Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Bruce D. Cheson is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Bruce D. Cheson.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1999

Report of an International Workshop to Standardize Response Criteria for Non-Hodgkin's Lymphomas

Bruce D. Cheson; Sandra J. Horning; Bertrand Coiffier; Margaret A. Shipp; Richard I. Fisher; Joseph M. Connors; T. Andrew Lister; Julie M. Vose; Antonio J. Grillo-Lopez; Anton Hagenbeek; Fernando Cabanillas; Donald Klippensten; Wolfgang Hiddemann; Ronald Castellino; Nancy Lee Harris; James O. Armitage; William Carter; Richard T. Hoppe; George P. Canellos

Standardized guidelines for response assessment are needed to ensure comparability among clinical trials in non-Hodgkins lymphomas (NHL). To achieve this, two meetings were convened among United States and international lymphoma experts representing medical hematology/oncology, radiology, radiation oncology, and pathology to review currently used response definitions and to develop a uniform set of criteria for assessing response in clinical trials. The criteria that were developed include anatomic definitions of response, with normal lymph node size after treatment of 1.5 cm in the longest transverse diameter by computer-assisted tomography scan. A designation of complete response/unconfirmed was adopted to include patients with a greater than 75% reduction in tumor size after therapy but with a residual mass, to include patients-especially those with large-cell NHL-who may not have residual disease. Single-photon emission computed tomography gallium scans are encouraged as a valuable adjunct to assessment of patients with large-cell NHL, but such scans require appropriate expertise. Flow cytometric, cytogenetic, and molecular studies are not currently included in response definitions. Response rates may be the most important objective in phase II trials where the activity of a new agent is important and may provide support for approval by regulatory agencies. However, the goals of most phase III trials are to identify therapies that will prolong the progression-free survival, if not the overall survival, of the treated patients. We hope that these guidelines will serve to improve communication among investigators and comparability among clinical trials until clinically relevant laboratory and imaging studies are identified and become more widely available.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma

Bruce D. Cheson; Beate Pfistner; Malik E. Juweid; Randy D. Gascoyne; Lena Specht; Sandra J. Horning; Bertrand Coiffier; Richard I. Fisher; Anton Hagenbeek; Emanuele Zucca; Steven T. Rosen; Sigrid Stroobants; T. Andrew Lister; Richard T. Hoppe; Martin Dreyling; Kensei Tobinai; Julie M. Vose; Joseph M. Connors; Massimo Federico; Volker Diehl

PURPOSE Standardized response criteria are needed to interpret and compare clinical trials and for approval of new therapeutic agents by regulatory agencies. METHODS The International Working Group response criteria (Cheson et al, J Clin Oncol 17:1244, 1999) were widely adopted, but required reassessment because of identified limitations and the increased use of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET), immunohistochemistry (IHC), and flow cytometry. The International Harmonization Project was convened to provide updated recommendations. RESULTS New guidelines are presented incorporating PET, IHC, and flow cytometry for definitions of response in non-Hodgkins and Hodgkins lymphoma. Standardized definitions of end points are provided. CONCLUSION We hope that these guidelines will be adopted widely by study groups, pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and regulatory agencies to facilitate the development of new and more effective therapies to improve the outcome of patients with lymphoma.


Blood | 2008

Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a report from the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia updating the National Cancer Institute-Working Group 1996 guidelines

Michael Hallek; Bruce D. Cheson; Daniel Catovsky; Federico Caligaris-Cappio; Guillaume Dighiero; Hartmut Döhner; Peter Hillmen; Michael J. Keating; Emili Montserrat; Kanti R. Rai; Thomas J. Kipps

Standardized criteria for diagnosis and response assessment are needed to interpret and compare clinical trials and for approval of new therapeutic agents by regulatory agencies. Therefore, a National Cancer Institute-sponsored Working Group (NCI-WG) on chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) published guidelines for the design and conduct of clinical trials for patients with CLL in 1988, which were updated in 1996. During the past decade, considerable progress has been achieved in defining new prognostic markers, diagnostic parameters, and treatment options. This prompted the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (IWCLL) to provide updated recommendations for the management of CLL in clinical trials and general practice.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2003

