Single-agent versus combination chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and a performance status of 2 : prognostic factors and treatment selection based on two large randomized clinical trials

Purpose: Data from two randomized phase III trials were analyzed to evaluate prognostic factors and treatment selection in the first-line management of advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with performance status (PS) 2. Patients and Methods: Patients randomized to combination chemotherapy (carboplatin and paclitaxel) in one trial and single-agent therapy (gemcitabine or vinorelbine) in the second were included in these analyses. Both studies had identical eligibility criteria and were conducted simultaneously. Comparison of efficacy and safety was performed between the two cohorts. A regression analysis identified prognostic factors and subgroups of patients that may benefit from combination or single-agent therapy. Results: Two hundred one patients were treated with combination and 190 with single-agent therapy. Objective responses were 37 and 15%, respectively. Median time to progression was 4.6 months in the combination arm and 3.5 months in the single-agent arm (p < 0.001). Median survival imes were 8.0 and 6.6 months, and 1-year survival rates were 31 and 26%, respectively. Albumin <3.5 g, extrathoracic metastases, lactate dehydrogenase ≥200 IU, and 2 comorbid conditions predicted outcome. Patients with 0-2 risk factors had similar outcomes independent of treatment, whereas patients with 3-4 factors had a nonsignificant improvement in median survival with combination chemotherapy. Conclusion: Our results show that PS2 non-small cell lung cancer patients are a heterogeneous group who have significantly different outcomes. Patients treated with first-line combination chemotherapy had a higher response and longer time to progression, whereas overall survival did not appear significantly different. A prognostic model may be helpful in selecting PS 2 patients for either treatment strategy. © 2009 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

New strategy toward dioxin risk reduction for local residents surrounding severe dioxin hotspots in Vietnam

Background A public health intervention program with active involvement of local related stakeholders was piloted in the Bien Hoa dioxin hot spot (2007-2009), and then expanded to the Da Nang dioxin hot spot in Vietnam (2009-2011). It aimed to reduce the risk of dioxin exposure through foods for local residents. This article presents the results of the intervention in Da Nang. Methodology To assess the results of this intervention program, pre-intervention and post-intervention knowledge-attitude-practice (KAP) surveys were implemented in 400 households, randomly selected from four wards surrounding Da Nang Airbase in 2009 and 2011, respectively. Results After the intervention, the knowledge on the existence of dioxin in food, dioxin exposure pathways, potential high risk foods and preventive measures significantly increased (p < 0.05). 98% were willing to follow advice on preventing dioxin exposure. Practices to reduce the risk of dioxin exposure also statistical significantly improved (p<0.05). After intervention, 60.4% of households undertook exposure preventive measures, significantly higher than that of the pre-intervention survey (39.6%; χ2 =40.15 , P<0.001). High risk foods had quite low rates of daily consumption (from 0% to 2.5%) and were significantly reduced (p<0.05). Conclusions This is seen as an effective intervention strategy toward reducing the risk of human exposure to dioxin at dioxin hot spots. While greater efforts are needed for remediating dioxin polluted areas inside airbases, there is also evidence to suggest that, during the past four decades, pollution has been expanding to the surrounding areas. For this reason, this model should be quickly expanded to the remaining dioxin hot spots in Vietnam to further reduce the exposure risk in these areas.

Monitoring policy and actions on food environments : rationale and outline of the INFORMAS policy engagement and communication strategies

The International Network for Food and Obesity/non-communicable diseases Research, Monitoring and Action Support (INFORMAS) proposes to collect performance indicators on food policies, actions and environments related to obesity and non-communicable diseases. This paper reviews existing communications strategies used for performance indicators and proposes the approach to be taken for INFORMAS. Twenty-seven scoring and rating tools were identified in various fields of public health including alcohol, tobacco, physical activity, infant feeding and food environments. These were compared based on the types of indicators used and how they were quantified, scoring methods, presentation and the communication and reporting strategies used. There are several implications of these analyses for INFORMAS: the ratings/benchmarking approach is very commonly used, presumably because it is an effective way to communicate progress and stimulate action, although this has not been formally evaluated; the tools used must be trustworthy, pragmatic and policy-relevant; multiple channels of communication will be needed; communications need to be tailored and targeted to decision-makers; data and methods should be freely accessible. The proposed communications strategy for INFORMAS has been built around these lessons to ensure that INFORMAS's outputs have the greatest chance of being used to improve food environments.