234 research outputs found

    A double-blind placebo-controlled, randomised study comparing gemcitabine and marimastat with gemcitabine and placebo as first line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

    Get PDF
    Pancreatic cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death in the western world and the prognosis for unresectable disease remains poor. Recent advances in conventional chemotherapy and the development of novel ‘molecular’ treatment strategies with different toxicity profiles warrant investigation as combination treatment strategies. This randomised study in pancreatic cancer compares marimastat (orally administered matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor) in combination with gemcitabine to gemcitabine alone. Two hundred and thirty-nine patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer were randomised to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg m−2) in combination with either marimastat or placebo. The primary end-point was survival. Objective tumour response and duration of response, time to treatment failure and disease progression, quality of life and safety were also assessed. There was no significant difference in survival between gemcitabine and marimastat and gemcitabine and placebo (P=0.95 log-rank test). Median survival times were 165.5 and 164 days and 1-year survival was 18% and 17% respectively. There were no significant differences in overall response rates (11 and 16% respectively), progression-free survival (P=0.68 log-rank test) or time to treatment failure (P=0.70 log-rank test) between the treatment arms. The gemcitabine and marimastat combination was well tolerated with only 2.5% of patients withdrawn due to presumed marimastat toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 musculoskeletal toxicities were reported in only 4% of the marimastat treated patients, although 59% of marimastat treated patients reported some musculoskeletal events. The results of this study provide no evidence to support a combination of marimastat with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The combination of marimastat with gemcitabine was well tolerated. Further studies of marimastat as a maintenance treatment following a response or stable disease on gemcitabine may be justified

    Explicit solution for a Gaussian wave packet impinging on a square barrier

    Get PDF
    The collision of a quantum Gaussian wave packet with a square barrier is solved explicitly in terms of known functions. The obtained formula is suitable for performing fast calculations or asymptotic analysis. It also provides physical insight since the description of different regimes and collision phenomena typically requires only some of the terms.Comment: To be published in J. Phys.

    Analytic results for Gaussian wave packets in four model systems: I. Visualization of the kinetic energy

    Full text link
    Using Gaussian wave packet solutions, we examine how the kinetic energy is distributed in time-dependent solutions of the Schrodinger equation corresponding to the cases of a free particle, a particle undergoing uniform acceleration, a particle in a harmonic oscillator potential, and a system corresponding to an unstable equilibrium. We find, for specific choices of initial parameters, that as much as 90% of the kinetic energy can be localized (at least conceptually) in the `front half' of such Gaussian wave packets, and we visualize these effects.Comment: 22 pages, RevTeX, four .eps figures, to appear in Found. Phys. Lett. Vol. 17, Dec. 200

    Endostatin expression in pancreatic tissue is modulated by elastase

    Get PDF
    Pancreatic tumours are scirrhous, avascular tumours, suggesting that they may produce angiogenesis inhibitors that suppress the growth of the vasculature to the tumour and metastases. We have sought evidence for the angiogenesis inhibitor, endostatin, in normal and cancerous pancreatic tissue. Using Western blotting, we found mature 20 kDa endostatin in cancer tissue but not in normal tissue. Several endostatin-related peptides of higher mol wt were present in both tissues. Extracts from normal tissue were able to degrade exogenous endostatin, whereas extracts from cancer were without effect. Although the exocrine pancreas secretes inactive proenzymes of trypsin, chymotrypsin and elastase, their possible role in this degradation was examined. The trypsin/chymotrypsin inhibitor, Glycine max, did not prevent the degradation of endostatin by normal pancreatic extracts but elastatinal, a specific inhibitor of elastase, reduced the rate of degradation. Extracts of pancreatic tumours did not express any detectable elastase activity, but an elastase (Km 1.1 mM) was expressed by extracts of normal pancreas. We conclude that endostatin is present and stable in pancreatic cancer tissues, which may explain their avascular nature, but that normal pancreatic tissue expresses enzymes, including elastase, which rapidly degrade endostatin. The stability of endostatin may have implications for its therapeutic use

