Fwd: Cancer stem cells as targets for cancer therapy: selected cancers as examples.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: HubMed - cancer <rssfwd@rssfwd.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Subject: Cancer stem cells as targets for cancer therapy: selected cancers as examples.
To: mesothelioma77@gmail.com


[1]Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2008 May 30;
Hombach-Klonisch S, Paranjothy T, Wiechec E, Pocar P, Mustafa T, Seifert A, Zahl C, Gerlach KL, Biermann K, Steger K, Hoang-Vu C, Schulze-Osthoff K, Los M

It is becoming increasingly evident that cancer constitutes a group of diseases involving altered stem-cell maturation/differentiation and the disturbance of regenerative processes. The observed malignant transformation is merely a symptom of normal differentiation processes gone astray rather than the primary event. This review focuses on the role of cancer stem cells (CSCs) in three common but also relatively under-investigated cancers: head and neck, ovarian, and testicular cancer. For didactic purpose, the physiology of stem cells is first introduced using hematopoietic and mesenchymal stem cells as examples. This is followed by a discussion of the (possible) role of CSCs in head and neck, ovarian, and testicular cancer. Aside from basic information about the pathophysiology of these cancers, current research results focused on the discovery of molecular markers specific to these cancers are also discussed. The last part of the review is largely dedicated to signaling pathways active within various normal and CSC types (e.g. Nanog, Nestin, Notch1, Notch2, Oct3 and 4, Wnt). Different elements of these pathways are also discussed in the context of therapeutic opportunities for the development of targeted therapies aimed at CSCs. Finally, alternative targeted anticancer therapies arising from recently identified molecules with cancer-(semi-)selective capabilities (e.g. apoptin, Brevinin-2R) are considered.



___
Source: http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=18512024
--
 ~
Powered by [5]RssFwd, a service of [6]Blue Sky Factory, Inc

 

Fwd: Clinical identification of colorectal cancer patients benefiting from adjuvant uracil-tegafur (UFT): a randomized controlled trial.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: HubMed - cancer <rssfwd@rssfwd.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Subject: Clinical identification of colorectal cancer patients benefiting from adjuvant uracil-tegafur (UFT): a randomized controlled trial.
To: mesothelioma77@gmail.com


[1]J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2008 May 30;
Fujii M, Takayama T, Kochi M

PURPOSE: A randomized controlled trial was conducted to determine whether pathologic necrosis in response to preoperative treatment with uracil-tegafur(UFT) could be used to identify patients with colorectal cancer most likely to benefit from postoperative adjuvant therapy with the drug. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The 152 patients with colorectal cancer who received preoperative UFT at a dose of 600 mg/day for at least 10 days were classified into two groups according to the pathologic necrosis in resected tumor specimens: 90% or more necrosis (sensitive) versus less than 90% necrosis (insensitive). After excluding 13 ineligible patients, the remaining 139 were then randomly assigned to receive postoperative adjuvant UFT (400 mg/day) for 12 months or no treatment. RESULTS: Preoperative and postoperative UFT produced no serious toxicity in any of the patients. Among the 22 patients with sensitive tumors, overall survival was significantly better in the UFT group (n = 12) than in the control (n = 10) (100 vs. 70.0%; P = 0.023). Among the 117 patients with insensitive tumors, there was no significant difference between the two groups (n = 60, 68.1% vs. n = 57, 76.6%; P = 0.373). CONCLUSION: Our method involving neoadjuvant UFT can identify patients most likely to benefit from postoperative UFT, as well as those unlikely to benefit from such treatment.



___
Source: http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=18512074
--
 Powered by [5]RssFwd, a service of [6]Blue Sky Factory, Inc

 

Fwd: Comparison of short-and long-term outcomes following either insertion of self-expanding metallic stents or emergency surgery in malignant large bowel obstruction.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: HubMed - cancer <rssfwd@rssfwd.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Subject: Comparison of short-and long-term outcomes following either insertion of self-expanding metallic stents or emergency surgery in malignant large bowel obstruction.
To: mesothelioma77@gmail.com


[1]Tech Coloproctol. 2008 Mar; 12(1): 51-5
Dastur JK, Forshaw MJ, Modarai B, Solkar MM, Raymond T, Parker MC

BACKGROUND: Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are now regarded as a safe and effective treatment for an acute obstructing colorectal cancer. SEMS insertion is an invasive procedure that could potentially worsen prognosis. This study assessed the short-and long-term outcomes in patients stented for acute large bowel obstruction and in patients who underwent primary emergency surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 19 patients who underwent SEMS insertion and 23 patients who had primary emergency surgery for left-sided large bowel obstruction as the first presentation of colorectal cancer. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 19 patients in the SEMS group and the 23 patients in the primary emergency surgery group in terms of demographics and tumour location and stage. Stent insertion was successful in 16 patients (84%). One patient died from a stent-related perforation and another had a stoma fashioned for stent migration. Stents were a definitive procedure in 2 patients with advanced disease and acted as a "bridge to surgery" in the remaining 12 patients. Compared to the primary surgery group, there was a trend towards a higher primary anastomosis rate in the SEMS group (p=0.08); there were no significant differences in length of hospital stay, 30-day mortality or complication rates between the groups. Long-term prognosis (estimated 3-year survival) did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0.54); this persisted when only curative resections were considered (p=0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative stent insertion is a safe and effective treatment for large bowel obstruction, and may result in a higher primary anastomosis rate. Stent insertion does not seem to have a deleterious effect on prognosis.



___
Source: http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=18512013
--
 ~
Powered by [5]RssFwd, a service of [6]Blue Sky Factory, Inc

 

Fwd: Prevalence and treatment patterns of physical impairments in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: HubMed - breast cancer <rssfwd@rssfwd.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Subject: Prevalence and treatment patterns of physical impairments in patients with metastatic breast cancer.
To: mesothelioma77@gmail.com


[1]J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jun 1; 26(16): 2621-9
Cheville AL, Troxel AB, Basford JR, Kornblith AB

PURPOSE: Physical impairments cause profound functional declines in patients with cancer. Although common rehabilitation measures can address many impairments, the extent of their delivery is unknown. We studied these issues by quantifying physical impairments in patients with metastatic breast cancer and by assessing how they are addressed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive sample of 163 community-dwelling patients with metastatic breast cancer was stratified by Karnofsky performance score and administered the Medical Outcomes Study Physical Function Subscale and the Older Americans Resource Study Activities of Daily Living subscales. Cancer-related physical impairments were identified through a physical examination, the 6-Minute Walk Test, and the Functional Independence Measure Mobility Subscale. Patients were questioned regarding the nature, type, and setting of treatments for impairments. Physical rehabilitation needs were determined through a consensus process involving physiatrists and physical/occupational therapists specializing in cancer. RESULTS: Ninety-two percent of patients (150 of 163) had at least one physical impairment. Among 530 identified impairments, 484 (92%) required a physical rehabilitation intervention and 469 (88%) required physical therapy (PT) and/or occupational therapy (OT). Only 30% of impairments requiring rehabilitation services and 21% of those requiring PT/OT received treatment. Impairments detected during hospitalization were overwhelmingly more likely to receive a rehabilitation intervention (odds ratio [OR] = 87.9; 95% CI, 28.5 to 271.4), and PT/OT (OR = 558.8; 95% CI, 187.0 to 1,669.6). Low socioeconomic and minority status were significantly associated with nontreatment. CONCLUSION: Remediable physical impairments were prevalent and poorly addressed among patients with metastatic breast cancer, drastically so in the outpatient setting. Undertreatment was particularly prominent among minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.



___
Source: http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=18509174
--
 ~
Powered by [5]RssFwd, a service of [6]Blue Sky Factory, Inc

 

Fwd: Estrogen receptor expression and efficacy of docetaxel-containing adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: results from a pooled analysis.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: HubMed - breast cancer <rssfwd@rssfwd.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Subject: Estrogen receptor expression and efficacy of docetaxel-containing adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: results from a pooled analysis.
To: mesothelioma77@gmail.com


[1]J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jun 1; 26(16): 2636-43
Andre F, Broglio K, Roche H, Martin M, Mackey JR, Penault-Llorca F, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L

PURPOSE: Several adjuvant chemotherapy trials suggested that cytotoxic treatment is less effective in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancers. The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy of adjuvant docetaxel and anthracycline therapy according to ER expression in two randomized clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pooled data from two randomized trials, BCIRG001 and PACS01, were examined. Hazard ratios for recurrence and survival were estimated by Cox proportional hazards models and were adjusted for clinical variables. Interaction between docetaxel and ER expression was tested. RESULTS: ER status was available for 3,329 patients (95% of all randomly assigned patients), of whom 75% (n = 2,493) were ER positive. Docetaxel therapy was associated with a 30% reduction in the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.91) in ER-positive patients and a 31% reduction (HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.94) in ER-negative patients. Docetaxel therapy was associated with a 21% reduction in the risk of recurrence (HR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93) in ER-positive patients and a 31% reduction (HR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.97) in ER-negative patients. The interaction between docetaxel therapy and ER status was not statistically significant for either overall survival (P = .87) or disease-free survival (P = .30). ER expression was also not predictive for docetaxel efficacy when it was analyzed as a semi-continuous variable based on percent of positive cells by immunohistochemistry (test for heterogeneity, P = .56 and .86 for overall survival and disease-free survival, respectively). CONCLUSION: In the pooled analysis of these two trials, docetaxel did not have a statistically significantly different effect on the risk of recurrence or death in ER-positive and ER-negative patients.



___
Source: http://www.hubmed.org/display.cgi?uids=18509176
--
 Powered by [5]RssFwd, a service of [6]Blue Sky Factory, Inc