Background:Regorafenib is a multi-kinase inhibitor approved for treatment of refractory advanced colorectal cancer. It was found in the clinical trials to have a modest benefit and significant toxicity. Our aim was to assess the outcome in our local clinic practice.Patients and methods:Records of patients with confirmed colorectal cancer treated with regorafenib were reviewed. Clinical, pathological, and molecular data were collected. Efficacy and factors of possible prognostic significance were analyzed.Results:A total of 78 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer were treated with regorafenib from February 2014 to February 2016 in 4 different institutions (median age: 50.5 years; male: 40 [51.3%]; KRAS mutant: 41 [52%]; right colonic primary: 18 [23%]). A total of 52 patients (66.7%) had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status of 0 to 1, whereas in 25 patients (32.1%) it was >1. In total, 58 patients (74%) had dose reduction. No patient achieved objective response, 15 patients (19%) achieved stable disease, and 56 patients (72%) had progressive disease. With a median follow-up of 6.5 months, the median progression-free survival was 2.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.3) and overall survival was 8.0 months (95% CI, 6.2-9.7). Only performance status of ⩽1 had a statistically significant impact on progression-free survival and overall survival in both univariate and multivariate analyses.Conclusions:Regorafenib in our clinical practice has equal efficacy to reported data from pivotal registration trials. Our data suggest that performance status is the most important prognostic factor in patients treated with regorafenib, suggesting a careful selection of patients.
Background: Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scan is useful if clinically indicated. It is not for conventional routine use due to its high cost. Moreover, it can be confusing if ordered in non-indicated conditions. We evaluate if the pattern of PET/CT ordered in gastrointestinal cancers (non-colorectal origin) has followed evidence-based guidelines and whether it helped in the improvement of patient's outcome. This study included non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancer patients from 2007 to 2008 who had one or more PET/CT scans done during their management. In each case, data collected revealed whether PET/CT affected the management or the stage or not. Patients were identified through the hospital tumor registry software CNExT (C/NET Solutions, Berkeley, CA). Tabulation and statistical data analysis were done using JMP-SAS statistical software application (version 9.4: SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). The scan report quality and use indications were outlined. Results: Seventy-seven patients were identified, with 107 PET/CT scans done. Their median age is 59 (21-86) years. Males were 45 (58.5%). Tumor origin was 46.8% esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer, 15.6% gastric cancer, 11.7% pancreatic cancer, 11.7% hepatobiliary tumors, 10.4% neuroendocrine tumors, 2.6 % gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and 1.3% small bowel cancer. Indications of the PET/CT were as follows: staging in 59.8%, follow-up after finishing treatment in 14.9%, restaging at relapse in 8.4%, assessing response after/during treatment in 3.7%, follow-up of previous PET/CT in 12.1%, and others in 0.9%. PET/CT changed the stage in 19.6% and affected the management plan in 11.2% only. Fifty-two scans needed pathological pursuit as decided by investigators; of them, PET/CT for the lesions that could have changed the stage reported indeterminate/equivocal results in 32 (29.9%) of all scans. The pathological pursuit for the equivocal lesions on PET/CT scans was done in only 12 of 52 (23.1%) scans. Conclusions: Local guidelines for ordering PET/CT scan are suggested because overuse was documented, and an evidence-based approach should be respected before its use.
Corona viruses are enveloped, positive-sense, single-stranded large RNA viruses that affect humans and many animals. About 5% of COVID-19 patients need ICU admission due to ARDS, with a case fatality rate varying from 30% to 60%. Some patients need help other than supplementary oxygen, such as non-invasive ventilation or intubation. Before deciding the appropriate respiratory support for acute respiratory failure patients, concerns regarding the dangers of various treatments should be considered. During the treatment of COVID-19 patients, all respiratory therapies face a risk of aerosol-generating procedures. When treating COVID-19 patients, the priority and consideration should be personal safety devices and environmental control/engineering.
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.