Abstract. Background: Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are characterized by presence of high proteolytic activity, atherosclerotic lesions, extensive transmural inflammation and the presence of variably sized and shaped intraluminal thrombus (ILT). Therefore, we evaluated a possible association between plasma matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), homocysteine (Hcy), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels and ILT thickness in patients with AAA. Methods: Plasma concentrations of MMP-9, Hcy and hsCRP were determined and ILT thickness was measured in 71 patients with AAA. They were divided into 2 groups according to ILT thickness: 34 patients with ILT mean thickness 9 mm and 37 patients with ILT < 9 mm. Results: Plasma MMP-9 and CRP concentrations in patients with thin ILT were significantly higher than in group with thick ILT (medians 610 vs. 485 ng/mL, p = 0.00003, and 7.7 vs. 3.3 mg/L, p < 0.00001, respectively). In contrast, plasma Hcy concentrations in patients with thin ILT were significantly lower than in the group with thick ILT (medians 14.3 vs. 19.2 µmol/L, p < 0.00001). Multiple regression models adjusted for age and AAA diameter showed that thin ILT is an independent predictor of high MMP-9 and CRP concentrations, while thick ILT predicts high Hcy concentrations. Conclusions: Association of higher plasma levels of MMP-9 and CRP with thin ILT may be related to two phenomena: thin thrombi convey more elastolysis-stimulating factors from blood to the AAA wall and thin thrombi convey more factors involved in proteolysis and inflammation from AAA wall to blood. The association of thin ILT with lower plasma Hcy concentrations may be related to the role of Hcy as a prothrombotic marker and needs further research.
BackgroundThe addition of MRI to mammography and ultrasound for breast cancer screening has been shown to improve screening sensitivity for high risk women, but there is little data to date for women at average or intermediate risk.MethodsTwo thousand nine hundred and ninety-five women, aged 40 to 65 years with no previous history of breast cancer were enrolled in a screening program, which consisted of two rounds of MRI, ultrasound and mammography, one year apart. Three hundred and fifty-six women had a CHEK2 mutation, 370 women had a first-degree relative with breast cancer (and no CHEK2 mutation) and 2269 women had neither risk factor. Subjects were followed for breast cancer for three years from the second screening examination.ResultsTwenty-seven invasive epithelial cancers, one angiosarcoma and six cases of DCIS were identified over the four-year period. Of the 27 invasive cancers, 20 were screen-detected, 2 were interval cancers, and five cancers were identified in the second or third follow-up year (i.e., after the end of the screening period). For invasive cancer, the sensitivity of MRI was 86%, the sensitivity of ultrasound was 59% and the sensitivity of mammography was 50%. The number of biopsies incurred by MRI (n = 156) was greater than the number incurred by mammography (n = 35) or ultrasound (n = 57). Of the 19 invasive cancers detected by MRI, 17 (89%) were also detected by ultrasound or mammography.ConclusionsIn terms of sensitivity, MRI is slightly better than the combination of mammography and ultrasound for screening of women at average or intermediate risk of breast cancer. However, because of additional costs incurred by MRI screening, and the small gain in sensitivity, MRI screening is probably not warranted outside of high-risk populations.
Publication is summarization of existing data being results of literature review and our experience on usefulness of selenium as a diagnostic marker selection for control examinations in surveillance and as a marker of patients with high risk of cancers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.