scholarly journals Study of the Fluorescence Intensity of Histones HP1gamma, H3K9me3, H3K27me3, and Histone Deacetylases SIRT1 and SIRT6 in Dermal Fibroblasts of Patients with Breast Cancer and Patients at Risk of Cancer

Author(s):  
Mirya Kuranova ◽  
Aleksandra Nozdracheva ◽  
Nadezhda Pleskach ◽  
Daria Pasekova ◽  
Aleksey Manikhas

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. J. Schlich-Bakker ◽  
F. J. M. Grosfeld ◽  
H. F. J. Kroode ◽  
C. C. Warlam-Rodenhuis ◽  
M. G. E. M. Ausems ◽  
...  


2020 ◽  
Vol 100 (12) ◽  
pp. 2186-2197
Author(s):  
Cheryl L Brunelle ◽  
Sacha A Roberts ◽  
Nora K Horick ◽  
Tessa C Gillespie ◽  
Jamie M Jacobs ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective The objectives of this study were to determine whether patients reporting symptoms are more likely to develop lymphedema and to describe the temporal relationship between symptom onset and lymphedema. Methods This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study of 647 women treated for breast cancer and screened for lymphedema using arm volume measurements and subjective questionnaires (n = 647; 2284 questionnaires [median 3.5 per patient, range = 1–24]). Primary study outcome was lymphedema (relative volume change ≥10%). The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate cumulative lymphedema incidence. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the relationship between symptoms, other risk factors, and lymphedema. Results A total of 64 patients (9.9%) developed lymphedema. On multivariable analysis, patients reporting increased arm size (hazard ratio = 3.09, 95% CI = 1.62–5.89) were more likely to progress to lymphedema than those who did not report this symptom. Of those who developed lymphedema, 37 (58%) reported an increased arm size a median of 6.1 months before lymphedema onset (range = 68.6 months before to 50.2 months after lymphedema onset). Conclusion Patients at risk of lymphedema who report increased arm size might do so prior to lymphedema onset and are at 3 times the risk of lymphedema as patients not reporting this symptom. Even without objective or observable edema, these patients should be followed vigilantly and considered for early intervention. Symptoms should be incorporated into screening and diagnostic criteria for lymphedema. Impact This study shows that patients at risk for breast cancer–related lymphedema who report increased arm size should be considered at high risk for progression to lymphedema—even without edema on measurement or clinical examination—and should be followed vigilantly, with consideration of early intervention. Lay summary If you are at risk of lymphedema and you feel as though your arm size has increased, you might develop lymphedema, and you are at 3 times the risk of lymphedema as patients not reporting this symptom. Even without measurable or observable edema, you should be followed vigilantly and consider early intervention.



2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 16-16
Author(s):  
Nimmi S. Kapoor ◽  
Lisa D. Curcio ◽  
Carlee A. Blakemore ◽  
Amy K. Bremner ◽  
Rachel E. McFarland ◽  
...  

16 Background: Recently introduced multi-gene panel testing including BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes (BRCA1/2) for hereditary cancer risk has raised concerns with the ability to detect all deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations compared to older methods of sequentially testing BRCA1/2 separately. The purpose of this study is to evaluate rates of pathogenic BRCA1/2mutations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) between previous restricted algorithms of genetic testing and newer approaches of multi-gene testing. Methods: Data was collected retrospectively from 966 patients who underwent genetic testing at one of three sites from a single institution. Test results were compared between patients who underwent BRCA1/2testing only (limited group, n = 629) to those who underwent multi-gene testing with 5-43 cancer-related genes (panel group, n = 337). Results: Deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations were identified in 37 patients, with equivalent rates between limited and panel groups (4.0% vs 3.6%, respectively, p = 0.86). Thirty-nine patients had a BRCA1/2 VUS, with similar rates between limited and panel groups (4.5% vs 3.3%, respectively, p = 0.49). On multivariate analysis, there was no difference in detection of either BRCA1/2 mutations or VUS between both groups. Of patients undergoing panel testing, an additional 3.9% (n = 13) had non-BRCA pathogenic mutations and 13.4% (n = 45) had non-BRCA VUSs. Mutations in PALB2, CHEK2, and ATM were the most common non-BRCA mutations identified. Conclusions: Multi-gene panel testing detects pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutations at equivalent rates as limited testing and increases the diagnostic yield. Panel testing increases the VUS rate, mainly due to non-BRCA genes. Patients at risk for hereditary breast cancer can safely benefit from upfront, more efficient, multi-gene panel testing.



Author(s):  
Sarah M. DeSnyder ◽  
Min Yi ◽  
Francesco Boccardo ◽  
Sheldon Feldman ◽  
V. Suzanne Klimberg ◽  
...  








2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 2799-2810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaniv Hanoch ◽  
Talya Miron-Shatz ◽  
Jonathan J. Rolison ◽  
Zehra Omer ◽  
Elisa Ozanne


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document