Clinical Outcomes of Upfront Primary Tumor Resection in Synchronous Unresectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

The role of upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) in patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer without severe symptoms remains controversial. We retrospectively analyzed the role of PTR in overall survival (OS) in this population. Among the 205 patients who enrolled, the PTR group (n = 42) showed better performance (p = 0.061), had higher frequencies of right-sided origin (p = 0.058), the T4 stage (p = 0.003), the M1a stage (p = 0.012), and <2 organ metastases (p = 0.002), and received fewer targeted agents (p = 0.011) than the chemotherapy group (n = 163). The PTR group showed a trend for longer OS (20.5 versus 16.0 months, p = 0.064) but was not related to OS in Cox regression multivariate analysis (p = 0.220). The male sex (p = 0.061), a good performance status (p = 0.078), the T3 stage (p = 0.060), the M1a stage (p = 0.042), <2 organ metastases (p = 0.035), an RAS wild tumor (p = 0.054), and the administration of targeted agents (p = 0.037), especially bevacizumab (p = 0.067), seemed to be related to PTR benefits. Upfront PTR could be considered beneficial in some subgroups, but these findings require larger studies to verify.

Sulfur Metabolism of the Gut Microbiome and Colorectal Cancer: The Threat to the Younger Generation.

Colorectal cancer diagnosed in individuals under 50 years old is called early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC), and its incidence has been rising worldwide. Simultaneously occurring with increasing obesity, this worrisome trend is partly explained by the strong influence of dietary elements, particularly fatty, meaty, and sugary food. An animal-based diet, the so-called Western diet, causes a shift in dominant microbiota and their metabolic activity, which may disrupt the homeostasis of hydrogen sulfide concentration. Bacterial sulfur metabolism is recognized as a critical mechanism of EOCRC pathogenesis. This review evaluates the pathophysiology of how a diet-associated shift in gut microbiota, so-called the microbial sulfur diet, provokes injuries and inflammation to the colonic mucosa and contributes to the development of CRC.

Intravenous, oral, and the combination of intravenous and oral ramosetron for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing general anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy have a high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) with incidences up to 75%. Ramosetron, a serotonin subtype 3 (5-HT(3)) antagonist, has been shown to be effective as an antiemetic after chemotherapy and surgery. Consensus guidelines recommend a combination of antiemetic therapies in high-risk groups. Until now, no published data have been available on the use of combination oral plus intravenous ramosetron. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of intravenous, oral, and the combination of oral and intravenous ramosetron for PONV prophylaxis in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were double-randomly allocated to 1 of 3 groups. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either 0.3 mg of intravenous ramosetron (group A), 0.1 mg of oral ramosetron (group B), or the combination of 0.1 mg of oral ramosetron and 0.3 mg of intravenous ramosetron (group C). All patients received standardized balanced anesthesia with desflurane and remifentanil. Postoperative nausea, retching, vomiting, pain, and adverse effects were assessed at 0 to 2, 2 to 24, and 24 to 48 hours after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 124 Korean patients (67 women, 57 men; age range, 25-65 years) were randomized to 1 of 3 study groups (42 in group A [mean age, 49.8 years], 41 in group B [mean age, 47.4 years], and 41 in group C [mean age, 48.9 years]). No statistical differences were observed among the 3 groups with regard to patient characteristics and information on surgery and anesthesia. During postoperative period 0 to 2 hours, complete response occurred in 31 (74%) patients in group A, 27 (66%) in group B, and 37 (90%) in group C. During the postoperative period of 2 to 24 hours, complete response was observed in 36 (86%), 33 (80%), and 40 (98%) patients in groups A, B, and C, respectively; there was a statistically significant difference in group C compared with group A or group B. During the postoperative period of 0 to 48 hours, incidences of rescue antiemetic use were 13 (31%), 14 (34%), and 3 (7%) in groups A, B and C, respectively. Common adverse effects (headache, dizziness, and drowsiness) were observed, but there was no significant difference in the incidences of adverse effects among the 3 groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of 0.1-mg oral and 0.3-mg intravenous ramosetron was more effective than either 0.3-mg intravenous ramosetron or 0.1-mg oral ramosetron alone for the prophylaxis of nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the first 24 hours after surgery. In addition, differences did not reach the level of statistical significance between 0.1 mg of oral ramosetron and 0.3 mg of intravenous ramosetron for the prevention of PONV in this patient population. Oral, intravenous, and combined oral and intravenous ramosetron appears well tolerated in the population studied. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT 01041183.