Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 24, Issue 6, pp 1510–1512 | Cite as

Open versus laparoscopic versus robotic gastrectomy for cancer: need for comparative-effectiveness quality

Letter

Notes

Disclosures

Georgios Baltogiannis, Dimosthenis Ziogas, and Georgios Glantzounis have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Stafford RS, Wagner TH, Lavori PW (2009) New, but not improved? Incorporating comp arative-effectiveness information into FDA labeling. N Engl J Med 361(13):1230–1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garber AM, Tunis SR (2009) Does comparative-effectiveness research threaten personalized medicine? N Engl J Med 360:1925–1927CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liakakos T, Roukos DH (2008) More controversy than ever: challenges and promises towards personalized treatment of gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 15:956–960CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Briasoulis E, Liakakos T, Dova L, Fatouros M, Tsekeris P, Roukos DH, Kappas AM (2006) Selecting a specific pre- or postoperative adjuvant therapy for individual patients with operable gastric cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 6:931–939CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roukos DH (2009) Genome-wide association studies and aggressive surgery toward individualized prevention, and improved local control and overall survival for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 16:795–798CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kappas AM, Roukos DH (2002) Quality of surgery determinant for the outcome of patient with gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 9:828–830CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roukos DH, Paraschou P, Lorenz M (2000) Distal gastric cancer and extensive surgery: a new evaluation method based on the study of the status of residual lymph nodes after limited surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 7:719–726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kappas AM, Fatouros M, Roukos DH (2004) Is it time to change surgical strategy for gastric cancer in the United States? Ann Surg Oncol 11:727–730CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roukos DH (1998) Extended lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer: when, for whom, and why. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 80:16–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roukos DH (2000) Extended (D2) lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: do patients benefit? Ann Surg Oncol 7:253–255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roukos DH, Hottenrott C, Encke A, Baltogiannis G, Casioumis D (1994) Primary gastric lymphomas: a clinicopathologic study with literature review. Surg Oncol 3:115–125CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roukos DH (2004) Early-stage gastric cancer: a highly treatable disease. Ann Surg Oncol 11:127–129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roukos DH, Lorenz M, Karakostas K, Paraschou P, Batsis C, Kappas AM (2001) Pathological serosa and node-based classification accurately predicts gastric cancer recurrence risk and outcome, and determines potential and limitation of a Japanese-style extensive surgery for Western patients: a prospective with quality control 10-year follow-up study. Br J Cancer 84:1602–1609CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim MC, Heo GU, Jung GJ (2009) Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: surgical techniques and clinical merits. Surg Endosc. August 18 (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dolgin E (2009) Collins sets out his vision for the NIH. Nature 460:939CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roukos DH (2009) Breast cancer outcomes: the crucial role of the breast surgeon in the era of personal genetics and systems biology. Ann Surg 249:1067–1068CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ziogas D, Roukos DH (2009) Genetics and personal genomics for personalized breast cancer surgery: progress and challenges in research and clinical practice. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1771–1782CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roukos DH (2009) Personalized cancer diagnostics and therapeutics. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 9:227–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roukos DH (2009) Mea culpa with cancer-targeted therapy: new thinking and new agents design for novel, causal networks-based, personalized biomedicine. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 9:217–221CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roukos DH (2009) Genome-wide association studies: how predictable is a person’s cancer risk? Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 9:389–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roukos DH, Kappas AM, Agnantis NJ (2003) Perspectives and risks of breast-conservation therapy for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 10:718–721CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roukos DH (2009) Twenty-one-gene assay: challenges and promises in translating personal genomics and whole-genome scans into personalized treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27:1337–1338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roukos DH (2009) Radiation therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 360:1362–1363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Roukos DH, Ziogas D (2009) Human genetic and structural genomic variation: would genome-wide association studies be the solution for cancer complexity like Alexander the Great for the “Gordian Knot”? Ann Surg Oncol 16:774–775CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roukos DH (2008) Breast-cancer stromal cells with TP53 mutations. N Engl J Med 358:1636CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roukos DH (2007) Prognosis of breast cancer in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. N Engl J Med 357:1555–1556CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Roukos DH (2009) Assessing both genetic variation (SNPs/CNVs) and gene–environment interactions may lead to personalized gastric cancer prevention. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 9:1–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ziogas D, Baltogiannis G, Fatouros M, Roukos DH (2008) Identifying and preventing high-risk gastric cancer individuals with CDH1 mutations. Ann Surg 247:714–715CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Roukos DH (2009) Personal genomics and genome-wide association studies: novel discoveries but limitations for practical personalized medicine. Ann Surg Oncol 16:77–773Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roukos DH (2010) Novel clinico-genome network modeling for revolutionizing genotype-phenotype-based personalized cancer care. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 10(1):33–48CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Roukos DH (2009) Isolated tumor cells in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 361:1994–1995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Roukos DH, Tzakos A, Zografos G (2009) Current concerns and challenges towards tailored anti-angiogenic therapy in cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 9(10):1413–1416 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ziogas D, Roukos DH (2009) CDH1 testing: can it predict the prophylactic or therapeutic nature of total gastrectomy in hereditary diffuse gastric cancer? Ann Surg Oncol 16(10):2678–2681CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liakakos T, Roukos DH (2009) Randomized evidence for laparoscopic gastrectomy short-term quality of life improvement and challenges for improving long-term outcomes. Ann Surg 250(2):349–350 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liakakos T, Roukos D (2008) Laparoscopic gastrectomy: advances enable wide clinical application. Surg Endosc 22(6):1553–1555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Roukos DH (2009) Laparoscopic gastrectomy and personal genomics: high-volume surgeons and predictive biomedicine may govern the future for resectable gastric cancer. Ann Surg 250:650–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of IoanninaIoanninaGreece

Personalised recommendations