Search

Your search keyword '"Marrelli, Daniele"' showing total 1,084 results
Start Over Author "Marrelli, Daniele"
1,084 results on '"Marrelli, Daniele"'

251. Predicting recurrence after curative resection for gastric cancer: External validation of the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) prognostic scoring system

Author

Barchi, L. C, Yagi, O. K, Jacob, C. E, Mucerino, D. R, Ribeiro, U, Marrelli, Daniele, Roviello, Franco, Cecconello, I, and Zilberstein, B.

Subjects
Adult, Male, Adenocarcinoma, Risk Assessment, Nomogram, Disease-Free Survival, Cohort Studies, Recurrence, Gastrectomy, Predictive Value of Tests, Stomach Neoplasms, Humans, Neoplasm Invasiveness, Gastric cancer, Lymphadenectomy, Stomach neoplasm, Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Retrospective Studies, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Survival Analysis, Nomograms, Treatment Outcome, Female, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Abstract

Most nomograms for Gastric Cancer (GC) were developed to predict overall survival (OS) after curative resection. The Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) prognostic scoring system (PSS) was designed to predict the recurrence risk after curative treatment based on pathologic tumor stage and treatment performed (D1-D2/D3 lymphadenectomy). This study was carried out to externally validate the GIRCG's PSS.Adopting the same criteria used by GIRCG to build the PSS, 185 patients with GC operated with curative intention were selected. The median follow-up period was 77.8 months (1.93-150.8) for all patients and 102.5 months (60.9-150.8) for patients free of disease. The NRI (net reclassification improvement) was calculated to estimate the overall improvement in the reclassification of patients using the PSS in place of the TNM stage system.GC recurrence occurred in 70 (37.8%) patients. The mean time to recurrence was 22.2 (range 1.9-98.1) months. For patients with recurrence, the gain in the proportion of reclassification was 0.257 (p 0.001), indicating an improvement of 26%. For patients without recurrence, the gain in the proportion of reclassification was -0.122 (p 0.001), indicating a worsening of 12%. The NRI calculated was 0.135 (p = 0.0527).The GIRCG's PSS, which predicts the likelihood of recurrence after radical surgical treatment for GC, is more accurate than TNM system to predict recurrence mainly for high-risk patients. Yet, the PSS does not have the same effectiveness for low-risk patients, overestimating the chance of recurrence occurs even for disease-free patients.

Published
2015

252. The role of staging laparoscopy in cM+ gastric cancer patients.

Author

Solaini, Leonardo, Bencivenga, Maria, Marrelli, Daniele, Milone, Marco, Marino, Elisabetta, De Pascale, Stefano, Gualtierotti, Monica, Rossella, Reddavid, Rosa, Fausto, Sacco, Michele, Giovanni, Ferrari, Degiuli, Maurizio, Romario, Uberto Fumagalli, Graziosi, Luigina, De Palma, Giovanni, Roviello, Franco, Morgagni, Paolo, and Ercolani, Giorgio

Subjects
STOMACH cancer, CANCER patients, LAPAROSCOPY
Published
2024
Full Text
View/download PDF

