Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S Lowenbraun

Publications and source records attributed to S Lowenbraun.

31 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Alternating non-cross-resistant drug combinations in the treatment of metastatic small-cell carcinoma of the lung.

In a randomized trial of the Southeastern Cancer Study Group, patients with metastatic small-cell lung carcinoma were treated with a combination of cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2 I.V.), Adriamycin (50 mg/m2 I.V.), DTIC (250 mg/m2 I.V.), and vincristine (1 mg/m2 I.V.) every 4 weeks for three cycles. Complete and partial responders to this induction regimen were then randomized to receive either the same combination every 4 weeks for an additional six cycles versus a non-cross-resistant drug combination of BCNU (100 mg/m2 I.V.), procarbazine (100 mg/m2 p.o. daily x 10 days), methotrexate (25 mg/m2 I.V.), and vinblastine (5 mg/m2 I.V.) every 4 weeks for six cycles versus alternating treatments with the two regimens for a total of six cycles of therapy. Patients who were less than good responders received six cycles of the non-cross-resistant drug combination. Of 202 evaluable patients, 40% responded (complete + partial responses) to induction; the complete response rate for the whole group was low (14%). Patients randomized to the BPMV combination, or crossed over to it, failed to improve upon their response to induction. Patients who responded to induction had a median survival of 41 weeks versus 20.6 weeks for the nonresponders, p less than 0.001. Performance status greater than or equal to 60%, and absence of prior radiotherapy were associated with improved survival (30 and 31.5 weeks, respectively). The toxicity of these regimens was acceptable. Failure to improve on results of our earlier protocol were probably due to the long (weeks) interval between treatments, inclusion of a relatively inactive but toxic drug (DTIC) in the induction combination which limited doses of the more active agents, and the use of a non-cross-resistant drug regimen which was inactive.

Adult↗

Combined modality treatment of localized small-cell lung carcinoma. A randomized prospective study of the Southeastern Cancer Study Group.

Seventy patients with small-cell lung carcinoma limited to the thorax +/- ipsilateral supraclavicular lymph nodes were randomized to either of two study arms: 33 patients received radiation therapy (RT) alone consisting of 4500 rads in 5-6 weeks to primary tumor and regional lymph nodes, and 3500 rads in 2 1/2 weeks to brain as prophylaxis; 37 patients received, in addition to the RT above, chemotherapy (CT) with cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2), Adriamycin (50 mg/m2), and DTIC (250 mg/m2) every 3 weeks given in two cycles before RT and seven cycles post-RT. Patients receiving RT alone who showed recurrence were crossed over to receive CT as above. Of 23 patients receiving RT alone who were evaluable 17 or 74% were responders; seven of these responses were complete (30%). On the RT and CT arm, of 24 evaluable cases, the response rate was 75%, of which 12 (50%) were complete. The median duration of disease-free survival of patients receiving RT + CT was 27 weeks, which ws superior to that of patients receiving RT alone (9.9 weeks, p = 0.019). The median survival of responders was essentially the same on both treatment arms; RT + CT, 47.7 weeks vs. RT alone, 50 weeks (p = N.S.).

Adult↗

The superiority of combination chemotherapy over single agent chemotherapy in small cell lung carcinoma.

From June 1974 to October 1976, 288 patients with small cell undifferentiated lung carcinoma were entered into a randomized, controlled study comparing the two noncycle-active induction regimens of cyclophosphamide vs. the combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and imidazole carboximide (DTIC). Patients were stratified by extent of disease, previous radiotherapy and performance status. Responding patients and those who did not progress were then randomized to receive their initial regimen alone, or their initial regimen with added cycle-active therapy (vincristine, hydroxyurea and methotrexate). While only 4/34 (12%) evaluable patients treated with cyclophosphamide achieved a response (greater than 50% regression), a final total of 119/217 (57%) evaluable patients on the three drugs have responded (p = 0.005). The survival curve for all the combination-treated patients was significantly better than for those treated with cyclophosphamide alone (p = 0.012). There was no demonstrable statistical superiority in length of remission or survival for patients on the combination who received in addition cycle-active consolidation therapy. In the combination chemotherapy group, survival duration was longer for patients with limited disease than extensive disease (p = 0.035). There was a strong correlation between quality of remission produced by the combination and survival.

Adult↗

cis-Dichlorodiammineplatinum(II) and hexamethylmelamine in the treatment of non-oat cell lung cancer: a pilot study of the Southeastern Cancer Study Group.

Fifty-one patients with metastatic non-oat cell carcinoma of the lung were treated with a combination of cis-dichlorodiammineplatinum(II) and hexamethylmelamine. The overall response rate (all cell types) was 16%. Four of 20 patients with adenocarcinoma had a partial response and an additional five patients classified as having stable disease had tumor regression less than 50%. The median survival of responders and of those with stable disease (all types) was 8 and 7 months respectively, significantly longer than the median survival of patients who progressed (median survival, 2 months [P less than 0.05]). The major dose-limiting toxicity was nausea and vomiting in over half of the patients; hematologic toxicity and peripheral neuropathy were the other adverse effects of the combination.

Adenocarcinoma↗

Social effects of integrated classrooms and resource room/regular class placements on elementary students with learning disabilities.

The social status of elementary students with learning disabilities (LD) served by the Integrated Classroom Model (ICM) was compared to the social status of elementary students with learning disabilities served in a regular class with resource room support. The ICM serves elementary special education and non-special-education students (1:2) together as one class. The comparison group was composed of students with learning disabilities who received special education services outside of their regular classroom for a portion of their school day. Social status was determined by assessing interpersonal relationships among students, using a peer rating method. The results of analyses of various dimensions suggest that while special education students in both programs have significantly lower social status on average than their non-special-education peers, the children in the ICM have a better opportunity to blend successfully into the classroom than the children who go out to a resource room.

Child↗