Objective:To explore the impact of neoadjuvant immunotherapy on the occurrence of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent restorative anterior resection, and to analyze associated risk factors.Methods:This study was an observational study. Patients with adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, or signet ring cell carcinoma of the rectum located 0-10 cm from the anal verge who received neoadjuvant immunotherapy followed by curative restorative anterior resection at Peking University Cancer Hospital between November 2019 and February 2024 were retrospectively examined. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) metastasis detected preoperatively;(2) follow-up <1 year or stoma closure <6 months; (3) local recurrence or metastasis during follow-up; and (4) stoma without closure or stoma re-creation. The Chinese version of the LARS questionnaire was used to assess bowel function by telephone interview, and patients were classified based on score into no LARS (0-20 points), minor LARS (21-29 points), and major LARS (30–42 points). The incidence of LARS, major LARS, and associated risk factors were analyzed.Results:A total of 52 patients (34 men) were included for analysis. Mean age was 58.0 ± 9.8 years and mean body mass index was 25.1 ± 2.6 kg/m 2. Median follow-up was 27.5 months (range, 12.0-63.7). Median LARS score was 21 (range, 1-41). Twenty-six patients (50.0%) developed LARS after surgery, and half of these (13 cases) were classified as major LARS. Stool clustering (repeated defecation within 1 hour) was observed in 80.8% (42/52) of patients. Distance between the tumor edge and the dentate line [odds ratio (OR), 3.597; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.140-11.360; P=0.026], management of the left colic artery (OR, 0.133; 95% CI, 0.026-0.691; P=0.008), and interval of stoma closure (OR, 5.250; 95%CI, 1.381-19.960; P=0.011) were significantly associated with LARS. Interval of stoma closure was significantly associated with major LARS (OR, 4.200; 95%CI, 1.064–16.584; P=0.040). In multivariate logistic regression, ≤3.5 cm between the tumor edge and the dentate line (OR, 7.407; 95%CI, 1.377-40.000; P=0.020), non-preservation of the left colic artery (OR, 8.403; 95%CI, 1.183-58.823; P=0.033) and interval of stoma closure >6 months (OR, 10.865; 95% CI, 2.039-57.896; P=0.005) were independent risk factors for LARS. Interval of stoma closure >6 months (OR, 4.356; 95% CI, 1.105-17.167; P=0.035) were independent risk factors for major LARS. Conclusion:Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy experienced a high incidence of LARS after curative surgery, with stool clustering as the predominant symptom. Tumor edge–dentate line distance ≤3.5 cm, non-preservation of the left colic artery, and interval of stoma closure >6 months were risk factors for LARS.

Objective:To explore the impact of neoadjuvant immunotherapy on the occurrence of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent restorative anterior resection, and to analyze associated risk factors.Methods:This study was an observational study. Patients with adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, or signet ring cell carcinoma of the rectum located 0-10 cm from the anal verge who received neoadjuvant immunotherapy followed by curative restorative anterior resection at Peking University Cancer Hospital between November 2019 and February 2024 were retrospectively examined. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) metastasis detected preoperatively;(2) follow-up <1 year or stoma closure <6 months; (3) local recurrence or metastasis during follow-up; and (4) stoma without closure or stoma re-creation. The Chinese version of the LARS questionnaire was used to assess bowel function by telephone interview, and patients were classified based on score into no LARS (0-20 points), minor LARS (21-29 points), and major LARS (30–42 points). The incidence of LARS, major LARS, and associated risk factors were analyzed.Results:A total of 52 patients (34 men) were included for analysis. Mean age was 58.0 ± 9.8 years and mean body mass index was 25.1 ± 2.6 kg/m 2. Median follow-up was 27.5 months (range, 12.0-63.7). Median LARS score was 21 (range, 1-41). Twenty-six patients (50.0%) developed LARS after surgery, and half of these (13 cases) were classified as major LARS. Stool clustering (repeated defecation within 1 hour) was observed in 80.8% (42/52) of patients. Distance between the tumor edge