Search

Abstract Background Numerous hypermethylated genes have been reported in breast cancer, and the silencing of these genes plays an important role in carcinogenesis, tumor progression and diagnosis. These hypermethylated promoters are very rarely found in normal breast. It has been suggested that aberrant hypermethylation may be useful as a biomarker, with implications for breast cancer etiology, diagnosis, and management. The relationship between primary neoplasm and metastasis remains largely unknown. There has been no comprehensive comparative study on the clinical usefulness of tumor-associated methylated DNA biomarkers in primary breast carcinoma and metastatic breast carcinoma. The objective of the present study was to investigate the association between clinical extension of breast cancer and methylation status of Estrogen Receptor1 (ESR1) and Stratifin (14-3-3-σ) gene promoters in disease-free and metastatic breast cancer patients. Methods We studied two cohorts of patients: 77 patients treated for breast cancer with no signs of disease, and 34 patients with metastatic breast cancer. DNA was obtained from serum samples, and promoter methylation status was determined by using DNA bisulfite modification and quantitative methylation-specific PCR. Results Serum levels of methylated gene promoter 14-3-3-σ significantly differed between Control and Metastatic Breast Cancer groups (P < 0.001), and between Disease-Free and Metastatic Breast Cancer groups (P < 0.001). The ratio of the 14-3-3-σ level before the first chemotherapy cycle to the level just before administration of the second chemotherapy cycle was defined as the Biomarker Response Ratio [BRR]. We calculated BRR values for the "continuous decline" and "rise-and-fall" groups. Subsequent ROC analysis showed a sensitivity of 75% (95% CI: 47.6 - 86.7) and a specificity of 66.7% (95% CI: 41.0 - 86.7) to discriminate between the groups for a cut-off level of BRR = 2.39. The area under the ROC curve (Z = 0.804 ± 0.074) indicates that this test is a good approach to post-treatment prognosis. Conclusions The relationship of 14-3-3-σ with breast cancer metastasis and progression found in this study suggests a possible application of 14-3-3-σ as a biomarker to screen for metastasis and to follow up patients treated for metastatic breast cancer, monitoring their disease status and treatment response.

Background: Numerous hypermethylated genes have been reported in breast cancer, and the silencing of these genes plays an important role in carcinogenesis, tumor progression and diagnosis. These hypermethylated promoters are very rarely found in normal breast. It has been suggested that aberrant hypermethylation may be useful as a biomarker, with implications for breast cancer etiology, diagnosis, and management. The relationship between primary neoplasm and metastasis remains largely unknown. There has been no comprehensive comparative study on the clinical usefulness of tumor-associated methylated DNA biomarkers in primary breast carcinoma and metastatic breast carcinoma. The objective of the present study was to investigate the association between clinical extension of breast cancer and methylation status of estrogen receptor1 (ESR1) and stratifin (14-3-3-sigma) gene promoters in disease-free and metastatic breast cancer patients.Methods: We studied two cohorts of patients: 77 patients treated for breast cancer with no signs of disease, and 34 patients with metastatic breast cancer. DNA was obtained from serum samples, and promoter methylation status was determined by using DNA bisulfite modification and quantitative methylation-specific PCR.Results: Serum levels of methylated gene promoter 14-3-3-sigma significantly differed between Control and Metastatic Breast Cancer groups (P < 0.001), and between Disease-Free and Metastatic Breast Cancer groups (P < 0.001). The ratio of the 14-3-3-sigma level before the first chemotherapy cycle to the level just before administration of the second chemotherapy cycle was defined as the Biomarker Response Ratio [BRR]. We calculated BRR values for the "continuous decline" and "rise-and-fall" groups. Subsequent ROC analysis showed a sensitivity of 75% (95% CI: 47.6 - 86.7) and a specificity of 66.7% (95% CI: 41.0 - 86.7) to discriminate between the groups for a cut-off level of BRR = 2.39. The area under the ROC curve (Z = 0.804 +/- 0.074) indicates that this test is a good approach to post-treatment prognosis.Conclusions: The relationship of 14-3-3-sigma with breast cancer metastasis and progression found in this study suggests a possible application of 14-3-3-sigma as a biomarker to screen for metastasis and to follow up patients treated for metastatic breast cancer, monitoring their disease status and treatment response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal malignancy with dispiriting survival data. Immunotherapy is a promising approach to many cancer types, but achieves poor outcomes in advanced PDAC due to its immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. We describe a case of metastatic PDAC effectively treated with pembrolizumab., Case Summary: We report the case of a 67-year-old woman with unresectable locally advanced PDAC, treated with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel followed by radiotherapy plus capecitabine. At nine months, pancreatic tumor progression was observed at the level of the hepatic hilum with the appearance of a new pulmonary nodule suggestive of a second primary, confirmed by left lung biopsy. Systemic immunotherapy was then initiated with pembrolizumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor targeting programmed cell death protein-1 that covers the two tumor types. The patient showed a complete metabolic response that was maintained throughout the treatment. The patient continues to be disease-free at 5.6 years since the start of immunotherapy., Conclusion: These results suggest that the administration of pembrolizumab after chemoradiotherapy has a beneficial effect in patients with metastatic PDAC. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of a patient with metastatic PDAC and metastatic lung cancer showing such a long-lasting complete response after pembrolizumab treatment without curative surgery. Further studies are required to determine biomarkers that identify PDAC patients most likely to benefit from this immunotherapy., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article., (©The Author(s) 2024. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to confirm the efficacy of the ERBITAX scheme (paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 weekly and cetuximab 400 mg/m 2 loading dose, and then 250 mg/m 2 weekly) as first-line treatment for patients with recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) who are medically unfit for cisplatin-based (PT) chemotherapy., Materials and Methods: This retrospective, non-interventional study involved 16 centers in Spain. Inclusion criteria were to have started receiving ERBITAX regimen from January 2012 to December 2018; histologically confirmed SCCHN including oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, and larynx; age ≥18 years; and platinum (PT) chemotherapy ineligibility due to performance status, comorbidities, high accumulated dose of PT, or PT refractoriness., Results: A total of 531 patients from 16 hospitals in Spain were enrolled. The median age was 66 years, 82.7% were male, and 83.5% were current/former smokers. Patients were ineligible to receive PT due to ECOG 2 (50.3%), comorbidities (32%), PT cumulative dose ≥ 225 mg/m 2 (10.5%), or PT refractoriness (7.2%). Response rate was 37.7%. Median duration of response was 5.6 months (95% CI: 4.4-6.6). With a median follow-up of 8.7 months (95% CI: 7.7-10.2), median PFS and OS were 4.5 months (95% CI: 3.9-5.0) and 8.9 months (95% CI: 7.8-10.3), respectively. Patients treated with immunotherapy after ERBITAX had better OS with a median of 29.8 months compared to 13.8 months for those who received other treatments. The most common grade ≥ 3 toxicities were acne-like rash in 36 patients (6.8%) and oral mucositis in 8 patients (1.5%). Five (0.9%) patients experienced grade ≥ 3 febrile neutropenia., Conclusion: This study confirms the real-world efficacy and tolerability of ERBITAX as first-line treatment in recurrent/metastatic SCCHN when PT is not feasible. Immunotherapy after treatment with ERBITAX showed remarkable promising survival, despite potential selection bias., Competing Interests: JR-C: Advisory role: Sanofi, Novartis and Merck. BCC: Support for this manuscript from Merck through TTCC Group. Speaker on behalf of BMS, MSD, and Merck. Meeting support from BMS and MSD. Member of TTCC Group unpaid. MP: Speaker on behalf of BMS. Meeting support from MSD Oncology. AG: Advisory board from MSD and Bristol Myers Squibb. AC: Speaker on behalf of Merck. Meeting support from Merck. LI: Speaker on behalf of Merck, MSD, Roche, Bayer, Eisai. Meeting support from Merck and MSD. Advisory board from Merck MSD, Roche, Lilly, and Ipsen. PP: Received grants from BMS, Merck, and MSD. Consulting fees from BMS, Merck, and MSD. Speaker on behalf of BMS, Merck, and MSD. Meeting support from BMS, Merck, and MSD. Member of TTCC Group. IC: Speaker on behalf of MSD, Merck, Roche, BMS, Seagen, and Pfizer. Meeting support in Pfizer, MSD, and Merck. CP: Speaker on behalf of Novartis, Merck, and MSD. Meeting support from Novartis, Merck, and MSD. IH: Speaker on behalf of Pierre Fabre educational event and Merck lecture. Meeting support from Merck support for an event and AztraZeneca support for educational expertise. MC: Participated in and received equipment for clinical trials from the institution. Speaker on behalf of MSD and Merck. Meeting support from MSD and Merck. EO: Speaker on behalf of GSK, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Merck, Pharmamar, and MSD. Expert testimony for GSK. Meeting support from Merck and MSD. Advisory board for Eisai. RM: Support for this manuscript from Merck for medical writing and article processing charges. Speaker on behalf of MSD and Merck. Meeting support from BMS, Merck, and MSD. Advisory board for MSD, Merck, Boehringer, Bayer, Roche, Nanobiotics and Sigean. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Rubió-Casadevall, Cirauqui Cirauqui, Martinez Trufero, Plana Serrahima, García Castaño, Carral Maseda, Iglesias Docampo, Pérez Segura, Ceballos Lenza, Gutiérrez Calderón, Fuster Salvà, Pena Álvarez, Hernandez, del Barco Morillo, Chaves Conde, Martínez Galán, Durán Sánchez, Quiroga, Ortega and Mesia.)