256. Follow-up after gastrectomy for cancer: the Charter Scaligero Consensus Conference

Author

Baiocchi, Gian Luca, D'Ugo, Domenico, Coit, Daniel, Hardwick, Richard, Kassab, Paulo, Nashimoto, Atsushi, Marrelli, Daniele, Allum, William, Berruti, Alfredo, Chandramohan, Servarayan Murugesan, Coburn, Natalie, Gonzalez-Moreno, Santiago, Hoelscher, Arnulf, Jansen, Edwin, Leja, Marcis, Mariette, Christophe, Meyer, Hans-Joachim, Moenig, Stefan, Morgagni, Paolo, Ott, Katia, Preston, Shaun, Rha, Sun Young, Roviello, Franco, Sano, Takeshi, Sasako, Mitsuru, Shimada, Hideaki, Schuhmacher, Cristoph, Bok-yan, Jimmy So, Strong, Vivian, Yoshikawa, Takaki, Terashima, Masanori, Ter-Ovanesov, Michail, Van der Velde, Cornelis, Memo, Maurizio, Castelli, Francesco, Pecorelli, Sergio, Detogni, Claudio, Kodera, Yasuhiro, de Manzoni, Giovanni, Baiocchi, Gian Luca, D'Ugo, Domenico, Coit, Daniel, Hardwick, Richard, Kassab, Paulo, Nashimoto, Atsushi, Marrelli, Daniele, Allum, William, Berruti, Alfredo, Chandramohan, Servarayan Murugesan, Coburn, Natalie, Gonzalez-Moreno, Santiago, Hoelscher, Arnulf, Jansen, Edwin, Leja, Marcis, Mariette, Christophe, Meyer, Hans-Joachim, Moenig, Stefan, Morgagni, Paolo, Ott, Katia, Preston, Shaun, Rha, Sun Young, Roviello, Franco, Sano, Takeshi, Sasako, Mitsuru, Shimada, Hideaki, Schuhmacher, Cristoph, Bok-yan, Jimmy So, Strong, Vivian, Yoshikawa, Takaki, Terashima, Masanori, Ter-Ovanesov, Michail, Van der Velde, Cornelis, Memo, Maurizio, Castelli, Francesco, Pecorelli, Sergio, Detogni, Claudio, Kodera, Yasuhiro, and de Manzoni, Giovanni

Abstract

Presently, there is no scientific evidence supporting a definite role for follow-up after gastrectomy for cancer, and clinical practices are quite different around the globe. The aim of this consensus conference was to present an ideal prototype of follow-up after gastrectomy for cancer, based on shared experiences and taking into account the need to rationalize the diagnostic course without losing the possibility of detecting local recurrence at a potentially curable stage. On June 19-22, 2013 in Verona (Italy), during the 10th International Gastric Cancer Congress (IGCC) of the International Gastric Cancer Association, a consensus meeting was held, concluding a 6-month, Web-based, consensus conference entitled Rationale of oncological follow-up after gastrectomy for cancer. Forty-eight experts, with a geographical distribution reflecting different health cultures worldwide, participated in the consensus conference, and 39 attended the consensus meeting. Six statements were finally approved, displayed in a plenary session and signed by the vast majority of the 10th IGCC participants. These statements are attached as an annex to the Charter Scaligero on Gastric Cancer. After gastrectomy for cancer, oncological follow-up should be offered to patients; it should be tailored to the stage of the disease, mainly based on cross-sectional imaging, and should be discontinued after 5 years.

Published
2016

257. Gastric cancer: Current status of lymph node dissection

Author

Degiuli, Maurizio, De Manzoni, Giovanni, Di Leo, Alberto, D'Ugo, Domenico, Galasso, Erica, Marrelli, Daniele, Petrioli, Roberto, Polom, Karol, Roviello, Franco, Santullo, Francesco, Morino, Mario, D'Ugo, Domenico (ORCID:0000-0001-6657-6318), Degiuli, Maurizio, De Manzoni, Giovanni, Di Leo, Alberto, D'Ugo, Domenico, Galasso, Erica, Marrelli, Daniele, Petrioli, Roberto, Polom, Karol, Roviello, Franco, Santullo, Francesco, Morino, Mario, and D'Ugo, Domenico (ORCID:0000-0001-6657-6318)

Abstract

D2 procedure has been accepted in Far East as the standard treatment for both early (EGC) and advanced gastric cancer (AGC) for many decades. Recently EGC has been successfully treated with endoscopy by endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection, when restricted or extended Gotoda's criteria can be applied and D1+ surgery is offered only to patients not fitted for less invasive treatment. Furthermore, two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been demonstrating the non inferiority of minimally invasive technique as compared to standard open surgery for the treatment of early cases and recently the feasibility of adequate D1+ dissection has been demonstrated also for the robot assisted technique. In case of AGC the debate on the extent of nodal dissection has been open for many decades. While D2 gastrectomy was performed as the standard procedure in eastern countries, mostly based on observational and retrospective studies, in the west theMedical Research Council (MRC), Dutch and Italian RCTs have been conducted to show a survival benefit of D2 over D1 with evidence based medicine. Unfortunately both the MRC and the Dutch trials failed to show a survival benefit after the D2 procedure, mostly due to the significant increase of postoperative morbidity and mortality, which was referred to splenopancreatectomy. Only 15 years after the conclusion of its accrual, the Dutch trial could report a significant decrease of recurrence after D2 procedure. Recently the long term survival analysis of the Italian RCT could demonstrate a benefit for patients with positive nodes treated with D2 gastrectomy without splenopancreatectomy. As nowadays also in western countries D2 procedure can be done safely with pancreas preserving technique and without preventive splenectomy, it has been suggested in several national guidelines as the recommended procedure for patients with AGC.

