PurposeEsophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is the most common type of esophageal cancer in Western countries. It is usually detected at an advanced stage and has a poor prognosis. The aim of this study was to identify key genes and miRNAs in EAC.MethodsThe mRNA microarray data sets GSE1420, GSE26886, and GSE92396 and miRNA data set GSE16456 were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus database. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and differentially expressed miRNAs (DEMs) were obtained using R software. Functional enrichment analysis was performed using the DAVID database. A protein–protein interaction (PPI) network and functional modules were established using the STRING database and visualized by Cytoscape. The targets of the DEMs were predicted using the miRecords database, and overlapping genes between DEGs and targets were identified. The prognosis-related overlapping genes were identified using Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard analysis based on The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. The differential expression of these prognosis-related genes was validated using the expression matrix in the TCGA database.ResultsSeven hundred and fifteen DEGs were obtained, consisting of 313 upregulated and 402 downregulated genes. The PPI network consisted of 281 nodes; 683 edges were constructed and 3 functional modules were established. Forty-four overlapping genes and 56 miRNA– mRNA pairs were identified. Five genes, FAM46A, RAB15, SLC20A1, IL1A, and ACSL1, were associated with overall survival or relapse-free survival. FAM46A and IL1A were found to be independent prognostic indicators for overall survival, and FAM46A, RAB15, and SLC20A1 were considered independent prognostic indicators for relapse-free survival. Among them, the overexpression of RAB15 and SLC20A1 and lower expression of ACSL1 were also identified in EAC tissues based on the expression matrix in the TCGA database.ConclusionThese prognosis-related genes and differentially expressed miRNA have provided potential biomarkers for EAC diagnosis and treatment.
To identify pathology discrepancy between forceps biopsies and polypectomy specimens in colorectal polyps, as well as the reliability of biopsy-based treatment strategy. Methods: All endoscopic polypectomy cases with forceps biopsies performed within 6 months were included in the study. The biopsies were compared with polypectomy specimens in terms of concordance of histological diagnosis. A logistic regression model was used to investigate the independent predictors of upgrade in histological diagnosis compared with concordance in histological diagnosis. Results: A total of 1686 paired screening-therapeutic colonoscopies and 1739 paired biopsy-polypectomy specimens were enrolled in the study. The grade of dysplasia in 84.5% of biopsy specimens were concordant to polypectomy specimens, but this proportion decreased to 75.4% when the specimens were classified using tubular or villousness structure. 10.1% and 5.4% of biopsy specimens were upgraded and downgraded in assessing grade of dysplasia, respectively, while 14.3% and 10.3% of biopsy specimens were upgraded and downgraded in assessing tubular or villousness structure, respectively. In subgroup analysis stratified by size of polyps, 9.0% and 10.6% of biopsies obtained from polyps smaller than 10 mm were upgraded in assessing dysplasia and tubular or villousness structure, respectively. This proportion increased to 10.7% and 21.3%, respectively, in biopsies obtained from polyps larger than 10 mm. Larger size of polyps and pedunculated polyps were associated with a higher incidence of upgrade in histological diagnosis. Nearly 25% of biopsy specimens with high-grade dysplasia were identified as adenocarcinoma in polypectomy specimens.
Conclusion:The concordance between biopsy and polypectomy specimens is not adequate. The biopsy-based treatment strategy is not reliable and should not be considered as an indicator for further treatment, particularly in large or pedunculated polyps.
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.