Small bowel intramural hematoma caused by warfarin: case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Intramural hematoma of the small bowel is a rare yet acute gastrointestinal condition typically linked with impaired coagulation function, often posing diagnostic challenges. It is principally encountered in patients undergoing prolonged anticoagulant therapy, specifically warfarin. CASE PRESENTATION: We reported a case of intramural hematoma associated with warfarin use. The patient was admitted to hospital with abdominal pain and had received anticoagulant therapy with warfarin 2.5 mg/day for 4 years. Laboratory examination showed decreased coagulation function, abdominal CT showed obvious thickening and swelling of part of the jejunal wall, and abdominal puncture found no gastroenteric fluid or purulent fluid. We treated the patient with vitamin K and fresh frozen plasma. The patient was discharged after the recovery of coagulation function. Then we undertaook a comprehensive review of relevant case reports to extract shared clinical features and effective therapeutic strategies. CONCLUSION: Our analysis highlights that hematoma in the small intestinal wall caused by warfarin overdose often presents as sudden and intense abdominal pain, laboratory tests suggest reduced coagulation capacity, and imaging often shows thickening of the intestinal wall. Intravenous vitamin K and plasma supplementation are effective non-surgical strategies. Nevertheless, in instances of severe obstruction and unresponsive hemostasis, surgical resection of necrotic intestinal segments may be necessary. In the cases we reported, we avoided surgery by closely monitoring the coagulation function. Therefore, we suggest that identifying and correcting the impaired coagulation status of patient is essential for timely and appropriate treatment.

Uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Choosing an optimal reconstruction method is pivotal for patients with gastric cancer undergoing distal gastrectomy. The uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction, a variant of the conventional Roux-en-Y approach (or variant of the Billroth II reconstruction), employs uncut devices to occlude the afferent loop of the jejunum. This modification is designed to mitigate postgastrectomy syndrome and enhance long-term functional outcomes. However, the comparative benefits and potential harms of this approach compared to other reconstruction techniques remain a topic of debate. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and clinical trial registries for published and unpublished trials up to November 2023. We also manually reviewed references from relevant systematic reviews identified by our search. We did not impose any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction versus other reconstructions after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. The comparison groups encompassed other reconstructions such as Billroth I, Billroth II (with or without Braun anastomosis), and Roux-en-Y reconstruction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. The critical outcomes included health-related quality of life at least six months after surgery, major postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification (grades III to V), anastomotic leakage within 30 days, changes in body weight (kg) at least six months after surgery, and incidence of bile reflux, remnant gastritis, and oesophagitis at least six months after surgery. We used the GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We identified eight trials, including 1167 participants, which contributed data to our meta-analyses. These trials were exclusively conducted in East Asian countries, predominantly in China. The studies varied in the types of uncut devices used, ranging from 2- to 6-row linear staplers to suture lines. The follow-up periods for long-term outcomes spanned from 3 months to 42 months, with most studies focusing on a 6- to 12-month range. We rated the certainty of evidence from low to very low. Uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction versus Billroth II reconstruction In the realm of surgical complications, very low-certainty evidence suggests that uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction compared with Billroth II reconstruction may make little to no difference to major postoperative complications (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 4.05; I² = 0%; risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.04; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 282 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and incidence of anastomotic leakage (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.44; I² not applicable; RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.02; I² = 32%; 3 studies, 615 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about these results. Focusing on long-term outcomes, low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests that uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction compared with Billroth II reconstruction may make little to no difference to changes in body weight (mean difference (MD) 0.04 kg, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.92 kg; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 233 participants; low-certainty evidence), may reduce the incidence of bile reflux into the remnant stomach (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.83; RD -0.29, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.16; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4, 95% CI 3 to 7; 1 study, 141 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may have little or no effect on the incidence of remnant gastritis (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.06; I2 = 78%; RD -0.15, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.07; I2 = 0%; NNTB 7, 95% CI 5 to 15; 2 studies, 265 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported on quality of life or the incidence of oesophagitis. Uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction versus Roux-en-Y reconstruction In the realm of surgical complications, very low-certainty evidence suggests that uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction compared with Roux-en-Y reconstruction may make little to no difference to major postoperative complications (RR 4.74, 95% CI 0.23 to 97.08; I² not applicable; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.04; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 256 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and incidence of anastomotic leakage (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.08; I² = 0%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.02; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 213 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about these results. Focusing on long-term outcomes, very low-certainty evidence suggests that uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction compared with Roux-en-Y reconstruction may increase the incidence of bile reflux into the remnant stomach (RR 10.74, 95% CI 3.52 to 32.76; RD 0.57, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.71; NNT for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 2, 95% CI 2 to 3; 1 study, 108 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference to the incidence of remnant gastritis (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.01; I² = 60%; RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.08; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 361 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and incidence of oesophagitis (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.26; I² = 0%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.03; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 361 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about these results. Data were insufficient to assess the impact on quality of life and changes in body weight. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the predominance of low- to very low-certainty evidence, this Cochrane review faces challenges in providing definitive clinical guidance. We found the majority of critical outcomes may be comparable between the uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction and other methods, but we are very uncertain about most of these results. Nevertheless, it indicates that uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction may reduce the incidence of bile reflux compared to Billroth-II reconstruction, albeit with low certainty. In contrast, compared to Roux-en-Y reconstruction, uncut Roux-en-Y may increase bile reflux incidence, based on very low-certainty evidence. To strengthen the evidence base, further rigorous and long-term trials are needed. Additionally, these studies should explore variations in surgical procedures, particularly regarding uncut devices and methods to prevent recanalisation. Future research may potentially alter the conclusions of this review.

