We previously developed γ-glutamyl hydroxymethyl rhodamine green (gGlu-HMRG) as a tool to detect viable cancer cells, based on the fact that the enzyme γ-glutamyltranspeptidase (GGT) is overexpressed on membranes of various cancer cells, but is not expressed in normal tissue. Cleavage of the probe by GGT generates green fluorescence. Here, we examined the feasibility of clinical application of gGlu-HMRG during breast-conserving surgery. We found that fluorescence derived from cleavage of gGlu-HMRG allowed easy discrimination of breast tumors, even those smaller than 1 mm in size, from normal mammary gland tissues, with 92% sensitivity and 94% specificity, within only 5 min after application. We believe this rapid, low-cost method represents a breakthrough in intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery.
The differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma requires the positive and negative immunohistochemical markers of mesothelioma. The IMIG guideline has suggested the use of Calretinin, D2-40, WT1, and CK5/6 as mesothelial markers, TTF-1, Napsin-A, Claudin 4, CEA as lung adenocarcinoma markers p40, p63, CK5/6, MOC-31 as squamous cell markers. However, use of other immunohistochemical markers is still necessary. We evaluated 65 epithelioid mesotheliomas, 60 adenocarcinomas, and 57 squamous cell carcinomas of the lung for MUC4 expression by immunohistochemistry and compared with the previously known immunohistochemical markers. MUC4 expression was not found in any of 65 cases of epithelioid mesothelioma. In contrast, MUC4 expression was observed in 50/60(83.3%) cases of lung adenocarcinoma and 50/56(89.3%) cases of lung squamous cell carcinoma. The negative MUC4 expression showed 100% sensitivity, 86.2% specificity and accuracy rate of 91.2% to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from lung carcinoma. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MUC4 are comparable to that of previously known markers of lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, namely CEA, Claudin 4 and better than that of MOC-31. In conclusion, MUC4 immunohistochemistry is useful for differentiation of epithelioid mesothelioma from lung carcinoma, either adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma.
The differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma using immunohistochemistry is improving. However, immunohistochemical markers with high sensitivity and specificity have yet to be identified. In this study, we investigated the utility of sex-determining region Y box 6 (SOX6) as a novel immunohistochemical marker, identified by analyzing previous gene expression data. Immunohistochemically, SOX6 expression was present in 53 of 54 (98%) cases of epithelioid mesothelioma, compared with its expression in only 5 of 69 (7%) cases of lung adenocarcinoma. The sensitivity and specificity of SOX6 expression for differentiating epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma were 98% and 93%, respectively. SOX6 expression showed similar sensitivity and far better specificity than those of calretinin or podoplanin (D2-40). In addition, SOX6 expression was more sensitive than Wilms’ tumor 1 expression. The combination of SOX6 with other markers showed comparable or better sensitivity and specificity relative to other combinations. In particular, the sensitivity of positivity for both SOX6 and calretinin (96%) and the specificity of positivity for both SOX6 and Wilms’ tumor 1 (93%) were higher than those of the other combinations. In conclusion, SOX6 is a novel candidate immunohistochemical marker for differentiating epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma.
Purpose To explore the actual status of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) through a multicenter prospective cohort study. Methods Patients with breast cancer treated with moderately emetogenic (MEC) or highly emetogenic (HEC) chemotherapy were eligible. A 7-day diary was provided for all patients. Acute and delayed CINV were defined as nausea and vomiting that developed ≤ 24 or > 24 h after the start of chemotherapy, respectively. The severity of nausea was evaluated with a visual analog scale (VAS). We also assessed the accuracy of estimations of CINV by medical staff. Results In total, 426 patients were included; 352 patients (82.6%) received HEC, and 74 (17.3%) received MEC. In the acute phase, 44.9% of patients receiving HEC and 5.4% receiving MEC experienced nausea, and 12.8% receiving HEC and none receiving MEC experienced vomiting. More patients experienced nausea in both groups and vomiting in MEC during the delayed phase (nausea: 59.4% in HEC and 44.6% in MEC group; vomiting: 11.1% in HEC; and 13.5% in MEC group) than during the acute phase. Estimations of CINV by medical staff were not accurate, with a kappa coefficient of 0.10 and 0.08 for acute nausea and vomiting and 0.02 and 0.01 for delayed. The VAS scores showed that in the HEC group, the degree of nausea was worst on the first day. Conclusions The degree of nausea was worst in the acute phase, although delayed nausea was more in proportion in HEC. Estimation by medical staff is not accurate.
Dysregulation of miR-182 and miR-183 has been implicated in the progression of several human cancers. Our previous study showed that miR-182 and miR-183 are upregulated in malignant mesothelioma. However, their biological functions remain unclear. We performed in-situ hybridization to analyze the expression of miR-182 and miR-183 in human tissues. Functional analysis was performed by treatment of two mesothelioma cell lines (ACC-MESO1 and CRL-5915) with miR-182 and miR-183 inhibitors. RT-PCR and western blot analysis were conducted to analyze the expression of FOXO1, a known target of both miR-182 and miR-183. Mesothelioma cells treated with FOXO1 siRNA and miR-182/183 inhibitors were also analyzed by evaluating cell proliferation and invasion, as well as expression of FOXO1 and its downstream targets. We confirmed miR-182 expression in 25/29 cases and miR-183 expression in 29/29 cases of human mesothelioma tissue by in-situ hybridization. Notably, inhibition of miR-182 or miR-183 reduced cell proliferation, invasion, migration, and adhesion abilities of mesothelioma cells. Surprisingly, transfection with both miR-182 and miR-183 inhibitors showed even more effects on cell progression. Furthermore, FOXO1 was identified as a target of miR-182 and miR-183 in mesothelioma cells. Inhibition of miR-182 and miR-183 reduced cell proliferation ability via upregulation of FOXO1 and its downstream targets, namely, p27. Moreover, inhibition of miR-182 and miR-183 reduced the cell invasion properties of mesothelioma cells. Our findings indicated that miR-182 and miR-183 promote mesothelioma cell progression via downregulation of FOXO1 and p27. Targeting the miR-182/183—FOXO1 axis could serve as a novel treatment against malignant mesothelioma.
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.