-
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) Aug 2022There is a pressing demand for the development of cancer-specific diagnostic imaging tools, particularly for staging of pancreatic-, gastric- or cholangiocarcinoma, as... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
There is a pressing demand for the development of cancer-specific diagnostic imaging tools, particularly for staging of pancreatic-, gastric- or cholangiocarcinoma, as current diagnostic imaging techniques, including CT, MRI and PET using FDG, are not fully adequate. The novel PET-tracer "FAPI" has the potential to visualize even small tumour deposits employing the tumour-specific expression of fibroblast-activating protein (FAP) in malignant cells.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review to select studies investigating the use of FAPI PET for staging pancreatic-, gastric- and cholangiocarcinoma (PROSPERO CRD42022329512). Patient-wise and lesion-wise comparisons were performed for primary tumour (T), lymph nodes (N), organ metastases (M) and peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) and tumour-to-background ratios (TBR) were compared between PET using FAPI versus FDG (if reported).
RESULTS
Ten articles met the inclusion criteria. In all studies, FAPI PET showed superiority over FDG-PET/CT/MRI for the detection of T, N, M and PC, both in the patient-wise and in lesion-wise comparisons (when performed). Additionally, higher SUVmax and TBRmax values were reported for use of FAPI compared to FDG.
CONCLUSIONS
The positive results of this review warrant prospective clinical studies to investigate the accuracy and clinical value of FAPI PET for diagnosing and staging patients with pancreatic-, gastric- and cholangiocarcinoma.
PubMed: 36010308
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12081958 -
Translational Research : the Journal of... Jun 2022Extensive research is focused on the role of liquid biopsy in pancreatic cancer since reliable diagnostic and follow-up biomarkers represent an unmet need for this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Extensive research is focused on the role of liquid biopsy in pancreatic cancer since reliable diagnostic and follow-up biomarkers represent an unmet need for this highly lethal malignancy. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prognostic value of exosomal biomarkers in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were systematically searched on the 18th of January, 2021 for studies reporting on the differences in overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in PDAC patients with positive vs negative exosomal biomarkers isolated from blood. The random-effects model estimated pooled multivariate-adjusted (AHR) and univariate hazard ratios (UHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Eleven studies comprising 634 patients were eligible for meta-analysis. Detection of positive exosomal biomarkers indicated increased risk of mortality (UHR = 2.81, CI:1.31-6,00, I = 88.7%, P < 0.001), and progression (UHR = 3.33, CI: 2.33-4.77, I = 0, P = 0.879) across various disease stages. Positive exosomal biomarkers identified preoperatively revealed a higher risk of mortality in resectable stages (UHR = 5.55, CI: 3.24-9.49, I = 0, P = 0.898). The risk of mortality in unresectable stages was not significantly increased with positive exosomal biomarkers (UHR = 2.51, CI: 0.55-11.43, I = 90.3%, P < 0.001). Detectable exosomal micro ribonucleic acids were associated with a decreased OS (UHR = 4.08, CI: 2.16-7.69, I = 46.9%, P = 0.152) across various stages. Our results reflect the potential of exosomal biomarkers for prognosis evaluation in PDAC. The associated heterogeneity reflects the variability of study methods and need for their uniformization before transition to clinical use.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Exosomes; Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis
PubMed: 35066189
DOI: 10.1016/j.trsl.2022.01.001 -
Folia Medica Cracoviensia Apr 2023Carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) is a heterogeneous group of oncological diseases in which it is impossible to determine the primary tumor. The incidence is 3-5% of...
Carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) is a heterogeneous group of oncological diseases in which it is impossible to determine the primary tumor. The incidence is 3-5% of oncologic patients, but the survival time varies from 6 weeks to 5 months. The diagnostics should begin with a clinical evaluation and basic laboratory tests. For CUP placed in head and neck the positron emission tomography - computed tomography is recommended; pancreatic or lung neoplasms are diagnosed with the computed tomography as well. Recently, the magnetic resonance, especially whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging has been introduced to the imaging panel. The lesion obtained during surgically removed metastases or biopsy material should be histopathological and molecularly examined to define the type of tumor. The basic immunoexpression panel should include cytokeratin-5/6, -7 and -20, EMA, synaptophysin, chromogranin, vimentin and GATA3 and molecular expression of ERBB2, PIK3CA, NF1, NF2, BRAF, IDH1, PTEN, FGFR2, EGFR, MET and CDK6. During the accurate diagnostics enable to classify malignancy of undefined primary origin as provisional CUP or finally confirmed CUP in which the primary place of tumor remains undetectable. The detailed diagnostics should be performed in highly specified centers to establish an accurate diagnosis and to initiate personalized treatment. Majority of patients are diagnosed with adenocarcinoma (70%), undifferentiated carcinoma (20%), squamous cell or transitional cell/uroepithelial carcinoma (5-10%), neuroendocrine tumor (5%) and with minor incidence other histological types, including melanoma.
Topics: Humans; Neoplasms, Unknown Primary; Carcinoma; Adenocarcinoma; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Head and Neck Neoplasms
PubMed: 37406274
DOI: 10.24425/fmc.2023.145427 -
Toxics Feb 2023N-nitroso compounds (NOCs) are a class of chemical carcinogens found in various environmental sources such as food, drinking water, cigarette smoke, the work... (Review)
Review
N-nitroso compounds (NOCs) are a class of chemical carcinogens found in various environmental sources such as food, drinking water, cigarette smoke, the work environment, and the indoor air population. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the links between nitrate, nitrite, and NOCs in food and water and the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, including esophageal cancer (EC), gastric cancer (GC), colorectal cancer (CRC), and pancreatic cancer (PC). A systematic search of the literature in Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Embase was performed for studies on the association between NOCs in drinking water and food sources and GI cancers. Forest plots of relative risk (RR) were constructed for all the cancer sites and the intake sources. The random-effects model was used to assess the heterogeneity between studies. Forty articles were included after removing duplicate and irrelevant articles. The meta-analysis indicated that the intake of high dose vs. low dose of these compounds was significantly associated with the overall GI cancer risk and nitrite (RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.07-1.29), and N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) (RR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.06-1.65). We found that dietary nitrite intake increased GC (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.02-1.73), and EC (RR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.01-1.89). Additionally, dietary NDMA intake increased the risk of CRC (RR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.18-1.58). This meta-analysis provides some evidence that the intake of dietary and water nitrate, nitrite, and NOCs may be associated with GI cancers. In particular, dietary nitrite is linked to GC and EC risks and dietary NDMA intake is associated with CRC.
PubMed: 36851064
DOI: 10.3390/toxics11020190 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Aug 2021To analyze the prevalence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To analyze the prevalence of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of HRD in PDAC from PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases, and online cancer genomic data sets. The main outcome was pooled prevalence of somatic and germline mutations in the better characterized HRD genes (, , , , , , , and the genes). The secondary outcomes were prevalence of germline mutations overall, and in sporadic and familial cases; prevalence of germline mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ); and prevalence of HRD based on other definitions (ie, alterations in other genes, genomic scars, and mutational signatures). Random-effects modeling with the Freeman-Tukey transformation was used for the analyses. PROSPERO registration number: (CRD42020190813).
RESULTS
Sixty studies with 21,842 participants were included in the systematic review and 57 in the meta-analysis. Prevalence of germline and somatic mutations was : 0.9%, : 3.5%, : 0.2%, : 2.2%, : 0.3%, : 0.5%, : 0.0%, and : 0.1%. Prevalence of germline mutations was : 0.9% (2.4% in AJ), : 3.8% (8.2% in AJ), : 0.2%, : 2%, : 0.3%, and : 0.4%. No significant differences between sporadic and familial cases were identified. HRD prevalence ranged between 14.5%-16.5% through targeted next-generation sequencing and 24%-44% through whole-genome or whole-exome sequencing allowing complementary genomic analysis, including genomic scars and other signatures (surrogate markers of HRD).
CONCLUSION
Surrogate readouts of HRD identify a greater proportion of patients with HRD than analyses limited to gene-level approaches. There is a clear need to harmonize HRD definitions and to validate the optimal biomarker for treatment selection. Universal HRD screening including integrated somatic and germline analysis should be offered to all patients with PDAC.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Homologous Recombination; Humans; Prevalence
PubMed: 34197182
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.20.03238 -
BMC Cancer Jan 2022Interleukin (IL)-17 family is a group of six cytokines that plays a central role in inflammatory processes and participates in cancer progression. Interleukin-17A has...
