Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Martijn G. H. van Oijen
Based on 3 articles published since 2008
||||

Between 2008 and 2019, M. G. H. van Oijen wrote the following 3 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline Consensus statement on mandatory measurements in pancreatic cancer trials (COMM-PACT) for systemic treatment of unresectable disease. 2018

Ter Veer, Emil / van Rijssen, L Bengt / Besselink, Marc G / Mali, Rosa M A / Berlin, Jordan D / Boeck, Stefan / Bonnetain, Franck / Chau, Ian / Conroy, Thierry / Van Cutsem, Eric / Deplanque, Gael / Friess, Helmut / Glimelius, Bengt / Goldstein, David / Herrmann, Richard / Labianca, Roberto / Van Laethem, Jean-Luc / Macarulla, Teresa / van der Meer, Jonathan H M / Neoptolemos, John P / Okusaka, Takuji / O'Reilly, Eileen M / Pelzer, Uwe / Philip, Philip A / van der Poel, Marcel J / Reni, Michele / Scheithauer, Werner / Siveke, Jens T / Verslype, Chris / Busch, Olivier R / Wilmink, Johanna W / van Oijen, Martijn G H / van Laarhoven, Hanneke W M. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. · Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. · Department of Internal Medicine III, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Klinikum Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany. · Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London and Surrey, UK. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine and Lorraine University, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Gasthuisberg Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. · Department of Oncology, Hôpital Riviera-Chablais, Vevey, Switzerland. · Department of Surgery, Technical University of Munich, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany. · Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. · Nelune Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Prince of Wales Clinical School University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. · Cancer Center, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy. · Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Cancer Unit, Erasme University Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. · Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (HUVH), Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. · Gastrointestinal Oncology Service, Division of Solid Tumor Oncology, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. · Department of Hematology, Oncology and Tumor Immunology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. · Department of Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA. · Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. · Department of Internal Medicine I, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. · Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, West German Cancer Cancer, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK, partner site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. · Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Electronic address: h.vanlaarhoven@amc.uva.nl. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #29508762.

ABSTRACT: Variations in the reporting of potentially confounding variables in studies investigating systemic treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer pose challenges in drawing accurate comparisons between findings. In this Review, we establish the first international consensus on mandatory baseline and prognostic characteristics in future trials for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. We did a systematic literature search to find phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify baseline characteristics and prognostic variables. We created a structured overview showing the reporting frequencies of baseline characteristics and the prognostic relevance of identified variables. We used a modified Delphi panel of two rounds involving an international panel of 23 leading medical oncologists in the field of pancreatic cancer to develop a consensus on the various variables identified. In total, 39 randomised controlled trials that had data on 15 863 patients were included, of which 32 baseline characteristics and 26 prognostic characteristics were identified. After two consensus rounds, 23 baseline characteristics and 12 prognostic characteristics were designated as mandatory for future pancreatic cancer trials. The COnsensus statement on Mandatory Measurements in unresectable PAncreatic Cancer Trials (COMM-PACT) identifies a mandatory set of baseline and prognostic characteristics to allow adequate comparison of outcomes between pancreatic cancer studies.

2 Review Clinical value of ctDNA in upper-GI cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. 2017

Creemers, A / Krausz, S / Strijker, M / van der Wel, M J / Soer, E C / Reinten, R J / Besselink, M G / Wilmink, J W / van de Vijver, M J / van Noesel, C J M / Verheij, J / Meijer, S L / Dijk, F / Bijlsma, M F / van Oijen, M G H / van Laarhoven, H W M. ·Cancer Center Amsterdam, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine (CEMM)/Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology (LEXOR), AMC, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, AMC, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.creemers@amc.uva.nl. · Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, AMC, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, AMC, The Netherlands. · Department of Pathology, AMC, The Netherlands. · Cancer Center Amsterdam, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine (CEMM)/Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology (LEXOR), AMC, The Netherlands. · Cancer Center Amsterdam, Center for Experimental and Molecular Medicine (CEMM)/Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology (LEXOR), AMC, The Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Department of Medical Oncology, AMC, The Netherlands. ·Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer · Pubmed #28801248.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The recent expanding technical possibilities to detect tumor derived mutations in blood, so-called circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), has rapidly increased the interest in liquid biopsies. This review and meta-analysis explores the clinical value of ctDNA in malignancies of the upper gastro-intestinal tract. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases were searched to identify studies reporting the diagnostic, prognostic or predictive value of ctDNA in patients with esophageal, gastric and pancreatic cancer, until January 2017. The diagnostic accuracy and, using random-effect pair-wise meta-analyses, the prognostic value of ctDNA was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 34 studies met the inclusion criteria. For esophageal and gastric cancer, amplification of oncogenes in blood, such as HER2 and MYC, can be relevant for diagnostic purposes, and to predict treatment response in certain patient subpopulations. Given the limited number of studies assessing the role of ctDNA in esophageal and gastric cancer, the meta-analysis estimated the diagnostic accuracy and predictive value of ctDNA in pancreatic cancer only (n=10). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ctDNA as a diagnostic tool in pancreatic cancer were 28% and 95%, respectively. Patients with pancreatic cancer and detectable ctDNA demonstrated a worse overall survival compared to patients with undetectable ctDNA (HR 1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-3.22, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: The presence of ctDNA is significantly associated with a poor prognosis in patients with pancreatic cancer. The use of ctDNA in clinical practice is promising, although standardization of sequencing techniques and further development of high-sensitive detection methods is needed.

3 Article A Nationwide Population-Based Study on the Survival of Patients with Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors in The Netherlands. 2018

Genc, C G / Klümpen, H J / van Oijen, M G H / van Eijck, C H J / Nieveen van Dijkum, E J M. ·Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Research, Comprehensive Cancer Centers Netherlands (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, PO Box 22660, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.j.nieveenvandijkum@amc.uva.nl. ·World J Surg · Pubmed #29018912.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Large population-based studies give insight into the prognosis and treatment outcomes of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs). Therefore, we provide an overview of the treatment and related survival of pNET in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with pNET between 2008 and 2013 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included. Patient, tumors and treatment characteristics were reported. Survival analyses with log-rank testing were performed to compare survival. RESULTS: In total, 611 patients were included. Median follow-up was 25.7 months, and all-cause mortality was 42%. Higher tumor grade and TNM stage were significantly associated with worse survival in both the overall and metastasized population. The effect of distant metastases on survival was more significant in lower tumor stages (T1-3 p < 0.05, T4 p = 0.074). Resection of the primary tumor was performed in 255 (42%) patients. Patients who underwent surgery had the highest 5-year survival (86%) compared to PRRT (33%), chemotherapy (21%), targeted therapy and somatostatin analogs (24%) (all p < 0.001). Patients with T1M0 tumors (n = 115) showed favorable survival after surgical resection (N = 95) compared to no therapy (N = 20, p = 0.008). Resection also improved survival significantly in patients with metastases compared to other treatments (all p > 0.05). Without surgery, PRRT showed the best survival curves in patients with distant metastases. Grade 3 tumors and surgical resection were independently associated with survival (HR 7.23 and 0.12, respectively). CONCLUSION: Surgical resection shows favorable outcome for all pNET tumors, including indolent tumors and tumors with distant metastases. Prospective trials should be initiated to confirm these results.