No abstract

No abstract

1 ESGE recommends endoscopic en bloc resection for superficial esophageal squamous cell cancers (SCCs), excluding those with obvious submucosal involvement (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) may be considered in such lesions when they are smaller than 10mm if en bloc resection can be assured. However, ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the first option, mainly to provide an en bloc resection with accurate pathology staging and to avoid missing important histological features (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). \ud \ud 2 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection with a curative intent for visible lesions in Barrett's esophagus (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESD has not been shown to be superior to EMR for excision of mucosal cancer, and for that reason EMR should be preferred. ESD may be considered in selected cases, such as lesions larger than 15mm, poorly lifting tumors, and lesions at risk for submucosal invasion (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). \ud \ud 3 ESGE recommends endoscopic resection for the treatment of gastric superficial neoplastic lesions that possess a very low risk of lymph node metastasis (strong recommendation, high quality evidence). EMR is an acceptable option for lesions smaller than 10-15mmwith a very low probability of advanced histology (Paris 0-IIa). However, ESGE recommends ESD as treatment of choice for most gastric superficial neoplastic lesions (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). \ud \ud 4 ESGE states that the majority of colonic and rectal superficial lesions can be effectively removed in a curative way by standard polypectomy and/or by EMR (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). ESD can be considered for removal of colonic and rectal lesions with high suspicion of limited submucosal invasion that is based on two main criteria of depressed morphology and irregular or nongranular surface pattern, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm; or ESD can be considered for colorectal lesions that otherwise cannot be optimally and radically removed by snare-based techniques (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence)

ECENT RETROSPECTIVE CORrelative analyses of metastatic colorectal cancer trials indicate that patients with KRAS-mutated tumors (NCBI Entrez Gene 3845) do not benefit from the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies cetuximab and panitumumab. 1 These retrospective analyses were performed independently, and for each analysis, KRAS wild-type vs mutant were studied grouping codons 12 and 13 mutations together, without subgroup analysis. Health authorities in the United States and Europe have indicated that patients with KRAS codon 12-or KRAS codon 13-mutated tumors should not receive cetuximab or panitumumab. 2-4 However, indications exist that not all KRAS mutations are equal in their biological characteristics. First, the pattern of KRAS mutations is tumor-type spe-Author Affiliations are listed at the end of this article.

No abstract

Background: KRAS mutation status is a candidate marker for predicting survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with cetuximab (CTX). Patients and methods:We studied the KRAS mutation status of 113 patients with irinotecan refractory mCRC treated with CTX in clinical trials. A predictive model for objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was constructed using logistic and Cox regression.Results: OR was seen in 27 of 66 KRAS wild-type (WT) patients versus 0 of 42 in KRAS mutants. Median OS was significantly better in KRAS WT versus mutants (43.0 versus 27.3 weeks; P = 0.020). Decrease in tumor sizes was significantly larger at all time points in WT patients. KRAS WT patients with an initial relative decrease of tumor size >9.66% at week 6 had a significantly better median OS compared with all other patients (74.9 versus 30.6 weeks; P = 0.0000025). Within KRAS WT patients OS was significantly better in patients with an initial decrease compared with those without [median OS: 74.9 versus 30.6 weeks (P = 0.00000012)].Conclusions: KRAS WT status is associated to survival benefit in CTX treated mCRC. This benefit is even more pronounced in those patients with early radiological response. These characteristics may be exploited for response prediction.Key words: cetuximab, colorectal cancer, EGFR, KRAS, survival introduction A recent advance in oncology is the targeting of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in the treatment of many tumor types. Cetuximab (CTX) (ErbituxÒ, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) is a chimeric immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody which binds the EGFR with high affinity and competitively inhibits ligand binding [1]. This prevents activation of downstream signalling pathways such as the PI3K/ Akt, RAS/Erk and STAT pathways, resulting in the inhibition of cellular proliferation and in the induction of apoptosis. However, for many tumor types including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), it is not clear what proportion of tumors are dependent on EGFR signalling for their survival, nor how additional molecular alterations present in the tumor may influence primary or secondary resistance to EGFR inhibitors. CTX is approved for irinotecan-resistant mCRC expressing EGFR by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Response rates in this group however only amount to 23% in combination with chemotherapy and about 10% in monotherapy [2,3]. Increased response rates in the combination arm did not translate into increased survival. As yet no clinical or molecular markers are available to identify those patients with a longer overall survival (OS). Predictive markers of response and survival benefit after CTX are urgently required to allow the rational and effective use of these drugs.In a small series, Lièvre et al. [4] have shown objective response (OR) to CTX to be excluded in KRAS-mutated CRC and most importantly, showed an increase in OS for the KRAS wild-type (WT) patients. We retrospectively studied the ability of KRAS mutations and tumo...

Aims: Impaired gastric accommodation is a major pathophysiological mechanism in functional dyspepsia. The aim of the present work was to assess a satiety drinking test in the evaluation of accommodation in health and dyspepsia. Methods: Twenty five controls and 37 severely dyspeptic patients seen at a tertiary care centre completed a dyspepsia questionnaire, and gastric emptying and gastric barostat studies. The amount of liquid meal ingested at maximum satiety during a slow satiety drinking test was determined. In controls, we studied the influence of caloric density and of pharmacological agents that influence accommodation. Results: In patients, satiety scores were higher and maximum satiety occurred at lower calories (542 (50) v 1508 (53) kcal; p<0.0001). Six patients had required nutritional support, but excluding these did not alter the correlations. With increasing severity of early satiety, less calories were ingested at maximum satiety. In multivariate analysis, the amount of calories was significantly correlated to accommodation but not to gastric emptying or sensitivity. Sensitivity and specificity of the satiety test in predicting impaired accommodation reached 92% and 86%, respectively. At different caloric densities, ingested volume rather than caloric load determined maximum satiety. Pharmacological agents (sumatriptan, cisapride, erythromycin) affected the satiety test according to their effect on accommodation. Conclusion: A slow caloric drinking test can be used to evaluate accommodation and early satiety. It provides a non-invasive method of predicting impaired accommodation and quantifying pharmacological influences on accommodation.

Expression of EGFR ligands in primary tumors significantly predicts outcome in KRAS WT cmCRC treated with cetuximab and irinotecan.