Sirolimus and Metformin Synergistically Inhibits Colon Cancer In Vitro and In Vivo

We estimated the effect of various immunosuppressants (ISs) and metformin (M) to provide theoretical background of optimal therapeutic strategy for de novo colon cancer after liver transplantation (LT). Three colon cancer cell lines (HT29, SW620, and HCT116) were used in in vitro studies. HT29 was also used in BALB/c-nude mice animal models. Following groups were used in both in vitro and in vivo studies: sirolimus (S), tacrolimus (T), cyclosporin A (CsA), M, metformin/sirolimus (Met/S), metformin/tacrolimus (Met/T), and metformin/cyclosporin A (Met/CsA). 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay was performed and western blot analyses were performed for mTOR pathway proteins, apoptosis proteins, and epithelial-mesenchymal-transition (EMT) proteins. Tumor volume was measured for 4 weeks after inoculation. MTT-assay revealed significant cell viability inhibition in all 3 colon cancer cell lines in groups of S, M, and Met/S. Of note, group Met/S showed synergistic effect compare to M or S group. Western blot analysis showed significant low levels of all investigated proteins in groups of S and Met/S in both in vitro and in vivo experiment. Tumor growth was significantly inhibited only in the Met/S group. Combination of Met and S showed the most potent inhibition in all colon cancer cell lines. This finding might have application for de novo colon cancer.

The correlation between preoperative volumetry and real graft weight: comparison of two volumetry programs

PURPOSE: Liver volumetry is a vital component in living donor liver transplantation to determine an adequate graft volume that meets the metabolic demands of the recipient and at the same time ensures donor safety. Most institutions use preoperative contrast-enhanced CT image-based software programs to estimate graft volume. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 2 liver volumetry programs (Rapidia vs. Dr. Liver) in preoperative right liver graft estimation compared with real graft weight. METHODS: Data from 215 consecutive right lobe living donors between October 2013 and August 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. One hundred seven patients were enrolled in Rapidia group and 108 patients were included in the Dr. Liver group. Estimated graft volumes generated by both software programs were compared with real graft weight measured during surgery, and further classified into minimal difference (≤15%) and big difference (>15%). Correlation coefficients and degree of difference were determined. Linear regressions were calculated and results depicted as scatterplots. RESULTS: Minimal difference was observed in 69.4% of cases from Dr. Liver group and big difference was seen in 44.9% of cases from Rapidia group (P = 0.035). Linear regression analysis showed positive correlation in both groups (P < 0.01). However, the correlation coefficient was better for the Dr. Liver group (R² = 0.719), than for the Rapidia group (R² = 0.688). CONCLUSION: Dr. Liver can accurately predict right liver graft size better and faster than Rapidia, and can facilitate preoperative planning in living donor liver transplantation.