Magnetoplasmonic design rules for active magneto-optics

Light polarization rotators and non-reciprocal optical isolators are essential building blocks in photonics technology. These macroscopic passive devices are commonly based on magneto-optical Faraday and Kerr polarization rotation. Magnetoplasmonics - the combination of magnetism and plasmonics - is a promising route to bring these devices to the nanoscale. We introduce design rules for highly tunable active magnetoplasmonic elements in which we can tailor the amplitude and sign of the Kerr response over a broad spectral range

Aberration-free ultra-thin flat lenses and axicons at telecom wavelengths based on plasmonic metasurfaces

The concept of optical phase discontinuities is applied to the design and demonstration of aberration-free planar lenses and axicons, comprising a phased array of ultrathin subwavelength spaced optical antennas. The lenses and axicons consist of radial distributions of V-shaped nanoantennas that generate respectively spherical wavefronts and non-diffracting Bessel beams at telecom wavelengths. Simulations are also presented to show that our aberration-free designs are applicable to high numerical aperture lenses such as flat microscope objectives

Cetuximab continuation after first progression in metastatic colorectal cancer (CAPRI-GOIM): A randomized phase II trial of FOLFOX plus cetuximab versus FOLFOX

Background: Cetuximab plus chemotherapy is a first-line treatment option in metastatic KRAS and NRAS wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. No data are currently available on continuing anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy beyond progression. Patients and methods: We did this open-label, 1:1 randomized phase II trial at 25 hospitals in Italy to evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab plus 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) as second-line treatment of KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic CRC patients treated in first line with 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab. Patients received FOLFOX plus cetuximab (arm A) or FOLFOX (arm B). Primary end point was progressionfree survival (PFS). Tumour tissues were assessed by next-generation sequencing (NGS). This report is the final analysis. Results: Between 1 February 2010 and 28 September 2014, 153 patients were randomized (74 in arm A and 79 in arm B). Median PFS was 6.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.7-8.0] versus 4.5 months (95% CI 3.3-5.7); [hazard ratio (HR), 0.81; 95% CI 0.58-1.12; P = 0.19], respectively. NGS was performed in 117/153 (76.5%) cases; 66/117 patients (34 in arm A and 32 in arm B) had KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA wild-type tumours. For these patients, PFS was longer in the FOLFOX plus cetuximab arm [median 6.9 (95% CI 5.5-8.2) versus 5.3 months (95% CI 3.7-6.9); HR, 0.56 (95% CI 0.33-0.94); P = 0.025]. There was a trend in better overall survival: median 23.7 [(95% CI 19.4-28.0) versus 19.8 months (95% CI 14.9-24.7); HR, 0.57 (95% CI 0.32-1.02); P = 0.056]. Conclusions: Continuing cetuximab treatment in combination with chemotherapy is of potential therapeutic efficacy in molecularly selected patients and should be validated in randomized phase III trials

Phase II study of docetaxel re-treatment in docetaxel-pretreated castration-resistant prostate cancer

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? We show that (i) docetaxel re-treatment, after a treatment-free interval, preserves activity; (ii) the treatment is especially well tolerated in patients who were effectively pretreated with docetaxel; and (iii) it could be speculated that combining docetaxel with other agents in this setting might be safe and result in greater activity. OBJECTIVE To determine the activity and tolerability of docetaxel re-treatment after first-line therapy with docetaxel in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between November 2005 and January 2009, 45 patients initially responding to docetaxel and then experiencing disease progression after a period of biochemical remission of at least 5 months were enrolled in a prospective multicenter study and re-treated with docetaxel. The primary endpoint was the biochemical response (biochemical partial response defined as > 50% prostate-specific antigen [PSA] decline); secondary endpoints were objective response, toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Partial PSA responses were observed in 11 patients (24.5%), 4 (25%) of whom also had an objective response. The treatment was well tolerated, with grade 1-2 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, vomiting and peripheral neuropathy noted in 18 (40%), 11 (24.5%), 8 (17.8%), and 6 (13.3%) patients, respectively. The most common grade 3 toxicity was neutropenia, which was observed in 8 patients (17.8%). Median PFS was 5 months and median OS was 13 months. CONCLUSIONS Docetaxel re-treatment preserves anti-tumour activity and is well tolerated in a selected population of pretreated patients with CRPC. Further randomized trials are needed to confirm our preliminary results

Phase II study of sorafenib in patients with sunitinib-refractory metastatic renal cell cancer

Purpose No previous prospective trials have been reported with sorafenib in patients with sunitinib-refractory metastatic renal cell cancer (MRCC). We conducted a multicenter study to determine the activity and tolerability of sorafenib as second-line therapy after sunitinib progression in MRCC. Patients and Methods Between January 2006 and September 2008, 52 patients were enrolled onto this single-arm phase II study. All patients received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice a day until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate (complete or partial response) evaluated every 8 weeks by use of the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; secondary end points were toxicity, time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). Results All patients were included in response and safety analyses. Partial responses were observed in 9.6% of patients (five of 52 patients; 95% CI, 5% to 17%) after two cycles. Grade 1 to 2 fatigue, diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, rash, and neutropenia were the most common side effects, noted in 16 (30.8%), 19 (36.5%), 20 (38.5%), 19 (36.5%), and 20 patients (38.5%), respectively. The most common grade 3 toxicity was diarrhea, noted in six patients (11.5%). Median TTP was 16 weeks (range, 8 to 40 weeks), and median OS was 32 weeks (range, 16 to 64 weeks). Conclusion Although well tolerated, sorafenib shows limited efficacy in sunitinib-refractory MRCC. Further randomized trials comparing sorafenib with other drugs that target different biologic pathways are needed to define the best second-line treatment option in these patients