1
|
de Rauglaudre B, Piessen G, Jary M, Le Malicot K, Adenis A, Mazard T, D’Journo XB, Petorin C, Buffet-Miny J, Aparicio T, Guimbaud R, Vendrely V, Lepage C, Dahan L. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy combined with fluorouracil-cisplatin plus cetuximab in operable, locally advanced esophageal carcinoma: Results of a phase I-II trial (FFCD-0505/PRODIGE-3). Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2024; 47:100804. [PMID: 38974185 PMCID: PMC11225011 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctro.2024.100804] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2024] [Revised: 06/06/2024] [Accepted: 06/08/2024] [Indexed: 07/09/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Radiotherapy combined with fluorouracil (5FU) and cisplatin for locally advanced esophageal cancer is associated with a 20-25% pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. Cetuximab increases the efficacy of radiotherapy in patients with head and neck carcinomas. The aim of this phase I/II trial was to determine the optimal doses and the pCR rate with chemoradiotherapy (C-RT) plus cetuximab. Methods A 45-Gy radiotherapy regimen was delivered over 5 weeks. The phase I study determined the dose-limiting toxicity and the maximum tolerated dose of 5FU-cisplatin plus cetuximab. The phase II trial aimed to exhibit a pCR rate > 20 % (25 % expected), requiring 33 patients (6 from phase I part plus 27 in phase II part). pCR was defined as ypT0Nx. Results The phase I study established the following recommended doses: weekly cetuximab (400 mg/m2 one week before, and 250 mg/m2 during radiotherapy); 5FU (500 mg/m2/day, d1-d4) plus cisplatin (40 mg/m2, d1) during week 1 and 5. In the phase II part, 32 patients received C-RT before surgery, 31 patients underwent surgery, and resection was achieved in 27 patients. A pCR was achieved in five patients (18.5 %) out of 27. After a median follow-up of 19 months, the median progression-free survival was 13.7 months, and the median overall survival was not reached. Conclusions Adding cetuximab to preoperative C-RT was toxic and did not achieve a pCR > 20 % as required. The recommended doses, determined during the phase I part, could explain these disappointing results due to a reduction in chemotherapy dose-intensity. Trial registration This trial was registered with EudraCT number 2006-004770-27.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Guillaume Piessen
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital Huriez, Lille, France
| | - Marine Jary
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Karine Le Malicot
- Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD), EPICAD INSERM LNC-UMR 1231, University of Burgundy and Franche-Comté, Dijon, France
| | - Antoine Adenis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France
| | - Thibault Mazard
- Department of Medical Oncology, ICM Val d’Aurelle, Montpellier, France
| | - Xavier Benoît D’Journo
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Aix-Marseille University, Hôpital Nord, Marseille, France
| | - Caroline Petorin
- Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital Estaing, Clermont-Ferrand, France
| | - Joelle Buffet-Miny
- Department of Radiotherapy, University Hospital Jean Minjoz, Besançon, France
| | - Thomas Aparicio
- Department of Digestive Oncology, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Paris, France
| | - Rosine Guimbaud
- Department of Medical Oncology, CHU de Toulouse, Toulouse, France
| | | | - Côme Lepage
- Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive (FFCD), EPICAD INSERM LNC-UMR 1231, University of Burgundy and Franche-Comté, Dijon, France
- Department of Digestive Oncology, Hôpital François Mitterrand, Dijon, France
| | - Laetitia Dahan
- Department of Digestive Oncology, Hôpital la Timone, Marseille, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Henckens SPG, Liu D, Gisbertz SS, Kalff MC, Anderegg MCJ, Crull D, Daams F, van Dalsen AD, Dekker JWT, van Det MJ, van Duijvendijk P, Eshuis WJ, Groenendijk RPR, Haveman JW, van Hillegersberg R, Luyer MDP, Olthof PB, Pierie JPEN, Plat VD, Rosman C, Ruurda JP, van Sandick JW, Sosef MN, Voeten DM, Vijgen GHEJ, Bijlsma MF, Meijer SL, Hulshof MCCM, Oyarce C, Lagarde SM, van Laarhoven HWM, van Berge Henegouwen MI. Prognostic value of Mandard score and nodal status for recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg 2024; 111:znae034. [PMID: 38387083 PMCID: PMC10883709 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znae034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2023] [Revised: 01/30/2024] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study evaluated the association of pathological tumour response (tumour regression grade, TRG) and a novel scoring system, combining both TRG and nodal status (TRG-ypN score; TRG1-ypN0, TRG>1-ypN0, TRG1-ypN+ and TRG>1-ypN+), with recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS This Dutch nationwide cohort study included patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy for distal oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2016. The primary endpoint was the association of Mandard score and TRG-ypN score with recurrence patterns (rate, location, and time to recurrence). The secondary endpoint was overall survival. RESULTS Among 2746 inclusions, recurrence rates increased with higher Mandard scores (TRG1 30.6%, TRG2 44.9%, TRG3 52.9%, TRG4 61.4%, TRG5 58.2%; P < 0.001). Among patients with recurrent disease, the distribution (locoregional versus distant) was the same for the different TRG groups. Patients with TRG1 developed more brain recurrences (17.7 versus 9.8%; P = 0.001) and had a longer mean overall survival (44 versus 35 months; P < 0.001) than those with TRG>1. The TRG>1-ypN+ group had the highest recurrence rate (64.9%) and worst overall survival (mean 27 months). Compared with the TRG>1-ypN0 group, patients with TRG1-ypN+ had a higher risk of recurrence (51.9 versus 39.6%; P < 0.001) and worse mean overall survival (33 versus 41 months; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION Improved tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy was associated with lower recurrence rates and higher overall survival rates. Among patients with recurrent disease, TRG1 was associated with a higher incidence of brain recurrence than TRG>1. Residual nodal disease influenced prognosis more negatively than residual disease at the primary tumour site.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sofie P G Henckens
