51 research outputs found

    Mismatch repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade.

    Get PDF
    The genomes of cancers deficient in mismatch repair contain exceptionally high numbers of somatic mutations. In a proof-of-concept study, we previously showed that colorectal cancers with mismatch repair deficiency were sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade with antibodies to programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1). We have now expanded this study to evaluate the efficacy of PD-1 blockade in patients with advanced mismatch repair-deficient cancers across 12 different tumor types. Objective radiographic responses were observed in 53% of patients, and complete responses were achieved in 21% of patients. Responses were durable, with median progression-free survival and overall survival still not reached. Functional analysis in a responding patient demonstrated rapid in vivo expansion of neoantigen-specific T cell clones that were reactive to mutant neopeptides found in the tumor. These data support the hypothesis that the large proportion of mutant neoantigens in mismatch repair-deficient cancers make them sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade, regardless of the cancers\u27 tissue of origin

    Robotic-assisted surgery in gynecologic oncology

    No full text
    The quest for improved patient outcomes has been a driving force for adoption of novel surgical innovations across surgical subspecialties. Gynecologic oncology is one such surgical discipline in which minimally invasive surgery has had a robust and evolving role in defining standards of care. Robotic-assisted surgery has developed during the past two decades as a more technologically advanced form of minimally invasive surgery in an effort to mitigate the limitations of conventional laparoscopy and improved patient outcomes. Robotically assisted technology offers potential advantages that include improved three-dimensional stereoscopic vision, wristed instruments that improve surgeon dexterity, and tremor canceling software that improves surgical precision. These technological advances may allow the gynecologic oncology surgeon to perform increasingly radical oncologic surgeries in complex patients. However, the platform is not without limitations, including high cost, lack of haptic feedback, and the requirement for additional training to achieve competence. This review describes the role of robotic-assisted surgery in the management of endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancer, with an emphasis on comparison with laparotomy and conventional laparoscopy. The literature on novel robotic innovations, special patient populations, cost effectiveness, and fellowship training is also appraised critically in this regard. (C) 2014 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine

    Surgery in Cervical Cancer

    No full text

    Comparing Single-Site and Multiport Robotic Hysterectomy with Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping for Endometrial Cancer: Surgical Outcomes and Cost Analysis

    No full text
    To compare operative times, surgical outcomes, and costs of robotic laparoendoscopic single-site (R-LESS) vs multiport robotic (MPR) total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) with sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping for low-risk endometrial cancer. Retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). Academic university hospital. Patients with a biopsy-proven diagnosis of complex atypical hyperplasia (CAH) or low-grade (1 or 2) endometrial cancer with body mass index <30 kg/m2 and undergoing robotic TLH and SLN mapping between 2012 and 2016 were included. Surgical outcomes and cost data were collected retrospectively and analyzed based on the surgical approach with R-LESS vs MPR assistance. Twenty-seven patients who met the inclusion criteria were identified, including 14 patients who underwent R-LESS TLH with SLN mapping and 13 patients who underwent MPR TLH with SLN mapping. Median uterine weight was comparable in the 2 cohorts (111.3 g vs 83.8 g; p = .33). Operative and console times were equivalent with the R-LESS and MPR approaches (median, 175 minutes vs 184 minutes, p = .61 and 136 vs 140 minutes, p = .12, respectively). Median estimated blood loss was 50 mL in both cohorts. Successful bilateral SLN mapping occurred in 85.7% of the R-LESS procedures and 76.9% of MPR procedures. No intraoperative or 30-day complications were encountered, and all patients were discharged within 23 hours of surgery. MPR was associated with additional disposable instrument and drape costs of 460to460 to 660 compared with R-LESS, depending on the surgeon's instrument selection. Average total hospital charges were lower for R-LESS procedures (13,410vs13,410 vs 15,952; p < .05). In highly selected patients with CAH or low-grade endometrial cancer undergoing TLH and SLN mapping, R-LESS appears to result in equivalent perioperative outcomes as a MPR approach while offering a more cost-effective option. Further research is needed to determine the benefits of R-LESS procedures in the gynecologic oncology setting
    corecore