Malignant pleural mesothelioma with long-term tumor disappearance of a local relapse after surgery: a case report

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Pneumothorax triggered by the combination of gefitinib and amrubicin and treated with endobronchial silicone spigots

Pneumothorax is a rare complication in cancer chemotherapy. We report a case in which a male patient with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) developed repetitive pneumothorax after receiving a combination of the chemotherapeutic drugs gefitinib and amrubicin (GEF + AMR). Both episodes of pneumothorax occurred on the 3rd day of GEF + AMR administration. Tube thoracostomy was performed, but pulmonary air leaks persisted in the second pneumothorax. Whereas surgical intervention was not applicable because of poor respiratory reserve, the chest tube was successfully removed by endoscopic occlusion of bronchopleural fistula with endobronchial Watanabe spigots (EWSs), a type of silicone bronchial blocker

Surgical Treatment following Chemo-Targeted Therapy with Bevacizumab for Lung Metastasis from Colorectal Carcinoma: Analysis of Safety and Histological Therapeutic Effects in Patients Treated at a Single Institution

Background: Recently, therapeutic strategies for a metastasectomy from colorectal carcinoma after chemo-targeted therapy with bevacizumab have been presented, with which some uncommon but serious adverse events have been reported. However, only few reports have investigated the safety of lung resection after such therapy or the histological effects. We retrospectively analyzed the both of them at our institute. Methods: Of 69 colorectal carcinoma patients who underwent pulmonary metastasectomy procedures from 2009 to 2014, we investigated 11 who also received chemo-targeted therapy prior to surgery. Results: In addition to bevacizumab, 5 fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin + oxaliplatin or capecitabine was given in 6 cases and 5 FU/leucovorin + irinotecan in 5 cases. The mean period from the end of chemo-targeted therapy to surgery was 2.7 ± 0.9 months. The response to therapy shown in imaging findings was progressive disease in 6, stable disease in 3, and partial response in 2 (response rate, 18.2%). The operation modes were wedge resection (n = 8, 72.3%), segmentectomy (n = 2, 1 in bilateral lobes, 1 in the right lobe, 18.2%), and lobectomy (n = 1, left lower lobectomy, 9.1%). All patients safely underwent a complete resection. As for postsurgical complications, chylothorax occurred in 1 case and prolonged pulmonary air leakage in 1 case. The histological effects of chemo-targeted therapy were slight. There was no relationship between histological findings with imaging findings obtained prior to the operation (p = 0.63). The 5-year disease-free survival rate after metastasectomy was 10.9%. Conclusions: Pulmonary metastasectomy after chemo-targeted therapy for colorectal carcinoma patients obtained acceptable results. In addition, there was no correlation between imaging and histopathologic results following chemo-targeted therapy

Analytical Performance of a Highly Sensitive System to Detect Gene Variants Using Next-Generation Sequencing for Lung Cancer Companion Diagnostics

The recent increase in the number of molecular targeted agents for lung cancer has led to the demand for the simultaneous testing of multiple genes. Although gene panels using next-generation sequencing (NGS) are ideal, conventional panels require a high tumor content, and biopsy samples often do not meet this requirement. We developed a new NGS panel, called compact panel, characterized by high sensitivity, with detection limits for mutations of 0.14%, 0.20%, 0.48%, 0.24%, and 0.20% for EGFR exon 19 deletion, L858R, T790M, BRAF V600E, and KRAS G12C, respectively. Mutation detection also had a high quantitative ability, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.966 to 0.992. The threshold for fusion detection was 1%. The panel exhibited good concordance with the approved tests. The identity rates were as follows: EGFR positive, 100% (95% confidence interval, 95.5–100); EGFR negative, 90.9 (82.2–96.3); BRAF positive, 100 (59.0–100); BRAF negative, 100 (94.9–100); KRAS G12C positive, 100 (92.7–100); KRAS G12C negative, 100 (93.0–100); ALK positive, 96.7 (83.8–99.9); ALK negative, 98.4 (97.2–99.2); ROS1 positive, 100 (66.4–100); ROS1 negative, 99.0 (94.6–100); MET positive, 98.0 (89.0–99.9); MET negative 100 (92.8–100); RET positive, 93.8 (69.8–100); RET negative, 100 (94.9–100). The analytical performance showed that the panel could handle various types of biopsy samples obtained by routine clinical practice without requiring strict pathological monitoring, as in the case of conventional NGS panels