BACKGROUND
Interleukin (IL)-17 family is a group of six cytokines that plays a central role in inflammatory processes and participates in cancer progression. Interleukin-17A has been shown to have mainly a protumorigenic role, but the other members of the IL-17 family, including IL-17F, have received less attention.
METHODS
We applied systematic review guidelines to study the role of IL-17F, protein and mRNA expression, polymorphisms, and functions, in cancer. We carried out a systematic search in PubMed, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane libraries, yielding 79 articles that met the inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
The findings indicated that IL-17F has both anti- and protumorigenic roles, which depend on cancer type and the molecular form and location of IL-17F. As an example, the presence of IL-17F protein in tumor tissue and patient serum has a protective role in oral and pancreatic cancers, whereas it is protumorigenic in prostate and bladder cancers. These effects are proposed to be based on multiple mechanisms, such as inhibition of angiogenesis, vasculogenic mimicry and cancer cell proliferation, migration and invasion, and aggravating the inflammatory process. No solid evidence emerged for the correlation between IL-17F polymorphisms and cancer incidence or patients' prognosis.
CONCLUSION
IL-17F is a multifaceted cytokine. There is a clear demand for more well-designed studies of IL-17F to elucidate its molecular mechanisms in different types of cancer. The studies presented in this article examined a variety of different designs, study populations and primary/secondary outcomes, which unfortunately reduces the value of direct interstudy comparisons.
Topics: Animals; Biomarkers, Tumor; Carcinogenesis; Cell Line, Tumor; Humans; Interleukin-17; Lymphocytes; Mice; Neoplasms; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Prognosis
PubMed: 35012470
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08969-0 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023In recent years, there has been rapid development in systemic therapeutic agents for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, most treatment modalities lack...
BACKGROUND
In recent years, there has been rapid development in systemic therapeutic agents for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. However, most treatment modalities lack head-to-head comparisons, and the distinctions in their efficacy and safety have yet to be elucidated. Consequently, the accurate selection of a treatment regimen poses a significant challenge for clinicians.
METHODS
This study incorporated twenty-three randomized controlled trials, encompassing fifteen first-line and eight second-line treatments, and involving a total of 14,703 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Results: In the context of first-line treatment, it was observed that the combination of a PD-1 inhibitor with bevacizumab (1/15) significantly extended overall survival in patients with advanced HCC. Furthermore, PD-1 inhibitors combined with TKIs (1/15) and PD-1 inhibitors combined with bevacizumab (2/15) exhibited enhanced efficacy in reducing the risk of progression-free survival events. In second-line therapy, the network meta-analysis revealed that all investigational agents prolonged progression-free survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma when compared to placebo. Cabozantinib ranked first (1/7) in this regard. However, this translated into an overall survival benefit only for cabozantinib, regorafenib, ramucirumab, and pembrolizumab, with regorafenib achieving the highest ranking (1/7).
CONCLUSION
In the treatment of advanced HCC, the immune checkpoint inhibitor combined with bevacizumab regimen and the immune checkpoint inhibitor combined with TKI regimen stand out as the two most effective first-line treatment options. It is noteworthy that, for patients with absolute contraindications to VEGF inhibitors, dual immunotherapy is the preferred choice. For second-line treatment, regorafenib and cabozantinib are identified as the two most effective options.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42023440173.
PubMed: 38125936
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1274754 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023The benefits of vitamin E (VE) for multiple health outcomes have been well evaluated in many recent studies.
BACKGROUND
The benefits of vitamin E (VE) for multiple health outcomes have been well evaluated in many recent studies.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this umbrella review was to conduct a systematic evaluation of the possible associations between VE intake and various health outcomes.
METHODS
We systematically searched various databases, such as PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science, to identify related meta-analyses of observational studies and randomized trials. We estimated the effect size of each association by using the random or fixed effects models and the 95% confidence intervals. We used standard approaches to evaluate the quality of the articles (AMSTAR) and classified the evidence into different levels of quality (GRADE).
