Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant radiotherapy on anorectal function of patients with mid-low rectal cancer by means of high-resolution anorectal manometry.Methods:A retrospective observational study was conducted. Information on patients with mid-low rectal cancer was collected from the prospective registry database of Rectal Cancer at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) from June 2020 to April 2023. Anorectal functions were detected using three-dimensional high-resolution manometry system. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the changed anorectal manometry.Results:A total of 45 patients with mid-low rectal cancer were included in the study. Thirty-two (71.1%) patients were male, 13 (28.9%) patients were female. The mean age was 60±11 years, and the mean BMI was 23.4±3.7 kg/m 2. The mean distance between the lower edge of the tumor and the anal verge was 5.4±1.5 cm. The median size of the tumor was 3.4 (2.9-4.5) cm, and the median circumferential extent of the tumor was 66.0 (45.5-75.0) %. 41 (81.1%) patients were MRI T3-4 and 40 (88.9%) patients were MRI N positive. The resting pressure has a decreasing trend after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (55.3±32.0 mmHg vs. 48.0±28.5 mmHg, t=1.930, P=0.060). There was no significant change in maximum squeezing and the length of the high-pressure zone after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. All volumes describing rectal sensitivity (first sensation, desire to defecate, and maximum tolerance) were lower after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. And maximum tolerance was significantly lower (66.0 [49.0,88.0] ml vs. 52.0 [39.0,73.5] ml, Z=-2.481, P=0.013). Univariate analysis demonstrated that the downstage of N-stage was associated with the decrease in maximum tolerance (OR=6.533, 95%CI:1.254-34.051, P=0.026). Conclusion:Neoadjuvant radiotherapy damages anorectal function by decreasing the resting pressure and rectal sensory threshold of patients. The N-stage downstaging was associated with a decrease in maximum tolerance.

Objective:To analyze the differences in clinicopathological features of colon cancers and survival between patients with right- versus left-sided colon cancers.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study. Information on patients with colon cancer from January 2016 to August 2020 was collected from the prospective registry database at Peking Union Medical College Hospital . Primary tumors located in the cecum, ascending colon, and proximal two‐thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided colon cancers (RCCs), whereas primary tumors located in the distal third of the transverse colon, descending colon, or sigmoid colon were defined as left‐sided colon cancers (LCCs). Clinicopathological features were compared using the χ 2 test or Mann‐Whitney U test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan‐Meier curves and the log‐rank test. Factors that differed significantly between the two groups were identified by multivariate survival analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards function. One propensity score matching was performed to eliminate the effects of confounding factors. Results:The study cohort comprised 856 patients, with TNM Stage I disease, 391 (45.7%) with Stage II, and 336 (39.3%) with Stage III, including 442 (51.6%) with LCC and 414 (48.4%) with RCC and 129 (15.1%). Defective mismatch repair (dMMR) was identified in 139 patients (16.2%). Compared with RCC, the proportion of men (274/442 [62.0%] vs. 224/414 [54.1%], χ 2=5.462, P=0.019), body mass index (24.2 [21.9, 26.6] kg/m 2 vs. 23.2 [21.3, 25.5] kg/m 2, U=78,789.0, P<0.001), and well/moderately differentiated cancer (412/442 [93.2%] vs. 344/414 [83.1%], χ 2=22.266, P<0.001) were higher in the LCC than the RCC group. In contrast, the proportion of dMMR (40/442 [9.0%] vs. 99/414 [23.9%], χ 2=34.721, P<0.001) and combined vascular invasion (106/442[24.0%] vs. 125/414[30.2%], χ 2=4.186, P=0.041) were lower in the LCC than RCC group. The median follow‐up time for all patients was 48 (range 33, 59) months. The log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) ( P=0.668) or overall survival (OS) ( P=0.828) between patients with LCC versus RCC. Cox proportional hazards model showed that dMMR was significantly associated with a longer DFS (HR=0.419, 95%CI: 0.204?0.862, P=0.018), whereas a higher proportion of T3‐4 (HR=2.178, 95%CI: 1.089?4.359, P=0.028), N+ (HR=2.126, 95%CI: 1.443?3.133, P<0.001), and perineural invasion (HR=1.835, 95%CI: 1.115?3.020, P=0.017) were associated with poor DFS. Tumor location was not associated with DFS or OS (all P>0.05). Subsequent analysis showed that RCC patients with dMMR had longer DFS than did RCC patients with pMMR (HR=0.338, 95%CI: 0.146?0.786, P=0.012). However, the difference in OS between the two groups was not statistically significant (HR=0.340, 95%CI:0.103?1.119, P=0.076). After propensity score matching for independent risk factors for DFS, the log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in DFS ( P=0.343) or OS ( P=0.658) between patients with LCC versus RCC, whereas patient with dMMR had better DFS ( P=0.047) and OS ( P=0.040) than did patients with pMMR. Conclusions:Tumor location is associated with differences in clinicopathological features; however, this has no impact on survival. dMMR status is significantly associated with longer survival: this association may be stronger in RCC patients.

