| 1. |
- Bergmann, T K, et al.
(author)
-
Impact of CYP2C8*3 on paclitaxel clearance: a population pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenomic study in 93 patients with ovarian cancer
- 2011
-
In: PHARMACOGENOMICS JOURNAL. - : Nature Publishing Group. - 1470-269X .- 1473-1150. ; 11:2, s. 113-120
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of CYP2C8*3 and three genetic ABCB1 variants on the elimination of paclitaxel. We studied 93 Caucasian women with ovarian cancer treated with paclitaxel and carboplatin. Using sparse sampling and nonlinear mixed effects modeling, the individual clearance of unbound paclitaxel was estimated from total plasma paclitaxel and Cremophor EL. The geometric mean of clearance was 385 l h(-1) (range 176-726 l h(-1)). Carriers of CYP2C8*3 had 11% lower clearance than non-carriers, P = 0.03. This has not been shown before in similar studies; the explanation is probably the advantage of using both unbound paclitaxel clearance and a population of patients of same gender. No significant association was found for the ABCB1 variants C1236T, G2677T/A and C3435T. Secondarily, other candidate single-nucleotide polymorphisms were explored with possible associations found for CYP2C8*4 (P = 0.04) and ABCC1 g.7356253C andgt; G (P = 0.04).
|
|
| 2. |
- Hansen, S, et al.
(author)
-
Microvessel density compared with the Chalkley count in a prognostic study of angiogenesis in breast cancer patients
- 2004
-
In: Histopathology. - : Wiley. - 0309-0167 .- 1365-2559. ; 44:5, s. 428-436
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: Evaluation of angiogenesis by intratumoral vessel profiles can be performed by different methods. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of estimates obtained by the intratumoral microvessel density (MVD) method and then to compare with corresponding estimates obtained by the Chalkley method. Methods and Results: A total of 330 patients treated for primary, unilateral, invasive breast carcinoma were included. The median follow-up time was 14 years and 4 months. The microvessels were immunohistochemically stained by antibodies to CD34. MVD was not significantly correlated with any clinicopathological variables. By univariate analysis, MVD showed no prognostic value with regard to recurrence-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS), while the Chalkley count had significant prognostic value (P < 0.0001; RFS and OS). In the Cox multivariate analysis, MVD had no prognostic impact {median HR [confidence interval (CI)] was 0.93 [0.66, 1.32] for RFS; and HR [CI] was 0.86 [0.62, 1.19] for OS}, while the Chalkley count [median HR (CI) was 2.12 (1.48, 3.06) for RFS; and HR (CI) was 1.71 (1.23, 2.37) for OS] provided independent prognostic value when adjusted for age, menopausal status, axillary lymph node status, tumour size, histological grade, adjuvant systemic treatment and radiation therapy. In comparing the results obtained by MVD in our study with those from other published studies we find good agreement. Conclusions: The Chalkley count technique seems to be preferable for estimating angiogenesis with regard to the prognostic stratification of breast cancer patients, based on its strong prognostic impact, and acceptable reproducibility.
|
|
