich
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - U Andergassen
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - N Harbeck
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - F Schochter
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - A De Gregorio
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - M Tzschaschel
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - J Huober
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - P Hepp
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - TN Fehm
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - A Schneeweiss
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - W Lichtenegger
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - J Blohmer
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - D Hauner
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - MW Beckmann
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - L Häberle
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - PA Fasching
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| | - H Hauner
- University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Gynecological Clinic Lorenz/Hecker/Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Breast Center of Düsseldorf, Luisenkrankenhaus, Düsseldorf, Germany; Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Germany; Schwerpunktpraxis für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Fürstenwalde, Germany; Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, München, Germany; HELIOS University Hospital Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany; University Hospital, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Mitte and Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany; Institute for Nutritional Medicine, Else Kröner-Fresenius-Center for Nutritional Medicine, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, München, Germany; University Hospit
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Auerbach S, Lopez R, Gruss V, Lorenz R. DEMENTIA BIASES AMONG INTERNATIONAL HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS: A LITERATURE REVIEW. Innov Aging 2018. [DOI: 10.1093/geroni/igy023.499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - R Lopez
- MGH Institute of Health Professions
| | - V Gruss
- University of Illinois at Chicago
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Köckerling F, Koch A, Adolf D, Keller T, Lorenz R, Fortelny RH, Schug-Pass C. Has Shouldice Repair in a Selected Group of Patients with Inguinal Hernia Comparable Results to Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP Techniques? World J Surg 2018; 42:2001-2010. [PMID: 29299648 PMCID: PMC5990577 DOI: 10.1007/s00268-017-4433-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
Background In the new international guidelines only the mesh-based Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP techniques are recommended. This present analysis of data from the Herniamed Registry compares the outcome for Shouldice versus Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP.
Methods Propensity score matching analyses were performed to obtain homogeneous comparison groups for Shouldice versus Lichtenstein (n = 2115/2608; 81.1%), Shouldice versus TEP (n = 2225/2608; 85.3%) and Shouldice versus TAPP (2400/2608; 92.0%). Results The most important characteristics of the Shouldice patient collective were younger patients with a mean age of 40 years, a large proportion of women of 30%, a mean BMI value of 24 and a proportion of defect sizes up to 3 cm of over 85%. For this selected patient collective, propensity score matched-pair analysis did not identify any difference in the perioperative and one-year follow-up outcome compared with TAPP, fewer intraoperative (0.5 vs. 1.3%; p = 0.009) but somewhat more postoperative complications (2.3 vs. 1.5%; p = 0.050) compared with TEP and advantages with regard to pain at rest (4.6 vs. 6.1%; p = 0.039) and on exertion (10.0 vs. 13.4%; p < 0.001) compared with the Lichtenstein technique. Conclusion For a selected group of patients the Shouldice technique can be used for primary unilateral inguinal hernia repair while achieving an outcome comparable to that of Lichtenstein, TEP and TAPP operations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Köckerling
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany.
| | - A Koch
- Hernia Center Cottbus, Gerhard-Hauptmann-Strasse 15, 03044, Cottbus, Germany
| | - D Adolf
- StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - T Keller
- StatConsult GmbH, Halberstädter Strasse 40 a, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- 3Surgeons, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany
| | - R H Fortelny
- Department of General Surgery Wilhelminenspital, Medical Faculty, Sigmund Freud University, Montleartstrasse 37, 1160, Vienna, Austria
| | - C Schug-Pass
- Department of Surgery and Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital of Charité Medical School, Vivantes Hospital, Neue Bergstrasse 6, 13585, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Schochter F, Rack B, Fasching PA, Häberle L, Tesch H, Lorenz R, Tzschaschel M, De Gregorio A, Fehm T, Müller V, Schneeweiss A, Lichtenegger W, Beckmann MW, Scholz C, Pantel K, Janni W, Friedl TWP. Nachweis von zirkulierenden Tumorzellen bei Patientinnen mit frühem Brustkrebs fünf Jahre nach adjuvanter Chemotherapie und späte Rezidive – Ergebnisse der SUCCESS A Studie. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2018. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1671512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- F Schochter
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - B Rack
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - PA Fasching
- Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Frauenklinik, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - L Häberle
- Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Frauenklinik, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - H Tesch
- Centrum für Hämatologie und Onkologie Bethanien, Frankfurt, Deutschland
| | - R Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker und Wesche, Braunschweig, Deutschland
| | | | | | - T Fehm
- Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Frauenklinik, Düsseldorf, Deutschland
| | - V Müller
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - A Schneeweiss
- Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland
| | - W Lichtenegger
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow Klinikum, Berlin, Deutschland
| | - MW Beckmann
- Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Frauenklinik, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - C Scholz
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - K Pantel
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Institut für Tumorbiologie, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - W Janni
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - TWP Friedl
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Tzschaschel M, Westernhagen U, Rack B, Schneweiss A, Müller V, Fehm T, Gade J, Lorenz R, Rezai M, Tesch H, Söling U, Polasik A, Schochter F, De Gregorio A, Mahner S, Schindlbeck C, Beckmann M, Fasching P, Janni W, Friedl TW. Gibt es einen Zusammenhang zwischen BMI und dem Nachweis von CTCs bei Patientinnen mit frühem Hochrisiko Mammakarzinom? Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2018. [DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1671343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - B Rack
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - A Schneweiss
- Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen, Heidelberg, Deutschland
| | - V Müller
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf, Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Hamburg, Deutschland
| | - T Fehm
- Klinikum der Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf, Deutschland
| | - J Gade
- Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Klinik für Gynäkologie, Hannover, Deutschland
| | - R Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker und Wesche, Braunschweig, Deutschland
| | - M Rezai
- Luisenkrankenhaus Düsseldorf, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Düsseldorf, Deutschland
| | - H Tesch
- Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis, Frankfurt, Deutschland
| | - U Söling
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Kassel, Deutschland
| | - A Polasik
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - F Schochter
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | | | - S Mahner
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Deutschland
| | - C Schindlbeck
- Klinikum Traunstein, Frauenklinik, Traunstein, Deutschland
| | - M Beckmann
- Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Frauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - P Fasching
- Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Frauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Deutschland
| | - W Janni
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| | - TW Friedl
- Universitätsfrauenklinik Ulm, Ulm, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Chekerov R, Hilpert F, Mahner S, El-Balat A, Harter P, De Gregorio N, Fridrich C, Markmann S, Potenberg J, Lorenz R, Oskay-Oezcelik G, Schmidt M, Krabisch P, Lueck HJ, Richter R, Braicu EI, du Bois A, Sehouli J. Sorafenib plus topotecan versus placebo plus topotecan for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (TRIAS): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2018; 19:1247-1258. [PMID: 30100379 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30372-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2018] [Revised: 05/08/2018] [Accepted: 05/10/2018] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Antiangiogenic therapy has known activity in ovarian cancer. The investigator-initiated randomised phase 2 TRIAS trial assessed the multi-kinase inhibitor sorafenib combined with topotecan and continued as maintenance therapy for platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. METHODS We did a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 2 trial at 20 sites in Germany. Patients (≥18 years) with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer previously treated with two or fewer chemotherapy lines for recurrent disease were stratified (first vs later relapse) in block sizes of four and randomly assigned (1:1) using a web-generated response system to topotecan (1·25 mg/m2 on days 1-5) plus either oral sorafenib 400 mg or placebo twice daily on days 6-15, repeated every 21 days for six cycles, followed by daily maintenance sorafenib or placebo for up to 1 year in patients without progression. Investigators and patients were masked to allocation of sorafenib or placebo; topotecan treatment was open label. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01047891. FINDINGS Between Jan 18, 2010, and Sept 19, 2013, 185 patients were enrolled, 174 of whom were randomly assigned: 85 to sorafenib and 89 to placebo. Two patients in the sorafenib group had serious adverse events before treatment and were excluded from analyses. 83 patients in the sorafenib group and 89 in the placebo group started treatment. Progression-free survival was significantly improved with sorafenib versus placebo (hazard ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·43-0·83; p=0·0018). Median progression-free survival was 6·7 months (95% CI 5·8-7·6) with sorafenib versus 4·4 months (3·7-5·0) with placebo. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were leucopenia (57 [69%] of 83 patients in the sorafenib group vs 47 [53%] of 89 in the placebo group), neutropenia (46 [55%] vs 48 [54%]), and thrombocytopenia (23 [28%] vs 20 [22%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 49 (59%) of 83 sorafenib-treated patients and 45 (51%) of 89 placebo-treated patients. Of these, events were fatal in four patients (5%) in the sorafenib group (dyspnoea and poor general condition, septic shock, ascites and dyspnoea, and sigma perforation) and seven (8%) in the placebo group (pulmonary embolism in two patients, disease progression in two patients, and one case each of sepsis with fever, pleural effusion, and tumour cachexia). Sorafenib was associated with increased incidences of grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (three [13%] vs 0 patients) and grade 2 alopecia (24 [29%] vs 12 [13%]). INTERPRETATION Sorafenib, when given orally in combination with topotecan and continued as maintenance therapy, showed a statistically and clinically significant improvement in progression-free survival in women with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. These encouraging results support the crucial role of antiangiogenesis as the treatment backbone in combination with chemotherapy, making this approach attractive for further assessment with other targeted strategies. FUNDING Bayer, Amgen, and GlaxoSmithKline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Radoslav Chekerov
