scholarly journals COMPARISON OF POST-OPERATIVE VALUES WITH PRE OPERATIVE VALUES OF CA 15-3 AND ITS PROGNOSTIC VALUE

2021 ◽  
pp. 88-89
Author(s):  
CHAHAT SEHGAL ◽  
SEEMA ◽  
MANINDER KAUR ◽  
ASHWANI KUMAR
Keyword(s):  
Effective Treatment ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Carcinoma Breast ◽  
Female Patients ◽  
Breast Malignancy ◽  
Tumor Load ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

Objective: This study was designed and conducted to establish the relationship of biomarker CA 15-3 levels with tumor load in cases of carcinoma breast. Methods: Fifty female patients with confirmed diagnosis of breast malignancy were included in the study. CA 15-3 levels were measured before surgery and after surgery. Results: It was found that levels of the biomarker were increased in all the cases; the rise was higher in advance cases of carcinoma. Levels decreased after the surgery and this decrease was statistically significant. Conclusions: It was concluded that levels of CA 15-3 increase in cases of carcinoma breast; higher levels indicate advanced stage and that decrease in levels indicate effective treatment.

scholarly journals A Clinical Study of Relationship of Body Mass Index with Allergic Rhinitis

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-36
Author(s):  
SS Bist ◽  
Sanjeev Bhagat ◽  
Himanshu Kala
Keyword(s):  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Clinical Study ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Allergic Diseases ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Female Patients ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
High Bmi

ABSTRACT Objectives Although the association between obesity and bronchial asthma (BA) has been gaining more attention, few studies have been conducted concerning the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and other allergic diseases. The purpose of this study is to determine the relationship between allergic rhinitis (AR) and BMI. Materials and methods This was a retrospective study. Two hundred and ten patients of AR (138 males and 72 females) and 424 healthy controls were included in the study. The BMI of patients and controls were calculated and correlated. Results The percentage of AR patients with a low BMI was 9.5%, whereas 57.6% had a normal BMI; 21% were preobese and 9.5% were obese. In the control group, 48.6% subjects had normal BMI range followed by preobese 21.2%, underweight 20.3%, and obese 9.9%. Among the overweight (preobese+ obese) category, the maximum number of subjects belonged to cases, i.e., 32.8% with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91-1.07). Thus, AR was not associated with high BMI. Among the underweight, the maximum number of subjects belonged to the control group, i.e., 20.3% with an OR of 2.13 (95% CI 1.24-3.68). Thus, AR had no relationship with lower BMI also. It was also observed that more of the female patients (18, 29.1, and 12.5% were underweight, preobese, and obese respectively) had deranged BMI than male patients (5.3, 20.2, and 7.9% were underweight, preobese, and obese respectively). A relative risk of 1.124 (95% CI 1.01-1.23) and 1.04 (95% CI 0.95-1.13) was present in female patients with low and high BMI respectively, which is statistically significant (p = 0.0008). Conclusion It was concluded that BMI was not associated with increased prevalence of AR. Among the underweight and overweight, AR was more common in females than in males. Thus, BMI had a significant association with AR among female patients. Overall, BMI had no significant association with AR. How to cite this article Kala H, Bhagat S, Varshney S, Bist SS. A Clinical Study of Relationship of Body Mass Index with Allergic Rhinitis. Clin Rhinol An Int J 2016;9(1):33-36.

scholarly journals The Prognostic Value of RASGEF1A RNA Expression and DNA Methylation in Cytogenetically Normal Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xue He ◽  
Weilong Zhang ◽  
Wei Fu ◽  
Xiaoni Liu ◽  
Ping Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Methylation ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
High Expression ◽  
Expression Level ◽  
Rna Expression ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Acute Myeloid ◽  
High Expression Level

