​Author(s): Ryan N.A.J.; Crosbie E.J.; Evans D.G.; Blake D.; Cabrera-Dandy M.; Glaire M.A.
Source: Systematic Reviews; Aug 2018; vol. 7 (no. 1)
Publication Date: Aug 2018
Publication Type(s): Article
Available  at Systematic reviews -  from BioMed Central
Abstract:Background: Lynch syndrome is the most common inherited cancer syndrome, which predisposes individuals to a number of different cancers, principally colorectal and endometrial cancer. The early diagnosis of Lynch syndrome enables colorectal surveillance, which has been shown to save lives through the detection and removal of premalignant polyps and earlier detection of invasive disease. Endometrial cancer, which is often the sentinel cancer in women, provides an opportunity to diagnose Lynch syndrome and thus enable colorectal surveillance as well as the cascade testing for Lynch syndrome in other family members. These potential benefits have led to a call for the universal screening of women with endometrial cancer for Lynch syndrome, a practice that is now commonplace in colorectal cancer. Healthcare providers and clinicians are however restricted by insufficient knowledge about the prevalence of Lynch syndrome in women with endometrial cancer, with estimates varying as widely as 1-10%. The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review with a meta-analysis of the current literature base in order to estimate the prevalence of Lynch syndrome among women with endometrial cancer to inform this discussion. 
Database: EMBASE

​Author(s): Lucente, Ermelinda; Liu, Hongguang; Liu, Yang; Hu, Xiang; Lacivita, Enza; Leopoldo, Marcello; Cheng, Zhen
Source: Bioconjugate chemistry; May 2018; vol. 29 (no. 5); p. 1595-1604
Publication Date: May 2018
Publication Type(s): Journal Article
PubMedID: 29587479
Abstract:Bombesin receptor 2 (BB2) and integrin αvβ3 receptor are privileged targets for molecular imaging of cancer because of their overexpression in a number of tumor tissues. The most recent developments in heterodimer-based radiopharmaceuticals concern BB2- and integrin αvβ3-targeting compounds, consisting of bombesin (BBN) and cyclic arginine-glycine-aspartic acid peptides (RGD), connected through short length linkers. 

​Author(s): Topps A.R.; Barr S.P.; Pikoulas P.; Maxwell A.J.; Pritchard S.A.
Source: Annals of Surgical Oncology; Oct 2017 ; p. 1-6
Publication Date: Oct 2017
Publication Type(s): Article In Press
Abstract:Background: Pre-operative ultrasound-guided needle sampling (UNS) of abnormal axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer can identify patients with axillary metastases and therefore rationalize patient care and inform decision-making. To obtain tissue diagnosis, UNS can be performed by either fine needle aspiration (FNA) or core needle biopsy (CNB). However, few studies have compared the sensitivity of these techniques and the majority show no difference. Methods: All node-positive patients (those with micro- and macrometastases but not isolated tumor cells) treated at a tertiary referral center between January 2012 and December 2015 were retrospectively identified from pathology records. The result of the first axillary UNS performed on each patient was compared with postoperative histopathology results. The UNS method used was according to individual radiologist preference. Results: A total of 215 patients underwent FNA (1 patient had bilateral breast cancer and underwent bilateral FNA), and 92 underwent CNB. Sensitivity of CNB was significantly higher than FNA (83.7 vs. 69.0%, P = 0.008). The false-negative rate in the FNA group was therefore higher than in the CNB group by a factor of 2.5. There was no difference in inadequacy rate between the two techniques. There were no complications in the FNA group, and only one hematoma (which did not require operative intervention) in the CNB group. Conclusions: CNB is safe and should be the preferred technique for UNS to improve sensitivity.Copyright © 2017 Society of Surgical Oncology
Database: EMBASE

