<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org">
<title>Journal of Clinical Oncology Current Issue</title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org</link>
<description>Journal of Clinical Oncology RSS feed -- current issue</description>
<prism:eIssn>1527-7755</prism:eIssn>
<prism:coverDisplayDate>Nov 10 2009 12:00:00:000AM</prism:coverDisplayDate>
<prism:publicationName>Journal of Clinical Oncology</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0732-183X</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e181?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e184?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e186?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e188?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e189?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e191?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e192?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5301?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5303?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5305?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5308?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5312?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5319?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5325?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5331?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5337?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5343?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5350?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5356?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5363?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5370?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5376?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5383?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5390?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5397?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5404?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5410?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5418?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5425?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5431?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5439?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5445?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5452?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5459?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5469?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5476?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://jco.ascopubs.org/icons/banner/logo.jpg" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/icons/banner/logo.jpg">
<title>Journal of Clinical Oncology</title>
<url>http://jco.ascopubs.org/icons/banner/logo.jpg</url>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e181?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Synchronous Advanced Pure Seminoma and Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Case of Multiple Oncologic Dilemmas [DIAGNOSIS IN ONCOLOGY]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e181?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[White, DeHaan, Wilson, Zakem, Maatman]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Therapy, Chemotherapy, Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.8551</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Synchronous Advanced Pure Seminoma and Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Case of Multiple Oncologic Dilemmas [DIAGNOSIS IN ONCOLOGY]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e183</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e181</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>DIAGNOSIS IN ONCOLOGY</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e184?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Coexistence of Leishmaniasis and Hodgkin's Lymphoma in a Lymph Node [DIAGNOSIS IN ONCOLOGY]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e184?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Domingues, Menezes, Ostronoff, Calixto, Florencio, Sucupira, Souto-Maior, Ostronoff]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Lymphoma]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.7835</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Coexistence of Leishmaniasis and Hodgkin's Lymphoma in a Lymph Node [DIAGNOSIS IN ONCOLOGY]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e185</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e184</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>DIAGNOSIS IN ONCOLOGY</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e186?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Thalidomide Maintenance in Multiple Myeloma: Certainties and Controversies [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e186?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cavo, Pantani, Tacchetti, Pallotti, Brioli, Petrucci, Zamagni, Tosi]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.0150</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Thalidomide Maintenance in Multiple Myeloma: Certainties and Controversies [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e187</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e186</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e188?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Reply to M. Cavo [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e188?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Spencer, Prince, Roberts]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.0853</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Reply to M. Cavo [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e188</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e188</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e189?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Time to Treatment Does Not Influence Overall Survival in Newly Diagnosed Mantle-Cell Lymphoma [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e189?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eve, Furtado, Hamon, Rule]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.9731</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Time to Treatment Does Not Influence Overall Survival in Newly Diagnosed Mantle-Cell Lymphoma [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e190</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e189</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e191?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Reply to H.E. Eve et al [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e191?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Martin, Leonard]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.0176</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Reply to H.E. Eve et al [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e191</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e191</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e192?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[What Does the Medical Profession Mean By "Standard of Care?" [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/e192?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Strauss, Thomas]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.6678</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[What Does the Medical Profession Mean By "Standard of Care?" [CORRESPONDENCE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e193</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e192</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5301?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Could Modification of Lifestyle Factors Prevent Second Primary Breast Cancers? [EDITORIALS]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5301?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ligibel]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:18 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.4517</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Could Modification of Lifestyle Factors Prevent Second Primary Breast Cancers? [EDITORIALS]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5302</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5301</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>EDITORIALS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5303?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Clinical Dilemma of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ [EDITORIALS]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5303?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harris, Morrow]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:18 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.24.1489</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Clinical Dilemma of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ [EDITORIALS]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5305</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5303</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>EDITORIALS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5305?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Is It Safe to Treat Endometrial Carcinoma Endoscopically? [EDITORIALS]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5305?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vergote, Amant, Neven]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:18 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.9822</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Is It Safe to Treat Endometrial Carcinoma Endoscopically? [EDITORIALS]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5307</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5305</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>EDITORIALS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5308?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Qualitative Age Interactions in Breast Cancer Studies: Mind the Gap [COMMENTS AND CONTROVERSIES]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5308?