1,721,178 research outputs found
Sorafenib for lung cancer: is the "Battle" still open ?
No full textIn the recent years, the improved understanding of the biological relevance of angiogenesis as a major cancer hallmark led to the development of a heterogeneous group of agents targeting this key process. Among the anti-angiogenic drugs (including monoclonal antibodies such as Bevacizumab, and other molecules with different mechanism of action, such as the vascular disrupting agents Vadimezan), the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs, Sorafenib, Sunitinib, Pazopanib, and Axitinib), are commonly thought to inhibit angiogenesis through a most rational and promising approach. In this regard, many tyrosine kinase inibitors, such as Sorafenib, are multi-targeted, which allows for the inhibition of those multiple functional pathways which are considered to be critical for both tumor development and progression. Besides, this multi-targeted activity may theoretically increase efficacy but also toxicity. As a member of this group, Sorafenib has already been approved for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and hepatocellular carcinoma not suitable for locoregional treatment, and it is currently under investigation for advanced non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either alone or in combination with other biological/cytotoxic agents
From supportive care to adjunctive treatment: the evolution in time of physical exercise and nutrition in lung cancer
No full text[no abstract available
Platelet-derived growth factor receptor inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: is the odyssey over?
No full textEditorial (no abstract available
Avoiding chemotherapy for advanced nononcogene addicted NSCLC overexpressing PD-L1: Rule or option?
No full textPatients with nonsmall-cell lung cancers expressing high levels of PD-L1 present a therapeutic dilemma for clinicians who have to choose between pembrolizumab as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy. In order to help them as they ponder over this decision we performed a meta-analysis using the data available from randomized clinical trials that enrolled patients with untreated advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancers with PD-L1 expression level ≥50%. We evaluated interactions according to type of treatment-add-on strategy: pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy or head-to-head strategy: pembrolizumab alone versus chemotherapy. Hazard and Odds Ratios (HR/OR) for primary (overall survival, OS) and secondary endpoints (progression-free survival, PFS and objective response rate, ORR) were extracted and cumulated by adopting a random-effect model with 95% confidence interval. Four clinical trials that enrolled 2,754 patients including 1,252 with PD-L1 expression in ≥50% of cells were examined. We did not find a significant interaction (P = 0.16) between an add-on strategy and head-to-head comparisons with pembrolizumab for OS (HRs in favor of immunotherapy of 0.50 and 0.67, respectively). A significant quantitative interaction favoring the add-on strategy was found for PFS and ORR (P < 0.001), with a HR for PFS of 0.36 with the add-on strategy and 0.65 in head-to head comparisons, and an OR for ORR of 5.35 and 1.58, respectively. In absence of planned prospective noninferiority trials addressing this issue, addition of chemotherapy to pembrolizumab appears to decrease tumor size and delay disease progression significantly more than pembrolizumab alone, but has no impact on OS. We conclude that the data support deciding between both treatment options on an individual basis by considering a patients' clinical status and disease characteristics
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Clinical meta-analyses of targeted therapies in adenocarcinoma.
No full textAlthough the interpretation of the data reported in meta-analyses may hide several issues, it is undoubtable that this methodological approach may significantly contribute to implement the results of clinical trials, and represent a useful and practical tool for the evidence-based medicine process. Indeed, level-one recommendations should consider well-conducted meta-analyses as well as large and adequately powered randomized trials as the main contributors for the definition of guidelines for clinical practice. In addition, the role of meta-analyses for issues whereas conflicting data (and/or unpowered results) are provided, is well established. In the field of lung cancer, meta-analyses already participated to change the current standard, and are now facing the challenging issues of predictive biomarkers of prognosis and/or efficacy of targeted agents. With this aim, the meta-analytic approach helped in the recent years to implement the quantification of the magnitude of the benefit of targeted agents, and added new insights by interpreting the data coming from clinical trials by integrating them with biomarkers. The treatment-interaction analyses according to putative predictive factors of efficacy may clarify unknown issues and generate new hypotheses for future perspectives. The current review attempts to put in the context of the clinical data of targeted agents for lung cancer all the pros and cons of the meta-analytic process published to date, and critically analyze all the potential perspectives which this methodology may add for both current practice and forthcoming research
- …
