International Journal of Clinical Oncology

The goal of this systematic review was to identify all of the research within the last 10 years that investigated both the Albumin–Globulin Ratio (AGR) and outcomes of solid tumor cancer patients via quantitative prognostic variables. Multiple scientific databases were researched for journal articles that included keywords relating AGR to prognosis. Once isolated from the databases, the articles were de-duplicated and manually screened based on standardized inclusion/exclusion criteria in a blind format via Rayyan. The collective data were sorted by cancer type, corrected for population size, and used to calculate the average cut-off values for the most popular prognostic variables. In total, 18 independent types of cancer have been evaluated to see if AGR is a prognostic indicator based on multivariate analyses. The average cut-off value for AGR in overall survival was 1.356, while the average cut-off value for AGR in progression free survival was 1.292. AGR was found to be significantly associated with at least one prognostic variable in every type of cancer evaluated based on multivariate analyses. The ease of access and affordability of AGR makes it an invaluable tool applicable to nearly all patients. Overall, AGR is a proven prognostic variable that should always be considered in the evaluation of a solid tumor cancer patient's prognosis. Further research needs to be conducted studying the potential prognostic effect in more types of solid tumors.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is the rate-limiting enzyme in the degradation of pyrimidine bases. DPD is also responsible for the degradation of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), which is the most frequently prescribed anticancer drug for the treatment of malignancies of the gastrointestinal tract. DPD could influence the antitumor effect and the adverse effects of 5-FU. High intratumoral DPD activity markedly decreases the cytotoxic effect of 5-FU. More than 80% of administered 5-FU is detoxified and excreted as F-β-alanine in urine. In 5-FU-based chemotherapy, escape from the degradation catalyzed by DPD is important. Recently, the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) was isolated, and its physical map and exon-intron organization were determined. To date, many DPYD variant alleles associated with a lack of DPD activity have been identified. In 5-FU-based cancer chemotherapy, severe toxicities were observed at higher rates in patients who were heterozygous for a mutant DPYD allele, compared with toxicities in patients who were homozygous for the wild DPYD allele. Furthermore, the adverse effects of 5-FU are often lethal for patients homozygous for the mutant DPYD allele. The apparently high prevalence of the DPYD mutation associated with lack of DPD activity in the normal population warrants genetic screening for the presence of these mutations in cancer patients before the administration of 5-FU. DPD inhibitory fluoropyrimidines (DIFs), including uracil plus tegafur (UFT) and tegafur plus 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine plus potassium oxonate, in a molar ratio of 1 : 0.4 : 1 (TS-1), have recently been used in clinical settings. DIFs should provide chemotherapy that improves both quality of life and duration of survival.

Esophageal stenosis is a serious complication after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for thoracic esophageal cancer (TEC), and steroid has been applied for stenosis prevention. However, the rate of stenosis and effect of steroid for ESD of cervical esophageal cancer (CEC) remain unknown. The aim was to clarify the rate and managements of post-ESD stenosis for CEC. A total of 325 lesions with 272 patients who underwent ESD for esophageal cancers were enrolled and were divided to the CEC group (43 lesions) or the TEC group (282 lesions). Patient characteristics, clinicopathological features, procedure-related outcomes of esophageal ESD, stenosis rate and clinical outcome of steroid use cases were evaluated. More patients in the CEC group received preventive steroid treatment compared to the TEC group (37.2% vs 14.5%, P = 0.001). The rate of post-ESD stenosis tended to be higher in the CEC group (11.6%) than in the TEC group (6.7%). For cases of 3/4 ≤ of circumference, local injection with oral steroid had lower stenosis rate than local injection only in both groups (CEC 40% vs 100%, TEC 30.7% vs 56.3%). More sessions and longer duration of dilation were needed to release the stenosis in the CEC group (20 times vs. 5 times, P = 0.015; 196 days vs. 55 days, P = 0.043). The post-ESD stenosis rate of CEC tended to be higher than that of TEC. More intensive preventive measures for post-ESD stenosis may be needed for CEC than TEC.

Adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection is established as a standard therapy for colon and rectal cancer. Although the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown by pooled analyses from randomized controlled trials, elderly patients still receive adjuvant chemotherapy less frequently than younger patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in elderly patients based on observational studies in which the elderly patients would likely be representative of those encountered in real-world clinical settings. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Observational studies that investigated the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection in elderly patients (age ≥ 70 years) with colon or rectal cancer were included. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate and OS were assessed. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Eleven studies in elderly patients with colon cancer were included. No relevant study was identified for rectal cancer. Elderly patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy had a significantly higher 5-year OS rate than those who did not (risk ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 1.29–1.76, P < 0.001). There was also a significant improvement in OS in elderly patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.53–0.66, P < 0.001). The overall risk of bias was judged to be critical for both outcomes. Adjuvant chemotherapy provides a survival benefit for elderly patients with colon cancer, although the quality of evidence is low.

In the United States, medical oncologists play a central role in the management of systemic therapy for cancer patients. Medical oncology as a specialty is not as established in Japan and several other European nations according to recent surveys, and little is known about this specialty in developing nations. We aimed to identify global differences in the roles of physicians treating cancer; specifically, how the management of advanced disease differs among nations. In March 2016, a self-administered internet survey was conducted with degreed physicians who prescribed systemic agents for adult cancer treatment within the past 5 years. Physicians were identified from the American Society of Clinical Oncology active member online directory. Among 3907 members in 55 nations, 376 (9.6%) responded to the survey. The 310 respondents who provided an answer to the recognition of medical oncology were dominated by male MDs that have practiced for more than 5 years at academic centers, and ~60% were medical oncologists. A majority of the respondents in all four regions reported that medical oncology was established in their corresponding nations. However, there are several outlying nations where oncologic specialties play a minimal role in the management of systemic therapy. Despite general recognition of medical oncology, the role is not globally established as the primary point of care for delivery of systemic therapy. Nations lacking this specialty should be assisted by the international community to develop medical oncology.