A meta-analysis on salvage surgery as a potentially curative procedure in patients with isolated local recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer after chemoradiotherapy

BackgroundIsolated local recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer (EC) after curative intended definitive (dCRT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with initially omitted surgery, is a potential indication for salvage surgery. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of salvage surgery in these patients.Material and methodsA systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was performed using databases of PubMed/Medline. All included studies were performed in patients with persistent or recurrent EC after initial treatment with dCRT or nCRT, between 2007 and 2017. Survival analysis was performed with an inverse-variance weighting method.ResultsOf the 278 identified studies, 28 were eligible, including a total of 1076 patients. Postoperative complications after salvage esophagectomy were significantly more common among patients with isolated persistent than in those with locoregional recurrent EC, including respiratory (36.6% versus 22.7%; difference in proportion 10.9 with 95% confidence interval (CI) [3.1; 18.7]) and cardiovascular complications (10.4% versus 4.5%; difference in proportion 5.9 with 95% CI [1.5; 10.2]). The pooled estimated 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.6% [1.6; 3.6] and 8.0% [6.3; 9.8], respectively. The pooled estimated 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 39.0% (95% CI: [35.8; 42.2]) and 19.4% [95% CI:16.5; 22.4], respectively. Patients with isolated persistent or recurrent EC after initial CRT had similar 5-year OS (14.0% versus 19.7%, difference in proportion −5.7, 95% CI [-13.7; 2.3]).ConclusionsSalvage surgery is a potentially curative procedure in patients with locally recurrent or persistent esophageal cancer and can be performed safely after definitive or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy when surgery was initially omitted.     

“Cheese Wire” Fenestration of Dissection Intimal Flap to Facilitate Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Chronic Dissection

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for aneurysmal chronic dissection is often complicated by retrograde filling of the false lumen and dissected distal landing zone. A “cheese wire”-style fenestration of the dissection intimal flap can create a landing zone facilitating TEVAR. This technique successfully aided TEVAR in 3 patients with an average age of 57.3 years. Complications included type III endoleak requiring relining and renal artery occlusion requiring stent placement. Average duration of clinical follow-up was 19 ± 4 months. Imaging follow-up was 8 ± 10 months. All patients have survived for more than 1 year without aneurysm enlargement.     

Aflibercept in Combination With FOLFIRI as First-line Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): A Phase II Study (FFCD 1302)

BackgroundFOLFIRI (irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin) + aflibercept improves median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Our aim was to investigate efficacy and tolerability of this combination in the first line.Patients and MethodsPatients with untreated documented mCRC received aflibercept plus FOLFIRI every 14 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity in an open, phase II single-arm, multicenter trial. The primary endpoint was the 6-month PFS rate. Secondary endpoints were OS and tolerability. A 2-step Simon design was used with H₀: 55% and H₁= 75%. Data were analyzed in intention to treat.ResultsForty-one patients were included, and 40 were analyzed (1 consent withdrawal) in 9 French centers between October 2014 and February 2017. The median age was 65 years (range, 46-81 years), 55% had ≥ 2 metastatic sites, and 50% and 15% had RAS and BRAF mutations, respectively. Twenty-two (54.5%; 95% confidence interval, 38.9%-68.5%) patients were alive and non-progressive at 6 months. FOLFIRI + aflibercept was considered ineffective, resulting in the cessation of inclusions. The median follow-up was 34 months. The overall response rate was 55%, and the disease control rate was 80%. The median duration of treatment was 5.3 months; the median PFS and OS were 8.2 and 18.6 months, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events were mainly gastrointestinal (47.5%) and vascular (32.5%). Of the patients, 87.5% had at least 1 dose modification.ConclusionAlthough the primary objective was not met, first-line FOLFIRI + aflibercept for mCRC leads to median PFS and OS close to those reported with classical doublet and targeted agents, but with significant toxicities needing dose reduction.     

Individual prediction of lateral neck metastasis risk in patients with unifocal papillary thyroid carcinoma

IntroductionMuch controversy exists over whether to perform lateral neck dissection (LND) on patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). This study aimed to build predictive nomograms that could individually estimate lateral neck metastasis (LNM) risk and help determine follow up intensity.Patients and methodsUnifocal PTC patients who underwent LND between April 2012 and August 2014 were identified. Clinical and pathological variables were retrospectively evaluated using univariate and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis. Variables that had statistical significance in final multivariate logistic models were chosen to build nomograms, which were further corrected using the bootstrap resampling method.ResultsIn all, 505 PTC patients were eligible for analysis. Among these, 178 patients (35.2%) had lateral neck metastasis. Two nomograms were generated: nomogram (c) and nomogram (c + p). Nomogram (c) incorporated four clinical variables: age, tumor size, tumor site, and extrathyroidal extension (ETE). It had a good discriminative ability, with a C-index of 0.79 (bootstrap-corrected, 0.78). Nomogram (c + p) incorporated two clinical variables and two pathological variables: tumor size, tumor site, extranodal extension (ENE), and number of positive nodes in the central compartment. Nomogram (c + p) showed an excellent discriminative ability, with a C-index of 0.86 (bootstrap-corrected, 0.85).ConclusionTwo predictive nomograms were generated. Nomogram (c) is a clinical model, whereas nomogram (c + p) is a clinicopathological model. Each nomogram incorporates only four variables and can give an accurate estimate of LNM risk in unifocal PTC patients, which may assist clinicians in patient counseling and decision making regarding LND.