ORCID Profile
0000-0001-8318-4615
Current Organisations
Liverpool Hospital
,
Western Sydney University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
Date: 2015
Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Date: 02-2019
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2019.37.4_SUPPL.675
Abstract: 675 Background: Consensus international guidelines recommend the use of neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy in patients with stage II-III rectal cancer. Despite this, due to factors including inaccurate/under-staging, patient co-morbidities and acute presentations, a proportion will undergo up-front surgical resection. The survival benefit of adjuvant therapy is unclear in this real world, non-trial population. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients presenting with stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma in South Western Sydney and Illawarra Shoalhaven Health Districts, Australia, between 2006 to 2015 was performed. Data was extracted from electronic health records, with institutional ethics approval. Treatment modalities, clinicopathological, recurrence and survival data were analyzed. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) by treatment modality. Results: 549 patients were identified, of which 295 (54%) underwent up-front surgical resection without neoadjuvant therapy. Of this cohort, 137 (46%) had no adjuvant therapy (Group A), 103 (35%) had adjuvant chemotherapy alone (Group B), and 55 (19%) had adjuvant radiotherapy +/- chemotherapy (Group C). Receipt of any adjuvant treatment was significantly associated with improved OS (5 year OS 56 vs. 79%, HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.3 – 0.6, p 0.0001) and recurrence free survival (5 yr RFS 25% vs. 47%, HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.5 – 0.9, p=0.01), but not cancer specific survival (5yr CSS 75 vs. 80%, HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.5 – 1.3, p = 0.30). Group B had improved OS compared to Group A (5 yr OS 56% vs. 80%, HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.22 – 0.55, p 0.0001). There was a trend to improved OS in Group C vs. Group A (5yr OS 56.0% vs. 69.2%, HR 0.79 95% CI 0.6 – 1.01, p = 0.052). The improved OS in Group B versus Group A remained significant in multivariate analysis (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.22 – 0.77, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Adjuvant chemotherapy improved OS in this real world cohort, and there was a trend to a benefit with adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. However, the lack of difference in cancer specific survival suggests that this benefit may be partly driven by patient selection bias. Further exploratory analyses to identify sub-groups deriving a cancer specific survival benefit are required.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 30-10-2018
DOI: 10.1111/AJCO.13089
Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Date: 02-2019
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2019.37.4_SUPPL.678
Abstract: 678 Background: There is limited information on outcomes in elderly patients with rectal cancer as they are often excluded from clinical trials. This study aimed to assess treatment patterns and outcomes in these patients. Methods: We utilised data from electronic records to identify patients aged ≥ 70 years with a histological diagnosis of rectal cancer from 2006-2015, treated in the South Western Sydney and Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health Districts, Australia. Treatment modalities, recurrence and survival data were analysed. Results: We identified 942 patients with rectal cancer, with median follow-up of 3.4 years. 393 patients (42%) were aged ≥ 70 years. Median age of this cohort was 77 years (range 70–96 years). Elderly patients were more likely to present with locoregional disease (stage I-III, 83% vs. 75%) and more likely to receive palliative treatment only (21% vs. 16%, p = 0.0005). Of 704 patients who received treatment with curative intent, 300 (43%) were ≥ 70 years. Although clinicopathological features were similar between elderly and young patients, patients ≥ 70 years were more likely to be treated with surgery alone (56% vs. 28%, p 0.0001), less likely to receive neoadjuvant (25% vs. 44%, p 0.0001) or adjuvant treatments (29% vs. 55%, p 0.0001), or be discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting (51% vs. 61%, p = 0.001). Compared to younger patients, elderly patients had a significantly poorer overall survival (HR 2.9, 95% CI 2.2 – 3.7, p 0.0001). There were no significant differences in cancer specific survival (HR 1.4, 95% CI 0.98 – 2.0, p = 0.06) or relapse free survival (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.7 – 1.2, p = 0.60). Conclusions: Although more elderly patients were treated with palliative intent compared to younger patients, the majority of elderly rectal cancer patients were still treated with curative intent. Most had surgery alone. Uptake of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, as well as multidisciplinary involvement, was lower. Elderly patients had similar cancer-specific outcomes compared to younger patients, supporting curative intent treatment in these patients. Further analyses are underway to identify subgroups in the elderly population who benefit from trimodality therapy, and potential differences in their disease biology.
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 22-03-2021
DOI: 10.1136/JCLINPATH-2020-207309
Abstract: The role of the local tumour and stromal immune landscape is increasingly recognised to be important in cancer development, progression and response to therapy. The composition, function, spatial orientation and gene expression profile of the infiltrate of the innate and adaptive immune system at the tumour and surrounding tissue has an established prognostic role in colorectal cancer (CRC). Multiple studies have confirmed that a tumour immune microenvironment (TIME) reflective of a type 1 adaptive immune response is associated with improved prognosis. There have been significant efforts to evolve these observations into validated, histopathology-based prognostic biomarkers, such as the Immunoscore. However, the clinical need lies much more in the development of predictive, not prognostic, biomarkers which have the potential to improve patient outcomes. This is particularly pertinent to help guide cytotoxic chemotherapy use in CRC, which remains the standard of care. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has recognised immunomodulatory activity distinct from its antimitotic effects, including mechanisms such as immunogenic cell death (ICD) and induction/inhibition of key immune players. Response to chemotherapy may differ with regard to molecular subtype of CRC, which are strongly associated with immune phenotypes. Thus, immune markers are potentially useful, though under-reported, predictive biomarkers. In this review, we discuss the impact of the TIME on response to cytotoxic chemotherapy in CRC, with a focus on baseline immune markers, and associated genomic and transcriptomic signatures.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 30-10-2017
DOI: 10.1111/AJCO.12799
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Kate Wilkinson.