Critical Success Factors – a study of Project Management techniques using Pinto’s Model in the Malaysia housing construction companies perspective

Non-familiarity and not being well versed with project management knowledge areas and processes, the use of project management tools and techniques, standardizations, consistency and optimization of the project management processes implementation which lead to unnecessary schedule delays, cost overruns, poor quality, overlooked risks and scope creep are among the host of issues associated with Project Management over the project life cycle. Each housing construction company strives to achieve the most efficient and effective project management processes to achieve project success and each manages project management processes differently. This study investigates the importance placed by the respective stakeholders of the construction companies in managing project management processes in housing constructions projects based on the nine project management knowledge areas and ten elements of the “project implementation profile”. Data was collected through the questionnaires where the questionnaire used the Likert Scale to evaluate the data. Due to insufficient data, interviews with relevant personnel were conducted. Based on the questionnaires and interviews, there seem to be initiatives taken by the Company in attaining project success in constructions projects. The study finds that the stakeholders and Companies are practicing Project management processes in their construction projects. It is proposed that construction companies implement, standardize, institutionalize and optimize project management processes and usage in order to avoid financial losses, cost overruns, legal disputes and other problems to increase the probability of project success. (Abstract by author

Impact of Smoking and Brain Metastasis on Outcomes of Advanced <i>EGFR</i> Mutation Lung Adenocarcinoma Patients Treated with First Line Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

<div><p>Objectives</p><p>This purpose of this study was to examine clinical-pathologic factors – particularly smoking and brain metastases – in <i>EGFR</i> mutation positive (M+) lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) to determine their impact on survival in patients treated with first line EGFR TKI.</p><p>Methods</p><p>A retrospective review of <i>EGFR</i> mutation reflex testing experience for all ADC diagnosed at a tertiary Asian cancer centre from January 2009 to April 2013. Amongst this cohort, patients with advanced <i>EGFR</i> M+ ADC treated with first line EGFR TKI were identified to determine factors that influence progression free and overall survival.</p><p>Results</p><p>444/742 (59.8%) ADC reflex tested for <i>EGFR</i> mutations were <i>EGFR</i> M+. Amongst never-smokers (n=468), <i>EGFR</i> M+ were found in 74.5% of females and 76.3% of males, and amongst ever smokers (n=283), in 53.3% of females and 35.6% of males. Exon 20 mutations were found more commonly amongst heavy smokers (> 50 pack years and > 20 pack years, Pearson’s chi square p=0.044, and p=0.038 respectively). 211 patients treated with palliative first line TKI had a median PFS and OS of 9.2 and 19.6 months respectively. 26% of patients had brain metastasis at diagnosis. This was significantly detrimental to overall survival (HR 1.85, CI 1.09-3.16, p=0.024) on multivariate analysis. There was no evidence that smoking status had a significant impact on survival.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>The high prevalence of <i>EGFR</i> M+ in our patient population warrants reflex testing regardless of gender and smoking status. Smoking status and dosage did not impact progression free or overall survival in patients treated with first line EGFR TKI. The presence of brain metastasis at diagnosis negatively impacts overall survival.</p></div

Univariate analysis of progression free survival and overall survival.

<p>Univariate analysis of progression free survival and overall survival.</p

Sites of EGFR mutations amongst 461 patients.

<p>Sites of EGFR mutations amongst 461 patients.</p

Kaplan-Meier plots of cohort of 211 patients treated with 1^st line EGFR TKI; (a) PFS by brain metastasis in ECOG 0–1 patients, (b) PFS by brain metastasis in ECOG 2–4 patients, (c) OS by brain metastasis in ECOG 0–1 patients, and (d) OS by brain metastasis in ECOG 2–4 patients.

<p>Kaplan-Meier plots of cohort of 211 patients treated with 1^st line EGFR TKI; (a) PFS by brain metastasis in ECOG 0–1 patients, (b) PFS by brain metastasis in ECOG 2–4 patients, (c) OS by brain metastasis in ECOG 0–1 patients, and (d) OS by brain metastasis in ECOG 2–4 patients.</p