Objective To investigate the advances and clinical efficacy evaluation method on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods Literatures on the advances and clinical efficacy evaluation method on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer were reviewed and analyzed. The agreement between computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) and the results of histopathology and survival was analyzed.Results CT and EUS were the method of efficacy evaluation commonly used at present, but the evaluation indexes and criteria were controversial, and the criteria for solid tumors seemed to be not feasible for gastric cancer. Diffusionweighted imaging (DWI) method needed more investigation, while PET held advantage in early selection of patients without response accurately.Conclusion There is no uniform standard for clinical efficacy evaluation yet, so an integration of diverse imaging methods may be the best choice to improve the accuracy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer.
ObjectiveTo study the latest progress of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. MethodsLiteratures of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer, involving with theoretical basis, clinical significance, indications, drugs, predictors, and its relationship of breastconserving surgery, sentinel lymph node biopsy were reviewed. ResultsNeoadjuvant chemotherapy could reduce the clinical stage, increase opportunity of breast-conserving surgery, learn the sensitivity of drugs, prevent distant metastases, but the impact of the sentinel lymph node biopsy was still in dispute. ConclusionNeoadjuvant chemotherapy is an important part of a systemic treatment for breast cancer, but how to select sensitive drugs, develop individualized treatment programs and forecast the outcome needs further study.
Objective To evaluate the risk of management decision combined neo-adjuvant chemotherapy with operation for colorectal cancer by means of the colorectal cancer model of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI-CCM). Methods One hundred and eighty-one eligible patients (102 male, 79 female, mean age 58.78 years), which were pathologically proved colorectal cancer in our ward from July to November 2007, involved 62 colonic and 119 rectal cancer. The enrollment were assigned into multi-disciplinary team (MDT) group (n=65) or non-MDT group (n=116), according to whether the MDT was adopted, and the operative risk was analyzed by ACPGBI-CCM. Results The baseline characteristics of MDT and non-MDT group were coherent. The watershed of lower risk group (LRG) and higher risk group (HRG) was set as predictive mortality=2.07%. The time involving extraction of gastric, urethral and drainage tube, feeding, out-of-bed activity after operation in MDT group, whatever in LRG or HRG, were statistically earlier than those in non-MDT group (P＜0.05). The resectable rate in LRG was statistically higher than that in HRG (P＜0.05), and the proportion of Dukes staging was significantly different (P＜0.05) between two groups; Moreover, predictive mortality in HRG was statistically higher than that in LRG (P＜0.05), while actually there was no death in both groups. Conclusion Dukes staging which is included as an indispensable option by ACPGBI-CCM is responsible for the lower predictive mortality in LRG.Hence, the value of ACPGBI-CCM used to asses the morbidity of complications within 30 days postoperatively would be warranted by further research. The postoperative risk evaluation can serve as a novel routine to comprehensively analyze the short-term safe in the MDT.
Objective To compare the clinical effect between neo-adjuvant chemotherapy combined with operation and simple operation under multi-disciplinary team in rectal cancer. Methods A survey of 72 patients with rectal cancer from Nov. 2007 to Mar. 2008 were studied. Patients were divided into two groups using a simple random method: 33 cases in combined therapy group were treated with single period neo-adjuvant chemotherapy as well as operation and 39 cases in control group received operation only. To compare the differences of perioperative period indexes between two groups. Results During the differences of indexes of age, gender, differentiation degree, clinicopathologic stage as well as the distance to dentate line of tumor, there was no statistical significance between combined therapy group and control group (Pgt;0.05). And at the same time, the operative type, operative time and bleeding quantity in operation had no statistically significant difference between two groups (Pgt;0.05). As for the postoperative rehabilitation indexes, the time of vent to normal in combined therapy group was earlier than that in control group, but the intake time was later than that in control group （Plt;0.05）. Falling range from preoperative CEA to postoperative CEA was larger in combined therapy group than that in control group （Plt;0.05）; and the falling range from preoperative WBC to postoperative WBC had no significant difference between two groups （Pgt;0.05）. Conclusion The clinical effect of combined therapy is obviously superior to simple operation, suggesting that neo-adjuvant chemotherapy combined with operation is feasible and safe.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and find the mechanism of multidrug resistance. MethodsTwenty patients with gastric cancer and 31 patients with colorectal cancer underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and then operations. The preoperative specimens were stained by immunohistochemical techniques for testing p53,multidrug resistanceassociated protein (MRP), glutathione S transferase（GST）, telomerase. Resection specimens were evaluated for chemotherapy effect by routine histology; at the same time, the postoperative morbidity and mortality were observed. ResultsIn 51 patients, the response rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 27.45%(14/51),so multidrug resistance was a kind of common phenomena in gastrointestinal carcinomas. The postoperative morbidity was 15.69%(8/15), the main operation complication was infection,the mortality was 1.96%(1/51),only one person died from severe infection.The expression rate of p53, MRP, GST, telomerase was 58.0%,51.0%,66.7%,74.0%respectively, the location of p53 was at cell nucleus,location of MRP,GST was at cell memberane and cytoplasm,location of telomerase was at cytoplasm.The response rate had nothing to do with age, sex and metastasis. But it was related with p53 and telomerase expression. ConclusionNeoadjuvant chemotherapy is an effective, safe therapy. But the rate of drug resistance is high in gastrointestinal carcinomas, and the response rate is related to p53, telomerase expression.
目的:探讨妊娠相关性宫颈癌的早期诊断、治疗和预后。方法:结合文献回顾分析我院2000年至2007年收治的13例妊娠相关性宫颈癌的诊治经过和预后。结果:妊娠相关性宫颈癌分化程度低，癌灶体积大，早期盆腔淋巴结转移率高，产褥期宫颈癌预后差。结论:宫颈细胞学检查应列为首次产检常规项目；妊娠期宫颈原位癌在密切随诊前提下可暂不予处理，待分娩后6~8周活检确认病变性质后，再采取相应治疗措施；新辅助化疗同样可为晚期别的妊娠相关性宫颈癌争取手术时机。
Objective To summarize the current value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for potentially resectable gastric cancer. Methods The recent 5-year literatures searched through the PubMed with the key words: stomach neoplasm, gastric cancer/carcinoma, neoadjuvant therapy/chemotherapy and preoperative therapy/chemotherapy as well as the relevant reports presented in the ASCO Annual Meeting in 2007 and 2008 were analyzed. The present status of NAC for advanced gastric cancer was summarized, the necessity and feasibility were evaluated, and the patients features for selecting, the predictors for response, the mainly existing problems and development trend of NAC were analyzed. Results At present, there were 7 randomized control trails (RCT) published, and among them 3 were phase Ⅲ. It was safe, effective and feasible to most of trails in NAC for gastric cancer. However, it was still little to obtain survival benefit for NAC RCT, and short of randomized trial comparing strict preoperative chemotherapy to surgery alone or perioperative chemotherapy to surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy. It remained lots of problems such as how to select the appropriate patients, the effective induced regimes and the predicted factors, the evaluated indices for response. Conclusion NAC is a safe, feasible and efficient method to potentially resectable gastric cancer, but strict phase Ⅲ randomized trials are needed. In the future, substantial improvements of treatment outcome will likely depend on the novel drugs and molecular biological targeted therapies.
Radical surgical resection is still the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic cancer. With the update of minimally invasive concepts, the laparoscopic and robotic platform has been introduced to pancreatic surgery practice. The recent studies have demonstrated that minimally invasive procedure achieved similar or improved perioperative outcomes compared to the standard open approach. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy is increasingly being applied in pancreatic surgery, making surgical resection more challenging. Numbers of patients undergoing minimally invasive resection following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy remain low. The author consulted the latest literatures at home and abroad and described the current situation of minimally invasive treatment of pancreatic cancer after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.
Objective To explore the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on postoperative risk of colorectal cancer by use of estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress （E-PASS）. Methods A total of 161 patients with colorectal cancer according to the inclusion criteria from January 2009 to December 2009 in West China Hospital of Sichuan University were analyzed retrospectively，who were assigned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy group （NC group, 78 patients） and non-NC group （83 patients）. The postoperative risk of each group was assessed by the E-PASS scale including preoperative risk score （PRS），surgical stress score （SSS），and comprehensive risk score （CRS）. Results The baseline of two groups had no significant difference （P＞0.05）. The postoperative complication incidence of two groups had no significant difference either （P＞0.05）， which was 10.26% （8/78） in the NC group，and 7.23% （6/83） in the non-NC group. The PRS was 78.42 in the NC group and 83.42 in the non-NC group （P=0.497）. The SSS was 80.77 in the NC group and 81.22 in the non-NC group （P=0.951）. The CRS was 80.74 in the NC group and 81.24 in the non-NC group （P=0.976）. The accuracy of the postoperative risk assessment was 70 cases and 78 cases in the NC group and non-NC group，respectively. There was no significant difference of accuracy between two groups （P=0.325）. Conclusions Neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not increase the risk of patients with colorectal cancer after operation，and the results suggest that E-PASS scale can provide a more accurate assessment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with surgical risk.