Revised Recommendations of the International Working Group for Diagnosis, Standardization of Response Criteria, Treatment Outcomes, and Reporting Standards for Therapeutic Trials in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Bruce D. Cheson; John M. Bennett; Kenneth J. Kopecky; Thomas Büchner; Cheryl L. Willman; Elihu H. Estey; Charles A. Schiffer; Hartmut Doehner; Martin S. Tallman; T. Andrew Lister; Francesco Lo-Coco; R. Willemze; Andrea Biondi; Wolfgang Hiddemann; Richard A. Larson; Bob Löwenberg; Miguel A. Sanz; David R. Head; Ryuzo Ohno; Clara D. Bloomfield

An International Working Group met to revise the diagnostic and response criteria for acute myelogenous leukemia originally published in 1990, as well as to provide definitions of outcomes and reporting standards to improve interpretability of data and comparisons among trials. Since the original publication, there have been major advances in our understanding of the biology and molecular genetics of acute leukemia that are clinically relevant and warrant incorporation into response definitions. Differences from the 1990 recommendations included a category of leukemia-free state, new criteria for complete remission, including cytogenetic and molecular remissions and remission duration. Storage of viable blasts for correlative studies is important for future progress in the therapy of these disorders.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Use of Positron Emission Tomography for Response Assessment of Lymphoma: Consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma

Malik E. Juweid; Sigrid Stroobants; Otto S. Hoekstra; Felix M. Mottaghy; Markus Dietlein; Ali Guermazi; Gregory A. Wiseman; Lale Kostakoglu; Klemens Scheidhauer; Andreas K. Buck; Ralph Naumann; Karoline Spaepen; Rodney J. Hicks; Wolfgang A. Weber; Sven N. Reske; Markus Schwaiger; Lawrence H. Schwartz; Josée M. Zijlstra; Barry A. Siegel; Bruce D. Cheson

PURPOSE To develop guidelines for performing and interpreting positron emission tomography (PET) imaging for treatment assessment in patients with lymphoma both in clinical practice and in clinical trials. METHODS An International Harmonization Project (IHP) was convened to discuss standardization of clinical trial parameters in lymphoma. An imaging subcommittee developed consensus recommendations based on published PET literature and the collective expertise of its members in the use of PET in lymphoma. Only recommendations subsequently endorsed by all IHP subcommittees were adopted. RECOMMENDATIONS PET after completion of therapy should be performed at least 3 weeks, and preferably at 6 to 8 weeks, after chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy, and 8 to 12 weeks after radiation or chemoradiotherapy. Visual assessment alone is adequate for interpreting PET findings as positive or negative when assessing response after completion of therapy. Mediastinal blood pool activity is recommended as the reference background activity to define PET positivity for a residual mass > or = 2 cm in greatest transverse diameter, regardless of its location. A smaller residual mass or a normal sized lymph node (ie, < or = 1 x 1 cm in diameter) should be considered positive if its activity is above that of the surrounding background. Specific criteria for defining PET positivity in the liver, spleen, lung, and bone marrow are also proposed. Use of attenuation-corrected PET is strongly encouraged. Use of PET for treatment monitoring during a course of therapy should only be done in a clinical trial or as part of a prospective registry.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2000

Fludarabine Compared with Chlorambucil as Primary Therapy for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Kanti R. Rai; Bercedis L. Peterson; Frederick R. Appelbaum; Jonathan E. Kolitz; Laurence Elias; Lois Shepherd; John D. Hines; Gregory A. Threatte; Richard A. Larson; Bruce D. Cheson; Charles A. Schiffer

