The increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Western countries requests reliable tumour markers for preclinical diagnosis. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP), in comparison with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) in a French cohort using a new analyser. One hundred and sixty-two patients with virus-related cirrhosis (46 HCC patients and 116 controls) were recruited in this retrospective proof-of-concept study. DCP was measured on new Lumipulse G600 analyzer and AFP on usual Cobas e602 analyzer in serum samples that were collected at the time of HCC diagnosis for HCC patients or during follow-up for controls. DCP and AFP levels were higher in HCC patients. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was larger for DCP than for AFP (0.89 vs 0.77, P=.03). At the cut-off value of 128 mAU/mL, sensitivity and specificity for DCP were 74% and 92%. At the cut-off value of 20 μg/L, sensitivity and specificity for AFP were 63% and 82%. NRI for the association of "AFP+DCP" were 101%, P<.0001, and 23%, P=.03, compared to "AFP" or "DCP" alone, respectively. We conclude that DCP outperformed AFP for the detection of HCC.

AbstractBorderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) represent around 15% of all epithelial ovarian cancer. Around one third of those patients is under 40 and has not completed childbearing when the tumor is diagnosed. Cancer survivors are more and more concerned about their future fertility since a large proportion of those with BOTs are young. Whatever the tumor stage, information regarding future fertility after treatment and fertility preservation (FP) options must be delivered to all patients before treatment. A multidisciplinary team will discuss and propose personalized treatment and FP strategies. Nowadays, the FP options offered to patients with BOT are the followings: i) minimal invasive conservative surgery, ii) oocyte cryopreservation after controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) or in vitro maturation (IVM) and iii) ovarian tissue cryopreservation. Generally, the most common strategy to preserve future fertility is represented by minimal invasive conservative surgery. However, with the remarkable success and evolution of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) – notably progress and efficiency in COS and oocyte vitrification – have led to offer another potential approach for FP consisting in oocyte cryopreservation. Several COS protocols, such as random start or dual stimulation associating tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors with gonadotropins provide similar results when compared to standard protocols while providing safety by minimizing the risk of high estrogen exposure. When COS is contraindicated, oocyte cryopreservation can still be possible throw IVM. Even though, oocyte competence after IVM is lower than that obtained after COS. A less used approach is cryopreservation of ovarian tissue, consisting in freezing ovarian cortex fragments for a future thawing and graft. Some concerns and limitations regard the ovarian cortex graft and the risk of reintroducing malignant cells once performed. Nonetheless, the latter it is the only option in prepubertal patients.

No abstract

Study question Is it possible to find viral Sars-Cov–2 RNA in FF of women undergoing treatment during Covid–19 pandemic that may compromise gamete and embryo safety? Summary answer No viral RNA was detected in tested FF of women undergoing IVF in compliance with recommendations. This was reassuring and supported good medical practice. What is known already Risks due to SARS-CoV–2 during IVF remain difficult to assess despite the screening recommended by French health authorities based on a symptom questionnaire of the couple (systematic testing by RT-PCR for the virus before egg retrieval (ER) is not mandatory). In this context, this is a real challenge for IVF laboratory to guarantee procedure, patients, gametes and embryos safety. Most studies have reported the absence of virus in sperm. No data are available for FF and only one study looked for the presence of the virus in oocytes of Covid-affected patients (Barragan M et al, 2020). Study design, size, duration Between June 17 and September 24, 2020, FF of consenting women were prospectively collected and symptom questionnaire recorded. During this period, women undergoing IVF in our center did not benefit from systematic PCR testing for the virus within 72 hours prior to ER through our health authorities’ recommendations. All collected FF were retrospectively tested to research viral RNA by RT-PCR and patients were recalled to answer an epidemiological follow-up questionnaire. Participants/materials, setting, methods For all couples, symptom questionnaires were prospectively recorded and verified at each step of IVF procedure. For all consenting women, a sample of 1 ml of FF was collected the day of ER and stored at –80 °C. After thawing, a Sars-Cov2 multiplex RT-PCR using CFX96 (Biorad*) was performed, after RNA extraction using Nimbus (Seegene*). A comprehensive epidemiological evaluation was made afterwards by phone interview and data were recorded and analyzed. Main results and the role of chance A total of 183 women was included out of the 214 treated during this period (85.5%). Retrospective epidemiological evaluation showed that 8 patients contracted Covid more than 2 months before the ER, 6 more than 2 months after and only one patient 1 month after ER (diagnosis based on pathognomonic signs as agueusia and anosmia or/and positive PCR ). We observed a prevalence of symptomatic Covid forms in our IVF population of 8.2% during a 6-month period surrounding their IVF cycle. Moreover, until the introduction of systematic testing by RT-PCR for the virus before ER since the end of September 2020, 3 patients have been cancelled out of the 403 planned for positive PCR despite a negative questionnaire, which represents a prevalence of asymptomatic forms on the day of the ER at 0.7%. All the 183 FF tested did not reveal any viral RNA detection, which was reassuring concerning our medical practice and patient compliance and transparency. The absence of detected viral RNA may be due to several reasons: 1) women were not infected the day of ER 2) women had an asymptomatic form of the disease with low viral load 3) FF is not a virus reservoir. Limitations, reasons for caution Not all patients were included (85.5%). Post-diagnosis stays uncertain because PCR tests at the beginning of the epidemic were not mandatory and hardly available. Wider implications of the findings: The absence of viral RNA in FF of women only screened through a symptom questionnaire is reassuring concerning the safety of IVF during Covid pandemic. Trial registration number Not applicable