Evaluation of organ-specific peripheral doses after 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer based on Monte Carlo and convolution/superposition algorithms: implications for secondary cancer risk assessment.

To make a comprehensive evaluation of organ-specific out-of-field doses using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations for different breast cancer irradiation techniques and to compare results with a commercial treatment planning system (TPS). Three breast radiotherapy techniques using 6MV tangential photon beams were compared: (a) 2DRT (open rectangular fields), (b) 3DCRT (conformal wedged fields), and (c) hybrid IMRT (open conformal+modulated fields). Over 35 organs were contoured in a whole-body CT scan and organ-specific dose distributions were determined with MC and the TPS. Large differences in out-of-field doses were observed between MC and TPS calculations, even for organs close to the target volume such as the heart, the lungs and the contralateral breast (up to 70% difference). MC simulations showed that a large fraction of the out-of-field dose comes from the out-of-field head scatter fluence (>40%) which is not adequately modeled by the TPS. Based on MC simulations, the 3DCRT technique using external wedges yielded significantly higher doses (up to a factor 4-5 in the pelvis) than the 2DRT and the hybrid IMRT techniques which yielded similar out-of-field doses. In sharp contrast to popular belief, the IMRT technique investigated here does not increase the out-of-field dose compared to conventional techniques and may offer the most optimal plan. The 3DCRT technique with external wedges yields the largest out-of-field doses. For accurate out-of-field dose assessment, a commercial TPS should not be used, even for organs near the target volume (contralateral breast, lungs, heart).

Cilengitide: an integrin-targeting arginine-glycine-aspartic acid peptide with promising activity for glioblastoma multiforme.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a highly invasive and vascular cancer, responds poorly to conventional cytotoxic therapy. Integrins, widely expressed in GBM and tumor vasculature, mediate cell survival, migration and angiogenesis. Cilengitide is a potent alphavbeta3 and alphavbeta5 integrin inhibitor. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the preclinical and clinical experience with cilengitide for GBM. METHODS: Preclinical studies and clinical trials evaluating cilengitide for GBM were reviewed. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Cilengitide is active and synergizes with external beam radiotherapy in preclinical GBM models. In clinical trials for recurrent GBM, single-agent cilengitide has antitumor benefits and minimal toxicity. Among newly diagnosed GBM patients, single-arm studies incorporating cilengitide into standard external beam radiotherapy/temozolomide have shown encouraging activity with no increased toxicity and have led to a planned randomized Phase III trial.

Notch tumor suppressor function

Cancer development results from deregulated control of stem cell populations and alterations in their surrounding environment. Notch signaling is an important form of direct cell-cell communication involved in cell fate determination, stem cell potential and lineage commitment. The biological function of this pathway is critically context dependent. Here we review the pro-differentiation role and tumor suppressing function of this pathway, as revealed by loss-of-function in keratinocytes and skin, downstream of p53 and in cross-connection with other determinants of stem cell potential and/or tumor formation, such as p63 and Rho/CDC42 effectors. The possibility that Notch signaling elicits a duality of signals, involved in growth/differentiation control and cell survival will be discussed, in the context of novel approaches for cancer therapy

Family history of cancer: pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium.

Alcohol and tobacco consumption are well-recognized risk factors for head and neck cancer (HNC). Evidence suggests that genetic predisposition may also play a role. Only a few epidemiologic studies, however, have considered the relation between HNC risk and family history of HNC and other cancers. We pooled individual-level data across 12 case-control studies including 8,967 HNC cases and 13,627 controls. We obtained pooled odds ratios (OR) using fixed and random effect models and adjusting for potential confounding factors. All statistical tests were two-sided. A family history of HNC in first-degree relatives increased the risk of HNC (OR=1.7, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.2-2.3). The risk was higher when the affected relative was a sibling (OR=2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.1) rather than a parent (OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1-1.8) and for more distal HNC anatomic sites (hypopharynx and larynx). The risk was also higher, or limited to, in subjects exposed to tobacco. The OR rose to 7.2 (95% CI 5.5-9.5) among subjects with family history, who were alcohol and tobacco users. A weak but significant association (OR=1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2) emerged for family history of other tobacco-related neoplasms, particularly with laryngeal cancer (OR=1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5). No association was observed for family history of nontobacco-related neoplasms and the risk of HNC (OR=1.0, 95% CI 0.9-1.1). Familial factors play a role in the etiology of HNC. In both subjects with and without family history of HNC, avoidance of tobacco and alcohol exposure may be the best way to avoid HNC.