Abstract Background Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a significantly heterogeneous malignancy of the blood. Cytogenetic abnormalities are crucial for the prognosis of AML. However, since more than half of patients with AML are cytogenetically normal AML (CN-AML), new markers are badly required for predicting prognosis. In recent years, gene abnormalities are considered to be strong prognostic factors of CN-AML, already having clinical significance for treatment. In addition, the relationship of methylation in some genes and AML prognosis predicting has been discovered. RASGEF1A is a guanine nucleotide exchange factors of Ras, and has been reported to relate to malignancy. However, there is no research about the relationship of RASGEF1A gene and CN-AML. Methods By integrating the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database 75 patients with CN-AML and 240 Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database CN-AML samples, we examined the association between RASGEF1A ’s RNA expression level and DNA methylation of and AML patients’ prognosis. Then, we investigated the RASGEF1A RNA expression and DNA methylation’s prognostic value in 77 patients with AML after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Allo-HSCT) as well as 101 AML patients after chemotherapy respectively. We investigated the association between sensitivity to Crenolanib and expression level of RASGED1A in patients by integrating 191 CN-AML patients from BeatAML dadataset. Finally, we integrated the expression and methylation of RASGEF1A to predict the CN-AML patients’ prognosis. Results We found that RASGEF1A gene high expression group predicted poorer event-free survival (EFS) (P < 0.0001) as well as overall survival (OS) (P < 0.0001) in CN-AML samples, and the identical results were found in AML patients receiving chemotherapy (P < 0.0001) and Allo-HSCT (P < 0.0001). RASGEF1A RNA expression level is an CN-AML patients’ independent prognostic factor (EFS: HR = 5.5534, 95% CI: 1.2982–23.756, P = 0.0208; OS: HR = 5.3615, 95% CI: 1.1014–26.099, P = 0.0376). The IC50 (half maximal inhibitory concentration) of Crenolanib of CN-AML samples with RASGEF1A high expression level is lower. In addition, patients with high RASGEF1A methylation level had significant favorable prognosis (EPS: P < 0.0001, OS: P < 0.0001). Furthermore, the integrative analysis of expression and methylation of RASGEF1A could classify CN-AML patients into subgroups with different prognosis (EFS: P < 0.0001, OS: P < 0.0001). Conclusion Higher RASGEF1A RNA expression and lower DNA methylation predicts CN-AML patients’ poorer prognosis. The RASGEF1A high expression level from patients with CN-AML have better sensitivity to Crenolanib. The integrative analysis of RASGEF1A RNA expression and DNA methylation can provide a more accurate classification for prognosis. Lower RASGEF1A expression is a favorable prognostic factor for AML patients receiving chemotherapy or Allo-HSCT.

scholarly journals The Relationship of LVEF and Myocardial Scar to Long-Term Mortality Risk and Mode of Death in Patients with Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

Circulation ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Klem ◽  
Michael Klein ◽  
Mohammad Khan ◽  
Eric Y. Yang ◽  
Faisal Nabi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Myocardial Scar ◽  
Risk Markers ◽  
Incremental Prognostic Value ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Mode Of Death ◽  
Long Term Mortality

Background: Non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) is a leading cause of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and is associated with high mortality risk from progressive heart failure and arrhythmias. Myocardial scar on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is increasingly recognized as risk marker for adverse outcomes, however LV dysfunction remains the basis for determining a patient's eligibility for primary prophylaxis implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). We wanted to investigate the relationship of LVEF and scar to long term mortality and mode of death in a large cohort of patients with NICM. Methods: This study is a prospective, longitudinal outcomes registry of 1020 consecutive patients with NICM who underwent clinical CMR for the assessment of LVEF and scar at three centers. Results: During a median follow-up of 5.2 (IQR 3.8, 6.6) years 277 (27%) patients died. On survival analysis LVEF≤35% and scar were strongly associated with all-cause (log-rank test p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively) and cardiac death (p=0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). While scar was strongly related to sudden cardiac death (SCD) (p=0.001), there was no significant association between LVEF≤35% and SCD-risk (p=0.57). On multivariable analysis including established clinical factors, LVEF and scar are independent risk-markers of all-cause and cardiac death. The addition of LVEF provided incremental prognostic value albeit insignificant discrimination improvement by C-statistic for all-cause and cardiac death, however no incremental prognostic value for SCD. Conversely, scar extent demonstrated significant incremental prognostic value and discrimination improvement for all three endpoints. On net reclassification analysis, the addition of LVEF resulted in no significant improvement for all-cause death 11.0% (95% CI -6.2-25.9%), cardiac death 9.8% (95% CI -5.7-29.3%), and SCD 7.5% (95% CI -41.2-42.9%). Conversely, the addition of scar extent resulted in significant reclassification improvement of 25.5% (95% CI 11.7-41.0%) for all-cause death, 27.0% (95% CI 11.6-45.2%) for cardiac death, and 40.6% (95% CI 10.5-71.8%) for SCD. Conclusions: Myocardial scar and LVEF are both risk markers for all-cause and cardiac death in patients with NICM. However, while myocardial scar has strong and incremental prognostic value for SCD risk stratification, LVEF has no incremental prognostic value over clinical parameters. Scar assessment should be incorporated into patient selection criteria for primary prevention ICD placement.