Published
2016

261. The Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) guidelines for gastric cancer staging and treatment: 2015

Author

De Manzoni, Giovanni, primary, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Baiocchi, Gian Luca, additional, Morgagni, Paolo, additional, Saragoni, Luca, additional, Degiuli, Maurizio, additional, Donini, Annibale, additional, Fumagalli, Uberto, additional, Mazzei, Maria Antonietta, additional, Pacelli, Fabio, additional, Tomezzoli, Anna, additional, Berselli, Mattia, additional, Catalano, Filippo, additional, Di Leo, Alberto, additional, Framarini, Massimo, additional, Giacopuzzi, Simone, additional, Graziosi, Luigina, additional, Marchet, Alberto, additional, Marini, Mario, additional, Milandri, Carlo, additional, Mura, Gianni, additional, Orsenigo, Elena, additional, Quagliuolo, Vittorio, additional, Rausei, Stefano, additional, Ricci, Riccardo, additional, Rosa, Fausto, additional, Roviello, Giandomenico, additional, Sansonetti, Andrea, additional, Sgroi, Giovanni, additional, Tiberio, Guido Alberto Massimo, additional, Verlato, Giuseppe, additional, Vindigni, Carla, additional, Rosati, Riccardo, additional, and Roviello, Franco, additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

268. Assessing the feasibility of full robotic interaortocaval nodal dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer

Author

Roviello, Franco, Piagnerelli, Riccardo, Ferrara, Francesco, Caputo, Edda, Scheiterle, Maximilian, and Marrelli, Daniele

Subjects
Male, GI/cancer, Biophysics, Computer Science Applications1707 Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Anastomosis, Roux-en-Y, Adenocarcinoma, GI, Robotic Surgical Procedures, Gastrectomy, Stomach Neoplasms, Pneumoperitoneum, Surgical, Lymphatic Metastasis, Feasibility Studies, Humans, Lymph Node Excision, Abdominal, Surgery, Human/robotic, Aged
Abstract

The clinical value of super-extended lymph node dissection (D2(+) ) is still debated. This procedure has not been reported using the laparoscopic or robotic approach. Although this technique, in low-volume centres, could lead to an increased risk of morbidity, in high-volume centres morbidity and mortality are similar to those of the standard D2 lymphadenectomy. Robotic surgery could overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery, especially in the removal of posterior nodal stations. In this report we describe the feasibility of fully robotic interaortocaval lymphadenectomy, following similar steps to those of the traditional open approach.The procedure was a total gastrectomy with oesophago-jejunal Roux-en-Y reconstruction in a 73 year-old male patient with clinically advanced (cT3) gastric adenocarcinoma, located in the lesser curvature (middle-upper third). The da Vinci® Si HD with a double-docking robot set-up was employed.The histological specimen examination showed a pT4aN3bM0, Borrmann type III, intestinal histotype, G3 gastric adenocarcinoma. No involvement of resection margins was found (R0 resection). The numbers of total harvested and positive nodes were 57 and 41, respectively; the number of harvested interaortocaval nodes was 14, and all of them were negative for tumour involvement. Operative time for lymphadenectomy was comparable with that of the traditional open approach. The postoperative period was uneventful and hospital stay was 11 days.Robotic-assisted interaortocaval lymphadenectomy is a feasible technique in high-volume centres for gastric cancer surgery, and should be considered in curative surgery for selected advanced cases, especially for the high-risk group of lymph node metastases in the posterior area.

Published
2014

269. International consensus on a complications list after gastrectomy for cancer.

Author

Baiocchi, Gian Luca, Giacopuzzi, Simone, Marrelli, Daniele, Reim, Daniel, Piessen, Guillaume, Matos da Costa, Paulo, Reynolds, John V., Meyer, Hans-Joachim, Morgagni, Paolo, Gockel, Ines, Lara Santos, Lucio, Jensen, Lone Susanne, Murphy, Thomas, Preston, Shaun R., Ter-Ovanesov, Mikhail, Fumagalli Romario, Uberto, Degiuli, Maurizio, Kielan, Wojciech, Mönig, Stefan, and Kołodziejczyk, Piotr

Subjects
SURGICAL complications, DISEASES, MORTALITY
Abstract

Background: Perioperative complications can affect outcomes after gastrectomy for cancer, with high mortality and morbidity rates ranging between 10 and 40%. The absence of a standardized system for recording complications generates wide variation in evaluating their impacts on outcomes and hinders proposals of quality-improvement projects. The aim of this study was to provide a list of defined gastrectomy complications approved through international consensus.Methods: The Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group consists of 34 European gastric cancer experts who are members of the International Gastric Cancer Association. A group meeting established the work plan for study implementation through Delphi surveys. A consensus was reached regarding a set of standardized methods to define gastrectomy complications.Results: A standardized list of 27 defined complications (grouped into 3 intraoperative, 14 postoperative general, and 10 postoperative surgical complications) was created to provide a simple but accurate template for recording individual gastrectomy complications. A consensus was reached for both the list of complications that should be considered major adverse events after gastrectomy for cancer and their specific definitions. The study group also agreed that an assessment of each surgical case should be completed at patient discharge and 90 days postoperatively using a Complication Recording Sheet.Conclusion: The list of defined complications (soon to be validated in an international multicenter study) and the ongoing development of an electronic datasheet app to record them provide the basic infrastructure to reach the ultimate goals of standardized international data collection, establishment of benchmark results, and fostering of quality-improvement projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

270. Oncologic Effectiveness and Safety of Bursectomy in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analysis.

Author

Marano, Luigi, Polom, Karol, Bartoli, Alberto, Spaziani, Alessandro, De Luca, Raffaele, Lorenzon, Laura, Di Martino, Natale, Marrelli, Daniele, Roviello, Franco, and Castagnoli, Giampaolo

Subjects
META-analysis, STOMACH cancer, PATIENT safety, THERAPEUTICS, OPERATIVE surgery
Abstract

Purpose/Aim: In the past few decades some researchers have questioned whether bursectomy for gastric cancer is essential from an oncological point of view and no consistent recommendations have been proposed. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to investigate the oncologic effectiveness and safety of bursectomy for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer patients. Materials and Methods: We planned and performed this systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Results: Overall, four studies with a total of 1,340 patients met inclusion criteria. The pooled hazard ratio for overall survival between the bursectomy versus nonbursectomy groups was [HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.66–1.11, p =.252]. Interestingly, the pooled HR between the two groups in serosa-positive cases subgroup, showed a significant improvement of overall survival rate in favor of bursectomy [HR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.73–0.99, p <.05]. Conclusions: Bursectomy represents a surgical procedure that might be able to improve overall survival in serosa positive gastric cancer patients. However, a definitive conclusion could not be made because of the studies' methodological limitations. This meta-analysis points to the urgent need of high quality, large-scaled, clinical trials with short- as well as long-term evaluation comparing bursectomy with non bursectomy procedures, in a controlled randomized manner, helping future researches and establishing a modern and tailored approach to gastric cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

