To estimate the distribution of lymphoid neoplasms in China, we conducted a comprehensive analysis, based on subtype, age, sex, and lesion, of primary and resected biopsy specimens of 4,638 lymphoid neoplasms diagnosed from 2004 to 2008 at 5 large hospitals. Of the 4,638 patients, mature B-cell neoplasms accounted for 64.3% of all lymphoid neoplasms, mature T/NK-cell neoplasms for 23.3%, and Hodgkin lymphoma for 8.6%. The most common subtype was diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (36.2%), followed by extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type (11.0%), classic Hodgkin lymphoma (8.4%), extranodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma (7.7%), plasmacytic neoplasm (5.0%), and peripheral T-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (3.9%). For most lymphoid neoplasm subtypes, male subjects showed higher rates than female subjects. In summary, our study showed that the epidemiologic features of lymphoid neoplasms in China are distinct from those in Western countries and similar in many ways to those in other countries of the Far East.

The objective of the study is to estimate the expression of some antibodies in the metastatic adenocarcinomas, malignant epithelial mesotheliomas, and reactive mesothelial cells in serous effusions and to choose effective panel to the differential diagnosis. Totally 113 effusion cytology samples (80 pleural fluid, 30 ascitic, and 3 pericardial fluid) from 60 cases of metastatic adenocarcinoma (ACA), 18 cases of malignant epithelial mesothelioma (MM), and 35 cases of reactive mesothelium (RM) were included in this study. The cytological diagnoses of these cases were confirmed by histopathology or clinical datas. Smears and cell blocks were prepared for each case. Immunocytochemical study was performed on the cell block sections. The sensitivity of E-cadherin, CEA, MOC-31, and Ber-EP4 for adenocarcinoma was 86.7%, 80%, 70%, and 76.4%, respectively. The specificity was 98.1%, 96.2%, 92.5%, and 86.8%, respectively. The sensitivity of calretinin, HBME-1, and thrombomodulin for RM/MM was 83%, 79.2%, and 47.2% respectively. The specificity was 88.3%, 21.7%, and 70%, respectively. The expression of E-cadherin, CEA, MOC-31, Ber-EP4, calretinin, and thrombomodulin showed significant difference between ACA and RM/MM (P < 0.01). The reactivity of EMA and Des showed significant difference between RM and MM (P < 0.01). In our opinion, the antibody panel that consists of E-cadherin, CEA, calretinin, and thrombomodulin should be the best for differential diagnosis between metastatic adenocarcinomas and RM/MM in serous effusions. EMA and Des should be used to differentiate malignant epithelial mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial cells. EMA positive and Des negative favor MM, while Des positive and EMA negative favor RM.

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that cooperative interaction between cutaneous fatty acid-binding protein (C-FABP) and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR) promotes the malignant progression of human prostate cancer. The expression of C-FABP, PPARβ/δ and PPARγ was measured by western blot analysis in prostate cell lines and by immunohistochemical staining in tissue sections of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostatic carcinomas. The correlation between the expression of PPARs and C-FABP was assessed. The significance of increased expression of these proteins was analysed with respect to prognosis and compared with those of alternative biomarkers. The expression levels of C-FABP and PPARγ in prostate cancer cell lines and the cytoplasm and nuclei of carcinoma tissues were significantly (Student's t-test, p<0.05) higher compared to those in benign cell lines and BPH tissues. The raised expression level of C-FABP and PPARγ was significantly correlated with the increased combined Gleason scores (GS) of the carcinomas. Enhanced expression of cytoplasmic C-FABP significantly correlated with increased nuclear PPARγ (Student's t-test, p<0.005). While expression of PPARβ/δ in carcinomas did not correlate with patient outcome, the increased levels of both C-FABP and PPARγ were associated with shorter patient survival. Multivariate analysis indicated that C-FABP was independently associated with patient survival, whereas PPARγ was confounded by C-FABP in predicting patient survival. Thus, the increased C-FABP may interact with PPARγ in a coordinated mechanism to facilitate malignant progression in prostatic cancer. Both C-FABP and PPARγ are suitable as prognostic factors to predict the clinical outcome of prostatic cancer patients.

No abstract