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Felix Hilpert
- Gynecologic Oncology Center at Jerusalem Hospital, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Sven Mahner
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany; Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Ahmed El-Balat
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, HSK Dr Horst-Schmidt-Kliniken, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - Philipp Harter
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | | | - Claudius Fridrich
- Department of Gynecology and Cancer Center, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Susanne Markmann
- Frauenarztpraxis, Rostock, Germany; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Jochem Potenberg
- Department of Hematology, Waldkrankenhaus Spandau, Berlin, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gynecologic Oncology, Gemeinschaftspraxis, Braunschweig, Germany
| | | | - Marcus Schmidt
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany
| | - Petra Krabisch
- Gynecologic Oncology, Klinikum Chemnitz, Chemnitz, Germany
| | | | - Rolf Richter
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Berlin, Germany
| | - Elena Ioana Braicu
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Berlin, Germany
| | - Andreas du Bois
- Department of Gynecology and Gynecologic Oncology, Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Jalid Sehouli
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Gynecology with Center for Oncological Surgery, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Ignatiadis M, Litière S, Rothe F, Riethdorf S, Proudhon C, Fehm T, Aalders K, Forstbauer H, Fasching P, Brain E, Vuylsteke P, Guardiola E, Lorenz R, Pantel K, Tryfonidis K, Janni W, Piccart M, Sotiriou C, Rack B, Pierga JY. Trastuzumab versus observation for HER2 nonamplified early breast cancer with circulating tumor cells (EORTC 90091-10093, BIG 1-12, Treat CTC): a randomized phase II trial. Ann Oncol 2018; 29:1777-1783. [DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdy211] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
|
37
|
Janni W, Rack BK, Fasching PA, Haeberle L, Tesch H, Lorenz R, Schochter F, Tzschaschel M, De Gregorio A, Fehm TN, Müller V, Schneeweiss A, Lichtenegger W, Beckmann MW, Scholz C, Pantel K, Friedl TWP. Persistence of circulating tumor cells in high risk early breast cancer patients five years after adjuvant chemotherapy and late recurrence: Results from the adjuvant SUCCESS A trial. J Clin Oncol 2018. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2018.36.15_suppl.515] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Hans Tesch
- Haemato-Oncology Practice, Bethanien Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz-Hecker-Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Fabienne Schochter
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Marie Tzschaschel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Amelie De Gregorio
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | | | - Volkmar Müller
- Department of Gynecology, Hamburg-Eppendorf University Medical Center, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- National Center for Tumor Diseases, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Werner Lichtenegger
- Department of Gynecology, Charité Medical University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Matthias W. Beckmann
- University Hospital Nuremberg-Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christoph Scholz
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Klaus Pantel
- University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, UKE Institute of Tumor Biology, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Thomas W. P. Friedl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Tang WW, McGee P, Lachin JM, Li DY, Hoogwerf B, Hazen SL, Nathan D, Zinman B, Crofford O, Genuth S, Brown‐Friday J, Crandall J, Engel H, Engel S, Martinez H, Phillips M, Reid M, Shamoon H, Sheindlin J, Gubitosi‐Klug R, Mayer L, Pendegast S, Zegarra H, Miller D, Singerman L, Smith‐Brewer S, Novak M, Quin J, Genuth S, Palmert M, Brown E, McConnell J, Pugsley P, Crawford P, Dahms W, Gregory N, Lackaye M, Kiss S, Chan R, Orlin A, Rubin M, Brillon D, Reppucci V, Lee T, Heinemann M, Chang S, Levy B, Jovanovic L, Richardson M, Bosco B, Dwoskin A, Hanna R, Barron S, Campbell R, Bhan A, Kruger D, Jones J, Edwards P, Bhan A, Carey J, Angus E, Thomas A, Galprin A, McLellan M, Whitehouse F, Bergenstal R, Johnson M, Gunyou K, Thomas L, Laechelt J, Hollander P, Spencer M, Kendall D, Cuddihy R, Callahan P, List S, Gott J, Rude N, Olson B, Franz M, Castle G, Birk R, Nelson J, Freking D, Gill L, Mestrezat W, Etzwiler D, Morgan K, Aiello L, Golden E, Arrigg P, Asuquo V, Beaser R, Bestourous L, Cavallerano J, Cavicchi R, Ganda O, Hamdy O, Kirby R, Murtha T, Schlossman D, Shah S, Sharuk G, Silva P, Silver P, Stockman M, Sun J, Weimann E, Wolpert H, Aiello L, Jacobson A, Rand L, Rosenzwieg J, Nathan D, Larkin M, Christofi M, Folino K, Godine J, Lou P, Stevens C, Anderson E, Bode H, Brink S, Cornish C, Cros D, Delahanty L, eManbey ., Haggan C, Lynch J, McKitrick C, Norman D, Moore D, Ong M, Taylor C, Zimbler D, Crowell S, Fritz S, Hansen K, Gauthier‐Kelly C, Service F, Ziegler G, Barkmeier A, Schmidt L, French B, Woodwick R, Rizza R, Schwenk W, Haymond M, Pach J, Mortenson J, Zimmerman B, Lucas A, Colligan R, Luttrell L, Lopes‐Virella M, Caulder S, Pittman C, Patel N, Lee K, Nutaitis M, Fernandes J, Hermayer K, Kwon S, Blevins A, Parker J, Colwell J, Lee D, Soule J, Lindsey P, Bracey M, Farr A, Elsing S, Thompson T, Selby J, Lyons T, Yacoub‐Wasef S, Szpiech