Prostate cancer (PCa) contains small population of cancer stem cells (CSCs) that contribute to its initiation and progression. Development of specific markers for identification of the CSCs may lead to new diagnostic strategies of PCa. Increased aldehyde dehydrogenase 1A1 (ALDH1A1) activity has been found in stem cell populations of leukemia and some solid tumors. The goal of the study was to investigate the stem cell-related function and clinical significance of the ALDH1A1 in human PCa. Aldefluor assay was used to isolate ALDH1A1+ cells from PCa cell lines. Stem cell characteristics of the ALDH1A1+ cells were then investigated by in vitro and in vivo approaches. ALDH1A1 expression by immunohistochemestry in 18 normal prostate and 163 PCa tissues was also analyzed. The ALDH1A1+ PCa cells displayed high clonogenic and tumorigenic capacities, and serially reinitiated transplantable tumors that resembled histopathologic characteristics and heterogeneity of the parental PCa cells in mice. Immunohistochemical analysis of human prostate tissues showed that ALDH1A1+ cells were sparse and limited to the basal component in normal prostates. In tumor specimens, however, increased ALDH1A1 immunopositivity was found not only in secretory type cancer epithelial cells, but also in neuroendocrine tumor populations. Furthermore, the high ALDH1A1 expression in PCa was positively correlated with Gleason score (P=0.01) and pathologic stage (P=0.01), and inversely associated with overall survival and cancer-specific survival of the patients (P=0.00093, P=0.00017). ALDH1A1 could be a prostate CSC-related marker. Measuring its expression might provide a potential approach to study tumorigenesis of PCa and predict outcome of the disease.

Objective To prevent the rapid spread of COVID-19, the Chinese government implemented a strict lockdown in Wuhan starting on 23 January, 2020, which inevitably led to the changes in indications for the mode of delivery. In this retrospective study, we present the changes in the indications for cesarean delivery (CD) and the birth weights of newborns after the lockdown in Wuhan. Methods A total of 3,432 pregnant women in the third trimester of their pregnancies who gave birth in our hospital from 23 January 2019 to 24 March 2020 were selected as the observation group, while 7,159 pregnant women who gave birth from 1 January 2019 to 22 January 2020 were selected as the control group; control group was matched using propensity score matching (PSM). A comparative analysis of the two groups was performed with the chisquare test, t test and rank sum test. Results The difference in the overall rate of CD between the two groups was not statistically significant (p<0.05). Among the indications for CD, CD on maternal request (CDMR) and fetal distress were also significantly more common in the observation group (p<0.05) than the control group. Furthermore, we found that the weight of newborns was significantly heavier in the observation group than in the control group when considering full-term or close-to-fullterm births (p<0.05). Conclusions The results may provide useful information to management practices regarding pregnancy and childbirth after lockdown in other cities or countries, enabling better control of the rate of

BackgroundQuantitative analyses of circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) are potential methods for the detection of ovarian cancer. Many studies have evaluated these approaches, but the results were too inconsistent to be conclusive. This study is the first to systematically evaluate the accuracy of circulating cfDNA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer by conducting meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases systematically for relevant literatures up to December 10, 2015. All analyses were conducted using Meta-DiSc1.4 and Stata 12.0 software. Sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of circulating cfDNA for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer were pooled. Meta-regression was performed to identify the sources of heterogeneity.ResultsThis meta-analysis included a total of 9 studies, including 462 ovarian cancer patients and 407 controls. The summary estimates for quantitative analysis of circulating cfDNA in ovarian cancer screen were as follows: sensitivity, 0.70 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65–0.74); specificity, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87–0.93); positive likelihood ratio, 6.60 (95% CI, 3.90–11.17); negative likelihood ratio, 0.34 (95% CI, 0.25–0.47); diagnostic odds ratio, 26.05 (95% CI, 14.67–46.26); and area under the curve, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83–0.95), respectively. There was no statistical significance for the evaluation of publication bias.ConclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that quantitative analysis of cfDNA has unsatisfactory sensitivity but acceptable specificity for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to validate the potential applicability of using circulating cfDNA alone or in combination with conventional markers as diagnostic biomarker for ovarian cancer and explore potential factors that may influence the accuracy of ovarian cancer diagnosis.

No abstract