Impact of tumor board recommendations on treatment outcome for locally advanced head and neck cancer

Background/Aims: To identify physician selection factors in the treatment of locally advanced head and neck cancer and how treatment outcome is affected by Tumor Board recommendations. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 213 patients treated for locally advanced head and neck cancer in a single institution was performed. All treatments followed Tumor Board recommendations: 115 patients had chemotherapy and radiation, and 98 patients received postoperative radiation. Patient characteristics, treatment toxicity, locoregional control and survival between these two treat- ment groups were compared. Patient survival was compared with survival data reported in randomized studies of locally advanced head and neck cancer. Results: There were no differences in comorbidity factors, and T or N stages between the two groups. A statistically significant number of patients with oropharyngeal and oral cavity tumors had chemoradiation and postoperative radiation, respectively (p < 0.0001). Grade 3-4 toxicities during treatment were 48 and 87% for the postoperative radiation and chemoradiation groups, respectively (p = 0.0001). There were no differences in survival, locoregional recurrences and distant metastases between the two groups. Patient survival was comparable to survival rates reported by randomized studies of locally advanced head and neck cancer. Conclusion: Disease sites remained the key determining factor for treatment selection. Multidisciplinary approaches provided optimal treatment outcome for locally advanced head and neck cancer, with overall survival in these patients being comparable to that reported in randomized clinical trials. Copyright © 2008 S. Karger AG.

Androgens and breast cancer

info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Androgens and breast cancer

We have recently demonstrated that physiological levels of androgens exert direct and potent inhibitory effects on the growth of human breast cancer ZR-75-1 cells in vivo in nude mice as well as in vitro under both basal and estrogen-stimulated conditions. The inhibitory effect of androgens has also been confirmed on the growth of dimethylbenz(a)anthracene (DMBA)-induced mammary carcinoma in the rat. Such observations are in close agreement with the clinical data showing that androgens and the androgenic compound medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) have beneficial effects in breast cancer in women comparable to other endocrine therapies, including tamoxifen. Although the inhibitory action of androgens on cell proliferation in estrogen-induced ZR-75-1 cells results, in part, from their suppressive effect on expression of the estrogen receptor, the androgens also exert a direct inhibitory effect independent of estrogens. Androgens cause a global slowing effect on the duration of the cell cycle. These observations support clinical data showing that androgenic compounds induce an objective remission after failure of antiestrogen therapy as well as those indicating that the antiproliferative action of androgens is additive to that of antiestrogens. We have also recently demonstrated in ZR-75-1 human breast cancer cells the antagonism between androgens and estrogens on the expression of GCDFP-15 and GCDFP-24 which are two major proteins secreted in human gross cystic disease fluid. The effects of androgens and estrogens as well as those of progestins and glucocorticoids on GCDFP-15 and GCDFP-24 mRNA levels and secretion are opposite to those induced by the same steroids on cell growth in ZR-75-1 cells.