Author
Benoit You
Other affiliations: Curie Institute, HCL Technologies, University Health Network ...read more
Bio: Benoit You is an academic researcher from Claude Bernard University Lyon 1. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Internal medicine. The author has an hindex of 32, co-authored 174 publications receiving 4157 citations. Previous affiliations of Benoit You include Curie Institute & HCL Technologies.
Topics: Medicine, Internal medicine, Oncology, Ovarian cancer, Bevacizumab
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center1, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre2, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center3, Hebron University4, European Institute of Oncology5, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute6, University of Manchester7, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart8, French Institute of Health and Medical Research9, Auckland City Hospital10, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital11, Ohio State University12, Johns Hopkins University13, University of Washington14, University of California, Los Angeles15, University of Glasgow16, Royal Melbourne Hospital17, Foundation Medicine18, University College London19, Ghent University Hospital20
TL;DR: This trial assessed rucaparib versus placebo after response to second-line or later platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with high-grade, recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian carcinoma harbouring a BRCA mutation or high percentage of genome-wide loss of heterozygosity.
1,139 citations
TL;DR: In patients with advanced ovarian cancer receiving first-line standard therapy including bevacizumab, the addition of maintenance olaparib provided a significant progression-free survival benefit, which was substantial in patients with HRD-positive tumors, including those without a BRCA mutation.
Abstract: Background Olaparib has shown significant clinical benefit as maintenance therapy in women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer with a BRCA mutation. The effect of combining mainte...
962 citations
University of Pennsylvania1, Institut Gustave Roussy2, French Institute of Health and Medical Research3, Université Paris-Saclay4, Seoul National University Hospital5, Samsung Medical Center6, Claude Bernard University Lyon 17, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre8, University of Manchester9, Ford Motor Company10, Washington University in St. Louis11, AstraZeneca12, Sheba Medical Center13, Tel Aviv University14
TL;DR: Combination of olaparib and durvalumab showed promising antitumour activity and safety similar to that previously observed in olapARib and DurvalumAB monotherapy studies.
Abstract: Summary Background Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors combined with immunotherapy have shown antitumour activity in preclinical studies. We aimed to assess the safety and activity of olaparib in combination with the PD-L1-inhibitor, durvalumab, in patients with germline BRCA1-mutated or BRCA2-mutated metastatic breast cancer. Methods The MEDIOLA trial is a multicentre, open-label, phase 1/2, basket trial of durvalumab and olaparib in solid tumours. Patients were enrolled into four initial cohorts: germline BRCA-mutated, metastatic breast cancer; germline BRCA-mutated, metastatic ovarian cancer; metastatic gastric cancer; and relapsed small-cell lung cancer. Here, we report on the cohort of patients with breast cancer. Patients who were aged 18 years or older (or aged 19 years or older in South Korea) with germline BRCA1-mutated or BRCA2-mutated or both and histologically confirmed, progressive, HER2-negative, metastatic breast cancer were enrolled from 14 health centres in the UK, the USA, Israel, France, Switzerland, and South Korea. Patients should not have received more than two previous lines of chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Patients received 300 mg olaparib in tablet form orally twice daily for 4 weeks and thereafter a combination of olaparib 300 mg twice daily and durvalumab 1·5 g via intravenous infusion every 4 weeks until disease progression. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, and 12-week disease control rate. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment, and activity analyses were done in the full-analysis set (patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and were not excluded from the study). Recruitment has completed and the study is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02734004. Findings Between June 14, 2016, and May 2, 2017, 34 patients were enrolled and received both study drugs and were included in the safety analysis. 11 (32%) patients experienced grade 3 or worse adverse events, of which the most common were anaemia (four [12%]), neutropenia (three [9%]), and pancreatitis (two [6%]). Three (9%) patients discontinued due to adverse events and four (12%) patients experienced a total of six serious adverse events. There were no treatment-related deaths. 24 (80%; 90% CI 64·3–90·9) of 30 patients eligible for activity analysis had disease control at 12 weeks. Interpretation Combination of olaparib and durvalumab showed promising antitumour activity and safety similar to that previously observed in olaparib and durvalumab monotherapy studies. Further research in a randomised setting is needed to determine predictors of therapeutic benefit and whether addition of durvalumab improves long-term clinical outcomes compared with olaparib monotherapy. Funding AstraZeneca.
