Interventions for Radiation-Induced Fibrosis in Patients With Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses.

Purpose: Radiation therapy can affect normal tissues in patients with breast cancer, causing adverse effects such as fibrosis. Although there are several interventions for radiation-induced fibrosis, the efficacy of these procedures is still unclear. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy of interventions for radiation-induced fibrosis in patients with breast cancer. Methods and Materials: This is a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Studies that compared any intervention for fibrosis to another intervention, placebo, or no intervention were included. Outcomes assessed were fibrosis, adverse events, quality of life, treatment adherence, pain, and functionality. Results: A total of 2501 publications were found, and 7 studies were selected because they met the inclusion criteria. The interventions for fibrosis were pentoxifylline and vitamin E, grape seed extract, kinesiotherapy, and endermotherapy. The results showed great heterogeneity in the treatment protocols for radiation-induced fibrosis in patients with breast cancer and in their evaluation metrics. The meta-analyses showed no benefit in using pentoxifylline and vitamin E compared with placebo or no intervention (standardized mean difference: -0.30; 95% confidence interval, -0.79 to 0.20; P = .24 [very low evidence]) compared with placebo and vitamin E (standardized mean difference: -0.09; 95% confidence interval, -0.66 to 0.49; P = .77 [moderate evidence]), respectively, assessed by the Late Effects Normal Tissue Task Force-Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic (LENT-SOMA) scoring scale. Conclusions: The effectiveness of these interventions for the treatment of radiation-induced fibrosis in patients with breast cancer could not be determined. Although isolated studies show significant results favorable to the experimental groups, caution should be exercised in these findings because of the small number, small sample size, and high risk of bias presented by some of the included studies, which makes the recommendation for clinical practice still weak.

Immunoexpression of TS, p53, COX2, EGFR, MSH6 and MLH1 biomarkers and its correlation with degree of differentiation, tumor staging and prognostic factors in colorectal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: There are cases of colorectal tumors that, although small, show more aggressive evolution than large tumors. This motivated us to study whether there are any proteins capable of alerting about these changes. The aim here was to correlate the immunoexpression of the TS, p53, COX2, EGFR, MSH6 and MLH1 biomarkers in tumors in patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma, with the degree of cell differentiation, tumor staging and clinical-pathological prognostic factors. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective observational study at a public tertiary-level hospital. METHODS: We analyzed tissue-microarray paraffin blocks of tumor tissues that had been resected from 107 patients. We used Fisher's exact test to study associations between tumor differentiation/staging and the immunoexpression of biomarkers. We also used Kaplan-Meier estimation, the log-rank test and the adjusted Cox regression model to investigate the patients' overall survival (in months) according to biomarkers and disease-free interval. RESULTS: The degree of tumor differentiation and tumor staging were not associated with the biomarkers, except in cases of patients in stages III or IV, in which there was a correlation with MLH1 expression (P=0.021). Patient survival and disease-free interval were not associated with the biomarkers. CONCLUSION: There were no associations between the degree of tumor differentiation, staging, length of survival or disease-free interval and the immunoexpression of the TS, p53, COX2, EGFR or MSH6 tumor markers. In advanced cases of colorectal adenocarcinoma (stages III and IV), there was a higher percentage of MLH1-negative results.

Immunoexpression of TS, p53, COX2, EGFR, MSH6 and MLH1 biomarkers and its correlation with degree of differentiation, tumor staging and prognostic factors in colorectal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective longitudinal study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: There are cases of colorectal tumors that, although small, show more aggressive evolution than large tumors. This motivated us to study whether there are any proteins capable of alerting about these changes. The aim here was to correlate the immunoexpression of the TS, p53, COX2, EGFR, MSH6 and MLH1 biomarkers in tumors in patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma, with the degree of cell differentiation, tumor staging and clinical-pathological prognostic factors. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective observational study at a public tertiary-level hospital. METHODS: We analyzed tissue-microarray paraffin blocks of tumor tissues that had been resected from 107 patients. We used Fisher's exact test to study associations between tumor differentiation/staging and the immunoexpression of biomarkers. We also used Kaplan-Meier estimation, the log-rank test and the adjusted Cox regression model to investigate the patients' overall survival (in months) according to biomarkers and disease-free interval. RESULTS: The degree of tumor differentiation and tumor staging were not associated with the biomarkers, except in cases of patients in stages III or IV, in which there was a correlation with MLH1 expression (P=0.021). Patient survival and disease-free interval were not associated with the biomarkers. CONCLUSION: There were no associations between the degree of tumor differentiation, staging, length of survival or disease-free interval and the immunoexpression of the TS, p53, COX2, EGFR or MSH6 tumor markers. In advanced cases of colorectal adenocarcinoma (stages III and IV), there was a higher percentage of MLH1-negative results.

Intervenção fisioterapêutica pré-operatória para pacientes submetidos à ressecção pulmonar por câncer: revisão sistemática / Preoperative physiotherapeutic intervention for patients undergo resection for lung cancer: systematic review

INTRODUÇÃO: A Fisioterapia tem sido defendida como um componente importante na prevenção e no tratamento de complicações pulmonares pós-operatórias, sendo utilizada nas fases pré e pós-operatória de ressecções pulmonares. A efetividade e a segurança da fisioterapia pré-operatória em pacientes que serão submetidos a cirurgias de ressecção pulmonar por câncer precisam ser avaliadas. MATERIAIS E MÉTODOS: Revisão sistemática de ensaios clínicos randomizados com metodologia Cochrane. A busca eletrônica foi realizada nas bases de dados Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PEDro; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; e LILACS. Realizamos também uma busca por estudos em andamento e/ou não publicados, através da Current Controlled Trials Database. Além disso, realizamos uma busca adicional na lista de referências de todos os estudos incluídos e contato com os autores, quando necessário. RESULTADOS: Vinte e oito estudos foram considerados potencialmente relevantes; destes, 26 foram excluídos. Dois ensaios clínicos randomizados preencheram os critérios de inclusão desta revisão. Um estudo comparou a ventilação mecânica não invasiva (BILEVEL) associada ao tratamento padrão versus tratamento padrão sendo atribuído de forma única; e o outro estudo comparou o treinamento muscular inspiratório e a espirometria de incentivo a nenhum tratamento. Um único desfecho foi comum entre os estudos, mas não foi possível realizar uma metanálise devida à insuficiência de informações. CONCLUSÕES: Não há evidência suficiente na literatura para se afirmar que a intervenção fisioterapêutica pré-operatória seja efetiva e segura para pacientes que serão submetidos à ressecção pulmonar por câncer.

INTRODUCTION: The physiotherapy has been advocated as an important component in the treatment and prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications, being used in both pre and postoperative periods of lung resection surgery. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of preoperative physiotherapy for patients who will undergo resection surgery for lung cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review of randomized clinical trials carried out in accordance with the Cochrane metodology. The electronic search was performed in Cochrane Library, PEDro, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS. We also searched for both non-published and on-going studies in the Current Controlled Trials database. In addition, a manual search in the references of all relevant studies was performed, and the authors were contacted for additional non-published data. RESULTS: Twenty-eight papers were considered potentially relevant; among them, 26 were excluded. Two randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. One study compared non invasive ventilation (BILEVEL) associated to standard treatment with standard treatment alone; and other study compared inspiratory muscle training and incentive spirometry with no training. There was just one common outcome between the studies, but was not possible to perform the meta-analysis due to missing data. CONCLUSION: There is no sufficient evidence to state that the preoperative physiotherapeutic intervention has efficacy and safety for patients who will undergo resection surgery for lung cancer.