A Phase I Trial of Trametinib in Combination with Sorafenib in Patients with Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer

Lessons Learned

• The combination of trametinib and sorafenib has an acceptable safety profile, albeit at doses lower than approved for monotherapy.
• Maximum tolerated dose is trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice daily.
• The limited anticancer activity observed in this unselected patient population does not support further exploration of trametinib plus sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BackgroundThe RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is associated with proliferation and progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Preclinical data suggest that paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway may be one of the resistance mechanisms of sorafenib; therefore, we evaluated trametinib plus sorafenib in HCC.MethodsThis was a phase I study with a 3+3 design in patients with treatment‐naïve advanced HCC. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. The secondary objective was clinical efficacy.ResultsA total of 17 patients were treated with three different doses of trametinib and sorafenib. Two patients experienced dose‐limiting toxicity, including grade 4 hypertension and grade 3 elevation of aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/bilirubin over 7 days. Maximum tolerated dose was trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐related adverse events were elevated AST (37%) and hypertension (24%). Among 11 evaluable patients, 7 (63.6%) had stable disease with no objective response. The median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 and 7.8 months, respectively. Phosphorylated‐ERK was evaluated as a pharmacodynamic marker, and sorafenib plus trametinib inhibited phosphorylated‐ERK up to 98.1% (median: 81.2%) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells.ConclusionTrametinib and sorafenib can be safely administered up to trametinib 1.5 mg daily and sorafenib 200 mg twice a day with limited anticancer activity in advanced HCC.     

PDCA循环在消化道肿瘤伴糖尿病患者营养全程管理中的效果观察

目的 探讨PDCA 循环在消化道肿瘤伴糖尿病患者营养全程管理中的效果观察。方法 运用PDCA循环对80例不同程度营养不良的消化道肿瘤伴糖尿病患者实施营养全程管理,比较干预前后患者的体重、BMI指数、糖化血红蛋白、血红蛋白、总蛋白、白蛋白及球蛋白水平。结果 患者血红蛋白、总蛋白、白蛋白及球蛋白水平均有提高,比较差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论 PDCA循环管理在消化道肿瘤伴糖尿病患者营养全程管理中有较大的优势, 值得推广。     

血液系统恶性肿瘤患者化疗后合并中性粒细胞减少性肠炎的诊治研究

目的分析成人血液系统恶性肿瘤患者接受强烈化疗后中性粒细胞减少性肠炎（NE）的发生率、危险因素及预后情况。方法收集2004至2013年接受化疗的1804例血液系统恶性肿瘤患者，记录患者血常规、凝血检测和血液生化检测结果，并记录患者年龄、性别、原发病、既往化疗次数、既往化疗方案中是否使用阿糖胞苷、临床症状、肠壁厚度、中性粒细胞最低计数、中性粒细胞缺乏持续时间、NE的治疗方法和预后等，探讨NE起病诱因、临床特征、腹部B超特点、症状的预后意义及化疗药物对发病的影响等。结果1804例患者中226例（12.5%）化疗后合并NE，化疗后10~19d起病，中位起病时间为化疗后第14天。发生NE后26例患者死亡，病死率11.5%。化疗药物包括阿糖胞苷、临床症状≥4项、中性粒细胞缺乏持续超过7d以及B超下肠壁厚度≥10mm的患者病死率相对较高。结论NE是接受强烈化疗的血液系统肿瘤患者的严重的并发症，发生NE后患者病死率较高。     

