42 research outputs found

    Lobular Carcinomas In Situ Display Intralesion Genetic Heterogeneity and Clonal Evolution in the Progression to Invasive Lobular Carcinoma

    Get PDF
    Purpose:; Lobular carcinoma; in situ; (LCIS) is a preinvasive lesion of the breast. We sought to define its genomic landscape, whether intralesion genetic heterogeneity is present in LCIS, and the clonal relatedness between LCIS and invasive breast cancers.; Experimental Design:; We reanalyzed whole-exome sequencing (WES) data and performed a targeted amplicon sequencing validation of mutations identified in 43 LCIS and 27 synchronous more clinically advanced lesions from 24 patients [9 ductal carcinomas; in situ; (DCIS), 13 invasive lobular carcinomas (ILC), and 5 invasive ductal carcinomas (IDC)]. Somatic genetic alterations, mutational signatures, clonal composition, and phylogenetic trees were defined using validated computational methods.; Results:; WES of 43 LCIS lesions revealed a genomic profile similar to that previously reported for ILCs, with; CDH1; mutations present in 81% of the lesions. Forty-two percent (18/43) of LCIS were found to be clonally related to synchronous DCIS and/or ILCs, with clonal evolutionary patterns indicative of clonal selection and/or parallel/branched progression. Intralesion genetic heterogeneity was higher among LCIS clonally related to DCIS/ILC than in those nonclonally related to DCIS/ILC. A shift from aging to APOBEC-related mutational processes was observed in the progression from LCIS to DCIS and/or ILC in a subset of cases.; Conclusions:; Our findings support the contention that LCIS has a repertoire of somatic genetic alterations similar to that of ILCs, and likely constitutes a nonobligate precursor of breast cancer. Intralesion genetic heterogeneity is observed in LCIS and should be considered in studies aiming to develop biomarkers of progression from LCIS to more advanced lesions

    Inmate cancer patients – highlighting the importance of a holistic approach to oncological care

    Get PDF
    Purpose: Inmate oncologic patients' rates increased drastically worldwide. Elderly, limited exercise, unhealthy diet, hepatitis, HIV+ status, tobacco and alcohol use, constitute the main cancer risk factors. We present an outline of practical oncological management and ethical thinking, in the specific environment of a detention facility. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS and grey literature were extensively searched upto October 2021. Ιncarcerated oncologic patients experiencevarious everyday challenges:their confinement in high securityfacilities, the lack of access to critical care and related ethicaldilemmas inherent to the context of a correctional facility. Results: The detention facilities may be inadequate in providing early cancer diagnosis and appropriate care mainlydue to a lack of specialized personnel, b) in-house or in external specialized cancer hospitals, care variability (e.g. admissions in small local or regional hospitals), c) delays inproviding access and d) gatekeeper systems. There is a paucity of administration of a) systemic therapy(chemotherapy, targeted drug therapy etc), b) radiotherapy, c)palliative care, and d) enrollment in clinical trials.  Conclusions: Correctional facilities must encourage teamwork between healthcare and correctional professionals inorder to improve the provided anticancer care

    Correction to: Two years later: Is the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still having an impact on emergency surgery? An international cross-sectional survey among WSES members

    Get PDF
    Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is still ongoing and a major challenge for health care services worldwide. In the first WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey, a strong negative impact on emergency surgery (ES) had been described already early in the pandemic situation. However, the knowledge is limited about current effects of the pandemic on patient flow through emergency rooms, daily routine and decision making in ES as well as their changes over time during the last two pandemic years. This second WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey investigates the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ES during the course of the pandemic. Methods: A web survey had been distributed to medical specialists in ES during a four-week period from January 2022, investigating the impact of the pandemic on patients and septic diseases both requiring ES, structural problems due to the pandemic and time-to-intervention in ES routine. Results: 367 collaborators from 59 countries responded to the survey. The majority indicated that the pandemic still significantly impacts on treatment and outcome of surgical emergency patients (83.1% and 78.5%, respectively). As reasons, the collaborators reported decreased case load in ES (44.7%), but patients presenting with more prolonged and severe diseases, especially concerning perforated appendicitis (62.1%) and diverticulitis (57.5%). Otherwise, approximately 50% of the participants still observe a delay in time-to-intervention in ES compared with the situation before the pandemic. Relevant causes leading to enlarged time-to-intervention in ES during the pandemic are persistent problems with in-hospital logistics, lacks in medical staff as well as operating room and intensive care capacities during the pandemic. This leads not only to the need for triage or transferring of ES patients to other hospitals, reported by 64.0% and 48.8% of the collaborators, respectively, but also to paradigm shifts in treatment modalities to non-operative approaches reported by 67.3% of the participants, especially in uncomplicated appendicitis, cholecystitis and multiple-recurrent diverticulitis. Conclusions: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still significantly impacts on care and outcome of patients in ES. Well-known problems with in-hospital logistics are not sufficiently resolved by now; however, medical staff shortages and reduced capacities have been dramatically aggravated over last two pandemic years

    Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

    Get PDF
    Background: Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA. Methods: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up. Results: 564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections. Conclusions: After 100 years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception

    Infected pancreatic necrosis: outcomes and clinical predictors of mortality. A post hoc analysis of the MANCTRA-1 international study

