Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Practicing on the edge of oncology: when standard of care feels uncomfortable

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology volume 18, pages 673–674 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

The treatments oncologists deliver are generally based on evidence from large randomized controlled trials, consistent with practice guidelines, and congruent with the treatments selected by our peers. In this Comment, we use two scenarios to highlight the discomfort clinicians might feel when they are outliers from the guideline-recommended standard of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Hurwitz, H. et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 350, 2335–2342 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Giantonio, B. J. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E3200. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 1539–1544 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Saltz, L. B. et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a randomized phase III study. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 2013–2019 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Baraniskin, A. et al. Efficacy of bevacizumab in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Cancer 106, 37–44 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Passardi, A. et al. Effectiveness of bevacizumab added to standard chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: final results for first-line treatment from the ITACa randomized clinical trial. Ann. Oncol. 26, 1201–1207 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Coiffier, B. et al. Long-term outcome of patients in the LNH-98.5 trial, the first randomized study comparing rituximab-CHOP to standard CHOP chemotherapy in DLBCL patients: a study by the Groupe d’Etudes des Lymphomes de l’Adulte. Blood 116, 2040–2045 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wilson, W. H. et al. Phase II study of dose-adjusted EPOCH and rituximab in untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with analysis of germinal center and post-germinal center biomarkers. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 2717–2724 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Petrich, A. M. et al. Impact of induction regimen and stem cell transplantation on outcomes in double-hit lymphoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis. Blood 124, 2354–2361 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bartlett, N. L. et al. Dose-adjusted EPOCH-R compared with R-CHOP as frontline therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: clinical outcomes of the Phase III intergroup trial alliance/CALGB 50303. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 1790–1799 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. NCCN. NCCN Guidelines B Cell Lymphomas. https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1480 (2021).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work of C.M.B. is supported by the Canada Research Chair in Population Cancer Care. The authors are grateful to Dr Vinay Prasad of the University of California San Francisco, who provided comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen’s University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

    Christopher M. Booth

  2. Departments of Oncology Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

    Christopher M. Booth

  3. Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

    Christopher M. Booth

  4. Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA

    Aaron M. Goodman

  5. Department of Medicine, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA

    Aaron M. Goodman

Authors
  1. Christopher M. Booth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron M. Goodman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher M. Booth.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

A.M.G. has acted as a consultant of EUSA Pharma and Seattle Genetics. C.M.B. declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Booth, C.M., Goodman, A.M. Practicing on the edge of oncology: when standard of care feels uncomfortable. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 18, 673–674 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-021-00550-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-021-00550-9

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing