Prognostic Impact of Ectopic Fat Deposition within Psoas Muscle in Stage IV Gastric Cancer Patients Undergoing Systemic Chemotherapy.

Aims: In this study, we focused on the fat ratio within psoas muscle (FRPM) and sought to clarify the impact of FRPM on overall survival (OS) in stage IV gastric cancer (GC) patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy (n = 79, median age = 69 years, 59 males). Methods: The median FRPM was 1.67 %. Forty patients with FRPM ≥1.67 % were defined as the FRPM-high group, and the remaining 39 patients was defined as the FRPM-low group. The median PMI in male and female patients was 4.35 cm2/m2 and 2.88 cm2/m2. Thirty male patients with PMI ≥4.35 cm2/m2 and 10 female patients with PMI ≥2.88 cm2/m2 was defined as the PMI-high group, and the remaining 39 patients was defined as the PMI-low group. Results: The 1-, 2- and 3- year cumulative OS rate for all cases was 70.8%, 24.3% and 14.6%. The proportion of ECOG-PS 2 or 3 in patients with FRPM-high and FRPM-low was 17.5% (7/40) and 2.6% (1/39). The 1-, 2- and 3- year cumulative OS rate in patients with FRPM-high and FRPM-low was 67.3%, 14.3% and 7.6% in the FRPM-high group and 74.8%, 40.5% and 32.4% in the FRPM-low group (P = 0.0341). The 1-, 2- and 3- year cumulative OS rate in patients with PMI-high and PMI-low was 86.7%, 40.4% and 30.0% in the PMI-high group and 55.8%, 12.8% and 6.4% in the PMI-low group (P < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis of factors associated with OS, PMI (P = 0.0047) and FRPM (P = 0.0019) were independent predictors for the OS. Conclusion: Higher FRPM can be associated with decreased physical activity, and not only skeletal muscle mass but also skeletal muscle function can be an essential prognostic factor in stage IV GC patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy.

A Prospective Study Regarding the Efficacy and Safety of the BNT162b2 Vaccine in Patients With Solid Malignancies Undergoing Systemic Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine in solid cancer patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy (n=63). PATIENTS AND METHODS: COVID-19 anti-spike protein antibody levels were measured before the first BNT162b2 vaccination, just before the second BNT162b2 vaccination, one month after the second BNT162b2 vaccination, and 3 months after the second BNT162b2 vaccination. Anti-spike protein antibody seropositivity was set at ≥0.8 U/ml. RESULTS: Colorectal cancer was the most commonly observed primary disease (36.5%). ECOG-PS 0 was observed in the majority (52.4%) of patients. The overall response rate and the median (range) anti-spike protein antibody levels in the whole cohort at 3 months after the second BNT162b2 vaccination were 98.4% (62/63) and 206 (0.4-3,813) U/ml. None of the patients required postponement or discontinuation of systemic chemotherapy because of an adverse reaction. CONCLUSION: The BNT162b vaccine in solid cancer patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy is effective and safe.

Sequential Treatment Strategy Using Fluoropyrimidine plus Bevacizumab Followed by Oxaliplatin for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase II Study (OGSG 1107).

Introduction: Previous prospective studies suggest that the sequential use of cytotoxic agents, such as oxaliplatin, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has the potential to improve prognosis and maintain quality of life than combination chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of a sequential treatment strategy consisting of an initial therapy (capecitabine, S-1, or 5-fluorouracil with leucovorin [LV/5-FU] plus bevacizumab) and subsequent therapy (i.e., initial therapy plus oxaliplatin) for mCRC. Methods: The primary endpoint was second progression-free survival (2nd PFS) between the start of initial therapy and tumor progression after sequential therapy; secondary endpoints were PFS after initial treatment, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: Sixty-six patients were planned to be recruited. However, owing to a slow accrual rate, recruitment was terminated when only 19 patients were enrolled between 2011 and 2015; 4, 10, and 5 patients were administered capecitabine plus bevacizumab, S-1 plus bevacizumab, and LV/5-FU plus bevacizumab, respectively. The proportions of those with a KRAS status (wild-type/mutant/unknown) were 26%, 21%, and 53%, respectively. The median 2nd PFS and OS were 19.1 months and not reached, respectively. The ORR was 45.5% in the initial therapy and 16.7% in the subsequent therapy. Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia (5%), proteinuria (5%), and hypertension (47%). Conclusion: Although our data are limited and preliminary, the sequential treatment strategy may provide a survival benefit in patients with mCRC. Further investigation of this treatment approach is warranted.

Pharmacokinetics of Dexamethasone when Administered with Fosaprepitant for Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting and Differences in Dose-Dependent Antiemetic Effects.

BACKGROUND: Fosaprepitant, an NK1 receptor antagonist, inhibits and induces cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) as its substrate. Contrarily dexamethasone is metabolized by CYP3A4. Therefore, in combination therapy wherein both agents interact with each other, it is recommended that the dexamethasone dose be reduced in the first two days. Thus far, there are only a few studies on the optimum dose of dexamethasone after day 3. Thus, we aimed to determine the pharmacokinetics of dexamethasone on day3 when administered together with fosaprepitant and investigate the dose-dependent differences in its antiemetic effect in patients with cancer. METHODS: Twelve patients with esophageal, stomach, or lung cancer received primary highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). We intravenously administered 9.9 mg and 6.6 mg of dexamethasone on days 1 and 2, respectively, and 6.6 mg or 13.2 mg on day 3 together with the administration of 150 mg fosaprepitant and 0.75 mg palonosetron. We assessed the pharmacokinetics of dexamethasone on day 3 by dose and examined the dose-dependent antiemetic effect. RESULTS: No differences were observed in the time-to-maximum concentration and blood half-life of dexamethasone between patient groups that received dexamethasone at doses of 6.6 mg and 13.2 mg. In contrast, the area under the blood concentration-time curve and the maximum concentration of dexamethasone correlated with its dose. Moreover, the blood dexamethasone concentration on day 3 increased by twofold after the administration of a higher dose than after a lower dose. The severity of nausea in the delayed phase significantly decreased in a dose-dependent manner. CONCLUSION: Administration of a higher dexamethasone dose on day 3 improved the antiemetic effect of the combined regimen in patients with cancer who underwent HEC.
.

