In 1998 Howard Parker, Judith Aldridge & Fiona Measham published Illegal Leisure, a ground‐breaking study of profound changes in British youth cultures in the 1990s, and the place of drugs and drug use in these upheavals. This work introduced the ‘normalization thesis’ to the social sciences, offering a novel vocabulary for re‐imagining the normative character of young people's attitudes towards and experiences of illicit drug use. Arriving at the dawn of the new century, the book offered a thoroughgoing re‐thinking of the character of youth cultures at a time of great social, cultural, economic and technological disruption. In so doing, the book deftly anticipated many of the most interesting currents of critical drug studies that followed. 相似文献
Comparative survival between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with cT2-4N0-1M0 non–small cell lung cancer has not been extensively studied.
Methods
Patients with cT2-4N0-1M0 non–small cell lung cancer who received platinum-based chemotherapy were retrospectively identified. Exclusion criteria included stage IV disease, induction radiotherapy, and targeted therapy. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points were overall survival, chemotherapy tolerance, and ability of Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors response to predict survival. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, compared using the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards models, and stratified using matched pairs after propensity score matching.
Results
In total, 330 patients met the inclusion criteria (n = 92/group after propensity-score matching; median follow-up, 42 months). Five-year disease-free survival was 49% (95% confidence interval, 39-61) for neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus 48% (95% confidence interval, 38-61) for adjuvant chemotherapy (P = .70). On multivariable analysis, disease-free survival was not associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.90; P = .737), nor was overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-2.30; P = .572). The neoadjuvant chemotherapy group was more likely to receive full doses and cycles of chemotherapy (P = .014/0.005) and had fewer grade 3 or greater toxicities (P = .001). Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with disease-free survival (P = .035); 15% of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (14/92) had a major pathologic response.
Conclusions
Timing of chemotherapy, before or after surgery, is not associated with an improvement in overall or disease-free survival among patients with cT2-4N0-1M0 non–small cell lung cancer who undergo complete surgical resection. 相似文献
COVID-19 is a novel coronavirus disease with a higher incidence of bilateral pneumonia and pleural effusion. The high pulmonary tropism and contagiousness of the virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have stimulated new approaches to combat its widespread diffusion. In developing new pharmacological strategies, the chemical characteristic of volatility can add therapeutic value to the hypothetical drug candidate. Volatile molecules are characterized by a high vapor pressure and are consequently easily exhaled by the lungs after ingestion. This feature could be exploited from a pharmacological point of view, reaching the site of action in an uncommon way but allowing for drug delivery. In this way, a hypothetical molecule for COVID-19 should have a balance between its lung exhalation characteristics and both antiviral and anti-inflammatory pharmacological action. Here, the feasibility, advantages, and disadvantages of a therapy based on oral administration of possible volatile drugs for COVID-19 will be discussed. Both aerosolized antiviral therapy and oral intake of volatile molecules are briefly reviewed, and an evaluation of 1,8-cineole is provided in view of a possible clinical use and also for asymptomatic COVID-19. 相似文献
Introduction: Ocular dysfunctions and toxicities induced by antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are rarely reviewed and not frequently received attention by treating physicians compared to other adverse effects (e.g. endocrinologic, cognitive and metabolic). However, some are frequent and progressive even in therapeutic concentrations or result in permanent blindness. Although some adverse effects are non-specific, others are related to the specific pharmacodynamics of the drug.
Areas covered: This review was written after detailed search in PubMed, EMBASE, ISI web, SciELO, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register databases (from 1970 to 2019). It summarized the reported ophthalmologic adverse effects of the currently available AEDs; their risks and possible pathogenic mechanisms. They include ocular motility dysfunctions, retinopathy, maculopathy, glaucoma, myopia, optic neuropathy, and impaired retinal vascular autoregulation. In general, ophthalmo-neuro- or retino-toxic adverse effects of AEDs are classified as type A (dose-dependent), type B (host-dependent or idiosyncratic) or type C which is due to the cumulative effect from long-term use.
Expert opinion: Ocular adverse effects of AEDs are rarely reviewed although some are frequent or may result in permanent blindness. Increasing knowledge of their incidence and improving understanding of their risks and pathogenic mechanisms are crucial for monitoring, prevention, and management of patients’ at risk. 相似文献