European journal of cancer : official journal for European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) [and] European Association for Cancer Research (EACR)
-
Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires should ideally be adapted to the individual patient and at the same time scores should be directly comparable across patients. This is achievable using a computerised adaptive test (CAT). Basing the CAT on an existing instrument enables measurement within an established HRQOL framework and allows backward-compatibility with studies using the original instrument. Because of these advantages the EORTC Quality of Life Group (QLG) has initiated a project to develop a CAT version of the widely used EORTC QLQ-C30. ⋯ Based on the findings for PF, we believe that our approach will generate item pools that are relevant and appropriate for cancer patients. These will form the basis for a backward-compatible CAT assessing the HRQOL dimensions of the EORTC QLQ-C30.
-
Multicenter Study
Phase II study of oral masitinib mesilate in imatinib-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic gastro-intestinal stromal tumour (GIST).
Masitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with greater in vitro activity and selectivity for the wild-type c-Kit receptor and its juxtamembrane mutation than imatinib, without inhibiting kinases of known toxicities. This phase II study evaluated masitinib as a first-line treatment of advanced GIST. ⋯ Masitinib appears to be effective as a first-line treatment of advanced GIST with comparable results to imatinib in terms of safety and response. PFS and in particular OS data show promise that masitinib may provide sustainable benefits. There is sufficient compelling evidence to warrant a phase III clinical trial.
-
Multicenter Study
Trends in incidence, treatment and survival of gastric adenocarcinoma between 1990 and 2007: a population-based study in the Netherlands.
Survival of gastric cancer in the Western world remains poor. We conducted a retrospective population-based study to evaluate trends in incidence, treatment and outcome of gastric adenocarcinoma. ⋯ The absence of improvement in survival rates indicates the need for earlier detection and prospective studies to evaluate new therapy regimens with standardised surgery and pathology.
-
Sorafenib induces apoptosis and enhances Tumour Necrosis Factor-Related Apoptosis-Inducing Ligand (TRAIL)-induced cell killing of tumoural cells. We have investigated the effects of the multikinase inhibitor Sorafenib alone or in combination with TRAIL and agonistic Fas antibodies on endometrial carcinoma cells. We have also focused on the search of the differential molecular mechanisms by which Sorafenib induces cell death and the ones involved in sensitisation to TRAIL. ⋯ Interestingly, cell death caused by Sorafenib was mediated by downregulation of Mcl-1, but not by FLIP. In contrast, we found that Sorafenib sensitisation of endometrial carcinoma cells to TRAIL- and Fas-induced apoptosis was dependent on FLIP but not on Mcl-1 downregulation. Altogether, we discern the dual mechanisms by which Sorafenib causes cell death from those involved in death receptor sensitisation.
-
Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neurotoxicity (CIPN) is a frequent, potentially severe and dose-limiting side-effect of cancer treatment. Despite its clinical relevance that limits the use of several antineoplastic agents and even the future development of new anticancer drugs, several crucial aspects of CIPN remain unsolved, one of which is how to assess its occurrence and severity in the most effective and reliable way. CIPN severity is generally assessed using Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) scales, although it is well known that significant inter-observer disagreement exists using these scales. ⋯ The use of other types of scale based on clinical and instrumental examinations, or the use of self-administered questionnaires for patients, has not yet really improved the accuracy of CIPN assessment, although some of these tools are promising and deserve to be further validated. As a result, there is a general recognition that CIPN has still not been properly assessed and that improvements should be made. In this review, the available data regarding the different tools used to assess CIPN will be revised and their features will be critically examined, with a special focus on their reliability and reproducibility across examiners and, when available, through direct comparison.