Efficacy of Prophylactic G-CSF in Patients Receiving FOLFIRINOX: A Preliminary Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: Recent guidelines have adopted an incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) threshold of 20% for the use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). In a Japanese phase II study of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) for Japanese patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, the incidence of FN and severe neutropenia were 24.7% and 77.8%, respectively, without G-CSF prophylaxis. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the incidence of FN or severe neutropenia induced by full-dose FOLFIRINOX administration with G-CSF prophylaxis during the first cycle of treatment. METHODS: Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who received FOLFIRINOX with G-CSF prophylaxis during the first cycle of treatment from January 2014 to August 2014 were investigated and the frequency of adverse events during the first cycle was measured. RESULTS: Among seven patients who received FOLFIRINOX, six patients met the eligibility criteria. The patient characteristics were as follows: median age (range), 57 (50-66); men/women, 3/3; performance status 0/1, 2/4. Grade 3/4 hematological adverse events were as follows: leukopenia in 33% of the patients, neutropenia in 33% of the patients, thrombocytopenia in 33% of the patients and FN in 17% of the patients. One patient was heterozygous for the UGT1A1*6 and UGT1A1*28 polymorphisms and experienced FN. Grade3/4 non-hematological adverse events were as follows: anorexia in 33% of the cases and nausea in 50% of the cases. CONCLUSION: Although the present study was retrospective and small, the simultaneous administration of G-CSF might be effective for the prevention of severe neutropenia and FN in patients treated with FOLFIRINOX.

[A Case of Esophageal Neuroendocrine Carcinoma for Which Irinotecan and Cisplatin Combination Therapy Was Effective].

A 72-year-old previously healthy man visited our hospital with complaints of hoarseness and dysphagia. Computed tomography showed wall thickening of the thoracic esophagus; invasion to the left main bronchus, aorta, and right supraclavicular lymph nodes (LNs); right recurrent nerve LNs; and cardiac LN swelling. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy revealed an elevated tumor in the middle thoracic esophagus, which was similar to a submucosal tumor and had a longitudinal ulcer at its center. Pathologicexamination showed a tumor with a high N/C ratio, and immunohistochemical staining showed the tumor was CD56 and NSE positive, with a Ki-67 index >80%. We diagnosed esophageal neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC), cT4N3M0, Stage IVa. We started chemotherapy with irinotecan and cisplatin (IP therapy) according to a regimen for small-cell lung cancer. After 3 courses of chemotherapy, the primary lesion and the LN swelling had almost disappeared. Esophageal NEC is relatively rare disease, so there are no standard established treatments. We report a case of esophageal NEC for which IP therapy was effective with the relevant literature cited.

Sedation with dexmedetomidine hydrochloride during endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric cancer.

AIM: Although the treatment of early gastric cancer with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely carried out, a standardized method of sedation for ESD has not been established. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sedation with dexmedetomidine (DEX). METHODS: We conducted a randomized study involving 90 patients with gastric tumors who were intended to be treated with ESD. The patients were sedated either with DEX (i.v. infusion of 3.0 µg/kg per h over 5 min followed by continuous infusion at 0.4 µg/kg per h [n = 30]), propofol (PF [n = 30]), or midazolam (MDZ [n = 30]). In all groups, 1 mg MDZ was added i.v. as needed. RESULTS: En bloc resection of the gastric tumor was achieved in 88 (98%) patients. None of the DEX-sedated patients showed a significant reduction of the oxygen saturation level. The percentage of patients who showed body movement in the DEX group was significantly lower than those in the PF and MDZ groups, and the mean dose of additional MDZ in the DEX group was significantly smaller than that in the MDZ group. The rate of effective sedation was significantly higher in the DEX group compared with the MDZ or PF group. The mean length of ESD in the DEX group was 65 min, which was significantly shorter than in the other two groups. No DEX-sedated patient developed major surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS: Sedation with DEX is effective and safe for patients with gastric tumors who are undergoing ESD.

[A case of probable autoimmune hepatitis from which the persistence of hepatitis A IgM antibody, and the improvement was pathologically obtained by ursodeoxycholic acid medication].

We present a 68 years old woman who was referred to our department due to impaired liver function. Hepatitis A IgM antibody and anti-nuclear antibody were positive, IgG, and gamma-globulin were elevated. Percutaneous liver biopsy was performed and autoimmune hepatitis was suspected pathologically. Oral administration of ursodeoxycholic acid was started and liver function was normalized three months later. The improvement of a hepatitis image was examined by percutaneous liver biopsy one year later. Although hepatitis A IgM antibody was positive throughout the course, hepatitis A virusemia was not considered the cause of persistent positive hepatitis A. IgM antibody could not be clarified. There was a possibility of a non-specific reaction and abnormalities in antibody production control were considered possible. We present this case and discuss the previous literature.