p53‐Based strategy to reduce hematological toxicity of?chemotherapy: A proof of principle study

p53 activation is a primary mechanism underlying pathological responses to DNA damaging agents such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Our recent animal studies showed that low dose arsenic (LDA)‐induced transient p53 inhibition selectively protected normal tissues from chemotherapy‐induced toxicity.Study objectives were to: 1) define the lowest safe dose of arsenic trioxide that transiently blocks p53 activation in patients and 2) assess the potential of LDA to decrease hematological toxicity from chemotherapy.Patients scheduled to receive minimum 4 cycles of myelosuppressive chemotherapy were eligible. For objective 1, dose escalation of LDA started at 0.005 mg/kg/day for 3 days. This dose satisfied objective 1 and was administered before chemotherapy cycles 2, 4, and 6 for objective 2. p53 level in peripheral lymphocytes was measured on day 1 of each cycle by ELISA assay. Chemotherapy cycles 1, 3, and 5 served as the baseline for the subsequent cycles of 2, 4, and 6 respectively. If p53 level for the subsequent cycle was lower (or higher) than the baseline cycle, p53 was defined as “suppressed” (or “activated”) for the pair of cycles. Repeated measures linear models of CBC in terms of day, cycle, p53 activity and interaction terms were used.Twenty‐six patients treated with 3 week cycle regimens form the base of analyses. The mean white blood cell, hemoglobin and absolute neutrophil counts were significantly higher in the “suppressed” relative to the “activated” group.These data support the proof of principle that suppression of p53 could lead to protection of bone marrow in patients receiving chemotherapy.This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01428128","term_id":"NCT01428128"}}NCT01428128.     

Do multidisciplinary team meetings make a difference in the management of lung cancer?

BACKGROUND:

There is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings in lung cancer. The objective of this study was to compare the patterns of care for patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer who were presented at a lung cancer MDT meeting with the patterns of care for patients who were not presented.

METHODS:

All patients who had lung cancer newly diagnosed in South West Sydney (SWS) between December 1, 2005, and December 31, 2008, were identified from the local Clinical Cancer Registry. Patient and tumor characteristics and treatment receipt were compared between patients who were and were not presented at MDT meetings. A logistic regression model was constructed to determine predictors for receiving treatment and survival.

RESULTS:

In total, there were 988 patients, including 504 patients who were presented at MDT meetings and 484 who were not presented at MDT meetings. The median patient age was 69 years and 73 years in the MDT group and the non‐MDT group, respectively (P < .01). There was no pathologic diagnosis for 13% of non‐MDT patients compared with 4% of MDT patients (P < .01). Treatment receipt for MDT patients versus non‐MDT patients was 12% versus 13%, respectively, for surgery (P value nonsignificant); 66% versus 33%, respectively, for radiotherapy (P < .001); 46% versus 29%, respectively, for chemotherapy (P < .001); and 66% versus 53%, respectively, for palliative care (P < .001). In patients with good performance status, the MDT group had significantly better receipt of radiotherapy among patients with stage I through IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and had significantly better receipt of chemotherapy among patients with stage IV NSCLC. MDT discussion was an independent predictor of receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and referral to palliative care but did not influence survival.

CONCLUSIONS:

MDT discussion was associated with better treatment receipt, which potentially may improve quality of life for patients with lung cancer. However, it did not improve survival. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

Primary central nervous system lymphoma: is absence of intratumoral hemorrhage a characteristic finding on MRI?

Background.

Previous studies have shown that intratumoral hemorrhage is a common finding in glioblastoma multi-forme, but is rarely observed in primary central nervous system lymphoma. Our aim was to reevaluate whether intratumoral hemorrhage observed on T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) as gross intratumoral hemorrhage and on susceptibility-weighted imaging as intratumoral susceptibility signal can differentiate primary central nervous system lymphoma from glioblastoma multiforme.

Patients and methods.

A retrospective cohort of brain tumors from August 2008 to March 2013 was searched, and 58 patients (19 with primary central nervous system lymphoma, 39 with glioblastoma multiforme) satisfied the inclusion criteria. Absence of gross intratumoral hemorrhage was examined on T2WI, and an intratumoral susceptibility signal was graded using a 3-point scale on susceptibility-weighted imaging. Results were compared between primary central nervous system lymphoma and glioblastoma multiforme, and values of P < 0.05 were considered significant.

Results.

Gross intratumoral hemorrhage on T2WI was absent in 15 patients (79%) with primary central nervous system lymphoma and 23 patients (59%) with glioblastoma multiforme. Absence of gross intratumoral hemorrhage could not differentiate between the two disorders (P = 0.20). However, intratumoral susceptibility signal grade 1 or 2 was diagnostic of primary central nervous system lymphoma with 78.9% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity (P < 0.001), irrespective of gross intratumoral hemorrhage.

