Neoadjuvant therapy has become the standard treatment for locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer, significantly improving long-term survival compared to surgery alone. Neoadjuvant therapy has evolved to include various strategies, such as concurrent chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or targeted combination therapy. This enriches clinical treatment options and provides a more personalized and scientific treatment approach for patients. This article aims to comprehensively summarize current academic research hot topics, review the rationale and evaluation measures of neoadjuvant therapy, discuss challenges in restaging methods after neoadjuvant therapy, and identify the advantages and disadvantages of various neoadjuvant therapeutic strategies.
This study reports a case of a 56-year-old female patient with BRAF-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who successfully underwent curative surgery after neoadjuvant targeted therapy with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib combined with the MEK inhibitor trametinib. The chest drainage tube was removed 2 days postoperatively, and the patient was discharged smoothly. Postoperative pathology indicated invasive adenocarcinoma, moderately to highly differentiated, with 80% being lepidic type, and the maximum tumor diameter was 4 cm. No vascular invasion, nerve invasion, air cavity dissemination, pleural invasion, or lymph node metastasis were observed. The postoperative staging was ypT2aN0M0. The patient continued with adjuvant treatment with dabrafenib combined with trametinib postoperatively, and no signs of recurrence were found in the follow-up examination six months after surgery.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced resectable non-small-cell lung carcinoma. Methods The clinical data of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy and surgery after chemotherapy alone from April 2021 to January 2021 in the first People's Hospital, Jining, were retrospectively analyzed. According to the preoperative neoadjuvant regimen, the patients were divided into a combination group and a chemotherapy group, and the clinical data of the two groups were compared. ResultsA total of 66 patients were enrolled, including 61 males and 5 females. There were 53 patients in the combination group with an average age of 63.40±6.80 years, and 13 patients in the chemotherapy group with an average age of 58.62±8.30 years. There was statistical difference in age between the two groups (P=0.02), but no statistical difference in other baseline data (P＞0.05). MPR was 54.7% in the combination group and 23.1% in the chemotherapy group (P=0.042), and PCR was 39.6% in the combination group and 0.0% in the chemotherapy group (P=0.006). The combined group had a shorter operative time (P=0.039). There were no statistical differences in intraoperative bleeding, postoperative tube-carrying time, postoperative complications, OS or EFS between the two groups. Conclusion Surgery after neoadjuvant immunotherapy is safe and feasible, and long-term efficacy should be confirmed by further follow-up.
ObjectiveTo summarize the value of imaging in the evaluation of non-surgical therapy for pancreatic cancer.MethodThe relevant literatures about imaging evaluation of non-surgical therapy for pancreatic cancer were collected to make an review.ResultsAt present, most of the imaging evaluation of non-surgical therapy for pancreatic cancer were based on the assessment of morphological characteristics of tumors, such as contrast-enhanced CT and MRI. However, only morphological changes of tumors could not accurately evaluate the response of pancreatic cancer after non-surgical treatment. A few studies had explored the value of functional imaging and artificial intelligence.ConclusionsNon-surgical therapy provides new treatment opportunities for unresectable pancreatic cancer, especially the proposed of neoadjuvant therapy, which provides the possibility of operation for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. More imaging indicators with stronger objectivity, higher accuracy, and wider universality need to be improved and developed in the future.
ObjectiveTo analyze whether neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can impact patients’ anal function and quality of life after rectal cancer surgery.MethodThe domestic and international publications on the studies how the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy impacted patients’ anal function and quality of life were collected and reviewed.ResultsThe neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy negatively impacted the patients’ anal function and quality of life, but which would be improved over time. The impact had no obvious difference between the long-course chemoradiotherapy and short-couse radiotherapy on the patients’ anal function and quality of life. Compared with the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the neoadjuvant chemotherapy might impact less on the anal function, but which still needed to evaluate the lower anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. In present, it lacked evidence of a higher rate of anastomotic leakage caused by the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, which might lead to the bowel dysfunction.ConclusionsNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy negatively impacts patients’ anal function and quality of life. Further studies are needed to figure out the best choice between long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and short-couse radiotherapy. In long term, impact of neoadjuvant therapy can be improved over time and be accepted by patients. Some intervention treatments including medicine and operations are needed if major LARS occurs.
The standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy combined with surgery, but patients after the same treatment regimen show a large difference in outcomes. For patients with good response to neoadjuvant therapy, the waiting & observation scheme can be selected to avoid surgery and other complications. Therefore, accurate assessment of the response of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy can better develop personalized treatment strategies. Current studies have found that blood sample detection, endoscopy, imaging examination and artificial intelligence have their own advantages and disadvantages in evaluating the response of neoadjuvant therapy. Therefore, this article reviews the application of different clinical tools in evaluating and predicting the response of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer, and looks forward to the future development direction.
ObjectiveTo analyze the relation between educational level of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and decision-making and curative effect of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in the current version of the Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA). MethodsThe eligible CRC patients were collected from June 29, 2022 updated DACCA according to the screening criteria and were assigned into 4 groups according to their educational level, namely, uneducated, primary educated, secondary educated, and tertiary educated. The differences in NAT decision-making, cancer marker change, symptomatic change, gross change, imaging change, and tumor regression grade (TRG) among the CRC patients with different educational levels were compared. ResultsA total of 2 816 data that met the screening criteria were collected, 138 of whom were uneducated, 777 of whom were primary educated, 1 414 of whom were secondary educated, and 487 of whom were tertiary educated. The analysis results revealed that the difference in the composition ratio of patients choosing NAT regimens by educational level was statistically significant (χ2=30.937, P<0.001), which was reflected that the composition ratio of choosing a simple chemotherapy regimen in the uneducated CRC patients was highest, while which of choosing combined targeted therapy regimen in the tertiary educated CRC patients was highest. In terms of treatment outcomes, the composition ratios of changes in cancer markers (H=4.795, P=0.187), symptoms (H=1.722, P=0.632), gross (H=2.524, P=0.471), imaging (H=2.843, P=0.416), and TRG (H=2.346, P=0.504) had no statistical differences. ConclusionsThrough data analysis in DACCA, it is found that the educational level of patients with CRC can affect the choice of NAT scheme. However, it is not found that the educational level is related to the changes in the curative effect of patients with CRC before and after NAT, and further analysis is needed to determine the reasons for this.
With the publication of several phase Ⅱ and Ⅲ clinical studies, the multidisciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for early resectable non-small cell lung cancer (rNSCLC) are rapidly evolving. These studies have elucidated the significant effects of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies on improving the prognosis of rNSCLC patients, while also highlighting the urgent need to revise and refine corresponding treatment protocols and clinical pathways. In response, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer has assembled a diverse, multidisciplinary international expert panel to evaluate current clinical trials related to rNSCLC and to provide diagnostic, staging, and treatment recommendations for rNSCLC patients in accordance with the 8th edition of the AJCC-UICC staging system. The consensus recommendations titled "Neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments for early stage resectable non-small cell lung cancer: Consensus recommendations from the International Associationfor the Study of Lung Cancer" outline 20 recommendations, 19 of which received over 85% agreement from the experts. The recommendations indicate that early rNSCLC patients should undergo evaluation by a multidisciplinary team and complete necessary imaging studies. For stage Ⅱ patients, consideration should be given to either adjuvant therapy following surgery or direct neoadjuvant/perioperative treatment, while stage Ⅲ patients are recommended to receive neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy followed by surgery. Postoperatively, adjuvant immunotherapy should be considered based on the expression levels of programmed cell death ligand 1, along with testing for other oncogenic driver mutations. For patients with epidermal growth factor receptor or anaplastic lymphoma kinase mutations sensitive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, corresponding adjuvant targeted therapy is recommended. These recommendations aim to provide personalized and precise treatment strategies for early rNSCLC patients to enhance the efficacy of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies. This article provides an in-depth interpretation of these consensus recommendations.