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), a chronic inflammation caused by the immune system attacking the pancreas, usually presents imaging and clinical features that overlap with those of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Serum biomarkers, substances that quantitatively change in sera during disease development, are a promising non-invasive tool with high utility for differentiating between these diseases. In this way, the presence of AIP is currently suspected when serum concentrations of immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) antibody are elevated. However, this approach has some drawbacks. Notably, IgG4 antibody concentrations are also elevated in sera from some patients with PDAC. This review focuses on the most recent and relevant serum biomarkers proposed to differentiate between AIP and PDAC, evaluating the usefulness of immunoglobulins, autoantibodies, chemokines, and cytokines. The proposed serum biomarkers have proven useful, although most studies had a small sample size, did not examine their presence in patients with PDAC, or did not test them in humans. In addition, current evidence suggests that a single serum biomarker is unlikely to accurately differentiate these diseases and that a set of biomarkers will be needed to achieve adequate specificity and sensitivity, either alone or in combination with clinical data and/or radiological images., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article., (©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency results from the destruction of the pancreatic parenchyma and is diagnosed by using direct or indirect tests, both of which have shortcomings. Chronic pancreatitis is the most frequent cause of this pathology in adults., Methods: Patients meeting radiological or histological diagnostic criteria of chronic pancreatitis are enrolled and the stool elastase test is conducted, considering fecal elastase levels >200 µg/g to represent normal pancreatic function, and levels <200 μg/g to indicate the presence of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. Additionally, we determine the body mass index of the patients and study their nutritional status and main biochemical and hematological variables, including their glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels., Results: Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency is detected in 60% of the patients. Among these, 83.3% are severe cases, and 72% of the latter also are diagnosed with endocrine pancreatic insufficiency (diabetes mellitus). During the nutritional status study, HbA1c levels are significantly higher, and magnesium and prealbumin levels are significantly lower in patients with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency than in those without this disease., Conclusions: Exocrine and endocrine pancreatic insufficiency are highly prevalent among patients with chronic pancreatitis and an early diagnosis of these diseases is vital to improve the clinical management of these patients and reduce their risk of mortality.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most aggressive and lethal cancers, with a 5-year survival rate of less than 5%. In fact, complete surgical resection remains the only curative treatment. However, fewer than 20% of patients are candidates for surgery at the time of presentation. Hence, there is a critical need to identify diagnostic biomarkers with potential clinical utility in this pathology. In this context, metabolomics could be a powerful tool to search for new robust biomarkers. Comparative metabolomic profiling was performed in serum samples from 59 unresectable PDAC patients and 60 healthy controls. Samples were analyzed by using an untargeted metabolomics workflow based on liquid chromatography, coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry in positive and negative electrospray ionization modes. Univariate and multivariate analysis allowed the identification of potential candidates that were significantly altered in PDAC patients. A panel of nine candidates yielded excellent diagnostic capacities. Pathway analysis revealed four altered pathways in our patients. This study shows the potential of liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution mass spectrometry as a diagnostic tool for PDAC. Furthermore, it identified novel robust biomarkers with excellent diagnostic capacities.

