Dynamic Modeling of Silicon Bioavailability, Uptake, Transport, and Accumulation: Applicability in Improving the Nutritional Quality of Tomato.

Silicon is an essential nutrient for humans, additionally is beneficial for terrestrial plants. In plants Si enhances tolerance to different types of stress; in humans, it improves the metabolism and increases the strength of skeletal and connective tissues as well as of the immune system. Most of the Si intake of humans come from edible plants creating a double benefit: first, because the absorption of Si increases the antioxidants and other phytochemicals in plants, thereby increasing its functional value, and second because the higher concentration of Si in plants increases intake in human consumers. Therefore, it is desirable to raise the availability of Si in the human diet through the agronomic management of Si accumulator species, such as corn, wheat, rice, soybeans, and beans. But also in such species as tomatoes, carrots, and other vegetables, whose per capita consumption has increased. However, there are few systematized recommendations for the application and management of Si fertilizers based on the physicochemical factors that determine their availability, absorption, transport, and deposition in cells and tissues. This study presents updated information about edaphic and plant factors, which determine the absorption, transport, and deposition rates in edible organs. The information was integrated into an estimated dynamic model that approximates the processes previously mentioned in a model that represents a tomato crop in soil and soilless conditions. In the model, on the other hand, was integrated the available information about key environmental factors related to Si absorption and mobilization, such as the temperature, pH, and soil organic matter. The output data of the model were compared against information collected in the literature, finding an adequate adjustment. The use of the model for educational or technical purposes, including the possibility of extending it to other horticultural crops, can increase the understanding of the agronomic management of Si in plants.

A survey of perceptions, attitudes, knowledge and practices of medical oncologists about cancer pain management in Spain.

PURPOSE: To monitor oncologists' perspective on cancer pain management. METHODS: An anonymized survey was conducted in two waves. First, over a convenience sample of oncologists known to be particularly concerned with the management of pain. Second, using a random sample of oncologists. RESULTS: In total, 73 and 82 oncologists participated in the first and second wave, respectively. Many oncologists reported to have good knowledge of analgesic drugs (95.9%), the mechanism of action of opioids (79.5%), and good skills to manage opioid-related bowel dysfunction (76.7%). Appropriate adjustment of background medication to manage breakthrough pain was reported by 95.5% of oncologists. Additionally, 87.7% (68.3% in the second wave, p = 0.035) of oncologists reported suitable opioid titration practices, and 90.4% reported to use co-adjuvant medications for neuropathic pain confidently. On the other hand, just 9.6% of oncologists participated in multidisciplinary pain management teams, and merely 30.3 and 27.1% reported to routinely collaborate with the Pain Clinics or involve other staff, respectively. Only 26.4% of the oncologists of the second wave gave priority to pain pathophysiology to decide therapies, and up to 75.6% reported difficulties in treating neuropathic pain. Significantly less oncologists of the second wave (82.9 vs. 94.5%, p = 0.001) used opioid rotation routinely. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike in previous surveys, medical oncologists reported in general good knowledge and few perceived limitations and barriers for pain management. However, multi-disciplinary management and collaboration with other specialists are still uncommon. Oncologists' commitment to optimize pain management seems important to improve and maintain good practices.

Pilot study on workload estimate in breast cancer, lung cancer and colorectal cancer in a Medical Oncology Service at Valme hospital.

New advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer and the increased incidence and prevalence of this disease have led to an increase in the number and duration of visits in Medical Oncology in the last few years. Based on the functions of a medical oncologist and the time recommended for each work activity established by the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), we carried out a pilot study on the three most frequent neoplasias in our country [breast cancer (BC), lung cancer (LC) and colorectal cancer (CRC)], in order to determine the real time each patient requires from a physician and thus establish a recommendation on the number of medical oncologists necessary. Using the actual itinerary of the first 20 patients of 2009 in each of the three neoplasias seen at the Medical Oncology Service of the Virgen de Valme University Hospital, we measured the number of visits, the antineoplastic treatments received, the number of hospital admissions and average length of stay. During the years following the study, these data were estimated based on the natural history of each neoplasia. During the first year, the average time spent by the medical oncologist was 235, 390 and 265 min on each outpatient with BC, LC and CRC, respectively. In hospitalisation, the average oncologist/patient minutes were 40, 360 and 118 for BC, LC and CRC, respectively. Finally, the time spent on each visit or day of hospitalisation was that recommended by the SEOM, achieving an ultimate ratio of 1 oncologist for every 83 first visits.

SEOM guideline for the treatment of malignant glioma.

High-grade gliomas are an infrequent disease diagnosed usually in the fifth or sixth decade. Careful histopathological diagnosis is essential because tumour grade and type condition the treatment. Magnetic resonance with gadolinium is considered the standard radiologic exploration and should be followed by tissue sampling. Treatment of these patients should be decided in a multidisciplinary committee. Surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are the basis of patients' treatment, with the best results obtained when the three of them can be used.

Functions and workload of medical oncologists in Spain.