BACKGROUND Fludarabine is an effective treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia that does not respond to initial treatment with chlorambucil. We compared the efficacy of fludarabine with that of chlorambucil in the primary treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. METHODS Between 1990 and 1994, we randomly assigned 509 previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia to one of the following treatments: fludarabine (25 mg per square meter of body-surface area, administered intravenously daily for 5 days every 28 days), chlorambucil (40 mg per square meter, given orally every 28 days), or fludarabine (20 mg per square meter per day for 5 days every 28 days) plus chlorambucil (20 mg per square meter every 28 days). Patients with an additional response at each monthly evaluation continued to receive the assigned treatment for a maximum of 12 cycles. RESULTS Assignment of patients to the fludarabine-plus-chlorambucil group was stopped when a planned interim analysis revealed excessive toxicity and a response rate that was not better than the rate with fludarabine alone. Among the other two groups, the response rate was significantly higher for fludarabine alone than for chlorambucil alone. Among 170 patients treated with fludarabine, 20 percent had a complete remission, and 43 percent had a partial remission. The corresponding values for 181 patients treated with chlorambucil were 4 percent and 33 percent (P< 0.001 for both comparisons). The median duration of remission and the median progression-free survival in the fludarabine group were 25 months and 20 months, respectively, whereas both values were 14 months in the chlorambucil group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The median overall survival among patients treated with fludarabine was 66 months, which was not significantly different from the overall survival in the other two groups (56 months with chlorambucil and 55 months with combined treatment). Severe infections and neutropenia were more frequent with fludarabine than with chlorambucil (P=0.08), although, overall, toxic effects were tolerable with the two single-drug regimens. CONCLUSIONS When used as the initial treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, fludarabine yields higher response rates and a longer duration of remission and progression-free survival than chlorambucil.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2014

Idelalisib and Rituximab in Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Richard R. Furman; Jeff Porter Sharman; Steven Coutre; Bruce D. Cheson; John M. Pagel; Peter Hillmen; Jacqueline C. Barrientos; Andrew D. Zelenetz; Thomas J. Kipps; Ian W. Flinn; Paolo Ghia; Herbert Eradat; Thomas J. Ervin; Nicole Lamanna; Bertrand Coiffier; Andrew R. Pettitt; Shuo Ma; Stephan Stilgenbauer; Paula Cramer; Maria Aiello; Dave Johnson; Langdon L. Miller; Daniel Li; Thomas M. Jahn; Roger Dansey; Michael Hallek; Susan O'Brien

BACKGROUND Patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have clinically significant coexisting medical conditions are less able to undergo standard chemotherapy. Effective therapies with acceptable side-effect profiles are needed for this patient population. METHODS In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of idelalisib, an oral inhibitor of the delta isoform of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, in combination with rituximab versus rituximab plus placebo. We randomly assigned 220 patients with decreased renal function, previous therapy-induced myelosuppression, or major coexisting illnesses to receive rituximab and either idelalisib (at a dose of 150 mg) or placebo twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. At the first prespecified interim analysis, the study was stopped early on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board owing to overwhelming efficacy. RESULTS The median progression-free survival was 5.5 months in the placebo group and was not reached in the idelalisib group (hazard ratio for progression or death in the idelalisib group, 0.15; P<0.001). Patients receiving idelalisib versus those receiving placebo had improved rates of overall response (81% vs. 13%; odds ratio, 29.92; P<0.001) and overall survival at 12 months (92% vs. 80%; hazard ratio for death, 0.28; P=0.02). Serious adverse events occurred in 40% of the patients receiving idelalisib and rituximab and in 35% of those receiving placebo and rituximab. CONCLUSIONS The combination of idelalisib and rituximab, as compared with placebo and rituximab, significantly improved progression-free survival, response rate, and overall survival among patients with relapsed CLL who were less able to undergo chemotherapy. (Funded by Gilead; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01539512.).


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2014

Recommendations for Initial Evaluation, Staging, and Response Assessment of Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: The Lugano Classification

Bruce D. Cheson; Richard I. Fisher; Sally Barrington; Franco Cavalli; Lawrence H. Schwartz; Emanuele Zucca; T. Andrew Lister

The purpose of this work was to modernize recommendations for evaluation, staging, and response assessment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). A workshop was held at the 11th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma in Lugano, Switzerland, in June 2011, that included leading hematologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, and nuclear medicine physicians, representing major international lymphoma clinical trials groups and cancer centers. Clinical and imaging subcommittees presented their conclusions at a subsequent workshop at the 12th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma, leading to revised criteria for staging and of the International Working Group Guidelines of 2007 for response. As a result, fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)–computed tomography (CT) was formally incorporated into standard staging for FDG-avid lymphomas. A modification of the Ann Arbor descriptive terminology will be used for anatomic distribution of disease extent, but the suffixes A or B for symptoms will only be included for HL. A bone marrow biopsy is no longer indicated for the routine staging of HL and most diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. However, regardless of stage, general practice is to treat patients based on limited (stages I and II, nonbulky) or advanced (stage III or IV) disease, with stage II bulky disease considered as limited or advanced disease based on histology and a number of prognostic factors. PET-CT will be used to assess response in FDG-avid histologies using the 5-point scale. The product of the perpendicular diameters of a single node can be used to identify progressive disease. Routine surveillance scans are discouraged. These recommendations should improve evaluation of patients with lymphoma and enhance the ability to compare outcomes of clinical trials.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2012

