Dolores Isla

Dr. Dolores Isla

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

29Years (1998-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2012 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Rafael RosellRafael Rosell
Rafael Rosell
ECEnric Carcereny
Enric Carcereny
RGRadj Gervais
Radj Gervais
AVAlain Vergnenegre
Alain Vergnenegre
BMBartomeu Massuti
Bartomeu Massuti
LPLuis Paz-Ares
Luis Paz-Ares

3 September 2009 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
RRRafael Rosell
Rafael Rosell
TMTeresa Moran
Teresa Moran
CQCristina Queralt
Cristina Queralt
RPRut Porta
Rut Porta
FCFelipe Cardenal
Felipe Cardenal
MTMiquel Taron
Miquel Taron
Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) confer hypersensitivity to the tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. We evaluated the feasibility of large-scale screening for EGFR mutations in such patients and analyzed the association between the mutations and the outcome of erlotinib treatment.

3 April 2008 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TTThorgeir E. Thorgeirsson
Thorgeir E. Thorgeirsson
FGFrank Geller
Frank Geller
PSPatrick Sulem
Patrick Sulem
TRThorunn Rafnar
Thorunn Rafnar
AWAnna Wiste
Anna Wiste
KSKari Stefansson
Kari Stefansson

18 January 2009 in Nature Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TRThorunn Rafnar
Thorunn Rafnar
PSPatrick Sulem
Patrick Sulem
SSSimon N Stacey
Simon N Stacey
FGFrank Geller
Frank Geller
JGJulius Gudmundsson
Julius Gudmundsson
KSKari Stefansson
Kari Stefansson

1 August 2015 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JSJean-Charles Soria
Jean-Charles Soria
EFEnriqueta Felip
Enriqueta Felip
MCManuel Cobo
Manuel Cobo
SLShun Lu
Shun Lu
KSKonstantinos Syrigos
Konstantinos Syrigos
GGGlenwood D Goss
Glenwood D Goss
There is a major unmet need for effective treatments in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. LUX-Lung 8 compared afatinib (an irreversible ErbB family blocker) with erlotinib (a reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor), as second-line treatment for patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. We did this open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial at 183 cancer centres in 23 countries worldwide. We enrolled adults with stage IIIB or IV squamous cell carcinoma of the lung who had progressed after at least four cycles of platinum-based-chemotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive afatinib (40 mg per day) or erlotinib (150 mg per day) until disease progression. The randomisation was done centrally with an interactive voice or web-based response system and stratified by ethnic origin (eastern Asian vs non-eastern Asian). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent central review (intention-to-treat population). The key secondary endpoint was overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01523587. 795 eligible patients were randomly assigned (398 to afatinib, 397 to erlotinib). Median follow-up at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival was 6·7 months (IQR 3·1-10·2), at which point enrolment was not complete. Progression free-survival at the primary analysis was significantly longer with afatinib than with erlotinib (median 2·4 months [95% CI 1·9-2·9] vs 1·9 months [1·9-2·2]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-1·00], p=0·0427). At the time of the primary analysis of overall survival (median follow-up 18·4 months [IQR 13·8-22·4]), overall survival was significantly greater in the afatinib group than in the erloinib group (median 7·9 months [95% CI 7·2-8·7] vs 6·8 months [5·9-7·8]; HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·69-0·95], p=0·0077), as were progression-free survival (median 2·6 months [95% CI 2·0-2·9] vs 1·9 months [1·9-2·1]; HR 0·81 [95% CI 0·69-0·96], p=0·0103) and disease control (201 [51%] of 398 patients vs 157 [40%] of 397; p=0·0020). The proportion of patients with an objective response did not differ significantly between groups (22 [6%] vs 11 [3%]; p=0·0551). Tumour shrinkage occurred in 103 (26%) of 398 patients versus 90 (23%) of 397 patients. Adverse event profiles were similar in each group: 224 (57%) of 392 patients in the afatinib group versus 227 (57%) of 395 in the erlotinib group had grade 3 or higher adverse events. We recorded higher incidences of treatment-related grade 3 diarrhoea with afatinib (39 [10%] vs nine [2%]), of grade 3 stomatitis with afatinib (16 [4%] vs none), and of grade 3 rash or acne with erlotinib (23 [6%] vs 41 [10%]). The significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival with afatinib compared with erlotinib, along with a manageable safety profile and the convenience of oral administration suggest that afatinib could be an additional option for the treatment of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. Boehringer Ingelheim.

1 July 2010 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EFEnriqueta Felip
Enriqueta Felip
RRRafael Rosell
Rafael Rosell
JMJosé Antonio Maestre
José Antonio Maestre
JRJosé Manuel Rodríguez-Paniagua
José Manuel Rodríguez-Paniagua
TMTeresa Morán
Teresa Morán
SGSpanish Lung Cancer Group
Spanish Lung Cancer Group
Purpose: To address whether preoperative chemotherapy plus surgery or surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy prolongs disease-free survival compared with surgery alone among patients with resectable non–small-cell lung cancer. Patients and Methods: In this phase III trial, 624 patients with stage IA (tumor size > 2 cm), IB, II, or T3N1 were randomly assigned to surgery alone (212 patients), three cycles of preoperative paclitaxel-carboplatin followed by surgery (201 patients), or surgery followed by three cycles of adjuvant paclitaxel-carboplatin (211 patients). The primary end point was disease-free survival. Results: In the preoperative arm, 97% of patients started the planned chemotherapy, and radiologic response rate was 53.3%. In the adjuvant arm, 66.2% started the planned chemotherapy. Ninety-four percent of patients underwent surgery; surgical procedures and postoperative mortality were similar across the three arms. Patients in the preoperative arm had a nonsignificant trend toward longer disease-free survival than those assigned to surgery alone (5-year disease-free survival 38.3% v 34.1%; hazard ratio [HR] for progression or death, 0.92; P = .176). Five-year disease-free survival rates were 36.6% in the adjuvant arm versus 34.1% in the surgery arm (HR 0.96; P = .74). Conclusion: In early-stage patients, no statistically significant differences in disease-free survival were found with the addition of preoperative or adjuvant chemotherapy to surgery. In this trial, in which the treatment decision was made before surgery, more patients were able to receive preoperative than adjuvant treatment.