Literature DB >> 17141421

Minimally invasive cancer surgery improves patient survival rates through less perioperative immunosuppression.

B A Whitson1, J D'Cunha, M A Maddaus.   

Abstract

The import of the immune system to cancer survival is paramount. Immune effector cells are intimately involved in the patient's response to cancer. People with decreased immune function develop cancer more frequently. In the early stages of solid organ malignancies, surgery can potentially be curative. Surgical intervention, in and of itself, is immunosuppressive. Surgical resections are traditionally performed through large incisions. Technologic advances have allowed minimally invasive surgery (MIS) to evolve to the point it is now being used for cancer treatment. Recent minimally invasive series have reported improved survival and recurrence rates, as compared with historical data. We hypothesized that outcome differences for cancer patients undergoing open surgery vs. MIS are due to differential inhibition of immune effector cell function, in response to the different surgical stimulus. This increased immunosuppression after open surgery could potentially inhibit immune effector cell tumor surveillance as well as inhibit scavenging of any residual or micrometastatic disease or of tumor cells shed at the time of the operation. The less immunosuppressive MIS may leave immune function above a threshold level where remaining tumor is cleared. This difference would lead to less recurrence and to survival advantages. A deeper understanding of the integral components of the immune response to surgery would open the door for immunomodulation strategies and be of great clinical utility in guiding neoadjuvant, surgical, or adjuvant therapeutic decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17141421     DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2006.09.063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Hypotheses        ISSN: 0306-9877            Impact factor:   1.538


  7 in total

1.  Measurement of tumour necrosis factor receptors for immune response in colon cancer patients.

Authors:  K Venetsanou; V Kaldis; N Kouzanidis; Ch Papazacharias; J Paraskevopoulos; G Baltopoulos
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 3.984

2.  Gut oxygenation and oxidative damage during and after laparoscopic and open left-sided colon resection: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Luca Gianotti; Luca Nespoli; Simona Rocchetti; Andrea Vignali; Angelo Nespoli; Marco Braga
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  VATS lobectomy has better perioperative outcomes than open lobectomy: CALGB 31001, an ancillary analysis of CALGB 140202 (Alliance).

Authors:  Chukwumere E Nwogu; Jonathan D'Cunha; Herbert Pang; Lin Gu; Xiaofei Wang; William G Richards; Linda J Veit; Todd L Demmy; David J Sugarbaker; Leslie J Kohman; Scott J Swanson
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Thoracoscopic lobectomy versus open lobectomy in stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yi-xin Cai; Xiang-ning Fu; Qin-zi Xu; Wei Sun; Ni Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Sepsis increases perioperative metastases in a murine model.

Authors:  Lee-Hwa Tai; Abhirami A Ananth; Rashmi Seth; Almohanad Alkayyal; Jiqing Zhang; Christiano Tanese de Souza; Phillip Staibano; Michael A Kennedy; Rebecca C Auer
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 4.430

Review 6.  Overview of the outcomes of robotic segmentectomy and lobectomy.

Authors:  Giulia Veronesi; Pierluigi Novellis; Gianluca Perroni
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 3.005

Review 7.  Attacking Postoperative Metastases using Perioperative Oncolytic Viruses and Viral Vaccines.

Authors:  Lee-Hwa Tai; Rebecca Auer
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 6.244

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.