Objective To discuss the performance of multi-disciplinary team (MDT) of colorectal cancer treatment within West China Hospital in Sichuan University. Methods To compare the therapeutic effect between groups of MDT model and non-MDT model by retrospectively analyzing the data of patients who diagnosed colorectal cancer and accepted in-hospital therapy during December 2006 and May 2007. Results The in-hospital days of the MDT model group during the perioperative period and in the surgical ward were less than that of the non-MDT model group ( Plt; 0. 05) , but there was no significant difference between the two groups about the total hospitalization time. And the MDT model group had a higher rate of cancer resection ( P lt; 0. 05) . Although the incidence of anastomotic leakage and bleeding as early postoperative complications didn’t show any variations between the two groups , the non-MDT model groupencountered more early postoperative ileus ( Plt; 0. 05) . During the 5－ 10 months follow-up , there came out less cancer recurrence rate in the MDT model group than the other ( P lt; 0. 05) . And the morbidity of anastomotic stricture and ileus didn’t show any statistical difference between the two groups. Conclusion The combined-therapy st rategy ofcolorectal cancer has showed a priority to routine ways , not only the more reasonable time arrangement for therapy , but also the more satisfied surgical outcomes. However , the factors correlated to the efficacy of the MDT model are not clear ; the MDT model still needs to be improved that a morereasonable and effective perioperative MDT model may come t rue.
In this paper, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials and other relevant studies on surgical and adjuvant therapy following operative therapy in renal cancer were identified by searching the Guidelines International Network, ACP Journal Club, the Cochrane Library （Issue 3, 2005 ） , MEDLINE, EMBASE and CBMdisc （ from 1996 to Sept. 2005）. In operative therapy, we found no study comparing operative therapy with no treatment or adjuvant therapy alone; A meta-analysis of cytoreductive nephrectomy in patients with metastatic renal cancer showed adjuvant therapy following nephrectomy was more effective than adjuvant therapy alone; a review comparing radical nephrectomy with nephron-sparing surgery in small-volume renal tumors found similar effectiveness between the two procedures. In the adjuvant therapy following nephrectomy, ten RCTs found adjuvant cytokine therapy （Interferon and Interleukin-2 ） and 5-FU not effective in the adjuvant setting, and could increase adverse reaction; Four RCTs found adjuvant vaccine therapy effective in the adjuvant setting with only a few side effects.
ObjectiveTo learn further the local immunity changes of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy and improve the cognition of this project. MethodsSixty cases of paraffin-embedded sections of the excised specimen from the two groups of middle and low rectal cancer patients, with (therapy group) or without (control group) neoadjuvant therapy, were studied respectively. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) in the two groups were counted under microscope, and also, dendritic cells (DC) were counted and morphology and distribution of the DCs were recorded through immunohistochemistry stain with monoclonal antibody, S-100. ResultsTILs and DCs in the two groups mainly assembled in the pericancerous tissues. The positive rate of TIL in therapy group was 75.00% (45/60) and 90.00% (54/60) in control group (χ2=10.58, P=0.014). S-100 positive DCs were (36.85±11.17)/HPF versus (26.50±7.68)/HPF in the therapy group and control group, respectively (P=0.001). ConclusionNeoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer can influence the local tumor immunity enviroment by reducing TILs and increasing DCs.
Objective To discuss the important role of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer. Methods From the surgical point of view, the evidences from clinic trials in literatures of recent years and also from the results of our single institution were analyzed. Results Preoperative radiotherapy with total dosage of 50 Gy had showed more and more advantages in the past two decades. Preoperative radiotherapy with concomitant chemotherapy had definite effects in downing stage and improving local control, while its role in sphincter preserving kept in controversy. However, this combined preoperative therapies had not improved long-term survival in rectal cancer. By now, there were no proper indicators to predict the effects of therapies. Conclusion Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is still the only way to improve the rate of R0 resection and decrease the rate of local currence after surgery for patients with mid-low advanced rectal cancer.
Objective To summarize the current value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for potentially resectable gastric cancer. Methods The recent 5-year literatures searched through the PubMed with the key words: stomach neoplasm, gastric cancer/carcinoma, neoadjuvant therapy/chemotherapy and preoperative therapy/chemotherapy as well as the relevant reports presented in the ASCO Annual Meeting in 2007 and 2008 were analyzed. The present status of NAC for advanced gastric cancer was summarized, the necessity and feasibility were evaluated, and the patients features for selecting, the predictors for response, the mainly existing problems and development trend of NAC were analyzed. Results At present, there were 7 randomized control trails (RCT) published, and among them 3 were phase Ⅲ. It was safe, effective and feasible to most of trails in NAC for gastric cancer. However, it was still little to obtain survival benefit for NAC RCT, and short of randomized trial comparing strict preoperative chemotherapy to surgery alone or perioperative chemotherapy to surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy. It remained lots of problems such as how to select the appropriate patients, the effective induced regimes and the predicted factors, the evaluated indices for response. Conclusion NAC is a safe, feasible and efficient method to potentially resectable gastric cancer, but strict phase Ⅲ randomized trials are needed. In the future, substantial improvements of treatment outcome will likely depend on the novel drugs and molecular biological targeted therapies.
In order to address the problem of traditional dolphin adjuvant therapy such as high cost and its limitation in time and place, this paper introduces a three-dimensional virtual dolphin adjuvant therapy system based on virtual reality technology. By adopting Oculus wearable three-dimensional display, the system combined natural human-computer interaction based on Leap Motion with high-precision gesture recognition and cognitive training, and achieved immersive three-dimensional interactive game for child rehabilitation training purposes. The experimental data showed that the system can effectively improve the cognitive and social abilities of those children with autism spectrum disorder, providing a useful exploration for the rehabilitation of those children.
Surgery has remained the cornerstone of lung cancer therapy. Sleeve lobectomy, which is featured by not only the maximal resection of tumors but also the maximal preservation of functional lung parenchyma, has been proved to be a valid therapeutic option for the treatment of some centrally located lung cancer . Evidence points toward equivalent oncologic outcomes with improved survival and quality of life after sleeve resections compared with pneumonectomy. However, the postoperative morbidities and the long-term results after sleeve lobectomy remain controversial, especially in relation to nodal involvement and after induction therapy. With the development of technology, minimally invasive procedures have been performed more and more widely.
ObjectiveTo explore the treatment strategies of different types of pancreatic cancer.MethodsBy reading the relevant literatures on the treatment of pancreatic cancer at home and abroad in recent years, the classification of pancreatic cancer and the progress of treatment measures were summarized.ResultsAccording to preoperative imaging evaluation, pancreatic cancer was divided into resectable pancreatic cancer, borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, locally advanced pancreatic cancer, and pancreatic cancer with distant metastasis. Resection of pancreatic cancer should be radical resection, supplemented with chemotherapy after surgery; patients with resected pancreatic cancer in the junction, if the patient with venous invasion could be resected and reconstructed, it was recommended to undergo surgery and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with unresectable reconstruction and arterial invasion should undergo neoadjuvant therapy, and then re-evaluate the resectability of the tumor to determine whether surgery was feasible. Patients with locally advanced or combined metastatic pancreatic cancer had lost the opportunity for surgery, for this kind of patient, advocated neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or second-line combined targeted therapy.ConclusionsMost patients with pancreatic cancer have progressed to the stage of clinical diagnosis. They are familiar with the treatment of different types of pancreatic cancer and take targeted treatment measures to improve the survival time of patients.
ObjectiveTo analyze whether neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can impact patients’ anal function and quality of life after rectal cancer surgery.MethodThe domestic and international publications on the studies how the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy impacted patients’ anal function and quality of life were collected and reviewed.ResultsThe neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy negatively impacted the patients’ anal function and quality of life, but which would be improved over time. The impact had no obvious difference between the long-course chemoradiotherapy and short-couse radiotherapy on the patients’ anal function and quality of life. Compared with the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the neoadjuvant chemotherapy might impact less on the anal function, but which still needed to evaluate the lower anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. In present, it lacked evidence of a higher rate of anastomotic leakage caused by the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, which might lead to the bowel dysfunction.ConclusionsNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy negatively impacts patients’ anal function and quality of life. Further studies are needed to figure out the best choice between long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and short-couse radiotherapy. In long term, impact of neoadjuvant therapy can be improved over time and be accepted by patients. Some intervention treatments including medicine and operations are needed if major LARS occurs.
