Tata Memorial Hospital
About: Tata Memorial Hospital is a(n) healthcare organization based out in Mumbai, India. It is known for research contribution in the topic(s): Cancer & Breast cancer. The organization has 3187 authors who have published 4636 publication(s) receiving 109143 citation(s).
Topics: Cancer, Breast cancer, Population, Sarcoma, Radiation therapy
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: The GLOBOCAN series of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as mentioned in this paper provides estimates of the worldwide incidence and mortality from 27 major cancers and for all cancers combined for 2012.
Abstract: Estimates of the worldwide incidence and mortality from 27 major cancers and for all cancers combined for 2012 are now available in the GLOBOCAN series of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. We review the sources and methods used in compiling the national cancer incidence and mortality estimates, and briefly describe the key results by cancer site and in 20 large “areas” of the world. Overall, there were 14.1 million new cases and 8.2 million deaths in 2012. The most commonly diagnosed cancers were lung (1.82 million), breast (1.67 million), and colorectal (1.36 million); the most common causes of cancer death were lung cancer (1.6 million deaths), liver cancer (745,000 deaths), and stomach cancer (723,000 deaths).
Gregory A. Roth1, Gregory A. Roth2, Degu Abate3, Kalkidan Hassen Abate4 +1025 more•Institutions (333)
10 Nov 2018-The Lancet
TL;DR: Non-communicable diseases comprised the greatest fraction of deaths, contributing to 73·4% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 72·5–74·1) of total deaths in 2017, while communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional causes accounted for 18·6% (17·9–19·6), and injuries 8·0% (7·7–8·2).
Abstract: Background Global development goals increasingly rely on country-specific estimates for benchmarking a nation's progress. To meet this need, the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2016 estimated global, regional, national, and, for selected locations, subnational cause-specific mortality beginning in the year 1980. Here we report an update to that study, making use of newly available data and improved methods. GBD 2017 provides a comprehensive assessment of cause-specific mortality for 282 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1980 to 2017. Methods The causes of death database is composed of vital registration (VR), verbal autopsy (VA), registry, survey, police, and surveillance data. GBD 2017 added ten VA studies, 127 country-years of VR data, 502 cancer-registry country-years, and an additional surveillance country-year. Expansions of the GBD cause of death hierarchy resulted in 18 additional causes estimated for GBD 2017. Newly available data led to subnational estimates for five additional countries—Ethiopia, Iran, New Zealand, Norway, and Russia. Deaths assigned International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for non-specific, implausible, or intermediate causes of death were reassigned to underlying causes by redistribution algorithms that were incorporated into uncertainty estimation. We used statistical modelling tools developed for GBD, including the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm), to generate cause fractions and cause-specific death rates for each location, year, age, and sex. Instead of using UN estimates as in previous versions, GBD 2017 independently estimated population size and fertility rate for all locations. Years of life lost (YLLs) were then calculated as the sum of each death multiplied by the standard life expectancy at each age. All rates reported here are age-standardised. Findings At the broadest grouping of causes of death (Level 1), non-communicable diseases (NCDs) comprised the greatest fraction of deaths, contributing to 73·4% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 72·5–74·1) of total deaths in 2017, while communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional (CMNN) causes accounted for 18·6% (17·9–19·6), and injuries 8·0% (7·7–8·2). Total numbers of deaths from NCD causes increased from 2007 to 2017 by 22·7% (21·5–23·9), representing an additional 7·61 million (7·20–8·01) deaths estimated in 2017 versus 2007. The death rate from NCDs decreased globally by 7·9% (7·0–8·8). The number of deaths for CMNN causes decreased by 22·2% (20·0–24·0) and the death rate by 31·8% (30·1–33·3). Total deaths from injuries increased by 2·3% (0·5–4·0) between 2007 and 2017, and the death rate from injuries decreased by 13·7% (12·2–15·1) to 