7 research outputs found
Π ΠΠΠ£ΠΠ¬Π’ΠΠ’Π« ΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠΠ― ΠΠΠΠΠ’Π£ΠΠ£ΠΠΠΠ Π ΠΠΠΠΠΠ Π‘ΠΠΠΠΠΠ Π’ΠΠ ΠΠΠΠ ΠΠΠΠΠ ΠΠΠ’ΠΠΠ¬ΠΠΠΠ Π ΠΠΠ Π‘ ΠΠΠ’ΠΠ‘Π’ΠΠΠΠΠ Π ΠΠΠ§ΠΠΠ¬
Panitumumab has been shown to increase progression free and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.Our purpose was to evaluate whether panitumumab is effective and safe in patients with potentially resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).Methods. Consecutive analysis of data from 11 patients (KRAS wild) receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and panitumumab as converse preoperative treatment for potentially resectable CRLM. At the moment of presentation R0-liver resection was not possible due to technical reasons (small remnant volume, large liver vessels involvement etc.). We studied objective response rate, surgical characteristics, skin toxicity profile, and perioperative course. Also expression of EGFR-ligands (transforming growth factor-Ξ± and amphiregulin) and Β Β expression of E-cadherin were studied.Results. After median 6 courses of treatment, metastatic liver tumors were reduced considerably (PR) in 8 pts (73 %). Radical liver resection (R0) with 3 median number of removed segments was done in 6 (55 %) patients. Two pts underwent successfully the two-stage surgery (1 β portal vein embolization and 1 β portal vein ligation with partial left resection). Two patients progressed on chemotherapy (18 %). There was no correlation between skin toxicity and response. Mean blood loss was 250 ml. Preoperative administration of panitumumab was associated with higher risk of postoperative infection complication (57.1 %).Conclusions. To the best of our knowledge this is the first report about using panitumumab as conversion therapy before liver resection. The panitumumab and oxaliplatine-based regimen may increase the resection rate of liver metastases and influence on adhesive and proliferative activity of cancer cells. It is necessary to focus on postoperative infection complications.ΠΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π½ΠΎ, ΡΡΠΎ ΠΏΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΌΡΠΌΠ°Π± ΡΠ²Π΅Π»ΠΈΡΠΈΠ²Π°Π΅Ρ Π²ΡΠΆΠΈΠ²Π°Π΅ΠΌΠΎΡΡΡ Π±Π΅Π· ΠΏΡΠΎΠ³ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΡΡΡ Π²ΡΠΆΠΈΠ²Π°Π΅ΠΌΠΎΡΡΡ Ρ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ² Ρ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ°Π·Π°ΠΌΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠ»ΠΎΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠ°ΠΊΠ° (ΠΠ Π ) Π² ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½Ρ.Π¦Π΅Π»ΡΡ Π½Π°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎ ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΡΡΠ°Π»Π° ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΊΠ° Π±Π΅Π·ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΈ ΡΡΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΠ±Π°Π²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΏΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΌΡΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΊ Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ² Ρ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠ°Π±Π΅Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠΌΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ°Π·Π°ΠΌΠΈ.ΠΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄Ρ. Π ΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΏΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π±ΡΠ»ΠΈ Π²ΠΊΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π½Ρ 11 ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ² (Π΄ΠΈΠΊΠΈΠΉ ΡΠΈΠΏ KRAS) Ρ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ°Π·Π°ΠΌΠΈ ΠΠ Π Π² ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½Ρ, ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½Π½ΡΠ΅ ΠΈΡΡ
ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ Β«ΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠ°Π±Π΅Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠ΅Β» ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΡΠΈΠ²ΡΠΈΠ΅ Π² ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²Π΅ ΠΊΠΎΠ½Π²Π΅ΡΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΌΡΠΌΠ°Π± Π² ΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ Ρ
ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΠΏΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ Π½Π° ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π΅ ΠΎΠΊΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠΏΠ»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π° Π² ΠΎΡΠ΄Π΅Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ Ρ
ΠΈΡΡΡΠ³ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈ, ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΠΆΠ΅Π»ΡΠ΄ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΆΠ΅Π»Π΅Π·Ρ ΠΈ ΠΆΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΡΡ
ΠΏΡΡΠ΅ΠΉ Π€ΠΠΠ£ Β«Π ΠΠ¦Π₯ ΠΈΠΌ. Π°ΠΊΠ°Π΄. Π.Π. ΠΠ΅ΡΡΠΎΠ²ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎΒ» Π ΠΠΠ. Π ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΠΌ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠ°ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠ°ΠΌ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈΡΡ ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΎΡΠ° ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅Π½Ρ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠ° ΠΏΠΎ ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΡΠΌ RECIST 1.1, ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΊΠ° ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΎΡΡ Π²ΡΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΈ Π² ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅ R0, ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΠ°ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΠ΅ ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ»Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΠΈ, ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΈΠ΅ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ ΠΊΡΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ Π²ΠΎ Π²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ, ΠΏΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ»ΠΆΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ, Π΄Π»ΠΈΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π±ΡΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ Π² ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°ΡΠ΅, ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ, 30-Π΄Π½Π΅Π²Π½Π°Ρ ΠΈ 90-Π΄Π½Π΅Π²Π½Π°Ρ Π»Π΅ΡΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡ. Π’Π°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ ΠΈΠ·ΡΡΠ°Π»Π°ΡΡ ΡΠΊΡΠΏΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΡ Π»ΠΈΠ³Π°Π½Π΄ΠΎΠ² ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ° ΡΠΏΠΈΠ΄Π΅ΡΠΌΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΠΎΡΠ° ΡΠΎΡΡΠ° (EGFR) β ΡΡΠ°Π½ΡΡΠΎΡΠΌΠΈΡΡΡΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎ ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΠΎΡΠ° ΡΠΎΡΡΠ° ΠΈ Π°ΠΌΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π³ΡΠ»ΠΈΠ½Π°, Π° ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΆΠ΅ E-ΠΊΠ°Π΄Π³Π΅ΡΠΈΠ½Π°.Π Π΅Π·ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°ΡΡ. ΠΠΎΡΠ»Π΅ Π² ΡΡΠ΅Π΄Π½Π΅ΠΌ 6 ΠΊΡΡΡΠΎΠ² Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ½ΡΠΉ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΡΠΉ ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅Ρ Π±ΡΠ» Π·Π°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΈΡΡΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ Π² 73 % ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°Π΅Π². Π Π°Π΄ΠΈΠΊΠ°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΡ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡ ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈ Ρ ΡΠ΄Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ Π² ΡΡΠ΅Π΄Π½Π΅ΠΌ 3 ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ² ΡΠ΄Π°Π»ΠΎΡΡ Π²ΡΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½ΠΈΡΡ Π² ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠ½ ΡΡΠ°ΠΏ Ρ 6 (55 %) ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ². ΠΠ²Π° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠ° ΡΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎ Π·Π°Π²Π΅ΡΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π΄Π²ΡΡ
ΡΡΠ°ΠΏΠ½ΠΎΠ΅ Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ (1 β ΡΠΌΠ±ΠΎΠ»ΠΈΠ·Π°ΡΠΈΡ Π²ΠΎΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π²Π΅Π½Ρ ΠΈ 1 β ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π²ΡΠ·ΠΊΠ° ΠΏΡΠ°Π²ΠΎΠΉ Π²ΠΎΡΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π²Π΅Π½Ρ Ρ ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ Π»Π΅Π²ΠΎΡΡΠΎΡΠΎΠ½Π½Π΅ΠΉ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ΅ΠΉ). Π£ 2 ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΈΠ΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ² Π±ΡΠ»Π° Π·Π°ΡΠΈΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π° ΠΏΡΠΎΠ³ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΡ Π½Π° ΡΠΎΠ½Π΅ Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ. ΠΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡΠΈΡ ΠΌΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Ρ ΡΡΠ΅ΠΏΠ΅Π½ΡΡ Π²ΡΡΠ°ΠΆΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠΆΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΠΎΠΊΡΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΡΠΌ ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠΎΠΌ ΠΎΡΡΡΡΡΡΠ²ΠΎΠ²Π°Π»Π°. ΠΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ°Π½Π° ΠΊΡΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠΈ ΡΠΎΡΡΠ°Π²ΠΈΠ»Π° 250 ΠΌΠ». ΠΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½Π°Ρ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΠΏΠΈΡ ΠΏΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΌΡΠΌΠ°Π±ΠΎΠΌ ΡΠΎΠΏΡΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΆΠ΄Π°Π»Π°ΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ²ΡΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΡΠΌ ΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ»Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ
ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ
ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ (57,1 %).ΠΡΠ²ΠΎΠ΄Ρ. ΠΠΎ Π½Π°ΡΠΈΠΌ Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΡΠΌ, ΡΡΠΎ ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ²ΠΎΠ΅ ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅, Π² ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΌ ΠΈΠ·ΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΎΡΡ Π΄ΠΎΠ±Π°Π²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΌΡΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΊ ΠΊΠΎΠ½Π²Π΅ΡΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΠΏΠΈΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΠ Π Π΄ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈ. Π Π΅ΠΆΠΈΠΌ Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ Ρ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΏΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡΠΌΡΠΌΠ°Π±Π° ΠΈ ΠΎΠΊΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠΏΠ»Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π° ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ΅Ρ ΡΠ²Π΅Π»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΡ ΡΠ°ΡΡΠΎΡΡ ΡΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ½ΡΡ
ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΉ ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈ ΠΈ Π²Π»ΠΈΡΡΡ Π½Π° Π°Π΄Π³Π΅Π·ΠΈΠ²Π½ΡΠ΅ ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ²ΠΎΠΉΡΡΠ²Π° ΠΎΠΏΡΡ
ΠΎΠ»Π΅Π²ΡΡ
ΠΊΠ»Π΅ΡΠΎΠΊ. ΠΠ΅ΠΎΠ±Ρ
ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΠΌΠΎ ΡΠ΄Π΅Π»ΡΡΡ Π²Π½ΠΈΠΌΠ°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π²ΠΎΠ·ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΡΠ°Π·Π²ΠΈΡΠΈΡ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ»Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ
ΠΈΠ½ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ
ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ.
Impact of Preoperative Chemotherapy Features on Patient Outcomes after Hepatectomy for Initially Unresectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: A LiverMetSurvey Analysis
Background: Prognostic factors have been extensively reported after resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM); however, specific analyses of the impact of preoperative systemic anticancer therapy (PO-SACT) features on outcomes is lacking. Methods: For this real-world evidence study, we used prospectively collected data within the international surgical LiverMetSurvey database from all patients with initially-irresectable CLM. The main outcome was Overall Survival (OS) after surgery. Disease-free (DFS) and hepatic-specific relapse-free survival (HS-RFS) were secondary outcomes. PO-SACT features included duration (cumulative number of cycles), choice of the cytotoxic backbone (oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based), fluoropyrimidine (infusional or oral) and addition or not of targeted monoclonal antibodies (anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF). Results: A total of 2793 patients in the database had received PO-SACT for initially irresectable diseases. Short (<7 or <13 cycles in 1st or 2nd line) PO-SACT duration was independently associated with longer OS (HR: 0.85 p = 0.046), DFS (HR: 0.81; p = 0.016) and HS-RFS (HR: 0.80; p = 0.05). All other PO-SACT features yielded basically comparable results. Conclusions: In this international cohort, provided that PO-SACT allowed conversion to resectability in initially irresectable CLM, surgery performed as soon as technically feasible resulted in the best outcomes. When resection was achieved, our findings indicate that the choice of PO-SACT regimen had a marginal if any, impact on outcomes.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio
ΠΡΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ½ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠΈΠΌΡΠ»ΡΡΠΎΡΡ ΡΠ΅Π³Π΅Π½Π΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΈ ΠΈΠΌΠΏΠ»Π°Π½ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π°Π»Π»ΠΎΠ³Π΅Π½Π½ΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΏΠ»Π°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ ΠΌΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΎΠ²
There are many different surgical techniques for bone reconstruction. However, biological reconstruction methodsΒ are being increasingly developed. The main purpose is not only to fill up defects, but to stimulate the processesΒ of reconstruction and regeneration of bone as a complete organ. In this report, we describe the basic principles ofΒ orthobiology and the essential orthobiological materials. A clinical case is presented where a combination of allogeneic osteoplastic materials with autologous platelet-rich plasma is used to reconstruct aΒ cavity defect in the tibia.Π Π½Π°ΡΡΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π΅ Π²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΡΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²ΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠΆΠ΅ΡΡΠ²ΠΎ ΡΠ°Π·Π½ΡΡ
ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ² Ρ
ΠΈΡΡΡΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π²ΠΎΡΡΡΠ°Π½ΠΎΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΊΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉΒ ΡΠΊΠ°Π½ΠΈ, Π½ΠΎ Π²ΡΠ΅ Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π΅ ΡΠ°Π·Π²ΠΈΡΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΡΠ°ΡΡ ΡΠΏΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Ρ Π±ΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠΉ ΡΠ΅ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΡΡΡΠΊΡΠΈΠΈ, ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΎΡΡΡ
ΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ Π½Π΅ ΡΠΎΠ»ΡΠΊΠΎ Π²ΠΎΡΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π΄Π΅ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ°, Π½ΠΎ ΡΡΠΈΠΌΡΠ»ΡΡΠΈΡΒ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΎΠ² ΡΠ΅Π³Π΅Π½Π΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ ΠΈ Π²ΠΎΡΡΡΠ°Π½ΠΎΠ²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΡΒ ΠΊΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊ ΠΎΡΠ³Π°Π½Π°. Π Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΏΡΠ±Π»ΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΠΈ Π°Π²ΡΠΎΡΡ ΠΎΠΏΠΈΡΡΠ²Π°ΡΡ Π±Π°Π·ΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ½ΡΠΈΠΏΡ ΠΎΡΡΠΎΠ±ΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠΈ ΠΈ ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π½ΡΠ΅Β ΠΎΡΡΠΎΠ±ΠΈΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ ΠΌΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»Ρ. ΠΡΠΈΠ²Π΅Π΄Π΅Π½ ΠΊΠ»ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠΉ ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°ΠΉ, Π³Π΄Π΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½Π΅Π½Π° ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠ±ΠΈΠ½Π°ΡΠΈΡ Π°Π»Π»ΠΎΠ³Π΅Π½Π½ΡΡ
