Bevacizumab for advanced breast cancer: hope, hype, and hundreds of headlines.

On February 22, 2008, the Food and Drug Administration granted accelerated approval for the use of bevacizumab (Avastin) in metastatic breast cancer. Based on subsequent clinical trials, this approval was revoked on November 18, 2011. In this study, we categorize and analyze the newspaper reports related to bevacizumab's use in advanced breast cancer. Methods. Using the Factiva media database, we reviewed all newspaper reports published in North America from January 4, 2002, to January 4, 2013, containing the words "breast cancer" and "Avastin," or "bevacizumab." Articles were classified as pre-approval (January 4, 2002-February 21, 2008), approval (February 22, 2008-November 17, 2011), or post-approval loss (November 18, 2011-January 4, 2013). Information regarding benefits, side effects, costs, interviewees, and article tone and theme were abstracted from each article by two independent reviewers. Differences among the three study phases were compared using the chi square analysis. Results. A total of 359 articles met study inclusion criteria. The number of reports having a positive headline tone and/or positive article tone declined with each study period. The proportion of articles discussing side effects and financial costs increased, whereas those discussing efficacy decreased with each study period. Drug representatives were most likely to be quoted in newspaper articles prior to bevacizumab's approval. Conclusion. Media reports are a common source of medical information for patients, practitioners, and policy makers. We observed substantial fluidity of media reports over time.

Appraisal of Systemic Treatment Strategies in Early HER2-Positive Breast Cancer-A Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: The overexpression of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2+) accounts for 15-20% of all breast cancer phenotypes. Even after the completion of the standard combination of chemotherapy and trastuzumab, relapse events occur in approximately 15% of cases. The neoadjuvant approach has multiple benefits that include the potential to downgrade staging and convert previously unresectable tumors to operable tumors. In addition, achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) following preoperative systemic treatment is prognostic of enhanced survival outcomes. Thus, optimal evaluation among the suitable strategies is crucial in deciding which patients should be selected for the neoadjuvant approach. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in the Embase, Medline, and Cochrane electronic libraries. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of tumor and LN staging and, hence, stratifying BC recurrence risk are decisive factors in guiding clinicians to optimize treatment decisions between the neoadjuvant versus adjuvant approaches. For each individual case, it is important to consider the most likely postsurgical outcome, since, if the patient does not obtain pCR following neoadjuvant treatment, they are eligible for adjuvant T-DM1 in the case of residual disease. This review of HER2-positive female BC outlines suitable neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic treatment strategies for guiding clinical decision making around the selection of an appropriate therapy.

Sino-Canadian collaborations in stem cell research: a scientometric analysis.

BACKGROUND: International collaboration (IC) is essential for the advance of stem cell research, a field characterized by marked asymmetries in knowledge and capacity between nations. China is emerging as a global leader in the stem cell field. However, knowledge on the extent and characteristics of IC in stem cell science, particularly China's collaboration with developed economies, is lacking. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We provide a scientometric analysis of the China-Canada collaboration in stem cell research, placing this in the context of other leading producers in the field. We analyze stem cell research published from 2006 to 2010 from the Scopus database, using co-authored papers as a proxy for collaboration. We examine IC levels, collaboration preferences, scientific impact, the collaborating institutions in China and Canada, areas of mutual interest, and funding sources. Our analysis shows rapid global expansion of the field with 48% increase in papers from 2006 to 2010. China now ranks second globally after the United States. China has the lowest IC rate of countries examined, while Canada has one of the highest. China-Canada collaboration is rising steadily, more than doubling during 2006-2010. China-Canada collaboration enhances impact compared to papers authored solely by China-based researchers This difference remained significant even when comparing only papers published in English. CONCLUSIONS: While China is increasingly courted in IC by developed countries as a partner in stem cell research, it is clear that it has reached its status in the field largely through domestic publications. Nevertheless, IC enhances the impact of stem cell research in China, and in the field in general. This study establishes an objective baseline for comparison with future studies, setting the stage for in-depth exploration of the dynamics and genesis of IC in stem cell research.

Health biotechnology innovation on a global stage.

With increasing globalization, infectious diseases are spreading faster than ever before, creating an urgent need for international collaboration. The rise of emerging economies has changed the traditional collaborative landscape and provided opportunities for more diverse models of collaboration involving developing countries, including North-South, South-South and North-South-South partnerships. Here, we discuss how developing countries can partner with other nations to address their shared health problems and to promote innovation. We look specifically at what drives collaborations and at the challenges that exist for them, and we propose actions that can strengthen these partnerships.

Globetrotting firms: Canada's health biotechnology collaborations with developing countries.

A survey of Canadian biotech firms reveals that their biotech collaborations with developing countries are not only significant but also increasingly reciprocal in terms of the exchange of financial resources and technological know-how.