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Dajia Liu
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Centre for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Suzanne S Gisbertz
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marianne C Kalff
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten C J Anderegg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - David Crull
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, the Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marc J van Det
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, the Netherlands
| | | | - Wietse J Eshuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Misha D P Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Pim B Olthof
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | - Victor D Plat
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Jelle P Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Johanna W van Sandick
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Daan M Voeten
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Guy H E J Vijgen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten F Bijlsma
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Centre for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Oncode Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sybren L Meijer
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten C C M Hulshof
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Radiotherapy, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cesar Oyarce
- Centre for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Laboratory for Experimental Oncology and Radiobiology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Oncode Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sjoerd M Lagarde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W M van Laarhoven
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mark I van Berge Henegouwen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sandø AD, Grønbech JE, Bringeland EA. Does the ypTNM-stage adequately predict long-term survival rates in gastric cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical resection? Acta Oncol 2023; 62:1846-1853. [PMID: 37903117 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2023.2274480] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 10/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for resectable gastric cancer, the prognostic adequacy of the UICC staging system needs to be investigated. In particular to explore whether the ypTNM curves for radically resected gastric cancer patients receiving NAC follow the stage-matched survival curves of radically resected chemo-naïve patients (pTNM). Further, to disclose any interaction between the TNM-response mode to NAC and stage-specific survival rates, i.e., whether survival for a particular pathological disease stage was dependent on whether this was reached through a downstaging or as stable disease following NAC. MATERIAL AND METHODS Retrospective study on radically resected patients ≤ 75 years of age with gastric adenocarcinoma stages I-III diagnosed during 2001-2016. The patients constitute two population-based cohorts; the SURG-group with n = 121 patients treated before 2007 when NAC was introduced, and the NAC-group with n = 126 patients diagnosed since early 2007, receiving NAC and subsequent radical resection. RESULTS Long-term survival rates were similar when specific ypTNM-stages were compared to their corresponding pTNM chemo-naïve counterparts. The dichotomised N0 vs. N + had a substantial impact on the long-term survival rates in both groups, however, no discrepancy in long-term survival rates between pN0 vs. ypN0, and pN + vs. ypN + was found. The pathological stage determined long-term survival rates irrespective of the baseline disease stage, as no interaction between the response mode and stage-specific survival rates was found. CONCLUSIONS Survival curves for specific ypTNM-stages following NAC did not differ from the corresponding survival curves of their chemo-naïve pTNM counterparts. The interpretation is that NAC affected the gastric cancer, lymph nodes, and micrometastases, in such a way that the final ypTNM-stage provided similar prognostic information as the chemo-naïve pTNM-stages. Survival rates were contingent on the final ypTNM-stages alone, and not influenced by the response mode to reach that particular disease stage, or predetermined by the original clinical TNM-stage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alina Desiree Sandø
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Jon Erik Grønbech
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Erling Audun Bringeland