Midline and off-midline wound closure methods after surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus.

BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus disease is a common and debilitating condition. Surgical treatment remains the mainstay for managing chronic disease, with options including midline and off-midline wound closure methods. However, the optimal approach remains uncertain. Recent developments in tension-free midline techniques require further exploration. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of midline and off-midline wound closure methods for pilonidal sinus, and to determine the optimal off-midline flap procedures. SEARCH METHODS: In June 2022, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus EBSCO, and clinical trials registries. We also scanned the reference lists of included studies, as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports. We applied no language, publication date, or study setting restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel RCTs involving participants undergoing midline closure without flap techniques and off-midline closure for pilonidal sinus treatment. We excluded quasi-experimental studies and studies that enroled participants presenting with an abscess. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. The critical outcomes included wound healing (time to wound healing, proportion of wounds healed), recurrence rate, wound infection, wound dehiscence, time to return to work, and quality of life. We assessed biases in these outcomes utilising the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and appraised evidence certainty via the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 33 studies with 3667 analysed participants. The median or average age of the participants across the included studies ranged from 21.0 to 34.2 years, with a predominant male representation. Geographically, the trials were primarily conducted in the Middle East. We identified nine intervention comparisons. In this abstract, we focus on and present the summarised findings for the three primary comparisons. Off-midline closure versus conventional midline closure Off-midline closure probably reduces the time to wound healing (mean difference (MD) -5.23 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.55 to -2.92 days; 3 studies, 300 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, there may be little to no difference between the two methods in the proportion of wounds healed (100% versus 88.5%, risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.39; 2 studies, 207 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Off-midline closure probably results in lower rates of recurrence (1.5% versus 6.8%, RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.45; 13 studies, 1492 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and wound infection (3.8% versus 11.7%, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.49; 13 studies, 1568 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may lower rates of wound dehiscence (3.9% versus 8.9%, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; 11 studies, 1389 participants; low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, off-midline closure may result in a reduced time to return to work (MD -3.72 days, 95% CI -6.11 to -1.33 days; 6 studies, 820 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life. Off-midline closure versus tension-free midline closure Off-midline closure may reduce the time to wound healing (median 14 days in off-midline closure versus 51 days in tension-free midline closure; 1 study, 116 participants; low-certainty evidence) and increase wound healing rates at three months (94.7% versus 76.4%, RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46; 1 study, 115 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may result in little to no difference in rates of recurrence (5.4% versus 7.8%, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.61; 6 studies, 551 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection (2.8% versus 6.4%, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.17; 6 studies, 559 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and wound dehiscence (2.5% versus 3.0%, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.84; 3 studies, 250 participants; very low-certainty evidence) compared to tension-free midline closure. Furthermore, off-midline closure may result in longer time to return to work compared to tension-free midline closure (MD 3.00 days, 95% CI 1.52 to 4.48 days; 1 study, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life. Karydakis flap versus Limberg flap Karydakis flap probably results in little to no difference in time to wound healing compared to Limberg flap (MD 0.36 days, 95% CI -1.49 to 2.22; 6 studies, 526 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to Limberg flap, Karydakis flap may result in little to no difference in the proportion of wounds healed (80.0% versus 66.7%, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.86; 1 study, 30 participants; low-certainty evidence), recurrence rate (5.1% versus 4.5%, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.14; 9 studies, 890 participants; low-certainty evidence), wound infection (7.9% versus 5.1%, RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.68; 8 studies, 869 participants; low-certainty evidence), wound dehiscence (7.4% versus 6.2%, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.50; 7 studies, 776 participants; low-certainty evidence), and time to return to work (MD -0.23 days, 95% CI -5.53 to 5.08 days; 6 studies, 541 participants; low-certainty evidence). There were no data available for quality of life. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane review examines the midline and off-midline wound closure options for pilonidal sinus, predominantly based on young adult studies. Off-midline flap procedures demonstrate there may be benefits over conventional midline closure for pilonidal sinus, with various off-midline flap techniques. When off-midline flap closures were compared to tension-free midline closure, low-certainty evidence indicated there may be improved wound healing and increased time to return to work for off-midline closure, whilst very low-certainty evidence indicated there may be no evidence of a difference in other outcomes. There may be no evidence of an advantage found amongst the off-midline techniques evaluated. The choice of either procedure is likely to be based on a clinician's preference, experience, patient characteristics, and the patients' preferences. To more accurately determine the benefits and potential harms of these closure techniques, further large-scale and meticulously-designed trials are essential. Specifically, there is a pressing need for more studies addressing the paediatric population, in addition to adult studies.

