Contributions of Intraindividual and Interindividual Differences to Multisensory Processes.

Most evidence on the neural and perceptual correlates of sensory processing derives from studies that have focused on only a single sensory modality and averaged the data from groups of participants. Although valuable, such studies ignore the substantial interindividual and intraindividual differences that are undoubtedly at play. Such variability plays an integral role in both the behavioral/perceptual realms and in the neural correlates of these processes, but substantially less is known when compared with group-averaged data. Recently, it has been shown that the presentation of stimuli from two or more sensory modalities (i.e., multisensory stimulation) not only results in the well-established performance gains but also gives rise to reductions in behavioral and neural response variability. To better understand the relationship between neural and behavioral response variability under multisensory conditions, this study investigated both behavior and brain activity in a task requiring participants to discriminate moving versus static stimuli presented in either a unisensory or multisensory context. EEG data were analyzed with respect to intraindividual and interindividual differences in RTs. The results showed that trial-by-trial variability of RTs was significantly reduced under audiovisual presentation conditions as compared with visual-only presentations across all participants. Intraindividual variability of RTs was linked to changes in correlated activity between clusters within an occipital to frontal network. In addition, interindividual variability of RTs was linked to differential recruitment of medial frontal cortices. The present findings highlight differences in the brain networks that support behavioral benefits during unisensory versus multisensory motion detection and provide an important view into the functional dynamics within neuronal networks underpinning intraindividual performance differences

Nestin expression associates with poor prognosis and triple negative phenotype in locally advanced (T4) breast cancer

Nestin, an intermediate filament protein, has traditionally been noted for its importance as a neural stem cell marker. However, in recent years, expression of nestin has shown to be associated with general proliferation of progenitor cell populations within neoplasms. There is no reported study addressing nestin expression in T4 breast cancer patients. Thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate, through immunohistochemistry, the expression and distribution of nestin in T4 breast cancer, in order to determine its association with clinical and pathological parameters as well as with patients' outcome. Nestin was detectable in tumoral cells and in endothelial cells of blood microvessels, and it is significantly expressed in triple-negative and in inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) subgroups of T4 breast tumours. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the presence of nestin in tumoral cells significantly predicted poor prognosis at 5-years survival (P=0.02) and with borderline significance at 10-years of survival (P=0.05) in T4 breast cancer patients. On the basis of these observations, we speculate that nestin expression may characterize tumours with an aggressive clinical behavior, suggesting that the presence of nestin in tumoral cells and vessels may be considered an important factor that leads to a poor prognosis. Further studies are awaited to define the biological role of nestin in the etiology of these subgroups of breast cancers

Aprepitant versus metoclopramide, both combined with dexamethasone, for the prevention of cisplatin-induced delayed emesis : a randomized, double-blind study

Background: A combination of aprepitant, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist (r.a.), and dexamethasone is recommended for the prophylaxis of cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting in the acute phase, and aprepitant + dexamethasone (A + D) in the delayed phase. The aim of this study was to verify if A + D is superior to metoclopramide plus dexamethasone (M + D) in preventing delayed emesis in cancer patients receiving the same prophylaxis for acute emesis. Patients and methods: A randomized double-blind study comparing A + D versus M+ D was completed in previously untreated cancer patients. Before chemotherapy, all patients were treated with intravenous palonosetron 0.25 mg and dexamethasone 12 mg, and oral aprepitant 125 mg. On day 2-4, patients randomly received oral dexamethasone 8 mg plus aprepitant 80 mg once daily (days 2-3) or metoclopramide 20 mg four times daily plus dexamethasone 8 mg bid. Primary endpoint was rate of complete response (no vomiting, no rescue treatment) in day 2-5 after chemotherapy. Results: Due to difficulty in the accrual of patients, 303 of the 480 planned patients were enrolled, 284 were fully evaluable, 147 receiving A + D, 137 M+ D. Day 1 results were similar in both arms. On day 2-5, complete response rate was not significantly different (80.3% with A + D versus 82.5% with M+ D, P < 0.38, respectively), and all secondary endpoints were also similar (complete protection, total control, no vomiting, no nausea, and score of Functional Living Index-Emesis; P < 0.24). Adverse events incidence was not significantly different between the two treatments. Conclusions: In cancer patients submitted to cisplatin-based chemotherapy, receiving the same antiemetic prophylaxis for acute emesis, A + D is not superior to M+ D in preventing delayed emesis, and both treatments present similar toxicity

Cancer patients as &apos;experts&apos; in defining quality of life domains. A multicentre survey by the Italian Group for the Evaluation of Outcomes in Oncology (IGEO)

