Juliette THARIAT

Prof. Juliette THARIAT

François Baclesse Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, 3, Avenue du Général Harris, 14000 Caen, France
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 September 2012 in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JEJoel B. Epstein
Joel B. Epstein
Juliette THARIATJuliette THARIAT
Juliette THARIAT
RBRene‐Jean Bensadoun
Rene‐Jean Bensadoun
ABAndrei Barasch
Andrei Barasch
BMBarbara A. Murphy
Barbara A. Murphy
EMEllie Maghami
Ellie Maghami
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Oral complications resulting from cancer and cancer therapies cause acute and late toxicities that may be underreported, underrecognized, and undertreated. Recent advances in cancer treatment have led to changes in the incidence, nature, and severity of oral complications. As the number of survivors increases, it is becoming increasingly recognized that the aggressive management of oral toxicities is needed to ensure optimal long‐term oral health and general well‐being. Advances in care have had an impact on previously recognized oral complications and are leading to newly recognized adverse effects. Here, the authors briefly review advances in cancer therapy, including recent advances in surgery, oral care, radiation therapy, hematopoietic cell transplantation, and medical oncology; describe how these advances affect oral health; and discuss the frequent and/or severe oral health complications associated with cancer and cancer treatment and their effect upon long‐term health. Although some of the acute oral toxicities of cancer therapies may be reduced, they remain essentially unavoidable. The significant impact of long‐term complications requires increased awareness and recognition to promote prevention and appropriate intervention. It is therefore important for the primary oncologist to be aware of these complications so that appropriate measures can be implemented in a timely manner. Prevention and management is best provided via multidisciplinary health care teams, which must be integrated and communicate effectively in order to provide the best patient care in a coordinated manner at the appropriate time. CA Cancer J Clin 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.

27 November 2012 in Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Juliette THARIATJuliette THARIAT
Juliette THARIAT
JHJean-Michel Hannoun-Levi
Jean-Michel Hannoun-Levi
AMArthur Sun Myint
Arthur Sun Myint
Te VuongTe Vuong
Te Vuong
JGJean-Pierre Gérard
Jean-Pierre Gérard

1 November 2013 in Radiotherapy and Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ELEric F. Lartigau
Eric F. Lartigau
ETEmmanuelle Tresch
Emmanuelle Tresch
Juliette THARIATJuliette THARIAT
Juliette THARIAT
PGPierre Graff
Pierre Graff
BCBernard Coche-Dequeant
Bernard Coche-Dequeant
AKAndrew Kramar
Andrew Kramar

1 January 2019 in Progress in Retinal and Eye Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
TMThibaud Mathis
Thibaud Mathis
PJPauline Jardel
Pauline Jardel
OLOlivier Loria
Olivier Loria
BDBenoit Delaunay
Benoit Delaunay
ANAnh-Minh Nguyen
Anh-Minh Nguyen
Juliette THARIATJuliette THARIAT
Juliette THARIAT
The most frequent site of ocular metastasis is the choroid. The occurrence of choroidal metastases has increased steadily due to the longer survival of metastatic patients and the improvement of diagnostic tools. Fundoscopy, ultrasonography, and fluorescein angiography are now complemented by indocyanine green angiography and optical coherence tomography. Choroidal tumor biopsy may also confirm the metastatic nature of the tumor and help to determine the site of the primary malignancy. There is currently no consensus on the treatment strategy. Most patients have a limited life expectancy and for these complex treatments are generally not recommended. However, recent advances in systemic therapy have significantly improved survival of certain patients who may benefit from an aggressive ocular approach that could preserve vision. Although external beam radiation therapy is the most widely used treatment, more advanced forms of radiotherapy that are associated with fewer side effects can be proposed in select cases. In patients with a shorter life expectancy, systemic therapies such as those targeting oncogenic drivers, or immunotherapy can induce a regression of the choroidal metastases, and may be sufficient to temporarily decrease visual symptoms. However, they often acquire resistance to systemic treatment and ocular relapse usually requires radiotherapy for durable control. Less invasive office-based treatments, such as photodynamic therapy and intravitreal injection of anti-VEGF, may also help to preserve vision while reducing time spent in medical settings for patients in palliative care. The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on choroidal metastases, with emphasis on the most recent findings in epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment.