A Phase I Study of Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel/S-1 Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Systemic chemotherapy is the primary treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). More effective treatment options are highly awaited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the toxicity and feasibility of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel/S-1 (GAS) chemotherapy on a 21-day cycle in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC, determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of S-1 in this regimen, and explore preliminary efficacy. METHODS: Eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC received GAS chemotherapy on a 21-day cycle. Fixed-dose nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) were given intravenously on days 1 and 8. Different doses of S-1 were given orally twice daily from day 1 to day 14 in a 3+3 dose escalation design. According to patients` body surface area, the dose-escalation design was as follows: patients with a body surface area of 1.25-1.5 m2 received S-1 40 mg/day initially and the dose was increased to 60 mg or 80 mg. Patients with a body surface area of more than 1.5 m2 received S-1 60 mg/day initially and the dose was increased to 80 mg or 100 mg. The primary endpoints were to evaluate the toxicity and determine the DLT and MTD of S-1. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate efficacy, including best objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). adverse events (AEs) were evaluated according to the NCI-CTCAE 5.0. Tumor response was assessed using the RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: A total of 21 eligible patients were included. Due to the infrequence of patients with a body surface area of 1.25-1.5 m2, only 2 patients were included in cohort of S-1 40 mg. The dose-escalation for patients in this group failed to be enrolled completely. For patients with a body surface area of more than 1.5 m2, 3 DLTs in 7 patients were detected at cohort of S-1 100 mg (grade 3 thrombocytopenia with hemorrhage, grade 3 rash, and grade 3 mucositis/stomatitis). S-1 80 mg/day (body surface area: >1.5 m2) was considered to be the MTD in GAS chemotherapy on a 21-day cycle. No grade 4 AEs or treatment-related deaths were observed. The most commonly occurring hematologic AE of any grade was anemia (38.1%). The most frequent nonhematologic AEs of any grade were peripheral neuropathy (38.1%), dyspepsia (23.8%), constipation (23.8%), and alopecia (23.8%). Response assessment showed that the best ORR was 36.8% (7 of 19 patients) and the DCR was 94.7% (18 of 19 patients). The median PFS was 5.3 (95% CI, 4.6 to 6.0) months and the median OS was 10.3 (95% CI, 8.1 to 12.5) months. CONCLUSION: GAS chemotherapy (21-day cycle) with nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, and S-1 80 mg/day (body surface area: >1.5 m2) was found to have acceptable toxicity and significant clinical control in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC. We conclude that further trials with this combination are warranted. (Trial Identifier: ChiCTR1900027833 [chictr.org]).

The KDM6A-SPARCL1 axis blocks metastasis and regulates the tumour microenvironment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours by inhibiting the nuclear translocation of p65.