Objective:To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research.Methods:This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2–T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared.Results:The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m 2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ 2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ 2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ 2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group ( Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group ( Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.

Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant radiotherapy on anorectal function of patients with mid-low rectal cancer by means of high-resolution anorectal manometry.Methods:A retrospective observational study was conducted. Information on patients with mid-low rectal cancer was collected from the prospective registry database of Rectal Cancer at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) from June 2020 to April 2023. Anorectal functions were detected using three-dimensional high-resolution manometry system. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the changed anorectal manometry.Results:A total of 45 patients with mid-low rectal cancer were included in the study. Thirty-two (71.1%) patients were male, 13 (28.9%) patients were female. The mean age was 60±11 years, and the mean BMI was 23.4±3.7 kg/m 2. The mean distance between the lower edge of the tumor and the anal verge was 5.4±1.5 cm. The median size of the tumor was 3.4 (2.9-4.5) cm, and the median circumferential extent of the tumor was 66.0 (45.5-75.0) %. 41 (81.1%) patients were MRI T3-4 and 40 (88.9%) patients were MRI N positive. The resting pressure has a decreasing trend after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (55.3±32.0 mmHg vs. 48.0±28.5 mmHg, t=1.930, P=0.060). There was no significant change in maximum squeezing and the length of the high-pressure zone after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. All volumes describing rectal sensitivity (first sensation, desire to defecate, and maximum tolerance) were lower after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. And maximum tolerance was significantly lower (66.0 [49.0,88.0] ml vs. 52.0 [39.0,73.5] ml, Z=-2.481, P=0.013). Univariate analysis demonstrated that the downstage of N-stage was associated with the decrease in maximum tolerance (OR=6.533, 95%CI:1.254-34.051, P=0.026). Conclusion:Neoadjuvant radiotherapy damages anorectal function by decreasing the resting pressure and rectal sensory threshold of patients. The N-stage downstaging was associated with a decrease in maximum tolerance.

