Single-agent gemcitabine in pretreated patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: results of an Argentinean multicentre phase II trial

The activity and mild toxicity profile of single-agent gemcitabine therapy in untreated (chemonaive) patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is well documented. This phase II trial was conducted to determine the objective tumour response rate and toxicity profile of single-agent gemcitabine in pretreated patients with NSCLC. Patients with histological evidence of advanced NCSLC stage IIIB or IV; at least one prior chemotherapy regimen including a platinum or taxane analogue; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2; clinically measurable disease; adequate bone marrow reserve; and adequate renal function; received 1000 mg m–2 gemcitabine administered over 30 min on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle defined as 3 weekly treatments followed by 1 week of rest. Twenty-nine patients were evaluated for efficacy and 32 for toxicity. One patient achieved a complete response and five patients had a partial response resulting in a total response rate of 20.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 6–34). Median response duration was 7 months (range 4–11 months). Twelve (41%) patients reached stable disease after two cycles of therapy and 11 (38%) patients had disease progression. Median progression-free survival time was 3 months and median overall survival time was 5.5 months. Toxicity was generally mild (grades 0–2). Severe (grade 3 or 4) haematological toxicities included grade 3 anaemia in one patient and grade 3 thrombocytopenia in two patients. Severe non-haematological toxicities included one patient each with grade 3 liver transaminase elevations, nausea/vomiting and diarrhoea. This study confirms the activity and safety of single-agent gemcitabine in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC who are refractory or sensitive to first-line therapy. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaig

Comprehensive cancer control-research & development: knowing what we do and doing what we know

Comprehensive cancer control is defined as an integrated and coordinated approach to reducing cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality across the cancer control continuum from primary prevention to end-of-life care. This approach assumes that when the public sector, non-governmental organizations, academia, and the private sector share with each other their skills, knowledge, and resources, a country can take advantage of all its talents and resources to more quickly reduce the burden of cancer for all its population. One critical issue for comprehensive cancer control is the extent to which the private sector can contribute to cancer prevention and control programs and policies that have historically been lead by the public health sector, and similarly how can the public sector increase its investment and involvement in clinical research and practice issues that are largely driven by the private sector worldwide? In addition, building capacity to integrate research that is appropriate to the culture and context of the population will be important in different settings, in particular research related to cancer control interventions that have the capacity to influence outcomes. To whatever extent cancer control research is ultimately funded through the private and public sectors, if investments in research discoveries are ultimately to benefit the populations that bear the greatest burden of disease, then new approaches to integrating the lessons learned from science with the lessons learned from service (public health, clinical, and public policy) must be found to close the gap between what we know and what we do. Communities of practice for international cancer control, like the ones fostered by the first three International Cancer Control Congresses, represent an important forum for knowledge exchange opportunities to accelerate the translation of new knowledge into action to reduce the burden of cancer worldwide

Comprehensive cancer control-research & development: knowing what we do and doing what we know

Comprehensive cancer control is defined as an integrated and coordinated approach to reducing cancer incidence, morbidity, and mortality across the cancer control continuum from primary prevention to end-of-life care. This approach assumes that when the public sector, non-governmental organizations, academia, and the private sector share with each other their skills, knowledge, and resources, a country can take advantage of all its talents and resources to more quickly reduce the burden of cancer for all its population. One critical issue for comprehensive cancer control is the extent to which the private sector can contribute to cancer prevention and control programs and policies that have historically been lead by the public health sector, and similarly how can the public sector increase its investment and involvement in clinical research and practice issues that are largely driven by the private sector worldwide? In addition, building capacity to integrate research that is appropriate to the culture and context of the population will be important in different settings, in particular research related to cancer control interventions that have the capacity to influence outcomes. To whatever extent cancer control research is ultimately funded through the private and public sectors, if investments in research discoveries are ultimately to benefit the populations that bear the greatest burden of disease, then new approaches to integrating the lessons learned from science with the lessons learned from service (public health, clinical, and public policy) must be found to close the gap between what we know and what we do. Communities of practice for international cancer control, like the ones fostered by the first three International Cancer Control Congresses, represent an important forum for knowledge exchange opportunities to accelerate the translation of new knowledge into action to reduce the burden of cancer worldwide

American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Global Oncology Leadership Task Force: Findings and Actions

In response to rising cancer incidence and mortality rates in low- and middle-income countries and the increasingly global profile of ASCO’s membership, the ASCO Board of Directors appointed the Global Oncology Leadership Task Force (Task Force) to provide recommendations on ASCO’s engagement in global oncology. To accomplish its work, the Task Force convened meetings of global oncology experts, conducted focus group discussions with member groups, did site visits to South America and India, and met regularly to analyze the findings and develop recommendations. Task Force findings included global concerns, such as access to care, and specific concerns of middle- and low-resource settings. The need to strengthen health systems and the importance of alliances with a range of international cancer stakeholders were emphasized. Task Force recommendations to the ASCO Board of Directors were based on a three-part global oncology strategy of professional development, improvement of access to quality care, and acceleration of global oncology research. Specific areas of focus within each of these strategic pillars are provided along with an update on areas of ASCO activity as these recommendations are implemented