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anderson, Jatoi, Sherman]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:18 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Epidemiology, Translational Oncology, Clinical Trials, Risk factors, Cancer Etiology, Breast Cancer]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.9450</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Qualitative Age Interactions in Breast Cancer Studies: Mind the Gap [COMMENTS AND CONTROVERSIES]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5311</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5308</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>COMMENTS AND CONTROVERSIES</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5312?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Relationship Between Potentially Modifiable Lifestyle Factors and Risk of Second Primary Contralateral Breast Cancer Among Women Diagnosed With Estrogen Receptor-Positive Invasive Breast Cancer [Breast Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5312?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>An outcome of considerable concern among breast cancer survivors is the development of second primary breast cancer. However, evidence regarding how potentially modifiable lifestyle factors modulate second breast cancer risk is limited. We evaluated the relationships between obesity, alcohol consumption, and smoking on risk of second primary invasive contralateral breast cancer among breast cancer survivors.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Utilizing a population-based nested case-control study design, we enrolled 365 patients diagnosed with an estrogen receptor&ndash;positive (ER+) first primary invasive breast cancer and a second primary contralateral invasive breast cancer, and 726 matched controls diagnosed with only an ER+ first primary invasive breast cancer. Obesity, alcohol use, and smoking data were ascertained from medical record reviews and participant interviews. Using conditional logistic regression we evaluated associations between these three exposures and second primary contralateral breast cancer risk.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Obesity, consumption of &ge; 7 alcoholic beverages per week, and current smoking were all positively related to risk of contralateral breast cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.1; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.2; and OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2 to 4.0, respectively). Compared with women who consumed fewer than seven alcoholic beverages per week and were never or former smokers, women who consumed &ge; 7 drinks per week and were current smokers had a 7.2-fold (95% CI, 1.9 to 26.5) elevated risk of contralateral breast cancer.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Our population-based study adds to the limited available literature and suggests that obesity, smoking, and alcohol consumption influence contralateral breast cancer risk, affording breast cancer survivors three means of potentially reducing this risk.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Li, Daling, Porter, Tang, Malone]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:18 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Epidemiology, Behavioral and Lifestyle Risk Factors]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.1597</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Relationship Between Potentially Modifiable Lifestyle Factors and Risk of Second Primary Contralateral Breast Cancer Among Women Diagnosed With Estrogen Receptor-Positive Invasive Breast Cancer [Breast Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5318</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5312</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5319?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Local Excision Alone Without Irradiation for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [Breast Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5319?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>To determine the risk of ipsilateral breast events in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with local excision without irradiation.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Patients with either low- or intermediate-grade DCIS measuring 2.5 cm or smaller, or high-grade DCIS measuring 1 cm or smaller who had microscopic margin widths of 3 mm or wider and no residual calcifications on postoperative mammograms were eligible for a prospective trial conducted from 1997 to 2002 by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and North Central Cancer Treatment Group. Patients entered in 2000 and later could take tamoxifen if they wished. Median age at last surgery for the entire population was 60 years (range, 28 to 88 years), and median tumor sizes in the two strata were 6 mm and 5 mm, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>With a median follow-up of 6.2 years, the 5-year rate of ipsilateral breast events in the 565 eligible patients in the low/intermediate grade stratum was 6.1% (95% CI, 4.1% to 8.2%). With a median follow-up of 6.7 years, this incidence for the 105 eligible patients in the high-grade stratum was 15.3% (95% CI, 8.2% to 22.5%).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Rigorously evaluated and selected patients with low- to intermediate-grade DCIS with margins 3 mm or wider had an acceptably low rate of ipsilateral breast events at 5 years after excision without irradiation. Patients with high-grade lesions had a much higher rate, suggesting that excision alone is inadequate treatment. Further follow-up is necessary to document long-term results.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hughes, Wang, Page, Gray, Solin, Davidson, Lowen, Ingle, Recht, Wood]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:18 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.21.8560</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Local Excision Alone Without Irradiation for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [Breast Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5324</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5319</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5325?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Use of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Results From a Population- Based Study [Breast Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5325?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>There is concern that minority women have limited access to breast reconstruction. We described patterns of use, experiences with clinicians, and patients' satisfaction with treatment decisions for women of different race/ethnicities.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>A total of 3,252 patients with breast cancer from Los Angeles and Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were surveyed near the time of diagnosis (n = 2,260, response rate 72.2%). The primary outcomes were receipt of reconstruction, access to information about reconstruction, and decisional satisfaction. The primary independent variable was race/ethnicity (white, African American [AA], highly acculturated Latina [Latina-high], and less acculturated Latina [Latina-low]). Control variables included other sociodemographic and clinical factors. <sup>2</sup> and multivariate logistic regression were used for the analyses.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Receipt of reconstruction varied significantly by patient race/ethnicity&mdash;40.9% of whites, 33.5% of AAs, 41.2% of Latina-high, and only 13.5% of Latina-low (<I>P</I> &lt; .001)&mdash;and persisted when we controlled for demographic and clinical factors. Minority women were significantly less likely than whites to see a plastic surgeon before initial surgery and were more likely to desire more information about reconstruction (17.0% of whites <I>v</I> 27.0% of AAs, 30.0% of Latina-high, and 55.9% of Latina-low; <I>P</I> &lt; .001). Decisional satisfaction was lowest among minority women without reconstruction (<I>P</I> &lt; .001).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Minority women, particularly less acculturated Latinas, had low receipt of breast reconstruction, which may be related to limited information about the procedure and less access to plastic surgeons. Greater desire for information and lower satisfaction with surgical decisions among these patients motivate greater attention to treatment support for these patients.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alderman, Hawley, Janz, Mujahid, Morrow, Hamilton, Graff, Katz]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Epidemiology, Surgery]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.2455</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Use of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Results From a Population- Based Study [Breast Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5330</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5325</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Breast Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5331?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Laparoscopy Compared With Laparotomy for Comprehensive Surgical Staging of Uterine Cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2 [Gynecologic Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5331?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>The objective was to compare laparoscopy versus laparotomy for comprehensive surgical staging of uterine cancer.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Patients with clinical stage I to IIA uterine cancer were randomly assigned to laparoscopy (n = 1,696) or open laparotomy (n = 920), including hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, pelvic cytology, and pelvic and para-aortic lymphadenectomy. The main study end points were 6-week morbidity and mortality, hospital length of stay, conversion from laparoscopy to laparotomy, recurrence-free survival, site of recurrence, and patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Laparoscopy was initiated in 1,682 patients and completed without conversion in 1,248 patients (74.2%). Conversion from laparoscopy to laparotomy was secondary to poor visibility in 246 patients (14.6%), metastatic cancer in 69 patients (4.1%), bleeding in 49 patients (2.9%), and other cause in 70 patients (4.2%). Laparoscopy had fewer moderate to severe postoperative adverse events than laparotomy (14% <I>v</I> 21%, respectively; <I>P</I> &lt; .0001) but similar rates of intraoperative complications, despite having a significantly longer operative time (median, 204 <I>v</I> 130 minutes, respectively; <I>P</I> &lt; .001). Hospitalization of more than 2 days was significantly lower in laparoscopy versus laparotomy patients (52% <I>v</I> 94%, respectively; <I>P</I> &lt; .0001). Pelvic and para-aortic nodes were not removed in 8% of laparoscopy patients and 4% of laparotomy patients (<I>P</I> &lt; .0001). No difference in overall detection of advanced stage (stage IIIA, IIIC, or IVB) was seen (17% of laparoscopy patients <I>v</I> 17% of laparotomy patients; <I>P</I> = .841).