No abstract available.
Lymphoma* ; Pseudolymphoma*

Although the incidence and mortality for most cancers such as lung and colon are decreasing in several countries, they are increasing in several developed countries because of an unhealthy western lifestyles including smoking, physical inactivity and consumption of calorie-dense food. The incidences for lung and colon cancers in a few of these countries have already exceeded those in the United States and other western countries. Among them, lung cancer is the main cause of cancer death in worldwide. The cumulative survival rate at five years differs between 13 and 21 % in several countries. Although the most important risk factors are smoking for lung cancer, however, the increased incidence of lung cancer in never smokers(LCINS) is necessary to improve knowledge concerning other risk factors. Environmental factors and genetic susceptibility are also thought to contribute to lung cancer risk. Patients with lung adenocarcinoma who have never smoking frequently contain mutation within tyrosine kinase domain of the epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR) gene. Also, K-ras mutations are more common in individuals with a history of smoking use and are related with resistance to EFGR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Recently, radon(Rn), natural and noble gas, has been recognized as second common reason of lung cancer. In this review, we aim to know whether residential radon is associated with an increased risk for developing lung cancer and regulated by several genetic polymorphisms.
Adenocarcinoma ; Colon ; Colonic Neoplasms ; Developed Countries ; Epidermal Growth Factor ; Genetic Predisposition to Disease ; Humans ; Incidence ; Life Style ; Lung Neoplasms* ; Lung* ; Mortality ; Phosphotransferases ; Polymorphism, Genetic ; Protein-Tyrosine Kinases ; Radon* ; Risk Factors ; Smoke ; Smoking ; Survival Rate ; United States

BACKGROUND: Although a laparoscopic cholecystectomy results in less pain than an open cholecystectomy, it is not a pain-free procedure. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine whether perioperative intravenous lidocaine would reduce postoperative pain after a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were divided into two groups; a lidocaine group, in which patients were injected with a lidocaine bolus (1.5 mg/kg) and infusion (1.5 mg/kg/h); and a control group, in which patients were injected with the same volume of saline bolus and infusion. Intravenous lidocaine was initiated before anesthesia was administered and continued for 1 hour postoperatively. The intensity of abdominal and shoulder pain was then assessed 1, 6, 12 and 24 hours after surgery and recorded using a visual analog pain score (VAS) and verbal rating score (VRS). RESULTS: The abdominal pain score (VAS and VRS) was significantly lower in the lidocaine group than in the control group at all times evaluated during the first 24 hours after surgery (P < 0.05). In addition, the shoulder pain score and incidence were significantly lower in the lidocaine group than the control group at 12 hours and 24 hours after surgery (P < 0.05). In the lidocaine group, the incidences of epigastric, right flank, and back pain were lower than that of the control group, but these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative intravenous lidocaine reduces shoulder and abdominal pain for 24 hours after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Abdominal Pain ; Anesthesia ; Back Pain ; Cholecystectomy ; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic ; Humans ; Incidence ; Lidocaine ; Oxalates ; Pain, Postoperative ; Shoulder ; Shoulder Pain

The Editorial Office of Obstet Gynecol Sci would like to correct the author list.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous injection of mesenchymal and hematopoietic stem cells (MSCs, HSCs) has the disadvantages of low delivery rate to bone marrow and sequestration of cells in the lung and liver. This study was designed to determine whether there is a relationship between the administration route and dosage of stem cells and GVHD and survival. METHODS: MSCs were retrieved from five subcultured C3H/10T1/2, cell lines from C3H/He mice. HSCs were transplanted by injecting 1 x 10(7) of bone marrow mononuclear cells and 5 x 10(6) of spleen cells from six to eight week old female C3H/He mice into six week old irradiated female BALB/c mice. The groups were divided into intravenous injection (IV) and intra-marrow (IM) injection groups. IV and IM+MSC groups consisted of mice transplanted with the same bone marrow mononuclear cells and SP, IV and IM groups, with the additional co-injection of 1 x 10(6) MSCs. RESULTS: Evaluation of all mice, in both groups, showed no difference in GVHD and survival. However, high dose injection with 1 x 10(6) MSCs led to a decreased incidence of GVHD (P<0.05) and improved survival (P<0.01) in both groups. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed that the positive effects of MSC on GVHD and survival were primarily dependent on the number of injected cells.
Animals ; Bone Marrow ; Cell Line ; Female ; Graft vs Host Disease* ; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation* ; Hematopoietic Stem Cells* ; Humans ; Incidence ; Injections, Intravenous ; Liver ; Lung ; Mesenchymal Stromal Cells* ; Mice ; Spleen ; Stem Cells ; Transplants*