ObjectiveTo understand the impact of preoperative nutritional status on the postoperative complications for patients with low/ultra-low rectal cancer undergoing extreme sphincter-preserving surgery following neoadjuvant therapy. MethodsThe patients with low/ultra-low rectal cancer who underwent extreme sphincter-preserving surgery following neoadjuvant therapy from January 2009 to December 2020 were retrospectively collected using the Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA), and then who were assigned into a nutritional risk group (the score was low than 3 by the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002) and non-nutritional risk group (the score was 3 or more by the Nutrition Risk Screening 2002). The postoperative complications and survival were analyzed for the patients with or without nutritional risk. The postoperative complications were defined as early-term (complications occurring within 30 d after surgery), middle-term (complications occurring during 30–180 d after surgery), and long-term (complications occurring at 180 d and more after surgery). The survival indicators included overall survival and disease-specific survival. ResultsA total of 680 patients who met the inclusion criteria for this study were retrieved from the DACCA database. Among them, there were 500 (73.5%) patients without nutritional risk and 180 (26.5%) patients with nutritional risk. The postoperative follow-up time was 0–152 months (with average 48.9 months). Five hundreds and forty-three survived, including 471 (86.7%) patients with free-tumors survival and 72 (13.3%) patients with tumors survival. There were 137 deaths, including 122 (89.1%) patients with cancer related deaths and 15 (10.9%) patients with non-cancer related deaths. There were 48 (7.1%) cases of early-term postoperative complications, 51 (7.5%) cases of middle-term complications, and 17 (2.5%) cases of long-term complications. There were no statistical differences in the incidence of overall complications between the patients with and without nutritional risk (χ2=3.749, P=0.053; χ2=2.205, P=0.138; χ2=310, P=0.578). The specific complications at different stages after surgery (excluding the anastomotic leakage complications in the patients with nutritional risk was higher in patients without nutritional risk, P=0.034) had no statistical differences between the two groups (P>0.05). The survival curves (overall survival and disease-specific survival) using the Kaplan-Meier method had no statistical differences between the patients with and without nutritional risk (χ2=3.316, P=0.069; χ2=3.712, P=0.054). ConclusionsFrom the analysis results of this study, for the rectal cancer patients who underwent extreme sphincter-preserving surgery following neoadjuvant therapy, the patients with preoperative nutritional risk are more prone to anastomotic leakage within 30 d after surgery. Although other postoperative complications and long-term survival outcomes have no statistical differences between patients with and without nutritional risk, preoperative nutritional management for them cannot be ignored.
ObjectiveTo analyze the relation between the age of patients with colorectal cancer and neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) regimen decision-making and outcomes in the current version of the Database from Colorectal Cancer (DACCA). MethodsThe version of DACCA selected for this analysis was updated on January 5, 2022. The patients were enrolled according to the established screening criteria and then assigned to 3 age groups: ≤45, 45–65, and ≥65 years old groups. The differences in the NAT regimen decision-making and changes of symptom, imaging, and cancer markers in these 3 age groups were analyzed. ResultsA total of 4 882 data that met the screened criteria were enrolled. The results of statistical analysis showed that the difference in the constituent ratio of patients chosen NAT strategies among 3 age groups was not statistically significant (χ2=8.885, P=0.180). There was a statistical difference in the constituent ratio of patients chosen combined target drug among 3 age groups (χ2=8.530, P=0.014), it was found that the proportion of the patients with ≤45 years old adopting combined target drug regimen was higher. Although the changes of symptom (H=12.299, P=0.056), image (H=1.775, P=0.412), and cancer markers (H=11.351, P=0.183) had no statistical differences of the 3 age groups after NAT, it was found that the proportions of patients with ≥65 years old with progresses of symptom and imaging changes and elevated cancer markers after NAT were higher, and the proportions of patients with ≤45 years old with complete and partial remissions of symptom and imaging changes and with normal cancer markers after NAT were higher. ConclusionsThrough analysis of DACCA data, it is found that in the selection of NAT strategy for colorectal cancer, the lower age group, the higher proportion of patients adopting combined target drug regimen. Although it is not found that age is related to changes of symptoms, imaging, and cancer markers after NAT, it still shows a trend of better outcomes in younger patients.
