104
512.19
4.92
238

Recent PublicationsView all

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The prognosis for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is dependent upon tumour stage, performance status (PS), severity of underlying liver disease, and the availability of appropriate therapies. The unavailability of sorafenib may have a significantly adverse effect on the prognosis of UK patients with advanced HCC. During the study period, access to sorafenib was at the discretion of local health funding bodies, a process that may delay or deny access to the drug and that remains in place for Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Here, we attempt to address the impact of this system on patients with advanced HCC in the United Kingdom. Methods: This is a retrospective study performed in the two largest specialist hepatobiliary oncology units in the United Kingdom. Funding applications were made to local funding bodies for patients with advanced HCC for whom sorafenib was considered appropriate (advanced HCC not suitable for loco-regional therapies, compensated chronic liver disease, PS 0–2). Results: A total of 133 applications were made, of which 57 (43%) were approved and 76 (57%) declined. Demographics and prognostic factors were balanced between the two groups. This cohort had a number of adverse prognostic features: patients were predominantly PS 1–2; the majority had multifocal disease with the largest lesion being >5 cm; and macroscopic vascular invasion, metastases, and AFP >1000 ng ml−1, were each present in one-third of cases. The median time from application to funding decision was 17 days (range 3–260 days). For the primary ‘intention-to-treat' analysis, median overall survival was 4.1 months when funding was declined, and 9.5 months when funding was approved (hazard ratio (HR) 0.48; 95% CI 0.3186–0.7267; P=0.0005). Conclusion: These data support the use of sorafenib for patients with advanced HCC as an effective intervention. In the United Kingdom, this applies to a relatively small group of patients, estimated to total ∼800 per year who, unfortunately, do not survive long enough to themselves lobby for the availability of this drug. These data provide a comparison of sorafenib with supportive care and demonstrate the potential detrimental impact on patient outcomes of rationing health-care resources on the basis of cost.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2013 · British Journal of Cancer
  • Source

    Preview · Article · Jun 2013 · Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nucleoli perform a crucial cell function, ribosome biogenesis, and of critical relevance to the subject of this review, they are also extremely sensitive to cellular stresses, which can cause loss of function and/or associated structural disruption. In recent years, we have learned that cells take advantage of this stress sensitivity of nucleoli, using them as stress sensors. One major protein regulated by this role of nucleoli is the tumor suppressor p53, which is activated in response to diverse cellular injuries in order to exert its onco-protective effects. Here we discuss a model of nucleolar regulation of p53, which proposes that key steps in the promotion of p53 degradation by the ubiquitin ligase MDM2 occur in nucleoli, thus providing an explanation for the observed link between nucleolar disruption and p53 stability. We review current evidence for this compartmentalization in p53 homeostasis and highlight current limitations of the model. Interestingly, a number of current chemotherapeutic agents capable of inducing a p53 response are likely to do so by targeting nucleolar functions and these compounds may serve to inform further improved therapeutic targeting of nucleoli.
    No preview · Article · May 2013 · Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences CMLS
Information provided on this web page is aggregated encyclopedic and bibliographical information relating to the named institution. Information provided is not approved by the institution itself. The institution’s logo (and/or other graphical identification, such as a coat of arms) is used only to identify the institution in a nominal way. Under certain jurisdictions it may be property of the institution.