Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Corneel Coens is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Corneel Coens.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2010

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Primary Surgery in Stage IIIC or IV Ovarian Cancer

Ignace Vergote; Claes G. Tropé; Frédéric Amant; Gunnar B. Kristensen; Tom Ehlen; Nick Johnson; René H.M. Verheijen; Maria E. L. van der Burg; A.J. Lacave; Pierluigi Benedetti Panici; Gemma G. Kenter; Antonio Casado; Cesar Mendiola; Corneel Coens; L Verleye; Gavin Stuart; Sergio Pecorelli; Nick Reed

BACKGROUND Primary debulking surgery before initiation of chemotherapy has been the standard of care for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with stage IIIC or IV epithelial ovarian carcinoma, fallopian-tube carcinoma, or primary peritoneal carcinoma to primary debulking surgery followed by platinum-based chemotherapy or to neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy followed by debulking surgery (so-called interval debulking surgery). RESULTS Of the 670 patients randomly assigned to a study treatment, 632 (94.3%) were eligible and started the treatment. The majority of these patients had extensive stage IIIC or IV disease at primary debulking surgery (metastatic lesions that were larger than 5 cm in diameter in 74.5% of patients and larger than 10 cm in 61.6%). The largest residual tumor was 1 cm or less in diameter in 41.6% of patients after primary debulking and in 80.6% of patients after interval debulking. Postoperative rates of adverse effects and mortality tended to be higher after primary debulking than after interval debulking. The hazard ratio for death (intention-to-treat analysis) in the group assigned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking, as compared with the group assigned to primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy, was 0.98 (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.13; P=0.01 for noninferiority), and the hazard ratio for progressive disease was 1.01 (90% CI, 0.89 to 1.15). Complete resection of all macroscopic disease (at primary or interval surgery) was the strongest independent variable in predicting overall survival. CONCLUSIONS Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery was not inferior to primary debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy as a treatment option for patients with bulky stage IIIC or IV ovarian carcinoma in this study. Complete resection of all macroscopic disease, whether performed as primary treatment or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, remains the objective whenever cytoreductive surgery is performed. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00003636.)


The Lancet | 2012

Pazopanib for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma (PALETTE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

Winette T. A. van der Graaf; Jean Yves Blay; Sant P. Chawla; Dong-Wan Kim; B. Bui-Nguyen; Paolo G. Casali; Patrick Schöffski; Massimo Aglietta; Arthur P. Staddon; Yasuo Beppu; Axel Le Cesne; Hans Gelderblom; Ian Judson; Nobuhito Araki; Monia Ouali; Sandrine Marreaud; Rachel Hodge; Mohammed R. Dewji; Corneel Coens; George D. Demetri; Christopher D. M. Fletcher; Angelo Paolo Dei Tos; Peter Hohenberger

BACKGROUND Pazopanib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has single-agent activity in patients with advanced non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma. We investigated the effect of pazopanib on progression-free survival in patients with metastatic non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma after failure of standard chemotherapy. METHODS This phase 3 study was done in 72 institutions, across 13 countries. Patients with angiogenesis inhibitor-naive, metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma, progressing despite previous standard chemotherapy, were randomly assigned by an interactive voice randomisation system in a 2:1 ratio in permuted blocks (with block sizes of six) to receive either pazopanib 800 mg once daily or placebo, with no subsequent cross-over. Patients, investigators who gave the treatment, those assessing outcomes, and those who did the analysis were masked to the allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Efficacy analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00753688. FINDINGS 372 patients were registered and 369 were randomly assigned to receive pazopanib (n=246) or placebo (n=123). Median progression-free survival was 4·6 months (95% CI 3·7-4·8) for pazopanib compared with 1·6 months (0·9-1·8) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·31, 95% CI 0·24-0·40; p<0·0001). Overall survival was 12·5 months (10·6-14·8) with pazopanib versus 10·7 months (8·7-12·8) with placebo (HR 0·86, 0·67-1·11; p=0·25). The most common adverse events were fatigue (60 in the placebo group [49%] vs 155 in the pazopanib group [65%]), diarrhoea (20 [16%] vs 138 [58%]), nausea (34 [28%] vs 129 [54%]), weight loss (25 [20%] vs 115 [48%]), and hypertension (8 [7%] vs 99 [41%]). The median relative dose intensity was 100% for placebo and 96% for pazopanib. INTERPRETATION Pazopanib is a new treatment option for patients with metastatic non-adipocytic soft-tissue sarcoma after previous chemotherapy. FUNDING GlaxoSmithKline.


