Banks and development: Jewish communities in the Italian Renaissance and current economic performance

Are differences in local banking development long-lasting? Do they affect long-term economic performance?I answer these questions by relying on an historical development that occurred in Italian cities during the 15thcentury. A sudden change in the Catholic doctrine had driven the Jews toward money lending. Cities thatwere hosting Jewish communities developed complex banking institutions for two reasons: first, the Jews werethe only people in Italy who were allowed to lend for a profit and, second, the Franciscan reaction to Jewishusury led to the creation of charity lending institutions, the Monti di Pietà, that have survived until today andhave become the basis of the Italian banking system. Using Jewish demography in 1500 as an instrument, Iprovide evidence of (1) an extraordinary persistence in the level of banking development across Italian cities (2)large effects of current local banking development on per-capita income. Additional firm-level analyses suggestthat well-functioning local banks exert large effects on aggregate productivity by reallocating resources towardmore efficient firms. I exploit the expulsion of the Jews from the Spanish territories in Italy in 1541 to arguethat my results are not driven by omitted institutional, cultural and geographical characteristics. In particular,I show that, in Central Italy, the difference in current income between cities that hosted Jewish communitiesand cities that did not exists only in those regions that were not Spanish territories in the 16th century.

An European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase I study of lapatinib and docetaxel as neoadjuvant treatment for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) positive locally-advanced/inflammatory or large operable breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lapatinib is an effective anti-HER2 therapy in advanced breast cancer and docetaxel is one of the most active agents in breast cancer. Combining these agents in pre-treated patients with metastatic disease had previously proved challenging, so the primary objective of this study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in treatment-naive patients, by identifying acute dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) during cycle 1 in the first part of a phases 1-2 neoadjuvant European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with large operable or locally-advanced HER2 positive breast cancer were treated with continuous lapatinib, and docetaxel every 21days for 4 cycles. Dose levels (DLs) were: 1000/75, 1250/75, 1000/85, 1250/85, 1000/100 and 1250/100 (mg/day)/(mg/m(2)). RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included. Two DLTs occurred at dose level 5 (1000/100); one grade 4 neutropenia ⩾7days and one febrile neutropenia. A further 3 patients were therefore treated at the same dose with prophylactic granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), and 3 patients at dose level 6. No further DLTs were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our recommended dose for phase II is lapatinib 1000mg/day and docetaxel 100mg/m(2) with G-CSF in HER2 positive non-metastatic breast cancer. The dose of lapatinib should have been 1250mg/day but we were mindful of the high rate of treatment discontinuation in GeparQuinto with lapatinib 1250mg/day combined with docetaxel. No grade 3-4 diarrhoea was observed. Pharmacodynamics analysis suggests that concomitant medications altering P-glycoprotein activity (in addition to lapatinib) can modify toxicity, including non-haematological toxicities. This needs verification in larger trials, where it may contribute to understanding the sources of variability in clinical toxicity and treatment discontinuation.