David Roberge

Dr. David Roberge

CRCHUM, CHUM, McGill, University of Montreal
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

26Years (2001-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 February 2012 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PSPaul W. Sperduto
Paul W. Sperduto
NKNorbert Kased
Norbert Kased
David RobergeDavid Roberge
David Roberge
ZXZhiyuan Xu
Zhiyuan Xu
RSRyan Shanley
Ryan Shanley
MMMinesh p Mehta
Minesh p Mehta
Purpose: Our group has previously published the Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA), a prognostic index for patients with brain metastases. Updates have been published with refinements to create diagnosis-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment indices. The purpose of this report is to present the updated diagnosis-specific GPA indices in a single, unified, user-friendly report to allow ease of access and use by treating physicians. Methods: A multi-institutional retrospective (1985 to 2007) database of 3,940 patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases underwent univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors associated with outcomes by primary site and treatment. Significant prognostic factors were used to define the diagnosis-specific GPA prognostic indices. A GPA of 4.0 correlates with the best prognosis, whereas a GPA of 0.0 corresponds with the worst prognosis. Results: Significant prognostic factors varied by diagnosis. For lung cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score, age, presence of extracranial metastases, and number of brain metastases, confirming the original Lung-GPA. For melanoma and renal cell cancer, prognostic factors were Karnofsky performance score and the number of brain metastases. For breast cancer, prognostic factors were tumor subtype, Karnofsky performance score, and age. For GI cancer, the only prognostic factor was the Karnofsky performance score. The median survival times by GPA score and diagnosis were determined. Conclusion: Prognostic factors for patients with brain metastases vary by diagnosis, and for each diagnosis, a robust separation into different GPA scores was discerned, implying considerable heterogeneity in outcome, even within a single tumor type. In summary, these indices and related worksheet provide an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival, potentially select appropriate treatment, and stratify clinical trials for patients with brain metastases.

1 August 2017 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PBPaul Brown
Paul Brown
KBKarla V Ballman
Karla V Ballman
JCJane H Cerhan
Jane H Cerhan
SAS Keith Anderson
S Keith Anderson
XCXiomara W Carrero
Xiomara W Carrero
David RobergeDavid Roberge
David Roberge

16 August 2013 in Neuro-Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PBPaul D. Brown
Paul D. Brown
SPStephanie Pugh
Stephanie Pugh
NLNadia N. Laack
Nadia N. Laack
JWJeffrey S. Wefel
Jeffrey S. Wefel
DKDeepak Khuntia
Deepak Khuntia
F(for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)
for the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG)
To determine the protective effects of memantine on cognitive function in patients receiving whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Adult patients with brain metastases received WBRT and were randomized to receive placebo or memantine (20 mg/d), within 3 days of initiating radiotherapy for 24 weeks. Serial standardized tests of cognitive function were performed. Of 554 patients who were accrued, 508 were eligible. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities and study compliance were similar in the 2 arms. There was less decline in delayed recall in the memantine arm at 24 weeks (P = .059), but the difference was not statistically significant, possibly because there were only 149 analyzable patients at 24 weeks, resulting in only 35% statistical power. The memantine arm had significantly longer time to cognitive decline (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.62–0.99, P = .01); the probability of cognitive function failure at 24 weeks was 53.8% in the memantine arm and 64.9% in the placebo arm. Superior results were seen in the memantine arm for executive function at 8 (P = .008) and 16 weeks (P = .0041) and for processing speed (P = .0137) and delayed recognition (P = .0149) at 24 weeks. Memantine was well tolerated and had a toxicity profile very similar to placebo. Although there was less decline in the primary endpoint of delayed recall at 24 weeks, this lacked statistical significance possibly due to significant patient loss. Overall, patients treated with memantine had better cognitive function over time; specifically, memantine delayed time to cognitive decline and reduced the rate of decline in memory, executive function, and processing speed in patients receiving WBRT. RTOG 0614, ClinicalTrials.gov number CT00566852.

1 June 2017 in JAMA Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PSPaul W. Sperduto
Paul W. Sperduto
TYT. Jonathan Yang
T. Jonathan Yang
KBKathryn Beal
Kathryn Beal
HPHubert Pan
Hubert Pan
PBPaul D. Brown
Paul D. Brown
MMMinesh p Mehta
Minesh p Mehta
Worldwide, in 2012, there were an estimated 1.24 million new lung cancers and 1.1 million lung cancer–related deaths.1 In 2016, in the United States alone, an estimated 224 000 new patients will be diagnosed with lung cancer, and over 158 000 will die from the disease.2 One of the most frequent and serious complications of this ubiquitous disease is metastasis to the brain, for which lung cancer remains the most common cause. Although there are no global or national population-based estimates on the true incidence of brain metastases, conservative estimates are that 10% to 30% of patients with lung cancer will develop brain metastases.3 In the past, survival after the development of brain metastases was poor and treatment often considered futile.4 With the recent advent of molecularly targeted therapies5,6 and immunotherapies,7,8 survival from lung cancer continues to improve. Patients are thus at greater risk for developing late sequelae of the disease, such as brain metastases. These trends coupled with the wide availability of magnetic resonance imaging suggest there will be an increasing number of patients diagnosed with brain metastases in coming years.

1 April 2012 in International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PSPaul W. Sperduto
Paul W. Sperduto
NKNorbert Kased
Norbert Kased
David RobergeDavid Roberge
David Roberge
ZXZhiyuan Xu
Zhiyuan Xu
RSRyan Shanley
Ryan Shanley
MMMinesh p Mehta
Minesh p Mehta

1 February 2003 in Breast Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MRMark E Robson
Mark E Robson
PCPierre O Chappuis
Pierre O Chappuis
JSJaya Satagopan
Jaya Satagopan
NWNora Wong
Nora Wong
JBJeff Boyd
Jeff Boyd
WFWilliam Foulkes
William Foulkes
The prognostic significance of germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in women with breast cancer remains unclear. A combined analysis was performed to address this uncertainty. Two retrospective cohorts of Ashkenazi Jewish women undergoing breast-conserving treatment for invasive cancer between 1980 and 1995 (n = 584) were established. Archived tissue blocks were used as the source of DNA for Ashkenazi Jewish BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutation analysis. Paraffin-embedded tissue and follow-up information was available for 505 women. Genotyping was successful in 496 women, of whom 56 (11.3%) were found to carry a BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutation. After a median follow-up period of 116 months, breast cancer specific survival was worse in women with BRCA1 mutations than in those without (62% at 10 years versus 86%; P < 0.0001), but not in women with the BRCA2 mutation (84% versus 86% at 10 years; P = 0.76). Germline BRCA1 mutations were an independent predictor of breast cancer mortality in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.2–4.8; P = 0.01). BRCA1 status predicted breast cancer mortality only among women who did not receive chemotherapy (hazard ratio 4.8, 95% confidence interval 2.0–11.7; P = 0.001). The risk for metachronous ipsilateral cancer was not greater in women with germline BRCA1/BRCA2 founder mutations than in those without mutations (P = 0.68). BRCA1 mutations, but not BRCA2 mutations, are associated with reduced survival in Ashkenazi women undergoing breast-conserving treatment for invasive breast cancer, but the poor prognosis associated with germline BRCA1 mutations is mitigated by adjuvant chemotherapy. The risk for metachronous ipsilateral disease does not appear to be increased for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, at least up to 10 years of follow up.