Although the subjective nature of quality of life is generally accepted, less attention has been paid to the procedure of selecting domains to be explored with questionnaires. To explore what contributes to cancer patients' quality of life, a survey was conducted with the aim of identifying contents of quality of life using cancer patients as 'experts'. A questionnaire with open-ended items aimed at exploring the meaning of quality of life and at determining the contents of health and not health related quality of life, was submitted to a sample of cancer patients stratified by residence, cancer site and stage of disease. The 248 questionnaires received were transcribed and broken down into phrases to allow coding. A content analysis was performed, using as a conceptual framework, the domains identified by the Italian Society of Psycho-Oncology. Overall, 43 domains and a list of symptoms were identified. The two most frequently reported symptoms were pain (21.4% patients) and fatigue (14.1% patients). Social relationships and psychological domains were heavily represented. Twenty sub-domains related to the domain `psychological well-being'. This study suggests that information on the content of quality of life questionnaires to be submitted to people affected by a specific disease, should be derived by studying people suffering the specific disease. These results reinforce the criticism that available quality of life instruments are more likely to reflect the perspective of health professionals than patients

Everolimus Plus Exemestane in Advanced Breast Cancer: Safety Results of the BALLET Study on Patients Previously Treated Without and with Chemotherapy in the Metastatic Setting

BACKGROUND: The BALLET study was an open-label, multicenter, expanded access study designed to allow treatment with everolimus plus exemestane in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer progressed following prior endocrine therapy. A post hoc analysis to evaluate if previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting affects the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane was conducted on the Italian subset, as it represented the major part of the patients enrolled (54%). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand one hundred and fifty-one Italian patients were included in the present post hoc analysis, which focused on two sets of patients: patients who never received chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (36.1%) and patients who received at least one chemotherapy treatment in the metastatic setting (63.9%). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and sixteen patients (97.0%) prematurely discontinued the study drug, and the main reasons reported were disease progression (39.1%), local reimbursement of everolimus (31.1%), and adverse events (AEs) (16.1%). The median duration of study treatment exposure was 139.5 days for exemestane and 135.0 days for everolimus. At least one AE was experienced by 92.5% of patients. The incidence of everolimus-related AEs was higher (83.9%) when compared with those that occurred with exemestane (29.1%), and the most commonly reported everolimus-related AE was stomatitis (51.3%). However, no significant difference in terms of safety related to the combination occurred between patients without and with chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. CONCLUSION: Real-life data of the Italian patients BALLET-related cohort were an adequate setting to state that previous chemotherapy did not affect the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane. The Oncologist 2017;22:1-8Implications for Practice: With the advent of new targeted agents for advanced or metastatic breast cancer, multiple lines of therapy may be possible, and components of the combined regimens can overlap from one line to another. Thus, it is important to assess even the potential of cumulative and additive toxic effects among the drugs. Previous chemotherapy did not affect the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane. The continuous monitoring of the safety signals of this drug combination from general clinical practice is important, in particular for stomatitis

Adjuvant chemotherapy in completely resected gastric cancer : a randomized phase III trial conducted by GOIRC

Complete surgical resection of gastric cancer is potentially curative, but long-term survival is poor. METHODS: Patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the stomach of stages IB, II, IIIA and B, or IV (T4N2M0) and treated with potentially curative surgery were randomly assigned to follow-up alone or to intravenous treatment with four cycles (repeated every 21 days) of PELF (cisplatin [40 mg/m(2), on days 1 and 5], epirubicin [30 mg/m(2), days 1 and 5], L-leucovorin [100 mg/m(2), days 1-4], and 5-fluorouracil [300 mg/m(2), days 1-4] in a hospital setting. Frequencies and severity of adverse events were determined. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between the treatment arms using Kaplan-Meier analysis and a Cox proportional hazards regression model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: From January 1995 through September 2000, 258 patients were randomly assigned to chemotherapy (n = 130) or surgery alone (n = 128). Patient characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Among those who received chemotherapy, grade 3 or 4 toxic effects including vomiting, mucositis, and diarrhea were experienced by 21.1%, 8.4%, and 11.8% of patients, respectively. Leucopenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia of grade 3 or 4 were experienced by 20.3%, 3.3%, and 4.2% of patients, respectively. After a median follow-up of 72.8 months, 128 patients (49.6%) experienced recurrence and 139 (53.9%) deaths were observed, one toxicity-related. Relative to treatment with surgery alone, adjuvant chemotherapy did not increase disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] of recurrence = 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 1.27) or overall survival (HR of death = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.26). CONCLUSIONS: Our results failed to provide proof of an effect of adjuvant chemotherapy with PELF on overall survival or disease-free survival. The estimated effect of chemotherapy (10% reduction in the hazard of death or relapse) is modest and consistent with the results of meta-analyses of adjuvant chemotherapy without platinum agent