Age is not a limiting factor for brachytherapy for carcinoma of the node negative oral tongue in patients aged eighty or older

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To examine the role of brachytherapy for aged patients 80 or more in the trend of rapidly increasing number.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We examined the outcomes for elderly patients with node negative oral tongue cancer (T1-3N0M0) treated with brachytherapy. The 21 patients (2 T1, 14 T2, and 5 T3 cases) ranged in age from 80 to 89 years (median 81), and their cancer was pathologically confirmed. All patients underwent definitive radiation therapy, with low dose rate (LDR) Ra-226 brachytherapy (n = 4; median 70Gy), with Ir-192 (n = 12; 70Gy), with Au-198 (n = 1) or with high dose rate (HDR) Ir-192 brachytherapy (n = 4; 60 Gy). Eight patients also underwent external radiotherapy (median 30 Gy). The period of observation ranged from 13 months to 14 years (median 2.5 years). We selected 226 population matched younger counterpart from our medical chart.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Definitive radiation therapy was completed for all 21 patients (100%), and acute grade 2-3 mucositis related to the therapy was tolerable. Local control (initial complete response) was attained in 19 of 21 patients (90%). The 2-year and 5-year local control rates were 91%, (100% for T1, 83% for T2 and 80% for T3 tumors after 2 years). These figures was not inferior to that of younger counterpart (82% at 5-year, n.s.). The cause-specific survival rate was 83% and the regional control rate 84% at the 2-years follow-up. However, 12 patients died because of intercurrent diseases or senility, resulting in overall survival rates of 55% at 2 years and 34% at 5 years.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Age is not a limiting factor for brachytherapy for appropriately selected elderly patients, and brachytherapy achieved good local control with acceptable morbidity.</p

A study of the static yield stress in a binary Lennard-Jones glass

The stress-strain relations and the yield behavior of model glass (a 80:20 binary Lennard-Jones mixture) is studied by means of MD simulations. First, a thorough analysis of the static yield stress is presented via simulations under imposed stress. Furthermore, using steady shear simulations, the effect of physical aging, shear rate and temperature on the stress-strain relation is investigated. In particular, we find that the stress at the yield point (the ``peak''-value of the stress-strain curve) exhibits a logarithmic dependence both on the imposed shear rate and on the ``age'' of the system in qualitative agreement with experiments on amorphous polymers and on metallic glasses. In addition to the very observation of the yield stress which is an important feature seen in experiments on complex systems like pastes, dense colloidal suspensions and foams, further links between our model and soft glassy materials are found. An example are hysteresis loops in the system response to a varying imposed stress. Finally, we measure the static yield stress for our model and study its dependence on temperature. We find that for temperatures far below the mode coupling critical temperature of the model ($Tc = 0.435$), \sigmay decreases slowly upon heating followed by a stronger decrease as \Tc is approached. We discuss the reliability of results on the static yield stress and give a criterion for its validity in terms of the time scales relevant to the problem.Comment: 14 pages, 18 figure

Empathy, engagement, entrainment: the interaction dynamics of aesthetic experience

A recent version of the view that aesthetic experience is based in empathy as inner imitation explains aesthetic experience as the automatic simulation of actions, emotions, and bodily sensations depicted in an artwork by motor neurons in the brain. Criticizing the simulation theory for committing to an erroneous concept of empathy and failing to distinguish regular from aesthetic experiences of art, I advance an alternative, dynamic approach and claim that aesthetic experience is enacted and skillful, based in the recognition of others’ experiences as distinct from one’s own. In combining insights from mainly psychology, phenomenology, and cognitive science, the dynamic approach aims to explain the emergence of aesthetic experience in terms of the reciprocal interaction between viewer and artwork. I argue that aesthetic experience emerges by participatory sense-making and revolves around movement as a means for creating meaning. While entrainment merely plays a preparatory part in this, aesthetic engagement constitutes the phenomenological side of coupling to an artwork and provides the context for exploration, and eventually for moving, seeing, and feeling with art. I submit that aesthetic experience emerges from bodily and emotional engagement with works of art via the complementary processes of the perception–action and motion–emotion loops. The former involves the embodied visual exploration of an artwork in physical space, and progressively structures and organizes visual experience by way of perceptual feedback from body movements made in response to the artwork. The latter concerns the movement qualities and shapes of implicit and explicit bodily responses to an artwork that cue emotion and thereby modulate over-all affect and attitude. The two processes cause the viewer to bodily and emotionally move with and be moved by individual works of art, and consequently to recognize another psychological orientation than her own, which explains how art can cause feelings of insight or awe and disclose aspects of life that are unfamiliar or novel to the viewer

