柴崎 晋

BACKGROUND: Nonresectable gastric cancer develops rapidly; thus, monitoring disease progression especially in patients receiving nivolumab as late-line therapy is important. Biomarkers may facilitate the evaluation of nivolumab treatment response. Herein, we assessed the utility of serum-based inflammatory indicators for evaluating tumor response to nivolumab. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included 111 patients treated with nivolumab monotherapy for nonresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer from October 2017 to October 2021. We measured changes in the C-reactive protein (CRP)-to-albumin ratio (CAR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in serum from baseline to after the fourth administration of nivolumab. Furthermore, we calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC ROCs) for CAR, PLR, and NLR to identify the optimal cutoff values for treatment response. We also investigated the relationship between clinicopathologic factors and disease control (complete response, partial response, and stable disease) using the chi-squared test. RESULTS: The overall response rate (complete and partial response) was 11.7%, and the disease control rate was 44.1%. The median overall survival (OS) was 14.0 (95% CI 10.7‒19.2) months, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.1 (95% CI 3.0‒5.9) months. The AUC ROCs for CAR, PLR, and NLR before nivolumab monotherapy for patients with progressive disease (PD) were 0.574 (95% CI, 0.461‒0.687), 0.528 (95% CI, 0.418‒0.637), and 0.511 (95% CI, 0.401‒0.620), respectively. The values for changes in CAR, PLR, and NLR were 0.766 (95% CI, 0.666‒0.865), 0.707 (95% CI, 0.607‒0.807), and 0.660 (95% CI 0.556‒0.765), respectively. The cutoff values for the treatment response were 3.0, 1.3, and 1.4 for CAR, PLR, and NLR, respectively. The PFS and OS were significantly longer when the treatment response values for changes in CAR, PLR, and NLR were below these cutoff values (CAR: OS, p < 0.0001 and PFS, p < 0.0001; PLR: OS, p = 0.0289 and PFS, p = 0.0302; and NLR: OS, p = 0.0077 and PFS, p = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of the changes in CAR, PLR, and NLR could provide a simple, prompt, noninvasive method to evaluate response to nivolumab monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with number K2023006.

Abstract Background The advantages of robot‐assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RA‐MIE) over conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (C‐MIE) are unknown. This nationwide large‐scale study aimed to compare surgical outcomes between RA‐MIE and C‐MIE using rigorous propensity score methods, including detailed covariates and relevant outcomes. Methods This Japanese nationwide retrospective cohort study included RA‐MIE or C‐MIE for esophageal malignant tumors performed between October 2018 and December 2019 and registered in the Japanese National Clinical Database. The primary outcome measure was postoperative complications classified as Clavien–Dindo Grade IIIa or higher. Propensity score matching was performed to create a balanced covariate distribution between the two groups. Results After propensity score matching, 1092 patients were selected. The RA‐MIE group had a significantly longer operation time and greater blood loss than the C‐MIE group (565 vs. 477 min and 120 vs. 90 mL). Furthermore, the R0 resection rate was lower in the RA‐MIE group than in the C‐MIE group (95.1% vs. 97.8%). The RA‐MIE and C‐MIE groups had no differences regarding overall complications ≥ Grade IIIa (22.0% vs. 20.3%, p = 0.52), 30‐day mortality rates (0.4% vs. 0.5%), and operative mortality rates (0.7% vs. 0.7%). Deep SSI was less frequent (2.7% vs. 6.0%) and pulmonary embolism was more frequent (2.4% vs. 0.5%) in the RA‐MIE group than in the C‐MIE group. Conclusions In the initial phase of implementation, RA‐MIE and C‐MIE demonstrated comparable morbidity rates when performed by skilled board‐certified endoscopic surgeons.

Concurrent direct and indirect inguinal, femoral, and obturator hernias are rare. This case report describes a rare case treated using the laparoscopic approach. A 68-year-old female patient presented with a moving left inguinal lump and pain. Physical examination and abdominal computed tomography scan revealed the coexistence of a left inguinal hernia or Nuck canal hydrocele and a left femoral hernia. The patient underwent laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair, and all four orifices were covered with one mesh. The patient was discharged on the second postoperative day without any complications. The concurrent presence of four hernias on the same side is rare and has not been previously reported. The laparoscopic approach is useful in such cases because it allows visualization of multiple hernia orifices from the intra-abdominal cavity.