Commentary: the role of the toxicologic pathologist in academia.

Veterinary pathologists working as toxicologic pathologists in academic settings fill many vital roles, such as diagnosticians, educators, and/or researchers. These individuals have spent years investigating pathology problems that mainly or exclusively focus on the reactions of cells, organs, or systems to toxic materials. Thus, academic toxicologic pathologists are uniquely suited both to help trainees understand toxicity as a cause of pathology responses and also to provide expert consultation on toxicologic pathology. Most toxicologic pathologists in academia are employed at colleges of medicine or veterinary medicine, even though specific toxicologic pathology faculty appointments are uncommon in Europe and North America. Academic toxicologic pathologists typically receive lower financial compensation than do toxicologic pathologists in industry, but academic positions generally provide alternative rewards, such as higher workplace autonomy and scheduling flexibility, professional enrichment through student interactions, and enhanced opportunities for collaborative research and advanced diagnostic investigations. Regular participation by academic toxicologic pathologists in professional training opportunities (eg, as pathology and toxicology instructors in medical and veterinary medical courses, graduate programs, and residencies) offers an important means of engendering interest and inspiring veterinarians to select toxicologic pathology and toxicology as their own areas of future expertise.

A meta-analysis of two randomised trials of early chemotherapy in asymptomatic metastatic colorectal cancer.

This report constitutes a prospectively planned meta-analysis combining two almost identical trials undertaken in Australasia and Canada to study the effect of starting chemotherapy immediately in asymptomatic patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients (n=168) were randomised to receive either immediate or delayed treatment (at onset of predefined symptoms). Australasian patients received either weekly 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (500 and 20 mg m(-2), respectively) (n=59) or the daily x 5 Mayo Clinic schedule (425 and 20 mg m(-2), respectively) (n=42). Canadian patients were treated with the Mayo schedule (n=67). Otherwise, the two studies were almost identical in design and each used the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 instrument for measuring quality of life (QoL). Treatment was continued until 6 months had elapsed or disease progression occurred. Low accrual led to trial suspension before the predetermined sample size for either study was reached. Median survival was not significantly better with immediate treatment (median 13.0 vs 11.0 months; hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.72; P=0.49). There was no statistically significant difference in progression-free survival (time from randomisation until first evidence of progression after chemotherapy, 10.2 vs 10.8 months; hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% CI 0.71-1.64; P=0.73). There was no difference in overall QoL or its individual domains between the two treatment strategies at baseline or at any subsequent time point. Early treatment of asymptomatic patients with metastatic colorectal cancer did not provide a survival benefit or improved QoL compared to withholding treatment until symptoms occurred.

Escalated as compared with standard doses of doxorubicin in BACOP therapy for patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: In 1981 the Clinical Trials Group of the National Cancer Institute of Canada completed a pilot study in patients with advanced-stage non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with aggressive tumor histology. That study demonstrated the potential efficacy of escalating the dose of doxorubicin used in a regimen of bleomycin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (BACOP). In the present study, we compared standard BACOP (s-BACOP) with BACOP that included escalated doses of doxorubicin (esc-BACOP) in 238 patients 16 to 70 years old with previously untreated, advanced-stage intermediate- or high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. During the first 28-day cycle all patients received doxorubicin in a dose of 25 mg per square meter of body-surface area on days 1 and 8. Patients randomly assigned to receive s-BACOP subsequently received five identical cycles, whereas those assigned to receive esc-BACOP received 40 mg of doxorubicin per square meter on days 1 and 8 of five subsequent cycles if granulocytopenia (< 1000 cells per cubic millimeter) had not developed during the first cycle. RESULTS: The 119 patients assigned to the esc-BACOP regimen received doxorubicin at a significantly higher mean weekly dose intensity (13.5 vs. 10.4 mg per square meter per week, P < 0.001) and mean total dose (296 vs. 231 mg per square meter, P < 0.001). Because of granulocytopenia during the first cycle of therapy, only 56 of these patients (47 percent) received the escalated doses of doxorubicin. During a median follow-up of 65 months, there were no differences between the s-BACOP and esc-BACOP groups in response rate, overall survival, or survival without disease progression. When the patients who actually received the escalated doses of doxorubicin were compared with the patients in the s-BACOP group in whom neutropenia did not develop during the first treatment cycle, no difference between their outcomes was observed. Toxicity was greater in the esc-BACOP group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced-stage intermediate- or high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, escalating the dose of doxorubicin in the BACOP regimen increases toxicity but does not improve the rate of response or survival.