Microwave and steam blanching as pretreatments to hot air drying of orange-fleshed sweet potato (OFSP) were studied. The air-drying experiment was performed at constant temperature of 70°C and airflow of 1.0 m/s. The effective moisture diffusivity varied from 1.5 × 10-9 to 4.4 × 10-9 m2/s, and 1.1 × 10-10 to 7.9×10-10 m2/s, for the microwave and blanched assisted hot air drying, respectively. The activation energy obtained for the various microwave-assisted hot air drying was 29.1 W/mm for 4 min, 68.1 W/mm for 3 min, and 79.7 W/mm for 2 min. Ascorbic acid degradation and formation of brown pigments in the OFSP slices were lower in microwave than in steam blanch-assisted drying. Microwave-assisted drying of OFSP is best governed by Page model, MR = exp(-ktn), while the blanch-assisted followed the logarithmic model, MR = a exp(-kt) + c. To produce better quality OFSP flour, it is recommended to cut the tubers into 3 mm slices, microwave at a power of 630 W for 2 min or blanch for 1 min, 43 seconds prior to hot air drying.[This corrects the article DOI 10.21037/atm.2020.03.229.].Despite significant therapeutic progress, gastric cancer remains among the most deadly forms of cancer encountered in clinical practice, and this remains true even in the context of declining incidence. Outcomes in advanced disease remain poor and therapy is rarely curative in this setting. As our understanding of tumor profile gains sophistication, a growing interest in targeted therapies and moreover the use of tumor profile to inform these therapies has developed in the hopes of altering nearly uniformly poor outcomes. A wide and growing array of molecular targets have been identified in the recent past.  https://www.selleckchem.com/products/rp-6685.html  Targets of potential clinical interest include human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), c-MET, and fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR). This advanced molecular understanding has been increasingly used to justify the off-label usage of targeted therapies, though the efficacy of this approach warrants careful consideration. While targeted agents have demonstrated efficacy across a wide range of malignancies, even with molecular profiling data, efficacy is not assured. It will also be demonstrated that even within the same malignancy, what holds true in the metastatic setting does not necessarily apply to the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting. This review will assess the current evidence for the use of targeted therapies utilizing these biomarkers in the context of gastric and gastroesophageal (GE) junction cancers.Gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer is one of the most common malignancy worldwide. In unresectable or metastatic disease, the prognosis is poor and is generally less than a year. Standard front-line chemotherapy includes two- or three-drug regimens with the addition of trastuzumab in HER2-positive disease. With an increased understanding of the biology of cancer over the past few decades, targeted therapies have made their way into the treatment paradigm of many cancers. They been examined in the first- and second-line settings in the treatment of gastroesophageal cancer though has yielded few viable treatment options. One success is ramucirumab either as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel is the preferred choice in second-line therapy. While immunotherapy has been considered a breakthrough in oncology over the past decade, the response rates in gastric and gastroesophageal cancers have been relatively low compared to other cancers, resulting in its limited approval and mostly reserved for second-line therapy or beyond. In this article, we will review the standard first- and second-line treatment regimens. Furthermore, this article will review the use of targeted therapies and immunotherapy in treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal cancers. Lastly, we will touch upon future treatment strategies that are currently under investigation.Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide. While relatively uncommon in the United States, worldwide it is the 5th most common cancer diagnosed. Almost half of patients present with locoregional disease. Even with advanced surgical techniques and adjuvant perioperative treatment the prognosis for patients in this cohort is still dismal. Perioperative chemotherapy and/or radiation have been used in the last several decades in an attempt to improve outcomes in locally advanced resectable gastric cancer. In this article, we will review the development of these multimodal treatment strategies over the past two to three decades. We will compare these treatment modalities and their impact on survival outcomes. We will review the evidence for perioperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, used in isolation and in combination. We will evaluate the evidence for these various treatment strategies and discuss how this impacts the current guidelines and recommendations. While advanced locoregional gastric cancer continues to carry significant mortality, several recent studies have added to the armament of treatment options and have seen significant improvement in progression free and overall survival in this patient population. Ongoing studies into perioperative management continue to investigate alternative treatment options and best practice for locally advanced resectable gastric cancer.Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a condition resulting from an acquired metaplastic epithelial change in the esophagus in response to gastroesophageal reflux. BE is the only known precursor lesion to esophageal adenocarcinoma, and can progress from non-dysplastic BE (NDBE) to low grade dysplasia (LGD) and high grade dysplasia (HGD), and ultimately invasive carcinoma. Although the risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in NBDE is less than 0.5% per year, there has been a rising incidence of EAC in Western countries, which continue to drive efforts to optimize screening and surveillance methods. The current gold standard for diagnosis is esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), and there has been significant interest in alternative, minimally invasive methods for screening which would be more readily accessible in the primary care setting. Surveillance endoscopy in 3-5 years is recommended for NDBE given the low progression to EAC. The mainstay of treatment for LGD and HGD is endoscopic eradication therapy (EET).