Radiosensitivity of pimonidazole-unlabelled intratumour quiescent cell population to γ-rays, accelerated carbon ion beams and boron neutron capture reaction.

[Objectives] To detect the radiosensitivity of intratumour quiescent (Q) cells unlabelled with pimonidazole to accelerated carbon ion beams and the boron neutron capture reaction (BNCR). [Methods] EL4 tumour-bearing C57BL/J mice received 5-bromo-2′-deoxyuridine (BrdU) continuously to label all intratumour proliferating (P) cells. After the administration of pimonidazole, tumours were irradiated with γ-rays, accelerated carbon ion beams or reactor neutron beams with the prior administration of a [10]B-carrier. Responses of intratumour Q and total (P+Q) cell populations were assessed based on frequencies of micronucleation and apoptosis using immunofluorescence staining for BrdU. The response of pimonidazole-unlabelled tumour cells was assessed by means of apoptosis frequency using immunofluorescence staining for pimonidazole. [Results] Following γ-ray irradiation, the pimonidazole-unlabelled tumour cell fraction showed significantly enhanced radiosensitivity compared with the whole tumour cell fraction, more remarkably in the Q than total cell populations. However, a significantly greater decrease in radiosensitivity in the pimonidazole-unlabelled cell fraction, evaluated using a delayed assay or a decrease in radiation dose rate, was more clearly observed among the Q than total cells. These changes in radiosensitivity were suppressed following carbon ion beam and neutron beam-only irradiaton. In the BNCR, the use of a[10]B-carrier, especially L-para-boronophenylalanine-[10]B, enhanced the sensitivity of the pimonidazole-unlabelled cells more clearly in the Q than total cells. [Conclusion] The radiosensitivity of the pimonidazole-unlabelled cell fraction depends on the quality of radiation delivered and characteristics of the [10]B-carrier used in the BNCR

A randomized, double-blind comparison of OROS® hydromorphone and controlled-release morphine for the control of chronic cancer pain

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Long-acting opioid formulations are advocated for maintaining pain control in chronic cancer pain. OROS^®hydromorphone is a sustained-release formulation of hydromorphone that requires dosing once daily to maintain therapeutic concentrations. The objective of this study was to demonstrate the clinical equivalence of immediate-release and sustained-release formulations of hydromorphone and morphine for chronic cancer pain.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>200 patients with cancer pain (requiring ≤ 540 mg/d of oral morphine) participated in this double-blind, parallel-group trial. Patients were randomized to receive hydromorphone or morphine (immediate-release for 2–9 days, sustained-release for 10–15 days). Efficacy was assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), investigator and patient global evaluations, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and the Mini-Mental State Examination. The primary endpoint was the 'worst pain in the past 24 hours' item of the BPI, in both the immediate-release and sustained-release study phases, with treatments deemed equivalent if the 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the between-group differences at endpoint were between -1.5 and 1.5. No equivalence limits were defined for secondary endpoints.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Least-squares mean differences (95% CI) between groups were 0.2 (-0.4, 0.9) in the immediate-release phase and -0.8 (-1.6, -0.01) in the sustained-release phase (intent-to-treat population), indicating that the immediate-release formulations met the pre-specified equivalence criteria, but that the lower limit of the 95% CI (-1.6) was outside the boundary (-1.5) for the sustained-release formulations. BPI 'pain now PM' was significantly lower with OROS^®hydromorphone compared with controlled-release morphine (least-squares mean difference [95% CI], -0.77 [-1.49, -0.05]; <it>p </it>= 0.0372). Scores for other secondary efficacy variables were similar between the two sustained-release treatments. At endpoint, > 70% of investigators and patients rated both treatments as good to excellent. The safety profiles of hydromorphone and morphine were similar and typical of opioid analgesics.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Equivalence was demonstrated for immediate-release formulations of hydromorphone and morphine, but not for the sustained-release formulations of OROS^®hydromorphone and controlled-release morphine. The direction of the mean difference between the treatments (-0.8) and the out-of-range lower limit of the 95% CI (-1.6) were in favor of OROS^®hydromorphone.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0041054</p

Target Identification for Stereotactic Thalamotomy Using Diffusion Tractography

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic targets for thalamotomy are usually derived from population-based coordinates. Individual anatomy is used only to scale the coordinates based on the location of some internal guide points. While on conventional MR imaging the thalamic nuclei are indistinguishable, recently it has become possible to identify individual thalamic nuclei using different connectivity profiles, as defined by MR diffusion tractography. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here we investigated the inter-individual variation of the location of target nuclei for thalamotomy: the putative ventralis oralis posterior (Vop) and the ventral intermedius (Vim) nucleus as defined by probabilistic tractography. We showed that the mean inter-individual distance of the peak Vop location is 7.33 mm and 7.42 mm for Vim. The mean overlap between individual Vop nuclei was 40.2% and it was 31.8% for Vim nuclei. As a proof of concept, we also present a patient who underwent Vop thalamotomy for untreatable tremor caused by traumatic brain injury and another patient who underwent Vim thalamotomy for essential tremor. The probabilistic tractography indicated that the successful tremor control was achieved with lesions in the Vop and Vim respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data call attention to the need for a better appreciation of the individual anatomy when planning stereotactic functional neurosurgery