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Laparoscopic surgical staging for uterine cancer is feasible and safe in terms of short-term outcomes and results in fewer complications and shorter hospital stay. Follow-up of these patients will determine whether surgical technique impacts pattern of recurrence or disease-free survival.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walker, Piedmonte, Spirtos, Eisenkop, Schlaerth, Mannel, Spiegel, Barakat, Pearl, Sharma]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Diagnosis & Staging]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.3248</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Laparoscopy Compared With Laparotomy for Comprehensive Surgical Staging of Uterine Cancer: Gynecologic Oncology Group Study LAP2 [Gynecologic Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5336</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5331</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Gynecologic Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5337?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Quality of Life of Patients With Endometrial Cancer Undergoing Laparoscopic International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Staging Compared With Laparotomy: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study [Gynecologic Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5337?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>The study's objective was to compare the quality of life (QoL) of patients with endometrial cancer undergoing surgical staging via laparoscopy versus laparotomy.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>The first 802 eligible patients (laparoscopy, n = 535; laparotomy, n = 267) participated in the QoL study in a Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) randomized trial of laparoscopy versus laparotomy (GOG 2222). Patients completed QoL assessments at baseline; at 1, 3, and 6 weeks; and at 6 months postsurgery.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>In an intent-to-treat analysis, laparoscopy patients reported significantly higher Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy&ndash;General (FACT-G) scores (<I>P</I> = .001), better physical functioning (<I>P</I> = .006), better body image (BI; <I>P</I> &lt; .001), less pain (<I>P</I> &lt; .001) and its interference with QoL (<I>P</I> &lt; .001), and an earlier resumption of normal activities (<I>P</I> = .003) and return to work (<I>P</I> = .04) over the 6-week postsurgery period, as compared with laparotomy patients. However, the differences in BI and return to work between groups were modest, and the adjusted FACT-G scores did not meet the minimally important difference (MID) between the two surgical arms over 6 weeks. By 6 months, except for better BI in laparoscopy patients (<I>P</I> &lt; .001), the difference in QoL between the two surgical techniques was not statistically significant.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Although the FACT-G did not show a MID between the two surgical groups, and only modest differences in return to work and BI were found between the two groups, statistically significantly better QoL across many parameters in the laparoscopy arm at 6 weeks provides modest support for the QoL advantage of using laparoscopy to stage patients with early endometrial cancer.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kornblith, Huang, Walker, Spirtos, Rotmensch, Cella]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Surgery]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.3529</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Quality of Life of Patients With Endometrial Cancer Undergoing Laparoscopic International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Staging Compared With Laparotomy: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study [Gynecologic Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5342</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5337</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Gynecologic Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5343?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Comparison of Iodine-123 Metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) Scan and [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography to Evaluate Response After Iodine-131 MIBG Therapy for Relapsed Neuroblastoma [Pediatric Oncology]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5343?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Children with relapsed neuroblastoma have poor survival. It is crucial to have a reliable method for evaluating functional response to new therapies. In this study, we compared two functional imaging modalities for neuroblastoma: metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scan for uptake by the norepinephrine transporter and [<sup>18</sup>F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) uptake for glucose metabolic activity.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Patients enrolled onto a phase I study of sequential infusion of iodine-131 (<sup>131</sup>I) MIBG (NANT-2000-01) were eligible for inclusion if they had concomitant FDG-PET and MIBG scans. <sup>131</sup>I-MIBG therapy was administered on days 0 and 14. For each patient, we compared all lesions identified on concomitant FDG-PET and MIBG scans and gave scans a semiquantitative score.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The overall concordance of positive lesions on concomitant MIBG and FDG-PET scans was 39.6% when examining the 139 unique anatomic lesions. MIBG imaging was significantly more sensitive than FDG-PET overall and for the detection of bone lesions (<I>P</I> &lt; .001). There was a trend for increased sensitivity of FDG-PET for detection of soft tissue lesions. Both modalities showed similar improvement in number of lesions identified from day 0 to day 56 scan and in semiquantitative scores that correlated with overall response. FDG-PET scans became completely negative more often than MIBG scans after treatment.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>MIBG scan is significantly more sensitive for individual lesion detection in relapsed neuroblastoma than FDG-PET, though FDG-PET can sometimes play a complementary role, particularly in soft tissue lesions. Complete response by FDG-PET metabolic evaluation did not always correlate with complete response by MIBG uptake.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taggart, Han, Quach, Groshen, Ye, Villablanca, Jackson, Mari Aparici, Carlson, Maris, Hawkins, Matthay]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Neuroblastoma]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.5732</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Comparison of Iodine-123 Metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) Scan and [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography to Evaluate Response After Iodine-131 MIBG Therapy for Relapsed Neuroblastoma [Pediatric Oncology]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5349</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5343</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Pediatric Oncology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5350?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Long-Term Evaluation of Ifosfamide-Related Nephrotoxicity in Children [Pediatric Oncology]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5350?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Ifosfamide is widely used in pediatric oncology but its nephrotoxicity may become a significant issue in survivors. This study is aimed at evaluating the incidence of late renal toxicity of ifosfamide and its risk factors.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Of the 183 patients prospectively investigated for renal function, 77 treated for rhabdomyosarcoma, 39 for other soft tissue sarcoma, 39 for Ewing's sarcoma, and 28 for osteosarcoma were investigated at least 5 years after treatment. No patients had received cisplatin and/or carboplatin. Glomerular and tubular functions were graded according to the Skinner system.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The median dose of ifosfamide was 54 g/m<sup>2</sup> (range, 18 to 117 g/m<sup>2</sup>). After a median follow-up of 10 years, 89.5% of patients had normal tubular function, and 78.5% had normal glomerular function rate (GFR). Serum bicarbonate and calcium were normal in all patients. Hypomagnesemia was observed in 1.2% and hypophosphatemia in 1%. The tubular threshold for phosphate was reduced in 24% of the patients (grade 1 in 15%, grade 2 in 8%, and grade 3 in 0.5%). Glycosuria was detected in 37% of the patients but was more than 0.5 g/24 hours in only 5%. Proteinuria was observed in 12%. Ifosfamide dose and interval from therapy to investigations were predictors of tubulopathy in univariate and multivariate analysis. In a multivariate analysis, an older age at diagnosis and the length of interval since treatment had independent impacts on the risk of abnormal GFR.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Renal toxicity is moderate with a moderate dose of ifosfamide. However, since it can be permanent and can get worse with time, repeated long-term evaluations are important, and this risk should be balanced against efficacy.