Objective:To analyze the differences in clinicopathological features of colon cancers and survival between patients with right- versus left-sided colon cancers.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study. Information on patients with colon cancer from January 2016 to August 2020 was collected from the prospective registry database at Peking Union Medical College Hospital . Primary tumors located in the cecum, ascending colon, and proximal two‐thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided colon cancers (RCCs), whereas primary tumors located in the distal third of the transverse colon, descending colon, or sigmoid colon were defined as left‐sided colon cancers (LCCs). Clinicopathological features were compared using the χ 2 test or Mann‐Whitney U test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan‐Meier curves and the log‐rank test. Factors that differed significantly between the two groups were identified by multivariate survival analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards function. One propensity score matching was performed to eliminate the effects of confounding factors. Results:The study cohort comprised 856 patients, with TNM Stage I disease, 391 (45.7%) with Stage II, and 336 (39.3%) with Stage III, including 442 (51.6%) with LCC and 414 (48.4%) with RCC and 129 (15.1%). Defective mismatch repair (dMMR) was identified in 139 patients (16.2%). Compared with RCC, the proportion of men (274/442 [62.0%] vs. 224/414 [54.1%], χ 2=5.462, P=0.019), body mass index (24.2 [21.9, 26.6] kg/m 2 vs. 23.2 [21.3, 25.5] kg/m 2, U=78,789.0, P<0.001), and well/moderately differentiated cancer (412/442 [93.2%] vs. 344/414 [83.1%], χ 2=22.266, P<0.001) were higher in the LCC than the RCC group. In contrast, the proportion of dMMR (40/442 [9.0%] vs. 99/414 [23.9%], χ 2=34.721, P<0.001) and combined vascular invasion (106/442[24.0%] vs. 125/414[30.2%], χ 2=4.186, P=0.041) were lower in the LCC than RCC group. The median follow‐up time for all patients was 48 (range 33, 59) months. The log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) ( P=0.668) or overall survival (OS) ( P=0.828) between patients with LCC versus RCC. Cox proportional hazards model showed that dMMR was significantly associated with a longer DFS (HR=0.419, 95%CI: 0.204?0.862, P=0.018), whereas a higher proportion of T3‐4 (HR=2.178, 95%CI: 1.089?4.359, P=0.028), N+ (HR=2.126, 95%CI: 1.443?3.133, P<0.001), and perineural invasion (HR=1.835, 95%CI: 1.115?3.020, P=0.017) were associated with poor DFS. Tumor location was not associated with DFS or OS (all P>0.05). Subsequent analysis showed that RCC patients with dMMR had longer DFS than did RCC patients with pMMR (HR=0.338, 95%CI: 0.146?0.786, P=0.012). However, the difference in OS between the two groups was not statistically significant (HR=0.340, 95%CI:0.103?1.119, P=0.076). After propensity score matching for independent risk factors for DFS, the log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in DFS ( P=0.343) or OS ( P=0.658) between patients with LCC versus RCC, whereas patient with dMMR had better DFS ( P=0.047) and OS ( P=0.040) than did patients with pMMR. Conclusions:Tumor location is associated with differences in clinicopathological features; however, this has no impact on survival. dMMR status is significantly associated with longer survival: this association may be stronger in RCC patients.

Objective:To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research.Methods:This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2–T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared.Results:The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m 2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ 2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ 2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ 2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group ( Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group ( Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors(TKIs)have emerged as the first-line small molecule drugs in many cancer therapies,exerting their effects by impeding aberrant cell growth and proliferation through the mod-ulation of tyrosine kinase-mediated signaling pathways.However,there exists a substantial inter-individual variability in the concentrations of certain TKIs and their metabolites,which may render patients with compromised immune function susceptible to diverse infections despite receiving theo-retically efficacious anticancer treatments,alongside other potential side effects or adverse reactions.Therefore,an urgent need exists for an up-to-date review concerning the biological matrices relevant to bioanalysis and the sampling methods,clinical pharmacokinetics,and therapeutic drug monitoring of different TKIs.This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the advancements in pretreatment methods,such as protein precipitation(PPT),liquid-liquid extraction(LLE),solid-phase extraction(SPE),micro-SPE(p-SPE),magnetic SPE(MSPE),and vortex-assisted dispersive SPE(VA-DSPE)achieved since 2017.It also highlights the latest analysis techniques such as newly developed high performance liquid chromatography(HPLC)and high-resolution mass spectrometry(HRMS)methods,capillary electro-phoresis(CE),gas chromatography(GC),supercritical fluid chromatography(SFC)procedures,surface plasmon resonance(SPR)assays as well as novel nanoprobes-based biosensing techniques.In addition,a comparison is made between the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches while pre-senting critical challenges and prospects in pharmacokinetic studies and therapeutic drug monitoring.