221 citations
TL;DR: A multicentre single-arm phase II trial in women with AR-positive, estrogen, progesterone receptor and HER2-negative metastatic or inoperable locally advanced BC to assess the efficacy and safety of abiraterone acetate (AA) plus prednisone treatment, finding that it is beneficial for some patients with molecular apocrine tumours.
221 citations
143 citations
Cited by
More filters
TL;DR: The SPIRIT 2013 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides important information to promote full understanding of the checklist recommendations and strongly recommends that this explanatory paper be used in conjunction with the SPIRit Statement.
Abstract: High quality protocols facilitate proper conduct, reporting, and external review
of clinical trials. However, the completeness of trial protocols is often
inadequate. To help improve the content and quality of protocols, an
international group of stakeholders developed the SPIRIT 2013 Statement
(Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials). The SPIRIT
Statement provides guidance in the form of a checklist of recommended items to
include in a clinical trial protocol. This SPIRIT 2013 Explanation and Elaboration paper provides important
information to promote full understanding of the checklist recommendations. For
each checklist item, we provide a rationale and detailed description; a model
example from an actual protocol; and relevant references supporting its
importance. We strongly recommend that this explanatory paper be used in
conjunction with the SPIRIT Statement. A website of resources is also available
(www.spirit-statement.org). The SPIRIT 2013 Explanation and Elaboration paper, together with the Statement,
should help with the drafting of trial protocols. Complete documentation of key
trial elements can facilitate transparency and protocol review for the benefit
of all stakeholders.
3,108 citations
Journal Article•
2,777 citations
TL;DR: Misinterpretation and abuse of statistical tests, confidence intervals, and statistical power have been decried for decades, yet remain rampant as discussed by the authors, and there are no interpretations of these concepts that are at once simple, intuitive, correct, and foolproof Instead, correct use and interpretation of these statistics requires an attention to detail which seems to tax the patience of working scientists.
Abstract: Misinterpretation and abuse of statistical tests, confidence intervals, and statistical power have been decried for decades, yet remain rampant A key problem is that there are no interpretations of these concepts that are at once simple, intuitive, correct, and foolproof Instead, correct use and interpretation of these statistics requires an attention to detail which seems to tax the patience of working scientists This high cognitive demand has led to an epidemic of shortcut definitions and interpretations that are simply wrong, sometimes disastrously so-and yet these misinterpretations dominate much of the scientific literature In light of this problem, we provide definitions and a discussion of basic statistics that are more general and critical than typically found in traditional introductory expositions Our goal is to provide a resource for instructors, researchers, and consumers of statistics whose knowledge of statistical theory and technique may be limited but who wish to avoid and spot misinterpretations We emphasize how violation of often unstated analysis protocols (such as selecting analyses for presentation based on the P values they produce) can lead to small P values even if the declared test hypothesis is correct, and can lead to large P values even if that hypothesis is incorrect We then provide an explanatory list of 25 misinterpretations of P values, confidence intervals, and power We conclude with guidelines for improving statistical interpretation and reporting
1,584 citations
University of Oklahoma1, European Institute of Oncology2, Sungkyunkwan University3, Autonomous University of Barcelona4, University of New South Wales5, University of Bordeaux6, University of Paris-Sud7, Netherlands Cancer Institute8, Edinburgh Cancer Research Centre9, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust10, University of Toronto11, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center12, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center13, Medical College of Wisconsin14, Harvard University15, AstraZeneca16
TL;DR: The use of maintenance therapy with olaparib provided a substantial benefit with regard to progression‐free survival among women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation, with a 70% lower risk of disease progression or death with olAParib than with placebo.
Abstract: Background Most women with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer have a relapse within 3 years after standard treatment with surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy. The benefit of the o...
1,552 citations
Gdańsk Medical University1, Institut Gustave Roussy2, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul3, Karolinska University Hospital4, Fortis Healthcare5, European Institute of Oncology6, Curie Institute7, American University of Beirut8, Brighton and Sussex Medical School9, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre10, BC Cancer Agency11, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich12, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center13, Sheba Medical Center14, Harvard University15, Université libre de Bruxelles16, Paris Descartes University17, University of California, San Francisco18, Johns Hopkins University19, Indiana University20, University of Washington21, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg22, King's College London23, Peking Union Medical College24
TL;DR: This ESO-ESMO ABC 5 Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for managing advanced breast cancer patients, and provides updates on managing patients with all breast cancer subtypes, LABC, follow-up, palliative and supportive care.
1,514 citations