ObjectiveTo study value of long noncoding RNA H19 and HOTTIP in plasma in predicting efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for resectable locally advanced gastric cancer. MethodsForty patients with T3–4aN+M0 gastric cancer and 40 patients with benign gastric diseases treated in the Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital Affiliated to Qingdao University from August 2020 to May 2021 were prospectively included. The expressions of H19 and HOTTIP in the plasma of gastric cancer and benign gastric diseases patients without any treatment after admission were detected before treatment (CAPEOX regimen was used in the patients with gastric cancer), then which were detected after 2 NAC courses for patients with gastric cancer. Meanwhile, some clinical items were detected and the efficacy of NAC was evaluated. The complete remission (CR) and partial remission (PR) were classified as objective remission, CR, PR, and disease stability were classified as disease control. The expressions of H19 and HOTTIP between the different patients were compared and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate their values in the diagnosis of resectable locally advanced gastric cancer. ResultsThere were 13 cases of T downstaging and 27 cases of T non-downstaging and 25 cases of objective remission and 35 disease control after NAC. The median relative expression levels of H19 and HOTTIP before NAC in the patients with gastric cancer were higher than those in the patients with benign gastric diseases (H19: 1.42 versus 0.98, Z=–3.835, P<0.001; HOTTIP: 2.15 versus 1.04, Z=–5.062, P<0.001), and which were in the patients with T downstaging and disease control were lower than those in the patients with T non-downstaging and 5 cases of disease progression (For T staging, H19: 1.12 versus 1.54, Z=–2.960, P=0.002; HOTTIP: 1.49 versus 2.30, Z=–2.310, P=0.019. For efficacy of NAC, H19: 1.39 versus 2.48, Z=–3.211, P<0.001; HOTTIP: 1.96 versus 3.25, Z=–2.393, P=0.014). The median relative expressions of H19 and HOTTIP after NAC were lower than those before NAC in the patients with gastric cancer (H19: 1.12 versus 1.42, Z=–3.965, P<0.001; HOTTIP: 1.30 versus 2.15, Z=–4.839, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in the changes of H19 and HOTTIP before and after NAC between the patients with T downstaging and T non-downstaging, and between disease control and disease progression (P>0.05). The areas of ROC curve of H19, HOTTIP, and combination of H19 and HOTTIP in diagnosis of resectable locally advanced gastric cancer were higher than 0.7. ConclusionsLncRNA H19 and HOTTIP might be potential tumor markers in gastric cancer, and their diagnostic values for resectable locally advanced gastric cancer are higher. Gastric cancer patients with low expressions of H19 and HOTTIP in plasma might be more sensitive to NAC.
Objective To explore the accuracy of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting pathological complete remission (pCR) in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant therapy (NAC). Methods The clinicopathological data of 245 patients with invasive breast cancer who had completed the surgical resection after NAC in the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University from March 2020 to April 2022 were collected retrospectively. According to the results of hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) detected by immunohistochemistry, all patients were divided into four subgroups: HR+/HER2–, HR+/HER2+, HR–/HER2+ and HR–/HER2–. The value of MRI in evaluating the efficacy of NAC was analyzed by comparing the postoperative pathological results as the gold standard with the residual tumor size assessed by preoperative MRI. Meanwhile, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of pCR predicted by the evaluation results of enhanced MRI were analyzed, and further analyzed its predictive value for pCR of different subtypes of breast cancer. Results There were 88 cases (35.9%) achieved radiological complete response (rCR) and 106 cases (43.3%) achieved pCR in 245 patients. Enhanced MRI in assessing the size of residual tumors overestimated and underestimated 12.7% (31/245) and 9.8% (24/245) of patients, respectively. When setting rCR as the MRI assessment index the specificity, sensitivity and PPV were 84.2% (117/139), 62.3% (66/106) and 75.0% (66/88), respectively. When setting near-rCR as the MRI assessment index the specificity, sensitivity and PPV were 70.5% (98/139), 81.1% (86/106), and 67.7% (86/127), respectively. The positive predictive value of both MRI-rCR and MRI-near-rCR in evaluating pCR of each subtype subgroup of breast cancer was the highest in the HR–/HER2+ subgroup (91.7% and 83.3%, respectively). In each subgroup, compared with rCR, the specificity of near-rCR to predict pCR decreased to different degrees, while the sensitivity increased to different degrees. Conclusions Breast contrast-enhanced MRI can more accurately evaluate the efficacy of localized breast lesions after NAC, and can also more accurately predict the breast pCR after NAC. The HR–/HER2+ subgroup may be a potentially predictable population with pCR exemption from breast surgery. However, the accuracy of the evaluation of pCR by breast enhancement MRI in HR+/HER2– subgroup is low.
