Weight Loss and Mortality in Overweight and Obese Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review

Background Excess adiposity is a risk factor for poorer cancer survival, but there is uncertainty over whether losing weight reduces the risk. We conducted a critical review of the literature examining weight loss and mortality in overweight or obese cancer survivors. Methods We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for articles reporting associations between weight loss and mortality (cancer-specific or all-cause) in overweight/obese patients with obesity-related cancers. Where available, data from the same studies on non-overweight patients were compared. Results Five articles describing observational studies in breast cancer survivors were included. Four studies reported a positive association between weight loss and mortality in overweight/obese survivors, and the remaining study observed no significant association. Results were similar for non-overweight survivors. Quality assessment indicated high risk of bias across studies. Conclusions There is currently a lack of observational evidence that weight loss improves survival for overweight and obese cancer survivors. However, the potential for bias in these studies is considerable and the results likely reflect the consequences of disease-related rather than intentional weight loss. There is a need for stronger study designs, incorporating measures of intentionality of weight loss, and extended to other cancers

The myofibroblast matrix: implications for tissue repair and fibrosis

Myofibroblasts, and the extracellular matrix ( ECM ) in which they reside, are critical components of wound healing and fibrosis. The ECM , traditionally viewed as the structural elements within which cells reside, is actually a functional tissue whose components possess not only scaffolding characteristics, but also growth factor, mitogenic, and other bioactive properties. Although it has been suggested that tissue fibrosis simply reflects an ‘exuberant’ wound‐healing response, examination of the ECM and the roles of myofibroblasts during fibrogenesis instead suggest that the organism may be attempting to recapitulate developmental programmes designed to regenerate functional tissue. Evidence of this is provided by the temporospatial re‐emergence of embryonic ECM proteins by fibroblasts and myofibroblasts that induce cellular programmatic responses intended to produce a functional tissue. In the setting of wound healing (or physiological fibrosis), this occurs in a highly regulated and exquisitely choreographed fashion which results in cessation of haemorrhage, restoration of barrier integrity, and re‐establishment of tissue function. However, pathological tissue fibrosis, which oftentimes causes organ dysfunction and significant morbidity or mortality, likely results from dysregulation of normal wound‐healing processes or abnormalities of the process itself. This review will focus on the myofibroblast ECM and its role in both physiological and pathological fibrosis, and will discuss the potential for therapeutically targeting ECM proteins for treatment of fibrotic disorders.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/94657/1/path4104.pd

A phase I trial of everolimus in combination with 5-FU/LV, mFOLFOX6 and mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab in patients with refractory solid tumors

PURPOSE: This phase I study investigated the safety, dose limiting toxicity, and efficacy in three cohorts all treated with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus that was delivered 1) in combination with 5-fluourouracil with leucovorin (5-FU/LV), 2) with mFOLFOX6 (5-FU/LV + Oxaliplatin), and 3) with mFOLFOX6 + panitumumab in patients with refractory solid tumors. METHODS: Patients were accrued using a 3-patient cohort design consisting of two sub-trials in which the maximum tolerated combination (MTC) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of everolimus and 5-FU/LV was established in sub-trial A and of everolimus in combination with mFOLFOX6 and mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab in sub-trial B. RESULTS: Thirty six patients were evaluable for toxicity, 21 on Sub-trial A and 15 on Sub-trial B. In Sub-trial A, DLT was observed in 1/6 patients enrolled on dose level 1A and 2/3 patients in Level 6A. In sub-trial B, 2/3 patients experienced DLT on Level 1B and subsequent patients were enrolled on Level 1B-1 without DLT. 3/6 patients in cohort 2B-1 experienced Grade 3 mucositis and further study of the combination of everolimus, mFOLFOX6, and panitumumab was aborted. Among the 24 patients enrolled with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, the median time on treatment was 2.7 months with 45% of patients remaining on treatment with stable disease for at least three months. CONCLUSIONS: While a regimen of everolimus in addition to 5-FU/LV and mFOLFOX6 appears safe and tolerable, the further addition of panitumumab resulted in an unacceptable level of toxicity that cannot be recommended for further study. Further investigation is warranted to better elucidate the role in which mTOR inhibitors play in patients with refractory solid tumors, with a specific focus on mCRC as a potential for the combination of this targeted and cytotoxic therapy in future studies

Phase I study of pulsatile 3-day administration of afatinib (BIBW 2992) in combination with docetaxel in advanced solid tumors.

Background A phase I study to assess the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a short course of afatinib in combination with docetaxel for the treatment of solid tumors. Methods Patients with advanced solid malignancies received docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 and oral afatinib once daily on days 2-4, in 3-week treatment cycles. The afatinib dose was escalated in successive cohorts of 3-6 patients until dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). The MTD cohort was expanded to 13 patients. Pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed. Results Forty patients were treated. Afatinib doses were escalated to 160 mg/day in combination with 75 mg/m(2) docetaxel. Three patients had drug-related DLTs during cycle 1. The MTD was defined as 90 mg/day afatinib (days 2-4) with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2). The most frequent drug-related adverse events (all grades) were alopecia, diarrhea, stomatitis (all 50 %) and rash (40 %, all grade ≤2). Three patients had confirmed responses, two patients had unconfirmed responses and nine patients had durable stable disease >6 cycles. No pharmacokinetic interaction was observed. Conclusion Afatinib 90 mg administered for 3 days after docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) is the MTD for this treatment schedule and the recommended phase II/phase III dose. This combination showed anti-tumor activity in phase I, with a manageable adverse-event profile.Journal ArticleSCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Pharmacokinetics of metronomic chemotherapy: a neglected but crucial aspect

Metronomic chemotherapy describes the close, regular administration of chemotherapy drugs at less-toxic doses over prolonged periods of time. In 2015, the results of randomized phase III clinical trials demonstrated encouraging, albeit limited, efficacy benefits of metronomic chemotherapy regimens administered as adjuvant maintenance therapy for the treatment of breast cancer, or as maintenance therapy in combination with an antiangiogenic agent for metastatic colorectal cancer. Owing to the investigational nature of this approach, metronomic chemotherapy regimens are highly empirical in terms of the optimal dose and schedule for the drugs administered; therefore, greater knowledge of the pharmacokinetics of metronomic chemotherapy is critical to the future success of this treatment strategy. Unfortunately, such preclinical and clinical pharmacokinetic studies are rare. Herein, we present situations in which active drug concentrations have been achieved with metronomic schedules, and discuss their associated pharmacokinetic parameters. We summarize examples from the limited number of clinical studies in order to illustrate the importance of assessing such pharmacokinetic parameters, and discuss the influence this information can have on improving efficacy and reducing toxicity