No abstract

No abstract

Tinnitus-the perception of sound in the absence of an actual external sound-represents a symptom of an underlying condition rather than a single disease. Several theories have been proposed to explain the mechanisms underlying tinnitus. Tinnitus generators are theoretically located in the auditory pathway, and such generators and various mechanisms occurring in the peripheral auditory system have been explained in terms of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions, edge theory, and discordant theory. Those present in the central auditory system have been explained in terms of the dorsal cochlear nucleus, the auditory plasticity theory, the crosstalk theory, the somatosensory system, and the limbic and autonomic nervous systems. Treatments for tinnitus include pharmacotherapy, cognitive and behavioral therapy, sound therapy, music therapy, tinnitus retraining therapy, massage and stretching, and electrical suppression. This paper reviews the characteristics, causes, mechanisms, and treatments of tinnitus.

BackgroundThis multicenter, randomized phase II trial was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of nimotuzumab plus irinotecan (N-IRI) versus irinotecan alone (IRI) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) showing disease progression after previous 5-fluorouracil-based therapy.MethodsIrinotecan-naive patients (n = 82) received N-IRI (nimotuzumab 400 mg weekly plus irinotecan 150 mg/m2 biweekly) or IRI (irinotecan 150 mg/m2 biweekly) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), safety, tolerability, and the correlation between efficacy and tumor epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression.ResultsOf 83 patients, 40 and 43 patients were randomly assigned to the N-IRI and IRI groups, respectively. In the N-IRI/IRI treatment group, median PFS was 73.0/85.0 days (P = 0.5668), and median OS and RR at 18 months were 250.5/232.0 days (P = 0.9778) and 18.4/10.3 %, respectively. Median PFS and OS in the EGFR 2+/3+ subgroups were 118.5/59.0 and 358.5/229.5 days, respectively. The RR was 33.3/0.0 % in the N-IRI/IRI treatment group. The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 77.5/64.3 %. No adverse events of grade 3 or higher skin rash or grade 3 or higher infusion-related reaction were reported.ConclusionsThere was no superiority of N-IRI over IRI alone in terms of PFS in 5-fluorouracil-refractory AGC patients. However, N-IRI showed potential improvement in the EGFR 2+/3+ subgroup based on improved RR, PFS, and OS.

Thymidylate synthase (TS) overexpression is a key determinant of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) resistance in human cancer cells. TS is also acutely up-regulated with 5-FU treatment, and, thus, novel strategies targeting TS downregulation seem to be promising in terms of modulating 5-FU resistance. Here, we report that histone deacetylase inhibitors can reverse 5-FU resistance by down-regulating TS. By using cDNA microarrays and validation experiments, we found that trichostatin A reduced the expression of both TS mRNA and TS protein. Cotreatment with trichostatin A and cycloheximide restored TS mRNA expression, suggesting that TS mRNA is repressed through new protein synthesis. On the other hand, TS protein expression was significantly reduced by lower doses of trichostatin A (50 nmol/L). Mechanistically, TS protein was found to interact with heat shock protein (Hsp) complex, and trichostatin A treatment induced chaperonic Hsp90 acetylation and subsequently enhanced Hsp70 binding to TS, which led to the proteasomal degradation of TS protein. Of note, combined treatment with low-dose trichostatin A and 5-FU enhanced 5-FUmediated cytotoxicity in 5-FU -resistant cancer cells in accordance with TS protein down-regulation. We conclude that a combinatorial approach using histone deacetylase inhibitors may be useful at overcoming 5-FU resistance. [Mol Cancer Ther 2006;5(12):3085 -95]