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Oberlin, Fawaz, Rey, Niaudet, Ridola, Orbach, Bergeron, Defachelles, Gentet, Schmitt, Rubie, Munzer, Plantaz, Deville, Minard, Corradini, Leverger, de Vathaire]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Long Term Survival & Late Effects, Osteosarcoma & Ewing Sarcomas:, Chemotherapy, Rhabdo & Other Soft Tissue Sarcomas:, Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.5257</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Long-Term Evaluation of Ifosfamide-Related Nephrotoxicity in Children [Pediatric Oncology]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5355</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5350</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Pediatric Oncology</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5356?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Longitudinal Cohort Study of Risk Factors in Cancer Patients of Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw [Treatment-Related Complications]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5356?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>The reported incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) ranges from 0.94% to 18.6%. This cohort study aimed to calculate the incidence of and identify the risk factors for ONJ in patients with cancer treated with intravenous zoledronate, ibandronate, and pamidronate.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Data analyzed included age, sex, smoking status, underlying disease, medical and dental history, bisphosphonates (BP) type, and doses administered. Relative risks, crude and adjusted odds ratios (aORs), and cumulative hazard ratios for ONJ development were calculated.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>We included 1,621 patients who received 29,006 intravenous doses of BP, given monthly. Crude ONJ incidence was 8.5%, 3.1%, and 4.9% in patients with multiple myeloma, breast cancer, and prostate cancer, respectively. Patients with breast cancer demonstrated a reduced risk for ONJ development, which turned out to be nonsignificant after adjustment for other variables. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that use of dentures (aOR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.03 to 3.96), history of dental extraction (aOR = 32.97; 95% CI, 18.02 to 60.31), having ever received zoledronate (aOR = 28.09; 95% CI, 5.74 to 137.43), and each zoledronate dose (aOR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.15 to 3.56) were associated with increased risk for ONJ development. Smoking, periodontitis, and root canal treatment did not increase risk for ONJ in patients receiving BP.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The conclusions of this study validated dental extractions and use of dentures as risk factors for ONJ development. Ibandronate and pamidronate at the dosages and frequency used in this study seem to exhibit a safer drug profile concerning ONJ complication; however, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these results. Before initiation of a bisphosphonate, patients should have a comprehensive dental examination. Patients with a challenging dental situation should have dental care attended to before initiation of these drugs.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vahtsevanos, Kyrgidis, Verrou, Katodritou, Triaridis, Andreadis, Boukovinas, Koloutsos, Teleioudis, Kitikidou, Paraskevopoulos, Zervas, Antoniades]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Paraneoplastic Syndrome: Diagnosis & Staging, Incidence trends, Causality, Risk factors, Combined Modality, Combined Modality, Quality of Care, Cost of Cancer Care, Pain Control, Supportive Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.21.9584</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Longitudinal Cohort Study of Risk Factors in Cancer Patients of Bisphosphonate-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw [Treatment-Related Complications]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5362</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5356</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Treatment-Related Complications</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5363?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Phase III Trial of Casopitant, a Novel Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonist, for the Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy [Supportive Care]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5363?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>The purpose of this phase III trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regimens containing casopitant, a novel neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during the first cycle in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Predominantly female patients (98%) diagnosed with breast cancer (96%) who were chemotherapy-na&iuml;ve and scheduled to receive an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC) &ndash;based regimen were enrolled onto this multinational, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled clinical trial. All patients received dexamethasone 8 mg intravenously (IV) on day 1 and oral ondansetron 8 mg twice daily on days 1 to 3. Patients were randomly assigned to a control arm (placebo), a single oral dose casopitant arm (150 mg orally [PO] on day 1), a 3-day oral casopitant arm (150 mg PO on day 1 plus 50 mg PO on days 2 to 3), or a 3-day IV/oral casopitant arm (90 mg IV on day 1 plus 50 mg PO on days 2 to 3). The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving complete response (no vomiting/retching or rescue medications) in the first 120 hours after the initiation of MEC.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>A significantly greater proportion of patients in the single-dose oral casopitant arm, 3-day oral casopitant arm, and 3-day IV/oral casopitant arm achieved complete response (73%, 73%, and 74%, respectively) versus control (59%; <I>P</I> &lt; .0001). The study did not demonstrate a reduced proportion of patients with nausea or significant nausea in those receiving casopitant. Adverse events were balanced among study arms.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>All casopitant regimens studied were more effective than the control regimen. Casopitant was generally well tolerated.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Herrstedt, Apornwirat, Shaharyar, Aziz, Roila, Van Belle, Russo, Levin, Ranganathan, Guckert, Grunberg]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Emesis, Supportive Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.21.8511</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Phase III Trial of Casopitant, a Novel Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonist, for the Prevention of Nausea and Vomiting in Patients Receiving Moderately Emetogenic Chemotherapy [Supportive Care]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5369</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5363</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Supportive Care</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5370?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Costs and Cost Effectiveness of a Health Care Provider-Directed Intervention to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening [Gastrointestinal Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5370?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains underutilized in the United States. Prior studies reporting the cost effectiveness of randomized interventions to improve CRC screening have not been replicated in the setting of small physician practices. We recently conducted a randomized trial evaluating an academic detailing intervention in 264 small practices in geographically diverse New York City communities. The objective of this secondary analysis is to assess the cost effectiveness of this intervention.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>A total of 264 physician offices were randomly assigned to usual care or to a series of visits from trained physician educators. CRC screening rates were measured at baseline and 12 months. The intervention costs were measured and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was derived. Sensitivity analyses were based on varying cost and effectiveness estimates.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Academic detailing was associated with a 7% increase in CRC screening with colonoscopy. The total intervention cost was $147,865, and the ICER was $21,124 per percentage point increase in CRC screening rate. Sensitivity analyses that varied the costs of the intervention and the average medical practice size were associated with ICERs ranging from $13,631 to $36,109 per percentage point increase in CRC screening rates.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>A comprehensive, multicomponent academic detailing intervention conducted in small practices in metropolitan New York was clinically effective in improving CRC screening rates, but was not cost effective.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Shankaran, Luu, Nonzee, Richey, McKoy, Graff Zivin, Ashford, Lantigua, Frucht, Scoppettone, Bennett, Sheinfeld Gorin]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Diagnosis & Staging, Cost Effectiveness, Cost of Cancer Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.6458</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Costs and Cost Effectiveness of a Health Care Provider-Directed Intervention to Promote Colorectal Cancer Screening [Gastrointestinal Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5375</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5370</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Gastrointestinal Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5376?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Survival Disparities in Patients With Lymphoma According to Place of Residence and Treatment Provider: A Population-Based Study [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5376?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Health disparities exist according to an individual's place of residence. We evaluated the association between primary area of residence (urban <I>v</I> rural) according to treatment provider (university based <I>v</I> community based) and overall survival in patients with lymphoma and determined whether there are patient groups that could benefit from better coordination of care.