Search

Aim This study was conducted in order to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) plus trastuzumab followed by 5-fluorouracil/ epirubicin/cyclophosphamide (FEC) in a neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) setting for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive operable breast cancer. Patients and methods Each patient received four cycles of 260 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel with 6 mg/kg trastuzumab (8 mg/kg as the loading dose) every 3 weeks (q3w) followed by four cycles of FEC (500/100/500 mg/m2) q3w. The primary endpoint was pathological complete response (pCR) rate. Results Twenty-nine patients were analyzed for the efficacy and safety of this treatment. All patients completed four cycles of nab-paclitaxel and trastuzumab, and 28 patients completed four cycles of FEC. Twenty-seven patients subsequently underwent surgery. The pCR rate was 74.0%. The most frequent toxicity was sensory neuropathy (96.6%), but grade 3 neuropathy rate was 3.4%. Conclusion Nab-paclitaxel plus trastuzumab followed by FEC in patients with HER2-positive operable breast cancer is considerably effective and well tolerated.

Background/aim A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate and compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted (RAS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAS) for rectal cancer. Materials and methods We searched MEDLINE for relevant papers published between 2010 and December 2017 by using specific search terms. We analyzed outcomes over short- and long-term periods. Results We identified 23 papers reporting results that compared RAS for rectal cancer with LAS. Our meta-analysis included 4,348 patients with rectal cancer; 2,068 had undergone RAS, and 2,280 had undergone LAS. In the short- and long-term period, 27 and 7 outcome variables were examined, respectively. RAS for rectal cancer was significantly associated with a greater operative time and a lower conversion rate to open surgery in the short-term, and results in almost similar outcomes in the long-term, compared to LAS. Conclusion RAS may be an acceptable surgical treatment option compared to LAS for rectal cancer.