Infiltrativni plicni procesy na jednotkach intenzivni pece. Vliv endoskopicke toalety dolnich dychacich cest na parametry zanetu a prognozu kriticky nemocneho.

Diagnostic and therapeutic bronchoscopy at ICUs has currently a favourable influence upon diagnostics of a wide range of pathological stages in the area of the chest. This method is widely available, quick and cheap and therefore it is advantageous to use it systematically in prevention and therapy of complications during ICU care. It follows from results of the study that flexible bronchoscopy and endoscopic toilet of lower air passages may be safely used, besides urgent situations, also for prevention, diagnostics and therapy of complications developing in critically ill patients coming to ICUs and in connection with artificial pulmonary ventilations. Its benefits are favourable effects on oxygenation, laboratory markers of inflammation - leucocytes, CRP, total SOFA score and subsequent morbidity - by means of an available, cheap, objective and documentable method with more opportunities of application in microbiological diagnostics of inflammatory infiltrative pulmonary processes at ICU.Available from STL Prague, CZ / NTK - National Technical LibrarySIGLECZCzech Republi

Patient attitudes towards chemotherapy and survival: A prospective observational study in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

WOS: 000272370400017PubMed ID: 19264374This multicenter, non-interventional, prospective, observational study aimed to determine whether patients' attitude to chemotherapy is an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who are treated with gemcitabine-platinum. Chemonaive patients (n = 1895) with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC not amenable to curative surgery or radiotherapy were treated with a combination of gemcitabine plus cisplatin/carboplatin and followed for a maximum of 18 months. Patients' attitude to treatment was measured on a 5-point scale and responses were used to assign patients to one of the three need categories: A, maximum extension of survival with the acceptance of high toxicity (60.0% of patients); B, maximum extension of survival only if coupled with normal lifestyle (26.1%); C, relief of symptoms (13.8%). Median survival varied significantly among the need categories (A = 13.00 months, B = 15.70 months, C = 15.33 months; log-rank test P=0.0415). Patient attitude to treatment (need categories) was not a significant prognostic factor for survival after adjusting for known prognostic factors (P=0.0503). After adjusting for baseline differences, patients in this study had a significantly lower risk of death than patients in three randomized trials (hazard ratio 0.879; 95% confidence interval: 0.775, 0.998; P=0.0458). In conclusion, in this observational study, patient attitude to chemotherapy was not an independent prognostic factor of survival. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.Eli Lilly and CompanyEli Lilly; Indianapolis, INWe acknowledge and thank all the clinicians involved in this study. This study was sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN. In compliance with the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts, established by the International Committee of Medical journal Editors, the sponsor of this study did not impose any impediment, directly or indirectly, on the publication of the study's results. Eligible authors from the sponsoring company worked with their co-authors to design the study, to collect, analyze and interpret the data and to prepare and make the decision to submit the manuscript. All authors acknowledge the independent medical writing assistance provided by ProScribe Medical Communications (www.proscribe.com.au), funded by Eli Lilly and Company. ProScribe's services complied with international guidelines for Good Publication Practice

Tumor Treating Fields therapy with standard systemic therapy versus standard systemic therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer following progression on or after platinum-based therapy (LUNAR): a randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt processes critical for cancer cell survival,info:eu-repo/semantics/inPres

Randomized Phase II Study of Paclitaxel plus Alisertib versus Paclitaxel plus Placebo as Second-Line Therapy for SCLC: Primary and Correlative Biomarker Analyses