BACKGROUND: It is urgent to explore the pathogenic mechanism of gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs). KDM6A, a histone demethylase, can activate gene transcription and has not been reported in GISTs. SPARCL1 may serve as a metastasis marker in GIST, but the molecular mechanism remains to be further explored. This study aimed to explore the biological function and molecular mechanism of KDM6A and SPARCL1 in GIST. METHODS: CCK-8, live cell count, colony formation, wound-healing and Transwell migration and invasion assays were employed to detect the cell proliferation, migration and invasion. A xenograft model and hepatic metastasis model were used to assess the role of KDM6A and SPARCL1 in vivo. RESULTS: KDM6A inhibited the proliferation, migration and invasion of GIST cells. Mechanistically, KDM6A promotes the transcription of SPARCL1 by demethylating histone H3 lysine trimethylation and consequently leads to the inactivation of p65. SPARCL1 affected the metastasis of GIST cells in a mesenchymal-epithelial transition- and matrix-metalloproteinase-dependent manner. SPARCL1 knockdown promoted angiogenesis, M2 polarisation and macrophage recruitment by inhibiting the phosphorylation of p65. Moreover, KDM6A and SPARCL1 inhibited hepatic metastasis and macrophage infiltration in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings establish the critical role of the KDM6A-SPARCL1-p65 axis in restraining the malignancy of GIST.

Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision with Central Vascular Ligation (CME + CVL) for Right-Sided Colon Cancer: A New "Superior Mesenteric Artery First" Approach.

PURPOSE: It remains a technical challenge to perform "superior mesenteric artery (SMA) first" approach for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolon excision (CME) as the vascular anatomy of the right colon varies a lot, which may cause difficulty in early location of SMA and the risk of vascular damage during central vascular ligation (CVL). The purpose of this study was to describe a new "SMA first" approach for laparoscopic CME with CVL in right hemicolectomy with Treitz's ligament and ileocolic vascular pedicle as the anatomical landmarks for early identification of and exposure of SMA. METHODS: This procedure was performed on 21 patients with right colon cancer between March 2020 and August 2021. To start, the transverse mesocolon was retracted to expose the ligament of Treitz, and the pedicle of ileocolic vessels was anteriorly grasped. Next, the peritoneum near the right border of the ligament of Treitz was divided along the left side of SMA until the peritoneum below the ileocolic vessels. Next, the mesenteric lymphatic adipose tissue outside of the sheath of SMA was dissected from medial to lateral. Then, laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) was performed. Patients' preoperative baseline characteristics and intraoperative and postoperative complications were examined. RESULTS: The median operative time was 180 min, and the median intraoperative blood loss was 50 ml (interquartile range 40-90). Chylous leakage occurred in four patients, and all the patients resolved with percutaneous drainage. The total harvested lymph nodes was 21.0 (range 16-27). The median times to first flatus and liquid diet intake were both 3.0 days. The median number of postoperative hospital days was 10.0 days. No severe postoperative complications, such as abdominal infection, anastomotic leakage, or bleeding, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This new "SMA first" approach is safe and technically feasible for laparoscopic CME with CVL in right hemicolectomy.

Comparative safety and tolerability of approved PARP inhibitors in cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate comparative safety and tolerability of the approved PARP inhibitors in people with cancer. METHODS: Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials comparing an approved PARP inhibitor (fluzoparib, olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, or talazoparib) with placebo or chemotherapy in cancer patients. Outcomes of interest included: serious adverse event (SAE), discontinuation due to adverse event (AE), interruption of treatment due to AE, dose reduction due to AE, and specific grade 1-5 AEs. RESULTS: Ten trials including 3763 participants and six treatments (olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, talazoparib, placebo, and protocol-specified single agent chemotherapy) were identified. SAE and discontinuation of treatment did not differ significantly among the four approved PARP inhibitors. Regarding interruption of treatment and dose reduction due to AE, statistically significant differences and statistically non-significant trend were observed. Talazoparib is associated with a higher risk of interruption of treatment and dose reduction (excluding rucaparib) due to AE as compared with the other drugs. Niraparib showed a trend of lower risk of AE related dose reduction as compared with the other drugs. Furthermore, there were significant differences in specific grade 1-5 AE among the four drugs. CONCLUSION: The safety profile of the four approved PARP inhibitors is comparable in terms of SAE and AE-related discontinuation of treatment. Statistically significant differences in the AEs spectrum and AEs related dose interruption and dose reduction demonstrated the prompt identification of AE and dose personalization seem mandatory to obtain maximal benefit from PARP inhibitors.