and the dentate line [odds ratio (OR), 3.597; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.140-11.360; P=0.026], management of the left colic artery (OR, 0.133; 95% CI, 0.026-0.691; P=0.008), and interval of stoma closure (OR, 5.250; 95%CI, 1.381-19.960; P=0.011) were significantly associated with LARS. Interval of stoma closure was significantly associated with major LARS (OR, 4.200; 95%CI, 1.064–16.584; P=0.040). In multivariate logistic regression, ≤3.5 cm between the tumor edge and the dentate line (OR, 7.407; 95%CI, 1.377-40.000; P=0.020), non-preservation of the left colic artery (OR, 8.403; 95%CI, 1.183-58.823; P=0.033) and interval of stoma closure >6 months (OR, 10.865; 95% CI, 2.039-57.896; P=0.005) were independent risk factors for LARS. Interval of stoma closure >6 months (OR, 4.356; 95% CI, 1.105-17.167; P=0.035) were independent risk factors for major LARS. Conclusion:Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy experienced a high incidence of LARS after curative surgery, with stool clustering as the predominant symptom. Tumor edge–dentate line distance ≤3.5 cm, non-preservation of the left colic artery, and interval of stoma closure >6 months were risk factors for LARS.

Objective:To investigate perspectives and changes in treatment selection by Chinese surgeons since introduction of the watch-and-wait approach after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.Methods:A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a questionnaire distributed through the "Wenjuanxing" online survey platform. The survey focused on the recognition and practices of Chinese surgeons regarding the strategy of watch-and-wait after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer and was disseminated within the China Watch-and-Wait Database (CWWD) WeChat group. This group targets surgeons of deputy chief physician level and above in surgical, radiotherapy, or internal medicine departments of nationally accredited tumor-specialist or comprehensive hospitals (at provincial or municipal levels) who are involved in colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment. From 13 to 16 December 2023, 321 questionnaires were sent with questionnaire links in the CWWD WeChat group. The questionnaires comprised 32 questions encompassing: (1) basic physician characteristics (including surgical volume); (2) assessment methods and criteria for clinical complete response (cCR); (3) patients eligible for watch-and-wait; (4) neoadjuvant therapies and other measures for achieving cCR; (5) willingness to implement watch-and-wait and factors influencing that willingness; (6) risks and monitoring of watch-and-wait; (7) subsequent treatment and follow-up post watch-and-wait; (8) suggestions for development of the CWWD. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis, with intergroup comparisons conducted using the χ 2 or Fisher's exact probability tests. Results:The response rate was 31.5%, comprising 101 responses from the 321 individuals in the WeChat group. Respondents comprised 101 physicians from 70 centers across 23 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions nationwide, 85.1% (86/101) of whom represented provincial tertiary hospitals. Among the respondents, 87.1% (88/101) had implemented the watch-and-wait strategy. The approval rate (65.6%, 21/32) and proportion of patients often informed (68.8%, 22/32) were both significantly higher for doctors in oncology hospitals than for those in general hospitals (27.7%, 18/65; 32.4%, 22/68) (χ 2=12.83, P<0.001; χ 2=11.70, P=0.001, respectively). The most used methods for diagnosing cCR were digital rectal examination (90.1%, 91/101), colonoscopy (91.1%, 92/101), and rectal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (86.1%, 87/101). Criteria used to identify cCR comprised absence of a palpable mass on digital rectal examination (87.1%, 88/101), flat white scars or new capillaries on colonoscopy (77.2%, 78/101), absence of evident tumor signals on rectal T2-weighted sequences or T2WI low signals or signals equivalent to the intestinal wall (83.2%, 84/101), and absence of tumor hyperintensity on diffusion-weighted imaging with no corresponding hypointensity on apparent diffusion coefficient maps (66.3%, 67/101). As for selection of neoadjuvant regimen and assessment of cCR, 57.4% (58/101) of physicians preferred a long course of radiotherapy with or without induction and/or consolidation capecitabine + oxaliplatin, whereas 25.7% (26/101) preferred immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy and concurrent radiotherapy. Most (96.0%, 97/101) physicians believed that the primary lesion should be assessed ≤12 weeks after completion of radiotherapy. Patients were frequently informed about the possibility of achieving cCR after neoadjuvant therapy and the strategy of watch-and-wait by 43.6% (44/101) of the responding physicians and 38.6% (39/101) preferred watch-and-wait for patients who achieved cCR or near cCR after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. Capability for multiple follow-up evaluations (70.3%, 71/101) was a crucial factor influencing physicians' choice of watch-and-wait after cCR. The proportion who patients who did not achieve cCR and underwent surgical treatment was lower in provincial tertiary hospitals (74.2%, 23/31) than in provincial general hospitals (94.5%, 52/55) and municipal hospitals (12/15); these differences are statistically significant (χ 2=7.43, P=0.020). The difference between local recurrence and local regrowth was understood by 88.1% (89/101) of respondents and 87.2% (88/101) agreed with monitoring every 3 months for 5 years. An increase in local excision or puncture rates to reduce organ resections in patients with pCR was proposed by 64.4% (65/101) of respondents. Conclusion:Compared with the results of a previous survey, Chinese surgeons' awareness of the watch-and-wait concept has improved significantly. Oncologists in oncology hospitals are more aware of the concept of watch-and-wait.

Objective:To investigate perspectives and changes in treatment selection by Chinese surgeons since introduction of the watch-and-wait approach after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.Methods:A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a questionnaire distributed through the "Wenjuanxing" online survey platform. The survey focused on the recognition and practices of Chinese surgeons regarding the strategy of watch-and-wait after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer and was disseminated within the China Watch-and-Wait Database (CWWD) WeChat group. This group targets surgeons of deputy chief physician level and above in surgical, radiotherapy, or internal medicine departments of nationally accredited tumor-specialist or comprehensive hospitals (at provincial or municipal levels) who are involved in colorectal cancer diagnosis and treatment. From 13 to 16 December 2023, 321 questionnaires were sent with questionnaire links in the CWWD WeChat group. The questionnaires comprised 32 questions encompassing: (1) basic physician characteristics (including surgical volume); (2) assessment methods and criteria for clinical complete response (cCR); (3) patients eligible for watch-and-wait; (4) neoadjuvant therapies and other measures for achieving cCR; (5) willingness to implement watch-and-wait and factors influencing that willingness; (6) risks and monitoring of watch-and-wait; (7) subsequent treatment and follow-up post watch-and-wait; (8) suggestions for development of the CWWD. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis, with intergroup comparisons conducted using the χ 2 or Fisher's exact probability tests. Results:The response rate was 31.5%, comprising 101 responses from the 321 individuals in the WeChat group. Respondents comprised 101 physicians from 70 centers across 23 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions nationwide, 85.1% (86/101) of whom represented provincial tertiary hospitals. Among the respondents, 87.1% (88/101) had implemented the watch-and-wait strategy. The approval rate (65.6%, 21/32) and proportion of patients often informed (68.8%, 22/32) were both significantly higher for doctors in oncology hospitals than for those in general hospitals (27.7%, 18/65; 32.4%, 22/68) (χ 2=12.83, P<0.001; χ 2=11.70, P=0.001, respectively). The most used methods for diagnosing cCR were digital rectal examination (90.1%, 91/101), colonoscopy (91.1%, 92/101), and rectal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (86.1%, 87/101). Criteria used to identify cCR comprised absence of a palpable mass on digital rectal examination (87.1%, 88/101), flat white scars or new capillaries on colonoscopy (77.2%, 78/101), absence of evident tumor signals on rectal T2-weighted sequences or T2WI low signals or signals equivalent to the intestinal wall (83.2%, 84/101), and absence of tumor hyperintensity on diffusion-weighted imaging with no corresponding hypointensity