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Evans RP, Kamarajah SK, Kunene V, Zardo D, Elshafie M, Griffiths EA. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on nodal regression and survival in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 48:1001-1010. [PMID: 34974947 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.12.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Revised: 11/02/2021] [Accepted: 12/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The prognostic value of lymph node regression (LNR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) for oesophageal and gastro-oeosphageal adenocarcinoma remains unclear. This study aimed to characterise the long-term survival outcomes of LNR in patients having resectional surgery after nCT. METHODS This study included patients undergoing oesophagectomy or extended total gastrectomy for oesophageal and junctional tumours (Siewert types 1,2,3) at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham from 2012 to 2018. Lymph nodes retrieved at surgery were examined for evidence of a response to chemotherapy. Patients were classified as lymph node-negative (either negative nodes with no evidence of previous tumour involvement or negative with evidence of complete regression) or positive with either partial or no response. RESULTS This study identified 183 patients who received nCT, of which 71% (130/183) had positive lymph nodes. Of these 130 patients, 44% (57/130) had a lymph node response and 56% (73/130) did not. The remaining 53 patients (29.0%) had negative lymph nodes with no evidence of tumour. Lymph node responders had a significant survival benefit compared to patients without lymph node response, but shorter than those with negative lymph nodes (median: 27 vs 18 vs NR months, p < 0·001). On multivariable analysis, lymph node responders had an improved overall (Hazard ratio (HR): 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.92, p < 0.001) and recurrence-free (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82-0.98, p = 0.030) survival. CONCLUSION Lymph node regression is an important prognostic factor, warranting closer evaluation over primary tumour response to help with planning further adjuvant therapy in these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard Pt Evans
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, UK
| | - Sivesh K Kamarajah
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Science, University of Birmingham, UK
| | - Victoria Kunene
- Department of Oncology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, UK
| | - Davide Zardo
- Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK; Department of Pathology, San Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza, Italy
| | - Mona Elshafie
- Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
| | - Ewen A Griffiths
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, UK; Institute of Cancer and Genomic Science, University of Birmingham, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bott RK, George G, McEwen R, Zylstra J, Knight WRC, Baker CR, Kelly M, Griffin N, McAddy N, Maisey N, Van Hemelrijck M, Gossage JA, Lagergren J, Davies AR. Predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Acta Oncol 2021; 60:1629-1636. [PMID: 34613874 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2021.1986228] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is often used prior to surgical resection for oesophageal adenocarcinoma but remains ineffective in a high proportion of patients. The histological Mandard tumour regression grade is used to determine chemoresponse but is not available at the time of treatment decision-making. The aim of this cohort study was to identify factors that predict chemotherapy response prior to surgery. METHODS A prospectively collected database of patients undergoing surgical resection for oesophageal adenocarcinoma from a high-volume UK institution was used. Patients were subcategorised using pathological tumour response into 'responders' (Mandard grade 1-3) and 'non-responders' (Mandard grade 4 and 5). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to calculate crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for responder status adjusting for a variety of parameters. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated. RESULTS Among 315 patients included, 102 (32%) were responders and 213 (68%) non-responders. A decrease in radiological tumour volume (OR 1.92 95%CI 1.02-3.62; p = 0.05), a 'partial response' RECIST score (OR 7.16 95%CI 1.49-34.36; p = 0.01), a clinically improved dysphagia score (OR 2.79 95%CI 1.05-7.04; p = 0.04) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 0.06 95%CI 0.02-0.13; p = 0.000) influenced responder status. ROC curve analysis for responder status utilising all available parameters had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86. CONCLUSION This study has highlighted the potential for using pre-defined factors to identify those patients who have responded to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, prior to surgical resection, potentially facilitating a more individualised therapeutic approach.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca K. Bott
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Gincy George
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Ricardo McEwen
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
| | - Janine Zylstra
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
| | - William R. C. Knight
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Cara R. Baker
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Mark Kelly
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Nyree Griffin
- Department of Radiology, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
| | - Naami McAddy
- Department of Radiology, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
| | - Nick Maisey
- Department of Medical Oncology, Guy’s Hospital London, London, UK
| | - Mieke Van Hemelrijck
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), King’s College London, London, UK
| | - James A. Gossage
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Jesper Lagergren
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
- Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Andrew R. Davies
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal and General Surgery, St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|