Dataset Information

Molecular and survival differences between familial and sporadic gastric cancers.

ABSTRACT: Mismatch repair (MMR) and germline E-cadherin (CDH1) mutations are two of the major pathways of carcinogenesis in familial gastric cancer (GC). A total of 260 sporadic and 66 familial GC patients were enrolled and molecular and survival differences were compared. Familial GC patients had earlier onset and were diagnosed at an earlier stage and had both a better 5-year overall survival rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate compared with sporadic GC patients. Only in diffuse type GC, the MSI-H phenotype and abnormal MMR protein expression were significantly higher in familial GC than in sporadic GC. In MSI-H GC, MLH1 promoter methylation was slightly higher in sporadic GC than familial GC (50% versus 23.1%), while the frequency of MMR gene mutation was slightly higher in familial GC than in sporadic GC (15.4% versus 3.1%). All of the patients with MMR gene mutation had diffuse type GC. Among familial GC patients with CDH1 mutation, most patients (72.3%) had diffuse type GC. In summary, for familial GC patients, we recommend screening of MSI status and CDH1 mutation especially for diffuse type GC. Because of the low incidence, mutation analysis of MMR gene might be considered in MSI-H familial GC with diffuse type only.

SUBMITTER: Fang WL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3603157 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Molecular and survival differences between familial and sporadic gastric cancers.

Fang Wen-Liang WL Chang Shih-Ching SC Lan Yuan-Tzu YT Huang Kuo-Hung KH Lo Su-Shun SS Li Anna Fen-Yau AF Chi Chin-Wen CW Wu Chew-Wun CW Chiou Shih-Hwa SH

BioMed research international 20130305

Mismatch repair (MMR) and germline E-cadherin (CDH1) mutations are two of the major pathways of carcinogenesis in familial gastric cancer (GC). A total of 260 sporadic and 66 familial GC patients were enrolled and molecular and survival differences were compared. Familial GC patients had earlier onset and were diagnosed at an earlier stage and had both a better 5-year overall survival rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate compared with sporadic GC patients. Only in diffuse type GC, the MSI- ...[more]

PMID: 23555086

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe possibility to generalize our understandings on treatments and assessments to both familial frontotemporal dementia (f-FTD) and sporadic FTD (s-FTD) is a fundamental perspective for the near future, considering the constant advancement in potential disease-modifying therapies that target particular genetic forms of FTD. We aimed to investigate differences in clinical features, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and blood-based biomarkers between f-FTD and s-FTD.MethodsIn this longitudinal cohort study, we evaluated a consecutive sample of symptomatic FTD patients, classified as f-FTD and s-FTD according to Goldman scores (GS). All patients underwent clinical, behavioral, and neuropsychiatric symptom assessment, CSF biomarkers and serum neurofilament light (NfL) analysis, and brain atrophy evaluation with magnetic resonance imaging.ResultsOf 570 patients with FTD, 123 were classified as f-FTD, and 447 as s-FTD. In the f-FTD group, 95 had a pathogenic FTD mutation while 28 were classified as GS = 1 or 2; of the s-FTD group, 133 were classified as GS = 3 and 314 with GS = 4. f-FTD and s-FTD cases showed comparable demographic features, except for younger age at disease onset, age at diagnosis, and higher years of education in the f-FTD group (all P < .05). f-FTD showed worse behavioral disturbances as measured with Frontal Behavioral Inventory (FBI) negative behaviors (14.0 ± 7.6 vs. 11.6 ± 7.4, P = .002), and positive behaviors (20.0 ± 11.0 vs. 17.4 ± 11.8, P = .031). Serum NfL concentrations were higher in patients with f-FTD (70.9 ± 37.9 pg/mL) compared to s-FTD patients (37.3 ± 24.2 pg/mL, P < .001), and f-FTD showed greater brain atrophy in the frontal and temporal regions and basal ganglia. Patients with f-FTD had significantly shorter survival than those with s-FTD (P = .004).Discussionf-FTD and s-FTD are very similar clinical entities, but with different biological mechanisms, and different rates of progression. The parallel characterization of both f-FTD and s-FTD will improve our understanding of the disease, and aid in designing future clinical trials for both genetic and sporadic forms of FTD.HighlightsDo clinical features and biomarkers differ between patients with familial frontotemporal dementia (f-FTD) and sporadic FTD (s-FTD)?In this cohort study of 570 patients with FTD, f-FTD and s-FTD share similar demographic features, but with younger age at disease onset and diagnosis in the f-FTD group.f-FTD showed higher serum neurofilament light concentrations, greater brain damage, and shorter survival, compared to s-FTD.f-FTD and s-FTD are very similar clinical entities, but with different cognitive reserve mechanisms and different rates of progression.

Dataset Information

Molecular and survival differences between familial and sporadic gastric cancers.

Publications

Molecular and survival differences between familial and sporadic gastric cancers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets