1,721,184 research outputs found
Current standard and future perspectives in first- and second-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic Adenocarcinoma
No full textBackground: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly aggressive malignancy with a median 5-year survival of <8%. At the time of diagnosis, a vast majority of pancreatic cancer patients were found to be with either metastatic spread of the disease or locally advanced tumors. Despite relatively low efficacy, gemcitabine administration was the first choice chemotherapeutic strategy in advanced PDAC for many years. In the last 5 years, however, our understanding of pancreatic carcinogenesis has improved dramatically and with this our therapeutic options have expanded significantly. Summary: With the FOLFIRINOX protocol or the combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel, 2 novel and more effective chemotherapeutic regimens have been introduced in clinical routine, which increased the overall survival by 4-5 months in the palliative situation. Most recently, we learned that both regimens can be modified and dosages can be adapted in older patients without significant loss of efficacy. Additionally, novel application strategies such as nanoparticle fused liposomal irinotecan along with 5-FU/LV provided convincing results in patients previously treated with gemcitabine. Current preclinical and clinical trials investigate efficacy and tolerability of novel drugs aiming at the inhibition of key inflammatory pathways, for example, JAK-STAT signaling, or the tumor surrounding desmoplasia. Prospectively, immunovaccination approaches or immune checkpoint inhibition appears as promising strategies in the near future, particularly when combined with epigenetic drugs in advanced PDAC patients. In this 'to-the-point' article, we review the current standard and summarize the most recent and encouraging advances in cytostatic PDAC treatment. Key Points: (1) FOLFIRINOX and nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine as first-line treatment regime significantly increase survival in patients with advanced PDAC; (2) Selection of appropriate treatment regime depends on patient performance, comorbidity, and toxicity; (3) PDAC patients will benefit from second-line chemotherapy and selection of appropriate regimes depends on first line therapy and patient criteria; (4) Future therapeutic strategies in advanced PDAC will respect molecular tumor profiling and other biomarkers. (C) 2016 S. Karger AG, Base
Relative potency of proton-pump inhibitors-comparison of effects on intragastric pH
No full textComparative potency of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) is an important clinical issue. Most available trials have compared the different PPIs at one or a few selected specific dosages, making it difficult to derive quantitative equivalence dosages. Here we derived PPI dose equivalents based on a comprehensive assessment of dose-dependent effects on intragastric pH. All available clinical studies reporting the effects of PPIs on mean 24-h intragastric pH were sought from electronic databases including Medline. Studies included were restricted to those targeting the Caucasian population, and healthy volunteers or gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) patients. The dose-effect relationships for mean 24-h intragastric pH and for percentage of time with pH > 4 in 24 h were analyzed for each PPI using pharmacodynamic modeling with NONMEM and a model integrating all available data. Fifty-seven studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Based on the mean 24-h gastric pH, the relative potencies of the five PPIs compared to omeprazole were 0.23, 0.90, 1.00, 1.60, and 1.82 for pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, esomeprazole, and rabeprazole, respectively. Compared with healthy volunteers, patients with GERD needed a 1.9-fold higher dose and Helicobacter pylori-positive individuals needed only about 20% of the dose to achieve a given increase in mean 24-h intragastric pH. The present meta-analysis provides quantitative estimates on clinical potency of individual PPIs that may be helpful when switching between PPIs and for assessing the cost-effectiveness of specific PPIs. However, our estimates must be viewed with caution because only a limited dose range has been tested and not exactly the same study conditions were applied for the different substances
Onlinebasierte, qualifizierte Zweitmeinung für Patienten mit kolorektalem Karzinom — eine Pilotstudie der Felix Burda Stiftung in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Netzwerk gegen Darmkrebs
Full text linkBACKGROUND Modern, individualised therapies can improve the survival of patients with colorectal cancer. However, not all patients are referred for treatment to a certified colorectal cancer centre, where a tumor board supports the implementation of their therapy in accordance to guidelines. This study examines the feasibility and demand of a structured, online-based, qualified second opinion for patients with colorectal cancer. METHOD A 15-month pilot study between 2009 and 2011, offered patients with colorectal cancer to obtain a qualified second opinion of a tumour board based on an electronic patient record completed online with the assistance of a case manager. Life-satisfaction levels and quality of life (EORCT QLQ-C30) of the participants has been monitored for a year. RESULTS In 95 % of the cases, a complete electronic patient record and a second opinion could be generated. Less than half of the participants received their first therapy recommendation from a clinic with a tumour board. The second opinion confirmed the initial medical opinion in 40 % of the cases - 33 % showed a partial and 27 % showed a significant deviation. In case of a deviation, the implementation of the second opinion improved the patients' quality of life. CONCLUSION Generating an online-based, qualified second opinion by an interdisciplinary tumour board is technically and logistically well feasible. The online-based second opinion could significantly improve the quality of treatment for patients with colorectal cancer in the future and thus improve their quality of life.HINTERGRUND Moderne, individualisierte Therapien können das Überleben von Patienten mit kolorektalem Karzinom verbessern. Jedoch werden nicht alle Patienten zur Behandlung in ein zertifiziertes Darmkrebszentrum überwiesen, wo ihre Therapie, unterstützt durch ein Tumorboard, leitliniengerecht durchgeführt wird. Daher wird derzeit die Zweitmeinung bei Krebserkrankungen diskutiert. Diese Studie beschreibt Ergebnisse einer Pilotstudie hinsichtlich der Machbarkeit und des Bedarfs einer strukturierten, onlinebasierten, qualifizierten Zweitmeinung für Patienten mit kolorektalem Karzinom. METHODEN Im Rahmen einer 15-monatigen Pilotphase zwischen 2009 und 2011 konnten Patienten mit kolorektalem Karzinom mittels einer onlinebasierten Elektronischen Patientenakte, unterstützt durch einen Case Manager, kostenfrei eine qualifizierte Zweitmeinung eines Tumorboards einholen. Ihre Zufriedenheit und ihre Lebensqualität (EORCT QLQ-C30) wurden über ein Jahr nachbeobachtet. ERGEBNISSE In 95 % der Fälle konnten eine vollständige Elektronische Patientenakte und eine Zweitmeinung erstellt werden. Weniger als die Hälfte der Teilnehmer erhielt die erste Therapieempfehlung aus einer Klinik mit Tumorboard. Die Erstmeinung konnte in 40 % der Fälle durch die Zweitmeinung bestätigt werden, in 33 % zeigte sich ein teilweises, in 27 % ein deutliches Abweichen. Bei Umsetzung der abweichenden Zweitmeinung verbesserte sich die Lebensqualität der Patienten. SCHLUSSFOLGERUNG Die Erstellung einer onlinebasierten, qualifizierten Zweitmeinung durch ein interdisziplinäres Tumorboard ist technisch und logistisch gut durchführbar. Die onlinebasierte Zweitmeinung könnte zukünftig die Qualität der Behandlung von Patienten mit kolorektalem Karzinom deutlich verbessern und damit ihre Lebensqualität erhöhen
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
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
