Background: Local cancer therapy by combining real-time surgical exploration and resection with delivery of a single dose of high-energy electron irradiation entails a very precise and effective local therapeutic approach. Integrating the benefits from minimally invasive surgical techniques with the very precise delivery of intraoperative electron irradiation results in an efficient combined modality therapy. Methods: Patients with locally advanced disease, who are candidates for laparoscopic and/or thoracoscopic surgery, received an integrated multimodal management. Preoperative treatment included induction chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation, followed by laparoscopic surgery and intraoperative electron radiation therapy. Results: In a period of 5 consecutive years, 125 rectal cancer patients were treated, of which 35% underwent a laparoscopic approach. We found no differences in cancer outcomes and tolerance between the open and laparoscopic groups. Two esophageal cancer patients were treated with IOeRT during thoracoscopic resection, with the resection specimens showing intense downstaging effects. Two oligo-recurrent prostatic cancer patients (isolated nodal progression) had a robotic-assisted surgical resection and post-lymphadenectomy electron boost on the vascular and lateral pelvic wall. Conclusions: Minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgery is feasible to combine with intraoperative electron radiation therapy and offers a new model explored with electron-FLASH beams.

Background: Oligo-recurrent disease has a consolidated evidence of long-term surviving patients due to the use of intense local cancer therapy. The latter combines real-time surgical exploration/resection with high-energy electron beam single dose of irradiation. This results in a very precise radiation dose deposit, which is an essential element of contemporary multidisciplinary individualized oncology. Methods: Patient candidates to proton therapy were evaluated in Multidisciplinary Tumor Board to consider improved treatment options based on the institutional resources and expertise. Proton therapy was delivered by a synchrotron-based pencil beam scanning technology with energy levels from 70.2 to 228.7 MeV, whereas intraoperative electrons were generated in a miniaturized linear accelerator with dose rates ranging from 22 to 36 Gy/min (at Dmax) and energies from 6 to 12 MeV. Results: In a period of 24 months, 327 patients were treated with proton therapy: 218 were adults, 97 had recurrent cancer, and 54 required re-irradiation. The specific radiation modalities selected in five cases included an integral strategy to optimize the local disease management by the combination of surgery, intraoperative electron boost, and external pencil beam proton therapy as components of the radiotherapy management. Recurrent cancer was present in four cases (cervix, sarcoma, melanoma, and rectum), and one patient had a primary unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. In re-irradiated patients (cervix and rectum), a tentative radical total dose was achieved by integrating beams of electrons (ranging from 10- to 20-Gy single dose) and protons (30 to 54-Gy Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE), in 10-25 fractions). Conclusions: Individual case solution strategies combining intraoperative electron radiation therapy and proton therapy for patients with oligo-recurrent or unresectable localized cancer are feasible. The potential of this combination can be clinically explored with electron and proton FLASH beams.

Cancer is first a localized tissue disorder, whose soluble and exosomal molecules and invasive cells induce a host response providing the stromal components of the primary tumor microenvironment (TME). Once the TME is developed, cancer-derived molecules and cells can more efficiently spread out and a whole-body response takes place, whose pathophysiological changes may result in a paraneoplastic syndrome. Remote organ-specific prometastatic reactions may also occur at this time, facilitating metastatic activities of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) through premetastatic niche development at targeted organs. However, additional signaling factors from the inter-organ communication network involved in the pathophysiology and comorbidities of cancer patients may also regulate prometastatic reaction-stimulating effects of cancer and non-cancer tissue factors. This article provides a conceptual overview of our ongoing clinical research on the liver prometastatic reaction (LPR) of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), their portal vein- and hepatic artery-driven LPR-Stimulating Factors (LPR-SF), and their resulting LPR-derived Metastasis-Stimulating Factors (LPR-MSF) acting on liverinvading CRC cells. In addition, we also provide new insights on the molecular subtyping of LPR-responsive cancer phenotypes in patients with CRC and melanoma; and on how to investigate and interpret the prometastatic infrastructure in the real pathophysiological context of patients with cancer undergoing surgical procedures and receiving pharmacological treatments with multiple side effects, including those affecting the LPR, its stimulating factors and responsive cancer phenotypes.

Background Weight loss after bariatric surgery varies among patients. Patients who do not complete long-term follow-up are considered to loose less weight than those with regular follow-up visits. Objective To evaluate the influence of patients' follow-up compliance on long-term excess weight loss (%EWL) and total weight loss (%TWL) after bariatric surgery, comparing results between gastric bypass (GB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Methods Patients with up to 5 years of follow-up data after bariatric surgery were included in this retrospective analysis. Patients were divided in 2 groups: those in group 1 who had attended every scheduled postoperative appointment and those in group 2 who had been lost to follow-up before 1 year and were later contacted by telephone. %EWL and %TWL were compared to determine the possible relationship between type of surgery and regularity of the follow-up. Results A total of 385 patients were included. A significant difference in EWL was observed at 5 years in the SG group (78% for group 1 versus 39% for group 2;p = 0.02) and GB group (75% for group 1 versus 62% for group 2;p = 0.01). No significant differences between surgeries were found when comparing long-term EWL in group 1 patients 77% for SG versus 75% for GB. For group 2 patients, GB achieved greater EWL than SG;p = 0.005. %TWL patients in group 2 showed significant differences in all periods of study (p < 0.05). Conclusion Bariatric surgery patients who attended all scheduled follow-up appointments experienced significantly greater long-term EWL and TWL than those who did not. GB has apparent increased benefits for weight loss in long-term follow-up when compared with SG for patients who did not attend long-term follow-up. Therefore, continued long-term follow-up of bariatric patients should be encouraged to increase postoperative weight loss results.

Complete cytoreduction after IDS yields a inferior outcome in terms of median survival than PDS of almost 2 years. Despite the higher rate of complete resection, IDS apparently fails to improve the results obtained by primary debulking.