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the Aurora A kinase inhibitor, alisertib, plus paclitaxel (henceforth referred to as alisertib/paclitaxel) as second-line treatment for SCLC. METHODS: In this double-blind study, patients with relapsed or refractory SCLC were stratified by relapse type (sensitive versus resistant or refractory) and brain metastases and randomized 1:1 to alisertib/paclitaxel or placebo plus paclitaxel (henceforth referred to as placebo/paclitaxel) in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Associations of c-Myc expression in tumor tissue (prespecified) and genetic alterations in circulating tumor DNA (retrospective) with clinical outcome were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were enrolled (89 in each arm). The median PFS was 3.32 months with alisertib/paclitaxel versus 2.17 months with placebo/paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77, 95% confidence limit [CI]: 0.557-1.067, p = 0.113 in the intent-to-treat population versus HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.509-0.985, p = 0.038 with corrected analysis applied). Among 140 patients with genetic alternations, patients with cell cycle regulator mutations (cyclin-dependent kinase 6 gene [CDK6], retinoblastoma-like 1 gene [RBL1], retinoblastoma-like 2 gene [RBL2], and retinoblastoma 1 gene [RB1]) had significantly improved PFS with alisertib/paclitaxel versus with placebo/paclitaxel (3.68 versus 1.80 months, respectively [HR = 0.395, 95% CI: 0.239-0.654, p = 0.0003]), and overall survival (7.20 versus 4.47 months, respectively [HR = 0.427, 95% CI: 0.259-0.704, p = 0.00085]). A subset of patients with c-Myc expression showed significantly improved PFS with alisertib/paclitaxel. The incidence of grade 3 or higher drug-related adverse events was 67% (58 patients) with alisertib/paclitaxel versus 22% (25 patients) with placebo/paclitaxel. Twelve patients (14%) versus 11 (12%) died on study, including four versus zero treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy signals were seen with alisertib/paclitaxel in relapsed or refractory SCLC. c-Myc expression and mutations in cell cycle regulators may be potential predictive biomarkers of alisertib efficacy; further prospective validations are warranted.status: publishe

Randomized Phase II Study of Paclitaxel plus Alisertib versus Paclitaxel plus Placebo as Second-Line Therapy for SCLC: Primary and Correlative Biomarker Analyses.

We assessed the Aurora A kinase inhibitor, alisertib, plus paclitaxel (henceforth referred to as alisertib/paclitaxel) as second-line treatment for SCLC. In this double-blind study, patients with relapsed or refractory SCLC were stratified by relapse type (sensitive versus resistant or refractory) and brain metastases and randomized 1:1 to alisertib/paclitaxel or placebo plus paclitaxel (henceforth referred to as placebo/paclitaxel) in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Associations of c-Myc expression in tumor tissue (prespecified) and genetic alterations in circulating tumor DNA (retrospective) with clinical outcome were evaluated. A total of 178 patients were enrolled (89 in each arm). The median PFS was 3.32 months with alisertib/paclitaxel versus 2.17 months with placebo/paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.77, 95% confidence limit [CI]: 0.557-1.067, p = 0.113 in the intent-to-treat population versus HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.509-0.985, p = 0.038 with corrected analysis applied). Among 140 patients with genetic alternations, patients with cell cycle regulator mutations (cyclin-dependent kinase 6 gene [CDK6], retinoblastoma-like 1 gene [RBL1], retinoblastoma-like 2 gene [RBL2], and retinoblastoma 1 gene [RB1]) had significantly improved PFS with alisertib/paclitaxel versus with placebo/paclitaxel (3.68 versus 1.80 months, respectively [HR = 0.395, 95% CI: 0.239-0.654, p = 0.0003]), and overall survival (7.20 versus 4.47 months, respectively [HR = 0.427, 95% CI: 0.259-0.704, p = 0.00085]). A subset of patients with c-Myc expression showed significantly improved PFS with alisertib/paclitaxel. The incidence of grade 3 or higher drug-related adverse events was 67% (58 patients) with alisertib/paclitaxel versus 22% (25 patients) with placebo/paclitaxel. Twelve patients (14%) versus 11 (12%) died on study, including four versus zero treatment-related deaths. Efficacy signals were seen with alisertib/paclitaxel in relapsed or refractory SCLC. c-Myc expression and mutations in cell cycle regulators may be potential predictive biomarkers of alisertib efficacy; further prospective validations are warranted