Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Article in Portuguese | LILACS, CONASS, ColecionaSUS, SES-GO | ID: biblio-1426707


Mesilato de osimertinibe, gefitinibe, erlotinibe, quimioterapia padrão. Indicação: Câncer de pulmão de células não pequenas com mutação do receptor do fator de crescimento epidérmico (EGFR). Pergunta: Mesilato de osimertinibe é mais eficaz e seguro que gefitinibe, erlotinibe ou quimioterapia para os desfechos de sobrevida global, sobrevida livre de progressão e de segurança no tratamento de carcinoma pulmonar de células não pequenas com mutação do EGFR? Métodos: Levantamento bibliográfico foi realizado na base de dados PUBMED e EPISTEMONIKOS, seguindo estratégias de buscas predefinidas. Foi feita avaliação da qualidade metodológica das revisões sistemáticas com a ferramenta AMSTAR-2 (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Version 2). Resultados: Foram selecionadas duas revisões sistemáticas que atenderam aos critérios de elegibilidade. Conclusão: Mesilato de osimertinibe é mais eficaz do que gefitinibe ou erlotinibe na melhora da sobrevida global e da sobrevida livre de progressão em pacientes virgens de tratamento. Em pacientes previamente tratados, o mesilato de osimertinibe não é superior à quimioterapia padrão à base de platina no prolongamento da sobrevida global, mas é mais eficaz no aumento da sobrevida livre de progressão. Para câncer avançado, mesilato de osimertinibe não é mais eficaz do que a quimioterapia com ou sem pemetrexede para prolongar a sobrevida global, mas é mais eficaz em melhorar a sobrevida livre de progressão. Gefitinibe combinado com quimioterapia à base de pemetrexede foi superior à quimioterapia com ou sem pemetrexede na melhora da sobrevida global e da sobrevida livre de progressão

Osimertinib mesylate, gefitinib, erlotinib, standard chemotherapy. Indication: Non-small cell lung cancer with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Question: Is osimertinib mesylate more effective and safer than gefitinib, erlotinib or chemotherapy for overall survival, progression-free survival and safety outcomes in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer with EGFR mutation? Methods: A bibliographic search was done in the PUBMED and EPISTEMONIKOS database, following predefined search strategies. The methodological quality of systematic reviews was evaluated using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews Version 2 tool. Results: Two systematic reviews were selected because they met the eligibility criteria. Conclusion: Osimertinib mesylate is more effective than gefitinib or erlotinib in improving overall survival and progression-free survival in treatment-naive patients. In previously treated patients, osimertinib mesylate is not superior to standard platinum-based chemotherapy in prolonging overall survival, but it is more effective in increasing progression-free survival. For advanced cancer, osimertinib mesylate is not more effective than chemotherapy with or without pemetrexed in prolonging overall survival, but it is more effective in improving progression-free survival. Gefitinib combined with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy was superior to chemotherapy with or without pemetrexed in improving overall survival and progression-free survival

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Erlotinib Hydrochloride/therapeutic use , Gefitinib/therapeutic use , Inhibitors, Tyrosine Kinase/therapeutic use , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage
Chinese Medical Journal ; (24): 2551-2561, 2023.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-1007566


