Treatment Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in N3 Stage Gastric Cancer After Curative Resection: A Real World Data

Purpose: N3 gastric cancer is characterized by a fairly high lymph node metastasis burden and poor outcome despite optimal therapy. Given the limitations of TNM classification, a comprehensive evaluation tool is necessary to predict the prognosis of patients with N3 gastric cancer who underwent curative surgery. This study aims to explore the outcomes and clinicopathologic prognostic factors affecting the overall survival (OS) of patients with N3 gastric cancer after surgery. Methods: Data on patients with N3 gastric cancer who underwent (sub)total gastrectomy and regional lymph node dissection between November 2005 and September 2018 (n = 169) were analyzed by Cox regression to determine the independent prognostic factors for OS. Results: The multivariable analysis established that gender, patient performance status, metastatic lymph node ratio (MLNR), tumor grade, and adjuvant chemotherapy are significantly associated with OS. The five-year OS of the study population was 15%. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy was applied to 72% of the patients, which resulted in an improvement in recurrence-free survival but not OS. Recurrence occurred in 103 (75%) patients, in which the most frequent recurrence site was distant metastasis. Conclusion: Male gender, poor performance status, grade 3 tumor, MLNR > 0.37, and not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy are predictors of poor prognosis in N3 gastric cancer after curative resection. Considering the high recurrence rates of this group, prospective studies are needed to optimize treatment strategies

What Is Your Choice for Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Metastatic Prostate Carcinoma: Surgical or Medical?

OBJECTIVE: : At the time of diagnosis, approximately 16.5% of prostate cancer patients are metastatic. The main framework of metastatic prostate cancer treatment is androgen deprivation therapy, which is performed surgically or medically. The aim of this study is to evaluate the attitudes of medical oncologists and urologists about orchiectomy as androgen deprivation therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 387 physicians working in the Departments of Urology (n = 217) and Medical Oncology (n = 170) were included in this descriptive study. Data were collected through an electronic survey. RESULTS: Only 7.5% of participants indicated that they offered surgical castration to their patients. Urologists preferred surgical castration more than oncologists for the treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate carcinoma (P = .003). The reasons why medical oncologists preferred surgical castration less are that it is an invasive procedure, has risk of morbidity and mortality, high cost of hospitalization, and may cause deterioration of the patient's body image (P < .05). CONCLUSION: This study showed that physicians were less likely to perform orchiectomy as an androgen deprivation therapy. Although the most important reason for this is the patient preference, the biased presentation of treatment options to patients, the lack of knowledge of physicians about orchiectomy, and the effect of the pharmaceutical industry should also be kept in mind

The effect of low HER2 expression on treatment outcomes in metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer patients treated with a combination of a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy: A multicentric retrospective study

Background: CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy have significantly improved treatment outcomes for metastatic hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer patients. However, the impact of low HER2 expression on treatment response and progression-free survival (PFS) remains unclear. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 204 HR+ breast cancer patients treated with a combination of CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy. HER2-zero disease was detected in 138 (68%) and HER2-low disease in 66 (32%) patients. Treatment-related characteristics and clinical outcomes were analyzed, with a median follow-up of 22 months. Results: The objective response rate (ORR) was 72.7% in the HER2 low group and 66.6% in the HER2 zero group (p = 0.54). Median PFS was not significantly different between the HER2-low and HER2 zero groups (19 months vs.18 months, p = 0.89), although there was a trend toward longer PFS in the HER2-low group for first-line treatment (24 months progression-free survival rate 63% vs 49%). In recurrent disease, the median PFS was 25 months in the HER2-low group and 12 months in the HER2-zero group (p = 0.08), while in de novo metastatic disease, the median PFS was 18 months in the HER2-low group and 27 months in the HER2-zero group (p = 0.16). The order of CDK4/6 inhibitor use and the presence of visceral metastasis were identified as independent variables affecting PFS. Conclusion: Low HER2 expression did not significantly impact treatment response or PFS in HR+ breast cancer patients treated with a CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy. Because of the conflicting results in the literature, further prospective studies are needed to evaluate the clinical significance of HER2 expression in HR+ breast cancer