Importance Primary tumor location is emerging as an important prognostic factor owing to distinct biological features. However, the side of origin of colon cancer (CC) still does not represent a prognostic parameter when deciding for adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy. Objective To determine the prognostic role of left vs right-sidedness of primary tumor location in patients with CC. Data Sources We searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, LILACS, CINAHL, and SCOPUS for prospective or retrospective studies reporting data on overall survival for left-sided colon cancer (LCC) compared with right-sided colon cancer (RCC). Study Selection Studies were selected if: (1) side of CC was reported among variables entered into survival analysis, (2) survival information was available (overall survival [OS] was reported in the article as hazard ratio (HR) according to multivariate analysis, (3) articles were published in the English language. Data Extraction and Synthesis Data were pooled using HRs for OS of LCC vs RCC according to fixed or random-effects models. Subgroup analysis and multivariate random-effects model meta-regression was also implemented adjusting for stage distribution, sample size, race, year of publication, type and quality of studies, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures HRs for OS (the primary outcome measure) were pooled to provide an aggregate value. In this analysis, all HRs with 95% CIs were pooled to obtain prognostic information on the location of the primary tumor (left vs right location site of CC) independent of other common clinicopathological covariates. Results An analysis was made from the 66 studies conducted. It included 1 437 846 patients with a median follow-up of 65 months. Left sided primary tumor location was associated with a significantly reduced risk of death (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.84;P < .001) and this was independent of stage, race, adjuvant chemotherapy, year of study, number of participants, and quality of included studies. Conclusions and Relevance Based on these results, CC side should be acknowledged as a criterion for establishing prognosis in all stages of disease. It should be considered when deciding treatment intensity in metastatic settings, and should represent a stratification factor for future adjuvant studies.

Non-coding RNAs represent a significant proportion of the human genome. After having been considered as ‘junk’ for a long time, non-coding RNAs are now well established as playing important roles in maintaining cellular homeostasis and functions. Some non-coding RNAs show cell- and tissue-specific expression patterns and are specifically deregulated under pathological conditions (e.g. cancer). Therefore, non-coding RNAs have been extensively studied as potential biomarkers in the context of different diseases with a focus on microRNAs (miRNAs) and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) for several years. Since their discovery, miRNAs have attracted more attention than lncRNAs in research studies; however, both families of non-coding RNAs have been established to play an important role in gene expression control, either as transcriptional or post-transcriptional regulators. Both miRNAs and lncRNAs can regulate key genes involved in the development of cancer, thus influencing tumour growth, invasion, and metastasis by increasing the activation of oncogenic pathways and limiting the expression of tumour suppressors. Furthermore, miRNAs and lncRNAs are also emerging as important mediators in drug-sensitivity and drug-resistance mechanisms. In the light of these premises, a number of pre-clinical and early clinical studies are exploring the potential of non-coding RNAs as new therapeutics. The aim of this review is to summarise the latest knowledge of the use of miRNAs and lncRNAs as therapeutic tools for cancer treatment.

Obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) greater than 30, is a chronic disease with increasing prevalence around the world, largely contributing to important health issues in most countries.¹ Alongside body fat, which is a general risk factor for serious illness (eg, metabolic syndrome), greater cardiometabolic risk has also been associated with the localization of excess fat in the visceral adipose tissue and ectopic deposits.² Several large epidemiologic studies have evaluated the association between obesity and mortality. In particular, a meta-analysis of 230 cohort studies including more than 30 million individuals³ found that both obesity and overweight were associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Despite the evidence that excess mortality increases with increasing BMI, some studies have reached the conclusion that elevated BMI may improve survival in patients with cardiovascular disease, a phenomenon called the obesity paradox.⁴

Background: The addition of induction chemotherapy to concomitant neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer could increase pathological downstaging and act on occult micrometastatic disease, leading ultimately to a better outcome. A systematic review was carried out of the existing literature on the treatment outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) on locally advanced rectal cancer. TNT was defined as chemotherapy using cycles of induction and/or consolidation in conjunction with standard chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery.Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed according to the PRISMA statement up until January 2019. The primary endpoints were complete pathologic response (pCR), disease-free survival, and overall survival rates.Results: A total of 28 studies (3 retrospective and 25 prospective for a total of 3579 patients) were included in the final analysis (n = 2688 treated with TNT and n = 891 with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy therapy). The pooled pCR rate was 22.4% (95% CI 19.4%–25.7%) in all patients treated with TNT (n = 27 studies with data available). In n = 10 comparative studies with data available, TNT was found to increase the odds of pCR by 39% (1.40, 95% CI 1.08–1.81,P= 0.01).Conclusions: The addition of induction or consolidation chemotherapy to standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy results in a higher pCR rate. Given that the comparative analysis was derived from few randomized publications, large confirmatory trials should be carried out before a strong recommendation is made in favor of TNT.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can elicit toxicities by inhibiting negative regulators of adaptive immunity. Sometimes, management of toxicities may require systemic glucocorticoids. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the correlation between steroids use, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) in cancer patients treated with ICIs. Publications that compared steroids with non-steroid users in cancer patients treated with ICIs from inception to June 2019 were identified by searching the EMBASE, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Patients (studies, n = 16; patients, n = 4045) taking steroids were at increased risk of death and progression compared to those not taking steroids (HR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.24–1.91; p = 0.01 and HR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.02–1.76; p = 0.03, respectively). The main negative effect on OS was associated with patients taking steroids for supportive care (HR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.41–4.43; p < 0.01) or brain metastases (HR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.22–1.87; p < 0.01). In contrast, steroids used to mitigate adverse events did not negatively affect OS. In conclusion, caution is needed when steroids are used for symptom control. In these patients, a negative impact of steroid use was observed for both OS and PFS.