BACKGROUND@#The brain is a common metastatic site in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), resulting in a relatively poor prognosis. Systemic therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is recommended as the first-line treatment for EGFR -mutated, advanced NSCLC patients. However, intracranial activity varies in different drugs. Thus, brain metastasis (BM) should be considered when choosing the treatment regimens. We conducted this network meta-analysis to explore the optimal first-line therapeutic schedule for advanced EGFR -mutated NSCLC patients with different BM statuses.@*METHODS@#Randomized controlled trials focusing on EGFR-TKIs (alone or in combination) in advanced and EGFR -mutant NSCLC patients, who have not received systematic treatment, were systematically searched up to December 2021. We extracted and analyzed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A network meta-analysis was performed with the Bayesian statistical model to determine the survival outcomes of all included therapy regimens using the R software. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare intervention measures, and overall rankings of therapies were estimated under the Bayesian framework.@*RESULTS@#This analysis included 17 RCTs with 5077 patients and 12 therapies, including osimertinib + bevacizumab, aumolertinib, osimertinib, afatinib, dacomitinib, standards of care (SoC, including gefitinib, erlotinib, or icotinib), SoC + apatinib, SoC + bevacizumab, SoC + ramucirumab, SoC + pemetrexed based chemotherapy (PbCT), PbCT, and pemetrexed free chemotherapy (PfCT). For patients with BM, SoC + PbCT improved PFS compared with SoC (HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.17-0.95), and osimertinib + bevacizumab was most likely to rank first in PFS, with a cumulative probability of 34.5%, followed by aumolertinib, with a cumulative probability of 28.3%. For patients without BM, osimertinib + bevacizumab, osimertinib, aumolertinib, SoC + PbCT, dacomitinib, SoC + ramucirumab, SoC + bevacizumab, and afatinib showed superior efficacy compared with SoC (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20-0.90; HR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.31-0.68; HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34-0.77; HR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.38-0.66; HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.43-0.89; HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.44-0.94; HR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76; HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.50-1.00), PbCT (HR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.74; HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15-0.62; HR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.17-0.69; HR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.18-0.64; HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.21-0.82; HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.22-0.87; HR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.22-0.74; HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.31-0.75), and PfCT (HR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.32; HR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.09-0.26; HR = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09-0.29; HR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.10-0.26; HR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.12-0.35; HR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.12-0.39; HR = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.12-0.31; HR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.16-0.34) in terms of PFS. And, SoC + apatinib showed relatively superior PFS when compared with PbCT (HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.22-0.92) and PfCT (HR = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.12-0.39), but similar PFS to SoC (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.42-1.03). No statistical differences were observed for PFS in patients without BM between PbCT and SoC (HR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.84-2.64), but both showed favorable PFS when compared with PfCT (PfCT vs. SoC, HR = 3.09, 95% CI: 2.06-4.55; PbCT vs. PfCT, HR = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.32). For patients without BM, osimertinib + bevacizumab was most likely to rank the first, with cumulative probabilities of 47.1%. For OS, SoC + PbCT was most likely to rank first in patients with and without BM, with cumulative probabilities of 46.8%, and 37.3%, respectively.@*CONCLUSION@#Osimertinib + bevacizumab is most likely to rank first in PFS in advanced EGFR -mutated NSCLC patients with or without BM, and SoC + PbCT is most likely to rank first in OS.

Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/metabolism , Afatinib/therapeutic use , Lung Neoplasms/metabolism , Bevacizumab/therapeutic use , Bayes Theorem , Network Meta-Analysis , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Brain Neoplasms/genetics , Mutation/genetics
Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases ; (12): 307-309, 2023.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-986034


Malignant mesothelioma is a highly malignant disease that most often occurs in the pleural cavity, followed by the peritoneum and pericardium. Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) accounts for 10%-15% of all mesothelioma. The most important risk factor for MPM is exposure to asbestos. MPM has no specific clinical symptoms, imaging and histopathology are critical for the diagnosis. There are currently no generally accepted guidelines for curative treatment of MPM. The patient mainly presented with abdominal pain, abdominal distension and discomfort. Due to extensive omentum metastasis, no further surgical treatment was performed. Pemetrexed combined with cisplatin chemotherapy was given for 2 cycles, and the patient is still alive.

Humans , Mesothelioma, Malignant/drug therapy , Mesothelioma/diagnosis , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Peritoneal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pleural Neoplasms , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy
Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer ; (12): 7-13, 2022.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-928773


BACKGROUND@#Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a highly aggressive disease arising from pleural mesothelial cells. Advanced pleural mesothelioma has a poor prognosis, with a median survival of no more than 15 months. First line standard chemotherapy regimen recommended is Pemetrexed based chemotherapy regimen, with or without bevacizumab. There is no consensus on whether patients who have received first-line standard chemotherapy can benefit from pemetrexed maintenance chemotherapy. The study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed maintenance therapy (PMT) after treatment with a pemetrexed and platinum regimen for patients with MPM.@*METHODS@#A total of 40 MPM patients were collected from Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2013 to January 2018, eligible patients were unresectable MPM, without disease progression following 4 to 6 cycles of pemetrexed and platinum, including pemetrexed maintenance therapy group (22 cases) and observation group (18 cases). The last follow-up was conducted in January 2020. The primary endpoint were progression free survival (PFS), and the secondary end points were overall survival (OS), the efficacy, adverse reactions of PMT.@*RESULTS@#The median PFS in the PMT arm was longer than that in the observation arm (8.5 mon vs 3 mon, P=0.008), but there was no significant difference in median OS (26.4 mon vs 15.7 mon, P=0.177). Objective response rate (ORR) of two group were 22.7% and 0%, respectively. The grade 3-4 toxicity in PMT group included grade 4 neutropenia in 1 patient (4.5%), grade 3 neutropenia in 1 patient (4.5%), grade 4 anemia in 1 patient (4.5%) and grade 3 nausea and anorexia in 1 patient (4.5%).@*CONCLUSIONS@#Pemetrexed maintenance therapy following initial pemetrexed and platinum chemotherapy improve PFS in patients with MPM, and is well tolerated.

