Rationale and design of an independent randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of aripiprazole or haloperidol in combination with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>One third to two thirds of people with schizophrenia have persistent psychotic symptoms despite clozapine treatment. Under real-world circumstances, the need to provide effective therapeutic interventions to patients who do not have an optimal response to clozapine has been cited as the most common reason for simultaneously prescribing a second antipsychotic drug in combination treatment strategies. In a clinical area where the pressing need of providing therapeutic answers has progressively increased the occurrence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, despite the lack of robust evidence of its efficacy, we sought to implement a pre-planned protocol where two alternative therapeutic answers are systematically provided and evaluated within the context of a pragmatic, multicentre, independent randomised study.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The principal clinical question to be answered by the present project is the relative efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment with clozapine plus aripiprazole compared with combination treatment with clozapine plus haloperidol in patients with an incomplete response to treatment with clozapine over an appropriate period of time. This project is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial that follow patients over a period of 12 months. Withdrawal from allocated treatment within 3 months is the primary outcome.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The implementation of the protocol presented here shows that it is possible to create a network of community psychiatric services that accept the idea of using their everyday clinical practice to produce randomised knowledge. The employed pragmatic attitude allowed to randomly allocate more than 100 individuals, which means that this study is the largest antipsychotic combination trial conducted so far in Western countries. We expect that the current project, by generating evidence on whether it is clinically useful to combine clozapine with aripiprazole rather than with haloperidol, provides physicians with a solid evidence base to be directly applied in the routine care of patients with schizophrenia.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><b>Clincaltrials.gov Identifier</b>: NCT00395915</p

Smoking status during first-line immunotherapy and chemotherapy in NSCLC patients: A case–control matched analysis from a large multicenter study

Background: Improved outcome in tobacco smoking patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following immunotherapy has previously been reported. However, little is known regarding this association during first-line immunotherapy in patients with high PD-L1 expression. In this study we compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status of two large multicenter cohorts. Methods: We compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status (never smokers vs. current/former smokers) of two retrospective multicenter cohorts of metastatic NSCLC patients, treated with first-line pembrolizumab and platinum-based chemotherapy. Results: A total of 962 NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% who received first-line pembrolizumab and 462 NSCLC patients who received first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were included in the study. Never smokers were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.49 [95% CI: 1.15–1.92], p = 0.0022) and death (HR = 1.38 [95% CI: 1.02–1.87], p = 0.0348) within the pembrolizumab cohort. On the contrary, a nonsignificant trend towards a reduced risk of disease progression (HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.52–1.05], p = 0.1003) and death (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.45–1.01], p = 0.0593) were reported for never smokers within the chemotherapy cohort. After a random case–control matching, 424 patients from both cohorts were paired. Within the matched pembrolizumab cohort, never smokers had a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.68 [95% CI: 1.17–2.40], p = 0.0045) and a nonsignificant trend towards a shortened overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 0.84–2.07], p = 0.2205). On the contrary, never smokers had a significantly longer PFS (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.49–0.95], p = 0.0255) and OS (HR = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.45–0.97], p = 0,0356) compared to current/former smoker patients within the matched chemotherapy cohort. On pooled multivariable analysis, the interaction term between smoking status and treatment modality was concordantly statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0074), PFS (p = 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0020), confirming the significantly different impact of smoking status across the two cohorts. Conclusions: Among metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% receiving first-line pembrolizumab, current/former smokers experienced improved PFS and OS. On the contrary, worse outcomes were reported among current/former smokers receiving first-line chemotherapy

Mucocele-like tumour of the breast

Mucocele-like (ML) lesions of the breast are rare tumours and were reported as benign lesions that histologically resembled colloid carcinoma of the breast when first described about sixteen years ago. Only subsequent reports identified ML lesions associated with ductal hyperplasia or carcinoma. The Authors report an additional case of ML tumour of the breast and review the available medical literature. A young asymptomatic woman, without family history of breast cancer, presented with a palpable breast mass. As the radiological aspect was not typical of a simple cyst, the patient underwent a fine needle aspiration biopsy which showed a doubtful pathological pattern compatible with fibroadenoma. The patient underwent surgery and the gross examination of the surgically removed mass revealed multiple aggregated cysts containing mucinous material. Microscopic examination showed a ML tumour of the breast, with aspects of cribriform ductal hyperplasia

The role of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) reintroduction with irinotecan or oxaliplatin in truly 5-FU-refractory advanced colorectal cancer patients.