scholarly journals High expression of LEF1 correlates with poor prognosis in solid tumors, but not blood tumors: a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoqi Yang ◽  
Haoran Liu ◽  
Tao Ye ◽  
Zhangqun Ye
Keyword(s):  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cancer Prognosis ◽  
Human Cancers ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Binding Factor ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Background: Previously published studies have indicated that lymphoid enhancer-binding factor 1 (LEF1) expression could be recognized as a valuable biomarker to evaluate clinical outcome for various types of malignant cancer, but the results remained controversial. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to pool the published estimates and discuss the relationship of LEF1 expression with cancer prognosis. Methods: Five electronic databases Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, and Wanfang were systematically searched for eligible literatures. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from the included studies were combined to estimate the effect of LEF1 expression on cancer patients’ survival. Results: Eleven original studies met the criteria and were enrolled for analysis. The results indicated that compared with patients in low LEF1 expression group, patients in high LEF1 expression group tended to have shorter overall survival (HR = 1.74, 95% CI: 1.06–2.86, P=0.029), especially for patients with solid tumors (HR = 2.39, 95% CI: 1.86–3.08, P=0.000). Conclusions: Individual evidence about the prognostic value of LEF1 expression in human cancers was limited. Our meta-analysis supported the suggestion that elevated LEF1 expression could function as a promising biomarker to predict the clinical outcomes for malignant cancers, especially solid tumors. More high-quality clinical studies are warranted to highlight the prognostic value of LEF1 expression in human cancers.

B-Cell Count and Survival: Differentiating Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) from and Monoclonal B-Cell Lymphocytosis (MBL) Based on Clinical Outcome.

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 2062-2062
Author(s):  
Tait Shanafelt ◽  
Neil E. Kay ◽  
Gregory Jenkins ◽  
Timothy G. Call ◽  
Clive S. Zent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Cell Count ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Prognostic Markers ◽  
Continuous Variables ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of CLL among asymptomatic patients without lymphadenopathy or cytopenias has historically been based on documenting a characteristic lymphocyte clone and the presence of lymphocytosis. Currently, there are no data regarding what lymphocyte type (absolute lymphocyte count [ALC] or B-cell count) or threshold should be used for this diagnosis. We analyzed the relationship of these lymphocyte counts to clinical outcome in a cohort of 459 patients to determine whether the CLL diagnosis: should be based on ALC or B-cell count what lymphocyte threshold should be used for diagnosis whether any lymphocyte counts has independent prognostic value after accounting for molecular prognostic markers. METHODS: We used the Mayo Clinic CLL database to identify all Rai stage 0 patients diagnosed with CLL between 1/1/00 and 12/31/07 who were evaluated and had flow cytometry at Mayo within 12 months of diagnosis. All patients had lymphocytosis (ALC ≥5 x 109/L) and fulfilled the 1996 criteria for CLL. Raw data from the peripheral blood flow analysis was used in conjunction with blood counts to determine ALC and absolute B-cell count at diagnosis. Estimates of survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: To assess whether B-cell count or ALC more strongly related to clinical outcome, we evaluated the relationship of these variables with treatment free survival (TFS) and overall survival (OS; n=459). When treated as continuous variables (i.e. measuring risk of each 1.0 x 109/L increase in cell count), both ALC and B-cell count were related to TFS (hazard ratio [HR] ALC=1.02; p&lt;0.0001; HR B-cell count=1.02; p&lt;0.0001) and OS (HR ALC=1.02; p=0.04; HR B-cell count=1.02; p=0.02). Because B-cell count and ALC related to TFS and OS as a continuous variables, we next evaluated what threshold (nearest 1.0 x109/L) at diagnosis best related to an individual’s risk of requiring chemotherapeutic treatment and/or dying of CLL using the HR (log rank statistic) and c-statistic [c=1 indicates perfect discrimination between poor survivors and good survivors; c=0.5 equivalent to chance]. The B-cell threshold that best predicted OS was 11 x 109/L (HR=2.36, p=0.01; c=0.60). This threshold also predicted TFS (HR=3.02; p&lt;0.0001; c=0.64). With respect to ALC, a threshold of 12 x 109/L was able to predict TFS (HR=2.28, p=0.003; c=0.62) but not OS (HR=1.62, p=0.12; c=0.56). The B-cell threshold used in the current diagnostic criteria (5 x 109/L) was able to predict TFS (HR=3.24, p&lt;0.0001; c=0.63), but not OS (HR=1.64, p=0.13; c=0.55) Finally, we evaluated the ability of B-cell count to predict TFS independent of IGHV mutation status, ZAP-70 status, CD38 status, and FISH. Since not all patients had all prognostic tests performed, the predictive value of B-cell count (&lt; or ≥11 x 109) independent of the other prognostic variable was assessed for each variable independently. B-cell count retained prognostic value independent of IGHV mutation status, ZAP-70 status, CD38 status, and FISH (all p≤0.001) [Table]. CONCLUSIONS: Although B-cell count and ALC have similar ability to predict TFS and OS as continuous variables, B-cell count may be a better predictor of TFS and OS when a defined lymphocyte threshold is used. These findings provide evidence to justify the recent proposal by Hallek et al (Blood 111:5446) to base the diagnosis of CLL on B-cell count rather than ALC. The results also provide justification for retaining the size of the B-cell count as part of the diagnostic criteria even in the era of molecular/biologic prognostic markers, but imply a threshold of 11 x 109 is the B-cell count that best predicts patient’s TFS and risk of death. Differentiating between CLL and MBL based on a patient’s likelihood of developing clinical symptoms and dying of disease could minimize unnecessary psychologic distress caused by labeling asymptomatic individuals at low risk for adverse clinical consequences as having leukemia. TABLE: TREATMENT FREE SURVIVAL HR p-value CD38 + 3.20 0.0002 B-cell ≥11 3.10 0.0001 ZAP + 8.33 &lt; 0.0001 B-cell ≥11 6.86 &lt; 0.0001 Unmutated 5.26 &lt; 0.0001 B-cell ≥11 3.06 0.001 FISH (17p- or 11q-) 3.97 0.01 B-cell ≥11 3.67 &lt; 0.0001

