ObjectiveTo investigate the relation between disulfidptosis-related genes (DRGs) and prognosis or immunotherapy response of patients with pancreatic cancer (PC). MethodsThe transcriptome data, somatic mutation data, and corresponding clinical information of the patients with PC in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were downloaded. The DRGs mutated in the PC were screened out from the 15 known DRGs. The DRGs subtypes were identified by consensus clustering algorithm, and then the relation between the identified DRGs subtypes and the prognosis of patients with PC, immune cell infiltration or functional enrichment pathway was analyzed. Further, a risk score was calculated according to the DRGs gene expression level, and the patients were categorized into high-risk and low-risk groups based on the mean value of the risk score. The risk score and overall survival of the patients with high-risk and low-risk were compared. Finally, the relation between the risk score and (or) tumor mutation burden (TMB) and the prognosis of patients with PC was assessed. ResultsThe transcriptome data and corresponding clinical information of the 177 patients with PC were downloaded from TCGA, including 161 patients with somatic mutation data. A total of 10 mutated DRGs were screened out. Two DRGs subtypes were identified, namely subtype A and subtype B. The overall survival of PC patients with subtype A was better than that of patients with subtype B (χ2=8.316, P=0.003). The abundance of immune cell infiltration in the PC patients with subtype A was higher and mainly enriched in the metabolic and conduction related pathways as compaired with the patients with subtype B. The mean risk score of 177 patients with PC was 1.921, including 157 cases in the high-risk group and 20 cases in the low-risk group. The risk score of patients with subtype B was higher than that of patients with subtype A (t=14.031, P<0.001). The overall survival of the low-risk group was better than that of the high-risk group (χ2=17.058, P<0.001), and the TMB value of the PC patients with high-risk was higher than that of the PC patients with low-risk (t=5.642, P=0.014). The mean TMB of 161 patients with somatic mutation data was 2.767, including 128 cases in the high-TMB group and 33 cases in the low-TMB group. The overall survival of patients in the high-TMB group was worse than that of patients in the low-TMB group (χ2=7.425, P=0.006). ConclusionDRGs are closely related to the prognosis and immunotherapy response of patients with PC, and targeted treatment of DRGs might potentially provide a new idea for the diagnosis and treatment of PC.
ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of three different modes of blood flow blocking in hepatectomy for primary hepatocellular carcinoma.MethodsThe clinical data of 152 patients with primary hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent hepatectomy and postoperative pathology examination in our department in recent 3 years (2017–2020) were retrospectively analyzed. According to the modes of intraoperative hepatic blood flow occlusion, the patients were divided into three groups: intermittent Pringle method (IPM) group (41 cases), IPM was applied only; hemihepatic group (35 cases), hemihepatic blood flow blocking method was used only; and combined group (76 cases), combined hemihepatic blood flow blocking method and IPM. SPSS software was used to compare the differences of the three groups’ general data, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative liver function indexes. The changes of transaminase levels in the three groups were observed dynamically.ResultsBaseline data of the three groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in operative time, the number of resected liver segments, blood transfusion rate, incidence of complications, and postoperative length of stay among the three groups (all P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss of the combined group and the IPM group were significantly less than that of the hemihepatic group (P<0.05). There was no difference in blood loss between the combined group and the IPM group (P>0.05). However, the blocking times in the combined group were significantly less than those in the IPM group (P<0.05). The transaminases in the three groups were close to the preoperative level on the fifth day after operation. Conclusions In hepatectomy of primary hepatocellular carcinoma, the three blocking modes are safe and effective. The combined application of hemihepatic blood flow blocking method and intermittent Pringle method can significantly reduce intraoperative blood loss, reduce the number of blocking, and do not aggravate the liver function injury.