Epidemiology and natural history of central venous access device use and infusion pump function in the NO16966 trial

Background: Central venous access devices in fluoropyrimidine therapy are associated with complications; however, reliable data are lacking regarding their natural history, associated complications and infusion pump performance in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.<p></p> Methods: We assessed device placement, use during treatment, associated clinical outcomes and infusion pump perfomance in the NO16966 trial.<p></p> Results: Device replacement was more common with FOLFOX-4 (5-fluorouracil (5-FU)+oxaliplatin) than XELOX (capecitabine+oxaliplatin) (14.1% vs 5.1%). Baseline device-associated events and post-baseline removal-/placement-related events occurred more frequently with FOLFOX-4 than XELOX (11.5% vs 2.4% and 8.5% vs 2.1%). Pump malfunctions, primarily infusion accelerations in 16% of patients, occurred within 1.6–4.3% of cycles. Fluoropyrimidine-associated grade 3/4 toxicity was increased in FOLFOX-4-treated patients experiencing a malfunction compared with those who did not (97 out of 155 vs 452 out of 825 patients), predominantly with increased grade 3/4 neutropenia (53.5% vs 39.8%). Febrile neutropenia rates were comparable between patient cohorts±malfunction. Efficacy outcomes were similar in patient cohorts±malfunction.<p></p> Conclusions: Central venous access device removal or replacement was common and more frequent in patients receiving FOLFOX-4. Pump malfunctions were also common and were associated with increased rates of grade 3/4 haematological adverse events. Oral fluoropyrimidine-based regimens may be preferable to infusional 5-FU based on these findings

A bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of systemic regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer

© 2014 Chan et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.Background: For advanced pancreatic cancer, many regimens have been compared with gemcitabine (G) as the standard arm in randomized controlled trials. Few regimens have been directly compared with each other in randomized controlled trials and the relative efficacy and safety among them remains unclear

Endoskeletal structure in Cheirolepis (Osteichthyes, Actinopterygii), An early ray-finned fish

As the sister lineage of all other actinopterygians, the Middle to Late Devonian (Eifelian–Frasnian) Cheirolepis occupies a pivotal position in vertebrate phylogeny. Although the dermal skeleton of this taxon has been exhaustively described, very little of its endoskeleton is known, leaving questions of neurocranial and fin evolution in early ray‐finned fishes unresolved. The model for early actinopterygian anatomy has instead been based largely on the Late Devonian (Frasnian) Mimipiscis, preserved in stunning detail from the Gogo Formation of Australia. Here, we present re‐examinations of existing museum specimens through the use of high‐resolution laboratory‐ and synchrotron‐based computed tomography scanning, revealing new details of the neuro‐cranium, hyomandibula and pectoral fin endoskeleton for the Eifelian Cheirolepis trailli. These new data highlight traits considered uncharacteristic of early actinopterygians, including an uninvested dorsal aorta and imperforate propterygium, and corroborate the early divergence of Cheirolepis within actinopterygian phylogeny. These traits represent conspicuous differences between the endoskeletal structure of Cheirolepis and Mimipiscis. Additionally, we describe new aspects of the parasphenoid, vomer and scales, most notably that the scales display peg‐and‐socket articulation and a distinct neck. Collectively, these new data help clarify primitive conditions within ray‐finned fishes, which in turn have important implications for understanding features likely present in the last common ancestor of living osteichthyans

ICR142 Benchmarker: evaluating, optimising and benchmarking variant calling performance using the ICR142 NGS validation series.

Evaluating, optimising and benchmarking of next generation sequencing (NGS) variant calling performance are essential requirements for clinical, commercial and academic NGS pipelines. Such assessments should be performed in a consistent, transparent and reproducible fashion, using independently, orthogonally generated data. Here we present ICR142 Benchmarker, a tool to generate outputs for assessing germline base substitution and indel calling performance using the ICR142 NGS validation series, a dataset of Illumina platform-based exome sequence data from 142 samples together with Sanger sequence data at 704 sites. ICR142 Benchmarker provides summary and detailed information on the sensitivity, specificity and false detection rates of variant callers. ICR142 Benchmarker also automatically generates a single page report highlighting key performance metrics and how performance compares to widely-used open-source tools. We used ICR142 Benchmarker with VCF files outputted by GATK, OpEx and DeepVariant to create a benchmark for variant calling performance. This evaluation revealed pipeline-specific differences and shared challenges in variant calling, for example in detecting indels in short repeating sequence motifs. We next used ICR142 Benchmarker to perform regression testing with DeepVariant versions 0.5.2 and 0.6.1. This showed that v0.6.1 improves variant calling performance, but there was evidence of minor changes in indel calling behaviour that may benefit from attention. The data also allowed us to evaluate filters to optimise DeepVariant calling, and we recommend using 30 as the QUAL threshold for base substitution calls when using DeepVariant v0.6.1. Finally, we used ICR142 Benchmarker with VCF files from two commercial variant calling providers to facilitate optimisation of their in-house pipelines and to provide transparent benchmarking of their performance. ICR142 Benchmarker consistently and transparently analyses variant calling performance based on the ICR142 NGS validation series, using the standard VCF input and outputting informative metrics to enable user understanding of pipeline performance. ICR142 Benchmarker is freely available at https://github.com/RahmanTeamDevelopment/ICR142_Benchmarker/releases.This article is freely available online from the publisher's site via Open Access

