PDX-1 mRNA expression in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle cytoaspirate: perspectives in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer

Burden of comorbid anxiety and depression in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), including Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, often have comorbid anxiety and depression that affects their quality of life (QoL) and management of their IBD.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify articles and conference abstracts on comorbid anxiety and depression in IBD patients using MEDLINE® and Embase® (January 2003 - June 2018). The impact of these psychological comorbidities on QoL and economic burden was examined. Non-pharmacologic interventions and disease-specific unmet clinical needs associated with these comorbidities were also evaluated.

EXPERT OPINION

There is evidence that individual and group-based cognitive behavioral therapy can reduce rates of anxiety and depression in adults and adolescents with IBD. Patients with IBD and anxiety or depression had an increased risk of hospitalization, emergency department visits, readmission, and used outpatient services more often than people without these conditions. Several disease-specific unmet clinical needs for IBD patients were identified. These included lack of reimbursement for mental-health care, inconsistent screening for psychological comorbidities and patients not consulting mental-health professionals when needed. IBD patients may benefit from integrated medical and psychological treatment, and should be considered for behavioral treatment.Plain Language Summary.

BACKGROUND

People with IBD may have mental-health conditions, such as anxiety and depression. These conditions can affect people's quality of life and how they manage their IBD.

WHAT DID THIS REVIEW LOOK AT?

We found 79 publications on anxiety or depression in people with IBD, published between January 2003 and June 2018. In people with IBD and anxiety or depression, researchers looked at: the impact on health-related quality of life and healthcare utilization, including access to and reimbursement for mental-health services how effective interventions that do not involve the use of medicines were (known as non-pharmacologic therapy).

WHAT WERE THE MAIN FINDINGS FROM THIS REVIEW?

People with IBD and anxiety or depression were more likely to be admitted to hospital and visit emergency departments than people without these conditions. Access to mental-health care varied and some people with IBD were not screened for depression.Individual and group-based talking therapy (known as cognitive behavioral therapy) reduced rates of anxiety and depression in some people with IBD.

WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS REVIEW?

We found evidence that people with IBD and anxiety or depression may benefit from certain non-pharmacologic interventions. However, many people with IBD and anxiety or depression did not have access to mental-health services. Healthcare professionals should address gaps in patient care to improve outcomes in people with IBD and anxiety or depression.See Additional file 1 for an infographic plain language summary.

Charting Extracellular Transcriptomes in The Human Biofluid RNA Atlas

Extracellular RNAs present in biofluids have emerged as potential biomarkers for disease. Where most studies focus on blood-derived fluids, other biofluids may be more informative. We present an atlas of messenger, circular, and small RNA transcriptomes of a comprehensive collection of 20 human biofluids. By means of synthetic spike-in controls, we compare RNA content across biofluids, revealing a 10,000-fold difference in concentration. The circular RNA fraction is increased in most biofluids compared to tissues. Each biofluid transcriptome is enriched for RNA molecules derived from specific tissues and cell types. Our atlas enables an informed selection of the most relevant biofluid to monitor particular diseases. To verify the biomarker potential in these biofluids, four validation cohorts representing a broad spectrum of diseases were profiled, revealing numerous differential RNAs between case and control subjects. Spike-normalized data are publicly available in the R2 web portal for further exploration.

Emerging Kinase Therapeutic Targets in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Pancreatic Cancer Desmoplasia