57·9 deaths (55·9–59·2) per 100 000 in 2017. Deaths from substance use disorders also increased, rising from 284 000 deaths (268 000–289 000) globally in 2007 to 352 000 (334 000–363 000) in 2017. Between 2007 and 2017, total deaths from conflict and terrorism increased by 118·0% (88·8–148·6). A greater reduction in total deaths and death rates was observed for some CMNN causes among children younger than 5 years than for older adults, such as a 36·4% (32·2–40·6) reduction in deaths from lower respiratory infections for children younger than 5 years compared with a 33·6% (31·2–36·1) increase in adults older than 70 years. Globally, the number of deaths was greater for men than for women at most ages in 2017, except at ages older than 85 years. Trends in global YLLs reflect an epidemiological transition, with decreases in total YLLs from enteric infections, respiratory infections and tuberculosis, and maternal and neonatal disorders between 1990 and 2017; these were generally greater in magnitude at the lowest levels of the Socio-demographic Index (SDI). At the same time, there were large increases in YLLs from neoplasms and cardiovascular diseases. YLL rates decreased across the five leading Level 2 causes in all SDI quintiles. The leading causes of YLLs in 1990—neonatal disorders, lower respiratory infections, and diarrhoeal diseases—were ranked second, fourth, and fifth, in 2017. Meanwhile, estimated YLLs increased for ischaemic heart disease (ranked first in 2017) and stroke (ranked third), even though YLL rates decreased. Population growth contributed to increased total deaths across the 20 leading Level 2 causes of mortality between 2007 and 2017. Decreases in the cause-specific mortality rate reduced the effect of population growth for all but three causes: substance use disorders, neurological disorders, and skin and subcutaneous diseases. Interpretation Improvements in global health have been unevenly distributed among populations. Deaths due to injuries, substance use disorders, armed conflict and terrorism, neoplasms, and cardiovascular disease are expanding threats to global health. For causes of death such as lower respiratory and enteric infections, more rapid progress occurred for children than for the oldest adults, and there is continuing disparity in mortality rates by sex across age groups. Reductions in the death rate of some common diseases are themselves slowing or have ceased, primarily for NCDs, and the death rate for selected causes has increased in the past decade. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
29 Oct 2005-The Lancet
TL;DR: Treatment with gefitinib was not associated with significant improvement in survival in either coprimary population, and there was pronounced heterogeneity in survival outcomes between groups of patients, with some evidence of benefit among never-smokers and patients of Asian origin.
Abstract: Summary Background This placebo-controlled phase III study investigated the effect on survival of gefitinib as second-line or third-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods 1692 patients who were refractory to or intolerant of their latest chemotherapy regimen were randomly assigned in a ratio of two to one either gefitinib (250 mg/day) or placebo, plus best supportive care. The primary endpoint was survival in the overall population of patients and those with adenocarcinoma. The primary analysis of the population for survival was by intention to treat. This study has been submitted for registration with ClinicalTrials.gov, number 1839IL/709. Findings 1129 patients were assigned gefitinib and 563 placebo. At median follow-up of 7·2 months, median survival did not differ significantly between the groups in the overall population (5·6 months for gefitinib and 5·1 months for placebo; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·77–1·02], p=0·087) or among the 812 patients with adenocarcinoma (6·3 months vs 5·4 months; 0·84 [0·68–1·03], p=0·089). Preplanned subgroup analyses showed significantly longer survival in the gefitinib group than the placebo group for never-smokers (n=375; 0·67 [0·49–0·92], p=0·012; median survival 8·9 vs 6·1 months) and patients of Asian origin (n=342; 0·66 [0·48–0·91], p=0·01; median survival 9·5 vs 5·5 months). Gefitinib was well tolerated, as in previous studies. Interpretation Treatment with gefitinib was not associated with significant improvement in survival in either coprimary population. There was pronounced heterogeneity in survival outcomes between groups of patients, with some evidence of benefit among never-smokers and patients of Asian origin.
