Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Oxford University Press
About: Journal of the National Cancer Institute is an academic journal published by Oxford University Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Cancer & Breast cancer. It has an ISSN identifier of 0027-8874. Over the lifetime, 22128 publications have been published receiving 1481052 citations. The journal is also known as: National Cancer Institute. Journal & JNCI.
Papers published on a yearly basis
TL;DR: A model by which a combined assessment of all existing lesions, characterized by target lesions and nontarget lesions, is used to extrapolate an overall response to treatment is proposed, which is largely validated by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group and integrated into the present guidelines.
Abstract: Anticancer cytotoxic agents go through a process by which their antitumor activity-on the basis of the amount of tumor shrinkage they could generate-has been investigated. In the late 1970s, the International Union Against Cancer and the World Health Organization introduced specific criteria for the codification of tumor response evaluation. In 1994, several organizations involved in clinical research combined forces to tackle the review of these criteria on the basis of the experience and knowledge acquired since then. After several years of intensive discussions, a new set of guidelines is ready that will supersede the former criteria. In parallel to this initiative, one of the participating groups developed a model by which response rates could be derived from unidimensional measurement of tumor lesions instead of the usual bidimensional approach. This new concept has been largely validated by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Group and integrated into the present guidelines. This special article also provides some philosophic background to clarify the various purposes of response evaluation. It proposes a model by which a combined assessment of all existing lesions, characterized by target lesions (to be measured) and nontarget lesions, is used to extrapolate an overall response to treatment. Methods of assessing tumor lesions are better codified, briefly within the guidelines and in more detail in Appendix I. All other aspects of response evaluation have been discussed, reviewed, and amended whenever appropriate.
TL;DR: In this paper, the role and limitations of retrospective investigations of factors possibly associated with the occurrence of a disease are discussed and their relationship to forward-type studies emphasized, and examples of situations in which misleading associations could arise through the use of inappropriate control groups are presented.
Abstract: The role and limitations of retrospective investigations of factors possibly associated with the occurrence of a disease are discussed and their relationship to forward-type studies emphasized. Examples of situations in which misleading associations could arise through the use of inappropriate control groups are presented. The possibility of misleading associations may be minimized by controlling or matching on factors which could produce such associations; the statistical analysis will then be modified. Statistical methodology is presented for analyzing retrospective study data, including chi-square measures of statistical significance of the observed association between the disease and the factor under study, and measures for interpreting the association in terms of an increased relative risk of disease. An extension of the chi-square test to the situation where data are subclassified by factors controlled in the analysis is given. A summary relative risk formula, R, is presented and discussed in connection with the problem of weighting the individual subcategory relative risks according to their importance or their precision. Alternative relative-risk formulas, R I , R2, Ra, and R4/ which require the calculation of subcategory-adjusted proportions ot the study factor among diseased persons and controls for the computation of relative risks, are discussed. While these latter formulas may be useful in many instances, they may be biased or inconsistent and are not, in fact, overages of the relative risks observed in the separate subcategories. Only the relative-risk formula, R, of those presented, can be viewed as such an average. The relationship of the matched-sample method to the subclassification approach is indicated. The statistical methodolo~y presented is illustrated with examples from a study of women with epidermoid and undifferentiated pulmonary ccrclnomc.e-J. Nat. Cancer Inst, 22: 719748, 1959.
TL;DR: The reliability and validity of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire were highly consistent across the three language-cultural groups studied: patients from English-speaking countries, Northern Europe, and Southern Europe.
Abstract: Background In 1986, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) initiated a research program to develop an integrated, modular approach for evaluating the quality of life of patients participating in international clinical trials. Purpose We report here the results of an international field study of the practicality, reliability, and validity of the EORTC QLQ-C30, the current core questionnaire. The QLQ-C30 incorporates nine multi-item scales: five functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, and social); three symptom scales (fatigue, pain, and nausea and vomiting); and a global health and quality-of-life scale. Several single-item symptom measures are also included. Methods The questionnaire was administered before treatment and once during treatment to 305 patients with nonresectable lung cancer from centers in 13 countries. Clinical variables assessed included disease stage, weight loss, performance status, and treatment toxicity. Results The average time required to complete the questionnaire was approximately 11 minutes, and most patients required no assistance. The data supported the hypothesized scale structure of the questionnaire with the exception of role functioning (work and household activities), which was also the only multi-item scale that failed to meet the minimal standards for reliability (Cronbach's alpha coefficient > or = .70) either before or during treatment. Validity was shown by three findings. First, while all interscale correlations were statistically significant, the correlation was moderate, indicating that the scales were assessing distinct components of the quality-of-life construct. Second, most of the functional and symptom measures discriminated clearly between patients differing in clinical status as defined by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status scale, weight loss, and treatment toxicity. Third, there were statistically significant changes, in the expected direction, in physical and role functioning, global quality of life, fatigue, and nausea and vomiting, for patients whose performance status had improved or worsened during treatment. The reliability and validity of the questionnaire were highly consistent across the three language-cultural groups studied: patients from English-speaking countries, Northern Europe, and Southern Europe. Conclusions These results support the EORTC QLQ-C30 as a reliable and valid measure of the quality of life of cancer patients in multicultural clinical research settings. Work is ongoing to examine the performance of the questionnaire among more heterogenous patient samples and in phase II and phase III clinical trials.