    Modelling prognostic factors in advanced pancreatic cancer

    Get PDF
    Pancreatic cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death. Identification of defined patient groups based on a prognostic index may improve the prediction of survival and selection of therapy. Many prognostic factors have been identified often based on retrospective, underpowered studies with unclear analyses. Data from 653 patients were analysed. Continuous variables are often simplified assuming a linear relationship with log hazard or introducing a step function (dichotomising). Misspecification may lead to inappropriate conclusions but has not been previously investigated in pancreatic cancer studies. Models based on standard assumptions were compared with a novel approach using nonlinear fractional polynomial (FP) transformations. The model based on FP-transformed covariates was most appropriate and confirmed five previously reported prognostic factors: albumin, CA19-9, alkaline phosphatase, LDH and metastases, and identified three additional factors not previously reported: WBC, AST and BUN. The effects of CA19-9, alkaline phosphatase, AST and BUN may go unrecognised due to simplistic assumptions made in statistical modelling. We advocate a multivariable approach that uses information contained within continuous variables appropriately. The functional form of the relationship between continuous covariates and survival should always be assessed. Our model should aid individual patient risk stratification and the design and analysis of future trials in pancreatic cancer

    Marimastat as maintenance therapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised trial

    Get PDF
    This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to evaluate the ability of the orally administered matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor, marimastat, to prolong survival in patients with non-resectable gastric and gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Three hundred and sixty-nine patients with histological proof of adenocarcinoma, who had received no more than a single regimen of 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy, were randomised to receive either marimastat (10 mg b.d.) or placebo. Patients were treated for as long as was tolerable. The primary endpoint was overall survival with secondary endpoints of time to disease progression and quality of life. At the point of protocol-defined study completion (85% mortality in the placebo arm) there was a modest difference in survival in the intention-to-treat population in favour of marimastat (P=0.07 log-rank test, hazard ratio=1.23 (95% confidence interval 0.98–1.55)). This survival benefit was maintained over a further 2 years of follow-up (P=0.024, hazard ratio=1.27 (1.03–1.57)). The median survival was 138 days for placebo and 160 days for marimastat, with 2-year survival of 3% and 9% respectively. A significant survival benefit was identified at study completion in the pre-defined sub-group of 123 patients who had received prior chemotherapy (P=0.045, hazard ratio=1.53 (1.00–2.34)). This benefit increased with 2 years additional follow-up (P=0.006, hazard ratio=1.68 (1.16–2.44)), with 2-year survival of 5% and 18% respectively. Progression-free survival was also significantly longer for patients receiving marimastat compared to placebo (P=0.009, hazard ratio=1.32 (1.07–1.63)). Marimastat treatment was associated with the development of musculoskeletal pain and inflammation. Events of anaemia, abdominal pain, jaundice and weight loss were more common in the placebo arm. This is one of the first demonstrations of a therapeutic benefit for a matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor in cancer patients. The greatest benefit was observed in patients who had previously received chemotherapy. A further randomised study of marimastat in these patients is warranted

    Resection of the mesopancreas (RMP): a new surgical classification of a known anatomical space

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Prognosis after surgical therapy for pancreatic cancer is poor and has been attributed to early lymph node involvement as well as to a strong tendency of cancer cells to infiltrate into the retropancreatic tissue and to spread along the peripancreatic neural plexuses. The objective of our study was to classify the anatomical-surgical layer of the mesopancreas and to describe the surgical principles relevant for resection of the mesopancreas (RMP). Immunohistochemical investigation of the mesopancreatic-perineural lymphogenic structures was carried out with the purpose of identifying possible routes of metastatic spread. METHODS: Resection of the mesopancreas (RMP) was performed in fresh corpses. Pancreas and mesopancreas were separated from each other and the mesopancreas was immunohistochemically investigated. RESULTS: The mesopancreas strains itself dorsally of the mesenteric vessels as a whitish-firm, fatty tissue-like layer. Macroscopically, in the dissected en-bloc specimens of pancreas and mesopancreas nerve plexuses were found running from the dorsal site of the pancreatic head to the mesopancreas to establish a perineural plane. Immunohistochemical examinations revealed the lymphatic vessels localized in direct vicinity of the neuronal plexuses between pancreas and mesopancreas. CONCLUSION: The mesopancreas as a perineural lymphatic layer located dorsally to the pancreas and reaching beyond the mesenteric vessels has not been classified in the anatomical or surgical literature before. The aim to ensure the greatest possible distance from the retropancreatic lymphatic tissue which drains the carcinomatous focus can be achieved in patients with pancreatic cancer only by complete resection of the mesopancreas (RMP)
    corecore