Pancreatic cancer is a highly malignant tumor. About 75% of patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent radical surgical resection will still experience postoperative recurrence. Neoadjuvant therapy could improve outcomes in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer,has become a consensus;however it is still controversial in resectable pancreatic cancer. Limited high-quality randomized controlled trial studies support the routine initiation of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer. With the development of new technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, liquid biopsy, imaging omics, and organoids, patients are expected to benefit from the precision screening of potential candidates for neoadjuvant therapy and individualized treatment strategy.
Humans ; Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods* ; Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology*

BACKGROUNDThe effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) treatment for patients with esophageal carcinoma (EC) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of NCRT followed by surgery (NCRTS) with surgery alone (SA) for EC.

METHODSThe PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched up to August 2015 for all the published studies that investigated EC patients receiving either NCRTS or SA, and the reference lists were also manually examined for the eligible studies. The risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI s) as effective size was determined to assess the 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates (SRs), postoperative morbidity, and postoperative mortality. Heterogeneity was determined using the Q-test. The Begg's test and Egger's test were used for assessing any potential publication bias.

RESULTSOf 1120 identified studies, 16 eligible studies were included in this analysis (involving 2549 patients). Overall, the pooled results suggested that NCRTS was associated with significantly improved 1-year (RR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), 3-year (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.14-1.39), and 5-year (RR: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.18-1.56) SRs. However, the results also indicated that NCRTS had no or little effect on postoperative morbidity (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.82-1.05) and postoperative mortality (RR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.56-2.44).

CONCLUSIONSCompared with SA, NCRTS can increase 1-, 3-, and 5-year SRs in patients with EC.

Esophageal cancer is a malignant tumor with a high incidence in China. At pesent, advanced esophageal cancer patients are still frequently encountered. The primary treatment for resectable advanced esophageal cancer is surgery-based multimodality therapy, including preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, such as chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy plus immunotherapy, followed by radical esophagectomy with thoraco-abdominal two-field or cervico-thoraco-abdominal three-field lymphadenectomy via minimally invasive approach or thoracotomy. In addition, adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy, or immunotherapy may also be administered if suggested by postoperative pathological results. Although the treatment outcome of esophageal cancer has improved significantly in China, many clinical issues remain controversial. In this article, we summarize the current hotspots and important issues of esophageal cancer in China, including prevention and early diagnosis, treatment selection for early esophageal cancer, surgical approach selection, lymphadenectomy method, preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, postoperative adjuvant therapy, and nutritional support treatment.
Humans ; Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Combined Modality Therapy ; Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods* ; Chemoradiotherapy ; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant ; Esophagectomy/methods*

The prognosis of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer treated by surgery alone is poor. The neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is considered to improve the long-term survival of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. The combination of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery has been recommended to be the standard treatment for the locally advanced esophageal cancer in China even in Europe and America countries. However, available evidence suggests that only those who had histopathologic response seemed to benefit the most from neoadjuvant chemotherapy while non-responders even had rather worse outcome compared to patients with surgery alone. Therefore, predictive markers of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer are highly significant and needed. These markers would allow a tailored treatment to guide non-responders to alternative preoperative therapies and ultimately avoid ineffective, costly and seriously cytotoxic treatments. Results of most studies on biomarkers for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer are promising. The potential utilization of biomarkers in clinical practice is urgently expected and needed, which plays an important role in guiding and improving the individualization of multimodality therapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer.
Biomarkers, Tumor ; Chemoradiotherapy ; Esophageal Neoplasms ; drug therapy ; radiotherapy ; surgery ; Humans ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; methods ; Treatment Outcome

Esophageal cancer (EC) has a high incidence and poor prognosis. The two major histological types, squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma, differ in their epidemiology and treatment options. Patients with locally advanced EC benefit from multimodal therapy concepts including neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and perioperative chemotherapy. Currently, immunotherapy for the solid tumor is a hot spot. Treatment with adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is the first immunotherapy for resectable EC listed in the latest National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for the Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers. Recent clinical trials have established ICIs for three treatment models of resectable EC. Their short-term results demonstrated ideal efficacy and tolerable toxicity, though some concerns remain. This review summarizes the novel data on the ICIs for resectable EC and lists the registered related clinical trials. Hopefully, this review can provide a reference for ongoing research on the treatment options for resectable EC.
Humans ; Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology* ; Esophagogastric Junction/pathology* ; Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods* ; Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy* ; Immunotherapy

