【 Abstract 】 Objective To discuss incidence of the complications in the rectal cancer patients ’ early postoperative being treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with surgical intervention. Methods The rectal cancer patients under surgical therapy being diagnosed definitely, with neoadjuvant chemotherapy under multi-disciplinary team (MDT) or without and firstly being discovered from April to October of 2007 were studied. The complication conditions of these patients 1 month after operation were studied and observed, and the differences between MDT group and non-MDT group were compared. Results According to the condition, 189 rectal cancer patients were internalized. Among all the patients, the distance of tumor to the dentate line were lt;3 cm 38 cases, 3 ～ 7 cm 86 cases, ≥ 7 cm 65 cases; pathological stage were Ⅰ stage 5 cases ， Ⅱstage 122 cases， Ⅲstage 50 cases， Ⅳstage 12 cases. There were 181 cases laparotomy, 8 cases laparoscopic operation; 33 cases stoma operation, 156 cases non-stoma operation. The total incidence of postoperative complication was 27.0% （51/189）. Of all, incision bleeding was 1 case, abdominal (deep) bleeding were 4 cases, anastomosis bleeding were 5 cases, pulmonary infection was 1 case, wound infection were 7 cases, urinary tract infection were 3 cases, abdominal (deep) infection was 1 case, unknown fever were 19 cases, superficial layer wound dehiscence was 1 case, wound co-liquation were 15 cases, anastomosis leakage were 3 cases, rectovaginal fistula were 2 cases; intestinal obstruction were 7 cases, urinary retention were 7 cases, stress ulcer were 2 cases. Follow-up in 2-10 months after operation, there was no death case. The baseline between MDT group and non-MDT group was equal. The ratio of postoperative blood transfusion of MDT group was obviously less than that of non-MDT group （P＜0.05）. Moreover, the operation time of MDT group was obviously shorter than that of non-MDT group, and the difference was statistically significant （P＜0.05）. But the ratio of laparotomy and laparoscopic operation, of stoma operation and non-stoma operation, as well as the types of radical excision operation of rectal cancer didn’t show any statistical difference between two groups (Pgt;0.05). The postoperative venting time, defecation time, intake time didn’t show any statistical difference between two groups too. But the postoperative out-of-bed activity time and the postoperative in-hospital days of MDT group was obviously shorter than that of non-MDT group, and the difference was statistically significant （P＜0.05）. In MDT group the postoperative total complication rate was less than non-MDT group, and the difference was statistically significant （P＜0.05）. Among all the complications, the MDT group had a lower rate of wound infection, wound co-liquation and urinary retention （P＜0.05）. Using multifactorial logistic regression analysis, the risk factor which influenced the postoperative complication rate in MDT group were: postoperative intake time and postoperative hospitalization time. But the risk factor in non-MDT group was only according to postoperative hospitalization time. Conclusion The patients who were treated by MDT, definite operative method combining neoadjuvant chemotherapy or not didn’t increase the postoperative complication rate and risk. So it could be believed that such a composite treatment was feasible and safe in early postoperative stage. But it needs further studies to evaluate the medium- and long-term clinical effect.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of TEC and CEF regimen in preoperative chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer. MethodsA total of one hundred breast cancer patients undergoing preoperative chemotherapy were divided into TEC group (n=50) and CEF group (n=50) by the pairgroup method and received surgical therapy after three courses of chemotherapy. The efficacy and toxicity of preoperative chemotherapy of patients in two groups were analyzed. ResultsFour patients with stage ⅢB breast cancer quit from CEF group after two courses of treatment because of the worse satisfaction. Clinical complete remission (cCR) was 7 cases, clinic partial remission (cPR) was 34 cases, stable disease (SD) was 9 cases, therefore, the remission rate (RR) was 82.0% (41/50), and reduction rate of tumor was 64.0% (32/50) in TEC group. cCR was 2 cases, cPR was 32 cases, SD was 12 cases, thus the RR was 680% (34/50), and reduction rate of tumor was 40.0% (20/50) in CEF group. The clinical efficacy and reduction rate of tumor of patients in TEC group were significantly superior than those in CEF group (Plt;0.05). The negative conversion ratio of lymph nodes were 54.1% (20/37) and 57.1% (20/35) in TEC group and CEF group, which was not statistically different (Plt;0.05). The occurrence of hair loss and leukopenia of patients in TEC group were significantly higher than those in CEF group (Plt;0.05), while the differences in thrombocytopenia, low concentration of hemoglobin, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, cardiac toxicity, and neurotoxicity were not significant (Pgt;0.05). ConclusionTEC regimen is better than CEF regimen in the efficacy and safety of neo-adjuant therapy for patients with breast cancer, and well tolerated.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and find the mechanism of multidrug resistance. MethodsTwenty patients with gastric cancer and 31 patients with colorectal cancer underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and then operations. The preoperative specimens were stained by immunohistochemical techniques for testing p53,multidrug resistanceassociated protein (MRP), glutathione S transferase（GST）, telomerase. Resection specimens were evaluated for chemotherapy effect by routine histology; at the same time, the postoperative morbidity and mortality were observed. ResultsIn 51 patients, the response rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was 27.45%(14/51),so multidrug resistance was a kind of common phenomena in gastrointestinal carcinomas. The postoperative morbidity was 15.69%(8/15), the main operation complication was infection,the mortality was 1.96%(1/51),only one person died from severe infection.The expression rate of p53, MRP, GST, telomerase was 58.0%,51.0%,66.7%,74.0%respectively, the location of p53 was at cell nucleus,location of MRP,GST was at cell memberane and cytoplasm,location of telomerase was at cytoplasm.The response rate had nothing to do with age, sex and metastasis. But it was related with p53 and telomerase expression. ConclusionNeoadjuvant chemotherapy is an effective, safe therapy. But the rate of drug resistance is high in gastrointestinal carcinomas, and the response rate is related to p53, telomerase expression.
