Center rquis

Rennes, France

Center rquis

Rennes, France
SEARCH FILTERS
Time filter
Source Type

Becker S.,Center rquis | Becker S.,French Institute of Health and Medical Research | Becker S.,European University of Brittany | Becker S.,Center cquerel | And 21 more authors.
Nuclear Medicine and Biology | Year: 2010

Introduction: Lipiodol is used as a vector for chemoembolization or internal radiotherapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). The aim of this study is to improve the tumoral uptake of Lipiodol by modulating membrane fluidizing agents to optimize the effectiveness of Lipiodol vectorized therapy. Methods: The effect of dexamethasone and tamoxifen on membrane fluidity was studied in vitro by electron paramagnetic resonance applied to rat hepatocarcinoma cell line N1S1.The tumoral uptake of Lipiodol was studied in vivo on rats with HCC, which had been previously treated by dexamethasone and/or tamoxifen, after intra-arterial administration of 99mTc-SSS-Lipiodol. Results: The two molecules studied here exhibit a fluidizing effect in vitro which appears dependent on time and dose, with a maximum fluidity obtained after 1 hr at concentrations of 20 μM for dexamethasone and 200 nM for tamoxifen. In vivo, while the use of dexamethasone or tamoxifen alone tends to lead to increased tumoral uptake of Lipiodol, this effect does not reach levels of significance. On the other hand, there is a significant increase in the tumoral uptake of 99mTc-SSS-Lipiodol in rats pretreated by both dexamethasone and tamoxifen, with a tumoral uptake (expressed in % of injected activity per g of tumor) of 13.57±3.65% after treatment, as against 9.45±4.44% without treatment (P<.05). Conclusions: Dexamethasone and tamoxifen fluidify the N1S1 cells membrane, leading to an increase in the tumoral uptake of Lipiodol. These drugs could be combined with chemo-Lipiodol-embolization or radiolabeled Lipiodol, with a view to improving the effectiveness of HCCs therapy. © 2010 Elsevier Inc.


PubMed | Center rquis, Nancy University Hospital Center, Data Center, CHR Metz Mercy and 4 more.
Type: Clinical Trial, Phase II | Journal: International journal of cancer | Year: 2016

We report on a phase II clinical trial to determine the effect of a concurrent ultra-fractionated radiotherapy and temozolomide treatment in inoperable glioblastoma patients. A phase II study opened; patients over 18 years of age who were able to give informed consent and had histologically proven, newly diagnosed inoperable diagnosed and supratentorial glioblastoma were eligible. Three doses of 0.75 Gy spaced apart by at least 4 hr were delivered daily, 5 days a week for six consecutive weeks for a total of 67.5 Gy. Chemotherapy was administered during the same period, which consisted of temozolomide given at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) for 7 days a week. After a 4-week break, chemotherapy was resumed for up to six cycles of adjuvant temozolomide treatment, given every 28 days, according to the standard 5-day regimen. Tolerance and toxicity were the primary endpoints; survival and progression-free survival were the secondary endpoints. In total, 40 patients were enrolled in this study, 29 men and 11 women. The median age was 58 years, and the median Karnofsky performance status was 80. The concomitant ultra-fractionated radiotherapy and temozolomide treatment was well tolerated. Complete responses were seen in four patients, and partial responses were reported in seven patients. The median survival from the initial diagnosis was 16 months. Several long-term survivors were noted. Concurrent ultra-fractionated radiation therapy and temozolomide treatment are well accepted by the patients. The results showed encouraging survival rates for these unfavorable patients.


PubMed | Center rquis
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology | Year: 2016

3641 Background: Once objective tumor response (OR) or stable disease (SD) has been achieved in patients (Pts) undergoing palliative chemotherapy (CT) for metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC), we propose a break, allowing the Pts a CT -free period with visit at 6 weeks then a CT every 3 months; in case of PD, CT is given.This retrospective series included a random selection of our Pts with MCRC who had had at least 1 break in their CT.62 Pts, age 60.9 +/- 10.8 yrs, received palliative CT for MCRC and had had at least 1 break in their CT. A break was defined as a period when CT could have been but was not given. Periods of palliative care and interruptions due to side effects were not considered breaks. The 1st break took place in a 1st-line (n=61) or 2-line (n=1) protocol in patients who had OR (n=41) or SD (n=20) after a median 4.5 mo (no difference between OR and SD). Median duration of these 1st break was 6 mo. Kaplan-Meier plots showed that 52.5 +/- 6.4%, 30.7 +/- 6% and 20.5 +/- 5.2% of the Pts were still CT -free at 6, 9, and 12 mo. The CT -free period was longer after OR (median > 6 mo) than after SD (4 mo) (p<0.02). After their first break, 57 Pts received a 2nd CT, 35 with the same CT (10 OR, all after initial OR, 14 SD and 8 PD) and 22 with another CT. After this 2nd cycle, 40 Pts took another break (median 5 mo) and 29.5 +/- 7.4% remained CT -free at 6 mo, 13 % at 1 yr. A 3rd cycle was delivered for 32 Pts (median 3 mo) and 13 of them then had another break (median 4 mo); 9 resumed CT (6 mo) and 5 had another break (4 mo). Globally, Pts had CT for a median 8.5 mo (range 3-30) and was CT -free for a median 11 mo (1-75). Median time without CT was 1.3 times median time with CT. On October 10, 2003, 29 Pts had died, 4 were receiving best supportive cares, 14 were CT -free, and 15 were receiving CT. The 1-, 2- and 3-yr survival rates were 95.2 +/- 2.7%, 70.8 +/- 6.5%, and 48 +/- 8% (11 exposed patients).From this retrospective analysis, we conclude that 1) responders can take a break in CT for MCRC, and 2) breaks can be repeated, 3) without compromising survival. The impact of this approach on quality-of-life, healthcare expenditures, and even overall survival is certainly worth evaluation in a large-scale prospective study. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


PubMed | Center rquis
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Nuclear medicine and biology | Year: 2010

Lipiodol is used as a vector for chemoembolization or internal radiotherapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). The aim of this study is to improve the tumoral uptake of Lipiodol by modulating membrane fluidizing agents to optimize the effectiveness of Lipiodol vectorized therapy.The effect of dexamethasone and tamoxifen on membrane fluidity was studied in vitro by electron paramagnetic resonance applied to rat hepatocarcinoma cell line N1S1. The tumoral uptake of Lipiodol was studied in vivo on rats with HCC, which had been previously treated by dexamethasone and/or tamoxifen, after intra-arterial administration of (99m)Tc-SSS-Lipiodol.The two molecules studied here exhibit a fluidizing effect in vitro which appears dependent on time and dose, with a maximum fluidity obtained after 1 hr at concentrations of 20 M for dexamethasone and 200 nM for tamoxifen. In vivo, while the use of dexamethasone or tamoxifen alone tends to lead to increased tumoral uptake of Lipiodol, this effect does not reach levels of significance. On the other hand, there is a significant increase in the tumoral uptake of (99m)Tc-SSS-Lipiodol in rats pretreated by both dexamethasone and tamoxifen, with a tumoral uptake (expressed in % of injected activity per g of tumor) of 13.57 3.65% after treatment, as against 9.45 4.44% without treatment (P<.05).Dexamethasone and tamoxifen fluidify the N1S1 cells membrane, leading to an increase in the tumoral uptake of Lipiodol. These drugs could be combined with chemo-Lipiodol-embolization or radiolabeled Lipiodol, with a view to improving the effectiveness of HCCs therapy.

Loading Center rquis collaborators
Loading Center rquis collaborators