Sleep traits and breast cancer risk: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study.

Globally, breast cancer continues to be the leading cause of cancer-related incidence and mortality among females. Research has shown that sleep patterns significantly influence tumor onset and progression. In this research, the association was examined through the application of a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach. For the analysis of seven sleep patterns, genetic tools were sourced from both the UK Biobank and 23andMe, including morning/evening person (chronotype) n = 177,604, morning person (chronotype) n = 248,094, daytime dozing/sleepiness n = 193,472, getting up in the morning n = 193,717, and sleeplessness n = 193,987; sleep duration n = 192,810; and nap during the day n = 166,853. The Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) supplied genome-wide association studies (GWAS) data, including 133,384 breast cancer cases and 113,789 controls, alongside subtype-specific data with 106,278 cases and 91,477 controls. We discovered that chronotype encompasses both morning and evening types contributes to the risk of overall breast cancer. While daytime dozing and morning person (chronotype) are linked to a lower risk of breast cancer in general, In subtype-specific analyses, morning person (chronotype) was negatively associated with luminal B, HER2-negative-like, and daytime dozing was negatively correlated with luminal A-like, luminal B-like, and HER2-enriched-like. The study corroborates that chronotype is a danger element for breast cancer, aligning with previous observational findings. The association between being a morning person (chronotype) or having daytime dozing and a decreased risk of breast cancer underscores the significance of sleep patterns in formulating strategies for cancer prevention.

Efficacy and Safety of Dual Anti-HER2 Blockade and Docetaxel With or Without Carboplatin as Neoadjuvant Regimen for Treatment of HER2-Positive Breast Cancer.

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab and docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab for treating HER2-positive breast cancer. Method: HER2-positive breast cancer from patients diagnosed between January 2020 and September 2022 were included in this retrospective study. Docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab or docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab was selected as the neoadjuvant regimen. The primary endpoint was a complete pathological remission rate. Secondary endpoints were toxicity during neoadjuvant treatment, adjustment of the neoadjuvant therapy scheme, and adjuvant medication. Result: A total of 81 patients were included in this study (38 in the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab treatment group and 43 in the docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group). The complete pathological remission rates in the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab and docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab groups were 44.7% (95% confidence interval: 30.2%-60.3%) and 51.2% (95% confidence interval: 36.8%-65.4%), respectively. The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicity in the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group was significantly higher than that in the docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group (68.4% vs 39.5%, P = .009). Neutropenia and asthenia were the most common grade 3 or higher toxicities. The incidence of neoadjuvant scheme adjustment was significantly higher in the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group than in the docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group (26.3% vs 7.0%, P = .039). The proportion of patients who received <6 cycles of neoadjuvant therapy was significantly higher in the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group than in the docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group (31.6% vs 4.7%, P = .004). Patients in the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab group received higher doses of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor. Conclusion: In the neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer, the docetaxel + trastuzumab + pertuzumab regimen might be more tolerated than the docetaxel + carboplatin + trastuzumab + pertuzumab regimen and did not show a lower complete pathological remission rate. However, our findings require further validation through prospective studies.

Prognostic Factors and Models for Elderly (≥70 Years Old) Primary Operable Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Analysis From the National Cancer Database.

