Survival outcomes according to the tumor location and prognostic factor in metastatic rectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Background & aims: Prognostic factors of metastatic rectal cancer are not well known. We aim to determine prognostic factors affecting survival for metastatic rectal cancer patients and also to investigate the effect of tumor localization on overall survival. Methods: Metastatic rectal cancer patients who received treatment in 5 different centers between 2012 and 2022 were included. Prognostic factors for survival were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analysis. The statistical methods included Pearson's chi-square test, Fisher exact test, Log-rank test, and Cox regression model. Results: A total of 283 patients with metastatic rectal cancer were included in the study. The median OS was not significantly different among the three groups (upper rectum 30.1 months, middle rectum 28.3 months, and low rectum cancer 24.8 months; log-rank p = 0.25). In univariate analysis, Grade 3, ECOG performance status 2, the presence of multiple metastatic sites, the presence of KRAS mutation, the presence of liver metastases, the presence of nonregional lymph node metastases, and the presence of bone metastases were significant predictors of poor survival. In multivariate analysis, Grade 3, ECOG performance status 2, and the presence of multiple metastatic sites were determined as indicators of worse prognosis. Conclusion: Our findings, primary tumor location did not affect survival in metastatic rectal cancer. The most important factors affecting survival were multiple metastatic sites, tumor grade, and ECOG performance status.

Paraneoplastic Hypereosinophilia in Locally Advanced Clear Cell Renal Carcinoma.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can cause various paraneoplastic syndromes, including metabolic and hematologic disturbances. Paraneoplastic hypereosinophilia has been reported in a variety of hematologic and solid tumors. Hypereosinophilia due to RCC is very rare and is only available as case reports in the literature. A 66-year-old male patient's thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) performed showed an increase in size in the right kidney and a heterogeneous contrasting solid mass of approximately 12 cm × 9 cm, which formed lobulations in its contours. The patient was diagnosed with clear-cell renal carcinoma as a result of a kidney biopsy. In the patient with stage cT4NxM0, the leukocyte count was 40.000/µl and the eosinophil count was 20% in biochemical tests. With these results, the patient was evaluated as having severe paraneoplastic hypereosinophilia due to RCC. The patient was started on sunitinib 50 mg for two weeks on/one week off. No symptoms were observed due to hypereosinophilia. In the evaluation made two weeks after the start of the treatment, it was observed that eosinophil levels decreased to normal rates. Paraneoplastic hypereosinophilia due to renal cell carcinoma may indicate poor prognosis and rapid disease progression. Myelosuppressive therapy is required for symptomatic patients.

Psychometric tests, critical flicker frequency, and inflammatory indicators in covert hepatic encephalopathy diagnosis.

Background and Aim: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a frequent complication of liver diseases. Systemic inflammation is key for HE pathogenesis. The main goal of the study was to investigate the role of psychometric tests, critical flicker frequency (CFF), and comparative evaluation of inflammatory indicators for the diagnosis of covert HE (CHE). Materials and Methods: The study was a prospective, nonrandomized, case-control study with a total of 76 cirrhotic patients and 30 healthy volunteers. The West Haven criteria were used to determine the occurrence of CHE in cirrhotic patients. Psychometric tests were applied to healthy and cirrhotic groups. CFF, venous ammonia, serum endotoxin, IL-6, IL-18, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) levels, and hemogram parameters were evaluated for cirrhotic patients. Results: CFF values and psychometric tests were found to accurately discriminate CHE positives from CHE negatives (p<0.05). When the control group was excluded, the digit symbol test and the number connection A test failed, unlike CFF and other psychometric tests. Using CFF, a 45 Hz cutoff value had 74% specificity and 75% sensitivity. Basal albumin levels (p=0.063), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) (p=0.086), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p 0.052) were significant, albeit slightly, among CHE groups. Basal albumin levels had 50% sensitivity and 71% specificity when 2.8 g/dL was used as a cutoff value to determine CHE. Conclusion: Both psychometric tests and CFF can be useful in diagnosing CHE. Using cytokine and endotoxin levels seems to be inadequate to diagnose CHE. Using LMR and albumin levels instead of psychometric tests for diagnosing CHE can be promising.