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Population-based, retrospective cohort study of 2,330 patients with centrally confirmed lymphoma from Nebraska and surrounding states and treated by university-based or community-based oncologists from 1982 to 2006.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Among urban residents, 321 (14%) were treated by university-based providers (UUB) and 816 (35%) were treated by community-based providers (UCB). Among rural residents, 332 (14%) were treated by university-based providers (RUB), and 861 (37%) were treated by community-based providers (RCB). The relative risk (RR) of death among UUB, UCB, and RUB were not statistically different. However, RCB had a higher risk of death (RR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.65; <I>P</I> = .01; and RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.49; <I>P</I> = .01) when compared with UUB and RUB, respectively. This association was true in both low- and intermediate-risk patients. Among high-risk patients, UCB, RUB, and RCB were all at higher risk of death when compared with UUB.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Survival outcomes of patients with lymphoma may be associated with place of residence and treatment provider. High-risk patients from rural areas may benefit from better coordination of care.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Loberiza, Cannon, Weisenburger, Vose, Moehr, Bast, Bierman, Bociek, Armitage]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Epidemiology, Quality of Care]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.0038</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Survival Disparities in Patients With Lymphoma According to Place of Residence and Treatment Provider: A Population-Based Study [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5382</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5376</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5383?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Cost Effectiveness and Screening Interval of Lipid Screening in Hodgkin's Lymphoma Survivors [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5383?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Survivors of Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) who received mediastinal irradiation have an increased risk of coronary heart disease. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of lipid screening in survivors of HL and compared different screening intervals.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We developed a decision-analytic model to evaluate lipid screening in a hypothetical cohort of 30-year-old survivors of HL who survived 5 years after mediastinal irradiation. We compared the following strategies: no screening, and screening at 1-, 3-, 5-, or 7-year intervals. Screen-positive patients were treated with statins. Markov models were used to calculate life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and lifetime costs. Baseline probabilities, transition probabilities, and utilities were derived from published studies and US population data. Costs were estimated from Medicare fee schedules and the medical literature. Sensitivity analyses were performed.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved, lipid screening at every interval was cost effective relative to a strategy of no screening. When comparing screening intervals, a 3-year interval was cost effective relative to a 5-year interval, but annual screening, relative to screening every 3 years, had an ICER of more than $100,000/QALY saved. Factors with the most influence on the results included risk of cardiac events/death after HL, efficacy of statins in reducing cardiac events/death, and costs of statins.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Lipid screening in survivors of HL, with statin therapy for screen-positive patients, improves survival and is cost effective. A screening interval of 3 years seems reasonable in the long-term follow-up of survivors of HL.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chen, Punglia, Kuntz, Mauch, Ng]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Radiation, Cost Effectiveness, Outcomes Research]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.8460</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Cost Effectiveness and Screening Interval of Lipid Screening in Hodgkin's Lymphoma Survivors [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5389</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5383</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5390?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Randomized Comparison of the Stanford V Regimen and ABVD in the Treatment of Advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Lymphoma Group Study ISRCTN 64141244 [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5390?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>This multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy and toxicity of two chemotherapy regimens in advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL): the weekly alternating Stanford V and the standard, twice-weekly regimen of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Patients had stage IIB, III, or IV disease or had stages I to IIA disease with bulky disease or other adverse features. Radiotherapy was administered in both arms to sites of previous bulk (&gt; 5 cm) and to splenic deposits, although this was omitted in the latter part of the trial for patients achieving complete remission (CR) in the ABVD arm. A total of 520 patients were randomly assigned and were assessed for the primary outcome measure of progression-free survival (PFS). Five hundred patients received protocol treatment, and radiotherapy was administered to 73% in the Stanford V arm and to 53% in the ABVD arm.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The overall response rates after completion of all treatment were 91% for Stanford V and 92% for ABVD. During a median follow-up of 4.3 years, there was no evidence of a difference in projected 5-year PFS and overall survival (OS) rates (76% and 90%, respectively, for ABVD; 74% and 92%, respectively, for Stanford V). More pulmonary toxicity was reported for ABVD, whereas other toxicities were more frequent with Stanford V.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>In a large, randomized trial, the efficacies of Stanford V and ABVD were comparable when given in combination with appropriate radiotherapy.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hoskin, Lowry, Horwich, Jack, Mead, Hancock, Smith, Qian, Patrick, Popova, Pettitt, Cunningham, Pettengell, Sweetenham, Linch, Johnson]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy, Combined Modality]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.3239</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Randomized Comparison of the Stanford V Regimen and ABVD in the Treatment of Advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Lymphoma Group Study ISRCTN 64141244 [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5396</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5390</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5397?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Daunorubicin Versus Mitoxantrone Versus Idarubicin As Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy for Adults With Acute Myeloid Leukemia: The EORTC and GIMEMA Groups Study AML-10 [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5397?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>To compare the antitumor efficacy of three different anthracyclines in combination with cytarabine and etoposide in adult patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>We randomly assigned 2,157 patients (age range, 15 to 60 years) to receive intensive induction-consolidation chemotherapy containing either daunorubicin, idarubicin, or mitoxantrone. After achieving complete remission (CR), patients were assigned to undergo either allogeneic or autologous stem-cell transplantation (SCT), depending on the availability of a sibling donor.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The overall CR rate (69%) was similar in the three groups. Autologous SCT was performed in 37% of cases in the daunorubicin arm versus only 29% and 31% in mitoxantrone and idarubicin, respectively (<I>P</I> &lt; .001). However, the disease-free survival (DFS) and survival from CR were significantly shorter in the daunorubicin arm: the 5-year DFS was 29% versus 37% and 37% in mitoxantrone and idarubicin, respectively. The proportion of patients who underwent allogeneic SCT (22%) was equivalent in the three treatment groups, and the outcome was similar as well: the 5-year overall survival rates were 34%, 34%, and 31%, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>In adult patients with AML who do not receive an allogeneic SCT, the use of mitoxantrone or idarubicin instead of daunorubicin enhances the long-term efficacy of chemotherapy.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mandelli, Vignetti, Suciu, Stasi, Petti, Meloni, Muus, Marmont, Marie, Labar, Thomas, Di Raimondo, Willemze, Liso, Ferrara, Baila, Fazi, Zittoun, Amadori, de Witte]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Clinical Trials, Leukemia, Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.6490</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Daunorubicin Versus Mitoxantrone Versus Idarubicin As Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy for Adults With Acute Myeloid Leukemia: The EORTC and GIMEMA Groups Study AML-10 [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5403</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5397</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5404?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Lenalidomide Oral Monotherapy Produces Durable Responses in Relapsed or Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5404?