Background: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer. In the elderly (≥70 years old) primary operable (T1-3N0-1M0) TNBC, individualized treatment modalities for this population are pivotal and important, but limited studies are explored. Methods: The clinicopathological features of elderly primary operable TNBC patients were retrospectively selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between January 2010 and December 2015. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to show the survival patterns in the different subgroups. Multivariate Cox analysis was used to identify independent risk factors in the 3-, 5-, and 7- year overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in this subpopulation. The predictive model was further developed and validated for clinical use. Result: Between 2010 and 2015 years, a total of 4,761 elderly primary operable TNBC patients were enrolled for the study, with a mean age of 76 years and a median follow-up of 56 months. The multivariate Cox analysis showed that age (increased per year: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05), race (Asian/Pacific Islander and American Indian/Alaska Native, HR = 0.73), differentiation grade (grade II: HR = 2.01; grade III/IV: HR = 2.67), larger tumor size (T1c: HR = 1.83; T2: HR = 2.78; T3: HR = 4.93), positive N stage (N1mi: HR = 1.60; N1: HR = 1.54), receiving radiation therapy (HR = 0.66), and receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (HR = 0.61) were the independent prognostic factors for OS, and a similar prognostic pattern was also determined in CSS. Besides, two nomograms for predicting the 3-, 5-, and 7-year OS and CSS in this population were developed with a favorable concordance index of 0.716 and 0.746, respectively. Conclusion: The results highlight that both radiation and adjuvant chemotherapy are significantly associated with favorable long-term OS and CSS probability in elderly primary operable TNBC patients. Based on the determined independent prognostic factors, the novel nomograms could assist the oncologists to make individualized clinical decisions for the subpopulation at different risks.

Anlotinib Combined with S-1 in Third- or Later-Line Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treatment: A Phase II Clinical Trial.

LESSONS LEARNED: The combination of anlotinib and S-1 exhibited good antitumor activity in third- or later-line treatment for stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Combination therapy of anlotinib with S-1 has manageable toxicities in patients with NSCLC. BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib combined with S-1 as a third- or later-line treatment for patients with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Anlotinib was approved in 2018 by the Chinese Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a third-line treatment for patients with refractory advanced NSCLC and is under study in the U.S. and Europe. METHODS: Simon's phase II clinical trial design with an α error of 5% and a power ß of 80% was used, anticipating a 10% objective response rate (ORR) of anlotinib and a 30% ORR of anlotinib combined with S-1; the required sample size was 29. A total of 29 patients were enrolled in the clinical trial. Patients were treated with anlotinib plus S-1 over a 21-day treatment course until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. If the efficacy was assessed as stable disease, partial response, or complete response after six cycles, anlotinib was maintained until disease progression or death. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate. Somatic mutations were not required for study enrollment. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 11.1 months. Objective responses were observed in 11 of 29 (37.9%) patients making up the intention-to-treat population, which reached the target primary endpoint of 30% ORR. The median overall and progression-free survival were 16.7 and 5.8 months, respectively. The most common grade 3 adverse events (AEs) were gastrointestinal, including nausea, vomiting and diarrhea, fatigue, and hypertension. No grade 4 treatment-related AEs or treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: The combination of anlotinib with S-1 in the third- or later-line treatment of stage IV NSCLC shows promising antitumor activity and manageable toxicity in patients with NSCLC; phase III trials will be planned in the future.

Radical radiotherapy for metachronous oligometastasis after initial treatment of esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of radical radiotherapy and assess prognostic factors in metachronous oligometastatic esophageal cancer (MOEC) patients after initial treatment with curative-intent surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MOEC Patients during 2009-2018 in Mianyang Central Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Each patient had ≤5 oligometastatic lesions, and the primary lesions were controlled in this study. Patients were devided into radiotherapy (RT) and non-radiotherapy (NRT) groups. The study endpoints were overall survival (OS) and treatment toxicities. RESULTS: This study included 82 patients who underwent intensity-modulated radiotherapy for MOEC. Median OS were 14 (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.0-17.0) and 7 (95% CI, 4.5-9.5) months for the RT and NRT groups, respectively (P = 0.016). Median OS were 18 (95% CI, 13.6-22.4) and 10 (95% CI, 5.1-14.9) months for lung and bone metastases, respectively (P = 0.010). Median OS were 15 (95% CI, 12.4-17.6) and 10 (95% CI, 7.6-12.4) months for interval time from initial diagnosis to metastasis ≥12 and <12 months, respectively (P = 0.026). Median OS were 16 (95% CI, 12.2-19.8) and 10 (95% CI, 5.0-15.0) months for biological effective dose (BED10) ≥ 60 Gy and BED10 < 60 Gy, respectively (P = 0.033). Cox multivariate regression analysis showed that treatment modality (RT vs. NRT) was an independent prognostic factor for MOEC patients (hazard ratio: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.1-3.0; P = 0.022). No toxic side effects greater than grade 3 were observed in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy is a feasible and positive treatment for MOEC patients after initial treatment, a radical radiation dose with BED10 ≥ 60 Gy has benefits in extending survival. Radical radiotherapy should thus be considered for MOEC patients.