​Author(s): Sharma V.; Junejo M.; Mitchell P.J.
Source: Colorectal Disease; Oct 2017; vol. 19 ; p. 39
Publication Date: Oct 2017
Publication Type(s): Conference Abstract
Available  at Colorectal Disease -  from Wiley Online Library Medicine and Nursing Collection 2018 - NHS
Abstract:Purpose: A malignant polyp is a retrospective diagnosis of an endoscopically excised polyp with positive histological finding of malignancy. ACPGBI guidelines (2013) recommend follow-up endoscopy at 3 months. Our primary aim was to assess concordance with these guidelines, with the secondary aim to assess early recurrence. Methods: Retrospective analysis of all malignant polyps treated endoscopically between April 2012 and April 2015 within a regional cancer network. Results: 177 patients were identified of whom 37 underwent surgery. 140 patients underwent endoscopic surveillance with recurrence in 5 patients. Median age of observed patients was 68.5 years. 93.6% of polyps were located in the rectum or sigmoid (n = 67 and 64 respectively). Median size of excised polyps was 15 mm. Endoscopic surveillance within three months was undertaken in 86 patients (61.4%) and within six months in 116 patients (82.9%). By 12 months 125 patients (89.3%) had undergone endoscopic surveillance. 3/86 (3.5%) patients having 3-month surveillance had endoscopic abnormality which resulted in surgical intervention. Positive residual disease was identified in 2 out of these 3 patients. 3 recurrences were identified late (>3 months) with two on cross sectional imaging (6 and 12 months respectively), and one on endoscopy at 12 months. A normal endoscopy at 3 months provided a negative predictive value of 96.4% for disease recurrence. Conclusion: A normal endoscopy at three months excluded the risk of recurrence/ residual disease for the vast majority of patients, however less than 2/3 patients with malignant polyps are appropriately followed up with a three-month endoscopy as per the ACPGBI guidelines.
Database: EMBASE

Author(s): Athanasiou, Christos; Robinson, Jonathan; Yiasemidou, Marina; Lockwood, Sonia; Markides, Georgios A

Source: International journal of surgery (London, England); Mar 2017

Publication Type(s): Journal Article Review

Abstract:
BACKGROUND
Transverse colon malignancies have been excluded from all randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic against open colectomies, potentially due to the advanced laparoscopic skills required for dissecting around the middle colic vessels and the associated morbidity. Concerns have been expressed that the laparospopic approach may compromise the oncological clearance in transverse colon cancer. This study aimed to comprehensively compare the laparoscopic (LPA) to the open (OPA) approach by performing a meta-analysis of long and short term outcomes.METHODSMedline, Embase, Cochrane library, Scopus and Web of Knowledge databases were interrogated. Selected studies were critically appraised and the short-term morbidity and long term oncological outcomes were meta-analyzed. Sensitivity analysis according to the quality of the study, type of procedure (laparoscopic vs laparoscopically assisted) and level of lymphadenectomy was performed. Statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were also investigated.

RESULTS
Eleven case control trials (1415 patients) were included in the study. There was no difference between the LPA and the OPA in overall survival [Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.83 (0.56, 1.22); P=0.34], disease free survival (p=0.20), local recurrence (p=0.81) or distant metastases (p=0.24). LPA was found to have longer operative time [Weighted mean difference (WMD)=45.00 (29.48, 60.52);P<0.00001] with earlier establishment of oral intake [WMD=-1.68 (-1.84, -1.53);P<0.00001] and shorter hospital stay [WMD =-2.94 (-4.27, -1.62);P=0.0001]. No difference was found in relation to anastomotic leakage (p=0.39), intra-abdominal abscess (p=0.25), lymph nodes harvested (p=0.17).CONCLUSIONSLPA seems to be safe with equivalent oncological outcomes to OPA and better short term outcomes in selected patient populations. High quality Randomized control trials are required to further investigate the role of laparoscopy in transverse colon cancer.
​
Database: Medline

Author(s): Nightingale, J.M.; Murphy, F.; Eaton, C.; Borgen, R.

Source: Radiography; Feb 2017; vol. 23 (no. 1); p. 38-47

Publication Date: Feb 2017

Publication Type(s): Academic Journal
​
Database: CINAHL