Background. Percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) has been used in the Far East for treating small, unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). To clarify when treatment with PEI may be best indicated for Western patients with HCC, the authors performed a retrospective analysis of the clinicopathologic factors influencing prognosis. Methods. From December 1987 to August 1994, 105 patients with cirrhosis with HCC received PEI as the sole anticancer treatment. Eighty‐two patients had uninodular tumors smaller than 5 cm, and 23 patients had multiple lesions (2–4) smaller than or equal to 3 cm each. All patients were in Child‐Pugh class A (n = 64) or B (n = 41). Survival was analyzed according to patient‐ and tumor‐related factors by means of the Kaplan‐Meier method. Results. The estimated survival rates of all 105 patients were 96% at 1 year, 86% at 2 years, 68% at 3 years, 51% at 4 years, 32% at 5 years, and 24% at 6 years. Survival was not affected by sex, age, etiology of cirrhosis, or hepatitis B surface antigen or anti‐hepatitis C virus positivity, but depended on Child‐Pugh class (P = 0.006) and presence of ascites (P = 0.009). Patients with a pretreatment alpha‐fetoprotein level of 200 ng/ml or less had a better prognosis than patients with an alpha‐fetoprotein level higher than 200 ng/ml (P = 0.007). Patients with uninodular HCC of 3 cm or less had significantly better long term survival (P = 0.04) than patients with uninodular HCC of 3.1‐5 cm or with multinodular tumors. Tumor grade according to Edmondson and Steiner1 and tumor volume, in contrast, did not significantly influence prognosis (P > 0.1). Conclusions. For Western patients with HCC treated with PEI, the prognosis was highly dependent on the severity of the underlying cirrhosis. Treatment with PEI is best indicated for patients with uninodular tumors of 3 cm or less in greatest dimension and an alpha‐fetoprotein level lower than 200 ng/ml. Cancer 1995; 76:1737–46.

Breast cancer represents a major health problem, with more than 1,000,000 new cases and 370,000 deaths yearly worldwide. In the last decade, in spite of an increasing incidence, breast cancer mortality has been declining in the majority of developed countries. This is the combined result of better education, widespread screening programmes and more efficacious adjuvant treatments. Better knowledge of breast cancer biology now allows the cosmetic, physical and psychological consequences of radical mastectomy to be spared in the majority of breast cancer patients. Use of the sentinel node technique is rapidly expanding and this will further reduce the extent and the consequences of surgery. Several clinico-pathological factors are used to discriminate between patients at low (<10%), average (10-40%) and high risk of relapse. Nodal status, tumour size, tumour grade and age are accepted universally as important factors to define risk categories. Newer factors such as uPA/PAI-1, HERer2-neu, proliferative indices and gene expression profile are promising and will allow better discrimination between patients at different risk. Endocrine manipulation with tamoxifen, ovarian ablation or both is the preferred option in the case of endocrine-responsive tumours. Tamoxifen administered for 5 years is the standard treatment for postmenopausal patients; tamoxifen plus ovarian ablation is more effective than tamoxifen alone for premenopausal women. Recent data demonstrate that, for postmenopausal patients, the aromatase inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen, with a different safety profile. At present, anastrozole can be used in the adjuvant setting in cases of tamoxifen intolerance or toxicity. Chemotherapy is the treatment of choice for steroid receptor-negative tumours. Polychemotherapy is superior to single agents and anthracycline-containing regimens are superior to CMF. Six courses of FEC or FAC or the sequential administration of four doses of anthracycline followed by four of CMF are the recommended regimens. New regimens including the taxanes have produced a further improvement in risk reduction and are reasonable therapeutic options. The taxanes have been approved for adjuvant therapy in the USA, while European approval is pending. Combined endocrine-chemotherapy is the standard adjuvant treatment in high-risk patients with endocrine-responsive tumours. Endocrine manipulation is usually administered after completion of the chemotherapy programme. For HER2-neu overexpressing tumours, several rapidly accruing trials are exploring the potential additive effect of trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against the extramembrane portion of the HER2 receptor. Primary chemotherapy is increasingly used in the treatment of locally advanced and operable breast cancer, with increased rates of breast-conserving surgery. A proportion of patients achieve a pathological complete response and these patients have significantly better long-term outcomes. Twenty-five to forty percent of breast cancer patients develop distant metastas...

No abstract

BackgroundMetastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) has a poor prognosis and aggressive clinical course. tnAcity evaluated the efficacy and safety of first-line nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin (nab-P/C), nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G), and gemcitabine plus carboplatin (G/C) in patients with mTNBC.Patients and methodsPatients with pathologically confirmed mTNBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic BC received (1 : 1 : 1) nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus C AUC 2, nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus G 1000 mg/m2, or G 1000 mg/m2 plus C AUC 2, all on days 1, 8 q3w. Phase II primary end point: investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), percentage of patients initiating cycle 6 with doublet therapy, and safety.ResultsIn total, 191 patients were enrolled (nab-P/C, n = 64; nab-P/G, n = 61; G/C, n = 66). PFS was significantly longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G [median, 8.3 versus 5.5 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.59 [95% CI, 0.38–0.92]; P = 0.02] or G/C (median, 8.3 versus 6.0 months; HR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.37–0.90]; P = 0.02). OS was numerically longer with nab-P/C versus nab-P/G (median, 16.8 versus 12.1 months; HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.47–1.13]; P = 0.16) or G/C (median, 16.8 versus 12.6 months; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.52–1.22]; P = 0.29). ORR was 73%, 39%, and 44%, respectively. In the nab-P/C, nab-P/G, and G/C groups, 64%, 56%, and 50% of patients initiated cycle 6 with a doublet. Grade ≥3 adverse events were mainly hematologic.ConclusionsFirst-line nab-P/C was active in mTNBC and resulted in a significantly longer PFS and improved risk/benefit profile versus nab-P/G or G/C.