Effects of Combined Bevacizumab and Paclitaxel on Tumor Interstitial Fluid Pressure in a Preclinical Breast Cancer Model

Effects of Combined Bevacizumab and Paclitaxel on Tumor Interstitial Fluid Pressure in a Preclinical Breast Cancer Model by Ricardo H. Alvarez Several mechanisms of cell resistance are often accountable for unsuccessful chemotherapy against cancer. Another reason, which has received increased attention, is the inefficient transport of anticancer drugs into tumor tissue. These impaired transports of chemotherapy into the tumor have been attributed to abnormal microvasculature and to pathologically increased tumor hypertension also called: interstitial fluid pressure (IFP). The pathophysiological processes leading to elevated tumor IFP are poorly understood. Here, in a preclinical breast cancer model, it is argued that a condition of raised IFP is a major factor in preventing optimal access of systemically administered chemotherapy agents. In our experimental model, we used a GILM2 human breast cancer in xenografts; mice were treated with different doses of paclitaxel –a widely used antimicrotubular agent, and bevacizumab –monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The proposed research project is designed to test the hypothesis that paclitaxel in combination with bevacizumab decreases the tumor IPF by restoring tumor permeability and increasing chemotherapy delivery. We demonstrated that the combination of paclitaxel and bevacizumab produced greater tumor control than either agent given alone and this combination reduced the IFP, producing an increment of 75% of apoptosis compared with the control arm. In addition, the intra-tumor paclitaxel quantification by liquid chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS) demonstrated that lower dose of both agents showed a synergistic effect compared with high dose of treatment, where there is no significantly increase of paclitaxel into the tumor. These preclinical results are likely to have broad implications for the utility of anti-angiogenic therapies alone and in combination with chemotherapeutic agents.

Family Preservation Research: Where We've Been, Where We Should Be Going

Although the literature has provided many critiques of research done on family preservation programs, these critiques have usually been limited to the studies ' assumptions, approach, or methodology. Because of the nature of these critiques, suggestions for future research in this field of practice have been scattered throughout the literature and have not benefitted from a wider historical perspective. This paper examines the historical evolution of family preservation studies in child welfare and suggests future directions for research in the field. Among the suggestions the authors posit are (1) research questions should be framed by what we know about improvements in the lives of families and children served by family preservation programs; (2) future explorations should include areas that have received relatively little attention in current research, including the impact of organizational conditions on service fidelity and worker performance; (3) newer treatment models, particularly those that provide both intensive services during a crisis period and less intensive services for maintenance, should be tested; (4) data collection points in longitudinal studies should be guided by theory, and measures should change over time to reflect the theoretically expected changes in families; (5) complex measures of placement prevention and other measures that capture changes in family functioning, child well-being, and child safety, should be utilized to obtain a full picture of program effects; and (6) multiple informants should be used to provide data about program effectiveness. In addition, the authors will argue that the field should carefully consider the amount of change that should be expected from the service models delivered.