Purpose: Gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound (NAB) paclitaxel (GA) significantly improved survival compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and a Karnofsky performance status (PS) of 70% or greater. Because of the low number of patients with reduced PS, the efficacy of this regimen in fragile patients remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of different GA dosing regimens in patients with a poor PS., Patients and Methods: In the phase I part of this study, patients were randomly assigned to one of the following four parallel GA treatment arms (six patients per arm): a biweekly schedule of NAB-paclitaxel (150 mg/m 2 [arm A] or 125 mg/m 2 [arm C]) plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 or a standard schedule of 3 weeks on and 1 week off of NAB-paclitaxel (100 mg/m 2 [arm B] or 125 mg/m 2 [arm D]) plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 . The two regimens with the better tolerability profile on the basis of predefined criteria were evaluated in the phase II part of the study, the primary end point of which was 6-month actuarial survival., Results: Arms B and D were selected for the phase II part of the study. A total of 221 patients (111 patients in arm B and 110 patients in arm D) were enrolled. Baseline characteristics including median age (71 and 68 years in arms B and D, respectively), sex (51% and 55% men in arms B and D, respectively), and metastatic disease (88% and 84% in arms B and D, respectively) were comparable between arms. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicities in arms B and D were anemia (12% and 7%, respectively), neutropenia (32% and 30%, respectively), thrombocytopenia (7% and 11%, respectively), asthenia (14% and 16%, respectively), and neurotoxicity (11% and 16%, respectively). In arms B and D, there were no significant differences in response rate (24% and 28%, respectively), median progression-free survival (5.7 and 6.7 months, respectively), and 6-month overall survival (63% and 69%, respectively)., Conclusion: NAB-paclitaxel administered at either 100 and 125 mg/m 2 in combination with gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days is well tolerated and results in acceptable safety and efficacy in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and a poor PS.

The current management of patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is based on systemic chemotherapy. The results of the MPACT and PRODIGE clinical trials have demonstrated that the combination of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine (GEM) as well as FOLFIRINOX regimen result in improvement in overall survival when compared to GEM alone. Treatment guidelines now recommend either one of these two regimens as first line treatment for fit patients with mPDAC. Because no head-to-head comparison between the two regimens exists, the selection of one versus the other is based on clinical criteria. The design and eligibility criteria of these two clinical trials are dissimilar, making the results of the MPACT trial more applicable to the general population of patients with mPDAC. In addition, the combination of nab-paclitaxel and GEM is better tolerated and easier to administer in clinical practice than FOLFIRINOX. Furthermore, when the regimens are studied in comparable patient populations the efficacy results are very similar. Nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5FU has recently demonstrated a significant increase in efficacy rates after a GEM-based treatment. Importantly, treatment of mPDAC should now be considered as a continuum care for patients who are fit, with second and even third line treatments. Different sequential treatment algorithms are proposed based on available data. In retrospective studies, patients who were managed with GEM-based regimens followed by fluoropyrimidine-based regimens appear to have the most favorable outcome., Competing Interests: Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.