PD-1 blockade is a cancer immunotherapy effective in various types of cancer. In a fraction of treated patients, however, it causes rapid cancer progression called hyperprogressive disease (HPD). With our observation of HPD in ∼10% of anti–PD-1 monoclonal antibody (mAb)-treated advanced gastric cancer (GC) patients, we explored how anti–PD-1 mAb caused HPD in these patients and how HPD could be treated and prevented. In the majority of GC patients, tumor-infiltrating FoxP3highCD45RA−CD4+ T cells [effector Treg (eTreg) cells], which were abundant and highly suppressive in tumors, expressed PD-1 at equivalent levels as tumor-infiltrating CD4+ or CD8+ effector/memory T cells and at much higher levels than circulating eTreg cells. Comparison of GC tissue samples before and after anti–PD-1 mAb therapy revealed that the treatment markedly increased tumor-infiltrating proliferative (Ki67+) eTreg cells in HPD patients, contrasting with their reduction in non-HPD patients. Functionally, circulating and tumor-infiltrating PD-1+ eTreg cells were highly activated, showing higher expression of CTLA-4 than PD-1− eTreg cells. PD-1 blockade significantly enhanced in vitro Treg cell suppressive activity. Similarly, in mice, genetic ablation or antibody-mediated blockade of PD-1 in Treg cells increased their proliferation and suppression of antitumor immune responses. Taken together, PD-1 blockade may facilitate the proliferation of highly suppressive PD-1+ eTreg cells in HPDs, resulting in inhibition of antitumor immunity. The presence of actively proliferating PD-1+ eTreg cells in tumors is therefore a reliable marker for HPD. Depletion of eTreg cells in tumor tissues would be effective in treating and preventing HPD in PD-1 blockade cancer immunotherapy.

Apparent diffusion coefficient measurement using DW-HASTE imaging is helpful in differentiating invasive ductal carcinoma from fibroadenoma. Nevertheless, DW-HASTE imaging has low detectability at present; therefore, more technologic improvement is desired.

No abstract

This novel trauma workflow, comprising immediate CT diagnosis and rapid bleeding control without patient transfer, as realized in the Hybrid ER, may improve mortality in severe trauma.This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.

No abstract

Background Robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) has been increasingly performed for a decade; however, evidence for its use as a standard treatment has not yet been established. The present study aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness of RG for GC. Methods This multi-institutional, single-arm prospective study, which included 330 patients from 15 institutions, was designed to compare morbidity rate of RG with that of a historical control (conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, LG). This trial was approved for Advanced Medical Technology ("Senshiniryo") B. The included patients were operable patients with cStage I/II GC. The primary endpoint was morbidity (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥ IIIa). The specific hypothesis was that RG could reduce the morbidity rate to less than half of that with LG (6.4%). A sample size of 330 was considered sufficient (one-sided alpha 0.05, power 80%). Results Among the 330 study patients, the protocol treatment was suspended in 4 patients. Thus, 326 patients fully enrolled and completed the study. The median patient age and BMI were 66 years and 22.4 kg/m 2 , respectively. Distal gastrectomy was performed in 253 (77.6%) patients. The median operative time and estimated blood loss were 313 min and 20 mL, respectively. No 30-day mortality was seen, and morbidity showed a significant reduction to 2.45% with RG (p = 0.0018). Conclusions RG for cStage I/II GC is safe and feasible. It may be effective in reducing morbidity with LG.

Mediastinal lymph node metastasis and tumor depth were significant and independent factors for poor prognosis after R0 resection for AEG. Esophageal invasion and histopathological grade were significant and independent factors for mediastinal lymph node metastasis.

Background Gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastasis is commonly considered unresectable, with a poor prognosis. We previously reported the results of the use of cisplatin and S-1 as preoperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastasis; docetaxel, cisplatin, and S-1 (DCS) have now been investigated for the same purpose. Methods Patients received two or three 28-day cycles of DCS therapy (docetaxel at 40 mg/m 2 and cisplatin at 60 mg/m 2 on day 1, S-1 at 40 mg/m 2 twice daily for 2 weeks) followed by gastrectomy with D2 plus para-aortic nodal dissection. After R0 resection, S-1 chemotherapy was given for 1 year. The primary end point was the response rate (RR) to preoperative chemotherapy determined by central peer review according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.0. The planned sample size was 50, with one-sided alpha of 10 %, power of 80 %, expected RR of 80 %, and threshold of 65 %. Results Between July 2011 and May 2013, 53 patients were enrolled, of whom 52 were eligible. The clinical RR was 57.7 % [30/52, 80 % confidence interval 47.9-67.1 %, p = 0.89], and R0 resection was achieved in 84.6 % of patients (44/52). Common grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events during DCS therapy were leukocytopenia (18.9 %), neutropenia (39.6 %), and hyponatremia (15.1 %). The common grade 3 or grade 4 surgical morbidity was abdominal infection (10.2 %). The pathological RR was 50.0 % (26/52). Conclusions Preoperative DCS therapy was feasible but did not show a sufficient RR. Preoperative cisplatin and S-1 therapy is still considered the tentative standard treatment for this population until survival results are known.