Docosahexaenoate (DHA) has been increasingly recognized as an important fatty acid for neural and visual development during the first 6 mon of life. One important point of controversy that remains is the degree to which adequate levels of DHA can be acquired from endogenous synthesis in infants vs. what should be provided as dietary DHA. We have approached this problem by a retrospective analysis of published body composition data to estimate the actual accumulation of DHA in the human infant brain, liver, adipose tissue, remaining lean tissue, and whole body. Estimating whether infants can synthesize sufficient DHA required comparison to and extrapolation from animal data. Over the first 6 mon of life, DHA accumulates at about 10 mg/d in the whole body of breast-fed infants, with 48% of that amount appearing in the brain. To achieve that rate of accumulation, breast-fed infants need to consume a minimum of 20 mg DHA/d. Virtually all breast milk provides a DHA intake of at least 60 mg/d. Despite a store of about 1,050 mg of DHA in body fat at term birth and an intake of about 390 mg/d alpha-linolenate (alpha-LnA), the brain of formula-fed infants not consuming DHA accumulates half the DHA of the brain of breast-fed infants while the rest of the body actually loses DHA over the first 6 mon of life. No experimental data indicate that formula-fed infants not consuming DHA are able to convert the necessary 5.2% of alpha-LnA intake to DHA to match the DHA accumulation of breast-fed infants. We conclude that dietary DHA should likely be provided during at least the first 6 mon of life.

Inclusion of C stage into the AJCC TNM staging of colon cancer revealed significant differences dependent on C stage in terms of 5-year survival. C-stage inclusion resulted in substantial change in survival estimates, with C1 status portending a prognosis to certain stages similar to or worse than higher AJCC TNM stages with C0 status. We recommend routine pretreatment CEA testing as standard of care in colon cancer and use of C stage for multimodality treatment planning and risk stratification in prospective studies and randomized clinical trials.

Background In most jurisdictions, a minority of patients are discussed at multidisciplinary cancer conference (MCC) despite recommendations for such reviews. We assessed the impact of MCC review of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers at a stand-alone cancer center. Methods Patient data were prospectively collected on consecutive cases presented at a GI MCC during a 6-month period. Original treatment plans were collected confidentially before presentation and compared to post-MCC treatment plans. We defined changes in management plans as major (change in treatment modality) or minor (testing prior to original plan). Results A total of 149 cases were evaluated: 115 upper GI (gastric/small bowel—10 %, liver—32 %, pancreaticobiliary— 36 %), and 34 lower GI (23 %). Reasons for presentation were: questions regarding progression/metastases (44 %), management (26 %), diagnosis (21 %), pathology (15 %), and resectability (7 %). Physicians were certain of their original plans being the final recommendations in 84 % (n = 125). Change in management was recommended in 36 %; 72 % were major and 28 % were minor. Patients underwent all recommended treatments at our institution in 77 % of cases, a portion in 5 %, and no recommended treatments in 18 %. On multivariate analysis, physician degree of certainty for original management plan was not predictive of a change in management plan (p = 0.61). Conclusions Although certainty of prediscussion treatment plan is high, changes in treatment recommendations occurred in more than one-third of patients after GI MCC. This prospective study demonstrates the value of MCC in GI cancer sites, even at a stand-alone cancer center.

The risks and benefits of cytoreductive surgery combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CS/HIPEC) continue to be debated by the oncology community. A retrospective analysis of contemporary data (2003–2011) was performed to provide objective information regarding surgical morbidity, mortality, and survival for patients undergoing CS/HIPEC at a comprehensive cancer center. While procedure-associated morbidity was comparable to other major surgical oncology procedures, there was no operative or 30-day mortality and 60-day mortality was 2.7%. Increasing numbers of bowel resections were found to correlate to an increased incidence of deep surgical site infections (including abscess and enterocutaneous fistula) and need for reoperation which was in turn associated with a decreased overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Five-year OS rates varied by site of tumor origin and histology (disseminated peritoneal adenomucinosis [91.3%], Mesothelioma [80.8%], Appendiceal Adenocarcinoma [38.7%], and Colorectal Adenocarcinoma [38.2%]). With an acceptable morbidity and mortality rate, CS/HIPEC should be included as an effective treatment modality in the multidisciplinary care of select patients with peritoneal metastases.

Perioperative care practices for CS/HIPEC are widely variable nationally and internationally. Standardization of such practices offers an opportunity to incorporate evidence-based interventions and may enhance patient outcomes and improve care standards across all centers that offer this procedure.