No abstract

G-protein signaling modulators (GPSMs) are a class of proteins involved in the regulation of G protein-coupled receptors, the most abundant family of cell-surface receptors that are crucial in the development of various tumors, including breast cancer. This study aims to identify the potential therapeutic and prognostic roles of GPSMs in breast cancer. Oncomine and UALCAN databases were queried to determine GPSM expression levels in breast cancer tissues compared to normal samples. Survival analysis was conducted to reveal the prognostic significance of GPSMs in individuals with breast cancer. Functional enrichment analysis was performed using cBioPortal and MetaCore platforms. Finally, the association between GPSMs and immune infiltration cells in breast cancer was identified using the TIMER server. The experimental results then showed that all GPSM family members were significantly differentially expressed in breast cancer according to Oncomine and UALCAN data. Their expression levels were also associated with advanced tumor stages, and GPSM2 was found to be related to worse distant metastasis-free survival in patients with breast cancer. Functional enrichment analysis indicated that GPSMs were largely involved in cell division and cell cycle pathways. Finally, GPSM3 expression was correlated with the infiltration of several immune cells. Members of the GPSM class were differentially expressed in breast cancer. In conclusion, expression of GPSM2 was linked with worse distant metastasis-free outcomes, and hence could potentially serve as a prognostic biomarker. Furthermore, GPSM3 has potential to be a possible target for immunotherapy for breast cancer.

Background: The global prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) continues to increase, with the arteriovenous fistula (AVF) as the most preferred vascular access for hemodialysis. Whether routine preoperative ultrasound mapping improves the outcome of AVF formation compared with clinical examination alone remains controversial. Methods: This retrospective study included patients undergoing AVF surgery with and without preoperative ultrasound at our center between September 2017 and August 2020. Outcome measures included AVF early and mid-term outcome. Cox regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of favorable AVF outcome. Results: A total of 158 patients received an AVF during the study period. Both groups with (n = 79) and without (n = 79) ultrasound mapping were similar regarding baseline characteristics (age, sex, comorbidities). Patency rates were comparable between the 2 groups at 30 days, 3 months, and 6 months after AVF surgery, although there was a trend toward more favorable outcome for the mapping group ( P = .07). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that at the end of study, the ultrasound mapping group had a higher mid-term patency rate; however, the improvement was not significant ( P = .07). Cox regression analysis did not reveal age, gender, comorbidities, and ultrasound as predictors of AVF survival. Conclusion: Our study did not find a significant benefit from routine preoperative ultrasound mapping in creating AVFs for hemodialysis. Further well-designed and adequately powered trials are needed to demonstrate the beneficial role of routine preoperative ultrasound mapping for vascular access in CKD coupled with clinical evaluation in short- and long-term AVF outcome.