4 research outputs found

    Multiple Components of 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid Uptake by Rat Choroid Plexus

    No full text

    Pazopanib efficacy in renal cell carcinoma: evidence for predictive genetic markers in angiogenesis-related and exposure-related genes.

    No full text
    PURPOSE: Pazopanib, an oral angiogenesis inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Response to pazopanib monotherapy varies between patients, and no validated biomarkers predictive of treatment outcome have been identified. We tested the hypothesis that this variability is partially dependent on germline genetic variants that may affect pazopanib exposure or angiogenesis pathways. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven functional polymorphisms within 13 genes were evaluated in 397 patients with RCC. Genetic association with progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (RR) was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model and proportional odds model, respectively. RESULTS: Three polymorphisms in IL8 and HIF1A and five polymorphisms in HIF1A, NR1I2, and VEGFA showed nominally significant association (P ≤ .05) with PFS and RR, respectively. Compared with the wild-type AA genotype (median PFS, 48 weeks), the IL8 2767TT variant genotype showed inferior PFS (27 weeks, P = .009). The HIF1A 1790AG genotype was associated with inferior PFS and reduced RR, compared with the wild-type GG genotype (median PFS, 20 v 44 weeks; P = .03; RR, 30% v 43%, P = .02). Reductions in RR were detected for the NR1I2 -25385TT genotype, compared with the wild-type CC genotype (37% v 50%, P = .03), and for the VEGFA -1498CC genotype compared with the TT genotypes (33% v 51%). CONCLUSION: Germline variants in angiogenesis- and exposure-related genes may predict treatment response to pazopanib monotherapy in patients with RCC. If validated, these markers may explain why certain patients fail antiangiogenesis therapy and they may support the use of alternative strategies to circumvent this issue

    Uptake and effectiveness of two-drug compared with three-drug antiretroviral regimens among HIV-positive individuals in Europe

    No full text
    Objective: To assess the use of two-drug antiretroviral regimens (2DR) and virologic and immunologic outcomes compared with three-drug regimens (3DR) in the EuroSIDA cohort. Design: Multicentre, prospective cohort study. Methods: Logistic regression was used to analyse the uptake and outcomes among HIV-positive individuals who started or switched to a 2DR compared with those on a 3DR. Virologic outcomes were assessed on-treatment as the proportion of individuals with controlled viral load (<400 copies/ml), or with a composite modified FDA snapshot endpoint (mFDA), with mFDA success defined as controlled viral load at 6 months or 12 months for individuals with a known viral load, no regimen changes, AIDS or death. Immunologic response was defined as a 100 cells/mu l or a 25% increase in CD4(+) cell counts from baseline. Results: Between 1 July 2010 and 31 December 2016, 423 individuals started or switched to a 2DR (eight antiretroviral-naive) and 4347 started a 3DR (566 naive). Individuals on 2DR tended to have suppressed viral load, higher CD4(+) cell counts and more comorbidities at baseline compared with those on 3DR. There were no differences in the proportions of individuals who obtained on-treatment or mFDA success, and no significant differences in the adjusted odds ratios for mFDA success or immunologic responses between the 2DR and 3DR groups at 6 months or 12 months. Conclusion: In routine clinical practice, 2DR were largely used for virologically suppressed individuals with higher cumulative exposure to antiretrovirals and comorbidities. Virologic and immunologic outcomes were similar among those on 2DR or 3DR, although confounding by indication cannot be fully excluded due to the observational nature of the study
    corecore