Randomised study of adjuvant chemotherapy for completely resected p-stage I–IIIA non-small cell lung cancer

We evaluated the therapeutic usefulness of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with completely resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We also examined the relation between DNA ploidy pattern and the response to chemotherapy. A total of 267 patients with NSCLC (pathologically documented stage I, II, or IIIA) underwent complete resection, and DNA ploidy pattern was analysed. Patients with stage I disease (n=172) were randomly assigned to receive surgery alone (group A) or surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy (UFT (oral anti-cancer drug, a combination of Uracil and Tegaful) 400 mg day−1 for 1 year after surgery; group B). Stage II or IIIA disease patients (n=95) were randomly assigned to surgery alone (group C) or surgery followed by chemotherapy (two 28-day courses of cisplatin 80 mg m−2 on day 1 plus vindesine 3 mg m−2 on days 1 and 8, followed by UFT 400 mg day−1 for at least 1 year; group D). Eight-year overall survival rate in patients with stage I disease was 74.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 64.4–84.0%) in group B and 57.6% (95% CI: 46.4–68.8%) in group A (P=0.045 by log-rank test). In patients with stage II and IIIA disease, no difference was found between groups C and D. Analysis according to DNA ploidy pattern revealed no difference between the groups. Postoperative chemotherapy with UFT was suggested to be useful in patients with completely resected stage I NSCLC. No difference was seen in relation to DNA pattern in any treatment group

Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected early-stage non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effects of administering chemotherapy following surgery, or following surgery plus radiotherapy (known as adjuvant chemotherapy) in patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC),we performed two systematic reviews and meta-analyses of all randomised controlled trials using individual participant data. Results were first published in The Lancet in 2010. OBJECTIVES: To compare, in terms of overall survival, time to locoregional recurrence, time to distant recurrence and recurrence-free survival:A. Surgery versus surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapyB. Surgery plus radiotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapyin patients with histologically diagnosed early stage NSCLC.(2)To investigate whether or not predefined patient subgroups benefit more or less from cisplatin-based chemotherapy in terms of survival. SEARCH METHODS: We supplemented MEDLINE and CANCERLIT searches (1995 to December 2013) with information from trial registers, handsearching relevant meeting proceedings and by discussion with trialists and organisations. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included trials of a) surgery versus surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy; and b) surgery plus radiotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy, provided that they randomised NSCLC patients using a method which precluded prior knowledge of treatment assignment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We carried out a quantitative meta-analysis using updated information from individual participants from all randomised trials. Data from all patients were sought from those responsible for the trial. We obtained updated individual participant data (IPD) on survival, and date of last follow-up, as well as details of treatment allocated, date of randomisation, age, sex, histological cell type, stage, and performance status. To avoid potential bias, we requested information for all randomised patients, including those excluded from the investigators' original analyses. We conducted all analyses on intention-to-treat on the endpoint of survival. For trials using cisplatin-based regimens, we carried out subgroup analyses by age, sex, histological cell type, tumour stage, and performance status. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 35 trials evaluating surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy versus surgery alone. IPD were available for 26 of these trials and our analyses are based on 8447 participants (3323 deaths) in 34 trial comparisons. There was clear evidence of a benefit of adding chemotherapy after surgery (hazard ratio (HR)= 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI)= 0.81 to 0.92, p< 0.0001), with an absolute increase in survival of 4% at five years.We identified 15 trials evaluating surgery plus radiotherapy plus chemotherapy versus surgery plus radiotherapy alone. IPD were available for 12 of these trials and our analyses are based on 2660 participants (1909 deaths) in 13 trial comparisons. There was also evidence of a benefit of adding chemotherapy to surgery plus radiotherapy (HR= 0.88, 95% CI= 0.81 to 0.97, p= 0.009). This represents an absolute improvement in survival of 4% at five years.For both meta-analyses, we found similar benefits for recurrence outcomes and there was little variation in effect according to the type of chemotherapy, other trial characteristics or patient subgroup.We did not undertake analysis of the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on quality of life and adverse events. Quality of life information was not routinely collected during the trials, but where toxicity was assessed and mentioned in the publications, it was thought to be manageable. We considered the risk of bias in the included trials to be low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Results from 47 trial comparisons and 11,107 patients demonstrate the clear benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for these patients, irrespective of whether chemotherapy was given in addition to surgery or surgery plus radiotherapy. This is the most up-to-date and complete systematic review and individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis that has been carried out