Lancet Oncology | 2014

Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial

M. Donker; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Marieke E. Straver; Philip Meijnen; Cornelis J. H. van de Velde; Robert E. Mansel; Luigi Cataliotti; A. Helen Westenberg; Jean H. G. Klinkenbijl; Lorenzo Orzalesi; Willem H. Bouma; Huub van der Mijle; G.A.P. Nieuwenhuijzen; Sanne C. Veltkamp; Leen Slaets; Nicole Duez; Peter W de Graaf; Thijs van Dalen; A. Marinelli; Herman Rijna; Marko Snoj; N.J. Bundred; Jos W.S. Merkus; Yazid Belkacemi; Patrick Petignat; Dominic A.X. Schinagl; Corneel Coens; Carlo Messina; Jan Bogaerts; Emiel J. Th. Rutgers

BACKGROUND If treatment of the axilla is indicated in patients with breast cancer who have a positive sentinel node, axillary lymph node dissection is the present standard. Although axillary lymph node dissection provides excellent regional control, it is associated with harmful side-effects. We aimed to assess whether axillary radiotherapy provides comparable regional control with fewer side-effects. METHODS Patients with T1-2 primary breast cancer and no palpable lymphadenopathy were enrolled in the randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive either axillary lymph node dissection or axillary radiotherapy in case of a positive sentinel node, stratified by institution. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of 5-year axillary recurrence, considered to be not more than 4% for the axillary radiotherapy group compared with an expected 2% in the axillary lymph node dissection group. Analyses were by intention to treat and per protocol. The AMAROS trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00014612. FINDINGS Between Feb 19, 2001, and April 29, 2010, 4823 patients were enrolled at 34 centres from nine European countries, of whom 4806 were eligible for randomisation. 2402 patients were randomly assigned to receive axillary lymph node dissection and 2404 to receive axillary radiotherapy. Of the 1425 patients with a positive sentinel node, 744 had been randomly assigned to axillary lymph node dissection and 681 to axillary radiotherapy; these patients constituted the intention-to-treat population. Median follow-up was 6·1 years (IQR 4·1-8·0) for the patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes. In the axillary lymph node dissection group, 220 (33%) of 672 patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection had additional positive nodes. Axillary recurrence occurred in four of 744 patients in the axillary lymph node dissection group and seven of 681 in the axillary radiotherapy group. 5-year axillary recurrence was 0·43% (95% CI 0·00-0·92) after axillary lymph node dissection versus 1·19% (0·31-2·08) after axillary radiotherapy. The planned non-inferiority test was underpowered because of the low number of events. The one-sided 95% CI for the underpowered non-inferiority test on the hazard ratio was 0·00-5·27, with a non-inferiority margin of 2. Lymphoedema in the ipsilateral arm was noted significantly more often after axillary lymph node dissection than after axillary radiotherapy at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years. INTERPRETATION Axillary lymph node dissection and axillary radiotherapy after a positive sentinel node provide excellent and comparable axillary control for patients with T1-2 primary breast cancer and no palpable lymphadenopathy. Axillary radiotherapy results in significantly less morbidity. FUNDING EORTC Charitable Trust.


The Lancet | 2010

Early versus delayed treatment of relapsed ovarian cancer (MRC OV05/EORTC 55955): a randomised trial

Gordon Rustin; Maria E. L. van der Burg; Clare L. Griffin; David Guthrie; Alan Lamont; Gordon C Jayson; Gunnar B. Kristensen; César Mediola; Corneel Coens; Wendi Qian; Mahesh Parmar; Ann Marie Swart

BACKGROUND Serum CA125 concentration often rises several months before clinical or symptomatic relapse in women with ovarian cancer. In the MRC OV05/EORTC 55955 collaborative trial, we aimed to establish the benefits of early treatment on the basis of increased CA125 concentrations compared with delayed treatment on the basis of clinical recurrence. METHODS Women with ovarian cancer in complete remission after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and a normal CA125 concentration were registered for this randomised controlled trial. Clinical examination and CA125 measurement were done every 3 months. Patients and investigators were masked to CA125 results, which were monitored by coordinating centres. If CA125 concentration exceeded twice the upper limit of normal, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by minimisation to early or delayed chemotherapy. Patients and clinical sites were informed of allocation to early treatment, and treatment was started as soon as possible within 28 days of the increased CA125 measurement. Patients assigned to delayed treatment continued masked CA125 measurements, with treatment commencing at clinical or symptomatic relapse. All patients were treated according to standard local practice. The primary outcome was overall survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered, ISRCTN87786644. FINDINGS 1442 patients were registered for the trial, of whom 529 were randomly assigned to treatment groups and were included in our analysis (265 early, 264 delayed). With a median follow-up of 56·9 months (IQR 37·4-81·8) from randomisation and 370 deaths (186 early, 184 delayed), there was no evidence of a difference in overall survival between early and delayed treatment (HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·80-1·20, p=0·85). Median survival from randomisation was 25·7 months (95% CI 23·0-27·9) for patients on early treatment and 27·1 months (22·8-30·9) for those on delayed treatment. INTERPRETATION Our findings showed no evidence of a survival benefit with early treatment of relapse on the basis of a raised CA125 concentration alone, and therefore the value of routine measurement of CA125 in the follow-up of patients with ovarian cancer who attain a complete response after first-line treatment is not proven. FUNDING UK Medical Research Council and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer.


European Journal of Cancer | 2008

Phase III randomised study to evaluate the role of adjuvant pelvic radiotherapy in the treatment of uterine sarcomas stages I and II: An European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study (protocol 55874)

Nicholas Reed; C Mangioni; H. Malmström; Giovanna Scarfone; Andres Poveda; Sergio Pecorelli; Saverio Tateo; Massimo Franchi; J.J. Jobsen; Corneel Coens; I. Teodorovic; Ignace Vergote; J.B. Vermorken

The management of uterine sarcomas continues to present many difficulties. Primary surgery is the optimal treatment but the role of post-operative radiation remains uncertain. In the mid-1980s, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Gynaecological Cancer Group Study proposed a trial to evaluate adjuvant radiotherapy, as previous non-randomised studies had suggested a survival advantage and improved local control when post-operative radiation was administered. The study opened in 1987 taking 13 years to accrue 224 patients. All uterine sarcoma subtypes were permitted. Patients were required to have undergone as a minimum, TAH and BSO and wahsings (166 patients) but nodal sampling was optional. There were 103 leiomyosarcomas (LMS), 91 carcinosarcomas (CS) and 28 endometrial stromal sarcomas (ESS). Patients were randomised to either observation or pelvic radiation, 51 Gy in 28 fractions over 5 weeks. Hundred and twelve were recruited to each arm. The initial analysis has shown a reduction in local relapse (14 versus 24, p=0.004) but no effect on either OS or PFS. No unexpected toxicity was seen in the radiation arm. No difference in either overall or disease-free survival was demonstrated but there is an increased local control for the CS patients receiving radiation but without any benefit for LMS. Prognostic factor analysis shows that stage, age and histological subtype were important predictors of behaviour which may explain differences between CS and LMS. CS appears to show more kinship to poorly differentiated endometrial carcinomas in behaviour. LMS did not show the same benefit from radiation. These results will help shape future management and clinical trials in uterine sarcomas.


Lancet Oncology | 2005

Health-related quality of life in patients with glioblastoma: a randomised controlled trial

Martin J. B. Taphoorn; Roger Stupp; Corneel Coens; D. Osoba; Rolf Dieter Kortmann; Martin J. van den Bent; Warren P. Mason; René O. Mirimanoff; Brigitta G. Baumert; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Peter A. Forsyth; Andrew Bottomley

BACKGROUND A randomised controlled trial of radiotherapy alone versus radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for patients with glioblastoma showed that survival was higher for patients assigned combination treatment compared with those assigned standard radiotherapy alone. This paper reports the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the patients in this trial. METHODS 573 patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were randomly allocated either radiotherapy alone or radiotherapy and temozolomide. The primary endpoint was survival, and HRQOL was a secondary endpoint. We assessed HRQOL at baseline and at every 3 months during treatment until progression using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire core-30 (QLQ-C30) and the EORTC brain cancer module (EORTC BN-20). We calculated changes from baseline score for seven predefined HRQOL measures (fatigue, overall health, social function, emotional function, future uncertainty, insomnia, and communication deficit) and differences between groups for these measures at every time point. The significance of, and proportions of patients with, improved HRQOL scores--defined as a change of 10 points or more--were recorded. This trial is registered on the US National Cancer Institute website http://www.cancer.gov/search/NewClinicalTrials, NCT00006353. FINDINGS Baseline questionnaires were available for 490 (86%) patients. Baseline HRQOL scores did not differ between groups. At first follow-up, groups differed only in social functioning, favouring the radiotherapy-only group (mean score 79.0 [SD 3.2] for patients assigned radiotherapy vs 67.4 [2.7] for those assigned radiotherapy and temozolomide; difference between groups 11.6 points [95% CI 3.5-19.7], p=0.0052). Over subsequent assessments, HRQOL was much the same between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION Addition of temozolomide during and after radiotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma significantly improved survival without a negative effect on HRQOL.


European Journal of Cancer | 2008

An international field study of the EORTC QLQ-PR25: A questionnaire for assessing the health-related quality of life of patients with prostate cancer

George van Andel; Andrew Bottomley; Sophie D. Fosså; Fabio Efficace; Corneel Coens; Stephane Guerif; Howard Kynaston; Paolo Gontero; George N. Thalmann; Atif Akdas; Sven D’Haese; Neil K. Aaronson

AIM To evaluate the psychometrics of the EORTC QLQ-PR25, a questionnaire assessing the health-related quality of life of prostate cancer patients. METHODS The QLQ-PR25 and the QLQ-C30 were administered to 642 prostate cancer patients from 13 countries treated with curative or palliative intent. The QLQ-PR25 assesses urinary, bowel and sexual symptoms and functioning, and the side-effects of hormonal treatment. RESULTS Five hundred and nine patients were available for the final analysis. Multitrait scaling analyses confirmed the hypothesised scale structure of the QLQ-PR25. Internal consistency reliability was good (coefficient alpha=0.70-0.86) for the urinary symptoms and sexual function scales, but lower for the bowel function and side-effects of hormonal treatment scales (alpha<0.70). The module discriminated clearly between clinically distinct patient subgroups, and was responsive to changes in health status over time. CONCLUSION In general, the QLQ-PR25 demonstrates acceptable psychometric properties and clinical validity. Some caution should be used in interpreting the bowel function and side-effects of hormonal therapy scales; results can be reported at the individual item and scale level.


European Journal of Cancer | 2010

An international validation study of the EORTC brain cancer module (EORTC QLQ-BN20) for assessing health-related quality of life and symptoms in brain cancer patients

M. J. B. Taphoorn; Lily Claassens; Neil K. Aaronson; Corneel Coens; Murielle Mauer; David Osoba; Roger Stupp; René O. Mirimanoff; Martin van den Bent; Andrew Bottomley

AIMS The psychometric properties of the EORTC QLQ-BN20, a brain cancer-specific HRQOL questionnaire, have been previously determined in an English-speaking sample of patients. This study examined the validity and reliability of the questionnaire in a multi-national, multi-lingual study. METHODS QLQ-BN20 data were selected from two completed phase III EORTC/NCIC clinical trials in brain cancer (N=891), including 12 languages. Experimental treatments were surgery followed by radiotherapy (RT) and adjuvant PCV chemotherapy or surgery followed by concomitant RT plus temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy and adjuvant TMZ chemotherapy. Standard treatment consisted of surgery and postoperative RT alone. The psychometrics of the QLQ-BN20 were examined by means of multi-trait scaling analyses, reliability estimation, known groups validity testing, and responsiveness analysis. RESULTS All QLQ-BN20 items correlated more strongly with their own scale (r>0.70) than with other QLQ-BN20 scales. Internal consistency reliability coefficients were high (all alpha0.70). Known-groups comparisons yielded positive results, with the QLQ-BN20 distinguishing between patients with differing levels of performance status and mental functioning. Responsiveness of the questionnaire to changes over time was acceptable. CONCLUSION The QLQ-BN20 demonstrates adequate psychometric properties and can be recommended for use in conjunction with the QLQ-C30 in assessing the HRQOL of brain cancer patients in international studies.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2005

Phase III Study of Adjuvant Vaccination With Bec2/Bacille Calmette-Guerin in Responding Patients With Limited-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 08971-08971B; Silva Study)

Giuseppe Giaccone; C. Debruyne; Enriqueta Felip; Paul B. Chapman; Stefan C. Grant; Michael Millward; Luc Thiberville; Giannicola D'Addario; Corneel Coens; Lisa S. Rome; Petr Zatloukal; Oriol Masso; Catherine Legrand

PURPOSE Bec2 is an anti-idiotypic antibody that mimics GD3, a ganglioside that is expressed on the surface of tumor cells and is of neuroectodermal origin. We assessed whether Bec2/bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccination prolongs survival in patients with limited-disease small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) after a major response to chemotherapy and chest radiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive five vaccinations of Bec2 (2.5 mg)/BCG vaccine or follow-up. Vaccination was given over a 10-week period. The sample size was targeted to detect an increase in median survival of 40% after random assignment, and stratification was by performance status, response, and institution. Quality of life was assessed by using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer instrument. Humoral response was assessed in patients who received vaccination. RESULTS A total of 515 patients were randomly assigned. The primary toxicities of vaccination were transient skin ulcerations and mild flu-like symptoms. There was no improvement in survival, progression-free survival, or quality of life in the vaccination arm. Median survival from randomization was 16.4 and 14.3 months in the observation and vaccination arms (P = .28), respectively. Among vaccinated patients, a trend toward prolonged survival was observed in those (one third) who developed a humoral response (P = .085). Multivariate analysis showed a positive impact on survival by prior treatment with concomitant chemoradiotherapy, prophylactic cranial irradiation, female sex, low lactate dehydrogenase, and normal platelets. CONCLUSION Vaccination with Bec2/BCG has no impact on outcome of patients with limited-disease SCLC responding to combined-modality treatment. Vaccination strategies in SCLC may still be warranted using vaccines that produce a better immunologic response.


Journal of the National Cancer Institute | 2014

Recommended Patient-Reported Core Set of Symptoms to Measure in Adult Cancer Treatment Trials

Bryce B. Reeve; Sandra A. Mitchell; Amylou C. Dueck; Ethan Basch; David Cella; Carolyn Miller Reilly; Lori M. Minasian; Andrea Denicoff; Ann M. O'Mara; Michael J. Fisch; Cynthia Chauhan; Neil K. Aaronson; Corneel Coens; Deborah Watkins Bruner

BACKGROUND The National Cancer Institutes Symptom Management and Health-Related Quality of Life Steering Committee held a clinical trials planning meeting (September 2011) to identify a core symptom set to be assessed across oncology trials for the purposes of better understanding treatment efficacy and toxicity and to facilitate cross-study comparisons. We report the results of an evidence-synthesis and consensus-building effort that culminated in recommendations for core symptoms to be measured in adult cancer clinical trials that include a patient-reported outcome (PRO). METHODS We used a data-driven, consensus-building process. A panel of experts, including patient representatives, conducted a systematic review of the literature (2001-2011) and analyzed six large datasets. Results were reviewed at a multistakeholder meeting, and a final set was derived emphasizing symptom prevalence across diverse cancer populations, impact on health outcomes and quality of life, and attribution to either disease or anticancer treatment. RESULTS We recommend that a core set of 12 symptoms--specifically fatigue, insomnia, pain, anorexia (appetite loss), dyspnea, cognitive problems, anxiety (includes worry), nausea, depression (includes sadness), sensory neuropathy, constipation, and diarrhea--be considered for inclusion in clinical trials where a PRO is measured. Inclusion of symptoms and other patient-reported endpoints should be well justified, hypothesis driven, and meaningful to patients. CONCLUSIONS This core set will promote consistent assessment of common and clinically relevant disease- and treatment-related symptoms across cancer trials. As such, it provides a foundation to support data harmonization and continued efforts to enhance measurement of patient-centered outcomes in cancer clinical trials and observational studies.

Collaboration


Dive into the Corneel Coens's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Andrew Bottomley

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Chantal Quinten

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ignace Vergote

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Fabio Efficace

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Efstathios Zikos

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Francesca Martinelli

European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Carolyn Gotay

University of British Columbia

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jolie Ringash

Princess Margaret Cancer Centre

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge