Differentiating the impact of anatomic and non-anatomic liver resection on early recurrence in patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>For Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) treated with hepatectomy, the extent of the resection margin remains controversial and data available on its effect on early tumor recurrence are very few and contradictory. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of the type of resection (anatomic versus non-anatomic) on early intra-hepatic HCC recurrence in patients with solitary HCC and preserved liver function.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Among 53 patients with similar clinico-pathologic data who underwent curative liver resection for HCC between 2000 and 2006, 28 patients underwent anatomic resection of at least one liver segment and 25 patients underwent limited resection with a margin of at least 1 cm.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After a close follow-up period of 24 months, no difference was detected in recurrence rates between the anatomic (35.7%) and the non-anatomic (40%) groups in either univariate (<it>p = 0.74</it>) and multivariate (<it>p = 0.65</it>) analysis. Factors contributing to early recurrence were tumor size (<it>p = 0.012</it>) and tumor stage including vascular invasion (<it>p = 0.009</it>).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The choice of the type of resection for HCC should be based on the maintenance of adequate hepatic reserve. The type of resection (anatomic vs non-anatomic) was found not to be a risk factor for early tumor recurrence.</p

Real exchange rates and real interest rates : a nonlinear perspective

In this paper we use a Threshold AutoRegressive (TAR) model to capture the nonlinear dynamics of monthly real effective exchange rate data for the G7 countries. The novelty of our approach relates to the use of the real interest differential as the switching variable. This choice allows us to consider jointly the nonlinearity and nonstationarity issues using récent advances in asymptotic theory. We find that the null of linearity is easily rejected against the nonlinear model for ail currencies considered. Further, for five out of the seven countries, where the null of unit root is rejected, we report evidence of quite rapid mean reversion.Real exchange rate, threshold autoregressive model, unit-root

Reliability analysis of single crystal NiAl turbine blades

As part of a co-operative agreement with General Electric Aircraft Engines (GEAE), NASA LeRC is modifying and validating the Ceramic Analysis and Reliability Evaluation of Structures algorithm for use in design of components made of high strength NiAl based intermetallic materials. NiAl single crystal alloys are being actively investigated by GEAE as a replacement for Ni-based single crystal superalloys for use in high pressure turbine blades and vanes. The driving force for this research lies in the numerous property advantages offered by NiAl alloys over their superalloy counterparts. These include a reduction of density by as much as a third without significantly sacrificing strength, higher melting point, greater thermal conductivity, better oxidation resistance, and a better response to thermal barrier coatings. The current drawback to high strength NiAl single crystals is their limited ductility. Consequently, significant efforts including the work agreement with GEAE are underway to develop testing and design methodologies for these materials. The approach to validation and component analysis involves the following steps: determination of the statistical nature and source of fracture in a high strength, NiAl single crystal turbine blade material; measurement of the failure strength envelope of the material; coding of statistically based reliability models; verification of the code and model; and modeling of turbine blades and vanes for rig testing

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of three current guidelines for the evaluation of asymptomatic pancreatic cystic neoplasms.

Asymptomatic pancreatic cysts are a common clinical problem but only a minority of these cases progress to cancer. Our aim was to compare the accuracy to detect malignancy of the 2015 American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), the 2012 International Consensus/Fukuoka (Fukuoka guidelines [FG]), and the 2010 American College of Radiology (ACR) guidelines.We conducted a retrospective study at 3 referral centers for all patients who underwent resection for an asymptomatic pancreatic cyst between January 2008 and December 2013. We compared the accuracy of 3 guidelines in predicting high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or cancer in resected cysts. We performed logistic regression analyses to examine the association between cyst features and risk of HGD or cancer.A total of 269 patients met inclusion criteria. A total of 228 (84.8%) had a benign diagnosis or low-grade dysplasia on surgical pathology, and 41 patients (15.2%) had either HGD (n = 14) or invasive cancer (n = 27). Of the 41 patients with HGD or cancer on resection, only 3 patients would have met the AGA guideline\u27s indications for resection based on the preoperative cyst characteristics, whereas 30/41 patients would have met the FG criteria for resection and 22/41 patients met the ACR criteria. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value of HGD, and/or cancer of the AGA guidelines were 7.3%, 88.2%, 10%, and 84.1%, compared to 73.2%, 45.6%, 19.5%, and 90.4% for the FG and 53.7%, 61%, 19.8%, and 88% for the ACR guidelines. In multivariable analysis, cyst size \u3e3 cm, compared to ≤3 cm, (odds ratio [OR] = 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11, 4.2) and each year increase in age (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.11) were positively associated with risk of HGD or cancer on resection.In patients with asymptomatic branch duct-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms or mucinous cystic neoplasms who underwent resection, the prevalence rate of HGD or cancer was 15.2%. Using the 2015 AGA criteria for resection would have missed 92.6% of patients with HGD or cancer. The more inclusive FG and ACR had a higher sensitivity for HGD or cancer but lower specificity. Given the current deficiencies of these guidelines, it will be important to determine the acceptable rate of false-positives in order to prevent a single true-positive

Role of Adjuvant Multimodality Therapy After Curative-Intent Resection of Ampullary Carcinoma

Importance: Ampullary adenocarcinoma is a rare malignant neoplasm that arises within the duodenal ampullary complex. The role of adjuvant therapy (AT) in the treatment of ampullary adenocarcinoma has not been clearly defined. Objective: To determine if long-term survival after curative-intent resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma may be improved by selection of patients for AT directed by histologic subtype. Design, setting, and participants: This multinational, retrospective cohort study was conducted at 12 institutions from April 1, 2000, to July 31, 2017, among 357 patients with resected, nonmetastatic ampullary adenocarcinoma receiving surgery alone or AT. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify covariates associated with overall survival. The surgery alone and AT cohorts were matched 1:1 by propensity scores based on the likelihood of receiving AT or by survival hazard from Cox modeling. Overall survival was compared with Kaplan-Meier estimates. Exposures: Adjuvant chemotherapy (fluorouracil- or gemcitabine-based) with or without radiotherapy. Main outcomes and measures: Overall survival. Results: A total of 357 patients (156 women and 201 men; median age, 65.8 years [interquartile range, 58-74 years]) underwent curative-intent resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma. Patients with intestinal subtype had a longer median overall survival compared with those with pancreatobiliary subtype (77 vs 54 months; P = .05). Histologic subtype was not associated with AT administration (intestinal, 52.9% [101 of 191]; and pancreatobiliary, 59.5% [78 of 131]; P = .24). Patients with pancreatobiliary histologic subtype most commonly received gemcitabine-based regimens (71.0% [22 of 31]) or combinations of gemcitabine and fluorouracil (12.9% [4 of 31]), whereas treatment of those with intestinal histologic subtype was more varied (fluorouracil, 50.0% [17 of 34]; gemcitabine, 44.1% [15 of 34]; P = .01). In the propensity score-matched cohort, AT was not associated with a survival benefit for either histologic subtype (intestinal: hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.67-2.16; P = .53; pancreatobiliary: hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.66-2.76; P = .41). Conclusions and relevance: Adjuvant therapy was more frequently used in patients with poor prognostic factors but was not associated with demonstrable improvements in survival, regardless of tumor histologic subtype. The value of a multimodality regimen remains poorly defined

Consensus guidelines for the definition of time-to-event end points in image-guided tumor ablation: results of the SIO and DATECAN initiative

International audienceThere is currently no consensus regarding preferred clinical outcome measures following image-guided tumor ablation or clear definitions of oncologic end points. This consensus document proposes standardized definitions for a broad range of oncologic outcome measures with recommendations on how to uniformly document, analyze, and report outcomes. The initiative was coordinated by the Society of Interventional Oncology in collaboration with the Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-Event End Points in Cancer Trials, or DATECAN, group. According to predefined criteria, based on experience with clinical trials, an international panel of 62 experts convened. Recommendations were developed using the validated three-step modified Delphi consensus method. Consensus was reached on when to assess outcomes per patient, per session, or per tumor; on starting and ending time and survival time definitions; and on time-to-event end points. Although no consensus was reached on the preferred classification system to report complications, quality of life, and health economics issues, the panel did agree on using the most recent version of a validated patient-reported outcome questionnaire. This article provides a framework of key opinion leader recommendations with the intent to facilitate a clear interpretation of results and standardize worldwide communication. Widespread adoption will improve reproducibility, allow for accurate comparisons, and avoid misinterpretations in the field of interventional oncology research. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Liddell in this issue

Defining the Critical Hurdles in Cancer Immunotherapy

ABSTRACT: Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators, others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet be overcome to improve outcomes of patients with cancer