Histopathologic features predictive of metastasis and survival in 230 patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck and non-head and neck locations: a single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Staging systems for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) produce inconsistent risk stratification. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify further prognostic parameters for better stratification. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the prognostic significance of clinicopathologic parameters of 230 patients who underwent primary excision of invasive cSCC of the head and neck (n = 115) and non-head and non-neck (n = 115) locations. In addition to known high-risk features, we analysed tumour nest shape, invasion pattern, lymphoid response pattern and tumour budding. RESULTS: On multivariable analysis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and high tumour budding predicted worse disease-specific survival, and ulceration, LVI and high tumour budding predicted worse overall survival. Only ulceration was independently associated with risk of nodal metastasis. CONCLUSION: High tumour budding, LVI and ulceration are independently associated with poor outcome in cSCC and may be used to refine cSCC prognostic stratification, which is crucial to optimize clinical decision and to identify patients who are more likely to benefit from more aggressive interventions or clinical trials.

Fludarabine with pharmacokinetically guided IV busulfan is superior to fixed-dose delivery in pretransplant conditioning of AML/MDS patients.

We hypothesized that IV busulfan (Bu) dosing could be safely intensified through pharmacokinetic (PK-) dose guidance to minimize the inter-patient variability in systemic exposure (SE) associated with body-sized dosing, and that this should improve outcome of AML/MDS patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation. To test this hypothesis, we treated 218 patients (median age 50.7 years, male/female 50/50%) with fludarabine 40 mg/m2 once daily x4, each dose followed by IV Bu, randomized to 130 mg/m2 (N=107) or PK-guided to average daily SE, AUC of 6000 µM min (N=111), stratified for remission status and allo-grafting from HLA-matched donors. Toxicity and GvHD rates in the groups were similar; the risk of relapse or treatment-related mortality remained higher in the fixed-dose group throughout the 80-month observation period. Further, PK-guidance yielded safer disease control, leading to improved overall and PFS, most prominently in MDS patients and in AML patients not in remission at allogeneic stem cell transplantation. We conclude that AML/MDS patients receiving pretransplant conditioning treatment with our 4-day regimen may benefit significantly from PK-guided Bu dosing. This could be considered an alternative to fixed-dose delivery since it provides the benefit of precise dose delivery to a predetermined SE without increasing risk(s) of serious toxicity and/or GvHD.

Atomoxetine treatment in children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid tic disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that atomoxetine does not significantly worsen tic severity relative to placebo in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid tic disorders. METHODS: Study subjects were 7 to 17 years old, met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV criteria for ADHD, and had concurrent Tourette syndrome or chronic motor tic disorder. Patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 72) or atomoxetine (0.5 to 1.5 mg/kg/day, n = 76) for up to 18 weeks. RESULTS: Atomoxetine treatment was associated with greater reduction of tic severity at endpoint relative to placebo, approaching significance on the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale total score (-5.5 +/- 6.9 vs -3.0 +/- 8.7, p = 0.063) and Tic Symptom Self-Report total score (-4.7 +/- 6.5 vs -2.9 +/- 5.2, p = 0.095) and achieving significance on the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) tic/neurologic severity scale score (-0.7 +/- 1.2 vs -0.1 +/- 1.0, p = 0.002). Atomoxetine patients also showed greater improvement on the ADHD Rating Scale total score (-10.9 +/- 10.9 vs -4.9 +/- 10.3, p < 0.001) and CGI severity of ADHD/psychiatric symptoms scale score (-0.8 +/- 1.1 vs -0.3 +/- 1.0, p = 0.015). Discontinuation rates were not significantly different between treatment groups. Atomoxetine patients had greater increases in heart rate and decreases of body weight, and rates of treatment-emergent decreased appetite and nausea were higher. No other clinically relevant treatment differences were seen in any other vital sign, adverse event, or electrocardiographic or laboratory measures. CONCLUSIONS: Atomoxetine did not exacerbate tic symptoms. Rather, there was some evidence of reduction in tic severity with a significant reduction of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms. Atomoxetine treatment appeared safe and well tolerated.

Effective resolution with olanzapine of acute presentation of behavioral agitation and positive psychotic symptoms in schizophrenia.

Behavioral agitation and prominent positive psychotic symptoms often characterize the acute presentation of schizophrenia. The clinical treatment goal is a rapid control of these symptoms. The relative efficacy of olanzapine, a novel antipsychotic drug, was compared with that of the conventional antipsychotic drug haloperidol. A post hoc analysis conducted on a large multicenter, double-blind, 6-week study of acute-phase patients with DSM-III-R schizophrenia or schizophreniform or schizoaffective disorders treated with olanzapine (5-20 mg/day) or haloperidol (5-20 mg/day) assessed the treatment effects on agitation (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] agitation score) and positive symptoms (BPRS positive symptom score). Overall, olanzapine-treated patients experienced significantly greater improvement in behavioral agitation than did haloperidol-treated patients (last observation carried forward [LOCF]; p < .0002). Both groups showed similar reductions in agitation scores during the first 3 weeks of therapy; olanzapine was associated with significantly greater improvements at weeks 4, 5, and 6 (observed cases [OC]). Similarly, patients with predominantly positive psychotic symptoms experienced significantly greater improvement in BPRS positive symptom scores with olanzapine compared with haloperidol (LOCF; p = .013). In olanzapine-treated patients, improvement in BPRS agitation and positive symptom scores was significantly greater at weeks 4, 5, and 6 (agitation scores, p < or = .01; positive symptom scores, p < .05) (OC). These data suggest that olanzapine may be considered a first-line treatment for the patient in an acute episode of schizophrenia.