Search

Background: Adamantinomatous craniopharyngiomas (ACPs) are rare benign epithelial tumours with high recurrence and poor prognosis. Biological differences between recurrent and primary ACPs that may be associated with disease recurrence and treatment have yet to be evaluated at the proteomic level. In this study, we aimed to determine the proteomic profiles of paired recurrent and primary ACP, gain biological insight into ACP recurrence, and identify potential targets for ACP treatment. Method: Patients with ACP (n = 15) or Rathke's cleft cyst (RCC; n = 7) who underwent surgery at Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China and received pathological confirmation of ACP or RCC were enrolled in this study. We conducted a proteomic analysis to investigate the characteristics of primary ACP, paired recurrent ACP, and RCC. Western blotting was used to validate our proteomic results and assess the expression of key tumour-associated proteins in recurrent and primary ACPs. Flow cytometry was performed to evaluate the exhaustion of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in primary and recurrent ACP tissue samples. Immunohistochemical staining for CD3 and PD-L1 was conducted to determine differences in T-cell infiltration and the expression of immunosuppressive molecules between paired primary and recurrent ACP samples. Results: The bioinformatics analysis showed that proteins differentially expressed between recurrent and primary ACPs were significantly associated with extracellular matrix organisation and interleukin signalling. Cathepsin K, which was upregulated in recurrent ACP compared with that in primary ACP, may play a role in ACP recurrence. High infiltration of T cells and exhaustion of TILs were revealed by the flow cytometry analysis of ACP. Conclusions: This study provides a preliminary description of the proteomic differences between primary ACP, recurrent ACP, and RCC. Our findings serve as a resource for craniopharyngioma researchers and may ultimately expand existing knowledge of recurrent ACP and benefit clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: Consensus methods are crucial in developing clinical guidelines. Different methods, such as the Delphi and nominal group techniques, are commonly used, but there is a lack of detailed instructions on how to implement them effectively. The survey aims to explore the opinions and attitudes of the chair, panel and working group on the critical elements of the consensus methods during guideline development. Methods: We used a cross-sectional design to conduct this study and sent a structured questionnaire to stakeholders, including the chair, panel members, and working group participants, through the popular mobile phone application WeChat.We selected participants using a combination of purposive and snowball sampling. The questionnaire gathered information on demographics, experiences, opinions, and concerns regarding consensus methods and guideline development. Results: The sample comprised 290 participants representing 31 provinces or municipalities. Among them, the most significant number of respondents (n = 107, 36.9%) were from Beijing. Most participants, specifically 211 (72.76%), held senior professional titles, while 186 (64.14%) adhered to ongoing guidelines. The Delphi method was the most commonly used consensus method (n = 132, 42.31%), but the respondents had only a preliminary understanding of it (n = 147, 47.12%). The consensus process also revealed the insufficiency of involving pharmacoeconomists, patients, and nurses. Conclusions: Consensus methods have to be standardised and used consistently in the guideline development process. The findings of this study offer insights into diverse roles and more effective ways to apply the consensus process during guideline development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]