Although several evidences have demonstrated a synergistic activity of 5-fluorouracil with irinotecan and oxaliplatin, thus explaining the use of this drug combination in the first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, the need for the reintroduction of 5-FU in the second-line setting is more questionable.We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of patients developing progressive disease while on an infusional 5-FU-based front-line chemotherapy and subsequently treated with one of the four following chemotherapy regimens: irinotecan, oxaliplatin and irinotecan or oxaliplatin both combined with the de Gramont schedule (LV5-FU2).225 patients (137 males and 88 females), were eligible for analysis. Second-line chemotherapy consisted of irinotecan in 79 patients (35\%, group A), oxaliplatin in 47 patients (21\%, group B), irinotecan with LV5-FU2 in 53 patients (24\%, group C) and oxaliplatin with LV5-FU2 in the remaining 46 cases (20\%, group D). The response rate to second-line chemotherapy was obtained in 6/79 patients (8\%) in group A, in 4/47 patients (9\%) in group B, in 11/53 patients (21\%) in group C and in 10/46 patients (22\%) in group D (p = 0.04).These data suggest that reintroduction of 5-FU could increase irinotecan and oxaliplatin activity in patients progressing during a 5-FU-based first-line chemotherapy

The role of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) reintroduction with irinotecan or oxaliplatin in truly 5-FU-refractory advanced colorectal cancer patients.

Although several evidences have demonstrated a synergistic activity of 5-fluorouracil with irinotecan and oxaliplatin, thus explaining the use of this drug combination in the first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, the need for the reintroduction of 5-FU in the second-line setting is more questionable.We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of patients developing progressive disease while on an infusional 5-FU-based front-line chemotherapy and subsequently treated with one of the four following chemotherapy regimens: irinotecan, oxaliplatin and irinotecan or oxaliplatin both combined with the de Gramont schedule (LV5-FU2).225 patients (137 males and 88 females), were eligible for analysis. Second-line chemotherapy consisted of irinotecan in 79 patients (35\%, group A), oxaliplatin in 47 patients (21\%, group B), irinotecan with LV5-FU2 in 53 patients (24\%, group C) and oxaliplatin with LV5-FU2 in the remaining 46 cases (20\%, group D). The response rate to second-line chemotherapy was obtained in 6/79 patients (8\%) in group A, in 4/47 patients (9\%) in group B, in 11/53 patients (21\%) in group C and in 10/46 patients (22\%) in group D (p = 0.04).These data suggest that reintroduction of 5-FU could increase irinotecan and oxaliplatin activity in patients progressing during a 5-FU-based first-line chemotherapy

On the origin of medium-period ionospheric waves and their possible modelling: a short review

This article introduces the concept of ionospheric waves with periods from about 15 min to about 4 h as one of the acoustic-gravity wave-induced phenomena. The existence of these medium-period ionospheric waves in the various ionospheric layers is supported by the results of a data analysis which has shown remarkable characteristics in occurrence and direction of the waves with a period not longer than about 2 h. The explanation offered is based on the assumption that a unique phenomenon capable to launch acoustic-gravity waves related to such ionospheric waves is the sudden change in physical conditions of the atmosphere due to the passage of the solar terminator

Emerging Immunotargets and Immunotherapies in Prostate Cancer

Innate and adaptive immunity are both involved in prostate cancer (PCa) carcinogenesis and progression. On this scenario, several immunotherapeutic approaches have been proposed and are presently under extensive investigation in PCa patients. Among emerging immune targets, immune checkpoint inhibitors such as anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyteassociated protein 4 (CTLA-4), anti-Programmed death-1 (PD-1) and anti-Programmed death-ligand-1 (PD-L1) agents seem to represent the most promising candidate for these patients, together with oncolytic viruses and vaccines, used alone or in combined strategies. In this review, we focused on emerging immunotherapeutic approaches in patients with PCa, showing the rational for their association with current standard therapies including anti-androgen agents, chemo- or radiation therapy