The functions and workload of medical oncologists are becoming increasingly relevant as cancer is a priority health issue in our country. Taking into account the specific characteristics and complexity of caring for cancer patients, the time of physicians attached to Medical Oncology could be distributed as follows: 70% for consultation (including participation in tumour committees and multidisciplinary units), 15% for research and 15% for training, teaching and clinical sessions. The time distribution for Heads of Services or Heads of Units is different, since it must also include their clinical management tasks, team coordination, and relations with other services and institutions. The average time, calculated in minutes, spent on each activity per patient is as follows: first visit and "second visit or results visit" 60-90 min; successive visits at the day hospital 15 min; successive visits of patients for follow-up or checkups 20 min; visits with family members 15-20 min; telephone or e-mail consultations 5-10 min; hospitalisation 20 min; and interconsultation 30-60 min. Also, participation in multidisciplinary committees takes up 60-120 min of an oncologist's time each week. When new technologies such as electronic medical records, e-mail and other software are used, these times increase with a correction factor that is still to be defined and which could vary according to the centre. Finally, the ratio recommended by SEOM is one medical oncologist for every 83 new patients a year.

A dose-dense schedule of docetaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as neoadjuvant treatment for breast cancer: results from a phase II study.

INTRODUCTION: The objective was to evaluate a dose-dense schedule of docetaxel followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) as neoadjuvant treatment for patients with locally advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-nine patients were included and received 100 mg/m(2) of docetaxel every two weeks for four cycles followed by 60 mg/m(2) of doxorubicin and 600 mg/m(2) of cyclophosphamide every two weeks for four cycles. Primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) was administered systematically to all patients. RESULTS: Efficacy and toxicity analyses were carried out on an intention-to-treat basis. After treatment, complete pathological response in the breast and lymph nodes was confirmed in 15 patients (15%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.4-22.9). Clinical response rate was 74% (95% CI: 65-82), of which 19% were complete responses. Breast-conserving surgery could be performed in 41% of patients. The dose-dense schedule was generally well tolerated. The most important grade 3/4 toxicities per patient were cutaneous toxicity (12.1%) and hepatic dysfunction (9.1%) during docetaxel administration, and neutropenia (28.1%) and leucopenia (8.3%) with AC. CONCLUSION: A dose-dense schedule of docetaxel followed by AC as neoadjuvant treatment is an effective and safe treatment for locally advanced breast cancer. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF, and possibly the change in the sequence of drug administration, appears to play a major role in avoiding the excessive toxicity of dose-dense schedules.

SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of antiemetic prophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy-induced emesis is one of the most frequent side effects that affect the quality of life of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. In recent years, clinical research has allowed us to increase our therapeutic arsenal with new drugs that have increased efficiency in the control of nausea and vomiting associated with chemo. This guide provides and update of the earlier published by our society and represents the continued commitment of SEOM to move forward and improve in the supportive care of cancer patients.

Supportive care for patients with early breast cancer.

Breast cancer treatment currently requires the joint efforts of a multidisciplinary team to effectively combine chemotherapy, hormone therapy, biological agents, surgery and radiation therapy when needed. To develop such a treatment plan, it is important to know the benefits as well as the potential toxic effects of each therapy. Thus, many patients with early breast cancer complain of collateral adverse events such as fatigue, nausea, vomiting, loss of libido, hot flashes, night sweats or neuropathy due to the complex therapies they are receiving. To date, the treatment of such symptoms is an important issue that greatly affects the quality of life of these patients. In this review, we report the content of a multi-expert meeting where the incidence of and medical approach to some of the most common adverse events encountered during the treatment of patients with early breast cancer were analysed.

Sarcoidosis as a diagnostic pitfall of pancreatic cancer.

Sarcoidosis (SA) is accompanied by malignancy more than can be explained by chance. Cancer can occur in patients with an established diagnosis of SA and SA can subsequently develop in a cancer patient. Malignancy can also be associated with the occurrence of sarcoid reactions (SR), which are typically restricted to the regional lymph nodes. Problems may also arise in distinguishing between tumour-related SRs and true systemic SA. Here we present a case with both SA and pancreatic cancer, and we discuss the result of distinguishing between SA and SRs in a patient with concurrent cancer.

Phase II study of dose-dense doxorubicin and docetaxel as neoadjunvant chemotherapy with G-CSF support in patients with large or locally advanced breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of the concomitant dose-dense administration of doxorubicin and docetaxel as primary chemotherapy for patients with large or locally advanced breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients were included and received 50 mg/m(2) of doxorubicin and 75 mg/m(2) of docetaxel every two weeks for four cycles. Primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony stimulating factor was administered. RESULTS: Patients included had mainly stage III disease (66%). Efficacy and toxicity analyses were carried out on an intention-to-treat basis. After study treatment, the rate of clinical responses was 85% (95% CI: 75-95) with 6% judged as clinical complete responses. Surgery was performed on 94% patients for whom the breast was conserved in 27%. Only one patient obtained a pathological complete response (with no evidence of invasive or non-invasive tumour in the breast and the lymph nodes). In three additional patients, malignant cells were detected only in one lymph node. The single severe haematological toxicity was neutropenia, occurring in one patient (2%) and two cycles (1%), being grade 3 in one and grade 4 in the other. Severe non-haematological toxicities were grade 3, and the most common was asthenia (8% of patients), followed by cutaneous toxicity, arthromyalgia and stomatitis, which occurred in fewer than 4% of patients in each case. CONCLUSIONS: The concomitant dose-dense administration of doxorubicin and docetaxel as neoadjuvant chemotherapy with granulocyte colony stimulating factor support is a feasible and effective schedule with a safe toxicity profile for women with large or locally advanced breast cancer.