The latest medical research on Neurosurgery

Depatux-M is a tumor-specific antibody-drug-conjugate consisting of an antibody (ABT-806) directed against the activated Epithelial Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) and the toxin monomethylauristatin-F. We investigated Depatux-M in combination with temozolomide or as single agent in a randomized controlled phase II trial in recurrent EGFR amplified glioblastoma.

Eligible were patients with centrally confirmed EGFR amplified glioblastoma at first recurrence after chemo-irradiation with temozolomide. Patients were randomized to either Depatux-M 1.25 mg/kg every 2 weeks intravenously, or this treatment combined with temozolomide 150-200 mg/m2 day 1-5 every 4 weeks, or either lomustine or temozolomide. The primary endpoint of the study was overall survival.

260 patients were randomized. In the primary efficacy analysis with 199 events (median follow-up 15.0 months) the hazard ratio (HR) for the combination arm compared to the control arm was 0.71, 95% CI [0.50, 1.02]; p = 0.062. The efficacy of Depatux-M monotherapy was comparable to that of the control arm (HR =1.04, 95%CI [0.73, 1.48]; p = 0.83). The most frequent toxicity in Depatux-M treated patients was a reversible corneal epitheliopathy, occurring as grade 3-4 in 25-30% of patients. In the long-term follow-up analysis with median follow-up of 28,7 months the HR for the comparison of the combination arm versus the control arm was 0.66 (95%CI [0.48, 0.93].

This trial suggests a possible role for the use of Depatux-M in combination with temozolomide in EGFR amplified recurrent glioblastoma, especially in patients relapsing well after the end of first-line adjuvant temozolomide treatment. (NCT02343406).

Glioblastoma (GBM) remains one of the least successfully treated cancers. It is essential to understand the basic biology of this lethal disease and investigate novel pharmacological targets to treat GBM. The aims of this study were to determine the biological consequences of elevated expression of ΔNp73, an N-terminal truncated isoform of TP73, and to evaluate targeting of its downstream mediators, the angiopoietin 1 (ANGPT1)/tunica interna endothelial cell kinase 2 (Tie2) axis, by using a highly potent, orally available small-molecule inhibitor (rebastinib) in GBM.

ΔNp73 expression was assessed in glioma sphere cultures, xenograft glioblastoma tumors, and glioblastoma patients by western blot, quantitative reverse transcription PCR, and immunohistochemistry. Immunoprecipitation, chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChiP) and sequential ChIP were performed to determine the interaction between ΔNp73 and E26 transformation-specific (ETS) proto-oncogene 2 (ETS2) proteins. The oncogenic consequences of ΔNp73 expression in glioblastomas were examined by in vitro and in vivo experiments, including orthotopic zebrafish and mouse intracranial-injection models. Effects of rebastinib on growth of established tumors and survival were examined in an intracranial-injection mouse model.

ΔNp73 upregulates both ANGPT1 and Tie2 transcriptionally through ETS conserved binding sites on the promoters by interacting with ETS2. Elevated expression of ΔNp73 promotes tumor progression by mediating angiogenesis and survival. Therapeutic targeting of downstream ΔNp73 signaling pathways by rebastinib inhibits growth of established tumors and extends survival in preclinical models of glioblastoma.

Aberrant expression of ΔNp73 in GBM promotes tumor progression through autocrine and paracrine signaling dependent on Tie2 activation by ANGPT1. Disruption of this signaling by rebastinib improves tumor response to treatment in glioblastoma.

Patients with frailty have higher risk for postoperative mortality and complications; however, most research has focused on small groups of high-risk procedures. The associations among frailty, operative stress, and mortality are poorly understood.

To assess the association between frailty and mortality at varying levels of operative stress as measured by the Operative Stress Score, a novel measure created for this study.

This retrospective cohort study included veterans in the Veterans Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program from April 1, 2010, through March 31, 2014, who underwent a noncardiac surgical procedure at Veterans Health Administration Hospitals and had information available on vital status (whether the patient was alive or deceased) at 1 year postoperatively. A Delphi consensus method was used to stratify surgical procedures into 5 categories of physiologic stress.

Frailty as measured by the Risk Analysis Index and operative stress as measured by the Operative Stress Score.

Postoperative mortality at 30, 90, and 180 days.

Of 432 828 unique patients (401 453 males [92.8%]; mean (SD) age, 61.0 [12.9] years), 36 579 (8.5%) were frail and 9113 (2.1%) were very frail. The 30-day mortality rate among patients who were frail and underwent the lowest-stress surgical procedures (eg, cystoscopy) was 1.55% (95% CI, 1.20%-1.97%) and among patients with frailty who underwent the moderate-stress surgical procedures (eg, laparoscopic cholecystectomy) was 5.13% (95% CI, 4.79%-5.48%); these rates exceeded the 1% mortality rate often used to define high-risk surgery. Among patients who were very frail, 30-day mortality rates were higher after the lowest-stress surgical procedures (10.34%; 95% CI, 7.73%-13.48%) and after the moderate-stress surgical procedures (18.74%; 95% CI, 17.72%-19.80%). For patients who were frail and very frail, mortality continued to increase at 90 and 180 days, reaching 43.00% (95% CI, 41.69%-44.32%) for very frail patients at 180 days after moderate-stress surgical procedures.

We developed a novel operative stress score to quantify physiologic stress for surgical procedures. Patients who were frail and very frail had high rates of postoperative mortality across all levels of the Operative Stress Score. These findings suggest that frailty screening should be applied universally because low- and moderate-stress procedures may be high risk among patients who are frail.

Armed conflict in the 21st century poses new challenges to a humanitarian surgical response, including changing security requirements, access to patients, and communities in need, limited deployable surgical assets, resource constraints, and the requirement to address both traumatic injuries as well as emergency surgical needs of the population. At the same time, recent improvements in trauma care and systems have reduced injury-related mortality. This combination of new challenges and medical capabilities warrants reconsideration of long-standing humanitarian surgery protocols.

To describe a consensus framework for surgical care designed to respond to this emerging need.

An international group of 35 representatives from humanitarian agencies, US military, and academic trauma programs was invited to the Stanford Humanitarian Surgical Response in Conflict Working Group to engage in a structured process to review extant trauma protocols and make recommendations for revision.

The working group's method adapted core elements of a modified Delphi process combined with consensus development conference from August 3 to August 5, 2018.

Lessons from civilian and military trauma systems as well as recent battlefield experiences in humanitarian settings were integrated into a tiered continuum of response from point of injury through rehabilitation. The framework addresses the security and medical requirements as well as ethical and legal principles that guide humanitarian action. The consensus framework includes trained, lay first responders; far-forward resuscitation/stabilization centers; rapid damage control surgical access; and definitive care facilities. The system also includes nontrauma surgical care, injury prevention, quality improvement, data collection, and predeployment training requirements.

Evidence suggests that modern trauma systems save lives. However, the requirements of providing this standard of care in insecure conflict settings places new burdens on humanitarian systems that must provide both emergency and trauma surgical care. This consensus framework integrates advances in trauma care and surgical systems in response to a changing security environment. It is possible to reduce disparities and improve the standard of care in these settings.