on apparent diffusion coefficient maps (66.3%, 67/101). As for selection of neoadjuvant regimen and assessment of cCR, 57.4% (58/101) of physicians preferred a long course of radiotherapy with or without induction and/or consolidation capecitabine + oxaliplatin, whereas 25.7% (26/101) preferred immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy and concurrent radiotherapy. Most (96.0%, 97/101) physicians believed that the primary lesion should be assessed ≤12 weeks after completion of radiotherapy. Patients were frequently informed about the possibility of achieving cCR after neoadjuvant therapy and the strategy of watch-and-wait by 43.6% (44/101) of the responding physicians and 38.6% (39/101) preferred watch-and-wait for patients who achieved cCR or near cCR after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. Capability for multiple follow-up evaluations (70.3%, 71/101) was a crucial factor influencing physicians' choice of watch-and-wait after cCR. The proportion who patients who did not achieve cCR and underwent surgical treatment was lower in provincial tertiary hospitals (74.2%, 23/31) than in provincial general hospitals (94.5%, 52/55) and municipal hospitals (12/15); these differences are statistically significant (χ 2=7.43, P=0.020). The difference between local recurrence and local regrowth was understood by 88.1% (89/101) of respondents and 87.2% (88/101) agreed with monitoring every 3 months for 5 years. An increase in local excision or puncture rates to reduce organ resections in patients with pCR was proposed by 64.4% (65/101) of respondents. Conclusion:Compared with the results of a previous survey, Chinese surgeons' awareness of the watch-and-wait concept has improved significantly. Oncologists in oncology hospitals are more aware of the concept of watch-and-wait.

Objective:To investigate the application of virtual simulation-based teaching-examination linkage mode based on aneSIM anesthesia simulation system and NW13 difficult airway management model in improving the ability of anesthesia crisis resource management among trainees receiving standardized residency training.Methods:A total of 236 trainees (189 trainees with non-anesthesia majors and 47 with anesthesia majors) who received standardized residency training in Department of Anesthesiology in 2021 were selected as control group, and 234 resident trainees (184 trainees with non-anesthesia majors and 50 with anesthesia majors) in 2022 were selected as observation group. The trainees in the control group received traditional theoretical teaching, and those in the observation group received teaching with the aneSIM system. The trainees in both groups received two sessions of online theoretical assessment through the QR code in Bangboss Application, as well as situational simulation training and assessment using the NW13 difficult airway management model. SPSS 26.0 was used to perform the t-test and the chi-square test. Results:Compared with the control group, the observation group had a significantly higher score of the second theoretical assessment, significantly better degree of anxiety and score of simulation assessment, and significantly better knowledge mastery and ability improvement ( t=7.15, 14.31, 3.90, 6.22, 4.23, 3.04, all P<0.05). Compared with the control group in terms of the resident trainees with non-anesthesia majors, the observation group had a significantly higher score of the second theoretical assessment, significantly better degree of anxiety and score of simulation assessment, a significantly higher degree of satisfaction with teaching, and significantly better knowledge mastery and ability improvement ( t=7.77, 5.43, 3.09, 5.26, 3.82, 2.19, all P<0.05). Compared with the control group in terms of the resident trainees with anesthesia majors, the observation group had a significantly higher score of simulation assessment, a significantly higher degree of satisfaction with teaching, and significantly better knowledge mastery and ability improvement ( t=2.60, 3.56, 2.01, 2.48, P=0.011, 0.001, 0.047, 0.015). Conclusions:The mode of virtual simulation-based teaching-examination linkage based on the aneSIM anesthesia simulation system and NW13 difficult airway management model can examine and improve the abilities for difficult airway management and operation among resident trainees, especially those with non-anesthesia majors, thereby showing its application value in the teaching of anesthesia crisis resource management.