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Lenalidomide is a novel immunomodulatory agent with antiproliferative activities. Given its efficacy in a wide range of hematologic malignancies, we conducted a phase II trial (NHL-001) of single-agent lenalidomide in indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Patients with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL were eligible, with no limit on the number of previous therapies. Oral lenalidomide 25 mg was self-administered once daily on days 1 to 21 of every 28-day cycle for up to 52 weeks as tolerated, or until disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR), with secondary end points of duration of response (DR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Forty-three enrolled patients were assessable for response and safety. Patients received a median of three prior systemic therapies (range, 1 to 17) and half were refractory to last therapy. ORR was 23% (10 of 43), including a 7% complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR rate. Twenty-seven percent (six of 22) of patients with follicular lymphoma grade 1 or 2, and 22% (four of 18) with small lymphocytic lymphoma responded to therapy. Median DR was not reached, but was longer than 16.5 months with seven of 10 responses ongoing at 15 to 28 months. Median PFS for the whole group was 4.4 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10.4 months). Adverse events were predictable and manageable; the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (30% and 16%, respectively) and thrombocytopenia (14% and 5%, respectively).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Oral lenalidomide monotherapy produces durable responses with manageable adverse events in patients with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL, warranting further investigation of treatment for indolent NHL.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Witzig, Wiernik, Moore, Reeder, Cole, Justice, Kaplan, Voralia, Pietronigro, Takeshita, Ervin-Haynes, Zeldis, Vose]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Clinical Trials, Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.21.1169</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Lenalidomide Oral Monotherapy Produces Durable Responses in Relapsed or Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5409</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5404</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5410?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Phase II Multi-Institutional Trial of the Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor Romidepsin As Monotherapy for Patients With Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5410?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Romidepsin (depsipeptide or FK228) is a member of a new class of antineoplastic agents active in T-cell lymphoma, the histone deacetylase inhibitors. On the basis of observed responses in a phase I trial, a phase II trial of romidepsin in patients with T-cell lymphoma was initiated.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>The initial cohort was limited to patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL), or subtypes mycosis fungoides or S&eacute;zary syndrome, who had received no more than two prior cytotoxic regimens. There were no limits on other types of therapy. Subsequently, the protocol was expanded to enroll patients who had received more than two prior cytotoxic regimens.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Twenty-seven patients were enrolled onto the first cohort, and a total of 71 patients are included in this analysis. These patients had undergone a median of four prior treatments, and 62 patients (87%) had advanced-stage disease (stage IIB, n = 15; stage III, n= 6; or stage IV, n = 41). Toxicities included nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and transient thrombocytopenia and granulocytopenia. Pharmacokinetics were evaluated with the first administration of romidepsin. Complete responses were observed in four patients, and partial responses were observed in 20 patients for an overall response rate of 34% (95% CI, 23% to 46%). The median duration of response was 13.7 months.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The histone deacetylase inhibitor romidepsin has single-agent clinical activity with significant and durable responses in patients with CTCL.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Piekarz, Frye, Turner, Wright, Allen, Kirschbaum, Zain, Prince, Leonard, Geskin, Reeder, Joske, Figg, Gardner, Steinberg, Jaffe, Stetler-Stevenson, Lade, Fojo, Bates]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.21.6150</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Phase II Multi-Institutional Trial of the Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor Romidepsin As Monotherapy for Patients With Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5417</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5410</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5418?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Pegylated Interferon Alfa-2a Yields High Rates of Hematologic and Molecular Response in Patients With Advanced Essential Thrombocythemia and Polycythemia Vera [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5418?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>We conducted a phase II study of pegylated interferon alfa-2a (PEG-IFN--2a) in patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET) and polycythemia vera (PV).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Seventy-nine patients (40 with PV and 39 with ET) have been treated. Median time from diagnosis to PEG-IFN--2a was 54 months in patients with PV and 33 months in patients with ET. Eighty-one percent of patients had received prior therapy. The first three patients received PEG-IFN--2a at 450 &micro;g weekly. As a result of poor tolerance, this dose was decreased in a stepwise manner to a current starting dose of 90 &micro;g weekly. Seventy-seven patients are evaluable and have been observed for a median of 21 months.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The overall hematologic response rate was 80% in PV and 81% in ET (complete in 70% and 76% of patients, respectively). The <I>JAK2<sup>V617F</sup></I> mutation was detected in 18 patients with ET and 38 patients with PV; sequential measurements by a pyrosequencing assay were available in 16 patients with ET and 35 patients with PV. The molecular response rate was 38% in ET and 54% in PV, being complete (undetectable <I>JAK2<sup>V617F</sup></I>) in 6% and 14%, respectively. The <I>JAK2<sup>V617F</sup></I> mutant allele burden continued to decrease with no clear evidence for a plateau. The tolerability of PEG-IFN--2a at 90 &micro;g weekly was excellent.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>PEG-IFN--2a resulted in remarkable clinical activity, high rates of molecular response, and acceptable toxicity in patients with advanced ET or PV. The ability of PEG-IFN--2a to induce complete molecular responses suggests selective targeting of the malignant clone.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quintas-Cardama, Kantarjian, Manshouri, Luthra, Estrov, Pierce, Richie, Borthakur, Konopleva, Cortes, Verstovsek]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Clinical Trials, Leukemia, Biological Therapy, Translational Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.6075</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Pegylated Interferon Alfa-2a Yields High Rates of Hematologic and Molecular Response in Patients With Advanced Essential Thrombocythemia and Polycythemia Vera [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5424</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5418</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5425?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Phase II Study of Alemtuzumab in Combination With Pentostatin in Patients With T-Cell Neoplasms [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5425?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>To examine the efficacy and safety of the combination of alemtuzumab and pentostatin in patients with T-cell neoplasms.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>We treated 24 patients with a variety of T-cell leukemias and lymphomas with a combination of alemtuzumab 30 mg intravenously (IV) three times weekly for up to 3 months and pentostatin 4 mg/m<sup>2</sup> IV weekly for 4 weeks followed by alternate weekly administration for up to 6 months. Prophylactic antibiotics including antiviral, antifungal, and antibacterial agents were administered during the treatment and for 2 months after its completion.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>The median age of patients was 57 years (range, 21 to 79 years). Eight patients were previously untreated, and 16 had a median of two prior therapies (range, one to six regimens). Thirteen patients responded to treatment (11 complete responses [CRs] and two partial responses), for an overall response rate of 54%. The median response duration was 19.5 months. Monoclonal T-cell receptor chain gene rearrangements were detected by polymerase chain reaction in bone marrow of 20 of 22 evaluable patients and became negative in five of seven evaluable patients in CR. Opportunistic infections caused by pathogens associated with severe T-cell dysfunction were common.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>The combination of alemtuzumab and pentostatin is feasible and effective in T-cell neoplasms. Although infections, including cytomegalovirus reactivation, are a concern, they may be minimized with adequate prophylactic antibiotic therapy.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ravandi, Aribi, O'Brien, Faderl, Jones, Ferrajoli, Huang, York, Pierce, Wierda, Kontoyiannis, Verstovsek, Pro, Fayad, Keating, Kantarjian]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Combined Therapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.6688</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Phase II Study of Alemtuzumab in Combination With Pentostatin in Patients With T-Cell Neoplasms [Hematologic Malignancies]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5430</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5425</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Hematologic Malignancies</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5431?