Background Ileus is common after elective colorectal surgery, and is associated with increased adverse events and prolonged hospital stay. The aim was to assess the role of non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reducing ileus after surgery. Methods A prospective multicentre cohort study was delivered by an international, student‐ and trainee‐led collaborative group. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The primary outcome was time to gastrointestinal recovery, measured using a composite measure of bowel function and tolerance to oral intake. The impact of NSAIDs was explored using Cox regression analyses, including the results of a centre‐specific survey of compliance to enhanced recovery principles. Secondary safety outcomes included anastomotic leak rate and acute kidney injury. Results A total of 4164 patients were included, with a median age of 68 (i.q.r. 57–75) years (54·9 per cent men). Some 1153 (27·7 per cent) received NSAIDs on postoperative days 1–3, of whom 1061 (92·0 per cent) received non‐selective cyclo‐oxygenase inhibitors. After adjustment for baseline differences, the mean time to gastrointestinal recovery did not differ significantly between patients who received NSAIDs and those who did not (4·6 versus 4·8 days; hazard ratio 1·04, 95 per cent c.i. 0·96 to 1·12; P = 0·360). There were no significant differences in anastomotic leak rate (5·4 versus 4·6 per cent; P = 0·349) or acute kidney injury (14·3 versus 13·8 per cent; P = 0·666) between the groups. Significantly fewer patients receiving NSAIDs required strong opioid analgesia (35·3 versus 56·7 per cent; P < 0·001). Conclusion NSAIDs did not reduce the time for gastrointestinal recovery after colorectal surgery, but they were safe and associated with reduced postoperative opioid requirement.

In this first analysis, samples from 23 BC survivors (group 1) and 291 healthy female controls (group 2) were characterised through the V3 and V4 regions that encode the “16S rRNA” gene of each bacteria. The samples were sequenced by next-generation sequencing (NGS), and the taxonomy was identified by resorting to Kraken2 and improved with Bracken, using a curated database called ‘GutHealth_DB’. The α and β-diversity analyses were used to determine the richness and evenness of the gut microbiota. A non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test was applied to assess differential abundance between both groups. The Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B) ratio was calculated using a Kruskal-Wallis chi-squared test. The α-diversity was significantly higher in group 1 (p = 0.28 × 10−12 for the Chao index and p = 1.64 × 10−12 for the ACE index). The Shannon index, a marker of richness and evenness, was not statistically different between the two groups (p = 0.72). The microbiota composition was different between the two groups: a null hypothesis was rejected for PERMANOVA (p = 9.99 × 10−5) and Anosim (p = 0.04) and was not rejected for β-dispersion (p = 0.158), using Unifrac weighted distance. The relative abundance of 14 phyla, 29 classes, 25 orders, 64 families, 116 genera, and 74 species differed significantly between both groups. The F/B ratio was significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2, p < 0.001. Our study allowed us to observe significant taxonomic disparities in the two groups by testing the differences between BC survivors and healthy controls. Additional studies are needed to clarify the involved mechanisms and explore the relationship between microbiota and BC survivorship.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive malignant brain tumor in adults. The mainstay of management for GBM is surgical resection, radiation (RT), and chemotherapy (CT). Even with optimized multimodal treatment, GBM has a high recurrence and poor survival rates ranging from 12 to 24 months in most patients. Recently, relevant advances in understanding GBM pathophysiology have opened new avenues for therapies for recurrent and newly diagnosed diseases. GBM's hypoxic microenvironment has been shown to be highly associated with aggressive biology and resistance to RT and CT. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) may increase anticancer therapy sensitivity by increasing oxygen tension within the hypoxic regions of the neoplastic tissue. Previous data have investigated HBOT in combination with cytostatic compounds, with an improvement of neoplastic tissue oxygenation, inhibition of HIF-1α activity, and a significant reduction in the proliferation of GBM cells. The biological effect of ionizing radiation has been reported to be higher when it is delivered under well-oxygenated rather than anoxic conditions. Several hypoxia-targeting strategies reported that HBOT showed the most significant effect that could potentially improve RT outcomes, with higher response rates and survival and no serious adverse events. However, further prospective and randomized studies are necessary to validate HBOT's effectiveness in the ‘real world' GBM clinical practice.

Introduction Cancer care providers have faced many challenges in delivering safe care for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-sectional survey-based study investigated the impact of the pandemic on clinical practices of Portuguese medical oncologists caring for patients with breast cancer. Methods An anonymous online survey comprising 42 questions gathered information regarding COVID-19 testing, treatment in (neo)adjuvant and metastatic settings, and other aspects of breast cancer management. Practices before and during the pandemic were compared, and potential differences in outcomes according to respondents’ regions, case volumes, and practice type were explored. Results Of 129 respondents, 108 worked in the public health system, giving a representative national picture of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer management. Seventy-one percent of respondents reported a reduction in visits for new cases of breast cancer, and there was a shift towards increased use of telemedicine. Clinical decision-making was largely unaffected in the most aggressive indications (i.e., triple-negative, HER2-positive, visceral crisis). The use of neoadjuvant therapy increased when access to surgery was difficult, whereas dose-dense regimens decreased, and cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor treatment decreased for less aggressive disease and increased for more aggressive disease. The use of oral formulations and metronomic chemotherapy regimens increased, and clinical trial participation decreased. Some differences by respondents’ region and case volume were noted. Conclusion Medical oncologists in Portugal implemented many changes during the COVID-19 pandemic, most of which were logical and reasonable responses to the current healthcare emergency; however, the true impact on patient outcomes remains unknown. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40487-022-00191-7.

No abstract