Inspiratory resistances facilitate the diaphragm response to transcranial stimulation in humans

BACKGROUND: Breathing in humans is dually controlled for metabolic (brainstem commands) and behavioral purposes (suprapontine commands) with reciprocal modulation through spinal integration. Whereas the ventilatory response to chemical stimuli arises from the brainstem, the compensation of mechanical loads in awake humans is thought to involve suprapontine mechanisms. The aim of this study was to test this hypothesis by examining the effects of inspiratory resistive loading on the response of the diaphragm to transcranial magnetic stimulation. RESULTS: Six healthy volunteers breathed room air without load (R0) and then against inspiratory resistances (5 and 20 cmH(2)O/L/s, R5 and R20). Ventilatory variables were recorded. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was performed during early inspiration (I) or late expiration (E), giving rise to motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in the diaphragm (Di) and abductor pollicis brevis (APB). Breathing frequency significantly decreased during R20 without any other change. Resistive breathing had no effect on the amplitude of Di MEPs, but shortened their latency (R20: -0.903 ms, p = 0.03) when TMS was superimposed on inspiration. There was no change in APB MEPs. CONCLUSION: Inspiratory resistive breathing facilitates the diaphragm response to TMS while it does not increase the automatic drive to breathe. We interpret these findings as a neurophysiological substratum of the suprapontine nature of inspiratory load compensation in awake humans

Safety and efficacy of second-line metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: An open-label phase II trial (VinMetAtezo).

This was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm Phase II study performed in patients with advanced NSCLC without activating EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement who progressed after first-line platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Combination treatment was atezolizumab (1200 mg IV day 1, every 3 weeks) and oral vinorelbine (40 mg, 3 times by week). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) during the 4-month follow-up from the first dose of treatment. Statistical analysis was based on the exact single-stage Phase II design defined by A'Hern. Based on literature data, the Phase III trial threshold was set at 36 successes in 71 patients.To evaluate the safety and efficacy of second-line metronomic oral vinorelbine-atezolizumab combination for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer

PD-L1-expression patterns in large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung: potential implications for use of immunotherapy in these patients: the GFPC 03-2017 “EPNEC” study

Background: Few data are available on programmed cell-death-protein-1-ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression on large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas of the lung (LCNECs). We analyzed PD-L1 expression on tumor (TCs) and inflammatory cells (ICs) from LCNEC patients to assess relationships between this expression, clinical characteristics, and disease outcomes. Methods: PD-L1 expression was determined by immunohistochemistry with monoclonal antibody 22C3 in consecutive LCNEC patients managed in 17 French centers between January 2014 and December 2016. Results: After centralized review, only 68 out of 105 (64%) patients had confirmed LCNEC diagnoses. Median overall survival (OS) (95% CI) was 11 (7-16) months for all patients, 7 (5-10), 21 (10-not reached) and not reached months for metastatic, stage III and localized forms (p = 0.0001). Respectively, 11% and 75% of the tumor samples were TC+ and IC+, and 66% had a TC-/IC+ profile. Comparing IC+ versus IC-metastatic LCNEC, the former had significantly longer progression-free survival [9 (4-13) versus 4 (1-8) months; p = 0.03], with a trend towards better median OS [12 (7-18) versus 9.5 (4-14) months; p = 0.21]. Compared to patients with TCtumors, those with TC+ LCNECs tended to have non-significantly shorter median OS [4 (1-6.2) versus 11 (8-18) months, respectively]. Median OS was significantly shorter for patients with TC+/IC-metastatic LCNECs than those with TC-IC+ lesions (2 versus 8 months, respectively; p = 0.04). Conclusion: TC-/IC+ was the most frequent PD-L1-expression profile for LCNECs, a pattern quite specific compared with non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer. IC PD-L1 expression seems to have a prognostic role