Objective To explore the effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on postoperative risk of colorectal cancer by use of estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress （E-PASS）. Methods A total of 161 patients with colorectal cancer according to the inclusion criteria from January 2009 to December 2009 in West China Hospital of Sichuan University were analyzed retrospectively，who were assigned to neoadjuvant chemotherapy group （NC group, 78 patients） and non-NC group （83 patients）. The postoperative risk of each group was assessed by the E-PASS scale including preoperative risk score （PRS），surgical stress score （SSS），and comprehensive risk score （CRS）. Results The baseline of two groups had no significant difference （P＞0.05）. The postoperative complication incidence of two groups had no significant difference either （P＞0.05）， which was 10.26% （8/78） in the NC group，and 7.23% （6/83） in the non-NC group. The PRS was 78.42 in the NC group and 83.42 in the non-NC group （P=0.497）. The SSS was 80.77 in the NC group and 81.22 in the non-NC group （P=0.951）. The CRS was 80.74 in the NC group and 81.24 in the non-NC group （P=0.976）. The accuracy of the postoperative risk assessment was 70 cases and 78 cases in the NC group and non-NC group，respectively. There was no significant difference of accuracy between two groups （P=0.325）. Conclusions Neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not increase the risk of patients with colorectal cancer after operation，and the results suggest that E-PASS scale can provide a more accurate assessment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with surgical risk.
Objective To investigate the advances and clinical efficacy evaluation method on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods Literatures on the advances and clinical efficacy evaluation method on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer were reviewed and analyzed. The agreement between computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) and the results of histopathology and survival was analyzed.Results CT and EUS were the method of efficacy evaluation commonly used at present, but the evaluation indexes and criteria were controversial, and the criteria for solid tumors seemed to be not feasible for gastric cancer. Diffusionweighted imaging (DWI) method needed more investigation, while PET held advantage in early selection of patients without response accurately.Conclusion There is no uniform standard for clinical efficacy evaluation yet, so an integration of diverse imaging methods may be the best choice to improve the accuracy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer.
Objective To investigate the perioperative differences between video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and thoracotomy after neoadjuvant therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods Clinical data of NSCLC patients who underwent VATS or thoracotomy after neoadjuvant therapy at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital from June 2020 to May 2022 were retrospectively collected. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 260 patients were enrolled, 184 (70.8%) patients underwent VATS and 76 (29.2%) patients underwent thoracotomy. After propensity matching, there were 113 (62.4%) patients in the VATS group and 68 (37.6%) patients in the thoracotomy group. VATS had similar lymph node dissection ability and postoperative complication rate with thoracotomy (P>0.05), with the advantage of having shorter operative time (146.00 min vs. 165.00 min, P=0.006), less intraoperative blood loss (50.00 mL vs. 100.00 mL, P<0.001), lower intraoperative blood transfusion rate (0.0% vs. 7.4%, P=0.003), less 3-day postoperative drainage (250.00 mL vs. 350.00 mL, P=0.011; 180.00 mL vs. 250.00 mL, P=0.002; 150.00 mL vs. 235.00 mL, P<0.001), and shorter postoperative drainage time (9.34 d vs. 13.84 d, P<0.001) and postoperative hospitalization time (6.19 d vs. 7.94 d, P=0.006). Conclusion VATS after neoadjuvant therapy for NSCLC is safer than thoracotomy and results in better postoperative recovery.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (a CRTS group) plus surgery versus surgery alone (a SA group) in the treatment of resectable esophageal neoplasms. Methods PubMed, Ovid Technologies, SCI, CBM Database, CNKI Database, VIP Database and Wanfang Database were searched to identify all published or unpublished RCTs those compared neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery with surgery alone for resectable esophageal neoplasms up to August 1, 2015. Meta-analysis was conducted by using Stata12.0 software. Results Twenty-six RCTs included 3 252 patients (1 606 in the CRTS group, 1 646 in the SA group) were selected. There was a significant difference between the CRTS group and the SA group in 3-year survival rate, 5-year survival rate, R0 resection rate, local recurrence rate, local recurrence and distant metastasis rate with relative risk (RR) value and 95%CI at 1.24 (1.13–1.36, P<0.000 1), 1.29 (1.10–1.50,P=0.001), 1.13 (1.05–1.212, P=0.001), 0.67 (0.52–0.85, P=0.001), 0.60 (0.40–0.90, P=0.013). And there was no significant difference between the CRTS group and the SA group in 1-year survival rate and distant metastasis with RR (95%CI) of 1.05 (0.99–1.12, P=0.103) and 0.84 (0.70–1.00, P=0.053). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications, 30-days mortality, pulmonary infections, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, cardiac complications, chylothorax between the two groups with RR (95%CI) at 1.09 (0.96–1.24, P=0.166), 1.32 (0.96–1.83, P=0.485), 1.45 (0.94–2.23, P=0.091), 0.89 (0.63–1.25, P=0.485), 0.93 (0.64–1.35, P=0.731), 1.24(0.84–1.87, P=0.283), and 1.62 (0.85–3.07, P=0.142). Conclusion CRTS significantly benefits to survival rate, R0 rescetion rate, and local recurrence rate compared to SA. Additionally there is no increased postoperative complication for patients with resectable esophageal neoplasms.
