http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/44106/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/30828/ 2011-09-27T00:00:00Z Background: To evaluate the anticancer activity of erlotinib in patients with previously treated, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose dose is increased to that associated with a maximal level of tolerable skin toxicity (i.e., target rash (TR)); to characterise the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of higher doses of erlotinib. Methods: Patients initially received erlotinib 150 mg per day. The dose was successively increased in each patient to that associated with a TR. Anticancer activity was evaluated. Plasma, skin, and hair were sampled for PK and PD studies. Results: Erlotinib dose escalation to 200-475 mg per day was feasible in 38 (90%) of 42 patients. Twenty-four (57%) patients developed a TR, but 19 (79%) did so at 150 mg per day. Five (12%) patients, all of whom developed a TR, had a partial response. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.3 months (95% CI: 1.61, 4.14); median PFS was 3.5 months and 1.9 months, respectively, for patients who did and did not experience a TR (hazard ratio, 0.51; P0.051). Neither rash severity nor response correlated with erlotinib exposure. Conclusion: Intrapatient dose escalation of erlotinib does not appreciably increase the propensity to experience a maximal level of tolerable skin toxicity, or appear to increase the anticancer activity of erlotinib in NSCLC. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/29675/ 2008-03-01T00:00:00Z Objectives: The first consensus report that had been presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, The Netherlands. Methods: Medical oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. Results: The second part of the consensus paper includes the treatment of metastasised disease, residual tumour resection, salvage therapy, follow-up, and late toxicities. Conclusions: Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early-stage as well as of advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/29720/ 2008-03-01T00:00:00Z Objectives: The first consensus report presented by the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG) in the year 2004 has found widespread approval by many colleagues throughout the world. In November 2006, the group met a second time under the auspices of the Department of Urology of the Amsterdam Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Methods: Medical oncologists, urological surgeons, radiation oncologists as well as pathologists from several European countries reviewed and discussed the data that had emerged since the 2002 conference, and incorporated the new data into updated and revised guidelines. As for the first meeting, the methodology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) was applied. The results of the discussion were compiled by the writing committee. All participants have agreed to this final update. Results: The first part of the consensus paper describes the clinical presentation of the primary tumor, its treatment, the importance and treatment of testicular intraepithelial neoplasia (TIN), histological classification, staging and prognostic factors, and treatment of stage I seminoma and non-seminoma. Conclusions: Whereas the vast majority of the recommendations made in 2004 remain valid 3 yr later, refinements in the treatment of early- and advanced-stage testicular cancer have emerged from clinical trials. Despite technical improvements, expert clinical skills will continue to be one of the major determinants for the prognosis of patients with germ cell cancer. In addition, the particular needs of testicular cancer survivors have been acknowledged.