scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Laurence Gladieff

Bio: Laurence Gladieff is an academic researcher from University of Toulouse. The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Ovarian cancer. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 118 publications receiving 3384 citations. Previous affiliations of Laurence Gladieff include University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Eric Pujade-Lauraine1, Jonathan A. Ledermann2, Frédéric Selle, Val Gebski3, Richard T Penson4, Amit M. Oza5, Jacob Korach6, Tomasz Huzarski7, Andres Poveda, Sandro Pignata, Michael Friedlander8, Nicoletta Colombo9, Philipp Harter, Keiichi Fujiwara10, Isabelle Ray-Coquard11, Susana Banerjee12, Joyce F. Liu4, Elizabeth S. Lowe13, Ralph Bloomfield13, Patricia Pautier14, Tomasz Byrski15, Giovanni Scambia, Maria Ornella Nicoletto, Fiona Nussey, Andrew R Clamp, Richard T. Penson4, Amit M. Oza5, Andrés Poveda Velasco, Manuel Rodrigues, Jean-Pierre Lotz, Diane Provencher, Aleix Prat Aparicio, Laura Vidal Boixader, Clare L. Scott, Kenji Tamura, Mayu Yunokawa, Alla Lisyanskaya16, Jacques Medioni, Nicolas Pécuchet, Coraline Dubot, Thibault De La Motte Rouge, Marie-Christine Kaminsky, Béatrice Weber, Alain Lortholary, Christine Parkinson, Jonathan A. Ledermann2, Sarah Williams, Jonathan Cosin, James Hoffman, Marie Plante, Allan Covens, Gabe S. Sonke17, Florence Joly, Anne Floquet, H. Hirte, Amnon Amit, Tjoung-Won Park-Simon18, Koji Matsumoto, Sergei Tjulandin, Jae Hoon Kim19, Jae Hoon Kim20, Laurence Gladieff, Roberto Sabbatini, David M. O'Malley, Patrick Timmins, Daniel Kredentser, Nuria Laínez Milagro, Maria Pilar Barretina Ginesta, Ariadna Tibau Martorell, Alfonso Gómez de Liaño Lista, Belén Ojeda González, Linda Mileshkin, Masaki Mandai, Ingrid A. Boere, Petronella B. Ottevanger, Joo-Hyun Nam, Elias Abdo Filho21, Salima Hamizi, Francesco Cognetti, David Warshal, Elizabeth Dickson-Michelson, Scott Kamelle, Nathalie McKenzie, Gustavo C. Rodriguez, Deborah K. Armstrong, Eva Chalas, Paul Celano, Kian Behbakht, Susan E Davidson, Stephen Welch, Limor Helpman, Ami Fishman, Ilan Bruchim, Magdalena Sikorska, Anna Słowińska, Wojciech Rogowski, Mariusz Bidziński, Beata Śpiewankiewicz, Antonio Casado Herraez, César Mendiola Fernández, Martina Gropp-Meier, Toshiaki Saito, Kazuhiro Takehara, Takayuki Enomoto, Hidemichi Watari, Chel Hun Choi, Byoung-Gie Kim, Jae Weon Kim20, Jae Weon Kim19, Roberto Hegg, Ignace Vergote15 
TL;DR: Olaparib tablet maintenance treatment provided a significant progression-free survival improvement with no detrimental effect on quality of life in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation.
Abstract: Summary Background Olaparib, a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, has previously shown efficacy in a phase 2 study when given in capsule formulation to all-comer patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed high-grade serous ovarian cancer. We aimed to confirm these findings in patients with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2 ) mutation using a tablet formulation of olaparib. Methods This international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial evaluated olaparib tablet maintenance treatment in platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer patients with a BRCA1/2 mutation who had received at least two lines of previous chemotherapy. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline of 0–1 and histologically confirmed, relapsed, high-grade serous ovarian cancer or high-grade endometrioid cancer, including primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to olaparib (300 mg in two 150 mg tablets, twice daily) or matching placebo tablets using an interactive voice and web response system. Randomisation was stratified by response to previous platinum chemotherapy (complete vs partial) and length of platinum-free interval (6–12 months vs ≥12 months) and treatment assignment was masked for patients, those giving the interventions, data collectors, and data analysers. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival and we report the primary analysis from this ongoing study. The efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population; safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01874353, and is ongoing and no longer recruiting patients. Findings Between Sept 3, 2013, and Nov 21, 2014, we enrolled 295 eligible patients who were randomly assigned to receive olaparib (n=196) or placebo (n=99). One patient in the olaparib group was randomised in error and did not receive study treatment. Investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was significantly longer with olaparib (19·1 months [95% CI 16·3–25·7]) than with placebo (5·5 months [5·2–5·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·30 [95% CI 0·22–0·41], p vs two [2%] of 99 patients in the placebo group), fatigue or asthenia (eight [4%] vs two [2%]), and neutropenia (ten [5%] vs four [4%]). Serious adverse events were experienced by 35 (18%) patients in the olaparib group and eight (8%) patients in the placebo group. The most common in the olaparib group were anaemia (seven [4%] patients), abdominal pain (three [2%] patients), and intestinal obstruction (three [2%] patients). The most common in the placebo group were constipation (two [2%] patients) and intestinal obstruction (two [2%] patients). One (1%) patient in the olaparib group had a treatment-related adverse event (acute myeloid leukaemia) with an outcome of death. Interpretation Olaparib tablet maintenance treatment provided a significant progression-free survival improvement with no detrimental effect on quality of life in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed ovarian cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation. Apart from anaemia, toxicities with olaparib were low grade and manageable. Funding AstraZeneca.