TL;DR: The SRB assay provides a sensitive measure of drug-induced cytotoxicity, is useful in quantitating clonogenicity, and is well suited to high-volume, automated drug screening.
Abstract: We have developed a rapid, sensitive, and inexpensive method for measuring the cellular protein content of adherent and suspension cultures in 96-well microtiter plates. The method is suitable for ordinary laboratory purposes and for very large-scale applications, such as the National Cancer Institute's disease-oriented in vitro anticancer-drug discovery screen, which requires the use of several million culture wells per year. Cultures fixed with trichloroacetic acid were stained for 30 minutes with 0.4% (wt/vol) sulforhodamine B (SRB) dissolved in 1% acetic acid. Unbound dye was removed by four washes with 1% acetic acid, and protein-bound dye was extracted with 10 mM unbuffered Tris base [tris (hydroxymethyl)aminomethane] for determination of optical density in a computer-interfaced, 96-well microtiter plate reader. The SRB assay results were linear with the number of cells and with values for cellular protein measured by both the Lowry and Bradford assays at densities ranging from sparse subconfluence to multilayered supraconfluence. The signal-to-noise ratio at 564 nm was approximately 1.5 with 1,000 cells per well. The sensitivity of the SRB assay compared favorably with sensitivities of several fluorescence assays and was superior to those of both the Lowry and Bradford assays and to those of 20 other visible dyes. The SRB assay provides a colorimetric end point that is nondestructive, indefinitely stable, and visible to the naked eye. It provides a sensitive measure of drug-induced cytotoxicity, is useful in quantitating clonogenicity, and is well suited to high-volume, automated drug screening. SRB fluoresces strongly with laser excitation at 488 nm and can be measured quantitatively at the single-cell level by static fluorescence cytometry.
TL;DR: Tamoxifen decreases the incidence of invasive and noninvasive breast cancer and its use as a breast cancer preventive agent is appropriate in many women at increased risk for the disease.
Abstract: Background: The finding of a decrease in contralateral breast cancer incidence following tamoxifen administration for adjuvant therapy led to the concept that the drug might play a role in breast cancer prevention. To test this hypothesis, the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project initiated the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (P-1) in 1992. Methods: Women (N = 13 388) at increased risk for breast cancer because they 1) were 60 years of age or older, 2) were 35‐59 years of age with a 5-year predicted risk for breast cancer of at least 1.66%, or 3) had a history of lobular carcinoma in situ were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 6707) or 20 mg/day tamoxifen (n = 6681) for 5 years. Gail’s algorithm, based on a multivariate logistic regression model using combinations of risk factors, was used to estimate the probability (risk) of occurrence of breast cancer over time. Results: Tamoxifen reduced the risk of invasive breast cancer by 49% (two-sided P<.00001), with cumulative incidence through 69 months of follow-up of 43.4 versus 22.0 per 1000 women in the placebo and tamoxifen groups, respectively. The decreased risk occurred in women aged 49 years or younger (44%), 50‐59 years (51%), and 60 years or older (55%); risk was also reduced in women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ (56%) or atypical hyperplasia (86%) and in those with any category of predicted 5-year risk. Tamoxifen reduced the risk of noninvasive breast cancer by 50% (two-sided P<.002). Tamoxifen reduced the occurrence of estrogen receptor-positive tumors by 69%, but no difference in the occurrence of estrogen receptor-negative tumors was seen. Tamoxifen administration did not alter the average annual rate of ischemic heart disease; however, a reduction in hip, radius (Colles’), and spine fractures was observed. The rate of endometrial cancer was increased in the tamoxifen group (risk ratio = 2.53; 95% confidence interval = 1.35‐4.97); this increased risk occurred predominantly in women aged 50 years or older. All endometrial cancers in the tamoxifen group were stage I (localized disease); no endometrial cancer deaths have occurred in this group. No liver cancers or increase in colon, rectal, ovarian, or other tumors was observed in the tamoxifen group. The rates of stroke, pulmonary embolism, and deep-vein thrombosis were elevated in the tamoxifen group; these events occurred more frequently in women aged 50 years or older. Conclusions: Tamoxifen decreases the incidence of invasive and noninvasive breast cancer. Despite side effects resulting from administration of tamoxifen, its use as a breast cancer preventive agent is appropriate in many women at increased risk for the disease. [J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1371‐88]