    Get PDF
    : The identification of high-risk patients in the early stages of infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is critical, because it could help the clinicians to adopt more effective management strategies. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the MANCTRA-1 international study to assess the association between clinical risk factors and mortality among adult patients with IPN. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify prognostic factors of mortality. We identified 247 consecutive patients with IPN hospitalised between January 2019 and December 2020. History of uncontrolled arterial hypertension (p = 0.032; 95% CI 1.135-15.882; aOR 4.245), qSOFA (p = 0.005; 95% CI 1.359-5.879; aOR 2.828), renal failure (p = 0.022; 95% CI 1.138-5.442; aOR 2.489), and haemodynamic failure (p = 0.018; 95% CI 1.184-5.978; aOR 2.661), were identified as independent predictors of mortality in IPN patients. Cholangitis (p = 0.003; 95% CI 1.598-9.930; aOR 3.983), abdominal compartment syndrome (p = 0.032; 95% CI 1.090-6.967; aOR 2.735), and gastrointestinal/intra-abdominal bleeding (p = 0.009; 95% CI 1.286-5.712; aOR 2.710) were independently associated with the risk of mortality. Upfront open surgical necrosectomy was strongly associated with the risk of mortality (p < 0.001; 95% CI 1.912-7.442; aOR 3.772), whereas endoscopic drainage of pancreatic necrosis (p = 0.018; 95% CI 0.138-0.834; aOR 0.339) and enteral nutrition (p = 0.003; 95% CI 0.143-0.716; aOR 0.320) were found as protective factors. Organ failure, acute cholangitis, and upfront open surgical necrosectomy were the most significant predictors of mortality. Our study confirmed that, even in a subgroup of particularly ill patients such as those with IPN, upfront open surgery should be avoided as much as possible. Study protocol registered in ClinicalTrials.Gov (I.D. Number NCT04747990)

    Global disparities in surgeons’ workloads, academic engagement and rest periods: the on-calL shIft fOr geNEral SurgeonS (LIONESS) study

    Get PDF
    : The workload of general surgeons is multifaceted, encompassing not only surgical procedures but also a myriad of other responsibilities. From April to May 2023, we conducted a CHERRIES-compliant internet-based survey analyzing clinical practice, academic engagement, and post-on-call rest. The questionnaire featured six sections with 35 questions. Statistical analysis used Chi-square tests, ANOVA, and logistic regression (SPSS® v. 28). The survey received a total of 1.046 responses (65.4%). Over 78.0% of responders came from Europe, 65.1% came from a general surgery unit; 92.8% of European and 87.5% of North American respondents were involved in research, compared to 71.7% in Africa. Europe led in publishing research studies (6.6 ± 8.6 yearly). Teaching involvement was high in North America (100%) and Africa (91.7%). Surgeons reported an average of 6.7 ± 4.9 on-call shifts per month, with European and North American surgeons experiencing 6.5 ± 4.9 and 7.8 ± 4.1 on-calls monthly, respectively. African surgeons had the highest on-call frequency (8.7 ± 6.1). Post-on-call, only 35.1% of respondents received a day off. Europeans were most likely (40%) to have a day off, while African surgeons were least likely (6.7%). On the adjusted multivariable analysis HDI (Human Development Index) (aOR 1.993) hospital capacity > 400 beds (aOR 2.423), working in a specialty surgery unit (aOR 2.087), and making the on-call in-house (aOR 5.446), significantly predicted the likelihood of having a day off after an on-call shift. Our study revealed critical insights into the disparities in workload, access to research, and professional opportunities for surgeons across different continents, underscored by the HDI

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

    Greek translation and cultural adaptation of the scored patient-generated subjective global assessment: A nutritional assessment tool suitable for cancer patients

    No full text
    Background and aims: Patients with cancer frequently present with disease-related malnutrition and functional decline. The scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA©) is a malnutrition screening and assessment tool commonly used in patients with cancer. The aim of the current study was to translate and culturally adapt the original English PG-SGA for the Greek setting, including assessment of comprehensibility, difficulty and content validity in patients and healthcare professionals. Methods: Our study was conducted according to the ten steps of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Principles of Good Practice for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Comprehensibility and difficulty of the Greek translation were assessed in 100 patients and 100 healthcare professionals (HCPs) from Greece. Content validity of the translation was assessed among HCPs. Item and scale indices were calculated for comprehensibility (I–CI; S–CI), difficulty (I-DI; S-DI), and content validity (I-CVI; S-CVI). Results: Patient perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the PG-SGA were considered to be excellent (S–CI = 0.97, S-DI = 0.97). HCPs perceived content validity for the patient component was also excellent (S-CVI = 0.95). The perceived content validity, comprehensibility and difficulty for the professional component of the PG-SGA, as perceived by the HCPs, was excellent (S-CVI = 0.94, S–CI = 0.94, S-DI = 0.90), with the physical exam being perceived as most difficult (I-DI = 0.78–0.92). Conclusions: Our study resulted in the successful translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the original English PG-SGA for the Greek setting. The Greek language version of the PG-SGA is characterized by high comprehensibility, low difficulty, and is considered relevant for use in Greece
    corecore