scholarly journals Circulating Exosomal Integrin β3 Is Associated with Intracranial Failure and Survival in Lung Cancer Patients Receiving Cranial Irradiation for Brain Metastases: A Prospective Observational Study

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 380
Author(s):  
Guann-Yiing Chen ◽  
Jason Chia-Hsien Cheng ◽  
Ya-Fang Chen ◽  
James Chih-Hsin Yang ◽  
Feng-Ming Hsu
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Subdistribution Hazard ◽  
Assessment Score ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Failure Patterns ◽  
Integrin Β3 ◽  
Prognostic Assessment ◽  
Graded Prognostic Assessment

Brain metastasis (BM) is a major problem in patients with cancer. Exosomes or extracellular vesicles (EV) and integrins contribute to the development of BM, and exosomal integrins have been shown to determine organotropic metastasis. We hypothesized that circulating EV integrins are able to influence the failure patterns and outcomes in patients treated for BM. We prospectively enrolled 75 lung cancer patients with BM who received whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). We isolated and quantified their circulating EV integrins, and analyzed the association of EV integrins with clinical factors, survival, and intracranial/extracranial failure. Circulating EV integrin levels were independent of age, sex, histology, number of BM, or graded prognostic assessment score. Age, histology, and graded prognostic assessment score correlated with survival. Patients with higher levels of circulating EV integrin β3 had worse overall survival (hazard ratio: 1.15 per 1 ng/mL increase; p = 0.04) following WBRT. Multivariate regression analysis also showed a higher cumulative incidence of intracranial failure (subdistribution hazard ratio: 1.216 per 1 ng/mL increase; p = 0.037). In conclusion, circulating EV integrin β3 levels correlated with survival and intracranial control of patients with lung cancer after WBRT for BM. This supports that EV integrin β3 mediates a brain-tropic metastasis pattern, and may serve as a novel prognostic biomarker for BM.

A validation study of graded prognostic assessment index for lung cancer patients with brain metastases.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2070-2070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lingling Du ◽  
Vyshak Alva Venur ◽  
Saurabh Dahiya ◽  
Rohan Garje ◽  
Kwabena Osei-Boateng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Squamous Cell ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Cleveland Clinic ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Prognostic Assessment ◽  
Graded Prognostic Assessment ◽  
Extracranial Metastases

2070 Background: The Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) is a commonly used index based on 5 prior randomized trials performed by the RTOG (Protocols 7916, 8528, 8905, 9104, and 9508). The purpose of this study was to validate GPA index in a recent cohort of lung cancer patients with brain metastases (LBM) at a larger tertiary care center. Methods: Cleveland Clinic Brain Tumor and Neuro-Oncology Center's database was used to identify LBM treated in the recent era (2000-12). A proportional hazards model was used to assess overall survival (OS), measured from the date of diagnosis of brain metastases to death or last follow-up. Results: 490 LBM (250 males) median age 61 years (range 35-86) were included. Histology included small cell (64, 13%) adenocarcinoma (289, 59%), squamous (53, 11%), large cell (26, 5%) and unknown (55, 11%). The median number of brain metastases was 1 (range, 1-47). Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) was 90-100 in 187 (41%), 70-80 in 238 (52%) and <70 in 33 (7%). Extracranial Metastases was present in 327 patients (67%). OS was 14.1 months (95% C.I. 12.3-15.7). GPA for lung cancer is derived from KPS, the number of brain mets, the presence/absence of extracranial metastases, and age. GPA was 0-1.0 in 83 patients, 1.5-2 in 211, 2.5-3 in 135 and 3.5-4 in 18 patients. Although overall GPA was prognostic for survival (p<.0001), not all of the factors used to derive it were significant (Table). Factors noted to be prognostic for survival included primary controlled (p=<.0001), squamous cell histology (p=.0001), age (p=.0002), KPS (p=.0002). The new index divided the patients into unfavorable, intermediate, favorable that was prognostic for survival in this cohort (p<.0001). Conclusions: New index developed based on a revised set of independent prognostic factors (primary controlled, squamous cell histology, age and performance status) is proposed. [Table: see text]

Tumor doubling time and prognostic assessment of primary lung cancer patients

Lung Cancer ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
K Usuda ◽  
T Nakada ◽  
G Okaniwa ◽  
Y Saito ◽  
M Sagawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Doubling Time ◽  
Primary Lung Cancer ◽  
Tumor Doubling Time ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Prognostic Assessment

scholarly journals Analysis of advanced lung cancer patients diagnosed following emergency admission

2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 1098-1107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daichi Fujimoto ◽  
Ryoko Shimizu ◽  
Takeshi Morimoto ◽  
Ryoji Kato ◽  
Yuki Sato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Receptor Gene ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Emergency Admission ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Advanced Lung Cancer ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients

Data on prognosis and predictors of overall survival in advanced lung cancer patients diagnosed following emergency admission (DFEA) are currently lacking.We retrospectively analysed data from 771 patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer between April 2004 and April 2012.Of the 771 patients, 103 (13%) were DFEA. DFEA was not an independent predictor of overall survival by multivariate Cox proportional hazard models, whereas good performance status (PS), epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutation, stage IIIB, adenocarcinoma and chemotherapy were independent predictors of overall survival (hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.36 (0.29–0.44), p<0.001; 0.49 (0.38–0.63), p<0.001; 0.64 (0.51–0.80), p<0.001; 0.81 (0.67–0.99), p=0.044; and 0.40 (0.31–0.52), p<0.001, respectively). Good PS just prior to opting for chemotherapy, but not at emergency admission, was a good independent predictor of overall survival in DFEA patients (hazard ratio (95% CI) 0.26 (0.12–0.55); p<0.001).DFEA is relatively common. DFEA and PS at emergency admission were not independent predictors of overall survival, but good PS just prior to opting for chemotherapy was an independent predictor of longer overall survival. Efforts to improve patient PS after admission should be considered vital in such circumstances.

Demographical differentials of lung cancer survival in Bangladeshi patients.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10570-10570
Author(s):  
Muhammad Rafiqul Islam ◽  
ATM Kamrul Hasan ◽  
Ferdous ara Begum ◽  
Nazrina Khatun ◽  
Md. Rafiqul Islam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Survival ◽  
Survival Outcome ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Impact On Survival ◽  
Lung Cancer Survival

10570 Background: Lung Cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality and most common cancer in worldwide with more than a million deaths annually. 20.8% cancer related death caused by lung cancer and more than half of lung cancer occurred in Asia. Differences In the epidemiology of lung cancer among the developing country may shed light on possible genetic and demographical influences on lung cancer survival. Demographic stratification of lung cancer patients of Bangladesh is remain unclear due of lack of data We tried to figure out the demographic pattern and its impact on survival in Bangladeshi lung cancer patient. Methods: Previously diagnosed primary lung cancer patients attending Medical Oncology department of National Institute of cancer research and Hospital, a tertiary care center of Bangladesh, between 2018 and 2019 were included. Demographic and clinical data were collected retrospectively from the medical records. Results: A total of 1868 consecutive patient (1580 males, 288females) diagnosed to have lung cancer; Mean age was 60 years which quite early compare to other countries. Older than 70-year age groups had worse survival outcome (hazard ratio 1.04: 95% confidence interval: 1.17–1.68). Below 50-year group had better outcome with standard adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy whereas older groups had better survival with sequential radiotherapy and chemotherapy or concurrent chemo radiation (Hazard Ratio 0.45; 95% confidence interval: 0.30–0.67). Sex was not a predicting factor for overall survival (Hazard ratios 1.04 95% confidence interval 0.89- 1.22, P = 0.621). But, Male had better treatment response than the female (Hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval: 0.51 and 0.42-0.61, P = < 0.001). Education level had significant impact on survival outcome (Hazard ratio 0.58 and 95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.71, P = < 0.001). Underweight group had worse survival than the normal BMI group (Hazard ratio1.18 and 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.31, P = 0.005). Having the Comorbid condition at the time of diagnosis had shorter survival (Hazard ratio 1.16 and 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.30 P = 0.007). Histological variation had no survival benefit among the squamous, small cell or other histological types (p = 0.214, 0.494, 0.658 respectively). But adenocarcinoma or small cell carcinoma had better treatment response outcome. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) 4 had worse outcome (Hazard ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.37–2.79; P = < 0.001). Conclusions: The socio-demographic related survival in lung cancer needs to be fully elucidated because of its implication in the design of experimental protocols for targeted chemoprevention, early disease screening, molecular marker based staging, and individualized treatment. Due to its extraordinary disease burden and the international variability in demographic variables, the lung cancer requires continual monitoring.

scholarly journals Predictive and prognostic value of serum periostin in advanced non–small cell lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy

Tumor Biology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 101042831769836 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Zhang ◽  
Dongmei Yuan ◽  
Yanwen Yao ◽  
Wenkui Sun ◽  
Yi Shi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients ◽  
Serum Periostin

Periostin is an extracellular matrix protein involved in tumorigenesis and metastasis. However, the role of serum periostin as a surrogate marker for treatment efficacy is still unknown. In 122 advanced non–small cell lung cancer cases, 37 patients with benign lung disease and 40 healthy controls, serum periostin was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. The associations of serum periostin levels with the clinic-pathological parameters, chemotherapy response, and clinical outcomes of non–small cell lung cancer patients were analyzed. Serum periostin levels were significantly higher in non–small cell lung cancer patients, and it was related significantly to bone metastasis ( p = 0.021). Serum periostin of 65 non–small cell lung cancer patients were detected before and after two cycles of chemotherapy. The patients with and without periostin response had significant difference in objective response to chemotherapy ( p = 0.001). For the 122 non–small cell lung cancer patients, the median progression-free survival was 5 months. In a multivariate analysis, performance status (hazard ratio, 1.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.10–2.67), baseline periostin (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.00–1.01), and periostin response (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.29–0.86) were significantly correlated with prognosis. In conclusion, serum periostin was elevated in advanced non–small cell lung cancer patients. Baseline periostin and periostin responses appeared to be reliable surrogate markers to predict chemotherapy response and survival in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document