AIMS OF THE STUDY: To analyse pre-treatment clinical features of DLBCL patients that are predictive of R-CHOP therapy resistance and early disease relapse after R-CHOP therapy treatment.
METHODS USED TO CONDUCT THE STUDY: A total of 698 lymphoma patients were screened and 134 R-CHOP-treated DLBCL patients were included. The Lugano 2014 criteria was applied for assessment of treatment response. DLBCL patients were divided into R-CHOP resistance/early relapse group and R-CHOP sensitive/late relapse group.
RESULTS OF THE STUDY: 81 of 134 (60%) were R-CHOP sensitive/late relapse, while 53 (40%) were R-CHOP resistance/early relapse. The median follow-up period was 59 months ± standard error 3.6. Five-year overall survival rate of R-CHOP resistance/early relapse group was 2.1%, while it was 89% for RCHOP sensitive/late relapse group. Having more than one extranodal site of DLBCL disease is an independent risk factor for R-CHOP resistance/early relapse [odds ratio = 5.268 (1.888-14.702), P = .002]. The commonest extranodal sites were head and neck, gastrointestinal tract, respiratory system, vertebra and bones. Advanced age (>60 years), advanced disease stage (lll-lV), raised pre-treatment lactate dehydrogenase level, bone marrow involvement of DLBCL disease high Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status (2-4) and high R-IPI score (3-5) showed no significant association with R-CHOP therapy resistance/early disease relapse (multivariate analysis: P > .05).
CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: DLBCL patients with more than one extranodal site are 5.268 times more likely to be R-CHOP therapy resistance or experience early disease relapse after R-CHOP therapy. Therefore, correlative studies are warranted in DLBCL patients with more than one extranodal site of disease to explore possible underlying mechanisms of chemoresistance.
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) from its inception until April 2020.
RESULTS: Six RCTs (n = 3139 patients) were included. In comparison to the GA alone, our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the cancer recurrence rate in patients who received the adjunctive use of RA in the routine care of GA (3 studies, n = 2380 patients; odds ratio 0.93, 95%CI 0.63-1.39, ρ = 0.73, certainty of evidence = very low). Our review also showed no significant difference in cancer-related mortality (2 studies, n = 545; odds ratio 1.20, 95%CI 0.83-1.74, ρ = 0.33, certainty of evidence = low), all-cause mortality (3 studies, n = 2653; odds ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.69-1.39, ρ = 0.89, certainty of evidence = low) and duration of cancer-free survival (2 studies, n = 659; mean difference 0.00 years, 95%CI -0.25-0.25, ρ = 1.00, certainty of evidence = high).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis concluded that the adjunctive use of RA in the routine care of GA did not reduce cancer recurrence rate in cancer resection surgery. However, this finding needs to be interpreted with caution due to low level of evidence, substantial heterogeneity and potential risk of bias across the included studies.
STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020171368.
PRESENTATION OF CASE: A 72-year-old female presented to us with right-sided abdominal pain for 3 weeks, associated with vomiting and diarrhoea. She had an appendectomy done 30 years ago and a recent myocardial infarction. Abdominal examination revealed a previous appendectomy scar and tenderness over the right lumbar region. Computed tomography showed ileocaecal intussusception. Right hemicolectomy with a double barrel stoma was performed as she was unstable intraoperatively. Histopathological examination of the tumour showed a well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumour. Subsequent PET scan showed no systemic disease and a reversal of the stoma was done. She remained disease free for a year.
DISCUSSION: Our patient had undergone a right hemicolectomy despite the high risk of mortality, as there is a high chance of malignancy. Double barrel stoma was done, as she was unstable intraoperatively. Fortunately, she recovered well and had her stoma reversed without any further recurrence of her disease.
CONCLUSION: Adult patients who present with intussusception should be managed with resection, as there is a high possibility of a malignancy. Early resection should be planned to prevent further spread of the tumour.
