Schofieldmaxwell0128

it independence allow plants to better optimize different functions, likely entailing higher adjustment potential against future environmental changes.

A recurrence score based on a 21-gene expression assay predicts the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. This systematic review aimed to determine whether the 21-gene expression assay performed on core biopsy at diagnosis predicted pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

The study was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant databases were searched to identify studies assessing the value of the 21-gene expression assay recurrence score in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. 2,6Dihydroxypurine The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of the studies. Results are reported as risk ratio (RR) with 95 per cent confidence interval using the Cochrane-Mantel-Haenszel method for meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were carried out where appropriate.

Seven studies involving 1744 patients reported the correlation between pretreatment ry the 21-gene expression assay on core biopsy might be of value when considering neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly being performed because of perceived patient benefits. Whether conversion of MIPD to open pancreatoduodenectomy worsens outcome, and which risk factors are associated with conversion, is unclear.

This was a post hoc analysis of a European multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MIPD (2012-2017) in ten medium-volume (10-19 MIPDs annually) and four high-volume (at least 20 MIPDs annually) centres. Propensity score matching (11) was used to compare outcomes of converted and non-converted MIPD procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for conversion, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i).

Overall, 65 of 709 MIPDs were converted (9.2 per cent) and the overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.8 per cent. Risk factors for conversion were tumour size larger than 40 mm (OR 2.7, 95 per cent c.i.1.0 to 6.8; P = 0.041), pancreatobiliaruring MIPD include age, large tumour size, tumour location, laparoscopic approach, and surgery in medium-volume centres. Although conversion during MIPD itself was not associated with worse outcomes, the outcome in these patients was poor in general which should be taken into account during patient selection for MIPD.

The effect of preoperative physical activity on recovery and complications after primary breast cancer surgery is unknown. The objective of this trial was to evaluate whether a recommendation of non-supervised physical activity improved recovery after breast cancer surgery.

This parallel, unblinded, multicentre interventional trial randomized women in whom breast cancer surgery was planned. The intervention consisted of an individual recommendation of added aerobic physical activity (30 min/day), before and 4 weeks after surgery. The control group did not receive any advice regarding physical activity. The primary outcome was patient-reported physical recovery at 4 weeks after surgery. Secondary outcomes included mental recovery, complications, reoperations, and readmissions.

Between November 2016 and December 2018, 400 patients were randomized, 200 to each group. Some 370 participants (180 intervention, 190 control) remained at 4 weeks, and 368 at 90 days. There was no significant difference in favour of the intervention for the primary outcome physical recovery (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95 per cent c.i. 0.95 to 1.13). There was also no difference for mental recovery (RR 1.05, 0.93 to 1.17) nor in mean Comprehensive Complication Index score (4.2 (range 0-57.5) versus 4.7 (0-58.3)) between the intervention and control groups.

An intervention with recommended non-supervised physical activity before and after breast cancer surgery did not improve recovery at 4 weeks after surgery. Registration number NCT02560662 (http//www.clinicaltrials.gov).

An intervention with recommended non-supervised physical activity before and after breast cancer surgery did not improve recovery at 4 weeks after surgery. Registration number NCT02560662 (http//www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Histopathological outcomes, such as lymph node yield and margin positivity, are used to benchmark and assess surgical centre quality, and are reported annually by the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) in England and Wales. The variation in pathological specimen assessment and how this affects these outcomes is not known.

A survey of practice was circulated to all tertiary oesophagogastric cancer centres across England and Wales. Questions captured demographic data, and information on how specimens were prepared and analysed. National performance data were retrieved from the NOGCA. Survey results were compared for tertiles of lymph node yield, and circumferential and longitudinal margins.

Survey responses were received from 32 of 37 units (86 per cent response rate), accounting for 93.1 per cent of the total oesophagectomy volume in England and Wales. Only 5 of 32 units met or exceeded current guidelines on specimen preparation according to the Royal College of Pathologists guidelines. There was wide variation in how centres defined positive (R1) margins, and how margins and lymph nodes were assessed. Centres with the highest nodal yield were more likely to use systematic fat blocking, and to re-examine specimens when the initial load was low. Systematic blocking of lesser curve fat resulted in significantly higher rates of patients with at least 15 lymph nodes examined (91.4 versus 86.5 per cent; P = 0.027).

Preparation and histopathological assessment of specimens varies significantly across institutions. This challenges the validity of currently used surgical quality metrics for oesophageal and other tumours.

Preparation and histopathological assessment of specimens varies significantly across institutions. This challenges the validity of currently used surgical quality metrics for oesophageal and other tumours.