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Multinational, Double-Blind, Phase III Study of Prednisone and Either Satraplatin or Placebo in Patients With Castrate-Refractory Prostate Cancer Progressing After Prior Chemotherapy: The SPARC Trial [Genitourinary Cancer]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5431?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>This multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial assessed the efficacy and tolerability of the oral platinum analog satraplatin in patients with metastatic castrate-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) experiencing progression after one prior chemotherapy regimen.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>Nine hundred fifty patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive oral satraplatin (n = 635) 80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> on days 1 to 5 of a 35-day cycle and prednisone 5 mg twice daily or placebo (n = 315) and prednisone 5 mg twice daily. Primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). The secondary end point was time to pain progression (TPP).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>A 33% reduction (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.77; <I>P</I> &lt; .001) was observed in the risk of progression or death with satraplatin versus placebo. This effect was maintained irrespective of prior docetaxel treatment. No difference in OS was seen between the satraplatin and placebo arms (HR = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.15; <I>P</I> = .80). Compared with placebo, satraplatin significantly reduced TPP (HR = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.79; <I>P</I> &lt; .001). Satraplatin was generally well tolerated, although myelosuppression and GI disorders occurred more frequently with satraplatin.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Oral satraplatin delayed progression of disease and pain in patients with metastatic CRPC experiencing progression after initial chemotherapy but did not provide a significant OS benefit. Satraplatin was generally well tolerated. These results suggest activity for satraplatin in patients with CRPC who experience progression after initial chemotherapy.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sternberg, Petrylak, Sartor, Witjes, Demkow, Ferrero, Eymard, Falcon, Calabro, James, Bodrogi, Harper, Wirth, Berry, Petrone, McKearn, Noursalehi, George, Rozencweig]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Clinical Trials, Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.1228</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Multinational, Double-Blind, Phase III Study of Prednisone and Either Satraplatin or Placebo in Patients With Castrate-Refractory Prostate Cancer Progressing After Prior Chemotherapy: The SPARC Trial [Genitourinary Cancer]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5438</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5431</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Genitourinary Cancer</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5439?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3 Levels Are Associated With Breslow Thickness at Presentation and Survival From Melanoma [Melanoma]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5439?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>A cohort study was carried out to test the hypothesis that higher vitamin D levels reduce the risk of relapse from melanoma.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>A pilot retrospective study of 271 patients with melanoma suggested that vitamin D may protect against recurrence of melanoma. We tested these findings in a survival analysis in a cohort of 872 patients recruited to the Leeds Melanoma Cohort (median follow-up, 4.7 years).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>In the retrospective study, self-reports of taking vitamin D supplements were nonsignificantly correlated with a reduced risk of melanoma relapse (odds ratio = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4 to 1.1; <I>P</I> = .09). Nonrelapsers had higher mean 25-hydroxyvitamin D<SUB>3</SUB> levels than relapsers (49 <I>v</I> 46 nmol/L; <I>P</I> = .3; not statistically significant). In the cohort (prospective) study, higher 25-hydroxyvitamin D<SUB>3</SUB> levels were associated with lower Breslow thickness at diagnosis (<I>P</I> = .002) and were independently protective of relapse and death: the hazard ratio for relapse-free survival (RFS) was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; <I>P</I> = .01) for a 20 nmol/L increase in serum level. There was evidence of interaction between the vitamin D receptor (<I>VDR</I>) BsmI genotype and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D<SUB>3</SUB> levels on RFS.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Results from the retrospective study were consistent with a role for vitamin D in melanoma outcome. The cohort study tests this hypothesis, providing evidence that higher 25-hydroxyvitamin D<SUB>3</SUB> levels, at diagnosis, are associated with both thinner tumors and better survival from melanoma, independent of Breslow thickness. Patients with melanoma, and those at high risk of melanoma, should seek to ensure vitamin D sufficiency. Additional studies are needed to establish optimal serum levels for patients with melanoma.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Newton-Bishop, Beswick, Randerson-Moor, Chang, Affleck, Elliott, Chan, Leake, Karpavicius, Haynes, Kukalizch, Whitaker, Jackson, Gerry, Nolan, Bertram, Marsden, Elder, Barrett, Bishop]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Epidemiology, Translational Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.1135</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3 Levels Are Associated With Breslow Thickness at Presentation and Survival From Melanoma [Melanoma]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5444</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5439</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Melanoma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5445?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[National Assessment of Melanoma Care Using Formally Developed Quality Indicators [Melanoma]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5445?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>There is considerable variation in the quality of cancer care delivered in the United States. Assessing care by using quality indicators could help decrease this variability. The objectives of this study were to formally develop valid quality indicators for melanoma and to assess hospital-level adherence with these measures in the United States.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Quality indicators were identified from available literature, consensus guidelines, and melanoma experts. Thirteen experts ranked potential measures for validity on the basis of the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology. Adherence with individual valid indicators and a composite measure of all indicators were assessed at 1,249 Commission on Cancer hospitals by using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB; 2004 through 2005).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Of 55 proposed quality indicators, 26 measures (47%) were rated as valid. These indicators assessed structure (n = 1), process (n = 24), and outcome (n = 1). Of the 26 measures, 10 are readily assessable by using cancer registry data. Adherence with valid indicators ranged from 11.8% to 96.5% at the patient level and 3.7% to 83.0% at the hospital level. (Adherence required that &ge; 90% of patients at a hospital receive concordant care.) Most hospitals were adherent with 50% or fewer of the individual indicators (median composite score, five; interquartile range, four to seven). Adherence was higher for diagnosis and staging measures and was lower for treatment indicators.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>There is considerable variation in the quality of melanoma care in the United States. By using these formally developed quality indicators, hospitals can assess their adherence with current melanoma care guidelines through feedback mechanisms from the NCDB and can better direct quality improvement efforts.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bilimoria, Raval, Bentrem, Wayne, Balch, Ko]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Non-ASCO Guidelines, Diagnosis & Staging, Surgery, Surgical Oncology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.9965</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[National Assessment of Melanoma Care Using Formally Developed Quality Indicators [Melanoma]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5451</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5445</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Melanoma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5452?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Phase II, Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blinded Trial of Weekly Elesclomol Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel Alone for Stage IV Metastatic Melanoma [Melanoma]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5452?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Elesclomol is a novel, small-molecule, oxidative stress inducer believed to exert selective cytotoxicity by increasing intracellular concentrations of reactive oxygen species, which results in cell death via mitochondrial apoptosis. We evaluated whether the addition of elesclomol to weekly paclitaxel could improve efficacy in patients with stage IV metastatic melanoma.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Patients and Methods</st>
