Dose Escalation Methods in Phase I Cancer Clinical Trials

Phase I clinical trials are an essential step in the development of anticancer drugs. The main goal of these studies is to establish the recommended dose and/or schedule of new drugs or drug combinations for phase II trials. The guiding principle for dose escalation in phase I trials is to avoid exposing too many patients to subtherapeutic doses while preserving safety and maintaining rapid accrual. Here we review dose escalation methods for phase I trials, including the rule-based and model-based dose escalation methods that have been developed to evaluate new anticancer agents. Toxicity has traditionally been the primary endpoint for phase I trials involving cytotoxic agents. However, with the emergence of molecularly targeted anticancer agents, potential alternative endpoints to delineate optimal biological activity, such as plasma drug concentration and target inhibition in tumor or surrogate tissues, have been proposed along with new trial designs. We also describe specific methods for drug combinations as well as methods that use a time-to-event endpoint or both toxicity and efficacy as endpoints. Finally, we present the advantages and drawbacks of the various dose escalation methods and discuss specific applications of the methods in developmental oncotherapeutics

Physiotherapists' experiences of physiotherapy interventions in scientific physiotherapy publications focusing on interventions for children with cerebral palsy: a qualitative phenomenographic approach

Background: Physiotherapy research concerning interventions for children with CP is often focused on collecting evidence of the superiority of particular therapeutic methods or treatment modalities. Articulating and documenting the use of theory, instrumentation and research design and the assumptions underlying physiotherapy research interventions are important. Physiotherapy interventions focusing on children with Cerebral Palsy should, according to the literature, be based on a functional and environmental perspective with task-specific functional activity, motor learning processes and Family-Centred Service i.e. to enhance motor ability and improve capacity so that the child can perform the tasks necessary to participate actively in everyday life. Thus, it is important to coordinate the norms and values of the physiotherapist with those of the family and child. The aim of this study was to describe how physiotherapists' experiences physiotherapy interventions for children with CP in scientific physiotherapy publications written by physiotherapists. Methods: A qualitative phenomenographic approach was used. Twenty-one scientific articles, found in PubMed, strategically chosen according to year of publication (2001-2009), modality, journals and country, were investigated. Results: Three qualitatively different descriptive categories were identified: A: Making it possible a functional-based intervention based on the biopsychosocial health paradigm, and the role of the physiotherapist as collaborative, interacting with the child and family in goal setting, intervention planning and evaluation, B: Making it work an impairment-based intervention built on a mixed health paradigm (biomedical and biopsychosocial), and the role of the physiotherapist as a coach, leading the goal setting, intervention planning and evaluation and instructing family members to carry out physiotherapist directed orders, and; C: Making it normal an impairment-based intervention built on a biomedical health paradigm, and the role of the physiotherapist as an authoritative expert who determine goals, intervention planning and evaluation. Conclusions: Different paradigms of health and disability lead to different approaches to physiotherapy which influence the whole intervention process regarding strategies for the assessment and treatment, all of which influence Family-Centred Service and the child's motor learning strategies. The results may deepen physiotherapists' understanding of how different paradigms of health influence the way in which various physiotherapy approaches in research seek to solve the challenge of CP

In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit

Many architects believe that major improvements in cost-energy-performance must now come from domain-specific hardware. This paper evaluates a custom ASIC---called a Tensor Processing Unit (TPU)---deployed in datacenters since 2015 that accelerates the inference phase of neural networks (NN). The heart of the TPU is a 65,536 8-bit MAC matrix multiply unit that offers a peak throughput of 92 TeraOps/second (TOPS) and a large (28 MiB) software-managed on-chip memory. The TPU's deterministic execution model is a better match to the 99th-percentile response-time requirement of our NN applications than are the time-varying optimizations of CPUs and GPUs (caches, out-of-order execution, multithreading, multiprocessing, prefetching, ...) that help average throughput more than guaranteed latency. The lack of such features helps explain why, despite having myriad MACs and a big memory, the TPU is relatively small and low power. We compare the TPU to a server-class Intel Haswell CPU and an Nvidia K80 GPU, which are contemporaries deployed in the same datacenters. Our workload, written in the high-level TensorFlow framework, uses production NN applications (MLPs, CNNs, and LSTMs) that represent 95% of our datacenters' NN inference demand. Despite low utilization for some applications, the TPU is on average about 15X - 30X faster than its contemporary GPU or CPU, with TOPS/Watt about 30X - 80X higher. Moreover, using the GPU's GDDR5 memory in the TPU would triple achieved TOPS and raise TOPS/Watt to nearly 70X the GPU and 200X the CPU.Comment: 17 pages, 11 figures, 8 tables. To appear at the 44th International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA), Toronto, Canada, June 24-28, 201

Enhanced response rate to pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in high grade serous ovarian carcinomas harbouring BRCA1 and BRCA2 aberrations

Abstract Background Approximately 10–15% of ovarian carcinomas (OC) are attributed to inherited susceptibility, the majority of which are due to mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2). These patients display superior clinical outcome, including enhanced sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy. Here, we seek to investigate whether BRCA1/2 status influences the response rate to single-agent pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in high grade serous (HGS) OC. Methods One hundred and forty-eight patients treated with single-agent PLD were identified retrospectively from the Edinburgh Ovarian Cancer Database. DNA was extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) archival tumour material and sequenced using the Ion Ampliseq BRCA1 and BRCA2 panel. A minimum variant allele frequency threshold was applied to correct for sequencing artefacts associated with formalin fixation. Results A superior response rate to PLD was observed in patients with HGS OC who harboured variants likely to affect BRCA1 or BRCA2 function compared to the BRCA1/2 wild-type population (36%, 9 of 25 patients versus 12.1%, 7 of 58 patients; p = 0.016). An enhanced response rate was also seen in patients harbouring only the BRCA1 SNP rs1799950, predicted to be detrimental to BRCA1 function (50%, 3 of 6 patients versus 12.1%, 7 of 58 patients; p = 0.044). Conclusions These data demonstrate that HGS OC patients with BRCA1/2 variants predicted damaging to protein function experience superior sensitivity to PLD, consistent with impaired DNA repair. Further characterisation of rs1799950 is now warranted in relation to chemosensitivity and susceptibility to developing ovarian carcinoma

Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown