METHODS: We investigated the anti-proliferative efficacy of polar leaf extracts (LP), non-polar leaf extracts (LN), polar stem extract (SP) and non-polar stem extracts (SN) in human breast, colorectal, lung, endometrial, nasopharyngeal, and pancreatic cancer cells using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide, MTT assay. The most potent extracts was tested along with gemcitabine using our established drug combination analysis. The effect of the combinatory treatment in apoptosis were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), Annexin V assay, antibody array and immunoblotting. Statistical significance was analysed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Dunnett's test. A p-value of less than 0.05 (p
METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial, done in 209 sites in 29 countries, we randomly assigned patients 2:1 with untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer using a block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice-response system with integrated web-response to pembrolizumab (200 mg) every 3 weeks plus chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel; paclitaxel; or gemcitabine plus carboplatin) or placebo plus chemotherapy. Randomisation was stratified by type of on-study chemotherapy (taxane or gemcitabine-carboplatin), PD-L1 expression at baseline (combined positive score [CPS] ≥1 or <1), and previous treatment with the same class of chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting (yes or no). Eligibility criteria included age at least 18 years, centrally confirmed triple-negative breast cancer; at least one measurable lesion; provision of a newly obtained tumour sample for determination of triple-negative breast cancer status and PD-L1 status by immunohistochemistry at a central laboratory; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score 0 or 1; and adequate organ function. The sponsor, investigators, other study site staff (except for the unmasked pharmacist), and patients were masked to pembrolizumab versus saline placebo administration. In addition, the sponsor, the investigators, other study site staff, and patients were masked to patient-level tumour PD-L1 biomarker results. Dual primary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival assessed in the PD-L1 CPS of 10 or more, CPS of 1 or more, and intention-to-treat populations. The definitive assessment of progression-free survival was done at this interim analysis; follow-up to assess overall survival is continuing. For progression-free survival, a hierarchical testing strategy was used, such that testing was done first in patients with CPS of 10 or more (prespecified statistical criterion was α=0·00411 at this interim analysis), then in patients with CPS of 1 or more (α=0·00111 at this interim analysis, with partial alpha from progression-free survival in patients with CPS of 10 or more passed over), and finally in the intention-to-treat population (α=0·00111 at this interim analysis). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518, and is ongoing.
FINDINGS: Between Jan 9, 2017, and June 12, 2018, of 1372 patients screened, 847 were randomly assigned to treatment, with 566 patients in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 281 patients in the placebo-chemotherapy group. At the second interim analysis (data cutoff, Dec 11, 2019), median follow-up was 25·9 months (IQR 22·8-29·9) in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 26·3 months (22·7-29·7) in the placebo-chemotherapy group. Among patients with CPS of 10 or more, median progression-free survival was 9·7 months with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy and 5·6 months with placebo-chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for progression or death, 0·65, 95% CI 0·49-0·86; one-sided p=0·0012 [primary objective met]). Median progression-free survival was 7·6 and 5·6 months (HR, 0·74, 0·61-0·90; one-sided p=0·0014 [not significant]) among patients with CPS of 1 or more and 7·5 and 5·6 months (HR, 0·82, 0·69-0·97 [not tested]) among the intention-to-treat population. The pembrolizumab treatment effect increased with PD-L1 enrichment. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse event rates were 68% in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 67% in the placebo-chemotherapy group, including death in <1% in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 0% in the placebo-chemotherapy group.
INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab-chemotherapy showed a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival versus placebo-chemotherapy among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer with CPS of 10 or more. These findings suggest a role for the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.
FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between October 2007 and May 2016, 106 patients with untreated squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix were enrolled in the present study. Radiation therapy consisted of pelvic irradiation (total dose, 50 Gy in 25 fractions including central shielding), prophylactic paraortic regional irradiation (36-40 Gy in 20 fractions), and either high- or low-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) according to institutional practice. The planned point A dose was 21 to 28 Gy in 3 to 4 fractions for high-dose-rate ICBT and 40 to 41 Gy in 1 to 2 fractions for low-dose-rate ICBT. Five cycles of weekly cisplatin (40 mg/m2) were administered during the radiation therapy course.
RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were enrolled. Of these, 9 had major protocol violations and 2 did not receive treatment because of worsened general condition. Thus, 95 patients were evaluable. The median follow-up was 56 months. Of the 95 patients, 76 (80%) received 4 or 5 cycles of chemotherapy. Acute grade 3 leukopenia was observed in 20 of the patients (21%), and late grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity was observed in 3%. The 2-year local control, progression-free survival, and overall survival rate for all patients were 96%, 78%, and 90%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that prophylactic extended-field concurrent chemoradiation therapy using weekly cisplatin is feasible and effective for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer in East and Southeast Asia.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study, which included 93 CML patients and 98 controls. The polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) method was used to genotype the FAS and FASL polymorphisms. Data nanlysis was done using SPSS Version 22. The associations of the genotypes with susceptibility risk and IM response in CML patients were assessed by means of logistic regression analysis and deriving odds ratio with 95% CI.
RESULTS: We observed a significant association between FASL-844T>C polymorphism and CML susceptibility risk and IM response. Variant C allele and FASL-844 CC variant genotype carriers had significantly higher risk for CML susceptibility (OR 1.756, CI 1.163-2.652, p=0.007 and OR 2.261, CI 1.013-5.047, p=0.047 respectively). Conversely, the heterozygous genotype FASL-844 TC conferred lower risk for CML susceptibility (OR 0.379, CI 0.176-0.816, p=0.013). The heterozygous and homozygous variant genotypes and variant C alleles were found to confer a lower risk for the development of IM resistance with OR 0.129 (95% CI: 0.034-0.489 p=0.003), OR 0.257 (95% CI: 0.081-0.818, p=0.021), and OR 0.486 (95% CI: 0.262-0.899, p=0.021) respectively. We also found that FAS-670 A>G polymorphism was not associated with CML susceptibility risk or IM response.
CONCLUSION: The genetic polymorphism FASL-844 T>C may contribute to the CML susceptibility risk and also IM treatment response in CML patients. Accodringly, it may be useful as a biomarker for predicting CML susceptibility risk and IM resistance.
METHODS: PARACHUTE is a phase IV, prospective, non-interventional, observational study. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients remaining progression free at 12 months. Secondary endpoints were ORR, PFS, safety and tolerability, and relative dose intensity (RDI).
RESULTS: Overall, 190 patients with a median age of 61 years (range: 22.0-96.0) were included. Most patients were Asian (70%), clear-cell type RCC was the most common (81%), with a favourable (9%), intermediate (47%), poor (10%), and unknown (34%) MSKCC risk score. At the end of the observational period, 78 patients completed the observational period and 112 discontinued the study; 60% of patients had the starting dose at 800 mg. Median RDI was 82%, with 52% of patients receiving 10%) TEAEs related to pazopanib included diarrhoea (30%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (15%), and hypertension (14%).
CONCLUSIONS: Results of the PARACHUTE study support the use of pazopanib in patients with advanced or mRCC who are naive to VEGF-TKI therapy. The safety profile is consistent with that previously reported by pivotal and real-world evidence studies.
METHODS: BCR-ABL positive K562 CML cells were treated with TQ. Cytotoxicity was determined by Trypan blue exclusion assay. Apoptosis assay was performed by annexin V-FITC/PI staining assay and analyzed by flow cytometry. Transcription levels of BCR ABL, JAK2, STAT3, STAT5A and STAT5B genes were evaluated by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR). Protein levels of JAK2 and STAT5 were determined by Jess Assay analysis.
RESULTS: TQ markedly decreased the cell proliferation and induced apoptosis in K562 cells (P < 0.001) in a concentration dependent manner. TQ caused a significant decrease in the transcriptional levels of BCR ABL, JAK2, STAT3, STAT5A and STAT5B genes (P < 0.001). TQ induced a significant decrease in JAK2 and STAT5 protein levels (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: our results indicated that TQ inhibited cell growth of K562 cells via downregulation of BCR ABL/ JAK2/STAT3 and STAT5 signaling and reducing JAK2 and STAT5 protein levels.