Data suggest that specific chromosomal alterations in clear cell renal cell carcinoma can be used to predict metastasis and cancer specific survival in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. It seems possible to design a combined fluorescence in situ hybridization assay based on these genetic targets for outcome prediction, which can be used for routine diagnostics.

An experimental in vitro study involving ten hand-sutured, ten biofragmentable anastomotic ring (BAR) and ten stapled anastomoses was conducted to compare current anastomotic techniques on the basis of early bursting pressure. The 30 fresh human colon segments used in the study were harvested from patients who had undergone elective oncologic resection. Following the construction of in vitro anastomoses, the pressure required to burst these specimens was measured. The results showed no significant differences among the three techniques. Since hand-sutured anastomoses proved to be as effective and reliable as the other methods and can offer the advantage of cost savings, they should remain standard procedure in colorectal surgery.

Purpose In mCRC, disease dynamics may play a critical role in the understanding of long-term outcome. We evaluated depth of response (DpR), time to DpR, and post-DpR survival as relevant endpoints. Methods We analyzed DpR by central review of computer tomography images (change from baseline to smallest tumor diameter), early tumor shrinkage (≥ 20% reduction in tumor diameter at first reassessment), time to DpR (study randomization to DpR-image), post-DpR progression-free survival (pPFS = DpR-image to tumor progression or death), and post-DpR overall survival (pOS = DpR-image to death) with special focus on BRAF status in 66 patients and primary tumor site in 86 patients treated within the VOLFI-trial, respectively. Results BRAF wild-type (BRAF-WT) compared to BRAF mutant (BRAF-MT) patients had greater DpR (− 57.6% vs. − 40.8%, p = 0.013) with a comparable time to DpR [4.0 (95% CI 3.1-4.4) vs. 3.9 (95% CI 2.5-5.5) months; p = 0.8852]. pPFS was 6.5 (95% CI 4.9-8.0) versus 2.6 (95% CI 1.2-4.0) months in favor of BRAF-WT patients (HR 0.24 (95% CI 0.11-0.53); p < 0.001). This transferred into a significant difference in pOS [33.6 (95% CI 26.0-41.3) vs. 5.4 (95% CI 5.0-5.9) months; HR 0.27 (95% CI 0.13-0.55); p < 0.001]. Similar observations were made for patients stratified for primary tumor site. Conclusions BRAF-MT patients derive a less profound treatment response compared to BRAF-WT patients. The difference in outcome according to BRAF status is evident after achievement of DpR with BRAF-MT patients hardly deriving any further disease control beyond DpR. Our observations hint towards an aggressive tumor evolution in BRAF-MT tumors, which may already be molecularly detectable at the time of DpR.