Single-Agent Versus Double-Agent Chemotherapy in Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Phase II Clinical Trial.

LESSONS LEARNED: The efficacy of single-agent chemotherapy was not significantly different from that of double-agent chemotherapy in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Single-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy had lower gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity. Overall survival and progression-free survival were not significantly different between single- and double-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy. BACKGROUND: This multicenter, randomized, phase II trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of single-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy using the oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 with those of double-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy using S-1 and cisplatin in patients with inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (clinical stages I to III) were randomly allocated to the single-agent group (S-1) or the double-agent group (S-1/cisplatin). The concurrent intensity-modulated radiation therapy plan was similar for both groups: planning target volume 1.8 Gy/f*30-33f and planning gross target volume of 2 Gy/f*30-33f. The primary outcome measure was the endoscopic complete response rate. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients randomized, 89 were assessable. The endoscopic complete response rate was 46.9% (23/49) in the single-agent group and 52.5% (21/40) in double-agent group. The median progression-free survival within a median follow-up of 23 months was 20 and 21 months, respectively. The median overall survival was 26 months and not reached, respectively. Grade 3 hematological toxicities occurred in 4.1% and 27.5% of the patients in the single- and the double-agent group, respectively. CONCLUSION: Single-agent chemotherapy in concurrent chemoradiotherapy for inoperable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma has good efficacy and safety, thus warranting a phase III trial.

Anlotinib Combined with S-1 in the Third-Line Treatment of Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Study Protocol for Phase II Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: A proportion of patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is predicted to receive third-line treatment. However, currently no standard third-line treatment for NSCLC is available. Anlotinib is an oral, multi-targeted tyrosine kinase (TK) receptor inhibitor, which was approved as a third-line treatment for stage IV NSCLC in China on May 9, 2018. Nevertheless, The objective response rate of patients treated with anlotinib was merely 9.2% and the overall survival was only 3 months compared with the patients treated with placebo. Previous studies have shown that cancer treatment with a combination of chemotherapy with TK receptor inhibitors is effective and safe well tolerated. Therefore, the combination of anlotinib with other chemotherapeutic agents may be an effective treatment strategy for patients with stage IV NSCLC. Oral S-1 is a third-generation fluorouracil derivative; it showed good efficacy and caused relatively low toxicity in patients with NSCLC. METHODS: The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib combined with S-1 as the third-line treatment for patients with stage IV NSCLC. This is a prospective, phase II clinical trial. We will enroll29 patients with stage IV NSCLC treated with anlotinib plus S-1. Tumors will be assessed using computed tomography prior to treatment, after two, four, and six cycles of treatment, and during follow-up every 3 months until disease progression or death. The primary endpoint is the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, duration of response, proportion of disease control, and safety. DISCUSSION: The expected outcome of this study is that anlotinib combined with S-1 has tolerable toxicity and better ORR than anlotinibmonotherapy. The results may indicate additional treatment options for patients with stage IV NSCLC.
.

Safety and efficacy of pulsed low-dose rate radiotherapy for local recurrent esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after radiotherapy: Study protocol for a prospective multi-center phase II trial.