Objective To understand the prevalence characteristics of influenza and changes of influenza virus strains,and provide reference for the prevention and control of influenza in the province.Methods Surveillance da-ta about influenza in Hunan Province from 2014 to 2023 were exported from China Influenza Surveillance Informa-tion System.Differences in the percentage of influenza-like illness(ILI)cases(percentage of influenza-like cases[ILI％]in outpatient and emergency department visits)among different years and different populations,as well as the positive rate of influenza virus in ILI specimens were compared.Results From 2014 to 2023,over 2.65 million cases of ILI were reported,with an ILI％of 4.70％.ILI％among different years presented statistically significant differences(P＜0.001).People aged 0-14 years old were the main population with ILI,accounting for 82.90％.The positive rate of influenza virus in ILI specimens was 14.14％,the positive rate of influenza virus among diffe-rent years and age groups were both significantly different(both P＜0.001).The main prevalent influenza strains from 2014 to 2023 included types A(H1N1),A(H3N2),B(Victoria),and B(Yamagata),alternating among di-fferent years.However,type B(Yamagata)strains were not detected from 2020 to 2023.There were basically two influenza prevalence seasons every year,namely winter-spring and summer.Conclusion People＜15 years old are the main population of influenza,and the prevalence peaks are in winter-spring and summer.From 2021 to 2023,the prevalence alternates mainly among 3 types:A(H1N1),A(H3N2),and B(Victoria).

Objective:To explore the influence of social exclusion on the relapse tendency of female drug re-hab patients,and the mediating role of self-esteem and the moderating role of positive psychological capital.Method:A total of 288 female drug rehabilitation patients were selected,and the Social Exclusion Question-naire(SEQ)was used to assess the degree of social exclusion experienced by the patients.The Relapse Tendency Questionnaire(RPQ)was used to evaluate the current tendency of drug relapse.The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale(RSES)was used to evaluate the self-esteem level of the patients,and the Positive Psychological Capital Question-naire(PPCQ)was used to evaluate their level of positive psychological capital.Results:The SEQ scores of female drug rehab patients were positively correlated with the RPQ scores(β=0.41,P＜0.001),The RSES scores had a mediating effect between the scores of SEQ and RPQ,with a mediation effect size of 0.09(95％CI:0.04-0.15,accounting for 20.6％of the total effect).The PPCQ scores had a moderating effect between the scores of RSES and RPQ(β=-0.08,P＜0.05)and between the scores of SEQ and RPQ(β=0.10,P＜0.05).Conclusion:So-cial exclusion could not only directly affect but also indirectly affect the relapse tendency through self-esteem of fe-male drug rehab patients.Positive psychological capital could moderate the relationship between social exclusion,self-esteem,and relapse tendency.

Patients with severe trauma require an extremely timely treatment and transfusion plays an irreplaceable role in the emergency treatment of such patients. An increasing number of evidence-based medicinal evidences and clinical practices suggest that patients with severe traumatic bleeding benefit from early transfusion of low-titer group O whole blood or hemostatic resuscitation with red blood cells, plasma and platelet of a balanced ratio. However, the current domestic mode of blood supply cannot fully meet the requirements of timely and effective blood transfusion for emergency treatment of patients with severe trauma in clinical practice. In order to solve the key problems in blood supply and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma, Branch of Clinical Transfusion Medicine of Chinese Medical Association, Group for Trauma Emergency Care and Multiple Injuries of Trauma Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Young Scholar Group of Disaster Medicine Branch of Chinese Medical Association organized domestic experts of blood transfusion medicine and trauma treatment to jointly formulate Chinese expert consensus on blood support mode and blood transfusion strategies for emergency treatment of severe trauma patients ( version 2024). Based on the evidence-based medical evidence and Delphi method of expert consultation and voting, 10 recommendations were put forward from two aspects of blood support mode and transfusion strategies, aiming to provide a reference for transfusion resuscitation in the emergency treatment of severe trauma and further improve the success rate of treatment of patients with severe trauma.