Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding key metabolising enzymes or involved in pharmacodynamics for possible associations with paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy.
Background
Although endoscopic eradication therapy with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is effective in most Barrett’s Esophagus (BE) patients, some might experience poor healing (PH) and/or poor squamous regeneration (PSR). We aimed to evaluate PH/PSR incidence and treatment outcomes.
Methods
We included all patients treated with RFA for early BE neoplasia, from a nationwide Dutch registry based on a joint treatment protocol. PH was defined as active inflammatory changes or visible ulcerations ≥3 months post-RFA, PSR as <50% squamous regeneration, and treatment success as complete eradication of BE (CE-BE).
<b>Results</b>
1,386 patients (median BE C2M5) underwent RFA with baseline low-grade dysplasia (27%), high-grade dysplasia (30%), or early cancer (43%). In all 134 patients with PH (10%), additional time and acid suppression resulted in complete esophageal healing. 67/134 (50%) had normal regeneration with 97% CE-BE. In total, 74 patients had PSR (5%). As compared to patients with normal squamous regeneration, PSR patients had a higher risk for treatment failure (64% versus 2%, RR 27 [95% CI 18-40]) and progression to advanced disease (15% versus <1%, RR 30 [95% CI 12-81]). Higher BMI, longer BE, reflux esophagitis, and <50% squamous regeneration after baseline endoscopic resection were independently associated with PSR in multivariable logistic regression.
<b>Conclusions</b>
In half of the patients with PH, additional time and acid suppression may lead to normal squamous regeneration and excellent treatment outcomes. However, if patients experience PSR, the risk for treatment failure and progression to advanced disease is significantly increased with a relative risk of 27 and 30, respectively.
Background
Selective lymphadenectomy using sentinel node-navigated surgery (SNNS) might offer a less invasive alternative to esophagectomy in patients with high-risk T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new treatment strategy, consisting of radical endoscopic resection of the tumor followed by SNNS.
Methods
In this multicenter pilot study, ten patients with a radically resected high-risk pT1cN0 EAC underwent SNNS. A hybrid tracer of technetium-99m nanocolloid and indocyanine green was injected endoscopically around the resection scar the day before surgery, followed by preoperative imaging. During surgery, sentinel nodes (SNs) were identified using a thoracolaparoscopic gammaprobe and fluorescence-based detection, and subsequently resected. Endpoints were surgical morbidity and number of detected and resected (tumor-positive) SNs.
Results
Localization and dissection of SNs was feasible in all ten patients (median 3 SNs per patient, range 1–6). The concordance between preoperative imaging and intraoperative detection was high. In one patient (10%), dissection was considered incomplete after two SNs were not identified intraoperatively. Additional peritumoral SNs were resected in four patients (40%) after fluorescence-based detection. In two patients (20%), a (micro)metastasis was found in one of the resected SNs. One patient experienced neuropathic thoracic pain related to surgery, while none of the patients developed functional gastroesophageal disorders.
Conclusions
SNNS appears to be a feasible and safe instrument to tailor lymphadenectomy in patients with high-risk T1 EAC. Future research with long-term follow-up is warranted to determine whether this esophageal preserving strategy is justified for high-risk T1 EAC.
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.