30 June 2017 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SSSebastien Salas
Sebastien Salas
NRN. Resseguier
N. Resseguier
JBJ. Y. Blay
J. Y. Blay
ACA. Le Cesne
A. Le Cesne
AIA. Italiano
A. Italiano
CBC. Bouvier
C. Bouvier
Solitary fibrous tumors (SFT) are rare unusual ubiquitous soft tissue tumors that are presumed to be of fibroblastic differentiation. At present, the challenge is to establish accurate prognostic factors. A total of 214 consecutive patients with SFT diagnosed in 24 participating cancer centers were entered into the European database (www.conticabase.org) to perform univariate and multivariate analysis for overall survival (OS), local recurrence incidence (LRI) and metastatic recurrence incidence (MRI) by taking competing risks into account. A prognostic model was constructed for LRI and MRI. Internal and external validations of the prognostic models were carried out. An individual risk calculator was carried out to quantify the risk of both local and metastatic recurrence. We restricted our analysis to 162 patients with local disease. Twenty patients (12.3%) were deceased at the time of analysis and the median OS was not reached. The LRI rates at 10 and 20 years were 19.2% and 38.6%, respectively. The MRI rates at 10 and 20 years were 31.4% and 49.8%, respectively. Multivariate analysis retained age and mitotic count tended to significance for predicting OS. The factors influencing LRI were viscera localization, radiotherapy and age. Mitotic count, tumor localization other than limb and age had independent values for MRI. Three prognostic groups for OS were defined based on the number of unfavorable prognostic factors and calculations were carried out to predict the risk of local and metastatic recurrence for individual patients. LRI and MRI rates increased between 10 and 20 years so relapses were delayed, suggesting that long-term monitoring is useful. This study also shows that different prognostic SFT sub-groups could benefit from different therapeutic strategies and that use of a survival calculator could become standard practice in SFTs to individualize treatment based on the clinical situation.

11 December 2017 in Annals of Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MFM. Frikha
M. Frikha
AAA. Auperin
A. Auperin
YTY. Tao
Y. Tao
FEF. Elloumi
F. Elloumi
NTN. Toumi
N. Toumi
Jean BourhisJean Bourhis
Jean Bourhis
Concomitant chemotherapy (CT)–radiotherapy (RT) is a standard of care in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and a role for induction CT is not established. Patients with locally advanced NPC, WHO type 2 or 3, were randomized to induction TPF plus concomitant cisplatin-RT or concomitant cisplatin-RT alone. The TPF regimen consisted of three cycles of Docetaxel 75 mg/m2 day 1; cisplatin 75 mg/m2 day 1; 5FU 750 mg/m2/day days 1–5. RT consisted of 70 Gy in 7 weeks plus concomitant cisplatin 40 mg/m2 weekly. A total of 83 patients were included in the study. Demographics and tumour characteristics were well balanced between both arms. Most of the patients (95%) in the TPF arm received three cycles of induction CT. The rate of grade 3–4 toxicity and the compliance (NCI-CTCAE v3) during cisplatin-RT were not different between both arms. With a median follow-up of 43.1 months, the 3-year PFS rate was 73.9% in the TPF arm versus 57.2% in the reference arm [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.20–0.97, P = 0.042]. Similarly the 3 years overall survival rate was 86.3% in the TPF arm versus 68.9% in the reference arm (HR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.15–1.04, P = 0.05). In conclusion, several important aspects can be emphasized: the compliance to induction TPF was good and TPF did not compromise the tolerance of the concomitant RT-cisplatin phase. The improved PFS and overall survival rates needs to be confirmed by further trials.