Individual patient data meta-analysis of neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus upfront surgery for carcinoma of the oesophagus or the gastro- oesophageal junction

Introduction Which neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced thoracic oesophagus (TE) or gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma is best remains an open question. Randomised controlled trials variously accrued patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, making strong conclusions hard to obtain. The primary objective of this individual participant data meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (OS). Patients and methods Eligible trials should have closed to accrual before 2016 and compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery (CS) to surgery alone. All relevant published and unpublished trials were identified via searches of electronic databases, conference proceedings and clinical trial registers. The main end-point was OS. Investigators were contacted to obtain the individual patient data, which was recorded, harmonised and checked. A random-effects Cox model, stratified by trial, was used for meta-analysis and subgroup analyses were preplanned. Results 16 trials were identified as eligible. Individual patient data were obtained from 12 trial and 2478 patients. CS was associated with an improved OS versus surgery, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83 [0.72–0.96], p < 0.0001, translating to an absolute benefit of 5.7% at 5-years from 16.8% to 22.5%. Treatment effects did not vary substantially between adenocarcinoma (HR = 0.73 [0.62–0.87]) and squamous cell carcinoma (HR = 0.91 [0.76–1.08], interaction p = 0.26). A somewhat more pronounced effect was observed in gastro-oesophageal junction (HR = 0.68 [0.50–0.93]) versus TE (HR = 0.87 [0.75–1.00], interaction p = 0.07). CS was also associated with a greater disease-free survival (HR = 0.74 [0.64–0.85], p < 0.001). Conclusions Neoadjuvant chemotherapy conferred a better OS than surgery alone and should be considered in all anatomical location and histological subtypes

Definitive and adjuvant radiotherapy for sinonasal squamous cell carcinomas: a single institutional experience

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the disease outcomes of patients treated with definitive and adjuvant radiotherapy for squamous cell carcinomas of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses in a single institution. Methods: Between 2007–2012 patients were retrospectively identified from electronic databases who had undergone surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy or definitive radiotherapy for sinonasal squamous cell carcinomas with curative intent. Results: Fourty three patients with sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma were identified (22 nasal cavity, 21 paranasal sinuses). 31/43 (72 %) had T3 or T4 disease; nodal stage was N0 in 38, N1 in 4, Na/b in 0 and N2c in 1 patient. Median age was 67 years (range 41–86). 18 (42 %) received definitive and 25 (58 %) adjuvant radiotherapy. Radiotherapy was delivered using either conventional radiotherapy (n = 39) or intensity modulated radiotherapy (n = 4). Elective neck radiotherapy was delivered to two patients. Chemotherapy was delivered to 6/43 (14 %) of patients. Two-year local control, regional control, distant metastases free survival, progression free survival, cause specific survival and overall survival were 81 %, 90 %, 95 %, 71 %, 84 % and 80 % respectively. There was no significant difference in outcome comparing patients who underwent surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy with patients receiving definitive radiotherapy (2 year locoregional disease free survival 75 % and 70 % respectively, p = 0.98). Pooly differentiated tumours were significantly associated with inferior disease outcomes. Local, regional, combined local and regional, and distant failure occurred in 7 (16 %), 3 (7 %), 1 (2 %) and 2 (5 %) of patients; all 3 regional recurrences were in patients with nasal cavity squamous cell carcinomas who had not undergone elective neck treatment. Conclusions: Definitive or adjuvant radiotherapy provides an effective treatment for sinonasal malignancies. The main pattern of failure remains local, suggesting the need for investigation of intensified local therapy. Whilst remaining uncommon, the cases of regional failure mean that the merits of elective lymph node treatment should be considered on an individual basis