A phase II irinotecan–cisplatin combination in advanced pancreatic cancer

We report a cisplatin and irinotecan combination in patients with biopsy-proven advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Patients were selected from a specialist centre and required good performance status (KPS>70%), measurable disease on CT scan, and biochemical and haematological parameters within normal limits. Based on a two-stage phase II design, we aimed to treat 22 patients initially. The study was stopped because of the death of the 19th patient during the first treatment cycle, with neutropenic sepsis and multiorgan failure. A total of 89 treatments were administered to 17 patients. Serious grade 3/4 toxicities were haematological (neutropenia) 6%, diarrhoea 6%, nausea 7% and vomiting 6%. Using the clinical benefit response (CBR) criteria, no patients had an overall CBR. For responses confirmed by CT examination, there was one partial response (5%), three stable diseases lasting greater than 6 weeks (16%), with an overall 22% with disease control (PR+SD). The median progression-free and overall survival was 3.1 months (95% CI: 1.3-3.7) and 5.0 (95% CI: 3.9-10.1) months, respectively. Although this synergistic combination has improved the response rates and survival of other solid tumours, we recommend caution when using this combination in the palliation of advanced pancreatic cancer, because of unexpected toxicity

Molecular Genetics of T Cell Development

T cell development is guided by a complex set of transcription factors that act recursively, in different combinations, at each of the developmental choice points from T-lineage specification to peripheral T cell specialization. This review describes the modes of action of the major T-lineage-defining transcription factors and the signal pathways that activate them during intrathymic differentiation from pluripotent precursors. Roles of Notch and its effector RBPSuh (CSL), GATA-3, E2A/HEB and Id proteins, c-Myb, TCF-1, and members of the Runx, Ets, and Ikaros families are critical. Less known transcription factors that are newly recognized as being required for T cell development at particular checkpoints are also described. The transcriptional regulation of T cell development is contrasted with that of B cell development, in terms of their different degrees of overlap with the stem-cell program and the different roles of key transcription factors in gene regulatory networks leading to lineage commitment

A double-blind placebo-controlled, randomised study comparing gemcitabine and marimastat with gemcitabine and placebo as first line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death in the western world and the prognosis for unresectable disease remains poor. Recent advances in conventional chemotherapy and the development of novel ‘molecular’ treatment strategies with different toxicity profiles warrant investigation as combination treatment strategies. This randomised study in pancreatic cancer compares marimastat (orally administered matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor) in combination with gemcitabine to gemcitabine alone. Two hundred and thirty-nine patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer were randomised to receive gemcitabine (1000 mg m−2) in combination with either marimastat or placebo. The primary end-point was survival. Objective tumour response and duration of response, time to treatment failure and disease progression, quality of life and safety were also assessed. There was no significant difference in survival between gemcitabine and marimastat and gemcitabine and placebo (P=0.95 log-rank test). Median survival times were 165.5 and 164 days and 1-year survival was 18% and 17% respectively. There were no significant differences in overall response rates (11 and 16% respectively), progression-free survival (P=0.68 log-rank test) or time to treatment failure (P=0.70 log-rank test) between the treatment arms. The gemcitabine and marimastat combination was well tolerated with only 2.5% of patients withdrawn due to presumed marimastat toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 musculoskeletal toxicities were reported in only 4% of the marimastat treated patients, although 59% of marimastat treated patients reported some musculoskeletal events. The results of this study provide no evidence to support a combination of marimastat with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The combination of marimastat with gemcitabine was well tolerated. Further studies of marimastat as a maintenance treatment following a response or stable disease on gemcitabine may be justified

Chronic Cough and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: An Uncommon Association

An increasing number of children, usually with gastrointestinal symptoms, is diagnosed with eosinophilic esophagitis (EE), and a particular subset of these patients complains of airway manifestations. We present the case of a 2-year-old child with chronic dry cough in whom EE was found after a first diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) due to pathological 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring. Traditional allergologic tests were negative, while patch tests were diagnostic for cow's milk allergy. We discuss the intriguing relationship between GERD and EE and the use of patch test for the allergologic screening of patients

Modelling prognostic factors in advanced pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death. Identification of defined patient groups based on a prognostic index may improve the prediction of survival and selection of therapy. Many prognostic factors have been identified often based on retrospective, underpowered studies with unclear analyses. Data from 653 patients were analysed. Continuous variables are often simplified assuming a linear relationship with log hazard or introducing a step function (dichotomising). Misspecification may lead to inappropriate conclusions but has not been previously investigated in pancreatic cancer studies. Models based on standard assumptions were compared with a novel approach using nonlinear fractional polynomial (FP) transformations. The model based on FP-transformed covariates was most appropriate and confirmed five previously reported prognostic factors: albumin, CA19-9, alkaline phosphatase, LDH and metastases, and identified three additional factors not previously reported: WBC, AST and BUN. The effects of CA19-9, alkaline phosphatase, AST and BUN may go unrecognised due to simplistic assumptions made in statistical modelling. We advocate a multivariable approach that uses information contained within continuous variables appropriately. The functional form of the relationship between continuous covariates and survival should always be assessed. Our model should aid individual patient risk stratification and the design and analysis of future trials in pancreatic cancer

A preclinical evaluation of pemetrexed and irinotecan combination as second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer

Gemcitabine (GEM)-based chemotherapy is regarded as the standard treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but yields a very limited disease control. Very few studies have investigated salvage chemotherapy after failure of GEM or GEM-containing chemotherapy and preclinical studies attempting to widen the therapeutic armamentarium, not including GEM, are warranted. MIA PaCa2, CFPAC-1 and Capan-1 pancreatic cancer cell lines were treated with GEM, fluouracil (5-FU), docetaxel (DCT), oxaliplatin (OXP), irinotecan (CPT-11), pemetrexed (PMX) and raltitrexed (RTX) as single agent. Pemetrexed, inducing apoptosis with IC50s under the Cmax in the three lines tested, appeared the most effective drug as single agent. Based on these results, schedule- and concentration-dependent drug interactions (assessed using the combination index) of PMX/GEM, PMX/DCT and PMX–CPT-11 were evaluated. The combinatory study clearly indicated the PMX and CPT-11 combination as the most active against pancreatic cancer. To confirm the efficacy of PMX–CPT-11 combination, we extended the study to a panel of 10 pancreatic cancer cell lines using clinically relevant concentrations (PMX 10 μM; CPT-11 1 μm). In eight of 10 lines, the PMX–CPT-11 treatment significantly reduced cell recovery and increased both the subG1 and caspase 3/7 fraction. After a 5-day wash out period, an increased fraction of subG1 and caspase3/7 persisted in PMX–CPT-11-pretreated cell lines and a significant reduction in the clonogenicity capacity was evident. Finally, in vivo, the PMX/CPT-11 combination showed the ability to inhibit xenograft tumours growth as second-line therapy after GEM treatment. The PMX and CPT-11 combination displays a strong schedule-independent synergistic cytotoxic activity against pancreatic cancer, providing experimental basis for its clinical testing as salvage chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients

Digital NFATc2 Activation per Cell Transforms Graded T Cell Receptor Activation into an All-or-None IL-2 Expression

The expression of interleukin-2 (IL-2) is a key event in T helper (Th) lymphocyte activation, controlling both, the expansion and differentiation of effector Th cells as well as the activation of regulatory T cells. We demonstrate that the strength of TCR stimulation is translated into the frequency of memory Th cells expressing IL-2 but not into the amount of IL-2 per cell. This molecular switch decision for IL-2 expression per cell is located downstream of the cytosolic Ca2+ level. Here we show that in a single activated Th cell, NFATc2 activation is digital but NF-κB activation is graded after graded T cell receptor (TCR) signaling. Subsequently, NFATc2 translocates into the nucleus in an all-or-none fashion per cell, transforming the strength of TCR-stimulation into the number of nuclei positive for NFATc2 and IL-2 transcription. Thus, the described NFATc2 switch regulates the number of Th cells actively participating in an immune response

Telerobotic Pointing Gestures Shape Human Spatial Cognition

This paper aimed to explore whether human beings can understand gestures produced by telepresence robots. If it were the case, they can derive meaning conveyed in telerobotic gestures when processing spatial information. We conducted two experiments over Skype in the present study. Participants were presented with a robotic interface that had arms, which were teleoperated by an experimenter. The robot could point to virtual locations that represented certain entities. In Experiment 1, the experimenter described spatial locations of fictitious objects sequentially in two conditions: speech condition (SO, verbal descriptions clearly indicated the spatial layout) and speech and gesture condition (SR, verbal descriptions were ambiguous but accompanied by robotic pointing gestures). Participants were then asked to recall the objects' spatial locations. We found that the number of spatial locations recalled in the SR condition was on par with that in the SO condition, suggesting that telerobotic pointing gestures compensated ambiguous speech during the process of spatial information. In Experiment 2, the experimenter described spatial locations non-sequentially in the SR and SO conditions. Surprisingly, the number of spatial locations recalled in the SR condition was even higher than that in the SO condition, suggesting that telerobotic pointing gestures were more powerful than speech in conveying spatial information when information was presented in an unpredictable order. The findings provide evidence that human beings are able to comprehend telerobotic gestures, and importantly, integrate these gestures with co-occurring speech. This work promotes engaging remote collaboration among humans through a robot intermediary.Comment: 27 pages, 7 figure

A multicenter phase III trial comparing irinotecan-gemcitabine (IG) with gemcitabine (G) monotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer

Our purpose was to determine the response rate and median and overall survival of gemcitabine as monotherapy versus gemcitabine plus irinotecan in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma who were chemotherapy and radiotherapy naive were enrolled. Patients were centrally randomised at a one-to-one ratio to receive either gemcitabine monotherapy (900 mg m−2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks (arm G), or gemcitabine (days 1 and 8) plus irinotecan (300 mg m−2 on day 8) (arm IG), repeated every 3 weeks. The total number of cycles administered was 255 in the IG arm and 245 in the G arm; the median number of cycles was 3. In all, 145 patients (71 in arm IG and 74 in arm G) were enrolled; 60 and 70 patients from arms IG and G, respectively, were evaluable. A complete clinical response was achieved in three (4.3%) arm G patients; nine (15%) patients in arm IG and four (5.7%) in arm G achieved a partial response. The overall response rate was: arm IG 15% and arm G 10% (95% CI 5.96–24.04 and 95% CI 2.97–17.03, respectively; P=0.387). The median time to tumour progression was 2.8 months and 2.9 months and median survival time was 6.4 and 6.5 months for the IG and G arms, respectively. One-year survival was 24.3% for the IG arm and 21.8% for the G arm. No statistically significant difference was observed comparing gemcitabine monotherapy versus gemcitabine plus irinotecan in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer, with respect to overall and 1-year survival