BACKGROUND: Enhancer of zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) is a member of the Polycomb group of genes that is involved in epigenetic silencing and cell cycle regulation. METHODS: We studied EZH2 expression in 409 patients with colorectal cancer stages II and III. The patients were included in a randomised study, and treated with surgery alone or surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: EZH2 expression was significantly related to increased tumour cell proliferation, as assessed by Ki-67 expression. In colon cancer, strong EZH2 expression (P ¼ 0.041) and high proliferation (X40%; P ¼ 0.001) were both associated with better relapse-free survival (RFS). In contrast, no such associations were found among rectal cancers. High Ki-67 staining was associated with improved RFS in colon cancer patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (P ¼ 0.001), but not among those who were treated by surgery alone (P ¼ 0.087). In colon cancers stage III, a significant association between RFS and randomisation group was found in patients with high proliferation (P ¼ 0.046), but not in patients with low proliferation (P ¼ 0.26). Multivariate analyses of colon cancers showed that stage III (hazard ratio (HR) 4.00) and high histological grade (HR 1.80) were independent predictors of reduced RFS, whereas high proliferation indicated improved RFS (HR 0.55). CONCLUSION: Strong EZH2 expression and high proliferation are associated features and both indicate improved RFS in colon cancer, but not so in rectal cancer.
Background and objectivesThe 52‐week, randomized, double‐blind, noninferiority, government‐funded NOR‐SWITCH trial demonstrated that switching from infliximab originator to less expensive biosimilar CT‐P13 was not inferior to continued treatment with infliximab originator. The NOR‐SWITCH extension trial aimed to assess efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients on CT‐P13 throughout the 78‐week study period (maintenance group) versus patients switched to CT‐P13 at week 52 (switch group). The primary outcome was disease worsening during follow‐up based on disease‐specific composite measures.MethodsPatients were recruited from 24 Norwegian hospitals, 380 of 438 patients who completed the main study: 197 in the maintenance group and 183 in the switch group. In the full analysis set, 127 (33%) had Crohn's disease, 80 (21%) ulcerative colitis, 67 (18%) spondyloarthritis, 55 (15%) rheumatoid arthritis, 20 (5%) psoriatic arthritis and 31 (8%) chronic plaque psoriasis.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar in the two groups at the time of switching (week 52). Disease worsening occurred in 32 (16.8%) patients in the maintenance group vs. 20 (11.6%) in the switch group (per‐protocol set). Adjusted risk difference was 5.9% (95% CI −1.1 to 12.9). Frequency of adverse events, anti‐drug antibodies, changes in generic disease variables and disease‐specific composite measures were comparable between arms. The study was inadequately powered to detect noninferiority within individual diseases.ConclusionThe NOR‐SWITCH extension showed no difference in safety and efficacy between patients who maintained CT‐P13 and patients who switched from originator infliximab to CT‐P13, supporting that switching from originator infliximab to CT‐P13 is safe and efficacious.
365 Background: The role of anti-EGFR therapy in first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is not established. In the present study pts were randomized to FLOX or FLOX + cetuximab until progression or FLOX intermittently + cetuximab continuously. Methods: Treatment arm A: Nordic FLOX (q2w): oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2day 1, 5-FU bolus 500 mg/m2 and FA 60 mg/m2 day 1-2; B: FLOX + cetuximab, initial dose 400 mg/m2, then 250 mg/m2/week; C: FLOX for 16 weeks + cetuximab continuously, with FLOX added at progression. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Between May 05-Oct 07, 571 pts were randomized, 566 pts evaluable in intention to treat (ITT) analyses. Median age was 61 (24-74). ECOG status: 0=67%, 1=29%, 2=4%. KRAS and BRAF mutation (mut) analyses were obtained in 498 (87%) and 457 pts (81%), respectively. 40% of tumors had KRAS mut, 12% had BRAF mut. Cetuximab combined with Nordic FLOX did not significantly improve RR, PFS or OS compared to FLOX. KRAS mutation was not predictive for cetuximab effect. OS was similar for patients treated with FLOX intermittently and cetuximab continuously as for patients treated until progression. BRAF mutation was a strong negative prognostic factor (median OS 7.6 vs. 20.4 mo). Conclusions: Cetuximab did not add significant benefit to the Nordic FLOX regimen in first-line treatment of mCRC, irrespective of KRAS-mut. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]
Optimal clinical management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) requires understanding of the impact on patients. The NORdic PAtient survey of Psoriasis and PsA (NORPAPP) aimed to obtain current data on disease prevalence and patient perceptions in Sweden, Denmark and Norway. Among 22,050 individuals questioned, the reported prevalence of psoriasis and/or PsA was 9.7% (5.7% physician-diagnosed plus 4.0% self-diagnosed only); prevalence was similar in Sweden (9.4%) and Denmark (9.2%) but significantly higher in Norway (11.9%). Of those reporting a physician's diagnosis, 74.6% reported psoriasis alone, 10.3% PsA alone and 15.1% both. Patients with PsA perceived their disease to be more severe than those with psoriasis; patients with PsA and psoriasis reported greater disease severity than those with each condition alone. Patient's perceptions of psoriasis severity correlated weakly (Spearman's rho 0.42) with clinical severity; both patient perceptions and clinical measures are important in the assessment and management of psoriasis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.