Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Response, disease-free survival, and overall survival: What matters for whom?

Ansprechen, Krankheits-freies Überleben, Gesamtüberleben: Was zählt für wen?

  • Main Topic
  • Published:
European Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

GRUNDLAGEN: Individualisierte, maßgeschneiderte Krebstherapie ist eine ebenso notwendige wie lohnende Entwicklung in der Krebsbehandlung. METHODIK: Review über Aspekte der Krebstherapie. ERGEBNISSE: Die verschiedenen Sichtweisen der Krebstherapie und ihrer Akteure werden reflektiert (Patient, Behandler, Pharmaunternehmen, regulative Strukturen). SCHLUSSFOLGERUNGEN: Unterschiedliche Kriterien werden zur Bewertung und zum Vergleich von Therapieansätzen verwendet. Die zur Beurteilung des Erfolges herangezogenen Kriterien hängen wesentlich von der Position des Akteurs zum Endprodukt (Krebstherapie) ab.

Summary

BACKGROUND: There is unanimous consent that the individualization of therapy is a necessary and rewarding way to direct anticancer treatment. METHODS: Review on aspects of anticancer therapy. RESULTS: This manuscript elucidates the different positions of those who are receiving anticancer therapy and those who are involved in providing health care concerning the outcome of anticancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: We have to be aware that the criteria used to evaluate and compare the various therapeutic approaches do differ dependent on the natural position of the stakeholder towards the end product to be evaluated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Hanauske A-R. Planung und Durchführung klinischer Phase-I-Studien. In: Dittrich C, Senn H-J, editors. Onkologie 2008. (Suppl 2); pp. 39–45

  • Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST Guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228–47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blessing JA. Design, analysis, and interpretation of chemotherapy trials in gynaecologic cancer. In: Deppe G, editor. Chemotherapy of gynecologic cancer. New York: Alan R. Liss, Inc; 1984. pp. 49–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:1753–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JR, Williams G, Pazdur R. End points and United States Food and Drug Administration approval of oncology drugs. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1404–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JR, Temple R. Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of anticancer drugs. Cancer Treat Rep 1985;69:1155–9

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bruzzi P, Del Mastro L, Sormani MP, et al. Objective response to chemotherapy as a potential surrogate end point of survival in metastatic breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:5117–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tang PA, Bentzen SM, Chen EX, et al. Surrogate end points for median overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer: literature-based analysis from 39 randomized controlled trials of first-line chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4562–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent DJ, Patiyil S, Yothers G, et al. End points for colon cancer adjuvant trials: observations and recommendations based on individual patient data from 20,898 patients enrolled onto 18 randomized trials from the ACCENT group. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4569–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1371–88

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1652–62

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Effects of tamoxifen vs. raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 Trial. JAMA 2006;295:2727–41

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jönsson B, Wilking N. Market access for cancer drugs and the role of health economics. Ann Oncol 2007;18(Suppl 3):iii55–66

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Applied Cancer Research, Vienna, and Center for Oncology and Hematology, 3rd Medical Department, Kaiser Franz Josef-Spital, Vienna, Austria

    C. Dittrich

  2. Applied Cancer Research-Institution for Translational Research Vienna/CEADDP, Vienna, Austria

    C. Dittrich

Authors
  1. C. Dittrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Dittrich.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dittrich, C. Response, disease-free survival, and overall survival: What matters for whom?. Eur Surg 42, 5–7 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-010-0520-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-010-0520-7

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation