Hennebergvelling7046

A scoring system based on these three prognostic factors classified the patients into three prognostic subgroups (scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4). The median survival of patients with scores of 0-1, 2-3 and 4 was 14, 5 and 2 mo, respectively (P less then 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that there were significant differences in prognosis among the groups. Score 2-3 vs 0-1 hazard ratio (HR) = 2.050, 95%CI 1.363-3.083; P = 0.001; score 4 vs 0-1 HR = 3.721, 95%CI 2.225-6.225; P less then 0.001; score 2-3 vs 4 HR = 0.551, 95%CI 0.374-0.812; P = 0.003. CONCLUSION The scoring system effectively distinguishes long-term and short-term survivors with synchronous BM from CRC. These results are helpful in providing a reference for guiding therapy. ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.BACKGROUND FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (Gem + nabPTX) were recently introduced for metastatic pancreatic cancer treatment. However, studies that compared these two regimens and studies in Asian populations are lacking. AIM To compare the treatment outcomes of FOLFIRINOX and Gem + nabPTX regimen for metastatic pancreatic cancer treatment in Korean population. METHODS Patients with metastatic or recurrent pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX (n = 86) or Gem + nabPTX (n = 81) as the first-line since January 2015 were identified using the Severance Hospital Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Registry. Treatment efficacy, treatment-related adverse events and economic aspects were compared. RESULTS Patients in the FOLFIRINOX group were significantly younger (54 vs 65 years; P less then 0.001) and had better performance statuses at diagnosis. The median overall survival (10.7 vs 12.1 mo; P = 0.157), progression-free survival (8.0 vs 8.4 mo; P = 0.134), and objective response rates (33.7% vs 46.9%; P = 0.067) were not significantly different when compared with Gem + nabPTX group. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the FOLFIRINOX group. The drug costs of both regimens were similar. CONCLUSION Treatment efficacy and economic burdens were comparable between the two regimens. But, the details of adverse event were different. Gem + nabPTX regimen might be considered preferentially in certain conditions. ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal diseases, with an average 5-year survival rate of less than 10%. Unfortunately, the majority of patients have unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. Moreover, traditional treatments such as chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation have not been shown to significantly improve survival. Recently, there has been a swift increase in cancer treatments that incorporate immunotherapy-based strategies to target all the stepwise events required for tumor initiation and progression. The results in melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer and renal cell carcinoma are very encouraging. Unfortunately, the application of checkpoint inhibitors, including anti-CTLA4, anti-PD-1, and anti-PD-L1 antibodies, in pancreatic cancer has been disappointing. Many studies have revealed that the PDAC microenvironment supports tumor growth, promotes metastasis and consists of a physical barrier to drug delivery. Combination therapies hold great promise for enhancing immune responses to achieve a better therapeutic effect. In this review, we provide an outline of why pancreatic cancer is so lethal and of the treatment hurdles that exist. Particular emphasis is given to the role of the tumor microenvironment, and some of the latest and most promising studies on immunotherapy in PDAC are also presented. ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Caffeine is a purine alkaloid and is widely consumed in coffee, soda, tea, chocolate and energy drinks. To date, a growing number of studies have indicated that caffeine is associated with many diseases including colorectal cancer. Caffeine exerts its biological activity through binding to adenosine receptors, inhibiting phosphodiesterases, sensitizing calcium channels, antagonizing gamma-aminobutyric acid receptors and stimulating adrenal hormones. Some studies have indicated that caffeine can interact with signaling pathways such as transforming growth factor β, phosphoinositide-3-kinase/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin and mitogen-activated protein kinase pathways through which caffeine can play an important role in colorectal cancer pathogenesis, metastasis and prognosis. Moreover, caffeine can act as a general antioxidant that protects cells from oxidative stress and also as a regulatory factor of the cell cycle that modulates the DNA repair system. Additionally, as for intestinal homeostasis, through the interaction with receptors and cytokines, caffeine can modulate the immune system mediating its effects on T lymphocytes, B lymphocytes, natural killer cells and macrophages. Furthermore, caffeine can not only directly inhibit species in the gut microbiome, such as Escherichia coli and Candida albicans but also can indirectly exert inhibition by increasing the effects of other antimicrobial drugs. This review summarizes the association between colorectal cancer and caffeine that is being currently studied. CB1954 ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global problem affecting millions of people worldwide. This disease is unique because of its slow progress that makes it preventable and often curable. CRC symptoms usually emerge only at advanced stages of the disease, consequently its early detection can be achieved only through active population screening, which markedly reduces mortality due to this cancer. CRC screening tests that employ non-invasively detectable biomarkers are currently being actively developed and, in most cases, samples of either stool or blood are used. However, alternative biological substances that can be collected non-invasively (colorectal mucus, urine, saliva, exhaled air) have now emerged as new sources of diagnostic biomarkers. The main categories of currently explored CRC biomarkers are (1) Proteins (comprising widely used haemoglobin); (2) DNA (including mutations and methylation markers); (3) RNA (in particular microRNAs); (4) Low molecular weight metabolites (comprising volatile organic compounds) detectable by metabolomic techniques; and (5) Shifts in gut microbiome composition.