15 Apr 2010
Thomas J. Hudson1, Thomas J. Hudson2, Warwick Anderson3, Axel Aretz4 +270 more•Institutions (92)
TL;DR: Systematic studies of more than 25,000 cancer genomes will reveal the repertoire of oncogenic mutations, uncover traces of the mutagenic influences, define clinically relevant subtypes for prognosis and therapeutic management, and enable the development of new cancer therapies.
Abstract: The International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) was launched to coordinate large-scale cancer genome studies in tumours from 50 different cancer types and/or subtypes that are of clinical and societal importance across the globe. Systematic studies of more than 25,000 cancer genomes at the genomic, epigenomic and transcriptomic levels will reveal the repertoire of oncogenic mutations, uncover traces of the mutagenic influences, define clinically relevant subtypes for prognosis and therapeutic management, and enable the development of new cancer therapies.
Mayo Clinic1, Southampton General Hospital2, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center3, Lund University4, University of Amsterdam5, Trinity College, Dublin6, Karolinska University Hospital7, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University8, University of Barcelona9, Harvard University10, Medical University of Graz11, Heidelberg University12, University of Hamburg13, University of Liverpool14, University of Colorado Boulder15, Tata Memorial Hospital16, Teikyo University17, Kyoto University18, Johns Hopkins University19, Thomas Jefferson University20
TL;DR: This new definition and grading system of postoperative pancreatic Fistula should lead to a more universally consistent evaluation of operative outcomes after pancreatic operation and will allow for a better comparison of techniques used to mitigate the rate and clinical impact of a pancreatic fistula.
Abstract: Background In 2005, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula developed a definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula that has been accepted universally. Eleven years later, because postoperative pancreatic fistula remains one of the most relevant and harmful complications of pancreatic operation, the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification has become the gold standard in defining postoperative pancreatic fistula in clinical practice. The aim of the present report is to verify the value of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula and to update the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification in light of recent evidence that has emerged, as well as to address the lingering controversies about the original definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Methods The International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula reconvened as the International Study Group in Pancreatic Surgery in order to perform a review of the recent literature and consequently to update and revise the grading system of postoperative pancreatic fistula. Results Based on the literature since 2005 investigating the validity and clinical use of the original International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula classification, a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula is now redefined as a drain output of any measurable volume of fluid with an amylase level >3 times the upper limit of institutional normal serum amylase activity, associated with a clinically relevant development/condition related directly to the postoperative pancreatic fistula. Consequently, the former “grade A postoperative pancreatic fistula” is now redefined and called a “biochemical leak,” because it has no clinical importance and is no longer referred to a true pancreatic fistula. Postoperative pancreatic fistula grades B and C are confirmed but defined more strictly. In particular, grade B requires a change in the postoperative management; drains are either left in place >3 weeks or repositioned through endoscopic or percutaneous procedures. Grade C postoperative pancreatic fistula refers to those postoperative pancreatic fistula that require reoperation or lead to single or multiple organ failure and/or mortality attributable to the pancreatic fistula. Conclusion This new definition and grading system of postoperative pancreatic fistula should lead to a more universally consistent evaluation of operative outcomes after pancreatic operation and will allow for a better comparison of techniques used to mitigate the rate and clinical impact of a pancreatic fistula. Use of this updated classification will also allow for more precise comparisons of surgical quality between surgeons and units who perform pancreatic surgery.
Showing all 3187 results
|Al B. Benson||113||578||48364|
|Ashish K. Jha||87||503||30020|
|Snehal G. Patel||73||367||16905|
|Ajit S. Puri||54||369||9948|
|Jasbir S. Arora||51||351||15696|
|Ian T. Magrath||47||107||8084|
|Pradeep Kumar Gupta||44||416||7181|
|Shiv K. Gupta||43||150||8911|
|Kikkeri N. Naresh||43||245||6264|
Related Institutions (5)
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
40.1K papers, 640.4K citations
The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
13.4K papers, 668.8K citations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
65.3K papers, 4.4M citations
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
92.5K papers, 4.7M citations
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre
9.8K papers, 458.8K citations