ObjectiveTo analyze the neoadjuvant therapy of colorectal cancer in this center in the background of real world data by studying Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA) in West China Hospital of Sichuan University.MethodsData was selected from DACCA who was updated on August 15, 2019. After deleting duplicate value, patients whose tumor location and tumor pathologic characteristic showed colon or rectum, as well as adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, and signet ring cell carcinoma were enrolled.ResultsThere were 2 783, 2 789, 2 790, 2 811, 4 148,3 824, 4 191, 3 676, 4 090, and 499 valid data of T, N, and M stages, clinical stages, tumor site, distance from tumor to anal dentate line, tumor pathologic characteristics, degree of tumor differentiation, neoadjuvant therapy, and compliance, respectively. There were 1 839 lines that " nature of the tumor pathology” was not empty and neoadjuvant scheme for the pure chemotherapy, radiotherapy alone or radiation, and chemotherapy, including 50 lines of signet ring cell carcinoma (2.7%), 299 lines of mucous adenocarcinoma (16.3%), 1 490 lines of adenocarcinoma (81.0%), various kinds of pathology in selection of neoadjuvant therapy difference was statistically significant (χ2=9.138, P=0.041). Except for the data lines with null value in the column of " operation date”, there were 2 234 (82.1%) and 486 (17.9%) effective data lines of " recommended” and " not recommended” for the use of neoadjuvant therapy, respectively. In the years with a large amount of data, among the patients who completed neoadjuvant therapy, the proportion of patients meeting the recommended indications was 27.4%–67.6%, with an average of 47.4%. Patients who did not meet the recommended indications but were recommended (off-label use) accounted for 7.3%–70.0%, with an average of 39.8%. According to regression analysis, the proportion in line with the recommendation (\begin{document}$\hat y $\end{document}=–0.032 5x+66.003 2, P=0.020) varies with the year, and the overall trend shows a gradual decline. The proportion of the use of super indications (\begin{document}$\hat y $\end{document}=–0.054 5x+110.174 6, P=0.002) changed with the year, and the overall trend showed a decline. A total of 1 161 valid data with non-null values of " eoadjuvant therapy regimen” and " recommended or not recommended” showed statistically significant difference in the use rate of neoadjuvant therapy among patients with different recommendation groups (χ2=9.244, P=0.002). " Patient compliance” was shown as " active cooperation” and " passive acceptance”, and " neoadjuvant therapy” was shown as " radiotherapy alone”" chemotherapy alone”, and " chemoradiotherapy” were 470 lines. There was no statistically significant difference in neoadjuvant therapy between patients receiving active and passive treatment (χ2=0.537, P=0.841). The effective data of clinical remission degree meeting the research conditions were 388 lines, including 121 lines of complete response (31.2%), 180 lines of partial response (46.4%), 79 lines of stable disease (20.4%), and 8 lines of progressive disease (2.1%). There was no statistically significant difference in clinical response degree among patients with different neoadjuvant therapy (H=0.435, P=0.783). There were 346 lines with effective data of pathologic tumor regression grade (TRG) meeting the study conditions, including 47 lines with TRG0 (13.6%), 39 lines with TRG1 (11.3%), 180 lines with TRG2 (52.0%), and 80 lines with TRG3 (23.1%). There was no statistical difference in the degree of TRG among patients with different neoadjuvant therapy (H=1.816, P=0.518).ConclusionsThe real world study reflects that in the western regional medical center, the demand for neoadjuvant therapy among the patients with colorectal cancer covered is huge. Although the implementation of neoadjuvant therapy is greatly influenced by the doctor’s recommendation behavior, the selection and recommendation of neoadjuvant therapy according to some specific clinical application guidelines are not fully met. The impact of more behavioral factors requires further in-depth analysis and research.