Publications en collaboration avec des chercheurs de KU Leuven (19)

2024

  1. ESGO/EURACAN/GCIG guidelines for the management of patients with uterine sarcomas

    International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, Vol. 34, Núm. 10, pp. 1499-1521

2023

  1. European multidisciplinary tumor boards support cross-border networking and increase treatment options for patients with rare gynecological tumors

    International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, Vol. 33, Núm. 10, pp. 1621-1626

2019

  1. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus debulking surgery in advanced tubo-ovarian cancers: Pooled analysis of individual patient data from the EORTC 55971 and CHORUS trials

    Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey

2018

  1. Expression III: Patients' expectations and preferences regarding physician-patient relationship and clinical management-results of the international NOGGO/ ENGOT-ov4-GCIG study in 1830 ovarian cancer patients from European countries

    Annals of Oncology, Vol. 29, Núm. 4, pp. 910-916

  2. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus debulking surgery in advanced tubo-ovarian cancers: pooled analysis of individual patient data from the EORTC 55971 and CHORUS trials

    The Lancet Oncology, Vol. 19, Núm. 12, pp. 1680-1687

2016

  1. ESMO-ESGO-ESTRO consensus conference on endometrial cancer: Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

    Annals of Oncology, Vol. 27, Núm. 1, pp. 16-41

  2. Erratum to: Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Pathway Biomarkers in the Randomized Phase III Trial of Erlotinib Versus Observation in Ovarian Cancer Patients with No Evidence of Disease Progression after First-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy (Targ Oncol, 10, 2015 (583-596), 10.1007/s11523-015-0369-6)

    Targeted Oncology

2015

  1. Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Pathway Biomarkers in the Randomized Phase III Trial of Erlotinib Versus Observation in Ovarian Cancer Patients with No Evidence of Disease Progression after First-Line Platinum-Based Chemotherapy

    Targeted Oncology, Vol. 10, Núm. 4, pp. 583-596

  2. Surgical and systemic management of endometrial cancer: an international survey

    Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Vol. 291, Núm. 4, pp. 897-905

2014

  1. Epithelial ovarian cancer: Rationale for changing the one-fits-all standard treatment regimen to subtype-specific treatment

    International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, Vol. 24, Núm. 3, pp. 468-477

  2. Randomized phase III study of erlotinib versus observation in patients with no evidence of disease progression after first-line platin-based chemotherapy for ovarian carcinoma: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group, and Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup study

    Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 32, Núm. 4, pp. 320-326

2013

  1. Randomized, phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind study with and without enzastaurin in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment followed by maintenance treatment in advanced ovarian cancer

    Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 31, Núm. 25, pp. 3127-3132

2012

  1. A systemic review of Toxic Death in clinical oncology trials: An Achilles heel in safety reporting revisited

    British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 107, Núm. 1, pp. 1-6

  2. EORTC Gynecological Cancer Group on the frontline of practice-changing clinical trials

    European Journal of Cancer, Supplement, Vol. 10, Núm. 1, pp. 66-75

2011

  1. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the better treatment option in some patients with stage IIIc to IV ovarian cancer

    Journal of Clinical Oncology

  2. Primary surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer

    European Journal of Cancer, Vol. 47, Núm. SUPPL. 3

2010

  1. Advanced ovarian cancer: Phase III randomized study of sequential cisplatin-topotecan and carboplatin-paclitaxel vs carboplatin-paclitaxel

    Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 102, Núm. 20, pp. 1547-1556

  2. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer

    New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 363, Núm. 10, pp. 943-953

  3. The authors reply

    New England Journal of Medicine