Search

Abstract Background This phase I study aimed to assess the safety, dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary effect of nanoparticle albumin‐bound (nab)‐paclitaxel in combination with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods Patients with locally advanced ESCC who were ineligible or refused surgery were enrolled. Nab‐paclitaxel (60 mg/m2, 75 mg/m2, and 90 mg/m2) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2) were administered intravenously weekly on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29 on the basis of the 3 + 3 dose escalation method. The total dose of radiation was 50–64 Gy. The primary endpoint was the safety of chemotherapy. Results The study enrolled 12 patients across three dose levels. No treatment‐related deaths occurred. One patient in the 60 mg/m2 dose level occurred dose‐limiting Grade 3 febrile neutropenia. No DLT was found in the 90 mg/m2 dose level thus the MTD was not reached. The phase II study's recommended dose was 75 mg/m2 based on the available preclinical and clinical data including pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and toxicity. The frequent hematologic toxicities were leukocytopenia (Grade 1–2 of 66.7% and Grade 3–4 of 33.3%), neutropenia (Grade 1–2 of 91.7% and Grade 3–4 of 8.3%). Nonhematologic toxicities were mild and manageable. Overall response rate (ORR) of all patients achieved 100%. Conclusions Weekly schedule of cisplatin and nab‐paclitaxel in combination with concurrent radiotherapy showed manageable toxicities and promising antitumor activity in patients with locally advanced ESCC. The recommended dose of nab‐paclitaxel for further studies is 75 mg/m2.

Accuracy and transparency of scientific data are becoming more and more relevant with the increasing concern regarding the evaluation of data reproducibility in many research areas. This concern is also true for quantifying coding and noncoding RNAs, with the remarkable increase in publications reporting RNA profiling and sequencing studies. To address the problem, we propose the following recommendations: (a) accurate documentation of experimental procedures in Materials and methods (and not only in the supplementary information, as many journals have a strict mandate for making Materials and methods as visible as possible in the main text); (b) submission of RT‐qPCR raw data for all experiments reported; and (c) adoption of a unified, simple format for submitted RT‐qPCR raw data. The Real‐time PCR Data Essential Spreadsheet Format (RDES) was created for this purpose.