RESULTS
A total of 1,974 review articles were searched, and 27 articles with 28 health outcomes were yielded according to our exclusion criteria. The intake of VE was inversely associated with the risk of breast cancer, lung cancer, esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, pancreatic cancer, kidney cancer, bladder cancer, cervical neoplasms, cardiovascular disease, Parkinson's disease, depression, age-related cataracts, metabolic syndrome, and fracture. Overall, most of the quality of the evidence was low or very low. Three outcomes (stroke, age-related cataracts, obesity) were identified as having a "moderate" level of quality. The AMSTAR scores for all health outcomes ranged from 5 to 10.
CONCLUSION
Our study revealed that VE intake is beneficially related to multiple health outcomes. However, future studies on recommended doses and recommended populations of VE are also needed.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022339571.
PubMed: 37522003
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1035674 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Jun 2020Preoperative chemotherapy has shown benefits for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has also been attempted in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Preoperative chemotherapy has shown benefits for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has also been attempted in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC); however, its role remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical difference between NAC and upfront resection (UR) in RPC.
METHODS
Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles from inception to February 2019 that addressed the overall survival in patients with RPC treated with or without NAC to identify eligible studies. Eleven studies were included in the final meta-analysis. The quality assessment of the included studies was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa quality scale. Data of the unresectable rate, R0 resection rate, and positive lymph node rate were also extracted in each study for further analysis. Pooled hazard ratio (HR), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the strength of the association.
RESULTS
A total of eleven studies (eight cohort studies and three randomized controlled trials) involving 9773 patients were included. Ten of the eleven studies followed the "intention-to-treat" principle. NAC was found to be significantly associated with a higher R0 resection rate (P < 0.0001; OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.70-4.03) and increased negative lymph node rate (P < 0.00001; OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.31-0.37). However, compared with the UR group, NAC was related to a lower surgical resection rate (P = 0.0004; OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.41-3.37). Overall, the NAC group exhibited no benefits in terms of overall survival compared with that in the UR group (P = 0.10; HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.03). In the subgroup analysis, however, patients who received gemcitabine-based regimen as the NAC strategy had more favorable overall survival than that in the UR group (P = 0.04; HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
NAC may be associated with a lower resection rate; however, it is associated with an increased R0 resection rate and lymph node negative rate. Although overall survival was similar in patients with or without NAC, gemcitabine-based NAC might provide longer overall survival. Further large-volume, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the improved prognosis of patients undergoing NAC.
Topics: Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32001139
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.01.001 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023This review aims to determine the incidence and risk of pancreatic adverse events (AEs) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy for solid tumors. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to determine the incidence and risk of pancreatic adverse events (AEs) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy for solid tumors.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to March 15, 2023, to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing ICIs with standard treatment in solid tumors. We included studies that reported immune-related pancreatitis or elevation of serum amylase or lipase levels. Following protocol registration in PROSPERO, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULTS
59 unique randomized controlled trials with at least one ICI-containing arm (41 757 patients) were retrieved. The incidences for all-grade pancreatitis, amylase elevation and lipase elevation were 0.93% (95% CI 0.77-1.13), 2.57% (95% CI 1.83-3.60) and 2.78% (95% CI 1.83-4.19), respectively. The incidences for grade ≥3 pancreatitis, amylase elevation and lipase elevation were 0.68% (95% CI 0.54-0.85), 1.17% (95% CI 0.83-1.64) and 1.71% (95% CI 1.18-2.49), respectively. The use of ICIs was associated with an increased risk of all-grade pancreatic immune-related AEs (irAEs) including pancreatitis (OR=2.04, 95% CI 1.42-2.94, P =0.0001), amylase elevation (OR=1.91, 95% CI 1.47-2.49, P < 0.0001) and lipase elevation (OR=1.77, 95% CI 1.37-2.29, P < 0.0001). In addition to these, the analysis found that PD-1 inhibitors had a significant higher risk of pancreatic AEs compared with PD-L1 inhibitors and the patients undergoing dual ICI therapy were at a significantly higher risk of pancreatic AEs than the patients receiving single ICI therapy.
CONCLUSION
Our study provides an overview of the incidence and risk of ICI-associated pancreatitis and pancreatic enzyme elevations in the treatment of solid tumors. Our findings may help raise awareness among clinicians of the potential for ICI-associated pancreatic AEs in clinical practice.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier 345350.
Topics: Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Pancreatitis; Neoplasms; Amylases; Lipase
PubMed: 37359551
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1166299