Results of a Pivotal Phase II Study of Brentuximab Vedotin for Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Anas Younes; Ajay K. Gopal; Scott E. Smith; Stephen M. Ansell; Joseph D. Rosenblatt; Kerry J. Savage; Radhakrishnan Ramchandren; Nancy L. Bartlett; Bruce D. Cheson; Sven de Vos; Andres Forero-Torres; Craig H. Moskowitz; Joseph M. Connors; Andreas Engert; Emily K. Larsen; Dana A. Kennedy; Eric L. Sievers; Robert Chen

PURPOSE Brentuximab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) that selectively delivers monomethyl auristatin E, an antimicrotubule agent, into CD30-expressing cells. In phase I studies, brentuximab vedotin demonstrated significant activity with a favorable safety profile in patients with relapsed or refractory CD30-positive lymphomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this multinational, open-label, phase II study, the efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin were evaluated in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkins lymphoma (HL) after autologous stem-cell transplantation (auto-SCT). Patients had histologically documented CD30-positive HL by central pathology review. A total of 102 patients were treated with brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg by intravenous infusion every 3 weeks. In the absence of disease progression or prohibitive toxicity, patients received a maximum of 16 cycles. The primary end point was the overall objective response rate (ORR) determined by an independent radiology review facility. RESULTS The ORR was 75% with complete remission (CR) in 34% of patients. The median progression-free survival time for all patients was 5.6 months, and the median duration of response for those in CR was 20.5 months. After a median observation time of more than 1.5 years, 31 patients were alive and free of documented progressive disease. The most common treatment-related adverse events were peripheral sensory neuropathy, nausea, fatigue, neutropenia, and diarrhea. CONCLUSION The ADC brentuximab vedotin was associated with manageable toxicity and induced objective responses in 75% of patients with relapsed or refractory HL after auto-SCT. Durable CRs approaching 2 years were observed, supporting study in earlier lines of therapy.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1990

Report of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored workshop on definitions of diagnosis and response in acute myeloid leukemia.

Bruce D. Cheson; Peter A. Cassileth; David R. Head; Charles A. Schiffer; John M. Bennett; Clara D. Bloomfield; Richard D. Brunning; Robert Peter Gale; Michael R. Grever; Michael J. Keating

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) sponsored a workshop to develop a set of standardized diagnostic and response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) clinical trials. The French-American-British (FAB) classification was retained for diagnosing AML, with the addition of patients with bone marrow morphologic features of a myelodysplastic syndrome and less than 30% bone marrow blasts, but with greater than or equal to 30% blasts in the peripheral blood. In this report, there are four important subgroups of AML not defined in the FAB classification that are discussed: undifferentiated acute leukemia, MO (AML lacking definitive myeloid differentiation by morphology or conventional cytochemistry but with ultrastructural or immunophenotypic evidence for AML), mixed lineage leukemia, and hypocellular AML. Definitions of response for clinical trials are presented to facilitate comparisons among different studies. Complete remission is considered the only response worth reporting in phase III trials, since lesser responses do not improve survival. Partial remissions may be of interest to identify active new agents in phase I and II studies. Monoclonal antibodies and cytogenetic studies are not part of the routine assessment of remission or reassessment at relapse, and their role in the evaluation of patients with AML is currently being evaluated in clinical trials. Although we recognize that some of the definitions in this report are arbitrary, generalized use of these guidelines will make results of clinical trials more comparable and interpretable.

Collaboration


Dive into the Bruce D. Cheson's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Nancy L. Bartlett

Washington University in St. Louis

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jeffrey L. Johnson

University of Colorado Denver

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Brad S. Kahl

Washington University in St. Louis

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Eric D. Hsi

Case Western Reserve University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Paul M. Barr

University of Rochester Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge