IIM is the PL with highest risk to progress to GC. Sub-typing of IM is a valid procedure for the identification of high risk patients that require more intensive surveillance.

No abstract

No abstract

Gastric carcinogenesis proceeds through a series of gastric cancer precursor lesions (GCPLs) leading to gastric cancer (GC) development. Although Helicobacter pylori infection initiates this process, genetic factors also play a role. We previously reported that genetic variability in MUC2 is associated with the evolution of GCPLs. In order to replicate previous results in an independent sample series and to explore whether genetic variability in other candidate genes plays a role in the evolution of GCPL, genomic DNA from 559 patients with GCPLs, recruited from 9 Spanish hospitals and followed for a mean of 12 years, was genotyped for 141 SNPs in 29 genes. After follow-up, 45.5% of the lesions remained stable, 37% regressed and 17.5% progressed to a more severe lesion. Genetic association with the evolution of the lesions (progression or regression) was analyzed by multinomial and binomial logistic regression. After correction for multiple comparisons, the results obtained confirmed the inverse association between MUC2 variants and the regression of the lesions. A significant association was also observed between NFKB1 and CD14 variants and the evolution of the lesions; interestingly, this association was with both progression and regression in the same direction, which could reflect the dual role of inflammation in cancer. Stratified analyses according to H. pylori virulence factors indicated some significant and differential effects but none of them passed the FDR test. These results confirm that genetic variability in MUC2, NFKB1 and CD14 may have a role in the evolution of the GCPLs along time and in gastric carcinogenesis.

Background The efficacy of licensed direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens is assumed to be the same for hepatitis C virus (HCV)–monoinfected patients (HCV-Mono) and HIV/HCV-coinfected patients (HCV-Co). However, the high sustained viral response (SVR) rates of DAA regimens and the small number of HIV-infected patients included in registration trials have made it difficult to identify predictors of treatment failure, including the presence of HIV. Methods We compared treatment outcomes for ledipasvir/sofosbuvir (LDV/SOF) against HCV G1 in treatment-naïve HCV-Mono and HCV-Co without cirrhosis in a prospective registry of individuals receiving DAAs for HCV. Results Up to September 2017, a total of 17 269 patients were registered, and 1358 patients (1055 HCV-Mono/303 HCV-Co) met the inclusion criteria. Significant differences between HCV-Mono and HCV-Co were observed for age, gender, and G1 subtype distribution. Among HCV-Co, 99.0% were receiving antiretroviral therapy. SVR rates for LDV/SOF at 8 weeks did not differ significantly between HCV-Mono and HCV-Co (96.9% vs 94.0%; P = .199). However, the SVR rate for LDV/SOF at 12 weeks was significantly higher for HCV-Mono than HCV-Co (97.2% vs 91.8%; P = .001). A multivariable logistic regression model including age, sex, liver stiffness, G1 subtype, HCV-RNA, HIV, and treatment duration showed the factors associated with treatment failure to be male sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27–4.91; P = .008) and HIV infection (aOR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.13–4.38; P = .020). Conclusions The results of this large prospective study analyzing outcomes for LDV/SOF against HCV G1 in treatment-naïve noncirrhotic patients suggest that HIV infection is a predictor of treatment failure in patients with chronic hepatitis C.