M, Wood D, Mayfield R, Molitch M, Adelman D, Colson S, Jampol L, Lyon A, Gill M, Strugula Z, Kaminski L, Mirza R, Simjanoski E, Ryan D, Johnson C, Wallia A, Ajroud‐Driss S, Astelford P, Leloudes N, Degillio A, Schaefer B, Mudaliar S, Lorenzi G, Goldbaum M, Jones K, Prince M, Swenson M, Grant I, Reed R, Lyon R, Kolterman O, Giotta M, Clark T, Friedenberg G, Sivitz W, Vittetoe B, Kramer J, Bayless M, Zeitler R, Schrott H, Olson N, Snetselaar L, Hoffman R, MacIndoe J, Weingeist T, Fountain C, Miller R, Johnsonbaugh S, Patronas M, Carney M, Mendley S, Salemi P, Liss R, Hebdon M, Counts D, Donner T, Gordon J, Hemady R, Kowarski A, Ostrowski D, Steidl S, Jones B, Herman W, Martin C, Pop‐Busui R, Greene D, Stevens M, Burkhart N, Sandford T, Floyd J, Bantle J, Flaherty N, Terry J, Koozekanani D, Montezuma S, Wimmergren N, Rogness B, Mech M, Strand T, Olson J, McKenzie L, Kwong C, Goetz F, Warhol R, Hainsworth D, Goldstein D, Hitt S, Giangiacomo J, Schade D, Canady J, Burge M, Das A, Avery R, Ketai L, Chapin J, Schluter M, Rich J, Johannes C, Hornbeck D, Schutta M, Bourne P, Brucker A, Braunstein S, Schwartz S, Maschak‐Carey B, Baker L, Orchard T, Cimino L, Songer T, Doft B, Olson S, Becker D, Rubinstein D, Bergren R, Fruit J, Hyre R, Palmer C, Silvers N, Lobes L, Rath PP, Conrad P, Yalamanchi S, Wesche J, Bratkowksi M, Arslanian S, Rinkoff J, Warnicki J, Curtin D, Steinberg D, Vagstad G, Harris R, Steranchak L, Arch J, Kelly K, Ostrosaka P, Guiliani M, Good M, Williams T, Olsen K, Campbell A, Shipe C, Conwit R, Finegold D, Zaucha M, Drash A, Morrison A, Malone J, Bernal M, Pavan P, Grove N, Tanaka E, McMillan D, Vaccaro‐Kish J, Babbione L, Solc H, DeClue T, Dagogo‐Jack S, Wigley C, Ricks H, Kitabchi A, Chaum E, Murphy M, Moser S, Meyer D, Iannacone A, Yoser S, Bryer‐Ash M, Schussler S, Lambeth H, Raskin P, Strowig S, Basco M, Cercone S, Zinman B, Barnie A, Devenyi R, Mandelcorn M, Brent M, Rogers S, Gordon A, Bakshi N, Perkins B, Tuason L, Perdikaris F, Ehrlich R, Daneman D, Perlman K, Ferguson S, Palmer J, Fahlstrom R, de Boer I, Kinyoun J, Van Ottingham L, Catton S, Ginsberg J, McDonald C, Harth J, Driscoll M, Sheidow T, Mahon J, Canny C, Nicolle D, Colby P, Dupre J, Hramiak I, Rodger N, Jenner M, Smith T, Brown W, May M, Lipps Hagan J, Agarwal A, Adkins T, Lorenz R, Feman S, Survant L, White N, Levandoski L, Grand G, Thomas M, Joseph D, Blinder K, Shah G, Burgess D, Boniuk I, Santiago J, Tamborlane W, Gatcomb P, Stoessel K, Ramos P, Fong K, Ossorio P, Ahern J, Gubitosi‐Klug R, Meadema‐Mayer L, Beck C, Farrell K, Genuth S, Quin J, Gaston P, Palmert M, Trail R, Dahms W, Lachin J, Backlund J, Bebu I, Braffett B, Diminick L, Gao X, Hsu W, Klumpp K, Pan H, Trapani V, Cleary P, McGee P, Sun W, Villavicencio S, Anderson K, Dews L, Younes N, Rutledge B, Chan K, Rosenberg D, Petty B, Determan A, Kenny D, Williams C, Cowie C, Siebert C, Steffes M, Arends V, Bucksa J, Nowicki M, Chavers B, O'Leary D, Polak J, Harrington A, Funk L, Crow R, Gloeb B, Thomas S, O'Donnell C, Soliman E, Zhang Z, Li Y, Campbell C, Keasler L, Hensley S, Hu J, Barr M, Taylor T, Prineas R, Feldman E, Albers J, Low P, Sommer C, Nickander K, Speigelberg T, Pfiefer M, Schumer M, Moran M, Farquhar J, Ryan C, Sandstrom D, Williams T, Geckle M, Cupelli E, Thoma F, Burzuk B, Woodfill T, Danis R, Blodi B, Lawrence D, Wabers H, Gangaputra S, Neill S, Burger M, Dingledine J, Gama V, Sussman R, Davis M, Hubbard L, Budoff M, Darabian S, Rezaeian P, Wong N, Fox M, Oudiz R, Kim L, Detrano R, Cruickshanks K, Dalton D, Bainbridge K, Lima J, Bluemke D, Turkbey E, der Geest ., Liu C, Malayeri A, Jain A, Miao C, Chahal H, Jarboe R, Nathan D, Monnier V, Sell D, Strauch C, Hazen S, Pratt A, Tang W, Brunzell J, Purnell J, Natarajan R, Miao F, Zhang L, Chen Z, Paterson A, Boright A, Bull S, Sun L, Scherer S, Lopes‐Virella M, Lyons T, Jenkins A, Klein R, Virella G, Jaffa A, Carter R, Stoner J, Garvey W, Lackland D, Brabham M, McGee D, Zheng D, Mayfield R, Maynard J, Wessells H, Sarma A, Jacobson A, Dunn R, Holt S, Hotaling J, Kim C, Clemens Q, Brown J, McVary K. Oxidative Stress and Cardiovascular Risk in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Insights From the DCCT/EDIC Study. J Am Heart Assoc 2018. [PMCID: PMC6015340 DOI: 10.1161/jaha.117.008368] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Background
Hyperglycemia leading to increased oxidative stress is implicated in the increased risk for the development of macrovascular and microvascular complications in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
Methods and Results
A random subcohort of 349 participants was selected from the
DCCT
/
EDIC
(Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications) cohort. This included 320 controls and 29 cardiovascular disease cases that were augmented with 98 additional known cases to yield a case cohort of 447 participants (320 controls, 127 cases). Biosamples from
DCCT
baseline, year 1, and closeout of
DCCT
, and 1 to 2 years post‐
DCCT
(
EDIC
years 1 and 2) were measured for markers of oxidative stress, including plasma myeloperoxidase, paraoxonase activity, urinary F
2α
isoprostanes, and its metabolite, 2,3 dinor‐8
iso
prostaglandin F
2α
. Following adjustment for glycated hemoblobin and weighting the observations inversely proportional to the sampling selection probabilities, higher paraoxonase activity, reflective of antioxidant activity, and 2,3 dinor‐8
iso
prostaglandin F
2α
, an oxidative marker, were significantly associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease (−4.5% risk for 10% higher paraoxonase,
P
<0.003; −5.3% risk for 10% higher 2,3 dinor‐8
iso
prostaglandin F
2α
,
P
=0.0092). In contrast, the oxidative markers myeloperoxidase and F
2α
isoprostanes were not significantly associated with cardiovascular disease after adjustment for glycated hemoblobin. There were no significant differences between
DCCT
intensive and conventional treatment groups in the change in all biomarkers across time segments.
Conclusions
Heightened antioxidant activity (rather than diminished oxidative stress markers) is associated with lower cardiovascular disease risk in type 1 diabetes mellitus, but these biomarkers did not change over time with intensification of glycemic control.