INTRODUCTION: Re-irradiation after radiotherapy is a common treatment for locally recurrent esophageal cancer. However, the side effects of re-irradiation are serious. The most serious adverse reactions of re-irradiation include esophageal perforation and hemorrhage caused by esophageal perforation. Studies have shown that pulsed low-dose rate radiotherapy (PLDR) induces a hypersensitivity effect on tumor tissue and a hyper-repair effect on normal tissue, which can simultaneously reduce damage on the normal tissue and increase the therapeutic effect on the tumor. The objective of this study is to explore whether PLDR can reduce rate of esophageal perforation and improve efficacy in patients with recurrent esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after radiotherapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a prospective, multi-center, open, single-arm clinical trial designed to enroll 27 patients with locally recurrent ESCC after radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. Re-irradiation will be performed using intensity modulated radiation therapy in 50 Gy/25 fractions. The strategy of PLDR includes dividing 2 Gy into 10 fractions, and administering each irradiating dose of 20 cGy at an interval of 3 minutes before the next low-dose irradiation. The actual dose rate of administration each time will be 16.67 cGy /minute. The primary endpoint in this study is the rate of esophageal perforation. The secondary endpoints are the objective remission rate, the palliative effect on quality of life and pain, and the time of disease progression. The observation time is 2 years after the end of the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial number: ChiCTR1900020609.

Comparison of the clinical efficacy between single-agent and dual-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Some Chinese patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinomaare often treated with single-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy. However, no results have been reported from randomized controlled clinical trials comparing single-agent with double-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy. It therefore remains unclear whether these regimens are equally clinically effective. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed and compared the therapeutic effects of single-agent and double-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: This study enrolled 168 patients who received definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced unresectable esophageal squamous carcinoma at 10 hospitals between 2010 and 2015. We evaluated survival time and toxicity. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival data. The log-rank test was used in univariate analysis A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to conduct a multivariate analysis of the effects of prognostic factors on survival. RESULTS: In this study, 100 (59.5%) and 68 patients (40.5%) received single-agent and dual-agent combination chemoradiotherapy, respectively. The estimate 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate of dual-agent therapy was higher than that of single-agent therapy (52.5% and 40.9%, 78.2% and 60.7%, respectively), but there were no significant differences (P = 0.367 and 0.161, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that sex, age,and radiotherapy dose had no significant effects on OS or PFS. Only disease stage was associated with OS and PFS in the multivariable analysis (P = 0.006 and 0.003, respectively). In dual-agent group, the incidence of acute toxicity and the incidence of 3 and4 grade toxicity were higher than single-agent group. CONCLUSION: The 5-year PFS and OS rates of dual-agent therapy were higher than those of single-agent concurrent chemoradiotherapy for patients with unresectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; however, there were no significant differences in univariate analysis and multivariable analysis. Single-agent concurrent chemotherapy had less toxicity than a double-drug regimen. Therefore, we suggest that single therapis not inferior to dual therapy y. In the future, we aim to confirm our hypothesis through a prospective randomized study.

S-1 versus S-1 plus cisplatin concurrent intensity modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Study protocol for a randomized controlled phase II trial.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy regimens are often a 2-drug regimen in concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for esophageal cancer (EC). However, some retrospective studies have suggested that for patients with EC receiving radiotherapy combined with 2-drug chemotherapy have the severe toxicity. And S-1 alone with the combination of radiotherapy treatment effect is good, and achieved good clinical remission rate. The purpose of this trial is compare the efficacy and toxicity of combining S-1 or S-1 plus cisplatin with radiotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial, comparing S-1 versus S-1 plus cisplatin concurrent radiotherapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Eighty-eight patients with unresectable or medically unfit for surgery esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (clinical stage I to III), will randomly assigned to receive four cycles (2 concomitant and 2 postradiotherapy) S-1 or S-1 plus cisplatin along with radiotherapy 60-66 Gy/30 to 33 fractions. The primary outcome is complete response rate of primary tumor which will be measured by endoscopy and computer screen at 3 months after the completion of treatment. Secondary outcomes include survival and toxicity. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this study protocol is the first to test the effect between S-1 versus S-1 plus cisplatin concurrent intensity modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. If the result will be the same effect and fewer side effects and less costly in S-1 plus radiotherapy. It will supply more treatment selection for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.