A model for the consolidation of rafted sea ice

Rafting is one of the important deformation mechanisms of sea ice. This process is widespread in the north Caspian Sea, where multiple rafting produces thick sea ice features, which are a hazard to offshore operations. Here we present a one-dimensional, thermal consolidation model for rafted sea ice. We consider the consolidation between the layers of both a two-layer and a three-layer section of rafted sea ice. The rafted ice is assumed to be composed of layers of sea ice of equal thickness, separated by thin layers of ocean water. Results show that the thickness of the liquid layer reduced asymptotically with time, such that there always remained a thin saline liquid layer. We propose that when the liquid layer is equal to the surface roughness the adjacent layers can be considered consolidated. Using parameters representative of the north Caspian, the Arctic, and the Antarctic, our results show that for a choice of standard parameters it took under 15 h for two layers of rafted sea ice to consolidate. Sensitivity studies showed that the consolidation model is highly sensitive to the initial thickness of the liquid layer, the fraction of salt release during freezing, and the height of the surface asperities. We believe that further investigation of these parameters is needed before any concrete conclusions can be drawn about rate of consolidation of rafted sea ice features

Twelve weeks of protracted venous infusion of fluorouracil (5-FU) is as effective as 6 months of bolus 5-FU and folinic acid as adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer.

We performed a multicentre randomised trial to compare the efficacy and toxicity of 12 weeks of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) delivered by protracted intravenous infusion (PVI 5-FU) against the standard bolus regimen of 5-FU and folinic acid (5-FU/FA) given for 6 months as adjuvant treatment in colorectal cancer. A total of 716 patients with curatively resected Dukes' B or C colorectal cancer were randomised to 5-FU/FA (5-FU 425 mg m(-2) i.v. and FA 20 mg m(-2) i.v. bolus days 1-5 every 28 days for 6 months) or to PVI 5-FU alone (300 mg m(-2) day for 12 weeks). With a median follow-up of 19.8 months, 133 relapses and 77 deaths have been observed. Overall survival did not differ significantly (log rank P=0.764) between patients receiving 5-FU/FA and PVI 5-FU (3-year survival 83.2 vs 87.9%, respectively). Patients in the 5-FU/FA group had significantly worse relapse-free survival (RFS, log rank P=0.023) compared to those receiving PVI 5-FU (3-year RFS, 68.6 vs 80%, respectively). Grades 3-4 neutropenia, diarrhoea, stomatitis and severe alopecia were significantly less (P<0.0001) and global quality of life scores significantly better (P&<0.001) for patients in the PVI 5-FU treatment arm. In conclusion, infused 5-FU given over 12 weeks resulted in similar survival to bolus 5-FU and FA over a 6 month period, but with significantly less toxicity