Objective To summarize the application and advancement of neoadjuvant therapy combined with transanal resection in stage T2-3 rectal cancer. Methods Domestic and abroad publications on the studies of neoadjuvant therapy combined with transanal resection in stage T2-3 rectal cancer in recent years were collected and reviewed. Results In selected patients with stage T2-3 rectal cancer, neoadjuvant therapy combined with transanal resection was efficacious in sphincter preservation and complications prevention. Compared with modality without chemoradiation, the recurrence rate had decreased from 17%-62% to 0-20%. Conclusion Selected patients with stage T2-3 rectal cancer can benefit from neoadjuvant chemoradiation combined with transanal resection.
Surgery is the preferred treatment for resectable esophageal cancer, but in locally advanced esophageal cancer, the effect of surgery alone is not ideal, so surgery-based comprehensive treatment is the best option. Neoadjuvant therapy has become a standard treatment in the treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant therapy includes neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radiochemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, etc. With the significant efficacy and acceptable toxicity of immunotherapy in the first-line and second-line treatment of advanced esophageal cancer, neoadjuvant immunotherapy has become a research hotspot of locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer. This article reviews the latest research progress and some limitations of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer.
Objective To investigate the influencing factors for the clinical remission of advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, establish an individualized nomogram model to predict the clinical remission of advanced ESCC with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and evaluate its efficacy, providing serve for the preoperative adjuvant treatment of ESCC.Methods The clinical data of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nedaplatin 80 mg/m2, day 3+docetaxel 75 mg/m2, day 1, 2 cycles, 21 days per cycle interval) in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College from February 2016 to August 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the WHO criteria for efficacy assessment of solid tumors, tumors were divided into complete remission (CR), partial remission (PR), stable disease (SD) and progressive disease (PD). CR and PR were defined as effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and SD and PD were defined as ineffective neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to analyze the influencing factors for the short-term efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The R software was used to establish a nomogram model for predicting the clinical remission of advanced ESCC with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and Bootstrap method for internal verification of the model. C-index, calibration curve and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the nomogram.Results Finally 115 patients were enrolled, including 93 males and 22 females, aged 40-75 (64.0±8.0) years. After receiving docetaxel+nedaplatin neoadjuvant chemotherapy for 2 cycles, there were 9 patients with CR, 56 patients with PR, 43 patients with SD and 7 patients with PD. Among them, chemotherapy was effective (CR+PR) in 65 patients and ineffective (SD+PD) in 50 patients, with the clinical effective rate of about 56.5% (65/115). Univariate analysis showed that there were statistical differences in smoking history, alcoholism history, tumor location, tumor differentiation degree, and cN stage before chemotherapy between the effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy group and the ineffective neoadjuvant chemotherapy group (P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that low-differentiation advanced ESCC had the worst clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, moderately-highly differentiated ESCC responded better (P<0.05). Stage cN0 advanced ESCC responded better to neoadjuvant chemotherapy than stage cN1 and cN2 (P<0.05). The C-index and the area under the ROC curve of the nomogram were both 0.763 (95%CI 0.676-0.850), the calibration curve fit well, the best critical value of the nomogram calculated by the Youden index was 70.04 points, and the sensitivity and specificity of the critical value were 80.0% and 58.0%, respectively.ConclusionThe established clinical prediction model has good discrimination and accuracy, and can provide a reference for individualized analysis of the clinical remission of advanced ESCC with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the screening of new adjuvant treatment subjects.