No abstract

Esophageal cancer is one of the most common gastrointestinal malignant diseases and there is still no effective treatment. The incidence of esophageal cancer in the world is relatively high and on the increase year by year. Thus, the elaboration on the carcinogenesis of esophageal cancer and the identification of new biomarkers and therapeutic targets is quite beneficial to optimizing the current therapeutic regimen for treating such deadly disease. More and more evidence has shown that non-coding RNAs play an important role in the development and progression of multiple human cancers, including esophageal cancer. microRNAs (miRNAs) and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are two functional kinds of non-coding RNAs that have been well investigated. They exert tumor suppressive or promoting effect by specifically regulating the expression of certain downstream target genes, which is tumor specific. It is also proved that miRNAs and lncRNAs level in tissue and plasma from esophageal cancer patients are closely correlated with the survival and disease progression, which could be used as a prognostic factor and therapeutic target for esophageal cancer.

Inflammation based prognostic scores may have a role in patients undergoing resection for oesophageal and gastric cancer. These scores are easily calculable from routinely collected data and could be used as an adjunct to existing staging modalities.

PurposeThis study aimed to establish a nomogram to predict the overall survival (OS) of the general non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with distant metastasis.Patients and methodsWe investigated Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for NSCLC patients with distant metastasis diagnosed between 2010 and 2014. Statistically significant prognostic factors were identified using uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses. A nomogram incorporating these prognostic factors was developed and evaluated by the Harrell’s concordance index (C-index), calibration plots, and risk group stratifications.ResultsWe finally included 18,209 patients for analysis. These patients were divided into two groups, 14,567 cases for the training cohort and 3,642 for the validation cohort. Marital status, sex, race, age, histology, T stage, N stage, histological differentiation, bone metastasis, brain metastasis, liver metastasis, with M1a disease, surgery of primary cancer, and chemotherapy were identified as the prognostic factors of the OS and integrated to construct the nomogram. The nomogram had a C-index of 0.704 (95% CI: 0.699–0.709) in the training set and 0.699 (95% CI: 0.689–0.709) in the validation set. The calibration curves for 1- and 2-year OS in the training and validation sets showed acceptable agreement between the predicted and observed survival. Also, the nomogram was capable of stratifying patients into different risk groups within the patients who presented with bone, liver, or brain metastasis, as well as in each T, N stage, respectively.ConclusionA nomogram was established and validated to predict individual prognosis for the general patients with distantly metastatic NSCLC. Global prospective data with the latest TNM classification and more comprehensive prognostic factors are needed to improve this model.

PurposeMinimally invasive esophagectomy is increasingly performed for esophageal or gastroesophageal junctional cancer, with advantages of improved perioperative outcomes in comparison with open esophagectomy. McKeown and Ivor Lewis are widely used procedures of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and there have been controversies on which one is preferred for patients with resectable esophageal or junctional cancer.Patients and methodsThis review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (number CRD42017075989). Studies in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were thoroughly investigated. Eligible studies included prospective and retrospective studies evaluating short-term outcomes of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIME) vs minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MILE) in patients with resectable esophageal or junctional tumors. Main parameters included anastomotic leak and 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Overall incidence rates (ORs)/weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by employing random-effects models.ResultsFourteen studies containing 3,468 cases were included in this meta-analysis. Age, male sex, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage between the 2 groups were not statistically different. MIME led to more blood loss, longer operating time, and longer hospital stay than MILE. MIME was associated with higher incidence of pulmonary complications (OR =1.96, 95% CI =1.28–3.00) as well as total anastomotic leak (OR =2.55, 95% CI =1.40–4.63), stricture (OR =2.07, 95% CI =1.05–4.07), and vocal cord injury/palsy (OR =5.62, 95% CI =3.46–9.14). In addition, the differences of R0 resection rate, number of lymph modes retrieved, blood transfusion rate, length of intensive care unit stay, incidence of cardiac arrhythmia, and Chyle leak between MIME and MILE were not statistically significant. Notably, incidence of severe anastomotic leak (OR =1.28, 95% CI =0.73–2.24) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality (OR =1.76, 95% CI =0.92–3.36) as well as 90-day mortality (OR =2.22, 95% CI =0.71–6.98) between the 2 procedures were also not significantly different.ConclusionThis study suggests that MIME and MILE are comparable with respect to clinical safety. MILE may be a better option when oncologically and clinically suitable. MIME is still a safe alternative procedure when clinically indicated. However, this evidence is at risk for bias; randomized controlled trials are needed to validate or correct our results.