Humans , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Mesothelioma/drug therapy , Mesothelioma, Malignant , Neutropenia , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use , Platinum/therapeutic use , Pleural Neoplasms/drug therapy
Odovtos (En línea) ; 20(1): 57-67, Jan.-Apr. 2018. graf
Article in English | LILACS, BBO | ID: biblio-1091437


Abstract The endodontic treatment of teeth with incomplete development is always a complex task. Nowadays, biomaterials such as bioceramics offers promising clinical evidence that supports its use. However, the standardization of its use for apexification purpose still needs a deeper understanding of the materials' behavior. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the marginal adaptability and microleakage by gas permeability of MTA and Biodentine™ apical plugs in an in vitro model. Materials and methods: Twenty- four single rooted human teeth were selected according to previously stablished inclusion criteria. All samples were prepared obtaining standard cylindrical internal canals with a diameter of 1.3 mm. Root canals were gently rinsed using 5.25% sodium hypochlorite and EDTA 17%. The apical 3mm and remaining coronal dental structure were sectioned to obtain 10mm roots. Roots were randomly assigned to 3 different groups as follows: GROUP A: MTA (n=10), GROUP B: Biodentine™ (n=10) and Group C: Control (positive n=1, negative n=3). MTA and Biodentine™ were prepared according to manufacturer's indications, and apical plugs of 4mm were passively placed in the correspondent teeth. All samples were stored in saline solution for 7 days at 37°C before evaluation. Samples were mounted in cylindrical sample-holders using epoxy resin. Microleakage was evaluated with an automatic permeability detector that calculates nitrogen diffusion between the material-root interphase. After microleakage evaluation, the samples were recovered and analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Microleakage results were analyzed using Chi-square and adaptation was evaluated with a descriptive analysis. Results: None of the evaluated materials completely avoided the nitrogen microleakage (positive leakage of 10% and 20% of samples for MTA and Biodentine™ respectively); with no statistical significant difference between groups (p=0.527). All apical plugs showed good adaptation under SEM, at 30x, 200x, 1000x and 2500x; with microscopical structures similar to previous reports. Conclusions: Both bioceramics behave similar when used as apical barriers to avoid permeability, with acceptable marginal adaptation. Further in vivo studies are needed to validate these results.

Resumen El tratamiento endodóntico de dientes con desarrollo incompleto es siempre una tarea compleja. Hoy en día, biomateriales como las biocerámicas ofrecen una evidencia clínica prometedora que apoya su uso. Sin embargo, la estandarización de su uso para fines de apexificación todavía necesita una comprensión más profunda del comportamiento de los materiales. El objetivo de esta investigación fue evaluar la adaptabilidad marginal y microfiltración por permeabilidad de gas de los tapones apicales de MTA y Biodentine™ en un modelo in vitro. Materiales y métodos: Veiticuatro dientes humanos uniradiculares fueron seleccionados meticulosamente según criterios de inclusión previamente establecidos. Todas las muestras fueron preparadas con canales cilíndricos internos estandarizados de 1,3 mm de diámetro. Los conductos radiculares fueron gentilmente lavados con hipoclorito de sodio al 5,25% y EDTA al 17%. La estructura dental apical de 3 mm y la coronal restante se seccionó para obtener raíces de 10 mm de longitud. Las raíces se asignaron aleatoriamente a 3 grupos diferentes de la siguiente manera: GRUPO A: MTA (n = 10), GRUPO B: Biodentine™ (n = 10) y Grupo C: Control (n = 1 positivo, n = 3 negativos). El MTA y Biodentine™ se prepararon de acuerdo con las indicaciones de los fabricantes, y se colocaron pasivamente los tapones apicales de 4 mm en los dientes correspondientes. Todas las muestras se almacenaron en solución salina durante 7 días a 37ºC antes de la evaluación. Las muestras se montaron en porta-muestras cilíndricos utilizando resina epóxica. La microfiltración se evaluó con un detector de permeabilidad automática que calcula la difusión de nitrógeno entre la interfase material-raíz. Después de la evaluación de microfiltración, las muestras fueron recuperadas y analizadas por microscopía electrónica de barrido (SEM). Los resultados de microfiltración se analizaron utilizando una prueba estadística de Chi-cuadrado y la adaptación se evaluó con un análisis descriptivo. Resultados: Ninguno de los materiales evaluados evitó completamente la microfiltración de nitrógeno (fuga positiva de 10% y 20% de muestras para MTA y Biodentine™, respectivamente); sin diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los grupos (p = 0,527). Todos los tapones apicales mostraron una buena adaptación bajo SEM, a 30x, 200x, 1000x y 2500x; con morfologías similares a las previamente reportadas. Conclusiones: ambas biocerámicas se comportan de forma similar cuando se usan como barreras apicales para evitar la permeabilidad de gas, con adaptación marginal aceptable. Se necesitan más estudios in vivo para validar estos resultados.

