Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

BACKGROUND: We aimed to classify metastatic pyloric/antral gastric cancer in terms of macroscopic morphology and metastatic form. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with pyloric/antral gastric cancer were included in the study. Patients were classified according to a combination of Borrmann classification type and metastatic type, and the clinicopathological characteristics of each group were compared. RESULT: Of the 38 patients, 33 (type II: 9 and type III: 24) (87%) had ulcerative gastric cancer. Ulcerative gastric cancer was classified into four groups: lymphatic only group (L+H-P-), lymphatic + hematogenous group (L+H+P-), disseminated ± lymphatic group (L±H-P+), and lymphatic + hematogenous + disseminated group (L+H+P+). In the L+H-P- group, all patients had bulky lymph nodes and serum levels of both carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) were high; the condition of patients was good, and the therapeutic response was good. In the L+H+P- group, metastases other than liver metastases were rare, and serum CEA levels were high. In the L±H-P+ group, the predominant histological type was signet ring cell carcinoma; both serum CEA and CA19-9 levels were low. Patients in the L+H+P+ group had higher serum CA19-9 levels and were more prone to hematogenous metastasis to various organs; these patients had worse patient status and lower treatment response. Gastric cancer other than ulcerative type was only detected in five patients (type V: 3, type IV: 1, type I: 1). CONCLUSION: Classification by a combination of macroscopic and metastatic form in pyloric/antral metastatic gastric cancer might be useful for diagnosis and treatment.

DOI： 10.1272/jnms.JNMS.2022_89-212

PubMed

researchmap

Language：English   Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)  

A 63-year-old woman was admitted to our institution for severe pain in her right lower abdomen caused by the perforation of cecal cancer. She underwent emergency surgery, from which she was diagnosed with cecal carcinoma with liver, lung, and lymph node metastases. As she was taking aspirin to prevent cerebral infarction, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (receptor) antibody and regorafenib therapy were not used. Thus, we started a modified FOLFOX 6+cetuximab regimen. This first-line treatment initially achieved a partial response (PR), but she then developed progressive disease (PD) after 14 months. We changed the regimen to FOLFIRI, followed by trifluridine/tipiracil, but her progression-free survival periods were 2.7 months and 1 month, respectively. Although we cycled through the available array of standard cancer drugs, the patient showed a good performance status, and some benefit from treatment still seemed plausible. We readministered the 5-fluorouracil oral preparation S-1, which maintained stable disease (SD) for 7 months. After PD emerged, we readministered the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibody panitumumab for 7.5 months of SD. Finally, 39 months after her diagnosis, she died from rapidly progressing disease. However, her relatively long survival implies that readministering drugs similar to those used in previous regimens might benefit patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

DOI： 10.1155/2020/2351810

PubMed

researchmap