Prognosis of mucinous and signet-ring cell colorectal cancer in a population-based cohort.

PURPOSE: Besides classical colorectal adenocarcinomas (AC), mucinous adenocarcinomas (MAC) and signet-ring cell carcinomas (SC) occur. Controversy remains regarding their prognostic role. Aim of this study was to define prognostic and histopathological specifications of mucinous and signet-ring cell colorectal cancer. METHODS: A total of 28,056 patients with AC, MAC, and SC between 1998 and 2012 in the catchment area of the Munich Cancer Registry were analyzed. Time to locoregional recurrence and distant recurrence was calculated by cumulative incidence. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method, calculation of relative survival, and Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: AC occurred in 25,172 patients (90 %), MAC in 2724 (9.7 %), and SC in 160 (0.6 %). AC were less frequently localized in the proximal colon (34 %) compared to MAC (57 %, p < 0.001) and SC (76 %, p < 0.001). Both, MAC and SC had higher T, N, and M categories, lymphatic invasion, and worse grading (p < 0.001 for each). There were significant differences regarding the 10-year cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence (p < 0.001), and distant recurrence (p < 0.001). For AC, the 5-year overall survival was 59 % (95 % confidence interval 58.0; 59.3), for MAC 52 % (50.2; 54.2), and for SC 40 % (32.1; 48.5; p < 0.001). However, MAC or SC did not remain independent prognostic factors for overall survival compared to AC upon multivariable analysis (p = 0.981). CONCLUSION: This large cohort reveals specific histopathological and recurrence patterns for patients with colorectal AC, MAC, and SC. MAC and SC are diagnosed at more advanced tumor stages and therefore entail reduced survival rates.

Importance of liver resection in case of hepatic breast cancer metastases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Primary focus of the therapy of metastatic breast cancer is currently a systemic therapy. Surgical therapies are of minor importance. Aim of this study was to investigate the relevance of hepatectomy in case of hepatic breast cancer metastases (HBCM) as an important part of multimodal therapy. METHODOLOGY: From January 2002 to December 2011, 30 patients with HBCM underwent hepatectomy. Criteria for hepatectomy were good condition, technical feasibility and control of extrahepatic metastases. For a heterogeneous group of women with HBCM the 3- and 5-year survival rate was determined by Kalpan-Meier survival estimate. RESULTS: The postoperative morbidity was 13.3%, the mortality rate was 3.3%. Minor hepatectomy has been performed in 62.1% and major hepatectomy in 37.9% of the cases. In all patients a R0 resection margin was performed. At a median follow-up interval of 34.1 months, 16 patients were still alive. The 3- and 5-year survival rates after surgically resection of HBCM in our collective were 31.0% and 20.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatectomy is a safe therapy with low morbidity, mortality and improves long-term survival in most patients with limited, resectable HBCM. In our opinion patient selection should not be that strict. The combination of systemic and surgical therapies can improve prognosis and long-term survival of these patients.

"Incidentaloma" of the liver: management of a diagnostic and therapeutic dilemma.

The continuous development of highly sensitive clinical imaging increased the detection of focal lesions of the liver. These accidentally detected liver tumors without liver-specific symptoms such as cholestasis have been named "incidentalomas." Diagnostic tools such as sonography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging are used increasingly in asymptomatic individuals without defined suspected diagnoses in the setting of general prevention or followup after a history of malignancy. But despite continuous improvement of diagnostics, some doubt regarding the benign or malign behavior of a tumor remains. In case an asymptomatic hemangioma or FNH can be preoperatively detected with certainty, the indication for surgery must be very strict. In case of symptomatic liver lesions surgical resection should only be indicated with tumor-specific symptoms. In the remaining cases of benign lesions of the liver, a "watch and wait" strategy is recommended. In case of uncertain diagnosis, especially in patients with positive history of a malignant tumor or the suspected diagnosis of hepatocellular adenoma, surgical resection is indicated. Due to the continuous improvement of surgical techniques, liver resection should be done in the laparoscopic technique. Laparoscopic surgery has lower morbidity and shorter hospitalization than open technique.

Liver resection or combined chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation improve survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the long-term outcome of surgical and non-surgical local treatments of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: We stratified a cohort of 278 HCC patients using six independent predictors of survival according to the Vienna survival model for HCC (VISUM-HCC). RESULTS: Prior to therapy, 224 HCC patients presented with VISUM stage 1 (median survival 18 months) while 29 patients were classified as VISUM stage 2 (median survival 4 months) and 25 patients as VISUM stage 3 (median survival 3 months). A highly significant (p < 0.001) improved survival time was observed in VISUM stage 1 patients treated with liver resection (n = 52; median survival 37 months) or chemoembolization (TACE) and subsequent radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (n = 44; median survival 45 months) as compared to patients receiving chemoembolization alone (n = 107; median survival 13 months) or patients treated by tamoxifen only (n = 21; median survival 6 months). Chemoembolization alone significantly (p < or = 0.004) improved survival time in VISUM stage 1-2 patients but not (p = 0.341) in VISUM stage 3 patients in comparison to those treated by tamoxifen. CONCLUSION: Both liver resection or combined chemoembolization and RFA improve markedly the survival of patients with HCC.