<p>We randomly assigned patients with metastatic melanoma, measurable disease, and one or fewer prior chemotherapy regimens to elesclomol 213 mg/m<sup>2</sup> plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> (E + P) or to paclitaxel 80 mg/m<sup>2</sup> alone at a 2:1 ratio; regimens were given as a 1-hour intravenous infusion weekly, during 3 of every 4 weeks until disease progression per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors or death occurred. Patients who experienced progression were unblended, and patients on paclitaxel alone were permitted to cross over to E + P. The primary efficacy end point was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points were response rate (RR), toxicity, and overall survival (OS; analyzed post hoc).</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>At 21 US sites, 53 patients were randomly assigned to E + P, and 28 patients were randomly assigned to paclitaxel. The addition of elesclomol to paclitaxel yielded a doubling of median PFS (112 <I>v</I> 56 days) and a 41.7% risk reduction for disease progression/death (hazard ratio, 0.583; <I>P</I> = .035). Respective RRs for the E + P and paclitaxel groups were 15% and 3%; median OS was 11.9 <I>v</I> 7.8 months. Of patients on paclitaxel alone, 19 (68%) of 28 crossed over to E + P after they experienced progression. Weekly E + P was well tolerated.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>E + P resulted in a statistically significant doubling of median PFS, with an acceptable toxicity profile and encouraging OS. A multinational, phase III trial (SYMMETRY) of E + P compared with paclitaxel alone in metastatic melanoma has closed.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[O'Day, Gonzalez, Lawson, Weber, Hutchins, Anderson, Haddad, Kong, Williams, Jacobson]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:19 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.1579</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Phase II, Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blinded Trial of Weekly Elesclomol Plus Paclitaxel Versus Paclitaxel Alone for Stage IV Metastatic Melanoma [Melanoma]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5458</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5452</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Melanoma</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5459?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors in Cancer Therapy [REVIEW ARTICLE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5459?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>Epigenetic processes are implicated in cancer causation and progression. The acetylation status of histones regulates access of transcription factors to DNA and influences levels of gene expression. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) activity diminishes acetylation of histones, causing compaction of the DNA/histone complex. This compaction blocks gene transcription and inhibits differentiation, providing a rationale for developing HDAC inhibitors.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>In this review, we explore the biology of the HDAC enzymes, summarize the pharmacologic properties of HDAC inhibitors, and examine results of selected clinical trials. We consider the potential of these inhibitors in combination therapy with targeted drugs and with cytotoxic chemotherapy.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>HDAC inhibitors promote growth arrest, differentiation, and apoptosis of tumor cells, with minimal effects on normal tissue. In addition to decompaction of the histone/DNA complex, HDAC inhibition also affects acetylation status and function of nonhistone proteins. HDAC inhibitors have demonstrated antitumor activity in clinical trials, and one drug of this class, vorinostat, is US Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Other inhibitors in advanced stages of clinical development, including depsipeptide and MGCD0103, differ from vorinostat in structure and isoenzyme specificity, and have shown activity against lymphoma, leukemia, and solid tumors. Promising preclinical activity in combination with cytotoxics, inhibitors of heat shock protein 90, and inhibitors of proteasome function have led to combination therapy trials.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>HDAC inhibitors are an important emerging therapy with single-agent activity against multiple cancers, and have significant potential in combination use.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lane, Chabner]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Phase I and Clinical Pharmacology]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.22.1291</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors in Cancer Therapy [REVIEW ARTICLE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5468</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5459</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>REVIEW ARTICLE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5469?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[American Society of Clinical Oncology/Oncology Nursing Society Chemotherapy Administration Safety Standards [ASCO SPECIAL ARTICLE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5469?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Standardization of care can reduce the risk of errors, increase efficiency, and provide a framework for best practice. In 2008, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) invited a broad range of stakeholders to create a set of standards for the administration of chemotherapy to adult patients in the outpatient setting. At the close of a full-day structured workshop, 64 draft standards were proposed. After a formal process of electronic voting and conference calls, 29 draft standards were eliminated, resulting in a final list of 35 draft measures. The proposed set of standards was posted for 6 weeks of open public comment. Three hundred twenty-two comments were reviewed by the Steering Group and used as the basis for final editing to a final set of standards. The final list includes 31 standards encompassing seven domains, which include the following: review of clinical information and selection of a treatment regimen; treatment planning and informed consent; ordering of treatment; drug preparation; assessment of treatment compliance; administration and monitoring; and assessment of response and toxicity monitoring. Adherence to ASCO and ONS standards for safe chemotherapy administration should be a goal of all providers of adult cancer care.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jacobson, Polovich, McNiff, LeFebvre, Cummings, Galioto, Bonelli, McCorkle]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.25.1264</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[American Society of Clinical Oncology/Oncology Nursing Society Chemotherapy Administration Safety Standards [ASCO SPECIAL ARTICLE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5475</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5469</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>ASCO SPECIAL ARTICLE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5476?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Improving the Methodologic and Ethical Validity of Best Supportive Care Studies in Oncology: Lessons From a Systematic Review [SPECIAL ARTICLE]]]></title>
<link>http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/short/27/32/5476?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Purpose</st>
<p>To systematically review the best supportive care (BSC) literature and to evaluate the ethical and methodologic validity issues by using widely acknowledged criteria.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>Two search strings that included both cancer and supportive as terms (with random article type, or review or meta-analysis) explored databases from 1966 to 2008. Citations, abstracts, and papers were reviewed for inclusion criteria, and relevant data were extracted by two independent researchers. Data were validated for accuracy. Ethical and methodologic validity were evaluated by using the criteria derived from the Helsinki Requirements of the WMA; CONSORT statements for the evaluation of reports of randomized, controlled trials; and the universal requirements for ethical clinical research.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Forty-three published papers were identified that described 32 studies, 20 of which incorporated the design of treatment plus supportive care (SC) versus SC alone, and 12 of which incorporated the design of treatment versus SC. Most of the studies had poor compliance to critical Helsinki requirements, to methodologic precautions derived from the CONSORT statement for studies involving a nonpharmacologic arm, and to four of seven universal requirements for ethical clinical research.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Lack of rigor in BSC studies has contributed to a generation of research with widespread ethical and methodologic shortcomings. Ad hoc SC and lack of standardization of SC delivery may be sources of systematic bias or error in BSC trials. Rectifying these shortcomings in future studies demands greater vigilance toward these issues by researchers, institutional review boards, editors, and peer reviewers. Given the prevalence of overlooked problems that are later identified, currently open BSC studies should be reevaluated by institutional review boards and researchers to check for ethical and methodologic validity, and identified shortcomings should be addressed.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cherny, Abernethy, Strasser, Sapir, Currow, Zafar]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:02:20 PST</dc:date>
<dc:subject><![CDATA[Clinical Trials, Pain Control, Supportive Care, Ethics, Outcomes Research, Quality of Care, Pain Control, Supportive Care, Palliative Care, Chemotherapy]]></dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1200/JCO.2009.21.9592</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Improving the Methodologic and Ethical Validity of Best Supportive Care Studies in Oncology: Lessons From a Systematic Review [SPECIAL ARTICLE]]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>American Society of Clinical Oncology</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>32</prism:number>
<prism:volume>27</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>5486</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-11-10</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5476</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>SPECIAL ARTICLE</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>