Tooth Abnormalities/diagnosis , Tooth Permeability/drug effects , Dental Cements/therapeutic use , Periapical Tissue/pathology , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use
Yonsei Medical Journal ; : 202-210, 2018.
Article in English | WPRIM | ID: wpr-713102


PURPOSE: Previous retrospective studies suggest that anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) mutation-positive (ALK+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients are sensitive to pemetrexed. To determine its efficacy, we retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes of pemetrexed-based chemotherapy in patients with ALK+ NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 126 patients with advanced, ALK+ NSCLC who received first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy. We compared response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) rates according to chemotherapy regimens. Furthermore, we evaluated intracranial time to tumor progression (TTP) and proportion of ALK+ cells as prognostic factors. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients received pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, while 78 received other regimens as first-line treatment. The pemetrexed-based chemotherapy group showed superior overall response (44.7% vs. 14.3%, p < 0.001) and disease control (85.1% vs. 62.3%, p=0.008) rates. The pemetrexed-based chemotherapy group also exhibited longer PFS (6.6 months vs. 3.8 months, p < 0.001); OS rates were not significantly different. The lack of exposure to second-generation ALK inhibitors and intracranial metastasis on initial diagnosis were independent negative prognostic factors of OS. Intracranial TTP was similar between the treatment groups (32.7 months vs. 35.7 months, p=0.733). Patients who harbored a greater number of ALK+ tumor cells (≥70%) showed prolonged OS on univariate analysis (not reached vs. 44.8 months, p=0.041), but not on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio: 0.19, 95% confidence interval: 0.03–1.42; p=0.106). CONCLUSION: Pemetrexed-based regimens may prolong PFS in patients with ALK+ NSCLC as a first-line treatment, but are not associated with prolonged OS. Exposure to second-generation ALK inhibitors may improve OS rates in patients with ALK+ NSCLC.

Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Disease-Free Survival , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Mutation , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use , Receptor Protein-Tyrosine Kinases/genetics , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , Treatment Outcome
Rev. ciênc. méd., (Campinas) ; 26(1): 37-40, 9 nov. 2017. ilus
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-875994


The aim of the present report is to alert health care workers about a 64­year­old patient diagnosed with adenocarcinoma in the right lung treated with pemetrexed disodium, cisplatin and dexamethasone. He evolved with prolonged neutropenia, symptoms of lower airways infection, and recent pulmonary infiltrate in the radiographic image. The cultures for bacteria and mycobacteria in the blood and sputum were negative. Because of the lack of response to treatment with broad spectrum antibiotics and maintenance of neutropenia, a transbronchial biopsy was performed, which demonstrated infection by Aspergillus fumigatus. The patient was treated.

O objetivo do presente relato é alertar os profissionais de saúde sobre o caso de um paciente de 64 anos de idade com diagnóstico de adenocarcinoma no pulmão direito tratado com pemetrexede dissódico, cisplatina e dexametasona. Ele evoluiu com neutropenia prolongada, sintomas de infecção de vias aéreas inferiores e infiltrado pulmonar recente na imagem radiográfica. As culturas para bactérias e micobactérias no sangue e escarro foram negativas. Por falha na resposta ao tratamento com antibióticos de largo espectro e manutenção da neutropenia, foi realizada biópsia transbrônquica que demonstrou infecção por Aspergillus fumigatus e o paciente foi tratado.

Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Aspergillus , Immunosuppression Therapy , Pulmonary Aspergillosis , Neutropenia , Pneumonia , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Adenocarcinoma , Cisplatin/therapeutic use , Pemetrexed/therapeutic use , Lung Neoplasms