Search

BackgroundHematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an important treatment for T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma/leukemia (T-LBL). To compare the efficacy and influencing factors of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) with those of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) from different donors for the treatment of T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma/leukemia (T-LBL) and provide a basis for selection of appropriate transplant methods and donors.MethodsTo provide evidence of appropriate transplant methods for these patients, we retrospectively summarized the clinical characteristics of 75 T-LBL patients receiving HSCT at Henan Cancer Hospital between March 2012 and October 2021. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), non-relapse mortality (NRM), and related factors affecting efficacy were analyzed.ResultsThe 3-year CIR (39.9% vs 31.1%, P=0.745), 3-year PFS (60.1% vs 49.6%, P=0.434), and 3-year OS (62.8% vs 53.0%, P=0.450) were not significantly different between the auto-HSCT and allo-HSCT groups. However, the 3-year NRM was significantly higher in the allo-HSCT group (0% vs 27.2%, P=0.033). Multivariate analysis showed that the first complete remission (CR1) after HSCT was an independent influencing factor of higher OS (HR=2.498, P=0.029) and PFS (HR=2.576, P=0.016). The absence of mediastinal invasion in patients receiving HSCT was an independent influencing factor of better PFS (HR=2.977, P=0.029) and lower CIR (HR=4.040, P=0.027). With respect to the impact of donor source, the NRM in the unrelated donor (URD) and haploid donor (HPD) groups was significantly higher than that in the auto-HSCT group (P=0.021 and P=0.003, respectively), while there was no significant difference between matched sibling donors (MSD) and auto-HSCT. Compared with the MSD-HSCT group, the auto-HSCT group showed an increasing trend in 3-year CIR (39.9 ± 11.1% vs 32.6 ± 11.2%, P=0.697) and a lower trend in 3-year OS (62.8 ± 11.4% vs 64.4 ± 12.2%, P=0.929).ConclusionsHSCT is an effective consolidation treatment option for patients with T-LBL without mediastinal invasion and with CR1 before transplantation. For CR1 patients, auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT are effective modalities for improving survival. In non-CR1 patients without an MSD, matched unrelated donors and haploidentical donor transplantations are the best treatment options to reduce relapse and improve prognosis.

BackgroundWhether autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improves the survival of patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) remains controversial. Some studies have demonstrated that the efficacy of ASCT is superior in patients with complete remission (CR), whereas patients with partial remission (PR) remain vulnerable to relapse after ASCT, resulting in decreased survival rates. Maintenance therapy after chemotherapy may reduce the relapse rate of PTCL and improve survival; however, the role of maintenance therapy after ASCT in PTCL remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to analyze the efficacy of ASCT and post-transplant maintenance therapy in PTCL.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 69 patients with PTCL who underwent ASCT at our center between November 2001 and November 2021. According to the patients’ intention, thirty patients received post-transplant maintenance treatment, whereas 39 did not. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between the groups were compared using the log-rank test.ResultsAt a median follow-up of 36 months, the entire cohort’s 3-year OS and PFS were 67.8% and 53.0%, respectively. The 3-year OS and PFS of patients with CR1, CR2, and PR were 85.3% and 65.4%, 80.0% and 60.0%, and 38.4% and 32.0%, respectively (OS: P=0.001; PFS: P=0.003). The relapse rates between the groups with or without maintenance therapy were 26.7% vs. 52.2%, the 3-year OS was 86.0% vs. 54.2% (P=0.004), and the 3-year PFS was 73.3% vs. 37.5% (P=0.004). Further analysis revealed that the efficacy of maintenance therapy was not significant in patients with CR1 and CR2, whereas patients with PR benefited from maintenance therapy. The relapse rate of patients with PR who received or did not receive maintenance therapy was 33.3% vs. 78.7%, 3-year OS was 66.7% vs. 21.9% (P=0.007), and 3-year PFS was 66.7% vs. 12.5% (P=0.004).ConclusionsPatients with CR in PTCL benefit from ASCT, and post-transplant maintenance therapy reduces the relapse rate and significantly improves OS and PFS in patients with PR.

BackgroundUnilateral oophorectomy has the benefits of preserving the ovarian function of fertility and hormone secretion, but the precise inclusion criteria for candidates for this procedure remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the prevalence and therapeutic efficiency of unilateral oophorectomy in women with ovarian cancer who underwent bilateral oophorectomy; moreover, it aimed to identify the appropriate candidates for unilateral oophorectomy.MethodsFemale patients diagnosed with stage I-III ovarian cancer between 2000 and 2017 were retrospectively identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) after unilateral or bilateral (salpingo-) oophorectomy were estimated. Cumulative mortality rates (CMRs) for non-cancer comorbidities were also estimated.ResultsA total of 28,480 women with ovarian cancer were included in this study, of whom 11,517 died during the study period. Of the patients, 7.5% and 48.0% underwent unilateral and bilateral oophorectomy, respectively. Overall, for stage-Ia tumors, unilateral oophorectomy was associated with remarkably better OS and DSS than bilateral oophorectomy (OS: p < 0.001; DSS: p = 0.01). For stage-Ib and stage-Ic ovarian tumor, there was no significant difference between the OS and DSS of patients treated by unilateral oophorectomy and those treated by bilateral oophorectomy. For stage-II and stage-III ovarian cancer, unilateral oophorectomy was associated with remarkably worse OS and DSS than bilateral oophorectomy. Among the reproductive-age women younger than 50 years, the OS and DSS of patients with stage-I tumors receiving unilateral oophorectomy were comparable to those receiving bilateral oophorectomy, even for high-grade stage-Ic tumors (all p > 0.05). For those aged 50 years and older, OS and DSS of patients with stage-I tumor receiving unilateral oophorectomy were significantly worse than those receiving bilateral oophorectomy, even for low-grade stage-Ia ovarian tumor (OS: p < 0.001; DSS: p = 0.02).ConclusionUnilateral oophorectomy exhibited excellent oncological superiority and was equivalent to bilateral oophorectomy for stage-I ovarian tumors among women of reproductive age. For women of reproductive age, the criteria of unilateral oophorectomy can be appropriately broadened to high-grade stage-Ic diseases because of the better performance of unilateral oophorectomy in this population.

Background: Inflammatory factors and nutritional status are critical to the prognosis of colorectal cancer patients. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the combination of preoperative lymphocytes, albumin, and neutrophils (LANR) in patients with resectable colorectal cancer.Methods: A total of 753 patients with pathologically diagnosed primary colorectal cancer were included in the study. The value of LANR was defined as follows: LANR, lymphocyte × albumin/neutrophil. The ROC curve, subgroup analysis and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis were used to assess the prognostic value of LANR in overall survival and progression-free survival.Results: The median age of the patients was 60 years (range 52–67 years). In overall survival, the area under the curve of LANR was 0.6276, and the HR (95% CI) was 0.551 (0.393–0.772). And in progression-free survival, the area under the curve of LANR was 0.5963, and the HR (95% CI) was 0.697 (0.550–0.884). The results indicate that preoperative LANR may be a reliable predictor of overall and progression-free survival in resectable colorectal cancer patients.Conclusions: LANR is an important prognostic indicator for patients with resectable colorectal cancer, and it can also provide a reference for clinicians and patients to choose a treatment plan.

The prognosis of patients with relapsed/refractory NK/T-cell lymphoma (NKTCL) is dismal. Immunotherapy has showed encouraging anti-tumor activity in patients with asparaginase-resistant NKTCL; however, only a portion of patients benefit and the median response duration is rather short. Treatment strategies have not been identified for immunotherapy-resistant NKTCL. We describe a patient with primary cutaneous NKTCL experienced disease progression after pegaspargase-based chemotherapy and PD-1 inhibitor (sintilimab)-based immunotherapy. Following a combined treatment of sintilimab and the HDAC inhibitor chidamide, the patient achieved a durable complete molecular response with mild toxicity. This case indicates that the combination of PD-1 inhibitor and HDAC inhibitor might be a treatment choice for immunotherapy-resistant NKTCL.

Serum enzymes, blood cytology indices, and pathological features are associated with the prognosis of patients with lung cancer, and we construct prognostic prediction models based on clinicopathological indices in patients with resectable lung cancer. The study includes 420 patients with primary lung cancer who underwent pneumonectomy. Cox proportional hazards regression was conducted to analyze the prognostic values of individual clinicopathological indices. The prediction accuracies of models for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated through Harrell’s concordance indices (C-index) and Brier scores. Nomograms of the prognostic models were plotted for individualized evaluations of death and cancer progression. We find that the prognostic model based on alkaline phosphatase (ALP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), age, history of tuberculosis, and pathological stage present exceptional performance for OS prediction [C-index: 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69-0.79) and Brier score: 0.10], and the prognostic model based on ALP, LDH, and platelet distribution width (PDW), age, pathological stage, and histological type presented outstanding performance for PFS prediction [C-index: 0.71 (95% CI, 0.66-0.75) and Brier score: 0.18]. These findings show that the models based on clinicopathological indices might serve as economic and efficient prognostic tools for resectable lung cancer.