Comparison of long-term quality of life between Billroth-I and Roux-en-Y anastomosis after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial

Background:The results of studies comparing Billroth-I(B-I)with Roux-en-Y(R-Y)reconstruction on the quality of life(QoL)are still inconsistent.The aim of this trial was to compare the long-term QoL of B-I with R-Y anastomosis after curative distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Methods:A total of 140 patients undergoing curative distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in West China Hospital,Sichuan University from May 2011 to May 2014 were randomly assigned to the B-I group(N=70)and R-Y group(N=70).The follow-up time points were 1,3,6,9,12,24,36,48,and 60 months after the operation.The final follow-up time was May 2019.The clinicopathological features,operative safety,postoperative recovery,long-term survival as well as QoL were compared,among which QoL score was the primary outcome.An intention-to-treat analysis was applied.Results:The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups.There were no statistically significant differences in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality rates,and postoperative recovery between the two groups.Less estimated blood loss and shorter surgical duration were found in the B-I group.There were no statistically significant differences in 5-year overall survival(79%[55/70]of the B-I group vs.80%[56/70]of the R-Y group,P=0.966)and recurrence-free survival rates(79%[55/70]of the B-I group vs.78%[55/70]of the R-Y group,P=0.979)between the two groups.The scores of the global health status of the R-Y group were higher than those of the B-I group with statistically significant differences(postoperative 1 year:85.4±13.1 vs.88.8±16.1,P=0.033;postoperative 3 year:87.3±15.2 vs.92.8±11.3,P=0.028;postoperative 5 year:90.9±13.7 vs.96.4±5.6,P=0.010),and the reflux(postoperative 3 year:8.8±12.9 vs.2.8±5.3,P=0.001;postoperative 5 year:5.1±9.8 vs.1.8±4.7,P=0.033)and epigastric pain(postoperative 1 year:11.8±12.7 vs.6.1±8.8,P=0.008;postoperative 3 year:9.4±10.6 vs.4.6±7.9,P=0.006;postoperative 5 year:6.0±8.9 vs.2.7±4.6,P=0.022)were milder in the R-Y group than those of the B-I group at the postoperative 1,3,and 5-year time points.Conclusions:Compared with B-I group,R-Y reconstruction was associated with better long-term QoL by reducing reflux and epigastric pain,without changing survival outcomes.Trial Registration:ChiCTR.org.cn,ChiCTR-TRC-10001434.

Revisiting the standards of cancer detection and therapy alongside their comparison to modern methods

In accordance with the World Health Organization data,cancer remains at the forefront of fatal diseases.An upward trend in cancer incidence and mortality has been observed globally,emphasizing that efforts in developing detection and treatment methods should continue.The diagnostic path typically begins with learning the medical history of a patient;this is followed by basic blood tests and imaging tests to indicate where cancer may be located to schedule a needle biopsy.Prompt initiation of diagnosis is crucial since delayed cancer detection entails higher costs of treatment and hospitalization.Thus,there is a need for novel cancer detection methods such as liquid biopsy,elastography,synthetic biosensors,fluorescence imaging,and reflectance confocal microscopy.Conventional therapeutic methods,although still common in clinical practice,pose many limitations and are unsatisfactory.Nowadays,there is a dynamic advancement of clinical research and the development of more precise and effective methods such as oncolytic virotherapy,exosome-based therapy,nanotechnology,dendritic cells,chimeric antigen receptors,immune checkpoint inhibitors,natural product-based therapy,tumor-treating fields,and photodynamic therapy.The present paper compares available data on conventional and modern methods of cancer detection and therapy to facilitate an understanding of this rapidly advancing field and its future directions.As evidenced,modern methods are not without drawbacks;there is still a need to develop new detection strategies and therapeutic approaches to improve sensitivity,specificity,safety,and efficacy.Nevertheless,an appropriate route has been taken,as confirmed by the approval of some modern methods by the Food and Drug Administration.

Role of the gut microbiota in anticancer therapy:from molecular mechanisms to clinical applications

In the past period,due to the rapid development of next-generation sequencing technology,accumulating evidence has clarified the complex role of the human microbiota in the development of cancer and the therapeutic response.More importantly,available evidence seems to indicate that modulating the composition of the gut microbiota to improve the efficacy of anti-cancer drugs may be feasible.However,intricate complexities exist,and a deep and comprehensive understanding of how the human microbiota interacts with cancer is critical to realize its full potential in cancer treatment.The purpose of this review is to summarize the initial clues on molecular mechanisms regarding the mutual effects between the gut microbiota and cancer development,and to highlight the relationship between gut microbes and the efficacy of immunotherapy,chemotherapy,radiation therapy and cancer surgery,which may provide insights into the formulation of individualized therapeutic strategies for cancer management.In addition,the current and emerging microbial interventions for cancer therapy as well as their clinical applications are summarized.Although many challenges remain for now,the great importance and full potential of the gut microbiota cannot be overstated for the development of individualized anti-cancer strategies,and it is necessary to explore a holistic approach that incorporates microbial modulation therapy in cancer.

Britanin–a beacon of hope against gastrointestinal tumors?

Britanin is a bioactive sesquiterpene lactone known for its potent anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant properties.It also exhibits significant anti-tumor activity,suppressing tumor growth in vitro and in vivo.The current body of research on Britanin includes thirty papers predominantly related to neoplasms,the majority of which are gastrointestinal tumors that have not been summarized before.To drive academic debate,the present paper reviews the available research on Britanin in gastrointestinal tumors.It also outlines novel research directions using data not directly concerned with the digestive system,but which could be adopted in future gastrointestinal research.Britanin was found to counteract liver,colorectal,pancreatic,and gastric tumors,by regulating proliferation,apoptosis,autophagy,immune response,migration,and angiogenesis.As confirmed in pancreatic,gastric,and liver cancer,its most commonly noted molecular effects include nuclear factor kappa B and B-cell lymphoma 2 downregulation,as well as Bcl-2-associated X protein upregulation.Moreover,it has been found to induce the Akt kinase and Forkhead box O1 axis,activate the AMP-activated protein kinase pathway,elevate interleukin-2 and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γlevels,reduce interleukin-10,as well as downregulate matrix metalloproteinase-9,Twist family bHLH transcription factor 1,and cyclooxygenase-2.It also inhibits Myc–HIF1αinteraction and programmed death ligand 1 transcription by interrupting the Ras/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway and mTOR/P70S6K/4EBP1 signaling.Future research should aim to unravel the link between Britanin and acetylcholinesterase,mast cells,osteolysis,and ischemia,as compelling data have been provided by studies outside the gastrointestinal context.Since the cytotoxicity of Britanin on noncancerous cells is significantly lower than that on tumor cells,while still being effective against the latter,further in-depth studies with the use of animal models are merited.The compound exhibits pleiotropic biological activity and offers considerable promise as an anti-cancer agent,which may address the current paucity of treatment options and high mortality rate among patients with gastrointestinal tumors.