Neoadjuvant therapy has become the standard treatment for locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer, significantly improving long-term survival compared to surgery alone. Neoadjuvant therapy has evolved to include various strategies, such as concurrent chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or targeted combination therapy. This enriches clinical treatment options and provides a more personalized and scientific treatment approach for patients. This article aims to comprehensively summarize current academic research hot topics, review the rationale and evaluation measures of neoadjuvant therapy, discuss challenges in restaging methods after neoadjuvant therapy, and identify the advantages and disadvantages of various neoadjuvant therapeutic strategies.
Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 56 consecutive patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer treated by neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery in our hospital between January 2015 and December 2016. There were 51 males and 5 females. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Neoadjuvant therapy followed by open surgery esophagectomy group was as an OE group with 25 patients aged 61 (50-73) years. And neoadjuvant therapy followed by MIE was as a MIE group with 31 patients aged 60 (55-79) years. Results The pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of 28 patients with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy was significantly higher than that of 28 patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (21.4% vs. 10.7%, P<0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, R2 rate and the number of lymph nodes dissection in the MIE group were obviously better than those of the OE group with statistical differences (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the number of resected lymph nodes along the bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerves and lymph node metastasis rate (P>0.05) between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative respiratory complications in the MIE group was lower than that of the OE group (P=0.041). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of other complications, re-operation, re-entry to ICU, median length of stay or perioperative deaths (P>0.05). There was only one patient with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy in the OE group died due to gastric fluid asphyxia caused by trachea-esophageal fistula. Conclusion Neoadjuvant therapy followed by MIE for locally advanced esophageal cancer is safe and feasible. The oncological outcomes seem comparable regardless of OE.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical application of oncoplastic surgery in breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.MethodsFrom May 2016 to May 2018, 32 breast cancer patients (cT2–3N0–3M0) who were scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and agreed to accept breast-conserving surgery after NAC in the Henan Tumor Hospital were enrolled into the retrospective study. These patients were originally unable to perform traditional breast conserving surgery because of the size or location of the tumor. We observed the success rate, safety and cosmetic effects of breast-conserving therapy, which were applicated of tumor down-staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with oncoplastic surgery.ResultsIn this study, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 31 patients achieved CR or PR, and 1 patient had SD. All 32 patients underwent breast-conserving surgery successfully, 3 patients underwent breast-conserving combined with volume replacement, and 29 patients underwent breast-conserving combined with volume displacement. One patient was not satisfied with the cosmetic effects, the other patients were satisfied or basically satisfied with the cosmetic effects. The median follow-up was 18 months (5–24 months), and no local recurrence or distant metastasis was found in 32 patients.ConclusionsBy tumor down-staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with oncoplastic surgery, we can make some patients who are originally not suitable for breast conserving due to tumor size and tumor location succeed in breast-conserving therapy, and the safety and cosmetic effect are basically satisfied.
ObjectiveTo analyze the risk factors influencing major postoperative complications (MPC) after minimally invasive radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT), and to construct a nomogram for accurately predicting MPC risk factors, and provide a reference for clinical decision-making. MethodsThe gastric cancer patients who underwent minimally invasive radical gastrectomy in the Department of General Surgery of the First Medical Center of the Chinese PLA General Hospital from February 2012 to December 2022 and met the inclusion criteria of this study were retrospectively collected. The univariate and multivariate logistic regression model were used to evaluate the risk factors influencing MPC and a nomogram model was constructed. The MPC were defined as Clavien-Dindo classification grade Ⅱ and beyond. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the calibration curve were used to evaluate the discrimination and accuracy of the nomogram model. ResultsA total of 362 patients were included in this study, among whom 65 cases (18.0%) experienced MPC. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the age ≥58 years old, body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2, tumor long diameter ≥30 mm, operative time ≥300 min, and preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥3.7 were the risk factors influencing MPC. The nomogram model constructed using the above variables showed that the AUC (95%CI) was 0.731 (0.662, 0.801) in predicting the risk of MPC. The calibration curves showed that the prediction curve of the nomogram in predicting the MPC was agree well with the actual MPC (Hosmer-Lemeshow test: χ2=9.293, P=0.056). ConclusionFrom the results of this study, nomogram model constructed by combining age, BMI, tumor long diameter, operative time, and preoperative NLR can distinguish between patients with and without MPC after minimally invasive radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer following NACT, and has a better accuracy.
ObjectiveTo analyze the relationship between adverse reactions and curative effect in neoadjuvant chemotherapy, this study is to explore whether the adverse reactions of chemotherapy can indirectly predict the efficacy of chemotherapy, so as to give a new definition of adverse reactions of chemotherapy.MethodsThe clinical data of 64 patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer (after 4 cycles of TAC regimen) were retrospectively analyzed. The adverse reactions (weakness, nausea, vomiting, alopecia, myelosuppression, cardiotoxicity) during chemotherapy were counted. At the same time, the evaluation of chemotherapy efficacy was carried out according to the RECIST1.1 standard, and the relationship between the degree of adverse reactions of chemotherapy and the curative effect was analyzed one by one. Then, according to the severity of adverse reactions, adopting the form of scoring to assign the value, and use Pearson correlation analysis to clarify the specific relationship between adverse reactions and curative effect. Finally, four subgroups of Luminal A, Luminal B, Her2+ and Sanyin were determined according to molecular typing, and the relationship between adverse reactions and therapeutic effects among different subgroups was analyzed.ResultsThere was no difference in the adverse reactions of chemotherapy in neoadjuvant chemotherapy patients of different ages (correlation coefficient r fluctuated between –0.079 and –0.164, P value fluctuated between 0.195 and 0.533). The patients with high scores of adverse reactions showed relatively good efficacy (r=0.587, P<0.01). There was no significant correlation between fatigue, nausea and vomiting and efficacy (r=0.199, P=0.144; r=0.127, P=0.144). Among the adverse reactions, there was a significant positive correlation between alopecia, myelosuppression, cardiotoxicity and efficacy (r=0.532, r=0.621, r=0.422, all P<0.01). The above correlation was verified in the Luminal A subgroup (r=0.559, P<0.007).ConclusionsThe severity of adverse reactions in neoadjuvant chemotherapy can predict the efficacy of chemotherapy. To a certain extent, the heavier adverse reactions, the better the chemotherapy effect. Hair loss, myelosuppression, and cardiotoxicity have a clearer effect on efficacy in several common adverse reactions.
ObjectiveTo analyze the association between preoperative staging (cTNM) and neoadjuvant therapy regimen decision-making and efficacy in patients with rectal cancer in the current version of Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA). MethodsThe data analysis for this study selected the DACCA version updated on April 20, 2024. The patient information was collected and categorized into three stages (Ⅱ, Ⅲ, and Ⅳ). The differences in neoadjuvant treatment decision-making and therapeutic effects, including gross changes, imaging changes, and tumor regression grade (TRG), were analyzed. ResultsA total of 3 158 eligible cases were collected in this study, with complete preoperative staging and neoadjuvant therapy decision-making data available for 2 370 patients. There were statistically significant differences in the overall comparison among the patients with rectal cancer in terms of the selection of combined targeted therapy, radiotherapy regimens, and the intensity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy by patients at different preoperative stages (χ2=42.239, P<0.001; χ2=41.615, P<0.001; H=1.161, P=0.004). Specifically, the proportion of patients choosing combined targeted therapy and combined radiotherapy gradually increased as the stage advanced. Among patients at different stages, the proportion of those choosing medium-course chemotherapy was the highest, and the proportion of patients choosing long-course chemotherapy was the highest among those with more advanced stages. Regarding the gross changes, imaging changes, and TRG results after neoadjuvant treatment in the patients at different preoperative stages, there were statistically significant differences in the overall comparison among patients with stage Ⅱ, Ⅲ, and Ⅳ rectal cancer (H=7.860, P=0.020; H=9.845, P=0.007; H=6.680, P=0.035). The proportion of partial response was the highest across all response metrics (macroscopic, radiographic, and TRG) in each stage. Notably, stage Ⅱ patients demonstrated the highest rate of complete response. For TRG evaluation, grade 2 (TRG2) was the most common outcome across all stages. ConclusionsData analysis from DACCA reveals that patients with advanced stages are more likely to choose chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy or radiotherapy, and had a higher proportion of intermediate range chemotherapy and the intensity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is stronger. In terms of neoadjuvant treatment effects, the earlier the staging, the better the gross and imaging changes, and the lower the TRG level.
The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy combined with surgery, but patients after the same treatment regimen show a large difference in outcomes. For patients with good response to neoadjuvant therapy, the waiting & observation scheme can be selected to avoid surgery and other complications. Therefore, accurate assessment of the response of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy can better develop personalized treatment strategies. Current studies have found that blood sample detection, endoscopy, imaging examination and artificial intelligence have their own advantages and disadvantages in evaluating the response of neoadjuvant therapy. Therefore, this article reviews the application of different clinical tools in evaluating and predicting the response of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer, and looks forward to the future development direction.
ObjectiveTo understand the progress of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer. MethodThe studies and the treatment guidelines relevant to PMRT in the patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer in recent years were analyzed and summarized. ResultsThe ability of PMRT to improve the prognosis of patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer remained controversial. Owing to the patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer were heterogeneous, and the indications for PMRT had not been standardized. With the increasing use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer, some studies had attempted to formulate decisions about PMRT based on changes in tumor characteristics before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, but the findings were currently controversial. ConclusionsWhether PMRT can improve prognosis and decision-making for patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer is still controversial. Some ongoing clinical trials may provide some references for the optimal decision-making of PMRT for patients with T1–2N1M0 breast cancer.