Conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE), drug-eluting beads (DEB-TACE) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) are alternative strategies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, which of these strategies is the best is still controversial. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effects of DEB-TACE, TARE and cTACE in terms of overall survival (OS), tumor response and complications. A literature search was conducted using the EMBASE, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases from inception until July 2019 with no language restrictions. The primary outcome was overall survival, and the secondary outcomes included complete response and local recurrence. The comparison of DEB-TACE with cTACE indicated that DEB-TACE has a better OS at 1 year (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67–0.93, p = 0.006), 2 years (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81–0.99, p = 0.046), and 3 years (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81–0.99, p = 0.035). The comparison of TARE with cTACE indicated that TARE has a better OS than cTACE at 2 years (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.80–0.95, p = 0.003) and 3 years (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.85–0.96, p = 0.001). The comparison of DEB-TACE with TARE indicated that DEB-TACE has a better OS than TARE at 2 years (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.19–0.84, p = 0.016). The current meta-analysis suggests that DEB-TACE is superior to both TARE and cTACE in terms of OS. TARE has significantly lower complications than both DEB-TACE and cTACE for patients with HCC. Further multicenter, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed, especially for evaluating DEB-TACE versus TARE.

We performed a retrospective analysis of 21 patients with primary gastric squamous cell carcinoma (PGSCC) who were admitted to our hospital from October 2008 to October 2014. The median age was 67 years and male predominance was observed, the most common tumor locations were the upper third of the stomach, most of the clinical manifestations were identical to those of other types of gastric tumors, and the tumor cells had positive immunoreactivity for p63 and CK5/6. In terms of treatments, surgery (R0 resection) is the main treatment; the effect of other treatments is unclear. The median survival time for the surgery group and nonsurgery group was 46 and 4.5 months, respectively. Probably due to limited number of cases, no significant difference in median survival time was observed between the surgery alone group and the surgery plus adjuvant therapy group (46 versus 51 months,P=0.310). A standard chemotherapy regimen for this disease has not yet been established; the choice of its chemotherapy regimens tends to follow the principle of the treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma or esophageal cancer. PGSCC generally had a poor prognosis, and early detection, early diagnosis, and early surgical treatment are beneficial to patients.

Background: Intraperitoneal paclitaxel is proved to be efficient for peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. It remains uncertain the efficacy and safety of the triplets regimen which combined intraperitoneal high‐dose paclitaxel with systemic SOX in gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastasis. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal administration of high‐dose paclitaxel, intravenous oxaliplatin and S‐1 in patients with peritoneal metastatic gastric cancer.Methods: This single‐center, prospective, single‐arm phase II study was conducted between January 2017 and May 2019 in West China Hospital, Sichuan University. Patients diagnosed with primary gastric cancer by histopathology and confirmed synchronous peritoneal metastasis were enrolled. This study aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal administration of high‐dose paclitaxel (80 mg/m², d1), intravenous oxaliplatin (100 mg/m², d1), and S‐1 (80 mg/m², d1‐14) of patients. The primary endpoint was 1‐year overall survival rate, and the second endpoints were progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and adverse events.Results: In this single‐arm phase II clinical trial, 49 patients received SOX combined intraperitoneal high‐dose paclitaxel treatment. One‐year survival rate was 81.6% (95% CI, 68.6–90.0%). Median PFS and OS were 6.50 months (95% CI, 2.89–10.11) and 16.9 months (95% CI, 13.58 to 20.22), respectively; ORR was 55.3% (95% CI, 41.3–68.6) and DCR was 76.6% (95% CI, 62.8–86.4). Thirteen patients underwent second laparoscopic detection, but only nine ultimately underwent radical gastrectomy. Subgroup analysis showed that sPCI ≤12 was a good index for a favorable prognosis. The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (40.8%), anemia (22.4%), leukopenia (18.4%), nausea (14.3%), and vomiting (12.2%). None of the patients had any intraperitoneal catheter‐related complications.Conclusions: Intraperitoneal high‐dose paclitaxel with systemic SOX is an effective and tolerable first‐line treatment for patients with peritoneal metastatic gastric cancer and patients with sPCI≤12 scores might be recommended crowd for this regimen as conversion therapy.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated promising outcomes in small cell lung cancer (SCLC), but not all patients benefit from it. Thus, developing precise treatments for SCLC is a particularly urgent need. In our study, we constructed a novel phenotype for SCLC based on immune signatures. Methods: We clustered patients with SCLC hierarchically in 3 publicly available datasets according to the immune signatures. ESTIMATE and CIBERSORT algorithm were used to evaluate the components of the tumor microenvironment. Moreover, we identified potential mRNA vaccine antigens for patients with SCLC, and qRT-PCR were performed to detect the gene expression. Results: We identified 2 SCLC subtypes and named Immunity High (Immunity_H) and Immunity Low (Immunity_L). Meanwhile, we obtained generally consistent results by analyzing different datasets, suggesting that this classification was reliable. Immunity_H contained the higher number of immune cells and a better prognosis compared to Immunity_L. Gene-set enrichment analysis revealed that several immune-related pathways such as cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction, programmed cell death-Ligand 1 expression and programmed cell death-1 checkpoint pathway in cancer were hyperactivated in the Immunity_H. However, most of the pathways enriched in the Immunity_L were not associated with immunity. Furthermore, we identified 5 potential mRNA vaccine antigens of SCLC (NEK2, NOL4, RALYL, SH3GL2, and ZIC2), and they were expressed higher in Immunity_L, it indicated that Immunity_L maybe more suitable for tumor vaccine development. Conclusions: SCLC can be divided into Immunity_H and Immunity_L subtypes. Immunity_H may be more suitable for treatment with ICIs. NEK2, NOL4, RALYL, SH3GL2, and ZIC2 may be act as potential antigens for SCLC.

Our previous study showed that the features of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-RAS signaling in penile squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) suggested potential benefits of anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for penile SCC. Here, we report, for the first time, a combination of nimotuzumab (an EGFR mAb) with chemotherapy that resulted in a partial response in a 44-year-old patient with penile SCC, who developed bilateral inguinal node metastasis after primary partial penile amputation. The literature of case reports of anti-EGFR mAbs in penile SCC was also reviewed.