Introduction Current monoanalyte biomarkers are ineffective in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). NETest, a novel multianalyte signature, provides molecular information relevant to disease biology. Aim(s) Independently validate NETest to diagnose GEP-NETs and identify progression in a tertiary referral center. Materials and methods Cohorts are 67 pancreatic NETs (PNETs), 44 small intestine NETs (SINETs) and 63 controls. Well-differentiated (WD) PNETs, n = 62, SINETs, all (n = 44). Disease extent assessment at blood draw: anatomical (n = 110) CT (n = 106), MRI (n = 7) and/or functional 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT (n = 69) or 18F-FDG-PET/CT (n = 8). Image-positive disease (IPD) was defined as either CT/MRI or 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT/18F-FDG-PET/CT-positive. Both CT/MRI and 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT negative diagnosis in WD-NETs was considered image-negative disease (IND). NETest (normal: 20): PCR (spotted plates). Data: mean ± SD. Results Diagnosis NETest was significantly increased in NETs (n = 111; 26 ± 21) vs controls (8 ± 4, p < 0.0001). Seventy-five (42 PNET, 33 SINET) were image positive. Eleven (8 PNET, 3 SINET; all WD) were IND. In IPD, NETest was significantly higher (36 ± 22) vs IND (8 ± 7, P < 0.0001). NETest accuracy, sensitivity and specificity are 97, 99 and 95%, respectively Concordance with imaging NETest was 92% (101/110) concordant with anatomical imaging, 94% (65/69) with 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT and 96% (65/68) dual modality (CT/MRI and 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT). In 70 CT/MRI positive, NETest was elevated in all (37 ± 22). In 40 CT/MRI negative, NETest was normal (11 ± 10) in 31. In 56 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT positive, NETest was elevated (36 ± 22) in 55. In 13 68Ga-SSA-PET/CT negative, NETest was normal (9 ± 8) in ten. Disease status NETest was significantly higher in progressive (61 ± 26; n = 11) vs stable disease (29 ± 14; n = 64; P < 0.0001) (RECIST 1.1). Conclusion NETest is an effective diagnostic for PNETs and SINETs. Elevated NETest is as effective as imaging in diagnosis and accurately identifies progression.

No abstract

Background: There is a substantial unmet clinical need for an accurate and effective blood biomarker for neuroendocrine neoplasms (NEN). We therefore evaluated, under real-world conditions in an ENETS Center of Excellence (CoE), the clinical utility of the NETest as a liquid biopsy and compared its utility with chromogranin A (CgA) measurement. Methods: The cohorts were: gastroenteropancreatic NEN (GEP­NEN; n = 253), bronchopulmonary NEN (BPNEN; n = 64), thymic NEN (n = 1), colon cancer (n = 37), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n = 63), benign lung disease (n = 59), and controls (n = 86). In the GEPNEN group, 164 (65%) had image-positive disease (IPD, n = 135) or were image-negative but resection-margin/biopsy-positive (n = 29), and were graded as G1 (n = 106), G2 (n = 49), G3 (n = 7), or no data (n = 2). The remainder (n = 71) had no evidence of disease (NED). In the BPNEN group, 43/64 (67%) had IPD. Histology revealed typical carcinoids (TC, n = 14), atypical carcinoids (AC, n = 14), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC, n = 11), and large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC, n = 4). Disease status (stable or progressive) was evaluated according to RECIST v1.1. Blood sampling involved NETest (n = 563) and NETest/CgA analysis matched samples (n = 178). NETest was performed by PCR (on a scale of 0–100), with a score ≥20 reflecting a disease-positive status and >40 reflecting progressive disease. CgA positivity was determined by ELISA. Samples were deidentified and measurements blinded. The Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and McNemar tests, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) were used in the statistical analysis. Results: In the GEPNEN group, NETest was significantly higher (34.4 ± 1.8, p < 0.0001) in disease-positive patients than in patients with NED (10.5 ± 1, p < 0.0001), colon cancer patients (18 ± 4, p < 0.0004), and controls (7 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001). Sensitivity for detecting disease compared to controls was 89% and specificity was 94%. NETest levels were increased in G2 vs. G1 (39 ± 3 vs. 32 ± 2, p = 0.02) and correlated with stage (localized: 26 ± 2 vs. regional/distant: 40 ± 3, p = 0.0002) and progression (55 ± 5 vs. 34 ± 2 in stable disease, p = 0.0005). In the BPNEN group, diagnostic sensitivity was 100% and levels were significantly higher in patients with bronchopulmonary carcinoids (BPC; 30 ± 1.3) who had IPD than in controls (7 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001), patients with NED (24.1 ± 1.3, p < 0.005), and NSCLC patients (17 ± 3, p = 0.0001). NETest levels were higher in patients with poorly differentiated BPNEN (LCNEC + SCLC; 59 ± 7) than in those with BPC (30 ± 1.3, p = 0.0005) or progressive disease (57.8 ± 7), compared to those with stable disease (29.4 ± 1, p < 0.0001). The AUC for differentiating disease from controls was 0.87 in the GEPNEN group and 0.99 in BPC patients (p < 0.0001). Matched CgA analysis was performed in 178 patients. In the GEPNEN group (n = 135), NETest was significantly more accurate for detecting disease (99%) than CgA positivity (53%; McNemar...

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is characterized by the clonal proliferation and accumulation of mature B lymphocytes. CLL cells show an antiapoptotic profile, suggesting the important role of apoptosis inhibition in the disease development. However, there is some population of proliferating CLL cells, which may also play a role in progression of the disease. There are several newer, biological prognostic factors in CLL. Currently, cytogenetic abnormalities with different prognostic values seem to be the most biologically relevant. During the last decades, the treatment of CLL has been significantly changed. Different strategies such as monotherapy with chlorambucil and purine nucleoside analogues (PNA) used alone or in combination with cyclophosphamide have been introduced. Most recently, immunochemotherapy with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, rituximab, combined with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide, became a gold standard of first-line treatment in eligible CLL patients. Currently, new treatment strategies including new monoclonal antibodies, bendamustine, lenalidomide, or inhibitors of several cell signaling pathways are under clinical studies in resistant/relapsed CLL patients. Moreover, allogeneic stem cell transplantation has to be considered, especially in younger high risk patients, for example, those who are resistant to PNA or those with 17p deletion. In this paper, we present the most important recent advances in CLL biology and treatment.

Introduction: Studies explored physiotherapeutic approaches in cervical dystonia (CD) patients with or without botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections, however the results are varying. There are no clinical trials investigating the effects of kinesiology taping in CD patients. The objective of this study is to investigate the efficacy of kinesiology taping as an adjunct to the BoNT injections in patients with CD. Methods: Twenty-five patients were enrolled to the study. Patients were randomly assigned to the experimental 1 (BoNT + KinesioTaping), experimental 2 (BoNT + ShamTaping) or control (BoNT) treatment. After 12 weeks they were moved to the next experimental group and finally every patient received all 3 proposed treatment options. The severity of CD was quantified with the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (TWSTRS) including Torticollis severity, Disability, and Pain scales. Quality of life was evaluated using Craniocervical dystonia questionnaire (CDQ4).Results: In all treatment groups, there was a significant improvement in dystonia symptoms measured with TWSTRS (total score) after BoNT injection regardless of the allocation to the experimental treatment (p < .05). ANOVA analysis revealed no differences in any of the TWSTRS variables after the intervention. Quality of life was significantly improved after application of taping (p < .05, p = .03).Conclusions: Application of KinesioTaping after BoNT injection provided no additional effect on the severity of dystonia, although the quality of life was improved in patients with CD. Further research investigating the effect of KinesioTaping prior to BoNT injection is required.