The use of antiproteolytic mixture fails to modify the abnormal von Willebrand factor pattern in myeloproliferative disease.

Abnormalities of von Willebrand factor, with reduction of higher molecular weight multimers, was described in patients with increased platelet number. We have studied twelve patients with myeloproliferative disease (9 patients with Essential Thrombocytosis and 3 patients with Polycythemia Vera). Blood samples were collected either with citrate and antiproteolytic mixture (EDTA 6 mM, Aprotinin 200 U/ml, N-ethylmaleimide 5 mM in sodium citrate 3.8%). VIIIR: RCoF was found decreased in all patients studied, using both anticoagulants, while VIIIR: Ag was within normal range. Higher molecular weight multimers were found decreased or absent both in samples collected with citrate and in those collected using the antiproteolytic mixture. These data suggested that von Willebrand factor abnormalities observed in myeloproliferative disease are not due to a proteolytic degradation that's supposed to happen in vitro during blood samples collection and manipulation

Clotting changes in borderline hypertension.

Coagulation factors evaluated in a group of patients with borderline hypertension. The following tests were carried out: prothrombin time (PT) and partial thromboplastin time (PTT), Factor VIII coagulant activity, Factor VIII antigen and Factor VIII ristocetin cofactor, Factor XII and Factor XI activities. These tests were selected for their relationship to the contact coagulative activation near the vascular wall. Comparing the results with those of normal controls, Factor VIII coagulant activity, Factor XII and PTT levels were significantly higher. Other tests were all within normal limits in both groups. High Factor VIII and Factor XII levels associated with PTT shortening suggest that an increased synthesis and/or release of these coagulation factors was present in our patients. Activated coagulation seems to be present in borderline hypertension before the appearance of clinical signs of vascular lesions

DDAVP infusion in haemophilia A carriers: different behaviour of plasma factor VIII and von Willebrand factor.

Abstract 1-desamino-8-D-arginine vasopressin (DDAVP) increases factor VIII (FVIII) and von Willebrand factor (vWF) levels in patients with haemophilia A and in some patients with von Willebrand disease. It is generally held that the increase of FVIII is a consequence of the increase of vWF. Carriers of haemophilia A generally, but not always, show plasma FVIII levels lower than vWF due to an abnormality in one of the two alleles of the FVIII gene. We investigated the time-course of plasma FVIII:C and vWF:Ag levels in 25 obligate carriers of haemophilia A after DDAVP infusion. In carriers with a normal FVIII to vWF ratio (> 0.8), DDAVP induced a progressive ratio decrease that reached levels significantly lower than that taken as cut-off to discriminate between low and normal values (0.68 +/- 0.1 vs before 0.912 +/- 0.18). In carriers with a borderline (0.7-0.8) or reduced (< 0.7) ratio DDAVP induced a further decrease in the FVIII/vWF ratio, albeit with a different kinetic; after an initial increase, values were lower than pre-DDAVP figures. In all subjects, following the post-DDAVP peak, plasma FVIII progressively decreased while vWF contemporaneously continued to increase. In contrast, DDAVP did not induce significant changes in the FVIII/vWF ratio in normal females, and the two molecules appeared to increase similarly throughout the observation period. These findings indicate that after DDAVP, FVIII increases less or for a shorter time than vWF, also in haemophilia A carriers who have a normal FVIII/vWF ratio. Hence, DDAVP may help identify haemophilia A carriers, especially subjects with normal or borderline ratios. Even though molecular biology procedures at present are the best and more reliable tools to identify the carrier state, DDAVP seems to improve the accuracy of haemostatic parameters

Re-challenge with pemetrexed in advanced mesothelioma: a multi-institutional experience

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although first-line therapy for patients affected by advanced mesothelioma is well established, there is a lack of data regarding the impact of second-line treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We retrospectively collected data of patients affected by advanced mesothelioma, already treated with first-line therapy based on pemetrexed and platin, with a response (partial response or stable disease) lasting at least 6 months, and re-treated with a pemetrexed-based therapy at progression. The primary objective was to describe time to progression and overall survival after re-treatment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall across several Italian oncological Institutions we found 30 patients affected by advanced mesothelioma, in progression after a 6-month lasting clinical benefit following a first-line treatment with cisplatin and pemetrexed, and re-challenged with a pemetrexed-based therapy. In these patients we found a disease control rate of 66%, with reduction of pain in 43% of patients. Overall time to progression and survival were promising for a second-line setting of patients with advanced mesothelioma, being 5.1 and 13.6 months, respectively.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In our opinion, when a patient has a long-lasting benefit from previous treatment with pemetrexed combined with a platin compound, the same treatment should be offered at progression.</p

Clinical outcomes of castration-resistant prostate cancer treatments administered as third or fourth line following failure of docetaxel and other second-line treatment: results of an Italian multicentre study

Background: The availability of new agents (NAs) active in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing after docetaxel treatment (abiraterone acetate, cabazitaxel, and enzalutamide) has led to the possibility of using them sequentially to obtain a cumulative survival benefit. Objective: To provide clinical outcome data relating to a large cohort of mCRPC patients who received a third-line NA after the failure of docetaxel and another NA. Design, setting, and participants: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of patients who had received at least two successive NAs after the failure of docetaxel. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The independent prognostic value of a series of pretreatment covariates on the primary outcome measure of overall survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis. Results and limitations: Weassessed260patientswhoreceivedonethird-lineNAbetween January 2012 and December 2013, including 38 who received a further NA as fourth-line therapy. The median progression-free and overall survival from the start of third-line therapy was, respectively, 4 mo and 11 mo, with no significant differences between the NAs. Performance status, and haemoglobin and alkaline phosphatase levels were the only independent prognostic factors. The limitations of the study are mainly due its retrospective nature and the small number of patients treatedwith some of the sequences. Conclusions: We were unable to demonstrate a difference in the clinical outcomes of third-line NAs regardless of previous NA therapy. Patient summary: It is debated which sequence of treatments to adopt after docetaxel. Our data do not support the superiority of any of the three new agents in third-line treatment, regardless of the previously administered new agent