Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths around the world. It is necessary to identify patients with poor prognosis or with high risk for recurrence so that we can selectively perform intensive treatments such as preoperative and/or postoperative chemotherapy and extended surgery. The clinical usefulness of inflammation-related prognostic biomarkers available from routine blood examination has been reported in many types of cancer, e.g., neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lymphocyte–C-reactive protein ratio (LCR), platelet–lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte–monocyte ratio (LMR), and so on. Moreover, some scoring systems based on circulating blood cell counts and albumin concentration have been also reported to predict cancer patients’ prognosis, such as the Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), systemic inflammation score (SIS), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI). The optimal biomarker and optimal cutoff value of the markers can be different depending on the cancer type. In this review, we summarize the prognostic impact of each inflammation-related marker in CRC.

827 patients with gastric cancer underwent 236 robotic and 591 laparoscopic radical gastrectomies with curative intent. The patients' data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Main Outcome Measures:We performed a comparative analysis between the robotic surgery group and laparoscopic surgery group for preoperative patient characteristics, intraoperative factors, and postoperative morbidity and mortality.Results: The robotic group was younger than the laparoscopic group, but other preoperative patient charac-teristics did not differ. The mean operative time for the robotic group (219.5 minutes) was on average 49 minutes longer than the laparoscopic group (170.7 minutes) (P Ͻ .001), while mean blood loss was significantly less in the robotic group (91.6 mL vs 147.9 mL; P=.002). The robotic group had mortality of 0.4% and morbidity of 11.0%, comparable with those of the laparoscopic group (P Ͼ .05). The number of lymph nodes retrieved per level was adequate in both groups and did not differ significantly. Robotic D1ϩ␣ (n = 5), D1ϩ␤ (n=126), and D2 (n=105) dissections retrieved 27.2, 36.7, and 42.4 mean numbers of lymph nodes, respectively. Except for 3 cases in the laparoscopic group, all specimens had negative margins.Conclusions: Our largest comparative study demonstrates robotic gastrectomy to have better short-term and comparable oncologic outcomes compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy. A robotic approach to gastric cancer is a promising alternative to laparoscopic surgery.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is a neoplasm arising in the liver, and its incidence is increasing in Japan as well as in Western countries. Prognosis of patients with this type of tumor remains unsatisfactory because no effective chemotherapeutic drugs are available, we have no sensitive tumor markers to detect this tumor in its early stage, and it is difficult to identify a high-risk group for the disease. To clarify the molecular mechanism of tumorigenesis and identify molecular targets for diagnosis and treatment, we analyzed global gene-expression profiles of 25 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas using tumor cell populations purified by laser microbeam microdissection and a cDNA microarray containing 27,648 genes. We identified 52 genes that were commonly upregulated and 421 that were downregulated in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas compared with noncancerous biliary epithelial cells. From the 52 upregulated genes, we selected P-cadherin and survivin for further investigation and corroborated enhanced expression of their products in cancer tissues by immunohistochemical staining. Furthermore, comparison between tumors with lymph node metastasis and those without metastasis identified 30 genes that were associated with lymph node involvement. In conclusion, these data should be helpful for a better understanding of the tumorigenesis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and should contribute to the development of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for this type of tumor.

Background Robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) has been increasingly performed for a decade; however, evidence for its use as a standard treatment has not yet been established. The present study aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of RG for GC. Methods This multi-institutional, single-arm prospective study, which included 330 patients from 15 institutions, was designed to compare morbidity rate of RG with that of a historical control (conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, LG). This trial was approved for Advanced Medical Technology ("Senshiniryo") B. The included patients were operable patients with cStage I/II GC. The primary endpoint was morbidity (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥ IIIa). The specific hypothesis was that RG could reduce the morbidity rate to less than half of that with LG (6.4%). A sample size of 330 was considered sufficient (one-sided alpha 0.05, power 80%). Results Among the 330 study patients, the protocol treatment was suspended in 4 patients. Thus, 326 patients fully enrolled and completed the study. The median patient age and BMI were 66 years and 22.4 kg/m 2 , respectively. Distal gastrectomy was performed in 253 (77.6%) patients. The median operative time and estimated blood loss were 313 min and 20 mL, respectively. No 30-day mortality was seen, and morbidity showed a significant reduction to 2.45% with RG (p = 0.0018). Conclusions RG for cStage I/II GC is safe and feasible. It may be effective in reducing morbidity with LG.