273. Clinical impact of molecular classifications in gastric cancer.

Author

Marrelli, Daniele, Polom, Karol, Neri, Alessandro, and Roviello, Franco

Abstract

Treatment options to gastric cancer (GC) have been changing in recent years from a standard to a tailored approach. Different individualized procedures can range from endoscopic resection, D2 with open or minimally invasive approach, to neo-adjuvant therapy followed by extended surgery. In more advanced stages, a combined approach with the inclusion of intraperitoneal chemo-hyperthermia (HIPEC) may represent a new advanced option. The inclusion of histological type according to Laurén classification in the flowchart of treatment could increase both accuracy and effectiveness of such tailored approach. New molecular classifications of GC have been introduced recently and translational clinical studies are ongoing. These classifications are expected to be included in multidisciplinary treatment of GC. In particular, in the group with microsatellite instability a less extended lymphadenectomy may be proposed. Also tailored neo-adjuvant treatment may be proposed according to molecular classifications. The group of patients with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition shows very high propensity to peritoneal dissemination, as well as N-metastases, and may benefit from prophylactic HIPEC and extended lymphadenectomy when confirmed in prospective trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

274. Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer: how to look for and how to manage it.

Author

Polom, Karol, Marrelli, Daniele, D’Ignazio, Alessia, and Roviello, Franco

Abstract

With a current molecular revolution, hereditary gastric cancer represents a small group of patients that require a special multidisciplinary treatment. Surgeons being a member of the multidisciplinary teams are an important part of the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of these patients. The prophylactic nature of the gastrectomy with all different problems associated with this procedure need to be widely discussed with patients. We present a review of how to look for and how to manage a hereditary diffuse-type gastric cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

275. Cutoff values of major surgical complications rates after gastrectomy.

Author

Baiocchi, Gian Luca, Giacopuzzi, Simone, and Marrelli, Daniele

Abstract

Gastric cancer is one of the most frequent cancers worldwide, and surgical resection remains the mainstay of the therapeutic pathway. Gastrectomy for cancer is still performed in many hospitals, and centralization remains limited to a small number of health systems. Morbidity and mortality after surgery for gastric cancer are surprisingly high. However, while mortality is obviously defined, major morbidity definitions still present some critical points. The aim of this study is to underline the need for universally accepted definitions of major complications and to describe the research agenda of a multicenter, European-based, prospective project launched by the European Chapter of the International Gastric Cancer Association (IGCA), with the goal of providing a list of complications related to gastrectomy for cancer with their definitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

276. Synchronous metastatic gastric cancer-molecular background and clinical implications with special attention to mismatch repair deficiency.

Author

Marrelli, Daniele, Roviello, Franco, Polom, Karol, Böger, Christine, Behrens, Hans-Michael, Röcken, Christoph, Smyth, Elizabeth, Marano, Luigi, Becker, Thomas, and Lordick, Florian

Subjects
STOMACH cancer, PROGNOSIS, METASTASIS, LYMPH nodes, MICROSATELLITE repeats
Abstract

Background Current guidelines recommend that metastatic gastric cancer should not be treated with surgery unless this is required for symptom control. We hypothesized that patients with mismatch repair deficiency (MMRd) gastric cancer and metastatic disease detected at the timepoint of surgical resection would have superior survival compared to patients with MMRd cancers in the same setting. Methods Clinicopathological details and survival data were collected from prospective databases at two large European centers on patients who had undergone surgery and were diagnosed with synchronous stage IV gastric cancer (distant lymph nodes, positive peritoneal cytology, peritoneal, and distant metastases) at the timepoint of surgery. Resection specimens were tested for the presence of microsatellite instability using a standard 5 mononucleotide repeat panel. Results One hundred and seventy six patients with resected stage IV gastric cancer were identified. 14/176 (8.0%) had MSI-H (high) disease. There was no significant difference between the clinical and pathological characteristics of MSI and microsatellite stable (MSS) patients. No differences in the type of metastases were observed between MSI and MSS groups. Patients who were MSI-H had superior OS compared to MSS patients (median OS 15.9 vs. 8 months, p = 0.023). However, in Cox regression multivariate analysis only liver and peritoneal metastases were independent predictors of survival. Conclusions Surgically treated patients with MSI-H stage IV gastric cancer have a better survival than patients with MSS gastric cancer. Further analysis of the role of surgery in MSI stage IV GC is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