Objective:To investigate the application of virtual simulation-based teaching-examination linkage mode based on aneSIM anesthesia simulation system and NW13 difficult airway management model in improving the ability of anesthesia crisis resource management among trainees receiving standardized residency training.Methods:A total of 236 trainees (189 trainees with non-anesthesia majors and 47 with anesthesia majors) who received standardized residency training in Department of Anesthesiology in 2021 were selected as control group, and 234 resident trainees (184 trainees with non-anesthesia majors and 50 with anesthesia majors) in 2022 were selected as observation group. The trainees in the control group received traditional theoretical teaching, and those in the observation group received teaching with the aneSIM system. The trainees in both groups received two sessions of online theoretical assessment through the QR code in Bangboss Application, as well as situational simulation training and assessment using the NW13 difficult airway management model. SPSS 26.0 was used to perform the t-test and the chi-square test. Results:Compared with the control group, the observation group had a significantly higher score of the second theoretical assessment, significantly better degree of anxiety and score of simulation assessment, and significantly better knowledge mastery and ability improvement ( t=7.15, 14.31, 3.90, 6.22, 4.23, 3.04, all P<0.05). Compared with the control group in terms of the resident trainees with non-anesthesia majors, the observation group had a significantly higher score of the second theoretical assessment, significantly better degree of anxiety and score of simulation assessment, a significantly higher degree of satisfaction with teaching, and significantly better knowledge mastery and ability improvement ( t=7.77, 5.43, 3.09, 5.26, 3.82, 2.19, all P<0.05). Compared with the control group in terms of the resident trainees with anesthesia majors, the observation group had a significantly higher score of simulation assessment, a significantly higher degree of satisfaction with teaching, and significantly better knowledge mastery and ability improvement ( t=2.60, 3.56, 2.01, 2.48, P=0.011, 0.001, 0.047, 0.015). Conclusions:The mode of virtual simulation-based teaching-examination linkage based on the aneSIM anesthesia simulation system and NW13 difficult airway management model can examine and improve the abilities for difficult airway management and operation among resident trainees, especially those with non-anesthesia majors, thereby showing its application value in the teaching of anesthesia crisis resource management.

Adopting the cell model of multilayer spherical symmetry and the circuit analysis, the present paper gives the calculated results of the voltages on each of several parts of malignant Tonsillar B-cells and Jurkat T lymphocytes when the first-order Gaussian pulses at different central frequency apposed on them. The relationship between the central frequency and the transmembrane voltages of plasma membrane is also given. The optimum frequency causing electroporation in nuclear envelope is given as well. The paper discusses the reasons of electroporation in membrane and DNA degradation in nuclear. The work provides a reference for usage of transient bipolar electric pulses in cancer treatment.
Apoptosis ; radiation effects ; B-Lymphocytes ; cytology ; radiation effects ; Cell Line, Tumor ; Cell Membrane ; physiology ; Electromagnetic Fields ; Electroporation ; methods ; Humans ; Jurkat Cells ; Nuclear Envelope ; pathology ; radiation effects

Nuclear envelope voltages of T cells were analyzed with a lumped circuitry for cells in combination with frequency domain power density of Gaussian pulses and monocycle pulses. According to the differences in geometric and electric parameters between normal and malignant T cells, circuitry analysis was performed. Theoretical evaluations indicated that apoptosis of malignant T cells was of feasibility, which could be applied in cancer therapy. The evaluations were in accord with the published experimental findings.
Animals ; Apoptosis ; radiation effects ; Electric Stimulation ; Electromagnetic Fields ; Electrophysiology ; Fourier Analysis ; Humans ; Jurkat Cells ; Nuclear Envelope ; pathology ; radiation effects ; T-Lymphocytes ; cytology ; radiation effects

The clinical evidences of the guideline came from clinical trials based evidence-based medicine. Applied principle of the evidence was: systematic reviews, RCTs, the results from multiple factors ana-lysis, consensus, especially combined with Chinese experience and some lung cancer guidelines used in USA or Europe. All doctors who use the guideline in making therapeutic strategy must combine patients' conditions with the knowledge of biological behavior, dynamic change and response to treatment of lung cancer.