Impact of Surgical Margin Status on Survival in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is inconclusive whether R1 margin determined by postoperative pathological examination indicates worse long-term survival in gastric cancer (GC) patients after curative intent resection (CIR). Hence, we aimed to systematically pool the conflicting evidence to fill this gap. METHODS: The present study was performed according to the published protocol and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Published studies examining the impact of microscopic margin status on overall survival (OS) and 5-year OS rate in GC were systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. RevMan 5.3 was used to conduct statistical analysis, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-three retrospective cohort studies including 19 992 patients were analyzed. The pooled hazard ratio for OS of 14 studies was 2.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.61-2.65, low certainty), indicating that R1 margin predicted inferior OS. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses upheld the statistical stability of this finding. The pooled odds ratio (OR) of 14 studies was .21 (95% CI: .17-.26, moderate certainty), demonstrating that the presence of R1 margins was associated with a poorer 5-year OS rate. Sensitivity analyses and most of the subgroup analyses confirmed this finding, except the "esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancers" subgroup, which included two studies with a pooled OR of .41 (95% CI: .10-1.61). CONCLUSION: R1 margin detected by pathological examination might exhibit a high correlation with poorer OS and 5-year OS rate in GC (except EGJ cancers) patients who underwent CIR. To figure out the effect of R1 margin on survival of different stages and histological types need prospective studies with large sample sizes and standardized methods. What is the best treatment for R1 margin patients also need more in-depth and special research.

Clinicopathological features, clinical efficacy on 101 cases of rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and the significance of neoadjuvant therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinicopathological features and clinical efficacy among 101 cases of rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) and to investigate the significance of imatinib mesylate (IM) neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: The clinicopathological features, treatment methods, perioperative data, and prognosis of the patients were summarized and analysed in 101 patients with rectal GISTs who received treatment in the Gastrointestinal Surgery of West China Hospital of Sichuan University and the Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University from August 2002 to November 2020 in China. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients, including 64 males and 37 females, were aged from 22 to 79 years (55.4 ± 12.2 years). Among the 70 patients who underwent direct surgery, 8 were very low risk cases, 10 were low risk cases, 7 were intermediate risk cases, and 45 were high risk cases. Cox regression analysis showed that postoperative IM adjuvant treatment improved the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of 52 intermediate and high risk patients. Among the 31 patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, the objective response rate (ORR) was 83.9% (26/31), and the disease control rate (DCR) reached 96.8% (30/31). Subgroup analysis was also conducted based on the tumour diameter. (1) Among the 36 patients with a diameter ≤ 5 cm, two patients received IM neoadjuvant therapy, while 34 patients received direct surgery. Neither univariate nor Cox regression analysis found that neoadjuvant therapy affected DFS and OS. (2) Among the 65 patients with a diameter > 5 cm, 29 received IM neoadjuvant therapy, and 36 received direct surgery. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy had less blood loss (P = 0.022), shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.001), increased anal retention rate (93.1% vs. 72.2%, P = 0.031), and decreased enterostomy rate (10.3% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.037) than those who underwent direct surgery. Cox regression analysis suggested that neoadjuvant therapy and postoperative IM adjuvant therapy improved DFS. CONCLUSION: Rectal GISTs are relatively rare and highly malignant tumors. Postoperative oral IM therapy can improve the DFS and OS of intermediate and high risk patients. In patients with rectal GISTs with diameters > 5 cm, IM neoadjuvant therapy can improve anal retention rate, preserve the structure and function of the organs, reduce enterostomy rate, and improve prognosis.

Long-term survival among patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors diagnosed after another malignancy: a SEER population-based study.

BACKGROUND: To explore overall survival (OS) and GISTs-specific survival (GSS) among cancer survivors developing a second primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). METHODS: We conducted a cohort study, where patients with GISTs after another malignancy (AM-GISTs, n = 851) and those with only GISTs (GISTs-1, n = 7660) were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries (1988-2016). Clinicopathologic characteristics and survival were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The most commonly diagnosed first primary malignancy was prostate cancer (27.7%), followed by breast cancer (16.2%). OS among AM-GISTs was significantly inferior to that of GISTs-1; 10-year OS was 40.3% vs. 50.0%, (p < 0.001). A contrary finding was observed for GSS (10-year GSS 68.9% vs. 61.8%, p = 0.002). In the AM-GISTs group, a total of 338 patients died, of which 26.0% died of their initial cancer and 40.8% died of GISTs. Independent of demographics and clinicopathological characteristics, mortality from GISTs among AM-GISTs patients was decreased compared with their GISTs-1 counterparts (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.84; p < 0.001), whereas OS was inferior among AM-GISTs (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.99-1.25; p = 0.085). CONCLUSIONS: AM-GISTs patients have decreased risk of dying from GISTs compared with GIST-1. Although another malignancy history does not seemingly affect OS for GISTs patients, clinical treatment of such patients should be cautious.

Secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine-like 1 suppresses metastasis in gastric stromal tumors.

BACKGROUND: Malignant growth and metastasis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) occur in some patients even during the course of treatment, but their mechanisms remains poorly understand at the molecular level so far. METHODS: Profiles of protein expression in gastric GIST tissues were explored using protein microarray analysis, down-regulation of SPARCL1 (secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine-like protein 1) was validated by RT-qPCR, western blot and immunohistochemistry. The effect of specific shRNA-induced SPARCL1 downregulation on the biological traits of GIST 882 cell was investigated. We then employed a mouse xenograft model to investigate whether the low-expression of SPARCL1 impact the metastasis ability of GIST cells in vivo. RESULTS: SPARCL1 was significantly downregulated in the gastric GIST with high-grade malignance as compared with low-grade malignance, its expression was closely correlated with tumor size, mitotic index, distant metastasis at the time of initial diagnosis and tumor progression of GIST (P < 0.05). Moreover, results of the Cox analysis showed that expression of SPARCL1 is an independent prognostic predictors for gastric GIST (P = 0.008; HR 0.157, 95% CI 0.040~ 0.612). Downregulation of SPARCL1 promoted cell migration and invasion, but did not affect proliferation, cell cycle and apoptosis of GIST 882 cells. In mouse xenograft model, GIST cells with the decreased expression of SPARCL1 presented an enhanced ability of liver metastasis (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our present study demonstrated that SPARCL1 have a certain degree of malignancy-suppressing potential through inhibiting the metastasis of gastric GIST.

Comparative effectiveness of adjuvant treatments for resected gastric cancer: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Different adjuvant treatments are available for patients with gastric cancer, but conventional meta-analyses performing direct comparisons between two alternative treatments did not have enough power to compare all the adjuvant treatments. Thus, we did a network meta-analysis summarizing the direct and indirect comparisons to identify the optimum treatment. METHODS: We systematically searched for RCTs of adjuvant treatments for gastric cancer comparing two or more of the following treatments: surgery alone, radiotherapy with fluoropyrimidine, S-1-based regimens, and XELOX. The treatments offering available indirect evidence to investigate the comparative effectiveness of adjuvant treatments mentioned above were also included. Then we performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to summarize the direct and indirect comparisons. We estimated hazard ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) for OS and DFS. RESULTS: 11 eligible RCTs (5620 patients) were included in the network meta-analysis. Radiotherapy with fluorouracil (5-FU/RT), S-1-based regimens, and XELOX significantly improved OS as compared with surgery alone [(HR = 0.75 with 95% CrI: 0.63-0.89), (HR = 0.63 with 95% CrI: 0.52-0.76), and (HR = 0.66 with 95% CrI: 0.51-0.85), respectively]. No treatment was clearly superior to others; however, S-1-based regimes and XELOX showed a statistically non-significant trend to better survival as compared with 5-FU/RT. CONCLUSIONS: S-1-based chemotherapy and XELOX are likely to be the most effective adjuvant treatments for patients with resected gastric cancer. 5-FU alone provided little survival benefits as compared with surgery alone. Further clinical trials may be required to investigate S-1-based and XELOX-based adjuvant treatment strategies.

[FAP Expression and Its Association with the Prognosis of Gastric Stromal Tumors].

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of FAP expression with the prognosis of gastric stromal tumors (GSTs). METHODS: Paraffin-embedded GSTs samples were collected from January 2010 to December 2013 in the department of pathology of our hospital. FAP expression was examined by immunohistochemistry staining. Its correlations with clinical pathological characteristics and prognosis of GSTs were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 98 cases were included in this study. FAP was expressed in the cytoplasm of GSTs cells, with a positive rate of 42.9%. No FAP expression was found in normal gastric tissues. No differences of FAP expression were found in patients with different gender, age and tumor mitotic counts (P >0.05). Tumor diameter and risk classification were associated with FAP expression (P <0.05). Higher levels of FAP expression were found in larger and higher risk tumors. No significant correlations between FAP expression and routine immunohistochemical markers were found. Log-rank univariate survival analysis showed that mitotic counts, tumor size, postoperative IM and FAP expression were associated with recurrence free survival of GSTs patients with intermediate-high risks (P <0.05). Cox multivariate survival analysis showed that mitotic counts, tumor size, postoperative IM and FAP were independent predictors for the prognosis of GSTs patients with intermediate-high risks (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: FAP is expressed in the cytoplasm of gastric GIST cells, but not in normal gastric tissues. FAP is a predictor for the prognosis of GSTs patients with intermediate-high risks.

Neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer patients with microsatellite instability or deficient mismatch repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Whether gastric cancer (GC) patients with deficient mismatch repair or microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-H) benefit from perioperative (neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant) chemotherapy is controversial. This protocol delineates the planned scope and methods for a systematic review and meta-analysis that aims to compare the efficacy of perioperative chemotherapy with surgery alone in resectable dMMR/MSI-H GC patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study protocol is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols-P guideline. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane (CENTRAL), and the Web of Science databases will be searched, supplemented by a secondary screening of relevant records. Both randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies will be included in this study. The primary and secondary outcomes under scrutiny will be overall survival, disease-free survival and progression-free survival. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data and assess the risk of bias. We will analyse different treatment settings (eg, neoadjuvant or adjuvant or combined as perioperative chemotherapies) separately and conduct sensitivity analyses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics approval is required for this systematic review and meta-analysis, as no individual patient data will be collected. The findings of our study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023494276.

Optimal reconstruction methods after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis update.

BACKGROUND: Distal gastrectomy (DG) is a commonly used surgical procedure for gastric cancer (GC), with three reconstruction methods available: Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en-Y. In 2018, our team published a systematic review to provide guidance for clinical practice on the optimal reconstruction method after DG for GC. However, since then, new evidence from several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has emerged, prompting us to conduct an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide the latest comparative estimates of the efficacy and safety of the three reconstruction methods after DG for GC. METHOD: This systematic review and network meta-analysis update followed the PRISMA-P guidelines and will include a search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for RCTs comparing the outcomes of Billroth I, Billroth II, or Roux-en-Y reconstruction after DG for patients with GC. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts based on predefined eligibility criteria, and two reviewers will assess the full texts of relevant studies. The Bayesian network meta-analysis will evaluate various outcomes, including quality of life after surgery, anastomotic leakage within 30 days after surgery, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, major postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery, incidence and severity of bile reflux, and loss of body weight from baseline. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The review does not require ethical approval. The findings of the review will be disseminated through publication in an academic journal, presentations at conferences, and various media outlets. INPLASY REGISTRATION NUMBER: INPLASY2021100060.

Activation of the FOXM1/ASF1B/PRDX3 axis confers hyperproliferative and antioxidative stress reactivity to gastric cancer.

Nucleosome assembly during DNA replication is dependent on histone chaperones. Recent studies suggest that dysregulated histone chaperones contribute to cancer progression, including gastric cancer (GC). Further studies are required to explore the prognostic and therapeutic implications of histone chaperones and their mechanisms of action in GC progression. Here we identified histone chaperone ASF1B as a potential biomarker for GC proliferation and prognosis. ASF1B was significantly upregulated in GC, which was associated with poor prognosis. In vitro and in vivo experiments demonstrated that the inhibition of ASF1B suppressed the malignant characteristics of GC, while overexpression of ASF1B had the opposite effect. Mechanistically, transcription factor FOXM1 directly bound to the ASF1B-promoter region, thereby regulating its transcription. Treatment with thiostrepton, a FOXM1 inhibitor, not only suppressed ASF1B expression, but also inhibited GC progression. Furthermore, ASF1B regulated the mitochondrial protein peroxiredoxin 3 (PRDX3) transcription in a FOXM1-dependent manner. The crucial role of ASF1B-regulated PRDX3 in GC cell proliferation and oxidative stress balance was also elucidated. In summary, our study suggests that the FOXM1-ASF1B-PRDX3 axis is a potential therapeutic target for treating GC.

Univariable and multivariable Mendelian randomization study identified the key role of gut microbiota in immunotherapeutic toxicity.