Clinical Trial Registration
URL
:
https://www.clinicaltrials.gov
. Unique identifiers:
NCT
00360815 and
NCT
00360893.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W.H. Wilson Tang
- Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Paula McGee
- The Biostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, MD
| | - John M. Lachin
- The Biostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, MD
| | - Daniel Y. Li
- Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | | | - Stanley L. Hazen
- Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Auerbach S, Lorenz R, Thomas FP. 1034 Discordance Between Subjective And Objective Measures Of Sleep Among Adults With Multiple Sclerosis. Sleep 2018. [DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsy061.1033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - R Lorenz
- University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY
| | - F P Thomas
- Seton Hall-Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, South Orange, NJ
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Schochter F, Rack B, Tzschaschel M, Polasik A, Andergassen U, Trapp E, Alunni-Fabbroni M, Schneeweiss A, Müller V, Pantel K, Gade J, Lorenz R, Rezai M, Tesch H, Soeling U, Fehm T, Mahner S, Schindlbeck C, Lichtenegger W, Beckmann MW, Fasching PA, Janni W, Friedl TW. Endocrine Treatment with 2 Years of Tamoxifen versus 2 Years of Exemestane in Postmenopausal Patients with High-Risk Early Breast Cancer and Persisting Circulating Tumor Cells - First Results of the SUCCESS C Endocrine Treatment Sub-Study. Oncol Res Treat 2018; 41:93-98. [DOI: 10.1159/000485566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2017] [Accepted: 11/22/2017] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
41
|
Ignatiadis M, Litiere S, Rothe F, Riethdorf S, Proudhon C, Fehm T, Aalders K, Forstbauer H, Fasching P, Brain E, Vuylsteke P, Guardiola E, Lorenz R, Pantel K, Tryfonidis K, Janni W, Piccart M, Sotiriou C, Rack B, Pierga JY. Abstract P1-13-09: Withdrawn. Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-p1-13-09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
This abstract was withdrawn by the authors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Ignatiadis
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - S Litiere
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - F Rothe
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - S Riethdorf
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - C Proudhon
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - T Fehm
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - K Aalders
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - H Forstbauer
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - P Fasching
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - E Brain
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - P Vuylsteke
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - E Guardiola
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - R Lorenz
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - K Pantel
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - K Tryfonidis
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - W Janni
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - M Piccart
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - C Sotiriou
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - B Rack
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| | - J-Y Pierga
- Institut Jules Bordet, Brussels, Belgium; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Center of Experimental Medicine; Circulating Biomarker Lab, SIRIC, Institut Curie; Forschungslabore der Frauenklinik des Universitätsklinikums; Haemotologic-Oncologic Practice Dres; Universitetsklinikum Erlangen; Institut Curie - Hôpital René Huguenin; CHU UCL Namur - Site Sainte-Elisabeth; Centre Hospitalier de la Dracénie; Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche; Universitaetsklinikum Ulm; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitaet; Institut Curie
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Möbus V, Mahlberg R, Janni W, Tomé O, Marmé F, Forstbauer H, Reimer T, von der Assen A, Reinisch M, Lorenz R, Schmatloch S, Schmidt M, Sinn B, Klutinus N, Stickeler E, Untch M, Seiler S, Burchardi N, von Minckwitz G, Loibl S. Abstract P5-20-09: Pharmacokinetic results of a subcutaneous injection of trastuzumab into the thigh versus into the abdominal wall in patients with HER2-positive primary breast cancer (BC) treated within the neo-/adjuvant GAIN-2 study. Cancer Res 2018. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs17-p5-20-09] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
A new subcutaneous (s.c.) formulation of trastuzumab became available in 2013 based on equivalent efficacy, pharmacokinetic (PK) profile and safety with the standard intravenous (i.v.) administration, where the s.c. trastuzumab was administered only into the thigh. As an s.c. injection into the abdominal wall (abdw) might be more convenient for patients (pts) and health care professionals, the PK profile of s.c. trastuzumab injected into the thigh vs the abdw in pts with HER2+ early BC needs to be evaluated.
Methods
GAIN-2 study compared two intense dose-dense (idd) anthracycline/taxane containing regimens. After completion of the anthracycline and i.v. trastuzumab given concurrently with taxanes, HER2+ BC pts were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to continue adjuvant s.c. trastuzumab 600mg fixed dose injected every 3 weeks either into the thigh or the abdw. Randomization was stratified according to CT arm [(iddEnPC) vs tailored dd CT (dtEC-dtD)] and age (≤50 vs >50). Pts in the EnPC arm received 14 and in the dtEC-dtD arm 15 cycles of s.c. trastuzumab.
For the PK profile of s.c. trastuzumab serum samples collected before cycle 7, on days 2, 4, 8, 15 and 21 of cycle 7 are evaluated. With a total sample size of 30 (15 per group), the simulated 90% two-sided CI for the area under the plasma concentration (AUC0-last) will be (0.79-1.27) and for the peak drug concentration (Cmax) will be (0.77-1.30). Allowing for a dropout rate of 15%, 18 pts per group will be included in the PK analysis.
The primary objective was to assess the PK profile of s.c. trastuzumab injected into the thigh vs the abdw. The secondary objectives included safety and tolerability.
Results
The per-protocol (pp) set consists of 30 pts (17 in the thigh group and 13 in the abdw group). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. The log-transformed Geometric Least Square Means (GLSM) for Cmax were 11.77 and 11.52 in the thigh and the abdw group, respectively. The geo-mean ratio (on the original scale) for Cmax was 1.29 (90% CI 1.05-1.58). The log-transformed GLSM for AUC0-last were 14.54 and 14.28 in the thigh and the abdw group, respectively. The geo-mean ratio for AUC0-last was 1.29 (90% CI 1.02-1.63).
Overall 29 pts (96.7%) reported any grade and 5 pts (16.7%) high grade adverse events (AEs). The incidence of any grade AEs was similar between the two groups. The most common AEs were anemia (70.6% for the thigh vs 61.5% for the abdw group, p=0.705), leukopenia (80.0% for both groups, p=1.000) and fatigue (47.1% for the thigh vs 76.9% for the abdw group, p=0.141). 6 serious AEs were reported (2 in the thigh vs 4 in the abdw group). The final PK results of s.c. trastuzumab will be presented at the meeting.
Conclusions
Bioavailability of s.c. trastuzumab as reflected by peak and total exposure measured in cycle 7 was approx. 30% higher if administered into the thigh than into the abdw in pts with HER2+ primary BC treated after dose-dense CT plus i.v. trastuzumab. However, no increased toxicity was observed. Study limitations were that no cross-over design was used and number of pts satisfying criteria for pp-set were different in the arms.
