Background: Granulosa cell tumors are rare neoplasms characterized by long natural history and favorable prognosis. Aims: The objective of this study was to determine the clinical presentation, treatment, outcome, and prognostic factors for patients of granulosa cell tumors. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 26 patients of granulosa cell tumor of ovary from 2002 to 2011 was carried out. The records of all patients were analyzed to determine clinical presentation, treatment, survival, and prognostic factors. Results: The median age of the patients was 50 years (range, 17-71 years). Abdominal pain was the most common presenting symptom. The median follow-up was 71.4 months (range, 21.6-149.9 months). The estimated 5 and 10 year overall survival (OS) was 84.6 and 72.5%, respectively. Event-free survival (EFS) was 76.5 and 52.9% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. Advanced stage was significant independent poor prognostic indicator for both OS and EFS. Conclusion: Majority of the patients with granulosa cell tumors of the ovary present in early stage. Surgery is the primary treatment modality for granulosa cell tumors. Advanced stage and presence of residual disease were associated with inferior survival, but only prospective studies can ascertain their definite role.

Small bowel adenocarcinoma: An overview

Glioblastoma is one of the most fatal and incurable human cancers characterized by nuclear atypia, mitotic activity, intense microvascular proliferation and necrosis. The current standard of care includes maximal safe surgical resection followed by radiation therapy (RT) with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ). The prognosis remains poor with median survival of 14.6 months with RT plus TMZ. Majority will have a recurrence within 2 years from diagnosis despite adequate treatment. Radiosensitizers, radiotherapy dose escalation and altered fractionation have failed to improve outcome. The molecular biology of glioblastoma is complex and poses treatment challenges. High rate of mutation, genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity, rapid development of resistance, existence of blood-brain barrier (BBB), multiple intracellular and intercellular signalling pathways, over-expression of growth factor receptors, angiogenesis and antigenic diversity renders the tumor cells differentially susceptible to various treatment modalities. Thus, the treatment strategies require personalised or individualized approach based on the characteristics of tumor. Several targeted agents have been evaluated in clinical trials but the results have been modest despite these advancements. This review summarizes the current standard of care, results of concurrent chemoradiation trials, evolving innovative treatments that use targeted therapy with standard chemoradiation or RT alone, outcome of various recent trials and future outlook.

Cholangiocarcinomas (CCA) pose a complex challenge in oncology due to diverse etiologies, necessitating tailored therapeutic approaches. This review discusses the risk factors, molecular pathology, and current therapeutic options for CCA and explores the emerging strategies encompassing targeted therapies, immunotherapy, novel compounds from natural sources, and modulation of gut microbiota. CCA are driven by an intricate landscape of genetic mutations, epigenetic dysregulation, and post-transcriptional modification, which differs based on geography (e.g., for liver fluke versus non-liver fluke-driven CCA) and exposure to environmental carcinogens (e.g., exposure to aristolochic acid). Liquid biopsy, including circulating cell-free DNA, is a potential diagnostic tool for CCA, which warrants further investigations. Currently, surgical resection is the primary curative treatment for CCA despite the technical challenges. Adjuvant chemotherapy, including cisplatin and gemcitabine, is standard for advanced, unresectable, or recurrent CCA. Second-line therapy options, such as FOLFOX (oxaliplatin and 5-FU), and the significance of radiation therapy in adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and palliative settings are also discussed. This review underscores the need for personalized therapies and demonstrates the shift towards precision medicine in CCA treatment. The development of targeted therapies, including FDA-approved drugs inhibiting FGFR2 gene fusions and IDH1 mutations, is of major research focus. Investigations into immune checkpoint inhibitors have also revealed potential clinical benefits, although improvements in survival remain elusive, especially across patient demographics. Novel compounds from natural sources exhibit anti-CCA activity, while microbiota dysbiosis emerges as a potential contributor to CCA progression, necessitating further exploration of their direct impact and mechanisms through in-depth research and clinical studies. In the future, extensive translational research efforts are imperative to bridge existing gaps and optimize therapeutic strategies to improve therapeutic outcomes for this complex malignancy.

Primary thyroid lymphoma (PTL) is a rare malignancy and represents 2%–5% of all thyroid malignancies and 1%–2.5% of all malignant lymphomas. We present our institute’s experience in combined modality management of 16 successive patients of PTL treated from 2005 to 2010. The median age of the patients was 56.0 years. Five patients were males, and 11 patients were females. An enlarging thyroid mass was the most common presenting symptom. 14 patients had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and 2 patients had follicular lymphoma. The most common stage of presentation was stage II comprising 6 (37.5%) patients. All patients received CCT, and only 12 patients received involved field RT with a median dose of 36.0 Gy. 10 patients (62.5%) had CR, and 6 patients (27.5%) had PR. Eight patients had disease progression in subsequent followup and this included the initial 6 patients with PR. The 5-year DFS was 40.0%, and median DFS was 47 months. The 5-year OS was 41.0%, and median OS was 51 months. Most common presentation in our series was locally advanced tumors. Most of these patients require combined modality management. Risk-adapted and multimodality approach is the need of the hour to achieve good control rates while minimizing treatment related toxicity.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE plus radiosensitizing capecitabine and octreotide long-acting release (LAR) as first-line systemic therapy in advanced well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of consecutive patients of advanced inoperable or metastatic grade 1 or 2 GEP-NETs treated with first-line ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE plus radiosensitizing capecitabine or octreotide LAR from September 2012 to December 2019 were collected and analyzed for response, toxicity, and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (median age: 53 years; range 14-81 years) with treatment-naïve advanced grade 1 or 2 GEP-NETs were included. Thirty-six patients received a median cumulative dose of 27.3 GBq of ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE intravenously at 8-12 weeks' intervals along with 1,250 mg/m² oral capecitabine on days 0-14 of each cycle of ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE, whereas 40 patients were administered 30 mg octreotide LAR intramuscularly every 4 weeks. Using response evaluation criteria in solid tumor 1.1, the objective response rate was 38% in the ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE arm compared with 15% in the octreotide LAR arm ( P = .025), whereas the disease control rates were 88% and 67% in ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE and octreotide LAR arms, respectively ( P = .035). The median durations of progression-free survival in the ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE and octreotide LAR arms were 54 months and 16 months, respectively ( P = .017), whereas the median overall survival was not reached and not significantly different across both the arms. Of the treatment-related adverse events, no major difference was observed in the occurrence of grade 3 or 4 toxicities between the two treatment arms. CONCLUSION: First-line systemic ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE plus radiosensitizing capecitabine achieved better radiologic response and longer progression-free survival compared with octreotide LAR in patients with advanced grade 1 or 2 GEP-NETs. Future randomized controlled trials are, however, required to determine the best treatment sequence for the treatment-naïve patients with advanced GEP-NETs.