Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Upcoming SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
Next
Download to read offline and view in fullscreen.

0

Share

Download to read offline

Incorporating data for management of breast cancer

Download to read offline

The guidelines are mostly western and in many scenarios, it is difficult to apply them to Indian population. We need to take in to consideration many factors while applying the data

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to like this

Incorporating data for management of breast cancer

  1. 1. How to effectively incorporate data to diagnose, stage and treat breast cancer Dr Ajeet Kumar Gandhi MD (AIIMS), DNB (Gold Medalist) UICCF (MSKCC,USA) Assistant professor, Radiation oncology Dr RMLIMS, Lucknow
  2. 2.  Discussion thoughts to go on:  Western versus Indian breast cancer patients  Western versus indigenous data  Consensus Indian guideline  Availability of changing data  Use of online tools  Some case discussion Incorporating Data
  3. 3. Indian breast cancer patients versus western population
  4. 4. 5-Year age distribution of breast cancer patients from registry data
  5. 5.  Disease peaks at 40-50 years of age  Higher incidence of triple negative breast cancers  Genomic variations  Advanced stage at presentation: 50% in stage III- IV  Access to screening, diagnostic and treatment facilities Indian versus western patients
  6. 6.  Patient population different  Tolerance to systemic chemotherapy/treatments different  Access to quality healthcare  Management of acute and late complications  Optimization of resources  Cost-effectiveness Western data vs Indian data
  7. 7. Indian guidelines!!
  8. 8.  New Phase III trial demonstrating an improvement of survival with change in practice recommendations presented at a prestigious meeting  Full paper publication  Center: Single vs multi-institutional  Indian patients %  Wait for more data: Trigger line for changing practice  Society recommendations: which one to follow?  ASCO, ESMO, NCCN, NICE, ASTRO etc.  Reading between the lines Application of an emerging data on practice
  9. 9.  Evidence based versus experience-based practice: Self bias  Retrospective evaluation of own practice  Clinical trials at own center  Multi-institutional collaborations  Medico-legal implications  Peer pressure  Administrative issues  Cost and availability Application of an emerging data on practice
  10. 10.  Use in your practice  Change in decisions based on the risk calculators  Which patients and what decisions  Tools available:  Breast cancer risk assessment tools: NCI  PREDICT survival rates after surgery: NHS  Adjuvant Online: Benefits of adjuvant therapy Online tools to facilitate practice
  11. 11. Online tools to facilitate practice
  12. 12. Online tools to facilitate practice
  13. 13. Slide 1
  14. 14. Slide 2
  15. 15. Conflicting results with adjuvant capecitabine GEICAM: However, a prespecified subgroup analysis showed a significant survival benefit with capecitabine among patients with non–basal-like triple- negative breast cancer (ie, IHC-negative for EGFR and CK5/6). Among this subgroup, 5-year disease-free survival was 82.6% with capecitabine vs 72.9% with observation—a significant 47% improvement (P = .02).
  16. 16. Slide 5
  17. 17. Slide 18
  18. 18. Slide 19
  19. 19. The SOFT trial
  20. 20. Summary – SOFT Trial SOFT Tamoxifen- OFS Tamoxifen P value 5-yr DFS 86.6% 84.7% 0.10 5-yr OS 96.7% 95.1% 0.13 5-yr BC freedom rate 88.4% 86.4% 0.09 949 premenopausal women (>40 years of age, small, node-negative tumors, low to intermediate Grade) Freedom from recurrence > 95% at 5 years with TAM alone
  21. 21.  Most recurrences of breast cancer were in patients who remained premenopausal after receiving chemo.
  22. 22. TEXT-SOFT combined analysis Tamoxifen- OFS Exemestane- OFS P-value 5-yr DFS 87.3% 91.1% P<0.001 5-yr BC free interval 88.8% 92.8% P<0.001 Freedom from recurrence of breast cancer at a distant site 92% 93.8% P=0.02 5-yr OS 95.9% 96.9% p=0.37 • Median follow-up : 68 months Among patients who received chemotherapy, the absolute improvement in the 5- year BC-free rate with Exemestane-OFS as compared with tamoxifen- OFS was 5.5% in TEXT and 3.9% in SOFT.
  23. 23.  Short follow up: 5 years in 15 years disease  Endpoints: DFS vs. OS  Late switch to AI after 5 years of TAM vs. OFS+AI [Improved DFS in MA.17]  Therapy after 5 years of OFS+AI unknown
  24. 24. Questions unanswered??  Role of OFS in patients receiving 10 years of TAM or TAM+AIs  Role of OFS versus Chemotherapy  Should all patients who remain premenopausal after adjuvant chemotherapy receive OFS? Adjuvant Ovarian Suppression plus AI or Tamoxifen (ASPAIT) Sun yat sen University (Recruiting) Neoadjuvant Aromatase Inhibitor(AI) With Ovarian Suppression Versus Chemotherapy in Premenopausal Breast Cancer Patients (COMPETE) Li Zhu, Rujin Hospital (China) Evaluating the Role of the Addition of Ovarian Function Suppression (OFS) to Tamoxifen in Young Women (ASTRRA) Korean breast cancer study group
  25. 25. Age <35 years Those who remained premenopausal after chemotherapy Large/ node-positive tumors, higher-grade tumour features.
  26. 26. Slide 23
  27. 27. The Biology Of The Patient Integrating / Presenting Information Decision The Biology Of The Tumor Treatment Efficacy / Toxicity Doctor’s Opinions Patient’s Opinions

The guidelines are mostly western and in many scenarios, it is difficult to apply them to Indian population. We need to take in to consideration many factors while applying the data

Views

Total views

58

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

1

Actions

Downloads

0

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

0

×