Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background: Siblings of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are considered biologically at risk of developing neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) that may involve sensorimotor, adaptive, and social–communication domains. Previous studies have highlighted the potential value of early intervention programs during the first year of life, when symptoms may not yet be evident. This study explores the impact of pre-emptive and early interventions on the developmental trajectories of infants at risk for NDDs. Methods: This case-series study included four children (one at low risk and three at high risk) who participated in the ERI-SIBS Project (Early Recognition and Intervention in Siblings at High Risk for Neurodevelopmental Disorders), an ongoing, innovative, and ecological early recognition and intervention program for siblings of children with ASD. Intervention frequency was personalized based on the presence or absence of early risk indicators and continued for six months. Data on global functioning, social-communication abilities, and mother–child interactions were collected over one year. Results: Qualitative analysis revealed four distinct developmental trajectories and treatment responses, emphasizing the need for a multidimensional approach and the active engagement of parents in the intervention process. Conclusions: Findings from this case series provide an in-depth understanding of how biological and environmental factors may interact to influence the outcomes of early interventions in children at risk for NDDs. These results underscore the importance of early, individualized, and family-centered approaches to support optimal developmental outcomes.

A prospective, multicenter trial was undertaken to assess the activity, safety, and quality of life of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) as second-line chemotherapy in HER2-negative, taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Fifty-two women with HER2-negative MBC who were candidates for second-line chemotherapy for the metastatic disease were enrolled and treated at three centers in Northern Italy. All patients had previously received taxane-based chemotherapy in the adjuvant or first-line metastatic setting. Single-agent nab-paclitaxel was given at the dose of 260 mg/m(2) as a 30-minute intravenous infusion on day 1 each treatment cycle, which lasted 3 weeks, in the outpatient setting. No steroid or antihistamine premedication was provided. Treatment was stopped for documented disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient refusal. All of the enrolled patients were evaluable for the study endpoints. The objective response rate was 48% (95% CI, 31.5%-61.3%) and included complete responses from 13.5%. Disease stabilization was obtained in 19 patients and lasted >6 months in 15 of them; the overall clinical benefit rate was 77%. The median time to response was 70 days (range 52-86 days). The median progression-free survival time was 8.9 months (95% CI, 8.0-11.6 months, range 5-21+ months). The median overall survival point has not yet been reached. Toxicities were expected and manageable with good patient compliance and preserved quality of life in patients given long-term treatment. Our results showed that single-agent nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks is an effective and well tolerated regimen as second-line chemotherapy in HER2-negative, taxane-pretreated MBC patients, and that it produced interesting values of objective response rate and progression-free survival without the concern of significant toxicity. Specifically, the present study shows that such a regimen is a valid therapeutic option for that 'difficult to treat' patient population represented by women who at the time of disease relapse have already received the most active agents in the adjuvant and/or metastatic setting (ie, conventional taxanes).

Background: The risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) during adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer (CRC) is unknown. We aim to evaluate if the Khorana score (KS) can predict this risk, and if it represents a prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) through a post hoc analysis of the phase III TOSCA trial of different durations (3- versus 6-months) of adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: A logistic regression model was used to test the associations between the risk of VTE and the KS. The results are expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). To assess the effect of the KS on OS, multivariable analyses using Cox regression models were performed. The results are expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI. Results: Among 1380 CRC patients with available data, the VTE risk (n = 72 events: 5.2%) was similar in the two duration arms (5.5% versus 4.9%), with 0.2% of patients belonging to the high-risk KS group. Rates of VTE were similar in the low- and intermediate-risk groups (4.8% versus 6.4%). KS did not represent an independent predictive factor for VTE occurrence. Chemotherapy duration was not associated with VTE risk. In addition, KS was not prognostic for OS in multivariate analysis (HR: 0.92, 95% CI, 0.63–1.36; p = 0.6835). Conclusions: The use of the KS did not predict VTEs in a low–moderate thromboembolic risk population as CRC. These data did not support the use of KS to predict VTE during adjuvant chemotherapy, and suggest that other risk assessment models should be researched.

