Background: The pretreatment De Ritis ratio [aspartate transaminase (AST)/alanine transaminase (ALT)] has been shown to be an adverse prognostic marker in various cancer entities. However, its relevance to advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has not yet been studied. In the present study we investigated the AST/ALT ratio as a possible predictor of treatment response and disease outcome in patients with advanced PDAC treated with first-line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Methods: A post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, noninterventional study was performed. A total of 202 patients with advanced PDAC treated with first-line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel for whom the AST/ALT ratio was measured were included in this analysis. Results: Median and 1-year progression-free survival estimates were 4.8 months and 5.1%, respectively in patients with an AST/ALT ratio above the 75th percentile of its distribution, and 6.0 months and 18.7%, respectively in patients with an AST/ALT ratio less than or equal to this cutoff, respectively (log-rank p = 0.004). In univariable Cox regression, a doubling of the AST/ALT ratio was associated with a 1.4-fold higher relative risk of progression or death [hazard ratio = 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06–1.80, p = 0.017]. The prognostic association was also found in multivariable analysis adjusting for Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and lung metastases (hazard ratio per AST/ALT ratio doubling = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.00–1.75, p = 0.047). In treatment response analysis, a doubling of the AST/ALT ratio was associated with a 0.5-fold lower odds of objective response (odds ratio = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.31–0.94, p = 0.020). Conclusions: The pretreatment serum AST/ALT ratio predicts poor disease outcome and response rate in patients with advanced PDAC treated with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel and might represent a novel and inexpensive marker for individual risk assessment in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.
Intraperitoneal administration of antibiotics is recommended for the treatment of peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis. However, little data are available on a possible interference between peritoneal dialysis fluids and the activity of antimicrobial agents. Thus, the present in vitro study set out to investigate the influence of different peritoneal dialysis fluids on the antimicrobial activity of ampicillin, linezolid, and daptomycin against Enterococcus faecalis. Time-kill curves in four different peritoneal dialysis fluids were performed over 24 h with four different concentrations (1 × MIC, 4 × MIC, 8 × MIC, 30 × MIC) of each antibiotic evaluated. Cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth was used as the comparator solution. All four peritoneal dialysis fluids evaluated had a bacteriostatic effect on the growth of Enterococcus faecalis. Compared to the cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth comparator solution, the antimicrobial activity of all antibiotics tested was reduced. For ampicillin and linezolid, no activity was found in any peritoneal dialysis fluid, regardless of the concentration. Daptomycin demonstrated dose-dependent activity in all peritoneal dialysis fluids. Bactericidal activity was observed at the highest concentrations evaluated in Dianeal® PDG4 and Extraneal®, but not in concentrations lower than 30 × MIC and not in Nutrineal® PD4 and Physioneal® 40. The antimicrobial activity of ampicillin and linezolid is limited in peritoneal dialysis fluids in vitro. Daptomycin is highly effective in peritoneal dialysis fluids and might, thus, serve as an important treatment option in peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical impact of the present findings.
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.