免疫检查点抑制剂应用于晚期胃癌治疗的研究进展

我国属胃癌高发国家,且以进展期胃癌为主。以手术和化疗为主的多学科治疗无法有效改善晚期胃癌患者的预后。近年来,免疫检查点抑制剂类药物的疗效在诸多癌症中得到了证实,因此,该类药物在胃癌中的治疗效果也受到了广泛的关注。本文对近年来的相关研究成果进行综述,全面介绍了免疫检查点抑制剂类药物在胃癌治疗中的临床应用情况、联合用药情况以及不良反应。对于其他治疗均失败的晚期胃癌患者,PD-1抑制剂是一个可行的治疗选项,其代表药物派姆单抗是目前唯一被美国食品药品监督管理局批准应用于胃癌治疗的免疫抑制剂类药物,而我国国家食品药品监督管理总局尚未批准任何此类药物应用于胃癌的临床治疗。如何进一步提高治疗的客观缓解率,将会是后续临床和基础研究的一大焦点。     

Porocarcinoma coexisting at a site of Bowen disease in a 63‐year‐old woman

Porocarcinoma is an unusual, locally aggressive and potentially fatal neoplasm. Several cutaneous malignancies have been described in association with porocarcinoma, including squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma and tricholemmal carcinoma. Previous reports have indicated that the occurrence of malignant tumours in combination with porocarcinoma is extremely rare, in particular with regard to Bowen disease (BD). We report an uncommon case of porocarcinoma occurring synchronously in a single BD lesion in a 63‐year‐old woman with multiple BD lesions. The clinical and histological findings confirmed this diagnosis.     

Sensitivity of the environmental costs of air pollution caused by SOx,NOx, and PM from power plants applied to the power mix configuration in South Korea

In the 6th Basic Plan for Long-Term Electricity Supply and Demand (6th BPE) for Korea, for the first time, the environmental costs of air pollution caused by oxides of sulfur (SOx), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and particulate matters (PM) from power plants were estimated and included. However, several deficiencies in evaluating the environmental costs were found. In this study, (1) the validity of the environmental costs used in the 6th BPE was assessed, (2) a systematic approach was suggested and used to improve the environmental costs estimation, and (3) the sensitivity of the cost of generating electricity to the environmental costs by fuel type with the proposed approach was discussed. We found that the applied environmental costs used in the 6th BPE did not fully include the demographic characteristics of Korea. By applying more realistic parameter values, it was found that the newly estimated environmental cost was about 23 times higher than the cost estimated in the original 6th BPE for coal-fired power plants and about 1.5 times higher for liquefied natural gas (LNG)-fired power plants, suggesting that LNG-fired power plants are more economical if using more realistic environmental costs. Thus, it is critical to check the validity of parameter values when calculating environmental costs.     

Lifitegrast clinical efficacy for treatment of signs and symptoms of dry eye disease across three randomized controlled trials

Objective: Report efficacy findings from three clinical trials (one phase 2 and two phase 3 [OPUS-1, OPUS-2]) of lifitegrast ophthalmic solution 5.0% for treatment of dry eye disease (DED).

Research design and methods: Three 84-day, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trials. Adults (≥18 years) with DED were randomized (1:1) to lifitegrast 5.0% or matching placebo. Changes from baseline to day 84 in signs and symptoms of DED were analyzed.

Main outcome measures: Phase 2, pre-specified endpoint: inferior corneal staining score (ICSS; 0–4); OPUS-1, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and visual-related function subscale (0–4 scale); OPUS-2, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and eye dryness score (EDS, VAS; 0–100).

Results: Fifty-eight participants were randomized to lifitegrast 5.0% and 58 to placebo in the phase 2 trial; 293 to lifitegrast and 295 to placebo in OPUS-1; 358 to lifitegrast and 360 to placebo in OPUS-2. In participants with mild-to-moderate baseline DED symptomatology, lifitegrast improved ICSS versus placebo in the phase 2 study (treatment effect, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.05–0.65; p?=?0.0209) and OPUS-1 (effect, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.38; p?=?0.0007). Among more symptomatic participants (baseline EDS ≥40, recent artificial tear use), lifitegrast improved EDS versus placebo in a post hoc analysis of OPUS-1 (effect, 13.34; 95% CI, 2.35–24.33; nominal p?=?0.0178) and in OPUS-2 (effect, 12.61; 95% CI, 8.51–16.70; p?<?0.0001).

Limitations: Trials were conducted over 12 weeks; efficacy beyond this period was not assessed.

Conclusions: Across three trials, lifitegrast improved ICSS in participants with mild-to-moderate baseline symptomatology in two studies, and EDS in participants with moderate-to-severe baseline symptomatology in two studies. Based on the overall findings from these trials, lifitegrast shows promise as a new treatment option for signs and symptoms of DED.