Caregiver burden in older Indian patients with cancer: Experience from a tertiary care center.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e24022-e24022
Author(s):  
Nandini Menon ◽  
Vijay Maruti Patil ◽  
Vanita Noronha ◽  
Anant Ramaswamy ◽  
Shreya Gattani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Caregiver Burden ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Psychological Status ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Median Score ◽  
Female Patients ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Indian Patients ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

e24022 Background: Most of the care for adults with chronic/debilitating illnesses is provided by unpaid family members. There is little information on caregiver burden in older patients with cancer in India. Methods: This was an observational study conducted in the geriatric oncology clinic at the Tata Memorial Centre, a tertiary care oncology center in Mumbai, India. The Fronto Temporal Lobe Disorders (FTLDA) caregiver burden scale was administered to the caregiver who accompanied the patient to the geriatric clinic. The scale has 22 questions, each scored from 0 to 4. The points were added to give the total caregiver burden score. The severity of the caregiver burden was scored based on the standard key: 0-20 little or no burden, 21-40 mild to moderate burden, 41-60 moderate to severe burden, 61-88 severe burden. Descriptive statistics were used for demographic & clinical variables. The factors impacting the caregiver burden were analyzed using multiple linear regression analysis. The caregiver burden score was the dependent variable in this analysis. The independent variables evaluated were patient-related factors (sex, education, primary tumor type), vulnerabilities noted on the geriatric assessment (function & falls, psychological status -depression & anxiety, cognition, nutrition, comorbidity) and caregiver-related, i.e., the relationship of the caregiver with the patient. Results: The caregiver burden scores were obtained from the caregivers of 127 older Indian patients with cancer between June 2020 & January 2021. The median age of patients in this study was 69 years (range, 60-90). There were 96 (75.6%) males; the two commonest malignancies were lung carcinoma (47 patients, 37%) & gastrointestinal cancers (46 patients, 36.2%). The relationship of the caregiver to the patient was child (94, 74%), in-law (12, 9.4%), spouse (7, 5.5%), grandchild (6, 4.7%) and other relative (8, 6.3%). The median caregiver burden score was 12 (IQR, 6-20). The caregiver burden was -little/no in 97 (76.4%), mild-moderate in 25 (19.7%), moderate-severe in 4 (3.1%) & severe in 1 (0.8%) of the caregivers assessed. On multivariate analysis, the factors that significantly impacted the caregiver burden score included the sex of the patient ( P= .0445) & the presence of psychological problems ( P= .0164). In the univariate analysis, the caregiver burden was higher in caregivers of female patients (median score, 16 [IQR 9-25] versus 10 [IQR 5-19], P= .02036). Caregivers of patients with psychological issues also had higher caregiver burden (median score, 19 [IQR 10-28] versus 10 [IQR 5.25-17], P= .00224). Conclusions: The caregiver burden was low in older Indian patients with cancer. Higher caregiver burden was experienced by the caregivers of female patients & patients with psychological disorders. Clinical trial information: CTRI/2020/04/024675.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document