PRESENTATION OF CASE: With that in mind, we describe a 66-year-old man who presented with recurrent episodes of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding for two years. Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) showed several small telangiectasias in the proximal small bowel. Oral route double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) revealed abnormal mucosa 165 cm from incisor with central ulceration and vascular component. He subsequently underwent surgical excision. The histopathological report confirmed the diagnosis of GIST arising from the jejunum. During his clinic follow up, he remains symptom-free with no evidence of recurrence.
DISCUSSION: The diagnosis of bleeding small intestine GISTs can be challenging as these are inaccessible by conventional endoscopy. Imaging modalities such as double-balloon enteroscopy, capsule endoscopy, CT angiography, intravenous contrast-enhanced multidetector row CT (MDCT) and magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) have been used to assist in the diagnosis of bleeding small intestine GISTs. The mainstay of management for small intestine GIST is complete surgical excision.
CONCLUSION: Bleeding jejunal GIST is very rare and only a handful of case reports have been published. The mainstay of management for small intestine GIST is complete surgical excision. It is essential to obtain a complete excision of localised disease and avoiding tumour spillage in order to reduce the risk of local recurrence and metastatic spread of GISTs.
CASE PRESENTATION: We described a lateral frontal sinus mucocele with intra-orbital extension, which was successfully managed by endoscopic sinus surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic sinus surgery is the treatment of choice in most frontal sinus mucoceles including lateral frontal mucoceles.
Case Report: We report the case of a 58-year-old woman who presented to us with a chief complaint of recurrent right-sided epistaxis and nasal blockage for the past 4 months, which was progressively worsening. Histopathological examination confirmed the presence of a REAH instead of a sinonasal malignancy. The tumor was surgically excised from the lateral nasal wall using electrocautery under endoscopic guidance. The patient was then carefully followed-up after surgery, and the wound was successfully healed 3 months after the initial surgery. There was no evidence of recurrence 6 months after the initial surgery.
Conclusion: This case demonstrates the rare presentation of a REAH, which had arisen from the lateral nasal wall. Clinically, it is difficult to distinguish a REAH from a more notorious mass such as a sinonasal malignancy. Therefore, biopsy is mandatory in all cases of lateral nasal mass in order to rule out malignancy before confirming nasal REAH. Fortunately, as seen in this case, a lateral nasal REAH, once diagnosed, can be safely and easily removed from the lateral nasal wall using electrocautery with good surgical outcomes and a low rate of recurrence.
Objective: To determine the proportion of adults treated for localized melanoma who prefer the standard scheduled visit frequency (as per Australian guideline recommendations) or fewer scheduled visits (adapted from the Melanoma Follow-up [MELFO] study of reduced follow-up).
Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used a telephone interview for surveillance following excision of localized melanoma at an Australian specialist center. We invited a random sample of 400 patients who had completed treatment for localized melanoma in 2014 to participate. They were asked about their preferences for scheduled follow-up, and experience of follow-up in the past 12 months. Those with a recurrent or new primary melanoma diagnosed by the time of interview (0.8-1.7 years since first diagnosis) were asked about how it was first detected and treated. SSE practices were also assessed.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion preferring standard vs fewer scheduled clinic visits, median delay between detection and treatment of recurrent or new primary melanoma, and SSE practices.
Results: Of the 262 people who agreed to be interviewed, the mean (SD) age was 64.3 (14.3) years, and 93 (36%) were women. Among the 230 people who did not have a recurrent or new primary melanoma, 149 vs 81 preferred the standard vs fewer scheduled clinic visits option (70% vs 30% after adjusting for sampling frame). Factors independently associated with preferring fewer visits were a higher disease stage, melanoma on a limb, living with others, not having private health insurance, and seeing a specialist for another chronic condition. The median delay between first detection and treatment of recurrent or new primary melanoma was 7 and 3 weeks, respectively. Only 8% missed a scheduled visit, while 40% did not perform SSE or did so at greater than 3-month intervals.
Conclusions and Relevance: Some patients with melanoma may prefer fewer scheduled visits, if they are supported to do SSE and there is rapid clinical review of anything causing concern (patient-led surveillance).