Β ΠΊΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠΏΠ»Π°ΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΠΌΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΎΠ² Ρ Π°ΡΡΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎΠΉ ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠ³Π°ΡΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΉ ΡΡΠΎΠΌΠ±ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈ ΠΏΠ»Π°Π·ΠΌΠΎΠΉ Π΄Π»Ρ ΡΠ΅ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΡΡΡΠΊΡΠΈΠΈΒ ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΎΡΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π΄Π΅ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ° Π±ΠΎΠ»ΡΡΠ΅Π±Π΅ΡΡΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΉ ΠΊΠΎΡΡΠΈ
RESULTS OF PANITUMUMAB ADDITION TO CONVERSION THERAPY FOR COLORECTAL CANCER LIVER METASTASES
Panitumumab has been shown to increase progression free and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.Our purpose was to evaluate whether panitumumab is effective and safe in patients with potentially resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).Methods. Consecutive analysis of data from 11 patients (KRAS wild) receiving oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and panitumumab as converse preoperative treatment for potentially resectable CRLM. At the moment of presentation R0-liver resection was not possible due to technical reasons (small remnant volume, large liver vessels involvement etc.). We studied objective response rate, surgical characteristics, skin toxicity profile, and perioperative course. Also expression of EGFR-ligands (transforming growth factor-Ξ± and amphiregulin) and Β Β expression of E-cadherin were studied.Results. After median 6 courses of treatment, metastatic liver tumors were reduced considerably (PR) in 8 pts (73 %). Radical liver resection (R0) with 3 median number of removed segments was done in 6 (55 %) patients. Two pts underwent successfully the two-stage surgery (1 β portal vein embolization and 1 β portal vein ligation with partial left resection). Two patients progressed on chemotherapy (18 %). There was no correlation between skin toxicity and response. Mean blood loss was 250 ml. Preoperative administration of panitumumab was associated with higher risk of postoperative infection complication (57.1 %).Conclusions. To the best of our knowledge this is the first report about using panitumumab as conversion therapy before liver resection. The panitumumab and oxaliplatine-based regimen may increase the resection rate of liver metastases and influence on adhesive and proliferative activity of cancer cells. It is necessary to focus on postoperative infection complications
Surgical management of patients with colorectal cancer and simultaneous liver and lung metastases
The management of patients with colorectal cancer and simultaneously diagnosed liver and lung metastases (SLLM) remains controversial
Liver-First Approach for Synchronous Colorectal Metastases: Analysis of 7360 Patients from the LiverMetSurvey Registry
Background: The liver-first approach in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has gained wide consensus but its role is still to be clarified. We aimed to elucidate the outcome of the liver-first approach and to identify patients who benefit at most from this approach. Methods: Patients with synchronous CRLM included in the LiverMetSurvey registry between 2000 and 2017 were considered. Three strategies were analyzed, i.e. liver-first approach, colorectal resection followed by liver resection (primary-first), and simultaneous resection, and three groups of patients were analyzed, i.e. solitary metastasis, multiple unilobar CRLM, and multiple bilobar CRLM. In each group, patients from the three strategy groups were matched by propensity score analysis. Results: Overall, 7360 patients were analyzed: 4415 primary-first, 552 liver-first, and 2393 simultaneous resections. Compared with the other groups, the liver-first group had more rectal tumors (58.0% vs. 31.2%) and higher hepatic tumor burden (more than three CRLMs: 34.8% vs. 24.0%; size > 50 mm: 35.6% vs. 22.8%; p < 0.001). In patients with solitary and multiple unilobar CRLM, survival was similar regardless of treatment strategy, whereas in patients with multiple bilobar metastases, the liver-first approach was an independent positive prognostic factor, both in unmatched patients (3-year survival 65.9% vs. primary-first 60.4%: hazard ratio [HR] 1.321, p = 0.031; vs. simultaneous resections 54.4%: HR 1.624, p < 0.001) and after propensity score matching (vs. primary-first: HR 1.667, p = 0.017; vs. simultaneous resections: HR 2.278, p = 0.003). Conclusion: In patients with synchronous CRLM, the surgical strategy should be decided according to the hepatic tumor burden. In the presence of multiple bilobar CRLM, the liver-first approach is associated with longer survival than the alternative approaches and should be evaluated as standard