BACKGROUND: In cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), there is emerging evidence suggesting a correlation between gut microbiota and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, the exact roles of gut microbiota and the causal associations are yet to be clarified. METHODS: To investigate this, we first conducted a univariable bi-directional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis. Instrumental variables (IVs) for gut microbiota were retrieved from the MiBioGen consortium (18,340 participants). GWAS summary data for irAEs were gathered from an ICIs-treated cohort with 1,751 cancer patients. Various MR analysis methods, including inverse variance weighted (IVW), MR PRESSO, maximum likelihood (ML), weighted median, weighted mode, and cML-MA-BIC, were used. Furthermore, multivariable MR (MVMR) analysis was performed to account for possible influencing instrumental variables. RESULTS: Our analysis identified fourteen gut bacterial taxa that were causally associated with irAEs. Notably, Lachnospiraceae was strongly associated with an increased risk of both high-grade and all-grade irAEs, even after accounting for the effect of BMI in the MVMR analysis. Akkermansia, Verrucomicrobiaceae, and Anaerostipes were found to exert protective roles in high-grade irAEs. However, Ruminiclostridium6, Coprococcus3, Collinsella, and Eubacterium (fissicatena group) were associated with a higher risk of developing high-grade irAEs. RuminococcaceaeUCG004, and DefluviitaleaceaeUCG011 were protective against all-grade irAEs, whereas Porphyromonadaceae, Roseburia, Eubacterium (brachy group), and Peptococcus were associated with an increased risk of all-grade irAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights a strong causal association between Lachnospiraceae and irAEs, along with some other gut microbial taxa. These findings provide potential modifiable targets for managing irAEs and warrant further investigation.

Efficacy and safety of ripretinib vs. sunitinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor previously treated with imatinib: A phase 2, multicenter, randomized, open-label study in China.

AIM: A bridging study of INTRIGUE study to assess the efficacy and safety of ripretinib versus sunitinib as second-line treatment in Chinese GIST patients. METHODS: This was a phase 2, multicenter, randomized, open-label study in China. GIST patients previously treated with imatinib were randomized (1:1) to receive ripretinib 150 mg once daily (QD) by continuous dosing in 42-day cycles or sunitinib 50 mg QD in 42-day cycles (four weeks on/two weeks off). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent radiological review (IRR). RESULTS: Between 6 December 2020 and 15 September 2021, 108 patients were randomized to receive ripretinib (n = 54) or sunitinib (n = 54) (all-patient [AP] intention-to-treat [ITT] population). Seventy patients had primary KIT exon 11 mutations (ripretinib, n = 35; sunitinib, n = 35; Ex11 ITT population). By data cut-off (20 July 2022), in AP ITT population, PFS by IRR was comparable between ripretinib and sunitinib arms (HR 0·99, 95 % CI 0·57, 1·69; nominal p = 0·92; median PFS [mPFS] 10·3 vs 8·3 months). In Ex11 ITT population, PFS by IRR was longer for ripretinib than sunitinib (HR 0·46, 95 % CI 0·23, 0·92; nominal p = 0·03; mPFS not reached in ripretinib arm and 4·9 months in sunitinib arm). Fewer patients experienced grade 3/4 treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events with ripretinib (17%) versus sunitinib (56%). CONCLUSIONS: Ripretinib demonstrated similar efficacy and a favorable safety profile versus sunitinib as second-line treatment in Chinese GIST patients. Furthermore, ripretinib provided greater clinically meaningful benefit versus sunitinib in patients with KIT exon 11 mutation.

Case Report: Giant abdominal hemangioma originating from the liver.

Background: Hepatic hemangioma is among the most common benign liver lesions. However, giant pedunculated hepatic hemangiomas are exceptionally rare and associated with additional risks, such as torsion. Case presentation: We present the case of a 63-year-old female patient who presented with abdominal distension and pain. Barium meal examination and gastroscopy revealed a large, smooth-surfaced submucosal bulge located at the fundus of the stomach. Subsequent MRI examination identified a mass measuring approximately 6.4 x 7 cm in the left upper abdomen. Surgical intervention was planned for mass removal. However, intraoperative exploration revealed the origin of the mass to be the liver, and subsequent histopathological examination confirmed it as a hemangioma. Conclusion: We systematically summarized the characteristics of our case along with 31 previously reported cases. Giant pedunculated hepatic hemangiomas typically occur in the left lobe of the liver. Due to their atypical presentation, a combination of imaging methods such as ultrasound, CT, and/or MRI is essential for accurate diagnosis. Furthermore, surgical intervention is recommended due to the potential risks of bleeding, rupture, and torsion.