Purpose A phase III trial assessed the efficacy of palonosetron plus dexamethasone given once in preventing acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following a broad range of moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) regimens. Methods This multicentre, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial evaluated two different treatment groups. One group received palonosetron (0.25 mg intravenously) and dexamethasone (8 mg intravenously) before chemotherapy, while the other was administered the same regimen on day 1 followed by dexamethasone 8 mg orally on days 2 and 3. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR; defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication) during the overall phase (days 1–5 after chemotherapy initiation). The non-inferiority margin was predefined as a 15% difference between groups in the primary endpoint. Results Of 332 chemotherapy-naïve patients included in the intention-to-treat analysis, 65.1% were female, and 35.2% received anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide (AC)-based regimens. Overall CR rates were 67.5% for those administered dexamethasone only on day 1 ( n  = 166), and 71.1% for those also administered dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 ( n  = 166; difference −3.6% (95% confidence interval, −13.5 to 6.3)). CR rates were not significantly different between groups during the acute (0–24 h post-chemotherapy; 88.6% versus 84.3%; P  = 0.262) and delayed phases (days 2–5; 68.7% versus 77.7%; P  = 0.116). Conclusions Palonosetron plus single-dose dexamethasone administered before common MEC regimens provide protection against acute and delayed CINV which is non-inferior to that of palonosetron plus dexamethasone for 3 days. However, the major benefit of the single-day regimen occurs in patients receiving non-AC MEC regimens.

Chemotherapy is the standard treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, and myelosuppression is a common side-effect. We aimed to assess whether haematological toxic effects could be a biological measure of drug activity and a marker of efficacy. We analysed data for 1265 patients who received chemotherapy (vinorelbine, gemcitabine, gemcitabine and vinorelbine, cisplatin and vinorelbine, or cisplatin and gemcitabine) within three randomised trials. Primary landmark analyses were restricted to 436 patients who received all six planned chemotherapy cycles and who were alive 180 days after randomisation. Neutropenia was categorised on the basis of worst WHO grade during chemotherapy: absent (grade 0), mild (grade 1–2), or severe (grade 3–4). All statistical analyses were stratified by treatment allocation. Analyses were repeated in the out-of-landmark group (829 patients), stratifying by treatment allocation and number of chemotherapy cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival. In the landmark group, hazard ratios of death were 0·65 (0·46–0·93) for patients with severe neutropenia and 0·74 (0·56–0·98) for those with mild neutropenia. Median survival after the landmark time of 180 days was 31·4 weeks (95% CI 25·7–39·6) for patients without neutropenia compared with 42·0 weeks (32·7–59·7) for patients with severe neutropenia, and with 43·7 weeks (36·6–66·0) for those with mild neutropenia (severe vs mild vs no neutropenia p=0·0118). Findings were much the same for the out-of-landmark group. Neutropenia during chemotherapy is associated with increased survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, and its absence might be a result of underdosing. Prospective trials are needed to assess whether drug dosing guided by the occurrence of toxic effects could improve efficacy of standard regimens.

The aims of the present study were to verify whether an innovative therapeutic strategy for the treatment of mild-moderate chronic cancer pain, passing directly from step I to step III of the WHO analgesic ladder, is more effective than the traditional three-step strategy and to evaluate the tolerability and therapeutic index in both strategies. Patients aged 18 years or older with multiple viscera or bone metastases or with locally advanced disease were randomized. Pain intensity was assessed using a 0-10 numerical rating scale based on four questions selected from the validated Italian version of the Brief Pain Inventory. Treatment-specific variables and other symptoms were recorded at baseline up to a maximum follow-up of 90 days per patient. Fifty-four patients were randomized onto the study, and pain intensity was assessed over a period of 2,649 days. The innovative treatment presented a statistically significant advantage over the traditional strategy in terms of the percentage of days with worst pain > or =5 (22.8 vs 28.6%, p < 0.001) and > or =7 (8.6 vs 11.2%, p = 0.023). Grades 3 and 4 anorexia and constipation were more frequently reported in the innovative strategy arm, although prophylactic laxative therapy was used less in this setting. Our preliminary data would seem to suggest that a direct move to the third step of the WHO analgesic ladder is feasible and could reduce some pain scores but also requires careful management of side effects.

