A phase I-II study of gemcitabine and paclitaxel in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

Thirty patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced non-small-cell lungcancer (NSCLC) were given escalating doses of paclitaxel (150, 175, 200mg/m²) on day 1 in three consecutive cycles, together with a fixeddose of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on days 1 and 8; cycles wererepeated every three weeks. The dose escalation of paclitaxel was feasible inthe majority of patients. Subsequently, 30 other NSCLC patients received adose of 200 mg/m² paclitaxel with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m²in a phase II study. The major side effect was mild myelosuppression. Aresponse rate of 24% was achieved in 49 fully evaluable patients. Thisregimen proved to be safe and easy to administer on an out-patient setting,and constitutes now one of the arms of the current EORTC randomized study foradvanced NSCLC.     

Treatment of brain metastases of small-cell lung cancer: comparing teniposide and teniposide with whole-brain radiotherapy--a phase III study of the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Lung Cancer Cooperative Group.

PURPOSE: Approximately 60% of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) develop brain metastases. Whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) gives symptomatic improvement in more than 50% of these patients. Because brain metastases are a sign of systemic progression, and chemotherapy was found to be effective as well, it becomes questionable whether WBRT is the only appropriate therapy in this situation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a phase III study, SCLC patients with brain metastases were randomized to receive teniposide with or without WBRT. Teniposide 120 mg/m(2) was given intravenously three times a week, every 3 weeks. WBRT (10 fractions of 3 Gy) had to start within 3 weeks from the start of chemotherapy. Response was measured clinically and by computed tomography of the brain. RESULTS: One hundred twenty eligible patients were randomized. A 57% response rate was seen in the combined-modality arm (95% confidence interval [CI], 43% to 69%), and a 22% response rate was seen in the teniposide-alone arm (95% CI, 12% to 34%) (P<.001). Time to progression in the brain was longer in the combined-modality group (P=.005). Clinical response and response outside the brain were not different. The median survival time was 3.5 months in the combined-modality arm and 3.2 months in the teniposide-alone arm. Overall survival in both groups was not different (P=.087). CONCLUSION: Adding WBRT to teniposide results in a much higher response rate of brain metastases and in a longer time to progression of brain metastases than teniposide alone. Survival was poor in both groups and not significantly different.     

Can Cerebrospinal Fluid Pressure Detect Catheter Complications in Patients Who Experience Loss of Effectiveness With Intrathecal Baclofen Therapy?

ObjectiveThe catheter status of patients who presented with loss of intrathecal baclofen (ITB) therapy effectiveness was investigated using measurements of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pressure transmitted through the catheter fluid path to the pump. The aim of the study was to estimate the appropriate threshold separating catheter complications from “normal” catheter function, and to compare catheter status based on CSF pressure with the clinical diagnosis.MethodsThis was a prospective, masked nonsignificant risk, research study. Patients (N = 47) received ITB for the treatment of severe spasticity and presented with symptoms of catheter malfunction. CSF pressure data were recorded using an external sensor connected to a needle inserted into the catheter access port. An algorithm calculated the energy of the variations in CSF pressure caused by respiration and heartbeat within the intrathecal space. These data were evaluated against a threshold that separated normal from abnormal catheter function. Catheter status based on the algorithm was compared with the clinical diagnosis.ResultsComplete data were available for 37 patients. Mean CSF pressure energy was significantly higher (p = 0.025; student t-test) for patients diagnosed with normal catheter function vs. catheters with complications. The CSF pressure algorithm matched the clinical diagnosis in 16 of 18 patients with catheter complications (sensitivity = 89%), and 13 of 19 patients with normal catheter function (specificity = 68%).ConclusionIn-clinic CSF pressure data acquisition is technically feasible. Overall, catheter status based on the algorithm demonstrated concordance with the clinical diagnosis in 29 of 37 patients (78.4%).     

Comprehensive CADM1 promoter methylation analysis in NSCLC and normal lung specimens

Methylation-mediated silencing of the tumour suppressor CADM1 has been functionally linked to lung cancer development. We aimed to determine whether CADM1 promoter methylation is a candidate early detection marker for lung cancer. To this end frozen tissue samples of 36 non-small cell lung cancers, 26 corresponding tumour distant normal tissue samples as well as 6 samples of normal lung from non-lung cancer patients were tested for DNA methylation at three different regions within the CADM1 promoter (M1, M5 and M9) using methylation specific PCR followed by methylation specific reverse line blot analysis.Sixty-four percentage of tumour samples tested positive at the M1 region, 47% at M5 and 74% at the M9 region, compared with 65% (M1), 23% (M5) and 46% (M9) of paired normal tissue samples. Methylation of each of these promoter regions was also detected in the majority of non-lung cancer control samples. Dense methylation, defined as methylation at ≥2 promoter regions, was detected in 66% of tumour samples compared with 38% of paired normal tissues and 67% of non-lung cancer control samples. Within the small subgroup of female patients dense methylation was found in all tumour samples but only 22% of paired normal samples. Neither methylation of individual sites nor dense methylation was correlated with disease free survival. In conclusion, CADM1 promoter methylation is a frequent event in NSCLC as well as normal lung, both of lung cancer and non-lung cancer patients. Hence, CADM1 methylation analysis is unlikely to have diagnostic value for the early detection of lung cancer in an unselected population. However, a diagnostic value for selected subjects, such as females, cannot be excluded.     

Assessment of Patient Preference for Constant Voltage and Constant Current Spinal Cord Stimulation

Objectives: Spinal cord stimulation devices control energy by generating either constant voltage (CV) pulses or constant current (CC) pulses. This study aimed to investigate: 1) whether patients feel differences between CV and CC stimulation; 2) if patients prefer CV or CC stimulation. Methods: Fourteen patients blinded to the type of pulse generation received 20 randomized pairs of 15‐sec pulse trains (CC‐CV, CV‐CC, CV‐CV, or CC‐CC). Patients identified whether the pairs were the same or different, and if they preferred the first or second train. Results: There was no difference in charge‐per‐pulse input between CV and CC modes. Patients performed at chance level in identifying identical pairs (55.7 ± 24.1% correct, 10 trials), and slightly better in identifying different pairs (67.1 ± 25.2% correct, 10 trials). No patients correctly identified all pairs. Patients were categorized based on their performance in this task. Only three patients fell into a category where preference could be established with some confidence with respect to the group averages. Two of these patients preferred CV, while one patient preferred CC. Conclusion: The lack of patient ability to discriminate in this preliminary investigation suggests that patient preference for a stimulation type should not be the key determining factor in choosing a spinal cord stimulation system.