No abstract

The fourth version of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hepatocellular Carcinoma was revised by the Japan Society of Hepatology, according to the methodology of evidence‐based medicine and partly to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system, which was published in October 2017 in Japanese. New or revised recommendations were described, herein, with a special reference to the surveillance, diagnostic, and treatment algorithms.

No abstract

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal of all solid tumors partially because of its chemoresistance. Although gemcitabine is widely used as a first selected agent for the treatment of this disease despite low response rate, molecular mechanisms of gemcitabine resistance in pancreatic cancer still remain obscure. The aim of this study is to elucidate the mechanisms of gemcitabine resistance. The 81-fold gemcitabine resistant variant MiaPaCa2-RG was selected from pancreatic cancer cell line MiaPaCa2. By microarray analysis between MiaPaCa2 and MiaPaCa2-RG, 43 genes (0.04%) were altered expression of more than 2-fold. The most upregulated gene in MiaPaCa2-RG was ribonucleotide reductase M1 subunit (RRM1) with 4.5-fold up-regulation. Transfection with RRM1-specific RNAi suppressed more than 90% of RRM1 mRNA and protein expression. After RRM1-specific RNAi transfection, gemcitabine chemoresistance of MiaPaCa2-RG was reduced to the same level of MiaPaCa2. The 18 recurrent pancreatic cancer patients treated by gemcitabine were divided into 2 groups by RRM1 levels. There was a significant association between gemcitabine response and RRM1 expression (p 5 0.018). Patients with high RRM1 levels had poor survival after gemcitabine treatment than those with low RRM1 levels (p 5 0.016). RRM1 should be a key molecule in gemcitabine resistance in human pancreatic cancer through both in vitro and clinical models. RRM1 may have the potential as predictor and modulator of gemcitabine treatment. ' 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: gemcitabine; pancreatic cancer; drug resistance; RRM1; microarray Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most malignant cancers. Although surgery is the only curative treatment currently available, over 80% of patients have advanced regional disease or distant metastasis at the time of diagnosis and less than 20% of the patients are candidates for resection.1 Therefore, chemotherapy, radiation or a combination of these therapies most commonly plays an important role in pancreatic cancer treatment. They have not had a significant impact on survival rates in recent decades, however, despite many clinical trials.

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of Immunoscore in patients with stage III colon cancer (CC) and to analyze its association with the effect of chemotherapy on time to recurrence (TTR). METHODS An international study led by the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer evaluated the predefined consensus Immunoscore in 763 patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control TNM stage III CC from cohort 1 (Canada/United States) and cohort 2 (Europe/Asia). CD3+ and cytotoxic CD8+ T lymphocyte densities were quantified in the tumor and invasive margin by digital pathology. The primary end point was TTR. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), prognosis in microsatellite stable (MSS) status, and predictive value of efficacy of chemotherapy. RESULTS Patients with a high Immunoscore presented with the lowest risk of recurrence, in both cohorts. Recurrence-free rates at 3 years were 56.9% (95% CI, 50.3% to 64.4%), 65.9% (95% CI, 60.8% to 71.4%), and 76.4% (95% CI, 69.3% to 84.3%) in patients with low, intermediate, and high immunoscores, respectively (hazard ratio [HR; high v low], 0.48; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.71; P = .0003). Patients with high Immunoscore showed significant association with prolonged TTR, OS, and DFS (all P < .001). In Cox multivariable analysis stratified by participating center, Immunoscore association with TTR was independent (HR [high v low], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.67; P = .0003) of patient’s sex, T stage, N stage, sidedness, and microsatellite instability status. Significant association of a high Immunoscore with prolonged TTR was also found among MSS patients (HR [high v low], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.62; P = .0003). Immunoscore had the strongest contribution χ2 proportion for influencing survival (TTR and OS). Chemotherapy was significantly associated with survival in the high-Immunoscore group for both low-risk (HR [chemotherapy v no chemotherapy], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.71; P = .0011) and high-risk (HR [chemotherapy v no chemotherapy], 0.5; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.77; P = .0015) patients, in contrast to the low-Immunoscore group ( P > .12). CONCLUSION This study shows that a high Immunoscore significantly associated with prolonged survival in stage III CC. Our findings suggest that patients with a high Immunoscore will benefit the most from chemotherapy in terms of recurrence risk.