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin after incomplete (R1) resection of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To analyze, in a prospective clinical trial, the efficacy and toxicity of concurrent radiotherapy and chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with incompletely (R1) resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 2000 and 2002, a total of 30 pancreatic cancer patients were treated. Radiotherapy was performed in 15 patients up to a total dose of 45.0 Gy. An additional 15 patients received a total dose of 50.0 Gy according to the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Report 50 reference point (equivalent to 45.0 Gy at the isodose, including 90% covering the former tumor area and local lymph nodes). Concurrent with radiotherapy, four applications of gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin (30 mg/m(2)) were administered. After chemoradiotherapy, patients received four additional courses of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) and cisplatin (50 mg/m(2)) on Days 1 and 15 in a 4-week cycle. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 10.6 months, and the median overall survival was 22.8 months. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rate was 81%, 43%, and 26%, respectively. After completion of chemoradiotherapy, distant metastasis was observed in 14 patients during a median follow-up of 15.0 months (range, 4.6-30.0). One patient developed both local recurrence and distant metastases. Hematologic toxicities were the most prominent side effects (leukopenia Grade 3 and 4 in 53% and 7% and thrombocytopenia Grade 3 and 4 in 33% and 7% of patients, respectively). Grade 3 and 4 GI toxicity was not observed. CONCLUSION: Postoperative chemoradiotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin after incomplete (R1) resection of pancreatic carcinoma is safe and feasible. A prolonged progression-free survival suggests high local efficacy, translating into a benefit of overall survival. On the basis of the favorable outcome of patients receiving gemcitabine/cisplatin-based chemoradiotherapy, testing this combined treatment strategy appears warranted in a comparative trial.

The role of graft-resident Kupffer cells and lymphocytes of donor type during the time course after liver transplantation--a clinico-pathological study.

Although graft-resident passenger leukocytes are known to mediate acute rejection by triggering direct allorecognition, they may also act in an immunomodulatory fashion and play an important role in tolerance induction. The present study evaluated by non-isotopic in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry if and during which time period after transplantation Kupffer cells (KC) and lymphocytes of the liver were replaced by recipient cells and if there is any correlation with the occurrence of rejection episodes and the clinical course. A successive re-population of the liver by recipient lymphocytes and KC was observed after transplantation but a smaller portion of lymphocytes and KC with donor genotype was detectable during the whole time course studied. There was no correlation between the portion of recipient-derived KC and donor-derived lymphocytes and histopathological alterations of the liver tissue. The biopsy content of KC with recipient origin has had no prognostic significance for the probability of survival, but patients with a low portion of donor lymphocytes in the liver biopsy obtained during the first week after transplantation have had a better prognosis for survival. The present results indicate that graft-resident KC and lymphocytes are potentially not the main cell types involved in tolerance induction after liver transplantation.

[Radiochemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin in pancreatic cancer -- feasible and effective]. / Radiochemotherapie mit Gemcitabin und Cisplatin bei Pankreaskarzinom - durchführbar und effektiv.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy with gemcitabine appears to be a promising tool for the treatment of pancreatic cancer since gemcitabine -- applied as single or combination therapy -- proved to have better efficacy in pancreatic cancer than 5-FU containing schemes and furthermore offers radiosensitizing potential. In the present paper our pilot data of concomitant and sequential chemoradiation with gemcitabine and cisplatin are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 57 patients (f/m 23/34) with pancreatic cancer was treated, of whom 33 patients had irresectable tumors, 19 patients following resection (R1 and/or pN+) and five patients with local recurrent disease. Radiotherapy was delivered in 25 fractions up to a total dose of 45.0 Gy specified according to ICRU reference point (50 patients, 1.8 Gy/fraction) respectively 50.0 Gy to gross tumor volume (seven patients; 45.0 Gy in locoregional lymphatic pathways; 2.0/1.8 Gy/fraction). Concomitant with radiotherapy cisplatin (30 mg/m(2)) and gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2)) were applied on days 1, 8, 22 and 29. After simultaneous chemoradiation two sequential cycles gemcitabine and cisplatin (1000 mg/m(2) and 50 mg/m(2) d 1, 15) were applied. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 8.2 months the median survival time was 14.8 months (irresectable patients: 10.3 months, postoperative patients, 15.1 months). Within 33 irresectable patients 19 and four partial and complete remissions, respectively, were observed. In 14 patients a secondary resection was possible. Using leveled antiemetics with ondansetron and dexamethasone no gastrointestinal toxicities grade III or IV were observed. Hematologic toxicities were the most grave side effects (leukocytopenia III/IV in 29/five patients and thrombocytopenia III/IV in 21/eight patients), however with minor clinical relevancy (one neutropenic infection, one thrombopenic epistaxis). CONCLUSION: The presented treatment scheme using concomitant and sequential gemcitabine and cisplatin with radiation is feasible with justifiable side effects. To evaluate the promising remission and survival rates, randomized trials of neoadjuvant and primary chemoradiation are started.