Citation Format: Möbus V, Mahlberg R, Janni W, Tomé O, Marmé F, Forstbauer H, Reimer T, von der Assen A, Reinisch M, Lorenz R, Schmatloch S, Schmidt M, Sinn B, Klutinus N, Stickeler E, Untch M, Seiler S, Burchardi N, von Minckwitz G, Loibl S. Pharmacokinetic results of a subcutaneous injection of trastuzumab into the thigh versus into the abdominal wall in patients with HER2-positive primary breast cancer (BC) treated within the neo-/adjuvant GAIN-2 study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-20-09.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- V Möbus
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - R Mahlberg
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - W Janni
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - O Tomé
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - F Marmé
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - H Forstbauer
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - T Reimer
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - A von der Assen
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - M Reinisch
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - R Lorenz
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - S Schmatloch
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - M Schmidt
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - B Sinn
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - N Klutinus
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - E Stickeler
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - M Untch
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - S Seiler
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - N Burchardi
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - G von Minckwitz
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| | - S Loibl
- Klinikum Frankfurt; Klinikum Mutterhaus Mitte, Trier; Universitätsklinikum Ulm; St. Vincentius-Kliniken gAG, Karlsruhe; Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg; GOSPL - Gesellschaft für Onkologische Studien, Troisdorf; Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt Rostock; Franziskus-Hospital Harderberg; Kliniken Essen-Mitte; Frauenärztl. Gemeinschafts- u. Schwerpunktpraxis Onkologie, Braunschweig; Elisabeth Krankenhaus Kassel; Universitätsmedizin Mainz; Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; HELIOS Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH Brustzentrum; Universitätsklinikum Freiburg; HELIOS Klinikum Berlin Buch; German Breast Group
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Alunni-Fabbroni M, Majunke L, Trapp EK, Tzschaschel M, Mahner S, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Schneeweiss A, Beck T, Lorenz R, Friedl TWP, Janni W, Rack B. Whole blood microRNAs as potential biomarkers in post-operative early breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer 2018; 18:141. [PMID: 29409452 PMCID: PMC5802058 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4020-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2017] [Accepted: 01/22/2018] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND microRNAs (miRNAs) are considered promising cancer biomarkers, showing high reliability, sensitivity and stability. Our study aimed to identify associations between whole blood miRNA profiles, presence of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and clinical outcome in post-operative early breast cancer patients (EBC) to assess the utility of miRNAs as prognostic markers in this setting. METHOD A total of 48 post-operative patients, recruited in frame of the SUCCESS A trial, were included in this retrospective study and tested with a panel of 8 miRNAs (miR-10b, -19a, - 21, - 22, -20a, - 127, - 155, -200b). Additional 17 female healthy donors with no previous history of cancer were included in the study as negative controls. Blood samples were collected at different time points (pre-adjuvant therapy, post-adjuvant therapy, 2 years follow up), total RNA was extracted and the relative concentration of each miRNA was measured by quantitative PCR and compared in patients stratified on blood collection time or CTC detection. Furthermore, we compared miRNA profiles of patients, for each time point separately, and healthy donors. CTCs were visualized and quantified with immunocytochemistry analysis. Data were analyzed using non-parametric statistical tests. RESULTS In our experimental system, miR-19a, miR-22 and miR-127 showed the most promising results, differentiating patients at different time points and from healthy controls, while miR-20a, miR-21 and miR-200b did not show any difference among the different groups. miR-10b and miR-155 were never detectable in our experimental system. With respect to patients' clinical characteristics, we found a significant correlation between miR-200b and lymph node status and between miR-20a and tumor type. Furthermore, miR-127 correlated with the presence of CTCs. Finally, we found a borderline significance between Progression Free Survival and miR-19a levels. CONCLUSIONS This pilot study suggests that profiling whole blood miRNAs could help to better stratify post-operative EBC patients without any sign of metastasis to prevent later relapse or metastatic events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marianna Alunni-Fabbroni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. .,Laboratory for Experimental Radiology, Institute for Clinical Radiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Hospital, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
| | - Leonie Majunke
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Elisabeth K Trapp
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Marie Tzschaschel
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Sven Mahner
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Peter A Fasching
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Erlangen University Hospital, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical Faculty and University Hospital, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thomas Beck
- RoMed Klinikum Rosenheim, Rosenheim, Germany
| | - Ralf Lorenz
- Gemeinschaftspraxis Lorenz / Hecker / Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Thomas W P Friedl
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | - Brigitte Rack
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.,Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ulm University Hospital, Ulm, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Lorenz R. Do we really need a renaissance of pure tissue repair? Invited comment to: Desarda's technique versus Lichtenstein technique for the treatment of primary inguinal hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Emile S, Elfeki H. Hernia 2018; 22:397-398. [PMID: 29392507 DOI: 10.1007/s10029-018-1742-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2017] [Accepted: 01/20/2018] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- R Lorenz
- 3+ Surgeons Herniacenter, Klosterstrasse 34/35, 13581, Berlin, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Dietlein M, Reiners C, Lorenz R. Nuclear medical inpatient treatment in Germany. Nuklearmedizin 2018; 49:49-57. [DOI: 10.3413/nukmed-0296] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2010] [Accepted: 02/19/2010] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
SummaryAll public licensed hospitals of Germany are obligated since 2004 to establish and to publish a structured biennial quality report. The aim of this study was to analyse the quality reports from 2008 of clinics with nuclear-medicine therapy ward and to investigate developments for the inpatient nuclear-medicine therapy by comparing the results with the quality reports of the years 2004 and 2006. Methods: All available structured quality reports of clinics with a nuclear-medicine therapy ward of the years 2004, 2006 and 2008 were evaluated. Results: The total number of inpatient treatment cases in 2008 amounted to 54 190 (2006: 54 884; 2004: 57 366). This corresponds to a decrease of 5.5% in comparison to 2004. The number of the therapy wards decreased at the same time to currently 117 (2006: 120; 2004: 124). Remarkable changes were found in the spectrum of the main diagnosis. Thus, the most frequent diagnosis with the ICD-code E05 (hyperthyroidism) decreased continuously from 37 747 treatments in 2004 and 34 764 in 2006 to 31 756 in the year 2008. In contrast, the ICD-diagnoses for thyroid cancer (C73, Z08) with 14 761 cases in 2008 increased with time (2006: 13 426; 2004: 12 581). Conclusions: In analogy to the observations from Europe after introduction of an iodine prophylaxis the improved iodine supply in Germany has led to a decline of the radioiodine therapy due to hyperthyroidism.