Background: The risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) during adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer (CRC) is unknown. We aim to evaluate if the Khorana score (KS) can predict this risk, and if it represents a prognostic factor for overall survival (OS) through a post hoc analysis of the phase III TOSCA trial of different durations (3- versus 6-months) of adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods: A logistic regression model was used to test the associations between the risk of VTE and the KS. The results are expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). To assess the effect of the KS on OS, multivariable analyses using Cox regression models were performed. The results are expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI. Results: Among 1380 CRC patients with available data, the VTE risk ( n  = 72 events: 5.2%) was similar in the two duration arms (5.5% versus 4.9%), with 0.2% of patients belonging to the high-risk KS group. Rates of VTE were similar in the low- and intermediate-risk groups (4.8% versus 6.4%). KS did not represent an independent predictive factor for VTE occurrence. Chemotherapy duration was not associated with VTE risk. In addition, KS was not prognostic for OS in multivariate analysis (HR: 0.92, 95% CI, 0.63–1.36; p  = 0.6835). Conclusions: The use of the KS did not predict VTEs in a low–moderate thromboembolic risk population as CRC. These data did not support the use of KS to predict VTE during adjuvant chemotherapy, and suggest that other risk assessment models should be researched.

Objective The aim of this national cross-sectional survey was to draw information on pain prevalence and intensity from a large sample of patients who were admitted to oncologic centres for different reasons and to evaluate the pain treatment and possible influencing factors. Materials and methods A total of 2,655 patients completed the study. Nine hundred and one patients (34%) reported pain. Results and discussions Higher pain levels were observed in inpatients, in the presence of bone metastases, and with low levels of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status. The number of patients receiving strong opioids increased with the highest levels of pain. However, a significant part of patients with moderate–severe pain were not receiving appropriate medication, patients being predominantly administered non-opioid drugs. General practitioners’ attitudes did not negatively influence the opioid prescription. Conclusion The results of this survey indicate a need for continuing educational and informative program in pain management for oncologists and more generally for any physician dealing with cancer patients.

Within the domain of Natural Language Processing (NLP), Large Language Models (LLMs) represent sophisticated models engineered to comprehend, generate, and manipulate text resembling human language on an extensive scale. They are transformer-based deep learning architectures, obtained through the scaling of model size, pretraining of corpora, and computational resources. The potential healthcare applications of these models primarily involve chatbots and interaction systems for clinical documentation management, and medical literature summarization (Biomedical NLP). The challenge in this field lies in the research for applications in diagnostic and clinical decision support, as well as patient triage. Therefore, LLMs can be used for multiple tasks within patient care, research, and education. Throughout 2023, there has been an escalation in the release of LLMs, some of which are applicable in the healthcare domain. This remarkable output is largely the effect of the customization of pre-trained models for applications like chatbots, virtual assistants, or any system requiring human-like conversational engagement. As healthcare professionals, we recognize the imperative to stay at the forefront of knowledge. However, keeping abreast of the rapid evolution of this technology is practically unattainable, and, above all, understanding its potential applications and limitations remains a subject of ongoing debate. Consequently, this article aims to provide a succinct overview of the recently released LLMs, emphasizing their potential use in the field of medicine. Perspectives for a more extensive range of safe and effective applications are also discussed. The upcoming evolutionary leap involves the transition from an AI-powered model primarily designed for answering medical questions to a more versatile and practical tool for healthcare providers such as generalist biomedical AI systems for multimodal-based calibrated decision-making processes. On the other hand, the development of more accurate virtual clinical partners could enhance patient engagement, offering personalized support, and improving chronic disease management.