Family Law in New Mexico

Copyright page and Table of Contents only. Your guide to state law on living together, marriage, divorce, property and debt division, child custody and support, spousal support, domestic violence and morehttps://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_facbookdisplay/1007/thumbnail.jp

Lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, in patients with pretreated germline BRCA1/2 metastatic breast cancer: results from a phase II basket study

Breast cancer; Lurbinectedin; Response rateCáncer de mama; Lurbinectedina; Tasa de respuestaCàncer de mama; Lurbinectedina; Taxa de respostaBackground Lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, has shown preclinical antitumor activity against homologous recombination repair-deficient models and preliminary clinical activity in BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Patients and methods This phase II basket multitumor trial (NCT02454972) evaluated lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks in a cohort of 21 patients with pretreated germline BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Patients with any hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status were enrolled. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Results Confirmed partial response (PR) was observed in six patients [ORR = 28.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.3% to 52.2%] who had received a median of two prior advanced chemotherapy lines. Lurbinectedin was active in both BRCA mutations: four PRs in 11 patients (36.4%) with BRCA2 and two PRs in 10 patients (20.0%) with BRCA1. Median DoR was 8.6 months, median PFS was 4.1 months and median OS was 16.1 months. Stable disease (SD) was observed in 10 patients (47.6%), including 3 with unconfirmed response in a subsequent tumor assessment [ORR unconfirmed = 42.9% (95% CI 21.8% to 66.0%)]. Clinical benefit rate (PR + SD ≥ 4 months) was 76.2% (95% CI 52.8% to 91.8%). No objective response was observed among patients who had received prior poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (61.9%), fatigue (38.1%) and vomiting (23.8%). These AEs were mostly grade 1/2. The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (42.9%: grade 4, 23.8%: with no febrile neutropenia). Conclusions This phase II study met its primary endpoint and showed activity of lurbinectedin in germline BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Lurbinectedin showed a predictable and manageable safety profile. Considering the exploratory aim of this trial as well as previous results in other phase II studies, further development of lurbinectedin in this indication is warranted.This work was supported by PharmaMar S.A, including partial funding by grants from the Centro para el Desarrollo Tecnológico IndustrialCentro para el Desarrollo Tecnológico Industrial (CDTI) during the conduct of the study (grant number IDI-20150006). VS is supported by NIH [grant number R01CA242845]. MD Anderson Cancer Center Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics is supported by the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas [grant number RP1100584], the Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan Institute for Personalized Cancer Therapy [grant number 1U01 CA180964], NCATS [grant number UL1 TR000371] (Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences) and the MD Anderson Cancer Center Support [grant number P30 CA016672]

Designer drugs on the Internet : a phenomenon out-of-control? : The emergence of hallucinogenic drug Bromo-Dragonfly

Copyright Bentham Science PublishersBased on the material available in both the scientific literature and on the web, the present paper provides an updated pharmacological, chemical, toxicological and behavioural overview of Bromo-Dragonfly (1-(8-bromobenzo[1,2- b;4,5-b']difuran-4-yl)-2-aminopropane; 'B-fly'). B-Fly is a powerful, long lasting, LSD-like, hallucinogenic drug, which has been associated with a number of acute intoxications and fatalities in a number of countries. A critical discussion of the potential of misuse of B-fly but also of the methodological limitations, which are intrinsically associated with the analysis of online, non-peer reviewed, material, is presented. It is concluded that the availability of online information on novel psychoactive drugs, such as B-fly, may constitute a public health challenge. Better international collaboration levels may be needed to tackle this novel and fast growing phenomenonPeer reviewe