Search

Purpose: Right-sided colon cancers (RCCs) and left-sided colon cancers (LCCs) have different embryological, epidemiological, physiological, pathological, genetic, and clinical characteristics, which result in differences in the course, prognosis, and outcome of disease. This study aimed to compare RCCs and LCCs regarding clinicopathological and survival characteristics. Methods: The present retrospective study included data of patients who were followed-up and treated for colon cancer from 2008 through 2017. Rectosigmoid, descending colon, and splenic flexure tumors were considered LCC, whereas hepatic flexure and ascending colon tumors were considered RCC. Tumors were staged according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer classification. Results: The study included 1725 patients (female, 58.7%) having colon cancer with a mean age of 64±12 years. Of the patients, 83.2% (n=1436) had LCC and 16.8% (n=289) had RCC. The rate of patients aged ?65 years and the rate of patients with a family history of colon cancer were higher in the RCC patients. The rate of metastatic patients was 29.1% in the RCC group and 23.2% in the LCC group (p=0.087). The median follow-up period was 18 months in the RCC group and 23 months in the LCC group (p=0.011). Although the median survival time was higher in the LCC group (62 vs. 43 months), no significant difference was determined between the RCC and LCC groups in terms of survival. Conclusions: There are numerous clinicopathological differences between RCC and LCC and these differences are reflected in prognostic and survival differences among certain subgroups. © 2019 Zerbinis Publications. All rights reserved. 2-s2.0-85075009456 PubMed: 31786846

Background: We examined the impact of adjuvant modalities on resected pancreatic and periampullary adenocarcinoma (PAC). Methods: A total of 563 patients who were curatively resected for PAC were retrospectively analyzed between 2003 and 2013. Results: Of 563 patients, 472 received adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) alone, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) alone, and chemoradiotherapy plus chemotherapy (CRT-CT) were analyzed. Of the 472 patients, 231 were given CRT-CT, 26 were given CRT, and 215 were given CT. The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were 12 and 19 months, respectively. When CT and CRT-CT groups were compared, there was no significant difference with respect to both RFS and OS, and also there was no difference in RFS and OS among CRT-CT, CT and CRT groups. To further investigate the impact of radiation on subgroups, patients were stratified according to lymph node status and resection margins. In node-positive patients, both RFS and OS were significantly longer in CRT-CT than CT. In contrast, there was no significant difference between groups when patients with node-negative disease or patients with or without positive surgical margins were considered. Conclusions: Addition of radiation to CT has a survival benefit in patients with node-positive disease following pancreatic resection.

The majority of patients with pancreatic cancer is of advanced disease. Several randomized Phase II and III trials suggest that the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) response rates were higher than Gemcitabine (Gem) alone, however the trials were not enough powered to indicate a statistically significant prolongation of survival in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study is to evaluated the efficiency of Gem alone versus GemCis in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma .A total of 406 patients, from fourteen centers were evaluated retrospectively. All patients received Gem or GemCis as first-line treatment between September 2005 to March 2011. Primary end of this study were to evaluate the toxicity, clinical response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between the arms. There were 156 patients (M: 98, F: 58) in Gem arm and 250 patients (M: 175, F: 75) in the combination arm. Gemcitabin arm patients older than the combination arm ( median 63 vs 57.5, p=0.001). In patients with the combination arm had a higher dose reduction (25.2% vs 11.3%, p=0.001) and dose delay (34% vs 16.8%, p=0.001). Among patients with the combination and Gemcitabin arm gender, diabetes mellitus, performance status, cholestasis, grade, stage did not have a statistically difference (p0.05). Clinical response rate to the combination arm was higher than the Gem arm (69.0% vs 49.7%, p=0.001). PFS was more favorable in the GemCis arm than Gem alone, but the difference did not attain statistical significance (8.9 vs 6.0, p=0.08). OS was not significantly superior in the GemCis arm (12.0 vs 10.2, p0.05). Grade III-IV hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity were higher in the combination arm. PFS was more favorable in the GemCis arm than Gem alone, but the difference did not attain statistical significance. OS was not significantly superior in the GemCis arm.

Purpose: The majority of patients with pancreatic cancer present with advanced disease. Systemic chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic cancer has limited impact on overall survival (OS). Patients eligible for chemotherapy should be selected carefully. The aim of this study was to analyse prognostic factors for OS in advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with first-line palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine alone or gemcitabine plus cisplatin.

The majority of patients with pancreatic cancer is of advanced disease. Several randomized Phase II and III trials suggest that the combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GemCis) response rates were higher than Gemcitabine (Gem) alone, however the trials were not enough powered to indicate a statistically significant prolongation of survival in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study is to evaluated the efficiency of Gem alone versus GemCis in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A total of 406 patients, from fourteen centers were evaluated retrospectively. All patients received Gem or GemCis as first-line treatment between September 2005 to March 2011. Primary end of this study were to evaluate the toxicity, clinical response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between the arms. There were 156 patients (M: 98, F: 58) in Gem arm and 250 patients (M: 175, F: 75) in the combination arm. Gemcitabin arm patients older than the combination arm ( median 63 vs 57.5, p=0.001). In patients with the combination arm had a higher dose reduction (25.2% vs 11.3%, p=0.001) and dose delay (34% vs 16.8%, p=0.001). Among patients with the combination and Gemcitabin arm gender, diabetes mellitus, performance status, cholestasis, grade, stage did not have a statistically difference (p>0.05). Clinical response rate to the combination arm was higher than the Gem arm (69.0% vs 49.7%, p=0.001). PFS was more favorable in the GemCis arm than Gem alone, but the difference did not attain statistical significance (8.9 vs 6.0, p=0.08). OS was not significantly superior in the GemCis arm (12.0 vs 10.2, p>0.05). Grade III-IV hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity were higher in the combination arm. PFS was more favorable in the GemCis arm than Gem alone, but the difference did not attain statistical significance. OS was not significantly superior in the GemCis arm.