Search

Background Patients presenting with bilateral trigeminal hypoesthesia may go on to have trigeminal isolated sensory neuropathy, a benign, purely trigeminal neuropathy, or facial-onset sensory motor neuronopathy (FOSMN), a malignant life-threatening condition. No diagnostic criteria can yet differentiate the two conditions at their onset. Nor is it clear whether the two diseases are distinct entities or share common pathophysiological mechanisms. Methods Seeking pathophysiological and diagnostic information to distinguish these two conditions at their onset, in this neurophysiological and morphometric study we neurophysiologically assessed function in myelinated and unmyelinated fibres and histologically examined supraorbital nerve biopsy specimens with optic and electron microscopy in 13 consecutive patients with recent onset trigeminal hypoesthesia and pain. Results The disease course distinctly differed in the 13 patients. During a mean 10 year follow-up whereas in eight patients the disease remained relatively stable, in the other five it progressed to possibly life-threatening motor disturbances and extra-trigeminal spread. From two to six years elapsed between the first sensory symptoms and the onset of motor disorders. In patients with trigeminal isolated sensory neuropathy (TISN) and in those with FOSMN neurophysiological and histological examination documented a neuronopathy manifesting with trigeminal nerve damage selectively affecting myelinated fibres, but sparing the Ia-fibre-mediated proprioceptive reflex. Conclusions Although no clinical diagnostic criteria can distinguish the two conditions at onset, neurophysiological and nerve-biopsy findings specify that in both disorders trigeminal nerve damage manifests as a dissociated neuronopathy affecting myelinated and sparing unmyelinated fibres, thus suggesting similar pathophysiological mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Elderly patients have been often excluded from or underrepresented in the study populations of combination chemotherapy trials. The primary end point of this study was to determine the response rate and the toxicity of the weekly oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid (OXALF) regimen in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer. The secondary objective was to measure the time to disease progression and the survival time. Methods: Chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced gastric cancer aged 70 or older were considered eligible for study entry. Patients received weekly oxaliplatin 40 mg/m2, fluorouracil 500 mg/m2 and folinic acid 250 mg/m2. All drugs were given intravenously on a day-1 schedule. Results: A total of 42 elderly patients were enrolled. Median age was 73 years and all patients had metastatic disease. The response rate according to RECIST criteria was 45.2% (95% CIs: 30%-56%) with two complete responses, 17 partial responses, 13 stable diseases and 10 progressions, for an overall tumor rate control of 76.2% (32 patients). Toxicity was generally mild and only three patients discontinued treatment because of treatment related adverse events. The most common treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue (7.1%), diarrhoea (4.8%), mucositis (2.4%), neurotoxicity (2.4%) and neutropenia (4.8%). The median response duration was 5.3 months (95% CIs: 2.13 — 7.34), the median time to disease progression was 5.0 months (95% CIs: 3.75 — 6.25) and the median survival time was 9.0 months (95% CIs: 6.18 — 11.82). Conclusion: OXALF represents an active and well-tolerated treatment modality for elderly patients with locally advanced and metastatic gastric cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The combination of capecitabine and gemcitabine at Fixed Dose Rate (FDR) has been demonstrated to be well tolerated, with apparent efficacy in patients with advanced cancers. FDR gemcitabine infusion leads to enhanced intracellular accumulation of drug and possible augmented clinical effect. The goals of this phase I study were to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of chronomodulated capecitabine in patients with advanced cancer and to describe the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), the safety profile of this way of administration. Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumours who had failed to response to standard therapy or for whom no standard therapy was available were elegible for this study. Capecitabine was administered orally according to following schedule: 1/4 of dose at 8:00 a.m.; 1/4 of dose at 6:00 p.m. and 1/2 of dose at 11:00 p.m. each day for 14 consecutive days, followed by a 7-day rest period. Results: All 27 patients enrolled onto the study were assessable for toxicity. The most common toxicities during the first two cycles of chemotherapy were fatigue, diarrhoea and hand foot syndrome (HFS). Only one out of the nine patients treated at capecitabine dose of 2,750 mg/m2 met protocol-specified DLT criteria (fatigue grade 4). However, at these doses the majority of cycles of therapy were delivered without dose reduction or delay. No other episodes of DLT were observed at the same dose steps and at the lower dose steps of capecitabine (1,500/1,750/2,000/2,250/2,500 mg/m2). The dose of 2,750 mg/m2 is recommended for further study. Tumor responses were observed in patients with metastatic breast and colorectal cancer. Conclusion: High doses of chronomodulated capecitabine can be administered with acceptable toxicity. The evidence of antitumor activity deserves further investigation in phase II combination chemotherapy studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this minireview the authors examine and discuss the radioprotective compounds and the new combination therapies for the prophylaxis of radiation-induced emesis. Radiation-induced emesis is an important secondary effect of this anticancer treatment and it represents one of the causes of therapy interruption and decay of life quality before the introduction of optimal control of radiation-induced emesis with new antiemetic drugs which ensure the continuance of radiotherapy and avoid time breaks, that could negatively influence the efficacy of anticancer treatment. The incidence, the severity or the latency of radiotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting are correlated both with the treatment features (fractions, total dose, irradiation site) and with the main clinical characteristics of the patients. In contrast to the very extensive literature on the prevention of chemotherapy-induced emesis, relatively few studies about the prevention of nausea and vomiting in patients submitted to radiotherapy have been published. Among antiemetic drugs for the prevention of emesis, benzamides and in particular metoclopramide, are widely used in clinical practice. The introduction of selective 5-HT3 antagonists in clinical practice produced an important improvement in control of chemotherapy induced emesis, but few published studies were aimed at evaluating the efficacy of these drugs in the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting due to radiation exposure. We herewith present a brief summary of Clinical practice guidelines for the use of antiemetics in anticancer therapy recently published by ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology).