Treatment rationale and study design for a phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of maintenance pemetrexed plus best supportive care versus best supportive care immediately following induction treatment with pemetrexed plus cisplatin for advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: To improve the efficacy of first-line therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), additional maintenance chemotherapy may be given after initial induction chemotherapy in patients who did not progress during the initial treatment, rather than waiting for disease progression to administer second-line treatment. Maintenance therapy may consist of an agent that either was or was not present in the induction regimen. The antifolate pemetrexed is efficacious in combination with cisplatin for first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC and has shown efficacy as a maintenance agent in studies in which it was not included in the induction regimen. We designed a phase III study to determine if pemetrexed maintenance therapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after cisplatin/pemetrexed induction therapy in patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC. Furthermore, since evidence suggests expression levels of thymidylate synthase, the primary target of pemetrexed, may be associated with responsiveness to pemetrexed, translational research will address whether thymidylate synthase expression correlates with efficacy outcomes of pemetrexed. METHODS/DESIGN: Approximately 900 patients will receive four cycles of induction chemotherapy consisting of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and cisplatin (75 mg/m2) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who have not progressed during induction therapy will randomly receive (in a 2:1 ratio) one of two double-blind maintenance regimens: pemetrexed (500 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. The primary objective is to compare PFS between treatment arms. Secondary objectives include a fully powered analysis of OS, objective tumor response rate, patient-reported outcomes, resource utilization, and toxicity. Tumor specimens for translational research will be obtained from consenting patients before induction treatment, with a second biopsy performed in eligible patients following the induction phase. DISCUSSION: Although using a drug as maintenance therapy that was not used in the induction regimen exposes patients to an agent with a different mechanism of action, evidence suggests that continued use of an agent present in the induction regimen as maintenance therapy enables the identification of patients most likely to benefit from maintenance treatment.

Primary renal lymphoma: report of three new cases and literature review.

OBJECTIVES We report the cases of three patients with primary renal lymphoma. Diagnosis and subsequent treatment are discussed. METHODS The literature on the origin, epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of primary renal lymphoma was reviewed. RESULTS The first patient was diagnosed after radical nephrectomy and subsequently was given six cycles of CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone). The diagnosis of the second patient was established by renal biopsy, and the patient received six cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine and predisone). The last patient had a lymphoma, secondary to immunosuppression, in a transplanted kidney. In this case transplant nephrectomy sufficed to cure the patient's lymphoma. All patients had B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (an extrarenal origin was ruled out by bone marrow biopsy), and were disease-free 15 months, 7 months, and 6.5 years after diagnosis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Primary renal lymphoma is rare. Diagnosis is established by renal biopsy, although it often presents as a mass simulating renal cell cancer and diagnosis is obtained after radical nephrectomy. Treatment consists of chemotherapy (CHOP). associated with rituximab.

Workshop on new strategies and tools for the eHealth library

The Andalusian eHealth Library (Biblioteca Virtual del Sistema Sanitario Publico de Andalucia, BV-SSPA), was created in June 2006. The 42 librarians who already worked for the Health System were integrated within this new system. The annual library meeting has been held every year since then, and in 2013 the EAHIL workshop held in Stockholm was the model to follow.