Conclusions.

Low intratumoral susceptibility signal grades can differentiate primary central nervous system lymphoma from glioblastoma multiforme. However, specificity in this study was relatively low, and primary central nervous system lymphoma cannot be excluded based solely on the presence of an intratumoral susceptibility signal.     

Serum oestrogen receptor �� and �� bioactivity are independently associated with breast cancer: a proof of principle study

Background:

Oestrogens play a crucial role in breast carcinogenesis. Earlier studies have analysed the serum levels of endogenous hormones measured by conventional assays. In this study, we analysed the capacity of serum from breast cancer cases and controls to transactivate the oestrogen receptor α (ER-α) and β (ER-β).

Methods:

We used a receptor oestrogen-responsive element (ERE) – the green fluorescent protein (GFP)-reporter test system in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Oestrogen receptor-α or ER-β bioactivity was determined in serum from 182 randomly chosen postmenopausal women with breast cancer and from 188 age-matched controls.

Results:

High serum ER-α and ER-β bioactivity were independently associated with the presence of breast cancer. Women whose levels of serum ER-α and ER-β bioactivity were in the highest quintile among controls had a 7.57-(95% confidence interval (CI): 2.46–23.32; P=0.0004) and a 10.14 (95% CI: 3.19–32.23; P<0.0001)-fold risk for general and oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, respectively.

Conclusion:

The use of serum ER-α and ER-β bioactivity assays as clinical tools in the management of breast cancer warrants further research. Future studies will dictate whether surrogate markers of ER-α and ER-β bioactivity will provide a means to monitor the efficacy of anti-endocrine, adjuvant and chemopreventive strategies.     

Exposure–response analysis of pertuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: absence of effect on QTc prolongation and other ECG parameters

Purpose

The phase III trial of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus trastuzumab plus docetaxel for first-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer included a substudy to determine whether pertuzumab affected the corrected QT (QTc) interval or other electrocardiogram parameters.

Methods

Triplicate 12-lead electrocardiogram measurements and serum samples were collected before (–30 and –15 min) and after (0–15 and 60–75 min) pertuzumab/placebo infusions (Cycles 1 and 3), and at 72 h post-infusion (Cycle 1). Fridericia’s correction was applied to QT measurements (QTcF) and change from baseline (ΔQTcF) calculated. Statistical analyses were performed on baseline-adjusted, placebo-corrected QTcF values (ΔΔQTcF). Linear mixed-effects modeling evaluated potential exposure–response relationships between ΔQTcF and observed pertuzumab concentrations.

Results

Thirty-seven female patients participated in the substudy. QTcF values in both groups were within the normal range and below critical thresholds of clinical concern. No pertuzumab-treated patient showed abnormal electrocardiogram morphology. In Cycle 1, mean ΔΔQTcF (90 % CI) values at 0–15 min, 60–75 min, and 72 h post-infusion were ?6.96 (?13.69, ?0.23), ?6.35 (?13.57, 0.88), and ?4.08 (?12.64, 4.48), all of which were <5 ms, with upper CI limits <10 ms. One Cycle 3 post-infusion mean ΔΔQTcF value exceeded 5 ms. Other electrocardiogram parameters were within normal ranges. Concentration–QTc modeling showed no apparent relationship between ΔQTcF and pertuzumab concentrations.

Conclusions

Cardiac monitoring and concentration–QTc modeling demonstrated that pertuzumab, combined with trastuzumab and docetaxel, had no clinically relevant effects on QTcF and other electrocardiogram parameters.     

Cancer‐related fatigue – a difference of opinion? Results of a multicentre survey of healthcare professionals,patients and caregivers

The objective of this study was to investigate the perceptions of patients with cancer, their caregivers and healthcare professionals (HCPs) about fatigue and its impact on quality of life. It was a cross-sectional survey, the respondents were patients with cancer attending three UK regional cancer centres ( n  = 1370), their informal caregivers ( n  = 1370) and a random selection of HCPs (oncologists/nurses/radiographers/haematologists; n  = 1098). The response rates for patients, caregivers and HCPs were 42%, 33% and 34% respectively. Fatigue was reported to affect 56% of patients and to have a considerable impact on quality of life. Caregivers also recognized that fatigue was a common problem, with significant effects on patients' quality of life and impact on themselves. Healthcare professionals recognized that fatigue was a common problem for their patients but overestimated its impact on some aspects of patients' daily lives. Although most HCPs reported that they prescribed/recommended treatment for over half of their patients, only 14% of patients reported receiving any such treatment. The most common advice was to take more rest and relaxation. Conclusions: patients with cancer report that fatigue is a common and distressing symptom and the importance of this symptom is generally recognized by both HCPs and lay-carers. Healthcare professionals need more information about the effectiveness of existing interventions for cancer-related fatigue and further research is required to improve the current management of this debilitating symptom.