First-line trastuzumab plus taxane-based chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer: cost-minimization analysis

Metastatic and triple-negative breast cancer: challenges and treatment options

The major current conventional types of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treatments include surgery, radiation, hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, or immunotherapy. Introducing biological drugs, targeted treatment and gene therapy can potentially reduce the mortality and improve the quality of life in patients with MBC. However, combination of several types of treatment is usually recommended. Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for 10-20% of all cases of breast carcinoma and is characterized by the low expression of progesterone receptor (PR), estrogen receptor (ER), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Consequently, convenient treatments used for MBC that target these receptors are not effective for TNBC which therefore requires special treatment approaches. This review discusses the occurrence of MBC, the prognosis and predictive biomarkers of MBC, and focuses on the novel advanced tactics for treatment of MBC and TNBC. Nanotechnology-based combinatorial approach for the suppression of EGFR by siRNA and gifitinib is described.

Anti-angiogenesis target therapy for advanced osteosarcoma (Review)

Osteosarcomas (OS), especially those with metastatic or unresectable disease, have limited treatment options. The greatest advancement in treatments occurred in the 1980s when multi-agent chemotherapy, including doxorubicin, cisplatin, high-dose methotrexate, and, in some regimens, ifosfamide, was demonstrated to improve overall survival compared with surgery alone. However, standard chemotherapeutic options have been limited by poor response rates in patients with relapsed or advanced cases. It has been reported that VEGFR expression correlates with the outcome of patients with osteosarcoma and circulating VEGF level has been associated with the development of lung metastasis. At present, it seems to us that progress has not been made since Grignani reported a phase II cohort trial of sorafenib and sorafenib combined with everolimus for advanced osteosarcoma, which, in a sense, have become a milestone as a second-line therapy for osteosarcoma. Although the recognization of muramyltripepetide phosphatidyl-ethanolamine has made some progress based on its combination with standard chemotherapy, its effect on refractory cases is controversial. Personalized comprehensive molecular profiling of high-risk osteosarcoma up to now has not changed the therapeutic prospect of advanced osteosarcoma significantly. Thus, how far have we moved forward and what therapeutic strategy should we prefer for anti-angiogenesis therapy? This review provides an overview of the most updated anti-angiogenesis therapy in OS and discusses some clinical options in order to maintain or even improve progression-free survival.