ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Identification of pancreatic cancer (PC) local invasion is crucial to optimize patients' selection for surgery. AIMS: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in local staging of PC. METHODS: We performed a multicenter study including all patients with PC who underwent surgery. RESULTS: One hundred twelve patients were included. Surgical findings of peri-pancreatic lymph nodes (LN), vascular and adjacent organ involvement were seen in 67 (59.8%), 33 (29.5%) and 19 patients (17%), respectively. The diagnostic performance of EUS was better than CECT in peri-pancreatic LN. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) of CECT vs. EUS were 28.4%, 80%, 67.9% and 42.9% vs. 70.2%, 75.6%, 81% and 63%, respectively. For vascular and adjacent organ involvement, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 45.5%, 93.7%, 75%, 80.4% and 31.6%, 89.2%, 37.5% and 86.5% for CECT, respectively, vs. 63.6%, 93.7%, 80.8%, 86.1% and 36.8%, 94.6%, 58.3% and 88% for EUS, respectively. Combining both CECT and EUS, the sensitivity for peri-pancreatic LN, vascular and adjacent organ involvement improved (76.1%, 78.8% and 42%), respectively. CONCLUSION: EUS was superior to CECT in local staging. Combined EUS and CECT had a higher sensitivity than either alone.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Humans , Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Sensitivity and Specificity , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasm Staging , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Endosonography , Pancreatic NeoplasmsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We sought to define the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib in a real-world (RW) cohort of Israeli patients with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: This was a multi-center retrospective observational cohort study (2019-2020) to assess the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib induction and maintenance therapy up to 26 weeks. Clinical response and remission were defined as a reduction in Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index (SCCAI) or partial Mayo score (PMS) of ≥3 points, and SCCAI ≤2 or a PMS ≤1, respectively. RESULTS: We included 73 patients, 47% male; median age 26 years [IQR: 19.5-39.5], disease duration 7 years [IQR: 2.5-14.5], follow-up 7.1 months [IQR: 3-12], 91% biologics-experienced, and 74% ≥ 2-biologics. Half of patients used concomitant corticosteroids (CS). Overall, 56.1% discontinued therapy due to either lack of response and/or adverse events (AEs), median time to discontinuation - 9.7 months [IQR 3.4-16]. Overall, response, remission, and CS-free-remission were achieved in 47.6%, 20.6%, and 17.5% of patients, respectively. At early maintenance (week 26), response, remission, and CS-free-remission were achieved in 65%, 22.5%, and 20% of patients, respectively. At week 26, tofacitinib 10 mg BID was still used in 43%. Seventeen patients (23.2%) had an adverse event including herpes zoster- 2.7%, hospitalization- 12.3%, and colectomy- 2.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Tofacitinib was effective in achieving CS-free-remission in about 1/5 of highly biologics -experienced patients with UC. Despite a considerable proportion of patients maintained on tofacitinib 10 mg bid, it was well tolerated and safe. Earlier positioning of tofacitinib in the therapeutic algorithm may result in improved outcomes.
