Hypofractionated radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer: From moderate to extreme protocols

Adjuvant irradiation is the standard treatment after breast conservative surgery. Normofractionated regimen with an overall treatment time of 5 to 6 weeks is often considered as a limiting factor for irradiation compliance. In order to answer this issue, moderate and more recently extreme hypofractionated protocols appeared. We report here oncological outcomes and toxicity of hypofractionated breast irradiation. After defining the frame of moderate and extreme hypofractionated breast irradiations based on overall treatment time, patient selection criteria were listed. According to their levels of proof, the results of moderate and extreme hypofractionated breast irradiation were analysed. Overall treatment time for moderate hypofractionated breast irradiation ranged from 3 to 4 weeks, while for extreme hypofractionated breast irradiation, it was less than 1 week. For moderate hypofractionated breast irradiation, whole breast irradiation was currently performed with or without lymph node irradiation. Moderate hypofractionated breast irradiation has proven to be as safe and as efficient as normofractionated breast irradiation with level IA evidence. For extreme hypofractionated breast irradiation, phase III randomized trials confirmed that accelerated partial breast irradiation was non-inferior in terms of local control compared to normofractionated whole breast irradiation (with external beam radiation therapy and multicatheter brachytherapy), with similar acute and late toxicity. While the use of intraoperative breast irradiation remains under debate, new very accelerated partial breast irradiation (overall treatment time not exceeding 2 days) protocols emerged with encouraging results. Accelerated partial breast irradiation is warranted for extreme hypofractionated breast irradiation and is indicated for low-risk breast cancers. Moderate and extreme hypofractionated breast irradiation regimens are validated and can be routinely proposed according to patient selection criteria.     

角膜电刺激对糖尿病大鼠前部缺血性视神经病变模型的影响

观察并评估角膜电刺激对糖尿病大鼠前部缺血性视神经病变（AION）模型的影响。方法：实验 研究。健康雄性Sparague-Dawley大鼠40只，随机分组后抽出8只作为正常大鼠组。余下32只先予 以链脲佐菌素腹腔注射建立糖尿病大鼠模型，将造模成功的大鼠随机抽出8只作为糖尿病组，余下 24只糖尿病大鼠采用孟加拉玫瑰红联合532 nm激光方法建立AION大鼠模型。将24只造模成功的 AION大鼠随机分成3组，每组8只，分别为AION模型组，不予任何处理；电刺激组，予以角膜电刺 激（刺激参数为：电流1 mA，频率20 Hz，波宽1 ms/phase，刺激时间1 h，隔日1次，刺激2周）；假电 刺激组，电极安放位置与电刺激组相同，仅不接通电源。2周后5组大鼠进行眼底照相、光学相干断 层扫描和视觉诱发电位，然后处死，行视网膜及视神经冰冻切片，苏木精伊红染色观察。数据采用 单因素方差分析和LSD-t检验进行分析。结果：正常大鼠组视盘上半部视网膜厚度为（211±13）μm， 糖尿病大鼠组为（206±16）μm，AION模型组为（240±54）μm，假电刺激组为（216±11）μm，电刺 激组为（198±4）μm，5组视盘上半部视网膜厚度差异有统计学意义（F=2.854，P=0.038）。其中AION 模型组视盘上半部视网膜厚度高于正常组、糖尿病组、电刺激组，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）； 正常组与糖尿病组差异无统计学意义，AION模型组与假电刺激组未见明显差异。视觉诱发电位示 AION模型组N1潜伏期较电刺激组延长，差异有统计学意义（t=4.1，P<0.001）；AION模型组P1潜伏 期较正常组、糖尿病组、假电刺激组、电刺激组延长，差异均有统计学意义（t=4.1、2.5、2.6、3.2， P<0.05）；电刺激组N1-P1波幅大于假电刺激组，差异有统计学意义（t=4.0，P<0.001）。结论：角膜电 刺激能促进糖尿病大鼠前部缺血性视神经病变模型肿胀的视盘变薄，加速视盘水肿的消退，同时在 一定程度上改善视功能。     

Pembrolizumab After Two or More Lines of Previous Therapy in Patients With Recurrent or Metastatic SCLC: Results From the KEYNOTE-028 and KEYNOTE-158 Studies

IntroductionPembrolizumab has shown clinical benefit in patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic SCLC in the phase 1b multicohort study KEYNOTE-028 (NCT02054806) and the phase 2 multicohort study KEYNOTE-158 (NCT02628067). We present a pooled analysis of patients from KEYNOTE-028 and KEYNOTE-158 who had received two or more lines of previous therapy for SCLC.MethodsEligible patients were aged 18 years and above, had histologically or cytologically confirmed incurable recurrent or metastatic SCLC, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 and below, and had received two or more lines of previous therapy. Patients in KEYNOTE-028 were required to have a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)–positive tumor. Patients received pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks in KEYNOTE-028 or 200 mg every 3 weeks in KEYNOTE-158) for up to 2 years. The primary end point was objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, which is presented here per independent review.ResultsEighty-three patients who had received two or more lines of previous therapy (KEYNOTE-028, n = 19; KEYNOTE-158, n = 64) were included. Median follow-up duration was 7.7 (range, 0.5–48.7) months. Objective response rate was 19.3% (95% confidence interval: 11.4–29.4); two patients had complete response (one with a PD-L1–positive tumor), and 14 patients had partial response (13 with PD-L1–positive tumors). The median duration of response was not reached (range, 4.1‒35.8+ mo; plus sign indicates ongoing response); 61% of responders had responses lasting 18 months or longer. Fifty-one patients (61.4%) experienced any-grade treatment-related adverse events; eight patients (9.6%) had grade 3 or higher events.ConclusionsPembrolizumab exhibited durable antitumor activity in a subset of patients with recurrent or metastatic SCLC who had undergone two or more previous lines of therapy, regardless of PD-L1 expression. Pembrolizumab was well tolerated.