Objective: To compare the effects of three treatment options: emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery, on the pathological characteris- tics of surgically-resected specimens from patients with completely obstructive colorectal cancer. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study analyzing clinicopathological data of patients with complete obstructive colorectal cancer who were admitted to the General Surgery Department of Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, between May 2012 and August 2020. The inclusion criteria were diagnosed with complete colorectal obstruction, pathologically confirmed as adenocarcinoma, resectable on imaging assessment, and without distant metastasis, combined with the patients' clinical manifestations and imaging examination findings. Patients with multiple colorectal cancers, refusal to undergo surgery, and concurrent peritonitis or intestinal perforation before stenting of the intestinal obstruction were excluded. Eighty-nine patients with completely obstructive colorectal cancer were enrolled in the study and were divided into emergency surgery group (n=30), stent-surgery group (n=34), and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy- surgery group (n=25) according to the treatment strategy. Differences in the pathological features (namely perineural infiltration, lymphovascular infiltration, tumor deposits, specimen intravascular necrosis, inflammatory infiltration, abscesses, mucus lake formation, foreign body giant cells, calcification, and tumor cell ratio) and biomolecular markers (namely cluster of differentiation (CD)34, Ki67, Bcl-2, matrix metalloproteinase-9, and hypoxia-inducible factor alpha) were recorded. Pathological evaluation was based on the presence or absence of qualitative evaluation of pathological features, such as peripheral nerve infiltration, vascular infiltration, and cancer nodules within the specimens. The evaluation criteria for the pathological features of the specimens were as follows: Semi-quantitative graded evaluation based on the proportion of tissue necrosis, inflammatory infiltrates, abscesses, mucus lake formation, foreign body giant cells, calcification, and tumor cells in the field of view within the specimen were classified as: grade 0: not seen within the specimen; grade 1: 0-25%; grade 2: 25%-50%; grade 3: 50%-75%; and grade 4: 75%-100%. The intensity of cellular immunity was classified as none (0 points), weak (1 point), moderate (2 points), and strong (3 points). The two evaluation scores were then multiplied to obtain a total score of 0-12. The immunohistochemical results were also evaluated comprehensively, and the results were defined as: negative (grade 0): 0 points; weakly positive (grade 1): 1-3 points; moderately positive (grade 2): 4-6 points; strongly positive (grade 3): 7-9 points; and very strong positive (grade 4): 10-12 points. Normally-distributed values were expressed as mean±standard deviation, and one-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the differences between the groups. Non-normally-distributed values were expressed as median (interquartile range: Q1, Q3). A nonparametric test (Kruskal-Wallis H test) was used for comparisons between groups. Results: The differences were not statistically significant when comparing the baseline data for age, gender, tumor site, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor T-stage, N-stage, and degree of differentiation among the three groups (all P>0.05). The differences were not statistically significant when comparing the pathological characteristics of the resected tumor specimens, such as foreign body giant cells, inflammatory infiltration, and mucus lake formation among the three groups (all P>0.05). The rates of vascular infiltration were 56.6% (17/30), 41.2% (15/34), and 20.0% (5/25) in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent- neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences between the groups (χ²=7.142, P=0.028). Additionally, the rate of vascular infiltration was significantly lower in the stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery group than that in the emergency surgery group (P=0.038). Peripheral nerve infiltration rates were 55.3% (16/30), 41.2% (14/34), and 16.0% (4/25), in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences (χ²=7.735, P=0.021). The infiltration peripheral nerve rates in the stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery group were significantly lower than those in the emergency surgery group (P=0.032). The necrosis grade was 2 (1, 2), 2 (1, 3), and 2 (2, 3) in the emergency surgery, stent- surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences (H=10.090, P=0.006). Post hoc comparison revealed that the necrosis grade was higher in the stent-surgery and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups compared with the emergency surgery group (both P<0.05). The abscess grade was 2 (1, 2), 3 (1, 3), and 2 (2, 3) in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences (H=6.584, P=0.037). Post hoc comparison revealed that the abscess grade in the emergency surgery group was significantly lower than that in the stent-surgery group (P=0.037). The fibrosis grade was 2 (1, 3), 3 (2, 3), and 3 (2, 3), in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences (H=11.078, P=0.004). Post hoc analysis revealed that the fibrosis degree was higher in both the stent-surgery group and the stent- neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery group compared with the emergency surgery group (both, P<0.05). The tumor cell ratio grades were 4 (3, 4), 4 (3, 4), and 3 (2, 4), in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, with statistically significant differences (H=8.594, P=0.014). Post hoc analysis showed that the tumor cell ratio in the stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery group was significantly lower than that in the emergency surgery group (P=0.012). The CD34 grades were 2 (2, 3), 3 (2, 4), and 3 (2, 3) in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (H=9.786, P=0.007). Post hoc analysis showed that the CD34 grades in the emergency surgery, stent-surgery, and stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery groups were 2 (2, 3), 3 (2, 4), and 3 (2,3), respectively. Post hoc analysis revealed that the CD34 concentration was higher in the stent-surgery group than that in the emergency surgery group (P=0.005). Conclusion: Stenting may increase the risk of distant metastases in obstructive colorectal cancer. The stent-neoadjuvant chemotherapy-surgery treatment model promotes tumor cell necrosis and fibrosis and reduces the proportion of tumor cells, vascular infiltration, and peripheral nerve infiltration, which may help decrease local tumor infiltration and distant metastasis in completely obstructive colorectal cancer after stent placement.
Humans ; Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods* ; Abscess ; Retrospective Studies ; Intestinal Obstruction/etiology* ; Stents ; Colorectal Neoplasms/therapy* ; Necrosis