287. Risk factor analysis for involvement of resection margins in gastric and esophagogastric junction cancer: an Italian multicenter study

Author

Bissolati, Massimiliano, primary, Desio, Matteo, additional, Rosa, Fausto, additional, Rausei, Stefano, additional, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Baiocchi, Gian Luca, additional, De Manzoni, Giovanni, additional, Chiari, Damiano, additional, Guarneri, Giovanni, additional, Pacelli, Fabio, additional, De Franco, Lorenzo, additional, Molfino, Sarah, additional, Cipollari, Chiara, additional, and Orsenigo, Elena, additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

288. Gastric cancer: Current status of lymph node dissection

Author

Degiuli, Maurizio, primary, De Manzoni, Giovanni, additional, Di Leo, Alberto, additional, D’Ugo, Domenico, additional, Galasso, Erica, additional, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Petrioli, Roberto, additional, Polom, Karol, additional, Roviello, Franco, additional, Santullo, Francesco, additional, and Morino, Mario, additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

290. Global validation of the WSES Sepsis Severity Score for patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections: a prospective multicentre study (WISS Study)

Author

Sartelli, Massimo, primary, Abu-Zidan, Fikri M., additional, Catena, Fausto, additional, Griffiths, Ewen A., additional, Di Saverio, Salomone, additional, Coimbra, Raul, additional, Ordoñez, Carlos A., additional, Leppaniemi, Ari, additional, Fraga, Gustavo P., additional, Coccolini, Federico, additional, Agresta, Ferdinando, additional, Abbas, Asrhaf, additional, Abdel Kader, Saleh, additional, Agboola, John, additional, Amhed, Adamu, additional, Ajibade, Adesina, additional, Akkucuk, Seckin, additional, Alharthi, Bandar, additional, Anyfantakis, Dimitrios, additional, Augustin, Goran, additional, Baiocchi, Gianluca, additional, Bala, Miklosh, additional, Baraket, Oussama, additional, Bayrak, Savas, additional, Bellanova, Giovanni, additional, Beltràn, Marcelo A., additional, Bini, Roberto, additional, Boal, Matthew, additional, Borodach, Andrey V., additional, Bouliaris, Konstantinos, additional, Branger, Frederic, additional, Brunelli, Daniele, additional, Catani, Marco, additional, Che Jusoh, Asri, additional, Chichom-Mefire, Alain, additional, Cocorullo, Gianfranco, additional, Colak, Elif, additional, Costa, David, additional, Costa, Silvia, additional, Cui, Yunfeng, additional, Curca, Geanina Loredana, additional, Curry, Terry, additional, Das, Koray, additional, Delibegovic, Samir, additional, Demetrashvili, Zaza, additional, Di Carlo, Isidoro, additional, Drozdova, Nadezda, additional, El Zalabany, Tamer, additional, Enani, Mushira Abdulaziz, additional, Faro, Mario, additional, Gachabayov, Mahir, additional, Giménez Maurel, Teresa, additional, Gkiokas, Georgios, additional, Gomes, Carlos Augusto, additional, Gonsaga, Ricardo Alessandro Teixeira, additional, Guercioni, Gianluca, additional, Guner, Ali, additional, Gupta, Sanjay, additional, Gutierrez, Sandra, additional, Hutan, Martin, additional, Ioannidis, Orestis, additional, Isik, Arda, additional, Izawa, Yoshimitsu, additional, Jain, Sumita A., additional, Jokubauskas, Mantas, additional, Karamarkovic, Aleksandar, additional, Kauhanen, Saila, additional, Kaushik, Robin, additional, Kenig, Jakub, additional, Khokha, Vladimir, additional, Kim, Jae Il, additional, Kong, Victor, additional, Koshy, Renol, additional, Krasniqi, Avidyl, additional, Kshirsagar, Ashok, additional, Kuliesius, Zygimantas, additional, Lasithiotakis, Konstantinos, additional, Leão, Pedro, additional, Lee, Jae Gil, additional, Leon, Miguel, additional, Lizarazu Pérez, Aintzane, additional, Lohsiriwat, Varut, additional, López-Tomassetti Fernandez, Eudaldo, additional, Lostoridis, Eftychios, additional, Mn, Raghuveer, additional, Major, Piotr, additional, Marinis, Athanasios, additional, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Martinez-Perez, Aleix, additional, Marwah, Sanjay, additional, McFarlane, Michael, additional, Melo, Renato Bessa, additional, Mesina, Cristian, additional, Michalopoulos, Nick, additional, Moldovanu, Radu, additional, Mouaqit, Ouadii, additional, Munyika, Akutu, additional, Negoi, Ionut, additional, Nikolopoulos, Ioannis, additional, Nita, Gabriela Elisa, additional, Olaoye, Iyiade, additional, Omari, Abdelkarim, additional, Ossa, Paola Rodríguez, additional, Ozkan, Zeynep, additional, Padmakumar, Ramakrishnapillai, additional, Pata, Francesco, additional, Pereira Junior, Gerson Alves, additional, Pereira, Jorge, additional, Pintar, Tadeja, additional, Pouggouras, Konstantinos, additional, Prabhu, Vinod, additional, Rausei, Stefano, additional, Rems, Miran, additional, Rios-Cruz, Daniel, additional, Sakakushev, Boris, additional, Sánchez de Molina, Maria Luisa, additional, Seretis, Charampolos, additional, Shelat, Vishal, additional, Simões, Romeo Lages, additional, Sinibaldi, Giovanni, additional, Skrovina, Matej, additional, Smirnov, Dmitry, additional, Spyropoulos, Charalampos, additional, Tepp, Jaan, additional, Tezcaner, Tugan, additional, Tolonen, Matti, additional, Torba, Myftar, additional, Ulrych, Jan, additional, Uzunoglu, Mustafa Yener, additional, van Dellen, David, additional, van Ramshorst, Gabrielle H., additional, Vasquez, Giorgio, additional, Venara, Aurélien, additional, Vereczkei, Andras, additional, Vettoretto, Nereo, additional, Vlad, Nutu, additional, Yadav, Sanjay Kumar, additional, Yilmaz, Tonguç Utku, additional, Yuan, Kuo-Ching, additional, Zachariah, Sanoop Koshy, additional, Zida, Maurice, additional, Zilinskas, Justas, additional, and Ansaloni, Luca, additional

