Actinomycosis is a rare disorder caused by an anaerobic gram-positive bacillus (Actinomyces), predominantly by the Actinomyces israelii species. Only 20% of cases show an abdominal manifestation, the appendix and ileocecal valve being the most frequent locations. Definitive diagnosis is based on microbiological cultures, microscopy or macroscopy examination. Nevertheless, histological examination of the percutaneous biopsy and blood microbiological cultures are rarely positives. Preoperative diagnosis is hampered by the lack of specific clinical and imaging manifestations, which often mimic malignancy. The rate of preoperative diagnosis is less than 10%, however, the outcome is excellent, with a low mortality rate. The authors describe the case of a patient who was diagnosed with primary hepatic actinomycosis only by a histological examination of the surgical specimen of left hepatectomy extended to segments V and VIII, for suspected malignant lesion. This case demonstrates the difficulties in diagnosing hepatic actinomycosis.
e235 otics, Piperacillin/Tazobactam was most commonly used (23 cases, 33.8%) and Cefepime was next. (20 cases, 29.4%). Successful response to initial antibiotics was 5 cases (72.4%) in MDI, 30 cases (85.7%) in CDI, and 24 cases (92.3%) in UF. Mortality rate was 4.4% and all death was related to infection. Conclusion: There were no evident differences of clinical features between the 1st period and the 2nd period. But we found two specific clinical features. The rate of successful response to initial antibiotics was the highest in UF (92.3%). It means that we need to change or add the empirical antibiotics if we could guess the site of infection rather than use the recommended antibiotics in 2002 IDSA guidelines. And extremely high portion of gram-positive bacteria (85.7%) were isolated compared with other clinics in Korea. We think it might be an unique clinical feature in Jeju island. In the future, empirical antibiotics that cover the grampositive bacteria for NF may need to be routinely used in Jeju island.
BackgroundRegorafenib and trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) are indicated in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractary to standard therapies. Both have been approved after being compared to placebo, so comparative studies with other therapies are needed.PurposeTo compare effectiveness and safety of regorafenib and TAS-102 in patients with advanced mCRC in real clinical practice.Material and methodsA retrospective observational study including all patients with mCRC who started treatment with regorafenib or TAS-102 between February 2013 and May 2017 was carried out.The following variables were collected: sex, KRAS-mutation, age and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale (ECOG) at the beginning of treatment and previous lines. Qualitative and quantitative variables between groups were compared using chi2 and t-student tests, respectively.Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were recorded to evaluate effectiveness. Differences in survival were evaluated with the logrank test.Adverse effects (AEs) classified according to the Common Toxicity Criteria v4.0 and dose reductions were recorded to measure safety.Statistical analysis was carried out using Stata® 14.ResultsThroughout the period of the study 31 patients (41% males, median age 60.7 years, 77% ECOG 1, median previous lines 3.3) started treatment with regorafenib or TAS-102 (10 and 21, respectively). Both groups were comparable in the variables above described.The median PFS and OS in the regorafenib group were 1.77 (0.13–4.36) and 7 (0.03–13.97) months, while in the TAS-102 group these were 2.07 (1.38–3.15) and 7 (5.09–8.91) months. Differences in PFS (p=0.483) and OS (p=0.850) were not statistically significant.The median number of AEs per patient was 4.70 and 2.71 with regorafenib and TAS-102, respectively. Most of them were grade (G) 1–2. The most frequent AEs related to regorafenib were asthaenia (70%, n=7), diarrhoea, hand-foot syndrome, mucositis and hyporexia (30%, n=3), whereas the most common AEs with TAS-102 were asthaenia (42%, n=9), neutropaenia (38%, n=8) and nausea (33%, n=7). Dose reductions were necessary in three patients treated with regorafenib due to infections and asthaenia G3 and in four patients with TAS-102 due to neutropenia G2 (n=2), G3 (n=1) and G4 (n=1).ConclusionIn our study, regorafenib and TAS-102 have similar, modest effectiveness. Differences in toxicity may be decisive in the choice of either treatment.No conflict of interest
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.