Amanda J W Gibson

Mrs. Amanda J W Gibson

University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
2 August 2018 in Medical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Amanda J W GibsonAmanda J W Gibson
Amanda J W Gibson
HLHaocheng Li
Haocheng Li
ADAdrijana D’sIlva
Adrijana D’sIlva
RTRoxana A. Tudor
Roxana A. Tudor
AEAnifat A. Elegbede
Anifat A. Elegbede
WCWinson Cheung
Winson Cheung

28 October 2021 in JTO Clinical and Research Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AEAnifat A. Elegbede
Anifat A. Elegbede
Amanda J W GibsonAmanda J W Gibson
Amanda J W Gibson
AFAndrea S. Fung
Andrea S. Fung
WCWinson Cheung
Winson Cheung
MDMichelle L. Dean
Michelle L. Dean
APAliyah Pabani
Aliyah Pabani
The real-world data evaluating treatment outcomes of atezolizumab plus carboplatin-etoposide chemotherapy (atezolizumab) for extensive-stage SCLC (ESCLC) are lacking. Our objective was to evaluate real-world outcomes of ESCLC treated with atezolizumab. A retrospective analysis of provincial patients with ESCLC who started first-line (1L) systemic treatment was conducted. We primarily evaluated the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes in association with atezolizumab compared with platinum-etoposide chemotherapy (chemotherapy) while adjusting for relevant demographic and clinical factors. Adverse events (AEs) during 1L were evaluated. A total of 67 patients were identified. Of the 34 patients who received atezolizumab, 24% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status greater than or equal to 2, approximately 50% were more than or equal to 65 years, 21% received cisplatin-etoposide chemotherapy before atezolizumab, and 12% had thoracic radiation (tRT). Within the atezolizumab versus chemotherapy group, the median PFS equals to 6.0 versus 4.3 months (p = 0.03) whereas OS = 12.8 versus 7.1 months (p = 0.01). Relative to chemotherapy, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for PFS was 0.53 (0.28–1.02) and OS was 0.42 (0.20–0.88) with atezolizumab. tRT compared with no tRT receipt correlated with reduced death risk (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.33 [0.13–0.88]). AE-related treatment withdrawal with atezolizumab was 32% and 15% with chemotherapy (p = 0.02). Within the tRT subgroup, 25% versus 20% in atezolizumab versus chemotherapy group, respectively, discontinued 1L owing to AE. This is the first real-world study revealing comparable survival with that in the IMpower133 trial. Treatment discontinuation from AEs was higher with atezolizumab among Canadian patients with ESCLC. Our data suggest safe use of tRT and chemoimmunotherapy, but its efficacy for ESCLC warrants further study.

4 September 2019 in Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Amanda J W GibsonAmanda J W Gibson
Amanda J W Gibson
ADAdrijana D'Silva
Adrijana D'Silva
AEAnifat A. Elegbede
Anifat A. Elegbede
RTRoxana A. Tudor
Roxana A. Tudor
MDMichelle L. Dean
Michelle L. Dean
DHDesiree Hao
Desiree Hao

14 March 2022 in Current Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Amanda J W GibsonAmanda J W Gibson
Amanda J W Gibson
ABAdrian Box
Adrian Box
WCWinson Cheung
Winson Cheung
MDMichelle L. Dean
Michelle L. Dean
AEAnifat A. Elegbede
Anifat A. Elegbede
DBD Gwyn Bebb
D Gwyn Bebb
The use, safety and effectiveness of crizotinib as part of the management of ROS1-rearranged NSCLC patients in a real-world Canadian clinical cohort was the focus of this retrospective review. Twenty-one ROS1-rearranged patients with advanced/metastatic disease receiving crizotinib between 2014–2020 were identified; crizotinib demonstrated tolerability and effectiveness in this population where outcomes were similar to those described in other crizotinib-treated real-world cohorts, but lower than those of the PROFILE 1001 clinical trial population. Systemic anti-cancer therapy prior to crizotinib initiation occurred in half of the study cohort, with platin-pemetrexed and immune checkpoint inhibitors being most common. Platin-pemetrexed showed good effectiveness in this cohort, but despite high prevalence of upregulated PD-L1 expression, immune checkpoint inhibitors showed poor effectiveness in his cohort. Among all systemic therapies received, crizotinib showed the most effective disease control, although longer intervals between diagnosis and crizotinib initiation were more common among those showing a lack of clinical response to crizotinib, and patients with brain metastases at the time of crizotinib initiation also showed increased diagnosis to crizotinib initiation intervals and decreased clinical response to crizotinib. This study reveals crizotinib has clinical benefit, but timely identification of ROS1-rearrangements and initiation targeted therapies appears important to maximize outcome in this population.


26 April 2024 in Current Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Amanda J W GibsonAmanda J W Gibson
Amanda J W Gibson
MDMichelle Liane Dean
Michelle Liane Dean
ILIshjot Litt
Ishjot Litt
ABAdrian Box
Adrian Box
WCWinson Cheung
Winson Cheung
VNVishal Navani
Vishal Navani
Introduction: The use of osimertinib in the first-line (1L) setting is an effective treatment option for sensitizing EGFR-mutations (EGFRm+) and has significantly altered the standard of care practice for EGFRm+ disease in Canada. Unfortunately, acquired resistance to osimertinib is almost universal, and outcomes are disparate. Post-progression treatment patterns and the outcome of real-world Canadian EGFRm+ patients receiving 1L osimertinib were the focus of this retrospective review. Methods: The Glans-Look Lung Cancer Research database was used to identify and collect demographic, clinical, treatment, and outcome data on EGFRm+ patients who received 1L osimertinib in the Canadian province of Alberta between 2018 and 2022. Results: A total of 150 patients receiving 1L osimertinib were identified. In total, 86 developed progressive disease, with 56 (65%) continuing systemic therapy, 73% continuing osimertinib, and 27% switching to second-line (2L) systemic therapy. Patients were similar both in clinical characteristics at 1L osimertinib initiation and patterns of treatment failure at progression; those continuing 1L osimertinib post-progression had a longer time to progression (13.5 vs. 8.8 months, p = 0.05) and subsequent post-osimertinib initiation survival (34.7 vs. 22.8 months, p = 0.11). Conclusions: The continuation of osimertinib post-progression is an effective disease management strategy for select real-world EGFRm+ patients, providing continued clinical benefit, potentially due to different underlying disease pathogenesis.