Citations

Abstract The Editors welcome topical correspondence from readers relating to articles published in the Journal. Responses can be sent electronically via the BJS website (www.bjs.co.uk) or by post. All letters will be reviewed and, if approved, appear on the website. A selection of these will be edited and published in the Journal. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length. Letters submitted by post should be typed on A4-sized paper in double spacing and should be accompanied by a disk.

Purpose A pressing need exists for agents active against anthracycline- or taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC), or both. Previous clinical trials suggested that irinotecan might have such activity. We conducted this multicenter phase II study to assess efficacy and tolerability of two irinotecan schedules. Patients and Methods MBC patients who experienced disease progression after one to three chemotherapy regimens, including at least one anthracycline- or taxane-based regimen, were randomly assigned to irinotecan in 6-week cycles comprising 100 mg/m2 weekly for 4 weeks, then a 2-week rest (weekly) or 240 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Results The weekly arm had 52 assessable patients; the every-3-weeks arm had 51 assessable patients. In the weekly arm, the objective response (complete regression [CR] + partial regression [PR]) rate was 23% (one CR, 11 PR; 95% CI, 13% to 37%). Median response duration was 4.9 months (range, 1.9 to 15.9 months), and median overall survival was 9.7 months (95% CI, 8.0 to 14.2 months). In the every-3-weeks arm, the objective response rate was 14% (nine PR; 95% CI, 6% to 26%), median response duration was 4.2 months (range, 3.1 to 13.9 months), and median overall survival was 8.6 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 12.3 months). Treatment generally was well tolerated, especially in the weekly arm. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events with ≥ 10% incidence included neutropenia (29%) and diarrhea (17%) in the weekly arm and neutropenia (36%), vomiting (20%), dyspnea (18%), nausea (16%), and diarrhea (12%) in the every-3-weeks arm. Conclusion Irinotecan is active with good tolerability in refractory MBC. Irinotecan (especially weekly) warrants additional study as monotherapy and in combination regimens in this setting.

Background— Revascularization strategies often hinge on the presence and degree of left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) stenosis. A decision for bypass surgery is often based on the durability of surgical LAD revascularization compared with percutaneous approaches. By decreasing restenosis, drug-eluting stents may have reduced the “reintervention gap” between surgery and percutaneous intervention, making the percutaneous route preferable. Methods and Results— Of the 1101 patients in the SIRIUS trial, 459 with an LAD stenosis were randomized to percutaneous intervention with either sirolimus-eluting or bare-metal stents. Baseline demographic, clinical, and angiographic data were obtained. Patients had 1-year clinical and 8-month angiographic follow-up. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. The majority of lesions were tubular type B lesions (69.7%) with a mean diameter of 2.73 mm and a mean length of 14.0 mm. The binary in-stent restenosis rate was 2% for the sirolimus stent group and 41.6% for the bare-metal arm (relative risk, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.1; P <0.001). One-year major adverse events (defined as cardiac death, Q-wave and non–Q-wave myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was decreased 59% in the sirolimus-stent group (9.8% versus 24.9%; relative risk, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.61; P <0.001). Subgroup analysis of 135 patients with proximal LAD lesions showed similar benefits. In-stent restenosis was 0 in the proximal LAD sirolimus-eluting group (n=67), compared with 38% in the bare-metal arm (n=68), and major adverse events demonstrated a similar trend, with a 50% decrease compared with control patients (10.4% versus 20.6%, P =NS). Conclusions— Sirolimus-eluting stents significantly decrease revascularization rates in LAD lesions. At 1 year, sirolimus-eluting stent revascularization rates are comparable to historic single vessel bypass surgery revascularization rates.

Background— Electron-beam computed tomography (EBCT) is used to measure coronary calcification but not for aortic valve calcification (AVC). Its accuracy, association with aortic stenosis (AS) severity, and diagnostic and prognostic value with respect to AVC are unknown. Methods and Results— In 30 explanted aortic valves, the AVC score by EBCT (1125±1294 Agatston units [AU]) showed a strong linear correlation ( r =0.96, P <0.0001) with valvular calcium weight (653±748 mg) by pathology that allowed estimation of calcium weight as AVC score/1.7, with a small standard error of the estimate (53 mg). In 100 consecutive clinical patients, we measured AVC by EBCT and AS severity by echocardiographic aortic valve area (AVA). The AVC score was 1316±1749 AU (range 0 to 7226 AU). Intraobserver and interobserver variabilities were excellent (4±4% and 4±10%, respectively). AVC and AVA were strongly associated ( r =0.79, P <0.0001) but had a curvilinear relationship that suggested that AVC and AVA provide complementary information. AVC score ≥1100 AU provided 93% sensitivity and 82% specificity for diagnosis of severe AS (AVA <1 cm 2 ), with a receiver operator characteristic curve area of 0.89. AVC assessment by echocardiography was often more severe than by EBCT ( P <0.0001). During follow-up, 22 patients either died, developed heart failure, or required surgery. With adjustment for age, sex, symptoms, ejection fraction, and AVA, the AVC score was independently predictive of event-free survival (risk ratio 1.06 per 100-AU increment [1.02 to 1.10], P <0.001), even after adjustment for echocardiographic calcifications. Conclusions— AVC is accurately and reproducibly measured by EBCT and shows a strong association and diagnostic value for severe AS. The curvilinear relationship between AVC and AVA suggests these measures are complementary, and indeed, AVC provides independent outcome information. Thus, AVC is an important measurement in the evaluation of patients with AS.