1,280 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Robert L. Coleman1, Amit M. Oza2, Domenica Lorusso, Carol Aghajanian3, Ana Oaknin4, Andrew Dean, Nicoletta Colombo5, Johanne I Weberpals6, Andrew R Clamp7, Giovanni Scambia8, Alexandra Leary9, Robert W Holloway, Margarita Amenedo Gancedo, Peter C.C. Fong10, Jeffrey C. Goh11, David M. O'Malley12, Deborah K. Armstrong13, Jesus Garcia-Donas, Elizabeth M. Swisher14, Anne Floquet, Gottfried E. Konecny15, Iain A. McNeish16, Clare L. Scott17, Terri Cameron, Lara Maloney, Jeff Isaacson, Sandra Goble, Caroline Grace, Thomas Harding, Mitch Raponi, James Sun18, Kevin K. Lin, Heidi Giordano, Jonathan A. Ledermann19, Martin Buck, A Dean, Michael Friedlander, J C Goh11, Paul R. Harnett, G Kichenadasse20, C L Scott17, H Denys, Luc Dirix, Ignace Vergote, Laurie Elit, Prafull Ghatage, Amit M. Oza2, Marie Plante, Diane Provencher, J I Weberpals6, Stephen Welch, A Floquet, Laurence Gladieff, Florence Joly, A Leary9, Alain Lortholary, Jean-Pierre Lotz, J. Medioni, Olivier Tredan, Benoit You, A El-Balat, C Hänle, P Krabisch, T Neunhöffer, M Pölcher, Pauline Wimberger, Amnon Amit, S Kovel, M Leviov, Tamar Safra, Ronnie Shapira-Frommer, Salomon M. Stemmer, Alessandra Bologna, N Colombo5, Domenica Lorusso, Sandro Pignata, Roberto Sabbatini, G Scambia8, Stefano Tamberi, Claudio Zamagni, P C Fong10, A O'Donnell, M Amenedo Gancedo, A Casado Herraez, J Garcia-Donas, E M Guerra, A Oaknin4, I Palacio, Iris L. Romero, A Sanchez, Susana Banerjee, A Clamp7, Y Drew, Hani Gabra, D Jackson, Jonathan A. Ledermann19, I A McNeish16, Christine Parkinson, Melanie E Powell, C Aghajanian3, D K Armstrong13, Michael J. Birrer, Mary K. Buss, Setsuko K. Chambers, L-m Chen, Robert L. Coleman1, R W Holloway, G E Konecny15, L Ma, Mark A. Morgan, R T Morris, David G. Mutch, D M O'Malley12, B M Slomovitz, E M Swisher14, T Vanderkwaak, M Vulfovich 
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