Collapse
|
46
|
Buck A, Reiners C, Lorenz R. Stationäre nuklearmedizinische Therapie 2010 bis 2012 in Deutschland. Nuklearmedizin 2017; 54:61-8. [DOI: 10.3413/nukmed-0725-15-02] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2015] [Accepted: 02/16/2015] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
ZusammenfassungDas Ziel dieser Analyse war es, deutschlandweite Daten über den Status und die Entwicklung der stationären nuklearmedizinischen Therapie zu ermitteln. Als Datenquelle wurden die gesetzlichen Qualitätsberichte der Krankenhäuser verwendet. Methodik: Die vom Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (G-BA) aus den maschinenverwertbaren XML-Daten der Qualitätsberichte erstellten Referenzberichte aller Kliniken Deutschlands mit nuklearmedizinischer Therapiestation wurden für die Jahre 2010 und 2012 analysiert. Für die Beurteilung der längerfristigen Entwicklung dienten Ergebnisse aus eigenen Voruntersuchungen der strukturierten Qualitätsberichte für die Jahre 2004, 2006 und 2008. Zur Ermittlung der deutschlandweiten Häufigkeit von Schilddrüsenoperationen und der Radioiodtherapie wurden öffentliche Datenbanken des Instituts für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus (InEK) für die Jahre 2004 bis 2012 ausgewertet. Ergebnisse: Die Gesamtzahl der stationären nuklearmedizinischen Behandlungsfälle hat von 2010 mit 50 363 Patienten bis 2012 auf 47 314 Patienten gering abgenommen. Im längeren Verlauf von 2004 bis 2012 findet sich ein deutlicher Rückgang der Fälle von 17,5%. Der Rückgang ist vor allem durch eine Abnahme an Erkrankungen mit Hyperthyreose (ICD-Code E05) bedingt. Seit 2009 ist auch die Anzahl der Schilddrüsenoperationen rückläufig. Ein moderater Anstieg der Fallzahlen von 23,7% zeigt sich für die Diagnose Schilddrüsenkarzinom (ICD-Code C73) von 2004 bis 2012. Schlussfolgerungen: Vermutlich führt die verbesserte Iodversorgung in Deutschland zu einem Rückgang an stationären Patienten mit Hyperthyreose in der Nuklearmedizin und in der Folge zu einer Abnahme sowohl der Anzahl an Radioiodtherapien als auch der Schilddrüsenoperationen in der Chirurgie. Im Gegensatz hierzu ist die Anzahl der Patienten mit der Diagnose Schilddrüsenkarzinom auf nuklearmedizinischen Therapiestationen moderat ansteigend, dies korreliert mit der weltweit zu beobachtenden Steigerung der Inzidenz des Schilddrüsenkarzinoms.
Collapse
|
47
|
Ross R, Koyfman S, Houston N, Reddy C, Joshi N, Woody N, Scharpf J, Prendes B, Lamarre E, Lorenz R, Chute D, Geiger J, Burkey B, Adelstein D, Ward M. A Matched Pair Analysis of Patients With HPV-Associated Carcinoma of Unknown Primary With T1-2 HPV-Associated Oropharynx Cancer: Implications for Clinical Trial Design. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.06.573] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
48
|
Dohlen S, Braun C, Brodkorb F, Fischer B, Ilg Y, Kalbfleisch K, Lorenz R, Kreyenschmidt M, Kreyenschmidt J. Effect of different packaging materials containing poly-[2-(tert-butylamino) methylstyrene] on the growth of spoilage and pathogenic bacteria on fresh meat. Int J Food Microbiol 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2017.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
|
49
|
Janni W, Rack B, Häberle L, Friedl TWP, Tesch H, Lorenz R, Jäger B, Fehm T, Müller V, Schneeweiß A, Lichtenegger W, Blohmer J, Beckmann MW, Scholz C, Pantel K, Trapp E, Fasching PA. Abstract P2-05-02: Active surveillance with a combination of tumor marker CA27.29 and detection of circulating tumor cells two year after primary diagnosis strongly predicts subsequent prognosis. Cancer Res 2017. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs16-p2-05-02] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
The prognosis of patients with early breast cancer is commonly estimated by prognostic factors obtained at the time of the initial diagnosis. However, patients and physicians alike are seeking for factors evaluating the prognosis years thereafter during follow-up. The identification of a patient group with an unfavourable prognosis could lead to secondary treatment intervention, potentially improving outcome. Aim of the study was to assess the added prognostic value of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and CA27.29 beyond established predictors.
Materials and Methods
Patients of the phase III SUCCESS-A study were included into this analysis (n=1005). SUCCESS-A is a chemotherapy study for high risk patients with a comprehensive translational research program, which included the determination of CTCs and CA27.29 two years after the initial diagnosis. A Cox regression model with disease-free survival (DFS) as outcome and well-established predictors (age, BMI, pT, pN, histology, grading, ER, PR, Her2neu) was compared with an extended Cox model with the well-established predictors and additionally CTC (>0 versus 0) two years after randomization, and CA27.29 (in U/mL) measured after chemotherapy and again two years after randomization using a likelihood ratio test. In case of significance, the extended model was applied to predict for each patient the risk of disease recurrence within the next 12 months (0 to 100%). Cross-validated AUC, sensitivity and specificity values were determined to assess clinical usefulness of risk prediction.
Results
The markers CA27.29 and CTC were both significantly associated with subsequent prognosis (p < 0.000001). The detection of CTCs increased the risk of subsequent DFS events (HR=2.14, 95%CI: 1.31-3.48), while CA27.29 after two years increased the risk for DFS events with a HR of 1.12 per U/mL increase (95%CI: 1.09-1.15). The combination of the two markers significantly empowered the prognostic relevance, with a HR of 6.64 for patients with CTCs and an elevated CA27.29 by 10 U/mL compared to patients without CTCs and without CA27.29 elevation. The mean risk of disease recurrence in the third year after randomization was 2.38%. Discrimination of patients with and without disease recurrence based on risk prediction from the extended Cox model (AUC: 0.80) was better than discrimination based on the clinical model without the markers CTC and CA27.29 (AUC: 0.64). Sensitivity with regard to decision thresholds 1%, 2%, 3%, and 4% predicted risk was 0.89, 0.77, 0.65, and 0.55, respectively. The corresponding specificity was 0.42, 0.69, 0.81, and 0.88.
Discussion
Both CTCs and CA29.27 values determined 2 years after primary diagnosis are clinically relevant predictors of subsequent prognosis for those patients. This study extends evidence for active surveillance of breast cancer survivors. Identifying a group of women with a high recurrence risk after two years could be the basis for the development of secondary adjuvant treatment.
