Dataset Information

Clinicopathological Correlation of Glioma Patients with respect to Immunohistochemistry Markers: A Prospective Study of 115 Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in North India.

ABSTRACT:

Background

With the incorporation of molecular subtyping in glioma patients in 2016 WHO classification, there is a need to understand the immunohistochemistry (IHC) marker expression in various glioma patients and to clinically correlate with various subgroups.

Objective

Aim of the study was to assess IHC marker expression profile in glioma patients and to clinically correlate them in various subgroups.

Materials and methods

The prospective study included 115 glioma patients. IHC markers (isocitrate dehydrogenase [IDH] 1, ATRX, P53, Ki-67 antibody) were done in all patients. Patients received treatment as per the grade of tumor. The patients were followed in 3 monthly intervals, for a period of 12 months. SPSS software version 20.0 was used for statistical analysis. Tables were prepared in Microsoft Excel sheet. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis.

Results

There were 11 Grade 1, 33 Grade 2, 26 Grade 3, and 45 glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients out of which 10 patients were secondary GBM cases. IDH1 mutation is frequent in Grade 2 and Grade 3 tumors of both astrocytic and oligodendroglia tumors. Its mutation is also common in secondary GBM patients. ATRX mutation is specific to astrocytic lineage, Grade 2, Grade 3, and secondary GBM patients.

Conclusion

Molecular nature of DA and AA cases can be accurately confirmed by combined IDH1 and ATRX IHC thereby avoiding costly investigations such as fluorescence in situ hybridization. In astrocytic tumors, p53 can act as a surrogate marker. IDH-mutant glioma patients have better prognoses than IDH wild gliomas.

SUBMITTER: Dahuja G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8751513 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose:The present study aims to estimate the prevalence of non-compliance and improper drop administration technique among glaucoma patients and describe common obstacles to medication compliance. Methods:A hospital-based cross-sectional study, using standardized questionnaire and direct observation by study personnel was conducted among glaucoma patients aged 18 years and above at a tertiary care charitable eye hospital in North India. 151 consecutive glaucoma patients on medical therapy following up at the glaucoma clinics for at least 6 months were recruited. Non-compliance was defined as missing at-least one drop of medication per week and (or) the inability to accurately describe the medication regimen. Study personnel also assessed drop administration technique during application of eye drops by patients treating ophthalmologist-provided information, including measures of disease stability. Factors such as socioeconomic status, presence of caregiver, and number of medications with their effect on compliance were studied using chi-square statistics. Results:Among 151 patients interviewed, around 49% of patients reported problems in using glaucoma medications, with 16% of them reporting total non-compliance. 35% of patients demonstrated improper drop administration technique. Forgetfulness was cited as the main reason for being non-compliant and had a significant association with non-compliance (P = 0.00). Paying patients were more compliant as compared to subsidized patients (P = 0.05). Disease was more stable in compliant patients compared to non-compliant patients (P = 0.05). No other factor had significant association with compliance (P > 0.05). Conclusions:Over 50% of the patients surveyed were non-compliant, and 35% demonstrated improper administration technique. Glaucoma patients should be educated on the importance of compliance and aids that minimize forgetfulness, and delivery systems facilitating the delivery of medications to the eye could be considered to enhance patient adherence.

Project description:BackgroundTeledermatology has evolved as a valuable option to outpatient visits during the current pandemic. We set up a smartphone-based hybrid model of teledermatology services providing direct care to patients at our center. To analyse patient and physician-experience and acceptability for teledermatology over a 6-month-period, along with clinicodemographic profile of patients.MethodologySingle-center, retrospective study conducted from May 20, 2020 to October 31, 2020. Patient satisfaction level for teledermatology was assessed on a 4-point scale and compared with the satisfaction level during their previous physical visits prior to COVID-19 pandemic. A physician assessment form was utilised to record the experience of dermatologists while providing teledermatology services.ResultsOf 7530 patients registered, a successful consult was provided to 6125 patients (81.34%). Average number of teleconsultations/day rose from 23.60 in May 2020 to 77.96 in October 2020. Mean age of patients availing teledermatology services was 33.60 ± 16.99 years. Average distance to care and travel time were 100.90 ± 171.77 km and 135 ± 222.32 min, respectively. A definitive diagnosis could be ascertained in 5724 patients (93.45%) and in-person visit was recommended to 133 patients (2.2%). Out of 6125 patients, 5229 could be contacted for feedback, 935 (18.18%), 2230 (42.65%), 1749 (33.45%), and 300 patients (5.70%) reported being very satisfied, satisfied, partially satisfied, and unsatisfied, respectively. Of 1914 patients, who had availed in-person OPD facilities prior to the pandemic, 914 patients (49.62%) preferred in-person visits. Of 34 dermatologists surveyed, 88.2% felt comfortable providing teleconsultations and 82.4% felt the need to continue teledermatology services in the upcoming months.ConclusionsOverall, teledermatology is a valid alternative for in-person dermatology visits during the current crisis; helping with initial triage and further patient management. Further refinement of the process could lead to even more acceptability.