430 research outputs found
Prognostic value of bcl-2 expression in invasive breast cancer.
Expression of the bcl-2 proto-oncogene was studied immunohistochemically in 251 invasive ductal breast carcinomas (median follow-up time 91 months, range 24-186 months) and the results were correlated with clinicopathological data and prognostic variables. Sixty-three (25%) tumours were scored bcl-2 negative and 188 (75%) tumours were bcl-2 positive. No relationship could be observed between bcl-2 status and tumour grade, pTNM staging or menopausal status. A strong positive relationship was demonstrated between bcl-2 immunoreactivity and oestrogen receptor status (P < 0.001) and progesterone receptor status (P < 0.001). No prognostic value was demonstrated for bcl-2 expression on disease-free survival and overall survival in axillary node-negative breast cancer patients. However, in axillary node-positive breast cancer patients multivariate analysis demonstrated absence of bcl-2 expression to be independently related to shortened disease-free survival (P = 0.003) and shortened overall survival (P < 0.001). Our results suggest a potential important role for bcl-2 expression as a modulator of response to adjuvant therapy in breast cancer
EORTC (30885) randomised phase III study with recombinant interferon alpha and recombinant interferon alpha and gamma in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. The EORTC Genitourinary Group.
In the treatment of renal cell carcinoma both complete (CRs) and partial remissions (PRs) have been obtained using recombinant (r) interferon alpha (IFN-alpha), with response rates ranging from 0 to 31% (mean 16%). rIFN-gamma is a potent immunostimulating agent, but the clinical experience of its use is limited and results are conflicting. In a phase II study with the combination of rIFN-alpha 2c (Boehringer Ingelheim) and rIFN-gamma (Genentech, supplied by Boehringer Ingelheim) in 31 eligible patients, a response rate of 25% was recorded. Based on this observation a randomised phase III study was initiated to investigate the possible advantage of the addition rIFN-gamma to rIFN-alpha 2c treatment. Treatment consisted of rIFN-alpha 2c 30 micrograms m-2 = 10 x 10(6) IU m-2 s.c. twice weekly in arm A and the same dose of rIFN-alpha combined with rIFN-gamma 100 micrograms m-2 = 2 x 10(6) IU m-2 in arm B. Eligibility criteria included documented progression of disease; patients with bone lesions only and overt central nervous system metastases were excluded. Between November 1988 and September 1990, 102 patients were entered into the study. An interim analysis showed a response in 7/53 (13%) patients (two CRs and five PRs) in the rIFN-alpha 2c monotherapy arm and in 2/45 (4%) (one CR and one PR) patients in the combination arm. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.17). The probability of missing an eventual 10% advantage for the combination is 0.001. The numbers are insufficient to rule out a negative effect of the addition of rIFN-gamma. The dose intensity of IFN-alpha 2c for the two treatment arms was the same. The addition of rIFN-gamma does not improve the response rate of rIFN-alpha 2c monotherapy. A possible detrimental effect cannot be excluded
Closed-form analytical expressions for the potential fields generated by triangular monolayers with linearly distributed source strength
The solution of the mixed boundary value problem of potential theory involves the computation of the potential field generated by monolayer and double layer source distributions on surfaces at which boundary conditions are known. Closed-form analytical expressions have been described in the literature for the potential field generated by double layers having a linearly distributed strength over triangular source elements. This contribution presents the corresponding expression for the linearly distributed monolayer strength. The solution is shown to be valid for all observation points in space, including those on the interior, edges and vertices of the source triangle
Elevated levels of the angiogenic cytokines basic fibroblast growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor in sera of cancer patients.
The concentration of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) was determined in the serum of 90 untreated and 42 treated metastatic cancer patients, including patients with colorectal, breast, ovarian and renal carcinomas, with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Levels higher than the 95th percentile of the concentrations of a control group, i.e. 7.5 pg ml(-1) for bFGF and 500 pg ml(-1) for VEGF, were identified as 'elevated'. One measurement during follow-up was included into the analysis per patient. For 19 treated patients, consecutive serum samples were analysed. Fifty-seven per cent of all untreated patients had elevated serum levels of one or both angiogenic factors. The fraction of patients with elevated serum levels of bFGF and/or VEGF was similar in the different tumour types. Agreement of bFGF levels and VEGF levels, classified in relation to their respective cut-off values, was present in 67% of all patients. Fifty-eight per cent of the patients with progressive disease during treatment compared with 15% of the patients showing response to treatment (chi-squared test P < 0.05) had elevated bFGF and/or VEGF serum levels. When consecutive serum samples were analysed, two-thirds of the patients showing progressive disease had increasing serum levels of the angiogenic factors compared with less than one-tenth of the patients showing response (chi-squared test P < 0.05). The lack of association between the serum bFGF and VEGF levels and the tumour type may suggest an aspecific host reaction responsible for solid tumour-related angiogenesis. The main determinants of the serum bFGF and VEGF concentration are the progression kinetics of the metastatic carcinomas
Phase I study on docetaxel and ifosfamide in patients with advanced solid tumours.
Docetaxel and ifosfamide have shown significant activity against a variety of solid tumours. This prompted a phase I trial on the combination of these drugs. This phase I study was performed to assess the feasibility of the combination, to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the side effects, and to propose a safe schedule for further phase II studies. A total of 34 patients with a histologically confirmed solid tumour, who were not pretreated with taxanes or ifosfamide and who had received no more than one line of chemotherapy for advanced disease were entered into the study. Treatment consisted of docetaxel given as a 1-h infusion followed by ifosfamide as a 24-h infusion (schedule A), or ifosfamide followed by docetaxel (schedule B) every 3 weeks. Docetaxel doses ranged from 60 to 85 mg m(-2) and ifosfamide doses from 2.5 to 5.0 g m(-2). Granulocytopenia grade 3 and 4 were common (89%), short lasting and ifosfamide dose dependent. Febrile neutropenia and sepsis occurred in 17% and 2% of courses respectively. Non-haematological toxicities were mild to moderate and included alopecia, nausea, vomiting, mucositis, diarrhoea, sensory neuropathy, skin and nail toxicity and oedema. There did not appear to be any pharmacokinetic interaction between docetaxel and ifosfamide. One complete response (CR) (soft tissue sarcoma) and two partial responses (PRs) were documented. A dose of 75 mg m(-2) of docetaxel combined with 5.0 g m(-2) ifosfamide appeared to be manageable. Schedule A was advocated for further treatment
- …