Citation Format: Janni W, Rack B, Häberle L, Friedl TWP, Tesch H, Lorenz R, Jäger B, Fehm T, Müller V, Schneeweiß A, Lichtenegger W, Blohmer J, Beckmann MW, Scholz C, Pantel K, Trapp E, Fasching PA. Active surveillance with a combination of tumor marker CA27.29 and detection of circulating tumor cells two year after primary diagnosis strongly predicts subsequent prognosis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-05-02.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Janni
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - B Rack
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - L Häberle
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - TWP Friedl
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - H Tesch
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - B Jäger
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - T Fehm
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - V Müller
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - A Schneeweiß
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - W Lichtenegger
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - J Blohmer
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - MW Beckmann
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - C Scholz
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - K Pantel
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - E Trapp
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| | - PA Fasching
- University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University of Munich, Munich, Germany; University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Frankfurt, Germany; Onkologische Praxisklinik, Braunschweig, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University, Duesseldorf, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Charite University Hospital, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Tzschaschel MLJ, Rack B, Andergassen U, Friedl TWP, Schneeweiss A, Mueller V, Tanja F, Pantel K, Gade J, Lorenz R, Rezai M, Tesch H, Soeling U, Polasik A, Alunni-Fabbroni M, Trapp EK, Mahner S, Schindlbeck C, Lichtenegger W, Beckmann MW, Fasching PA, Janni W. Abstract P1-01-03: Dynamics of circulating tumor cells during the course of chemotherapy and prognostic relevance across molecular subtypes in high-risk early breast cancer patients – Results from the adjuvant SUCCESS A trial. Cancer Res 2017. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs16-p1-01-03] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background: The presence of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) before chemotherapy is known to be associated with reduced disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in early breast cancer (EBC). In addition, recent findings suggest that CTCs persisting after adjuvant chemotherapy indicate poor prognosis. In an explorative analysis of the SUCCESS A trial, we evaluated the prognostic relevance of changes in CTC counts during the course of adjuvant chemotherapy across molecular subtypes to assess whether the prognostic role of persisting CTCs varies according to tumor biology.
Methods: The SUCCESS A trial is a phase III study, where patients with high-risk EBC (stage pN1-3 or pT2-4 or grade 3 or age ≤ 35 or hormone-receptor negative) were randomized to adjuvant chemotherapy with 3 cycles of epirubicin-fluorouracil-cyclophosphamide followed by either 3 cycles of docetaxel or 3 cycles of gemcitabine-docetaxel. CTC enumeration was performed before and after chemotherapy using the FDA-approved CellSearch® System (Janssen Diagnostics, LLC), and CTC positivity was defined as ≥ 1 CTC in 23 ml blood. Molecular subtypes were defined as luminal A like (hormone-receptor positive, grading 1 or 2), luminal B like (hormone-receptor positive, grading 3), triple-negative or HER2-positive. Patient outcome in terms of DFS and OS was analyzed using univariate log-rank tests and Cox regression models (median follow-up time 65.2 months).
Results: Data on both molecular subtypes and CTC status before and after chemotherapy were available for 1485 (39.6%) of 3754 patients randomized. This cohort contained 577 (38.9%) luminal A like, 236 (15.9%) luminal B like, 379 (25.5%) HER2-positive and 293 (19.7%) triple negative tumors. Overall, 917 (61.8%) patients were CTC negative before and after chemotherapy (neg/neg), 260 (17.5%) patients had a negative CTC status before and a positive CTC status after chemotherapy (neg/pos), 229 (15.4%) patients converted from positive to negative CTC status (pos/neg), and 79 (5.3%) patients were positive for CTCs at both time points (pos/pos). There were significant differences in DFS and OS among these four groups in patients with luminal A like tumors (log rank test, both p < 0.003) and patients with luminal B like tumors (log rank test, both p < 0.001). In both patients with luminal A like or luminal B like tumors, persistently CTC positive patients had the worst outcome (relative to persistently CTC-negative patients) in terms of DFS and OS. In contrast to luminal-like tumors, no significant differences with regard to DFS or OS were found among the four groups (neg/neg, neg/pos, pos/neg, pos/pos) in patients with HER2-positive or triple-negative tumors (log rank test, all p > 0.13).
Conclusion: The presence of CTCs both before and after adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with poor survival in luminal A like and luminal B like tumors, but not in HER2-positive or triple-negative tumors. Further research is needed to evaluate the effect of chemotherapy on CTC prevalence in different molecular subtypes of EBC.
Citation Format: Tzschaschel MLJ, Rack B, Andergassen U, Friedl TWP, Schneeweiss A, Mueller V, Tanja F, Pantel K, Gade J, Lorenz R, Rezai M, Tesch H, Soeling U, Polasik A, Alunni-Fabbroni M, Trapp EK, Mahner S, Schindlbeck C, Lichtenegger W, Beckmann MW, Fasching PA, Janni W. Dynamics of circulating tumor cells during the course of chemotherapy and prognostic relevance across molecular subtypes in high-risk early breast cancer patients – Results from the adjuvant SUCCESS A trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-01-03.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- MLJ Tzschaschel
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - B Rack
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - U Andergassen
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - TWP Friedl
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - A Schneeweiss
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - V Mueller
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - F Tanja
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - K Pantel
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - J Gade
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - R Lorenz
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - M Rezai
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - H Tesch
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - U Soeling
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - A Polasik
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - M Alunni-Fabbroni
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - EK Trapp
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - S Mahner
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - C Schindlbeck
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - W Lichtenegger
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - MW Beckmann
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - PA Fasching
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| | - W Janni
- Ludwig Maximilians Universitaet Muenchen Klinik und Poliklinik fuer Frauenheilkunde und Gerburtshilfe, Munich, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; Universitaetsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Heinrich-Heine-University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Diakoniekrankenhaus Friederikenstift, Hannover, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Lorenz, Hecker, Wesche, Braunschweig, Germany; Luisenkrankenhaus Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany; Onkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis am Betahnien-Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany; Gemeinschaftspraxis Siehl und Soeling, Cassel, Germany; Clinical Center Traunstein, Traunstein, Germany; Charité University Hospital Campus Virchow, Berlin, Germany; University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|