Gastrectomy with limited surgery for elderly patients with gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Elderly patients with gastric cancer can receive standard gastrectomy or gastrectomy with reduced nodal dissection, i.e., limited surgery, in order to prevent postoperative complications. This study evaluated the feasibility of gastrectomy with limited surgery for elderly patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: A total of 267 elderly patients (≥70 years old) were divided into two groups according to the level of nodal dissection: patients who received nodal dissection according to guidelines were included in the standard surgery group (standard group), and those who received reduced nodal dissection were included in the limited surgery group (limited group). The surgical outcomes of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: There were 170 patients in the standard group and 97 patients in the limited group. The limited group had significantly poorer nutrition status and a significantly higher proportion with comorbidities. Morbidity and mortality were similar in both groups. Multivariate analysis showed that the overall survival rates were significantly worse in patients with advanced age, male gender, low body mass index, low prognostic nutrition index, and higher tumor stage. The disease-specific survival rate was significantly lower in the limited group than in the standard group (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Gastrectomy according to the gastric treatment guidelines for elderly patients with gastric cancer is recommended. Elderly male patients with poor nutrition have poor prognosis; prognostic nutrition index <40. Limited surgery is a treatment option for such patients.

[Surgical treatment for perianal Crohn's disease].

Perianal lesions are a frequent complication of Crohn's disease (CD) and include fistula, abscess, anal ulcer, skin tag, anal stricture, and carcinoma. Perianal fistula is the most commonly observed condition and exhibits multiple incidence and intractable characteristics. The starting point for the management of perianal fistula is an accurate diagnosis, which requires careful exploration during an EUA. The condition is treated with medications such as antibiotics, immunosuppressants, or anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. However, it is difficult to maintain long-term remission. Surgical therapy is selected according to the type of fistula and can include conventional fistulotomy, seton drainage, diverting stoma, and anorectal amputation. After fistulotomy, recurrence is frequent and there is an increased risk of incontinence. Seton drainage is the preferred treatment to improve symptoms and preserve anal function. Stoma is useful to relieve symptoms but difficult to indicate for young patients. The optimum treatment for perianal fistula associated with CD remains controversial. Currently, the goal of therapy for these patients has shifted from complete fistula closure to reducing drainage from the fistula to improve their quality of life. Ongoing careful management is important to control anal symptoms and maintain long-term anal function in the treatment of patients with CD, while monitoring them to detect possible progression to anorectal carcinoma.

Efficacy and safety of irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) therapy to treat advanced/recurrent colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) therapy and 5-FU, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) therapy are standard chemotherapies to treat advanced/recurrent colorectal cancer. However, these chemotherapies require continuous infusion of 5-FU for a prolonged time of 40 h or more, every two weeks. Accordingly, these chemotherapies require hospitalization and placement of a central venous catheter. Because of frequent catheterization, long-term use of these therapies potentially risks complications such as infection and thrombosis. In contrast, S-1 (tegaful, gimeracil, oteracil) combined with irinotecan (IRIS) therapy involves giving one drug orally and infusing the other for about two hours every two weeks, so placement of a central venous catheter is not necessary. The current study examined the efficacy and safety of IRIS therapy in 90 patients at this Hospital who underwent such therapy to treat advanced/recurrent colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised 90 patients who underwent IRIS therapy to treat advanced/recurrent colorectal cancer from December 2004 to December 2011. RESULTS: The ratio of male-to-female patients was 64:26. The mean age at the start of IRIS therapy was 64.5 years, and patients underwent an average of 11 courses of therapy. The response rate to IRIS therapy was 14.8%, the disease control rate was 60.5%, and the overall survival time was 26.7 months. The incidence of adverse events was 70.0%, and the incidence of grade 3 or more severe adverse reactions was 17.8%. CONCLUSION: In comparison to the standard therapies of FOLFOX and FOLFIRI, IRIS therapy had a lower response rate but led to an equivalent overall survival time. IRIS therapy had a low incidence of serious adverse events and allowed patients to continue therapy on an out-patient basis. These findings indicate that IRIS therapy may be a useful form of chemotherapy to treat advanced/recurrent colorectal cancer.

Early colorectal carcinomas: CD10 expression, mucin phenotype and submucosal invasion.

We analyzed 170 tumors (polypoid, 98; non-polypoid, 72) of early colorectal carcinoma with or without submucosal invasions (Tis and T1 of TNM classification) from 161 patients to evaluate correlations between clinicopathological factors and immunohistochemical expressions of CD10, MUC2, and MUC5AC. The coexistence of adenomatous components was significantly less common in non-polypoid carcinomas (4.2%) than in polypoid carcinomas (66.3%) (P < 0.0001). Non-polypoid carcinomas were smaller in size and tended to infiltrate into the submucosa with higher incidence of lymphatic and venous permeations. CD10 was more frequently expressed in non-polypoid carcinomas (70.8%) than in polypoid carcinomas (51.0%) (P= 0.01). Total carcinomas with high grade atypia showed higher incidence of CD10 expression (60.6%) than those with low grade atypia (28.9%) (P < 0.0001). Carcinomas with low grade atypia exhibited a higher incidence of MUC2 and MUC5AC expression (91.1% and 57.8%, respectively), when compared with carcinomas with high grade atypia (41.6% and 20.0%, respectively) (both, P < 0.0001). In submucosal invasive carcinomas with residual intramucosal carcinoma component (IMCC), CD10 expression in IMCC and submucosal invasive carcinoma component (SMCC) simultaneously exhibited identical positive or negative results, regardless of the polypoid or non-polypoid growth pattern. The CD10 expression may occur in the early stage of carcinogenesis within the mucosa, and these neoplasms may retain CD10 in SMCC, possibly resulting in more advanced stages of stromal invasion and distant metastases. In conclusion, our data suggest that the CD10 expression and mucin phenotypes may be potentially useful markers for estimating biological properties of early colorectal carcinomas.

The effect of lentinan combination therapy for unresectable advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Developed as a biological response modifier (BRM), lentinan mitigates patients' symptoms by boosting the immune system. In combination with S-1 (tegafur, gimeracil, oteracil), lentinan is reported to mitigate adverse reactions to therapy for unresectable recurrent gastric cancer and prolong survival. However, there are few reports from actual clinical practice, and precise methods of using lentinan have not yet been established. This study retrospectively examined the usefulness of lentinan in patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The subjects of this study were 39 patients who were diagnosed with unresectable gastric cancer, based on preoperative examinations or findings at laparotomy in our Department. These patients underwent S-1/paclitaxel therapy. Nineteen of the patients received lentinan while 20 did not, and these two groups of patients were compared. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in patients' characteristics such as the male:female ratio, age at the start of chemotherapy, and staging classification of the 19 patients receiving lentinan and the 20 patients not receiving lentinan. Comparison of the two groups revealed no significant differences in overall survival time, but comparison of the duration of therapy revealed that therapy tended to be longer for the group taking lentinan than the group not taking lentinan. Adverse events were noted in 61.5% (24 patients) of the total patients group; such events tended to occur less frequently in the group receiving lentinan. CONCLUSION: Lentinan inclusion in therapy did not seem to prolong survival. Nevertheless, the duration of therapy tended to be longer for patients taking lentinan. This may be due to the fact that adverse events tended to occur less frequently in these patients during therapy. A decline in the incidence of adverse events increases the duration of therapy and improves the patients' quality of life (QOL); it may also prolong survival. Optimal methods of using lentinan need to be established.