Meta-analysis of randomized trials: evaluation of benefit from gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy applied in advanced pancreatic cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Single-agent gemcitabine (GEM) is a standard treatment for advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. This study examines the question whether GEM-based combination chemotherapy can further improve treatment efficacy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate randomized trials comparing GEM versus GEM+X (X = cytotoxic agent). Fifteen trials including 4465 patients were eligible for an analysis of overall survival, the primary end-point of this investigation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The meta-analysis revealed a significant survival benefit for GEM+X with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85 – 0.97, p = 0.004). The overall test for heterogeneity resulted in p = 0.82 (I²= 0%). The analysis of platinum-based combinations indicated a HR of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.76 – 0.96, p = 0.010), while for fluoropyrimidine-based combinations the HR was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.81 – 0.99, p = 0.030). No risk reduction was observed in the group of trials combining GEM with irinotecan, exatecan or pemetrexed (HR = 0.99). A meta-analysis of the trials with adequate information on baseline performance status (PS) was performed in five trials with 1682 patients. This analysis indicated that patients with a good PS had a marked survival benefit when receiving combination chemotherapy (HR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.67 – 0.87; p < 0.0001). By contrast, application of combination chemotherapy to patients with an initially poor PS appeared to be ineffective (HR = 1.08; 95% CI: 0.90 – 1.29, p = 0.40).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The meta-analysis of randomized trials indicated a significant survival benefit when GEM was either combined with platinum analogs or fluoropyrimidines. Based on a preliminary subgroup analysis (representing 38% of all patients included in this meta-analysis), pancreatic cancer patients with a good PS appear to benefit from GEM-based cytotoxic combinations, whereas patients with a poor PS seem to have no survival benefit from combination chemotherapy.</p

Gemcitabine with a specific conformal 3D 5FU radiochemotherapy technique is safe and effective in the definitive management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer

The aim of this phase II study was to assess the feasibility and efficacy of a specific three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique with concurrent continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (CI 5FU) sandwiched between gemcitabine chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients with inoperable cancer in the pancreatic head or body without metastases were given gemcitabine at 1000 mg m−2 weekly for 3 weeks followed by a 1-week rest and a 6-week period of radiotherapy and concurrent CI 5FU (200 mg m−2 day−1). The defined target volume was treated to 54 Gy in 30 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy. After 4 weeks' rest, gemcitabine treatment was re-initiated for three cycles (days 1, 8, 15, q28). Forty-one patients were enrolled. At the end of radiotherapy, one patient (2.4%) had a complete response and four patients (9.6%) had a partial response; at the end of treatment, three patients (7.3%) had a complete response and two patients (4.9%) had a partial response. Median survival time was 11.7 months, median time to progression was 7.1 months, and median time to failure of local control was 11.9 months. The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 46.3 and 9.8%, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported by 16 (39.0%) and four (9.8%) patients, respectively. Sixteen out of 41 patients did not complete the planned treatment and nine due to disease progression. This approach to treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer is safe and promising, with good local control for a substantial proportion of patients, and merits testing in a randomised trial

Gemcitabine based combination chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer-indirect comparison

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recent meta-analyses have found a survival advantage with gemcitabine based combinations over single agent gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. There is paucity of evidence in the form of direct head-to-head randomised controlled trials to determine which combinations are to be preferred.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Using the adjusted indirect comparison method proposed by Bucher et al, we have assessed randomised controlled trials of four gemcitabine based combinations namely gemcitabine plus a platinum compound or 5-fluorouracil or irinotecan or capecitabine.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No particular combination was significantly superior to another, but the indirect evidence suggests some important trends.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The strongest trends on indirect comparison are towards favouring gemcitabine plus capecitabine or gemcitabine plus a platinum compound over gemcitabine plus irinotecan, and to a lesser degree, over gemcitabine plus 5-fluorouracil.</p

Phase II randomised trial of chemoradiotherapy with FOLFOX4 or cisplatin plus fluorouracil in oesophageal cancer

International audienceBackground: Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is a valuable treatment option for localised oesophageal cancer (EC), but improvement is still needed. A randomised phase II trial was initiated to assess the feasibility and efficacy in terms of the endoscopic complete response rate (ECRR) of radiotherapy with oxaliplatin, leucovorin and fluorouracil (FOLFOX4) or cisplatin/fluorouracil. Methods: Patients with unresectable EC (any T, any N, M0 or M1a), or medically unfit for surgery, were randomly assigned to receive either six cycles (three concomitant and three post-radiotherapy) of FOLFOX4 (arm A) or four cycles (two concomitant and two post-radiotherapy) of cisplatin/fluorouracil (arm B) along with radiotherapy 50 Gy in both arms. Responses were reviewed by independent experts. Results: A total of 97 patients were randomised (arm A/B, 53/44) and 95 were assessable. The majority had squamous cell carcinoma (82%; arm A/B, 42/38). Chemoradiotherapy was completed in 74 and 66%. The ECRR was 45 and 29% in arms A and B, respectively. Median times to progression were 15.2 and 9.2 months and the median overall survival was 22.7 and 15.1 months in arms A and B, respectively. Conclusion: Chemoradiotherapy with FOLFOX4, a well-tolerated and convenient combination with promising efficacy, is now being tested in a phase III trial