Carcinoma ; Drugs, Chinese Herbal ; therapeutic use ; Humans ; Nasopharyngeal Neoplasms ; radiotherapy ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; methods ; Phytotherapy

In comparison with the radical resection for rectal cancer, the local excision of rectal cancer is associated with advantages of less trauma, lower risks, anal sphincter preservation, and sexual and urinary function preservation. Being one of the local excision techniques for rectal cancers, transanal endoscopic microsurgery(TEM) becomes increasingly prevailing worldwide in recent years. As compared to traditional local excision procedures, TEM has been proven to improve the operative exposure and provide more adequate operating space. In addition, the TEM is equipped with multiple well-crafted surgical instruments that offer superior performances, which allows delicate surgical dissection and precise tumor excision. TEM provides surgeons with perfect technical support to decrease the chance of or to prevent insufficient removal of the lesion, which leaves an unsafe or positive surgical margin. Good therapeutic results are based on the accurate preoperative evaluation and careful selection of the patient, as well as strict adherence to the indications of this procedure. The best indications for TEM procedure include rectal adenomas with high-grade dysplasia (Tis stage), medium- or low-risk T1 rectal cancers, and cancers that only infiltrate into the Sm1 and Sm2 layers of the submucosa. Patients of T2 and T3 rectal cancers acquiring marked tumor downstaging (or tumor size decreases by more than 50%) after the neoadjuvant therapy may also be candidates for TEM local excision in clinical research studies. TEM technique enables a locally radical excision of the lesion, which is the key to prevent the postoperative recurrence.
Adenoma ; Anal Canal ; Colonoscopy ; methods ; Humans ; Microsurgery ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery

Baseline magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become the primary staging modality for surgical plans and stratification of patient populations for more efficient neoadjuvant treatment. Patients who exhibit a complete response to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) may achieve excellent local tumor control and better quality of life with organ-preserving treatments such as local excision or even watch-and-wait management. Therefore, the evaluation of tumor response is a key factor for determining the appropriate treatment following CRT. Although post-CRT MRI is generally accepted as the first-choice method for evaluating treatment response after CRT, its application in the clinical decision process is not fully validated. In this review, we will discuss various oncologic treatment options from radical surgical technique to organ-preservation strategies for achieving better cancer control and improved quality of life following CRT. In addition, the current status of post-CRT MRI in restaging rectal cancer as well as the main imaging features that should be evaluated for treatment planning will also be described for the tailored treatment.
Chemoradiotherapy ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Methods ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; Quality of Life ; Rectal Neoplasms

Immunotherapy has been one of the hot topics in the field of colorectal cancer research in recent years. Patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) or mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) are the main beneficiaries of immunotherapy. The response rate of patients with dMMR/MSI-H colorectal cancer receiving neoadjuvant immunotherapy is nearly 100%, of which the pathological complete response rate approximately accounts for 60%-67%. The prospect of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in dMMR or MSI-H colorectal cancer patients, especially in the rectal cancer patients, lies in achieving sustainable clinical complete response so as to achieve organ preservation and avoid adverse effects on reproductive, sexual, bowel and bladder function after surgery and radiotherapy. Studies have shown that part of the colorectal cancer patients of microsatellite stability (MSS) or mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) can respond to neoadjuvant immunotherapy in combination with other treatment methods such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy. In pMMR or MSS colorectal cancer, optimizing neoadjuvant immunotherapy regimens and finding effective efficacy prediction biomarkers are important research directions. In neoadjuvant immunotherapy, overcoming primary and secondary resistance and identifying the pseudoprogression and hyperprogression of neoadjuvant immunotherapy are clinical challenges that require attention. This paper comprehensively reviews the research progress, controversies,challenges and future research directions of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (mainly immune checkpoint inhibitors) in colorectal cancer.
Humans ; Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods* ; Colorectal Neoplasms/drug therapy* ; Colonic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Immunotherapy/methods* ; DNA Mismatch Repair ; Microsatellite Instability