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

292. Krukenberg Tumors of Gastric Origin: The Rationale of Surgical Resection and Perioperative Treatments in a Multicenter Western Experience

Author

Rosa, Fausto, primary, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Morgagni, Paolo, additional, Cipollari, Chiara, additional, Vittimberga, Giovanni, additional, Framarini, Massimo, additional, Cozzaglio, Luca, additional, Pedrazzani, Corrado, additional, Berardi, Stefano, additional, Baiocchi, Gian Luca, additional, Roviello, Franco, additional, Portolani, Nazario, additional, de Manzoni, Giovanni, additional, Costamagna, Guido, additional, Doglietto, Giovanni Battista, additional, and Pacelli, Fabio, additional

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

294. Clinical value and impact on prognosis of peri-operative CA 19-9 serum levels in stage I and II adenocarcinoma of the pancreas

Author

Piagnerelli, Riccardo, primary, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Roviello, Giandomenico, additional, Ferrara, Francesco, additional, Di Mare, Giulio, additional, Voglino, Costantino, additional, Petrioli, Roberto, additional, Marini, Mario, additional, Macchiarelli, Raffaele, additional, and Roviello, Franco, additional

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

297. Treatment of advanced oesophagogastric cancer with FOLFOX-4 regimen followed by leucovorin/bolus and continuous infusion 5-FU as maintenance chemotherapy in patients aged ≥75years with impaired performance status

Author

Petrioli, Roberto, primary, Francini, Edoardo, additional, Roviello, Franco, additional, Marrelli, Daniele, additional, Miano, Salvatora Tindara, additional, Fiaschi, Anna Ida, additional, Laera, Letizia, additional, Bellini, Marco Antonio, additional, and Roviello, Giandomenico, additional

Published
2015
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results