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Adjuvant treatment with letrozole had superior efficacy (DFS) compared with tamoxifen in all age groups, and age per se should not unduly affect the choice of adjuvant endocrine therapy.
Abstract: Purpose To explore potential differences in efficacy, treatment completion, and adverse events (AEs) in elderly women receiving adjuvant tamoxifen or letrozole for five years in the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial. Methods This report includes the 4,922 patients allocated to 5 years of letrozole or tamoxifen in the BIG 1-98 trial. The median follow-up was 40.4 months. Subpopulation Treatment Effect Pattern Plot (STEPP) analysis was used to examine the patterns of differences in disease-free survival and incidences of AEs according to age. In addition, three categoric age groups were defined: “younger postmenopausal” patients were younger than 65 years (n = 3,127), “older” patients were 65 to 74 years old (n = 1,500), and “elderly” patients were 75 years of age or older (n = 295). Results Efficacy results for subpopulations defined by age were similar to the overall trial results: Letrozole significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS), the primary end point, compared with tamoxifen. Elder...

134 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In recurrent disease resistant to standard treatment, gefitinib has only minimal monotherapy activity, however, the observation that 20% of patients treated with gefITinib had stable disease may warrant further investigation.

128 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2011
TL;DR: The sheer volume and scope of data posed by this flood of data pose a significant challenge to the development of efficient and intuitive visualization tools able to scale to very large data sets and to flexibly integrate multiple data types, including clinical data.
Abstract: Rapid improvements in sequencing and array-based platforms are resulting in a flood of diverse genome-wide data, including data from exome and whole-genome sequencing, epigenetic surveys, expression profiling of coding and noncoding RNAs, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) and copy number profiling, and functional assays. Analysis of these large, diverse data sets holds the promise of a more comprehensive understanding of the genome and its relation to human disease. Experienced and knowledgeable human review is an essential component of this process, complementing computational approaches. This calls for efficient and intuitive visualization tools able to scale to very large data sets and to flexibly integrate multiple data types, including clinical data. However, the sheer volume and scope of data pose a significant challenge to the development of such tools.

2,187 citations

01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: Lymphedema is a common complication after treatment for breast cancer and factors associated with increased risk of lymphedEMA include extent of axillary surgery, axillary radiation, infection, and patient obesity.

1,988 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
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

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Among patients with a germline BRCA mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer, progression-free survival was longer with maintenance olaparib than with placebo, and there was no significant between-group difference in health-related quality of life.
Abstract: Background Patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation make up a small subgroup of those with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The poly(adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase (PARP) in...

1,321 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The role of cell cycle proteins in cancer, the rationale for targeting them in cancer treatment and results of clinical trials, as well as the future therapeutic potential of various cell cycle inhibitors are discussed.
Abstract: Cancer is characterized by uncontrolled tumour cell proliferation resulting from aberrant activity of various cell cycle proteins. Therefore, cell cycle regulators are considered attractive targets in cancer therapy. Intriguingly, animal models demonstrate that some of these proteins are not essential for proliferation of non-transformed cells and development of most tissues. By contrast, many cancers are uniquely dependent on these proteins and hence are selectively sensitive to their inhibition. After decades of research on the physiological functions of cell cycle proteins and their relevance for cancer, this knowledge recently translated into the first approved cancer therapeutic targeting of a direct regulator of the cell cycle. In this Review, we focus on proteins that directly regulate cell cycle progression (such as cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs)), as well as checkpoint kinases, Aurora kinases and Polo-like kinases (PLKs). We discuss the role of cell cycle proteins in cancer, the rationale for targeting them in cancer treatment and results of clinical trials, as well as the future therapeutic potential of various cell cycle inhibitors.

1,250 citations