Circulating microRNAs that are associated with specific diseases have garnered much attention for use in diagnostic assays. However, detection of disease-associated miRNA can be affected by several factors such as release of contaminating cellular miRNA during sample collection, variations due to amplification of transcript for detection, or controls used for normalization for accurate quantitation. We analyzed circulating miRNA in serum and plasma samples obtained concurrently from 28 patients, using a Nanostring quantitative assay platform. Total RNA concentration ranged from 32–125 μg/ml from serum and 30–220 μg/ml from plasma. Of 798 miRNAs, 371 miRNAs were not detected in either serum or plasma samples. 427 were detected in either serum or plasma but not both, whereas 151 miRNA were detected in both serum and plasma samples. The diversity of miRNA detected was greater in plasma than in serum samples. In serum samples, the number of detected miRNA ranged from 3 to 82 with a median of 17, whereas in plasma samples, the number of miRNA detected ranged from 25 to 221 with a median of 91. Several miRNA such as miR451a, miR 16-5p, miR-223-3p, and mir25-3p were highly abundant and differentially expressed between serum and plasma. The detection of endogenous and exogenous control miRNAs varied in serum and plasma, with higher levels observed in plasma. Gene expression stability identified candidate invariant microRNA that were highly stable across all samples, and could be used for normalization. In conclusion, there are significant differences in both the number of miRNA detected and the amount of miRNA detected between serum and plasma. Normalization using miRNA with constant expression is essential to minimize the impact of technical variations. Given the challenges involved, ideal candidates for blood based biomarkers would be those that are indifferent to type of body fluid, are detectable and can be reliably quantitated.
Introduction & Aims Cholangiocarcinomas are a heterogeneous group of tumors that can be classified into three clinically distinct types of cancers, intrahepatic, perihilar and distal cholangiocarcinoma. The inconsistent use of nomenclature for these cancers has obscured a true knowledge of the epidemiology, natural history and response to therapy of these cancers. Our aims were to define demographic characteristics, management and outcomes of these three distinct cancer types. Materials and Methods A retrospectivestudy of patients enrolled in an institutional cancer registry from 1992 to 2010. Median survival was compared between different treatment modalities over three time periods for the three types of cholangiocarcinoma at different stages of the disease using Kaplan Meyer analysis. Results 242 patients were identified. All cases were reviewed and classified into intrahepatic (90 patients), distal (48 patients) or perihilar (104 patients) cholangiocarcinomas These cancers differed in median age of onset, gender distribution, median survival and stage. 13.8% of patients presented with stage I, 5.8% with stage II, 9.6% with stage III, 28% with stage IV, with 41.8% having unknown stage. The overall median survival was 15.8 months, and was 23, 25, 14, and 4.5 months for stages I, II, III, and IV respectively. Surgery improved survival in both early and advanced stages. Multimodality therapies further improved outcomes, particularly for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Conclusion Perihilar, distal and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma vary in their presentation, natural history and therapeutic approach to management. A consistently applied classification is essential for meaningful interpretation of studies of these cancers.
This paper reviews the use of photodynamic therapy (PDT) in patients with Barrett's esophagus and esophageal carcinoma. We describe the history of PDT, mechanics, photosensitizers for PDT in patients with esophageal disease. Finally, we discuss its utility and limitations in this setting.
While liver transplantation is the definitive therapy for end stage liver disease, it remains a major procedure, with many potential complications. Hospital readmissions after the initial hospitalization for liver transplantation can be associated with adverse outcomes, increased cost, and resource utilization. Our aim was to define the incidence and reasons for hospital readmission after liver transplant and the impact of readmissions on patient outcomes. We retrospectively analyzed 30- and 90-day readmission rates and indications in patients who underwent liver transplant at a large-volume transplant center over a 3-year period. Four hundred seventy-nine adult patients underwent their first liver transplant during the study period. The 30-day readmission rate was 29.6%. Recipient and donor age, etiology of liver disease, biological Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and cold ischemia time were similar between patients who were readmitted within 30 days and those who were not readmitted. Readmissions occurred in 25% of patients who were hospitalized prior to liver transplant compared to 30% who were admitted for liver transplant. The most common indications for readmission were infection, severe abdominal pain, and biliary complications. Early discharge from hospital (fewer than 7 days after liver transplant), was not associated with readmission; however, a prolonged hospital stay after liver transplant was associated with an increased risk of readmission (p = 0.04). In conclusion, patients who undergo liver transplant have a high rate of readmission. In our cohort, readmissions were unrelated to pre-existing recipient or donor factors, but were associated with a longer hospital stay after liver transplant.
Females take longer time to achieve CRIM when treated with RFA when compared with males of similar age and BE length.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.