The inevitable accumulation of chromosomal abnormalities in human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) during in vitro expansion represents a considerable obstacle for cell replacement therapies. To determine the source of chromosomal abnormalities, we examined hESCs maintained in culture for over 55 months for defects in telomere maintenance and DNA repair. Although prolonged culture affected neither telomerase activity nor nonhomologous end joining, the efficiency of base excision repair (BER) was significantly decreased and correlated with reduced expression of apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APE1), the major nuclease required for BER. Interestingly, the expression of other BER enzymes was unchanged. Addition of human recombinant APE1 protein to nuclear extracts from late passage hESCs increased BER efficiency to the level typical of early passage hESCs. The link between BER and double-strand breaks (DSB) was demonstrated by decreased DSB release after downregulation of APE1 in early passage hESCs via siRNA. Correspondingly lower APE1 level in late passage hESC resulted in slower and less intensive but long lasting DSB release upon ionizing radiation (IR). Downregulation of APE1 in early passage hESCs also led to approximately 30% decrease in c-H2AX signaling following IR, similar to that in late passage hESCs. We suggest that downregulation of APE1 significantly contributes to the failure of BER during long-term culture of hESCs, and further that BER failure is one of the factors affecting the genomic instability of hESCs by altering BER-dependent DSB release and cell cycle/checkpoint signaling. STEM CELLS 2013;31:693-702 Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is found at the end of this article.
Pediatric oncology is a critical area where the more efficient development of new treatments is urgently needed. The speed of approval of new drugs is still limited by regulatory requirements and a lack of innovative designs appropriate for trials in children. Childhood cancers meet the criteria of rare diseases. Personalized medicine brings it even closer to the horizon of individual cases. Thus, not all the traditional research tools, such as large-scale RCTs, are always suitable or even applicable, mainly due to limited sample sizes. Small samples and traditional versus subject-specific evidence are both distinctive issues in personalized pediatric oncology. Modern analytical approaches and adaptations of the paradigms of evidence are warranted. We have reviewed innovative trial designs and analytical methods developed for small populations, together with individualized approaches, given their applicability to pediatric oncology. We discuss traditional population-based and individualized perspectives of inferences and evidence, and explain the possibilities of using various methods in pediatric personalized oncology. We find that specific derivatives of the original N-of-1 trial design adapted for pediatric personalized oncology may represent an optimal analytical tool for this area of medicine. We conclude that no particular N-of-1 strategy can provide a solution. Rather, a whole range of approaches is needed to satisfy the new inferential and analytical paradigms of modern medicine. We reveal a new view of cancer as continuum model and discuss the “evidence puzzle”.
Background: Perioperative chemotherapy is a recommended treatment approach for localised oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma, but not all patients respond to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Early identification of non-responders and treatment adaptation in the preoperative period could improve outcomes. GastroPET is a national, multicentre phase II trial evaluating a 18FDG-PET/CT-guided preoperative treatment strategy with the R0 resection rate as a primary endpoint. Here, we report on the accuracy of the methodology, the feasibility of the study design and patient safety data after enrolment of the first 63 patients. Methods: Patients with locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma (Siewert I – III) stage Ib–IIIc underwent baseline 18FDG-PET/CT scanning and re-evaluation after 14 days of oxaliplatinum-5FU-(docetaxel) chemotherapy. Responders were defined by a ⩾ 35% decrease in tumour FDG standardised uptake value (SUV)average from baseline. Responders continued with the same chemotherapy for 2 to 3 months prior to surgery. PET-non-responders switched to preoperative chemoradiotherapy [weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (45 Gy in 25 fractions)]. Here, we aim to confirm the feasibility of FDG-PET-based response assessment in a multicenter setting and to compare local versus central reading. In addition, we report on the feasibility of the study conduct and patient safety data. Results: A total of 64 patients received baseline and sequential 14-day 18FDG-PET/CT scanning. And, 63 were allocated to the respective treatment arm according to PET-response [35 (56%) responders and 28 (44%) non-responders]. The concordance of local versus central reading of SUV changes was 100%. Until the date of this analysis, 47 patients (28 responders and 19 non-responders) completed surgery. Postoperative complications of grade ⩾ 3 (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, CTCAE Version 5.0) were reported in five responders (18%; 95% CI: 7.9–36%) and two non-responders (11%; 95% CI: 2.9–31%), with no statistical difference ( p = 0.685). One patient in each arm died after surgery, leading to a postoperative in-hospital mortality rate of 4.3% (2/47 patients; 95% CI: 1.2–14%). Conclusion: Local and central FDG-SUV quantification and PET-response assessment showed high concordance. This confirms the accuracy of a PET-response-guided treatment algorithm for locally advanced oesophago-gastric junction cancer in a multicenter setting. Preoperative treatment adaptation revealed feasible and safe for patients.
Background: Chemoradiotherapy-induced gastrointestinal toxicity may lead to a significant impairment of the oncological patient’s quality of life, as well as to reduced adherence to the treatment, which may have a negative impact on survival and mortality rates. Objective: The aim of this review was to investigate whether oral probiotic administration prevents chemotherapy (± radiotherapy)-induced gastrointestinal toxicity, particularly diarrhea. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases for randomized controlled trials in English published between 1990 and 2020. We conducted statistical data analyses expressing the treatment effect size as a risk ratio (RR) together with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Implications are based on trials rated as having a low risk of bias (RoB). Results: We included 8 trials (n = 697 participants), from which 3 studies rated as low RoB contained primary endpoint data; the risk of developing grade 3/4 diarrhea in patients receiving probiotics was reduced by 78% compared to the control group (RR = 0.22 [95% CI 0.05-1.08]; P = .06; n = 114 participants). Probiotics showed preventive effects in patients treated with chemotherapy alone (RR = 0.34 [0.12-0.94]; P = .04, n = 121 participants) and in patients with colorectal cancer (RR = 0.56 [0.34-0.92]; P = .02; n = 208 participants). The reduction in the incidence of overall diarrhea was not significant. Conclusions: Probiotics failed to prove a preventive effect of statistical significance against the development of severe and overall diarrhea in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy (± radiotherapy). However, we cannot rule out that the effects of probiotics are clinically relevant, especially in certain subgroups of patients. This needs to be clarified in further well-performed studies.
Východiska: Glioblastom představuje nejčastější a zároveň nejagresivnější primární mozkový nádor dospělých. Radioterapii podstupuje naprostá většina pacientů s tímto onemocněním. Význam správného konturingu (stanovení cílových objemů) v radioterapii glioblastomů v současnosti stále stoupá. Dvěma základními přístupy ke konturování glioblastomů jsou postup "americký" dle Pracovní skupiny pro radioterapii v onkologii (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-RTOG), tzv. RTOG contouring approach s definicí dvou cílových objemů, a postup "evropský" dle Evropské organizace pro výzkum a léčbu nádorových onemocnění (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-EORTC), tzv. EORTC contouring approach s definicí jednoho cílového objemu. Oba přístupy v definování cílových objemů jsou považovány za standardní a v praxi se výběr konkrétního postupu liší i dle zvyklostí daného pracoviště. Významným parametrem hodnocení přístupu ke konturingu je prostorové hodnocení následných recidiv, tzv. patterns of failure (PoF). Cíl: Akademická klinická studie GlioART srovnává RTOG a EORTC přístupy v prospektivním nastavení a se zohledněním všech parametrů nutných pro validní hodnocení následných recidiv-definice recidiv, specifikace MR prokazujícího progresi, specifikace techniky plánované radioterapie, molekulárně bio logické charakteristiky glioblastomů, rozsah resekce a lokalizace původního glioblastomu. Cílem tohoto textu je představit zmiňovanou studii GlioART a diskutovat přidružená témata spojená s definováním cílových objemů radioterapie. Závěr: Výsledky akademické studie GlioART mohou definovat doporučení ovlivňující každodenní praxi v radioterapii glioblastomů. Klíčová slova glioblastom-radioterapie-konturování-patterns of failure-GlioART Podpořeno MZ ČR-RVO (MOÚ, 00209805 a FNBr, 65269705) a Grantovou agenturou Masarykovy univerzity (MUNI/A/1562/2018) a CZECRIN LM2018128. Autoři deklarují, že v souvislosti s předmětem studie nemají žádné komerční zájmy. The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study. Redakční rada potvrzuje, že rukopis práce splnil ICMJE kritéria pro publikace zasílané do bi omedicínských časopisů. The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE recommendation for biomedical papers.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.