PURPOSE: Surgical resection is still considered as the gold standard in patients with hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. The impact of the number of hepatic metastases is a controversial issue. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes and the prognostic factors after hepatic resection in multiple hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. METHODS: Between June 1989 and October 2005, 42 patients underwent hepatic resections for three or more hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Disease-free survival analyses were performed on patients grouped as a function of the following factors: age, sex, preoperative serum CEA level, primary tumor site, nodal status, intrahepatic distribution, diameter of the liver lesion, their number, and the resection margin. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, 29 (69.0%) developed recurrence (16 in the liver alone, 5 in the liver and another distant site, 8 in a distant site alone) during a median follow-up of 24 months. The overall 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates were 89.1%, 58.6%, and 31.8%, respectively. The 1-year and 2-year disease-free survival rates were 38.1 and 29.4%, respectively. There was no postoperative mortality and the morbidity rate was 11.9%. The disease-free survival rate was independently associated with the resection margin of the metastatic tumor (P=0.017). The 1-year disease- free survival rates in patients with more than a 5-mm resection margin and with less than a 5-mm resection margin were 72.7%, and 25.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: If technically feasible, an aggressive hepatic resection should be performed for the treatment of multiple hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. The surgical resection margin may govern the outcomes in patients with surgically curable hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer.
Colorectal Neoplasms ; Disease-Free Survival ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Liver ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Prognosis ; Recurrence ; Survival Rate

PURPOSE: Recent studies have showed a 7~15% lymph node metastasis rate in T1 rectal cancer. Surgical options for T1 rectal cancer are radical resections, local excisions, and local excisions with adjuvant radiotherapy. Outcomes according to the type of surgery are variable. The present study was performed to assess outcomes of T1 rectal cancer according to therapeutic modalities and to provide guidelines for appropriate treatment of T1 rectal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study of 117 patients with T1 rectal cancer who underwent surgery between June 1989 and December 2002 at Asan Medical Center was conducted. Radical resections, local excisions, and local excisions with adjuvant radiotherapy were performed as therapeutic modalities. Adjuvant radiotherapy after local excision was performed in patients with sm2 or sm3 cancers, lympho-vascular invasion (+), poorly differentiated cancer, and resection margin (+) or because of a patient's refusal to undergo a radical resection. RESULTS: Twenty-five (21.3%) patients were treated by local excision, 14 (12.0%) by adjuvant radiotherapy after local excision, and 78 (66.7%) by radical resection. The distance from the anal verge was significantly longer in the radical resection group than in the local excision group (7.8+/-3.4 vs. 4.9+/-2.1 cm; P<0.001). There was no significant difference by age, sex, or pathologic findings between the three groups. There was one local recurrence in the local excision group, one distant metastasis in the local excision with adjuvant radiotherapy group, and two distant metastases in the radical resection group. The 5-year cancer-specific survival and disease-free survival rates were as follows; local excision group, 94.1 and 95.8%, respectively; local excision with adjuvant radiotherapy group, 100 and 92.8%, respectively; radical resection group, 98.3 and 98.6%, respectively. There were no significant differences in survival between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oncological outcomes of T1 rectal cancer patients were comparable among the surgical options. Adjuvant radiotherapy is recommended after local excision in patients with risk factors, such as sm2 or sm3 cancer, poorly differentiated cancer, and positive lympho-vascular invasion.
Chungcheongnam-do ; Disease-Free Survival ; Disulfiram ; Humans ; Lymph Nodes ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant ; Rectal Neoplasms* ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors

Purpose: The oncological safety of a sphincter-saving resection (SSR) in lower rectal cancer is widely accepted, and both an abdominoperineal resection (APR) and a SSR are used in potentially curative surgery. This retrospective study was performed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes after an APR and a SSR in patients with lower rectal cancer (within 5 cm from the anal verge). Methods: We recruited 441 lower rectal cancer patients who underwent curative resections (APR: 305, SSR: 136) between 1995 and 2000. A total mesorectal excision and autonomic nerve preservation were routinely performed. The median follow- up period was 65 months. Results: Most demographic findings were comparable between the groups; however, the APR groups revealed more advanced pathological characteristics (tumor depth, size, cell differentiation, and metastatic LN number). The local recurrence rates after an APR and a SSR were 12.8% and 7.4%, respectively (P= 0.09). An independent risk factor of local recurrence was LN metastasis only. Distant recurrence was higher in the APR group (26.4%) than in the SSR group (13.2%), but on multivariate analysis the difference was not significant (P=0.17). The 5-year cancer-specific survival rates after an APR and a SSR were 73.2% and 87.6%, respectively (P<0.05). Particularly, there was a significant survival difference for stage III patients (APR: 59.0% vs. SSR: 83.0%, P<0.05). However, an APR was not an independent prognostic factor for cancer-specific survival in the multivariate analysis (P=0.07). Conclusions: An APR per se did not influence local recurrence after a curative resection for lower rectal cancer. The poor cancer-specific survival in the stage III APR group might be attributed to increased distant metastasis due to its more distal location.
Risk Factors ; Neoplasm Metastasis ; Rectal Neoplasms

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a serious and life-threatening complication following rectal cancer surgery. The impact on long-term oncologic outcome in patients with AL is not clear. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the risk factors of AL and its impact on long-term prognosis after rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: We investigated 1,391 patients who underwent primary resection and anastomosis for rectal cancer between January 1997 and August 2003. Operations were performed as follows: AR (n=164), LAR (n=898), uLAR (n=329). Standard procedures in our clinic were mesorectal excision according to tumor location and autonomic nerve preservation. Median follow-up period was 40.1 months (2~96 months). RESULTS: AL rate was 2.5% (n=35). Gender (male), age (>60 years) and uLAR were independent risk factors in multivariate analysis (HR: 3.03, 95% CI: 1.18~7.22; HR: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.12~7.83; HR: 2.68, 95% CI: 1.08~7.09, respectively). Local recurrence in the AL group was significantly higher than that in the non-AL group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in multivariate analysis (P=0.14). Systemic recurrence between both groups was not statistically different. The 5-year overall survival rate was significantly lower in the AL group than in the non-AL group (55.1% vs 74.1%, P<0.05) and the cancer- specific survival rate was lower in the AL group than in the non-AL group (63.0% vs 78.3%, P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Age, gender, and anastomotic level were risk factors for AL after rectal cancer surgery and anastomotic leakage was associated with a poor survival.
Anastomotic Leak* ; Autonomic Pathways ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Multivariate Analysis ; Prognosis ; Rectal Neoplasms* ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors* ; Survival Rate

No abstract available.
Bone Marrow/pathology ; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 12 ; Chromosomes, Human, Pair 9 ; Core Binding Factor Alpha 2 Subunit/*genetics ; DNA/metabolism ; Gene Rearrangement ; Humans ; In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence ; Karyotyping ; Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive/diagnosis/*genetics ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Oncogene Proteins, Fusion/*genetics ; Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction ; Translocation, Genetic