Dataset Information

Assessment of two different HER2 scoring systems and clinical relevance for colorectal cancer.

ABSTRACT: Although the positivity of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is low in colorectal cancer (CRC), anti-HER2 is becoming a new target therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, assessment of the HER2 scoring system was still not established in CRC. The purpose of our study was to evaluate HER2 status and its correlation with clinicopathological characteristics and survival according to the HER2 diagnostic criteria for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA criteria) and the HERACLES diagnostic criteria (HERACLES criteria) in a large cohort of Chinese CRC patients. The HER2 positivity was 2.9% (43/1490) and 2.6% (39/1490) in CRCs based on the GEA criteria and the HERACLES criteria, and 3.7% (9/243) in mCRC according to both criteria. HER2 status was associated with primary tumor location (P =?0.037), regional lymph node metastasis (P =?0.035), and TNM stage (P =?0.022) in CRCs based on the HERACLES criteria. No such association was found based on the GEA criteria. Furthermore, HER2 positive only presented in patients with RAS gene wild type (P =?0.001). Significant difference was only observed between the HER2-positive and HER2-negative groups in terms of disease-free survival for stage II-III CRCs (P =?0.048) according to the HERACLES criteria, but not based on the GEA criteria. Our findings suggest that the frequency of HER2 overexpression or amplification was low in Chinese CRC patients, and provide a rationale for further evaluation of HER2 in CRC based on the HERACLES criteria and the HER2 diagnostic criteria for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

SUBMITTER: Liu F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7085476 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessment of two different HER2 scoring systems and clinical relevance for colorectal cancer.

Liu Furong F Ren Chao C Jin Ying Y Xi Shaoyan S He Caiyun C Wang Fang F Wang Zixian Z Xu Rui-Hua RH Wang Feng F

Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology 20191113 3

Although the positivity of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is low in colorectal cancer (CRC), anti-HER2 is becoming a new target therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, assessment of the HER2 scoring system was still not established in CRC. The purpose of our study was to evaluate HER2 status and its correlation with clinicopathological characteristics and survival according to the HER2 diagnostic criteria for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA criteria) and th ...[more]

PMID: 31720832

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn an attempt to further improve liver allograft utilization and outcome in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), a variety of clinical scoring systems have been developed. Here we aimed to comparatively investigate the association of the Balance-of-Risk (BAR), Survival-Outcomes-Following-Liver-Transplant (SOFT), Preallocation-Survival-Outcomes-Following-Liver-Transplant (pSOFT), Donor-Risk-Index (DRI), and the Eurotransplant-Donor-Risk-Index (ET-DRI) scores with short- and long-term outcome following OLT.MethodsWe included 338 consecutive patients, who underwent OLT in our institution between May 2010 and November 2017. For each prognostic model, the optimal cutoff values were determined with the help of the Youden-index and their diagnostic accuracy for 90-day post OLT-mortality and major postoperative complications was measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Patient- and graft survival were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. Morbidity was assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification and the Comprehensive-Complication-Index.ResultsBAR, SOFT, and pSOFT performed well above the conventional AUROC-threshold of 0.70 with good prediction of early mortality. Only BAR showed AUC>0.70 for both mortality and major morbidity. With the cutoffs of 14, 31, and 22 respectively for BAR, SOFT, and pSOFT, subgroup analysis showed significant differences (p<0.001) in morbidity and mortality, length of intensive care- and hospital-stay and early allograft dysfunction rates. Five-years patient survival was inferior in the high BAR, pSOFT, and SOFT groups.ConclusionsOut of all scores tested, the BAR-score had the best value in predicting both 90-day morbidity and mortality after OLT showing the highest AUCs. The pSOFT and SOFT scores demonstrated an acceptable accuracy in predicting 90-day morbidity and mortality. The used BAR, SOFT, and pSOFT cutoffs allowed the identification of patients at risk in terms of five-year patient survival. The DRI and ET-DRI scores have failed to predict recipient outcomes in the present setting.

Project description:Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) represents a common diagnostic challenge, as it might be related to both benign and malignant conditions. Endometrial cancer may not be detected with blind uterine cavity sampling by dilatation and curettage or suction devices. Several scoring systems using different ultrasound image characteristics were recently proposed to estimate the risk of endometrial cancer (EC) in women with AUB. The aim of the present study was to externally validate the predictive value of the recently proposed scoring systems including the Risk of Endometrial Cancer scoring model (REC) for EC risk stratification. It was a retrospective cohort study of women with postmenopausal bleeding. From June 2012 to June 2020 we studied a group of 394 women who underwent standard transvaginal ultrasound examination followed by power Doppler intrauterine vascularity assessment. Selected ultrasound features of endometrial lesions were assessed in each patient. The median age was 60.3 years (range ± 10.7). The median body mass index (BMI) was 30.4 (range ± 6.0). Histological examination revealed 158 cases of endometrial hyperplasia (EH) and 236 cases of EC. Of the studied ultrasound endometrial features, the highest areas under the curve (AUCs) were found for endometrial thickness (ET) (AUC = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.71-0.81) and for interrupted endomyometrial junction (AUC = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.65-0.75). Selected scoring systems presented moderate to good predictive performance in differentiating EC and EH. The highest AUC was found for REC model (AUC = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.70-0.79) and for the basic model that included ET, Doppler score and interrupted endometrial junction (AUC = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.73-0.82). REC model was more accurate than other scoring systems and selected single features for differentiating benign hyperplasia from EC at early stages, regardless of menopausal status. New scoring systems, including the REC model may be used in women with AUB for more efficient differentiation between benign and malignant conditions.

Project description:BackgroundAssessment of undergraduate students using assessment instruments in the clinical setting is known to be complex. The aim of this study was therefore to examine whether two different assessment instruments, containing learning objectives (LO`s) with similar content, results in similar assessments by the clinical supervisors and to explore clinical supervisors' experiences of assessment regarding the two different assessment instruments.MethodA mixed-methods approach was used. Four simulated care encounter scenarios were evaluated by 50 supervisors using two different assessment instruments. 28 follow-up interviews were conducted. Descriptive statistics and logistic binary regression were used for quantitative data analysis, along with qualitative thematic analysis of interview data.ResultWhile significant differences were observed within the assessment instruments, the differences were consistent between the two instruments, indicating that the quality of the assessment instruments were considered equivalent. Supervisors noted that the relationship between the students and supervisors could introduce subjectivity in the assessments and that working in groups of supervisors could be advantageous. In terms of formative assessments, the Likert scale was considered a useful tool for evaluating learning objectives. However, supervisors had different views on grading scales and the need for clear definitions. The supervisors concluded that a complicated assessment instrument led to limited very-day usage and did not facilitate formative feedback. Furthermore, supervisors discussed how their experiences influenced the use of the assessment instruments, which resulted in different descriptions of the experience. These differences led to a discussion of the need of supervisor teams to enhance the validity of assessments.ConclusionThe findings showed that there were no significant differences in pass/fail gradings using the two different assessment instruments. The quantitative data suggests that supervisors struggled with subjectivity, phrasing, and definitions of the LO´s and the scales used in both instruments. This resulted in arbitrary assessments that were time-consuming and resulted in limited usage in the day-to-day assessment. To mitigate the subjectivity, supervisors suggested working in teams and conducting multiple assessments over time to increase assessment validity.

Dataset Information

Assessment of two different HER2 scoring systems and clinical relevance for colorectal cancer.

Publications

Assessment of two different HER2 scoring systems and clinical relevance for colorectal cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets