Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Melanoma: HELP
Articles by Georges Noël
Based on 2 articles published since 2008
||||

Between 2008 and 2019, G. Noël wrote the following 2 articles about Melanoma.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline [ANOCEF guidelines for the management of brain metastases]. 2015

Le Rhun, É / Dhermain, F / Noël, G / Reyns, N / Carpentier, A / Mandonnet, E / Taillibert, S / Metellus, P / Anonymous2980820. ·Neuro-oncologie, département de neurochirurgie, hôpital Roger-Salengro, CHRU de Lille, rue Émile-Laine, 59037 Lille cedex, France; Oncologie médicale, centre Oscar-Lambret, 3, rue Frédéric-Combemale, BP 307, 59020 Lille cedex, France; Laboratoire Prism, université Lille 1, Inserm U1192, bâtiment SN3 1(er) étage, 59655 Villeneuve d'Ascq cedex, France; Groupe de réflexion sur la prise en charge des métastases cérébrales (GRPCMaC) , 13273 Marseille cedex 09, France. Electronic address: emilie.lerhun@chru-lille.fr. · Groupe de réflexion sur la prise en charge des métastases cérébrales (GRPCMaC) , 13273 Marseille cedex 09, France; Département de radiothérapie, institut de cancérologie Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif cedex, France; Réunion de concertation pluridisciplinaire de neuro-oncologie, institut de cancérologie Gustave-Roussy, 114, rue Édouard-Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif cedex, France. · Département universitaire de radiothérapie, centre de lutte contre le cancer Paul-Strauss, 3, rue de la Porte-de-l'Hôpital, BP 42, 67065 Strasbourg cedex, France; Laboratoire EA 3430, fédération de médecine translationnelle de Strasbourg (FMTS), université de Strasbourg, 4, rue Kirschleger, 67085 Strasbourg cedex, France. · Département de neurochirurgie, hôpital Roger-Salengro, CHRU de Lille, rue Émile-Laine, 59037 Lille cedex, France. · Service de neurologie, hôpital Avicenne, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), 125, rue de Stalingrad, 93009 Bobigny cedex, France. · Département de neurochirurgie, hôpital Lariboisière, 2, rue Ambroise-Paré, 75010 Paris, France. · Département de neurologie 2, groupe hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France; Département de radiothérapie, groupe hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, 47-83, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France; Université Pierre-et-Marie-Curie Paris VI, 4, place Jussieu, 75005 Paris, France. · Groupe de réflexion sur la prise en charge des métastases cérébrales (GRPCMaC) , 13273 Marseille cedex 09, France; Département de neurochirurgie, centre hospitalo-universitaire La Timone, AP-HM, 264, rue Saint-Pierre, 13385 Marseille cedex 05, France; Centre de recherche en oncologie et oncopharmacologie (CRO2), faculté de médecine Timone, université Aix-Marseille, 27, boulevard Jean-Moulin, 13385 Marseille cedex 05, France; Inserm U911, faculté de médecine Timone, 27, boulevard Jean-Moulin, 13385 Marseille cedex 05, France. ·Cancer Radiother · Pubmed #25666314.

ABSTRACT: The incidence of brain metastases is increasing because of the use of new therapeutic agents, which allow an improvement of overall survival, but with only a poor penetration into the central nervous system brain barriers. The management of brain metastases has changed due to a better knowledge of immunohistochemical data and molecular biological data, the development of new surgical, radiotherapeutic approaches and improvement of systemic treatments. Most of the time, the prognosis is still limited to several months, nevertheless, prolonged survival may be now observed in some sub-groups of patients. The main prognostic factors include the type and subtype of the primitive, age, general status of the patient, number and location of brain metastases, extracerebral disease. The multidisciplinary discussion should take into account all of these parameters. We should notice also that treatments including surgery or radiotherapy may be proposed in a symptomatic goal in advanced phases of the disease underlying the multidisciplinary approach until late in the evolution of the disease. This article reports on the ANOCEF (French neuro-oncology association) guidelines. The management of brain metastases of breast cancers and lung cancers are discussed in the same chapter, while the management of melanoma brain metastases is reported in a separate chapter due to different responses to the brain radiotherapy.

2 Article Institutional, retrospective analysis of 777 patients with brain metastases: treatment outcomes and diagnosis-specific prognostic factors. 2013

Antoni, Delphine / Clavier, Jean-Baptiste / Pop, Marius / Schumacher, Catherine / Lefebvre, François / Noël, Georges. ·Radiotherapy Department, Paul Strauss Cancer Center, Strasbourg, France. Dantoni@strasbourg.unicancer.fr ·Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys · Pubmed #23582409.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate the prognostic factors and survival of a series of 777 patients with brain metastases (BM) from a single institution. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were treated with surgery followed by whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) or with WBRT alone in 16.3% and 83.7% of the cases, respectively. The patients were RPA (recursive partitioning analysis) class I, II, and III in 11.2%, 69.6%, and 18.4% of the cases, respectively; RPA class II-a, II-b, and II-c in 8.3%, 24.8%, and 66.9% of the cases, respectively; and with GPA (graded prognostic assessment) scores of 0-1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0 in 35%, 27.5%, 18.2%, and 8.6% of the cases, respectively. RESULTS: The median overall survival (OS) times according to RPA class I, II, and III were 20.1, 5.1, and 1.3 months, respectively (P<.0001); according to RPA class II-a, II-b, II-c: 9.1, 8.9, and 4.0 months, respectively (P<.0001); and according to GPA score 0-1.0, 1.5-2.0, 2.5-3.0, and 3.5-4.0: 2.5, 4.4, 9.0, and 19.1 months, respectively (P<.0001). By multivariate analysis, the favorable independent prognostic factors for survival were as follows: for gastrointestinal tumor, a high Karnofsky performance status (KPS) (P=.0003) and an absence of extracranial metastases (ECM) (P=.003); for kidney cancer, few BM (P=.002); for melanoma, few BM (P=.01), an absence of ECM (P=.002), and few ECM (P=.0002); for lung cancer, age (P=.007), a high KPS (P<.0001), an absence of ECM (P<.0001), few ECM and BM (P<.0001 and P=.0006, respectively), and control of the primary tumor (P=.004); and for breast cancer, age (P=.001), a high KPS (P=.007), control of the primary tumor (P=.05), and few ECM and BM (P=.01 and P=.0002, respectively). The triple-negative subtype was a significant unfavorable factor (P=.007). CONCLUSION: Prognostic factors varied by pathology. Our analysis confirms the strength of prognostic factors used to determine the GPA score, including the genetic subtype for breast cancer.