RESUMEN
Rectal small cell carcinoma is a rare and aggressive cancer subtype for which a consensus of optimal treatment has not yet been reached. This cancer presents a difficult surgical problem, and thus, the mainstay of treatment tends to mirror that of small cell carcinoma of the lung (chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and immune modulators). This brief report highlights current treatment options available for this rare and difficult entity. There is a significant need for large-center clinical trials and prospective studies to help determine the best treatment regimen to effectively care for patients with small cell carcinoma of the rectum.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Pequeñas , Neoplasias del Recto , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Pequeñas/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Células Pequeñas/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Recto/patología , Neoplasias del Recto/diagnóstico , Neoplasias del Recto/terapia , Neoplasias del Recto/patología , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Gastric neuroendocrine tumors (gNETs) are rare cancers for which surgery may improve survival. We aim to determine if facility type affects treatment and survival outcomes. METHODS: The NCDB was queried for patients with gNET from 2004-2016 and stratified into Academic/Research Program (ARP), Community Cancer Program (CCP), Comprehensive Community Cancer Program (CCCP), or Integrated Network Cancer Program (INCP). Overall survival along with clinical and demographic features was compared. RESULTS: Median survival was improved in patients treated at an academic program: 137.3 months versus 88.0, 96.3, and 100.2 for CCP, CCCP, INCP, respectively (P < .0001). Patients treated at academic centers were more likely to have surgery (64.2% vs 59.1%, 57.5%, 51.4%, P < .0001). After propensity matching for age, race, grade, stage, insurance status, and comorbidity score, survival benefit from treatment at an academic center remained (P = .03), particularly for patients undergoing surgery (P < .0001) and chemotherapy (P = .04). CONCLUSION: Patients with gNET treated at an academic hospital had improved median survival after propensity matching and may benefit from treatment at academic rather than community medical centers.
Asunto(s)
Tumores Neuroendocrinos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/cirugía , Carbonil Cianuro m-Clorofenil Hidrazona , Hospitales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The clinical importance of postoperative hyperamylasemia (POHA) grade is unknown. Our objectives were to evaluate the association of POHA grade with clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) and compare its prognostic utility against postoperative day 1 drain fluid amylase (DFA-1). METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreatectomy from January 2019 through March 2020 were identified in the ACS NSQIP pancreatectomy-targeted dataset. POHA grade was assigned using post-operative serum amylase and clinical sequelae. The primary outcome was CR-POPF within 30 days. The association of POHA grade with CR-POPF was assessed using multivariable logistic regression, and c-statistics were used to compare POHA grade versus DFA-1. RESULTS: POHA occurred in 520 patients at 98 hospitals, including 261 (50.2%) with grade A, 234 (45.0%) with grade B, and 25 (4.8%) with grade C POHA. CR-POPFs were increased among patients with grade B (66.2%, OR 9.28 [5.84-14.73]) and C (68.0%, OR 10.50 [3.77-29.26]) versus grade A POHA (19.2%). POHA-inclusive models better predicted CR-POPF than those with DFA-1 alone (p < 0.002) and models with both predictors outperformed POHA alone (p = 0.039). CONCLUSION: POHA grade represents a measure of post-pancreatectomy outcomes that predicts CR-POPF and outperforms DFA-1 but must be aligned with new international definitions.
Asunto(s)
Hiperamilasemia , Pancreatectomía , Amilasas , Drenaje/efectos adversos , Humanos , Pancreatectomía/efectos adversos , Fístula Pancreática/diagnóstico , Fístula Pancreática/etiología , Pancreaticoduodenectomía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Duodenal adenocarcinoma treatment consists of either simple or radical surgical resection. Existing evidence suggests similar survival outcomes between the two but is limited by small numbers and single-institution analysis. We aim to compare survival after partial versus radical resection for duodenal adenocarcinoma using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). METHODS: Using NCDB results from 2004 to 2014, we compared patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma undergoing partial resection (n = 1247) and radical resection (n = 1240) by age, sex, facility type, facility location, cancer stage, cancer grade, lymph node sampling, node status, tumor size, margin status, neoadjuvant therapy, and adjuvant therapy using chi-square analysis. Survival was compared using propensity matching. RESULTS: Patients undergoing partial resection had overall earlier cancer stage, more favorable tumor grade, and were less likely to undergo lymph node sampling and neoadjuvant therapy. When overall survival was compared between the 2 propensity-matched groups, the median survival was 46.7 months after partial resection and 43.2 months after radical resection (P = .329), and overall survival was similar between the 2 groups (P = .894). The use of adjuvant therapy demonstrated improved survival over either surgery alone (P < .0001, P = .0037). CONCLUSION: Partial resection did not demonstrate worse survival outcomes than radical resection for duodenal adenocarcinoma. The use of adjuvant therapy in addition to surgery demonstrated improved survival regardless of surgery type and played a larger role in survival than the type of surgery. Our findings provide evidence to support the continued use of both partial and radical surgical resections to treat duodenal malignancy.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/cirugía , Neoplasias Duodenales/cirugía , Duodeno/cirugía , Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bases de Datos Factuales , Neoplasias Duodenales/mortalidad , Neoplasias Duodenales/patología , Duodeno/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Puntaje de Propensión , Análisis de Supervivencia , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto JovenAsunto(s)
Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/metabolismo , Prolactina/metabolismo , Receptores de Prolactina/metabolismo , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/metabolismo , Adulto , Femenino , Genes Relacionados con las Neoplasias , Humanos , Mutación , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Embarazo , Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/patología , Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/terapia , Transducción de Señal , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas/terapia , Regulación hacia ArribaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Recurrence of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) after surgical resection and imatinib mesylate (IM) adjuvant therapy poses a significant treatment challenge. We present the case of a patient who underwent surgical resection after recurrence and review the current literature regarding treatment. CASE PRESENTATION: A 58-year-old man with a large intra-abdominal jejunal GIST was treated with complete surgical resection followed by IM. The patient experienced disease recurrence 3.5 years later and underwent IM dose escalation and reresection. CONCLUSION: Current strategies to treat recurrent GIST include dose escalation, modifying adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy, and surgery. High-level evidence will be required to better define the combinatory roles of tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy, guided by molecular profiling, and surgery in the management of recurrent GIST.