Kinase drug discovery represents an active area of therapeutic research, with previous pharmaceutical success improving patient outcomes across a wide variety of human diseases. In pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), innovative pharmaceutical strategies such as kinase targeting have been unable to appreciably increase patient survival. This may be due, in part, to unchecked desmoplastic reactions to pancreatic tumors. Desmoplastic stroma enhances tumor development and progression while simultaneously restricting drug delivery to the tumor cells it protects. Emerging evidence indicates that many of the pathologic fibrotic processes directly or indirectly supporting desmoplasia may be driven by targetable protein tyrosine kinases such as Fyn-related kinase (FRK); B lymphoid kinase (BLK); hemopoietic cell kinase (HCK); ABL proto-oncogene 2 kinase (ABL2); discoidin domain receptor 1 kinase (DDR1); Lck/Yes-related novel kinase (LYN); ephrin receptor A8 kinase (EPHA8); FYN proto-oncogene kinase (FYN); lymphocyte cell-specific kinase (LCK); tec protein kinase (TEC). Herein, we review literature related to these kinases and posit signaling networks, mechanisms, and biochemical relationships by which this group may contribute to PDAC tumor growth and desmoplasia.

New era for pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound: From imaging to molecular pathology of pancreatic cancer

With recent advances in molecular pathology and the development of new chemotherapy regimens, the knowledge of the molecular alterations of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is becoming appealing for stratifying patients for prognosis and response to a defined treatment. Archival formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples are a useful source of genomic deoxyribonucleic acid; nevertheless, most studies employed formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples deriving from surgical specimens, which are therefore representative of <20% of PDAC patients. Indeed, the development of a reliable methodology for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition, stabilization, and analysis is crucial for the development of molecular markers for clinical use in order to achieve “personalized medicine”. With the development of new needles, this technique is able to retrieve a high quantity and quality of PDAC tissue that can be used not only for diagnosis but also for mutational and transcriptome evaluations and for the development of primary cell or tissue cultures. In the present editorial, we discuss the current knowledge regarding the use of endoscopic ultrasound as a tool to obtain samples for molecular analyses, its possible pitfalls, and its use for the development of disease models such as xenografts or organoids.

Analysis of circulating blood and tissue biopsy PDX1 and MSX2 gene expression in patients with pancreatic cancer: A case-control experimental study

Early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) is based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). However, EUS is invasive and requires a high level of technical skill. Recently, liquid biopsies have achieved the same sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of numerous pathologies, including cancer. Insulin-promoting factor 1 (PDX1) and Msh-homeobox 2 (MSX2), 2 homeotic genes, have been confirmed to be related to pancreatic oncogenesis.The aim of this study is to establish the diagnostic utility of circulating serum levels of MSX2 and PDX1 expression in patients with PC.A prospective study was conducted from January 2014 to February 2017. Patients with a suspected diagnosis of PC who underwent fine needle aspiration biopsy guided by EUS (EUS-FNA) were included in the study, in addition to non-PC control subjects. Both tissue and blood serum samples were submitted to histopathological analysis and measurement of PDX1 and MSX2 gene expression by means of qRT-PCR.Patients were divided into non-PC, malignant pathology (MP), or benign pathology (BP) groups. Significant differences in both MSX2 [2.05 (1.66-4.60) vs 0.83 (0.49-1.60), P = .006] and PDX1 [2.59 (1.28-10.12) vs 1.02 (0.81-1.17), P = .036] gene expression were found in blood samples of PC compared with non-PC subjects. We also observed a significant increase in MSX2 transcripts in tissue biopsy samples of patients diagnosed with MP compared with those with BP [1.98 (1.44-4.61) and 0.66 (0.45-1.54), respectively, P = .012]. The ROC curves indicate a sensitivity and specificity of 80% for PDX1 and 86% for MSX2.Gene expression of MSX2 in tissue samples obtained by EUS-FNA and serum expression of MSX2 and PDX1 were higher in patients with PC.

Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of incidental pancreatic lesions are being detected each year. Accurate characterisation of pancreatic lesions into benign, precancerous, and cancer masses is crucial in deciding whether to use treatment or surveillance. Distinguishing benign lesions from precancerous and cancerous lesions can prevent patients from undergoing unnecessary major surgery. Despite the importance of accurately classifying pancreatic lesions, there is no clear algorithm for management of focal pancreatic lesions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of various imaging modalities in detecting cancerous and precancerous lesions in people with focal pancreatic lesions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index until 19 July 2016. We searched the references of included studies to identify further studies. We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include studies reporting cross-sectional information on the index test (CT (computed tomography), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), PET (positron emission tomography), EUS (endoscopic ultrasound), EUS elastography, and EUS-guided biopsy or FNA (fine-needle aspiration)) and reference standard (confirmation of the nature of the lesion was obtained by histopathological examination of the entire lesion by surgical excision, or histopathological examination for confirmation of precancer or cancer by biopsy and clinical follow-up of at least six months in people with negative index tests) in people with pancreatic lesions irrespective of language or publication status or whether the data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently searched the references to identify relevant studies and extracted the data. We planned to use the bivariate analysis to calculate the summary sensitivity and specificity with their 95% confidence intervals and the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) to compare the tests and assess heterogeneity, but used simpler models (such as univariate random-effects model and univariate fixed-effect model) for combining studies when appropriate because of the sparse data. We were unable to compare the diagnostic performance of the tests using formal statistical methods because of sparse data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 54 studies involving a total of 3,196 participants evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of various index tests. In these 54 studies, eight different target conditions were identified with different final diagnoses constituting benign, precancerous, and cancerous lesions. None of the studies was of high methodological quality. None of the comparisons in which single studies were included was of sufficiently high methodological quality to warrant highlighting of the results. For differentiation of cancerous lesions from benign or precancerous lesions, we identified only one study per index test. The second analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous versus benign lesions, provided three tests in which meta-analysis could be performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing cancer were: EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 1.00), specificity 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.00); EUS: sensitivity 0.95 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.99), specificity 0.53 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.74); PET: sensitivity 0.92 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.97), specificity 0.65 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.84). The third analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous lesions from benign lesions, only provided one test (EUS-FNA) in which meta-analysis was performed. EUS-FNA had moderate sensitivity for diagnosing precancerous or cancerous lesions (sensitivity 0.73 (95% CI 0.01 to 1.00) and high specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.00), the extremely wide confidence intervals reflecting the heterogeneity between the studies). The fourth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (dysplasia) provided three tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing invasive carcinoma were: CT: sensitivity 0.72 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.87), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.97); EUS: sensitivity 0.78 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.94), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.98); EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.66 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.99), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.98). The fifth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) versus precancerous (low- or intermediate-grade dysplasia) provided six tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivities and specificities for diagnosing cancer (high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) were: CT: sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.00 to 1.00), specificity 0.96 (95% CI 0.00 to 1.00); EUS: sensitivity 0.86 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.92), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96); EUS-FNA: sensitivity 0.47 (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70), specificity 0.91 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.00); EUS-FNA carcinoembryonic antigen 200 ng/mL: sensitivity 0.58 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.83), specificity 0.51 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.81); MRI: sensitivity 0.69 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.86), specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.00); PET: sensitivity 0.90 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.96), specificity 0.94 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.99). The sixth analysis, of studies differentiating cancerous (invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) provided no tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The seventh analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous (intermediate- or high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) provided two tests in which meta-analysis was performed. The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing cancer were: CT: sensitivity 0.83 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.92), specificity 0.83 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.93) and MRI: sensitivity 0.80 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.92), specificity 0.81 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.95), respectively. The eighth analysis, of studies differentiating precancerous or cancerous (intermediate- or high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma) from precancerous (low-grade dysplasia) or benign lesions provided no test in which meta-analysis was performed.There were no major alterations in the subgroup analysis of cystic pancreatic focal lesions (42 studies; 2086 participants). None of the included studies evaluated EUS elastography or sequential testing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were unable to arrive at any firm conclusions because of the differences in the way that study authors classified focal pancreatic lesions into cancerous, precancerous, and benign lesions; the inclusion of few studies with wide confidence intervals for each comparison; poor methodological quality in the studies; and heterogeneity in the estimates within comparisons.