中国精神分裂症患者不同家庭干预措施效果比较的meta分析

目的对中国精神分裂症患者采取家庭干预的研究文献进行综合回顾和系统评价, 比较不同条件下家庭干预效果的差异。方法在中国知网、维普、万方、中国生物医学文献数据库四大中文数据库及OVID Medline、Science Direct、Web of Science、EBSCO四大英文数据库中, 检索各数据库建库至2015年1月为止使用社会功能缺陷筛选量表(SDSS)、简明精神病(科)量表(BPRS)、阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)研究中国精神分裂症患者家庭干预效果的文献, 以标准化加权均数差( SMD)作为效应量, 采用meta分析比较不同干预时间、不同干预类型、对不同病程和不同严重程度的精神分裂症患者的家庭干预效果差异。 结果共纳入57篇符合标准的文献。SDSS、PANSS分析结果显示:① 干预时间越长干预效果越好( P < 0.0001、 P=0.0025);② 单独家庭干预比多个家庭合并单独家庭干预的效果更明显( P < 0.0001、 P=0.0131);③ 干预对于病情较重患者效果较好( P < 0.0001、 P=0.0280)。SDSS量表还显示家庭干预对于病程短的患者效果更好( P < 0.0001)。 结论家庭干预更适合病程较短的精神分裂症患者, 干预应实施较长时间; 单独家庭干预更有利于患者阴性症状的改善和社会功能的康复, 且对于病情较轻患者的阴性症状改善效果更好。     

基于剂量组学预测肺癌患者放射性肺炎发生的研究

目的 探讨剂量组学在预测肺癌根治性放疗患者放射性肺炎发生中的应用潜能。方法 回顾性收集行根治性放疗的314例肺癌患者的临床资料、放疗剂量文件、定位及随访CT图像,根据临床资料及影像学随访资料对放射性肺炎进行分级,提取全肺的剂量组学特征,构建机器学习模型。应用1000次自助抽样法（bootstrap）的最小绝对值收敛和选择算子嵌套逻辑回归（LASSO‐LR）及1000次bootstrap的赤池信息量准则（AIC）向后法筛选与放射性肺炎相关的剂量组学特征,随机按照7∶3划分为训练集及验证集,应用逻辑回归建立预测模型,并应用ROC曲线及校正曲线评价模型的性能。结果 共提取120个剂量组学特征,经LASSO‐LR降维筛选得到12个特征进入“特征池”,再经过AIC向后法筛选,最终筛选出6个剂量组学特征进行模型构建,训练集AUC为0.77（95%CI为0.65~0.87）,独立验证集AUC为0.72（95%CI为0.64~0.81）。结论 利用剂量组学建立的预测模型具有预测放射性肺炎发生的潜力,但仍需继续纳入多中心数据及前瞻性数据进一步挖掘剂量组学的应用潜能。     

骨碎补化学成分和生物活性研究进展＊

骨碎补是历代临床常用中药，具有疗伤止痛、补肾强骨、消风祛斑等功效。其主要含黄酮、苯丙素、三萜、酚酸及其苷等类化学成分，现代研究表明骨碎补具有抗骨质疏松、促进骨折愈合、促软骨再生、护牙健齿、保护肾功能、抗炎、防治中毒性耳聋、降血脂等多种生物活性，开发前景广阔。本文对近年来骨碎补的化学成分、药理作用及临床应用研究进行综述，以期为骨碎补的进一步深入系统的研究和开发利用提供依据。     

Colorectal serrated pathway cancers and precursors

The serrated pathway (SP) can be viewed as two parallel, but partially overlapping, arrays of colorectal precursor lesions, and their respective endpoint carcinomas, that are distinct from those of the conventional adenoma–carcinoma sequence (APC‐pathway). In this review we focus at the outset on the clinical impact, pathological features, molecular genetics and biological behaviours of the various SP cancers. Then we summarize the clinicopathological features, classification and molecular profiles of the two main precursor lesions that anchor the respective pathways: (i) sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P), also called sessile serrated lesion (SSL), and (ii) traditional serrated adenoma (TSA). Activating mutations of the RAS–RAF–MAPK pathway initiate and sustain the lesions of the SP, and CpG island methylation of the promoter regions of tumour suppressor and DNA repair genes play the major role in their neoplastic progression. The SP includes microsatellite stable (MSS) carcinomas that are among the most biologically aggressive colorectal carcinomas (CRC), and also accounts for the great preponderance of sporadic hypermutated, mismatch repair (MMR)‐deficient or microsatellite instable (MSI) CRC. The identification, removal and appropriate classification of at‐risk SP precursors and surveillance of individuals who harbour these lesions present a challenge and opportunity for CRC prevention and mortality reduction.