End-of-life discussion with patients with advanced cancer is one of the important factors to determine the patient quality of life and their families' grief. The primary aim of this study is to collect Japanese medical oncologists' views toward end-of-life discussion. A context analysis of free comments of the questionnaire survey was conducted. Questionnaires were mailed to 864 medical oncologists, and 490 responses were obtained. A content analysis identified 420 free comments. As barriers of end-of-life discussion for oncologists, three types of barriers were emerged: 1) issues relating to patient and family (e.g., [individuality of the patient and family], [difficulty of acceptance of illness progression]), 2) issues relating to medical professionals (e.g., [a lack of psychological support], [difference in beliefs about end-of-life discussion among medical professionals]), and 3) health care systems (e.g., [a lack of time and human resources], [a lack of education and research]). The findings of this study may be useful to improve mutual understanding of oncologists and palliative care physicians when performing the end-of-life discussion in collaboration.

Background/Aims: Advanced pancreatic and biliary tract cancers can invade the duodenum and cause duodenal hemorrhagic stenosis. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of covered self-expandable metal stents in the treatment of cancer-related duodenal hemorrhage with stenosis. Methods: Between January 2014 and December 2016, metal stents were placed in 51 patients with duodenal stenosis. Among these patients, a self-expandable covered metal stent was endoscopically placed in 10 patients with hemorrhagic duodenal stenosis caused by pancreatobiliary cancer progression. We retrospectively analyzed the therapeutic efficacy of the stents by evaluating the technical and clinical success rates based on successful stent placement, degree of oral intake, hemostasis, stent patency, and overall survival. Results: The technical and clinical success rates were 100%. All 10 patients achieved a gastric outlet obstruction scoring system score of three within two weeks after the procedure and had no recurrence of melena. The median stent patency duration and overall survival after stent placement were 52 days (range, 20–220 days) and 66.5 days (range, 31–220 days), respectively. Conclusions Endoscopic placement of a covered metal stent for hemorrhagic duodenal stenosis associated with pancreatic or biliary tract cancer resulted in duodenal hemostasis, recanalization, and improved quality of life.

The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery launched the clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer) in 2007, then published the 2nd version in 2014. In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as grade 1 (strong) or grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation system. The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (1) prophylactic treatment, (2) diagnosis, (3) biliary drainage, (4) surgical treatment, (5) chemotherapy, and (6) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded. This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.

Background/Aims: To date, only thinner-diameter metal stents have been evaluated for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (UR-MDBO). This study investigated the outcomes and optimal cohorts for a 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) compared with those for a 10-mm-diameter FCSEMS. Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent initial transpapillary metal stenting for UR-MDBO. Propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed. Results: Of 133/68 patients who underwent 6-mm/10-mm-diameter FCSEMS deployment, 59 in each group were selected. The median time to recurrent biliary obstruction was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.46). In contrast, use of the 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS resulted in a significantly reduced incidence of stent-related adverse events (AEs) (p=0.016), especially cholecystitis (p=0.032), and patients aged <70 years were particularly affected by this significant reduction. Among the patients in the end-stage cohort who were unable to continue chemotherapy after FCSEMS deployment, the free rate of stent-related events, including recurrent biliary obstruction and stent-related AEs, was significantly higher in the 6-mm group (p=0.027). Conclusions For UR-MDBO, a 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS can be an optimal and safe option in the younger cohort with a relatively high risk of AEs and in the end-stage cohort requiring safer drainage without interference from stent-related events during times of poor prognosis.

Background/Aims: To date, only thinner-diameter metal stents have been evaluated for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (UR-MDBO). This study investigated the outcomes and optimal cohorts for a 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) compared with those for a 10-mm-diameter FCSEMS. Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent initial transpapillary metal stenting for UR-MDBO. Propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed. Results: Of 133/68 patients who underwent 6-mm/10-mm-diameter FCSEMS deployment, 59 in each group were selected. The median time to recurrent biliary obstruction was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.46). In contrast, use of the 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS resulted in a significantly reduced incidence of stent-related adverse events (AEs) (p=0.016), especially cholecystitis (p=0.032), and patients aged <70 years were particularly affected by this significant reduction. Among the patients in the end-stage cohort who were unable to continue chemotherapy after FCSEMS deployment, the free rate of stent-related events, including recurrent biliary obstruction and stent-related AEs, was significantly higher in the 6-mm group (p=0.027). Conclusions For UR-MDBO, a 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS can be an optimal and safe option in the younger cohort with a relatively high risk of AEs and in the end-stage cohort requiring safer drainage without interference from stent-related events during times of poor prognosis.

Background/Aims: To date, only thinner-diameter metal stents have been evaluated for unresectable malignant distal biliary obstruction (UR-MDBO). This study investigated the outcomes and optimal cohorts for a 6-mm-diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS) compared with those for a 10-mm-diameter FCSEMS. Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent initial transpapillary metal stenting for UR-MDBO. Propensity score matching (1:1) analysis was performed. Results: Of 133/68 patients who underwent 6-mm/10-mm-diameter FCSEMS deployment, 59 in each group were selected. The median time to recurrent biliary obstruction was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.46). In contrast, use of the 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS resulted in a significantly reduced incidence of stent-related adverse events (AEs) (p=0.016), especially cholecystitis (p=0.032), and patients aged <70 years were particularly affected by this significant reduction. Among the patients in the end-stage cohort who were unable to continue chemotherapy after FCSEMS deployment, the free rate of stent-related events, including recurrent biliary obstruction and stent-related AEs, was significantly higher in the 6-mm group (p=0.027). Conclusions For UR-MDBO, a 6-mm-diameter FCSEMS can be an optimal and safe option in the younger cohort with a relatively high risk of AEs and in the end-stage cohort requiring safer drainage without interference from stent-related events during times of poor prognosis.