The indications for biopsy in routine upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

Melatonin for gastric cancer treatment: where do we stand?

Gastric cancer (GC) is the third leading reason of death in men and the fourth in women. Studies have documented an inhibitory function of melatonin on the proliferation, progression and invasion of GC cells. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small, non-coding RNAs that play an important function in regulation of biological processes and gene expression of the cells. Some studies reported that melatonin can suppress the progression of GC by regulating the exosomal miRNAs. Thus, melatonin represents a promising potential therapeutic agent for subjects with GC. Herein, we evaluate the existing data of both in vivo and in vitro studies to clarify the molecular processes involved in the therapeutic effects of melatonin in GC. The data emphasize the critical function of melatonin in several signaling ways by which it may inhibit cancer cell proliferation, decrease chemo-resistance, induce apoptosis as well as limit invasion, angiogenesis, and metastasis. This review provides a resource that identifies some of the mechanisms by which melatonin controls GC enlargement. In light of the findings, melatonin should be considered a novel and testable therapeutic mediator for GC treatment.

Radiomics analysis in predicting vascular invasion in gastric cancer based on enhanced CT: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND

Vascular invasion (VI) is closely related to the metastasis, recurrence, prognosis, and treatment of gastric cancer. Currently, predicting VI preoperatively using traditional clinical examinations alone remains challenging. This study aims to explore the value of radiomics analysis based on preoperative enhanced CT images in predicting VI in gastric cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 194 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent enhanced CT examination. Based on pathology analysis, patients were divided into the VI group (n = 43) and the non-VI group (n = 151). Radiomics features were extracted from arterial phase (AP) and portal venous phase (PP) CT images. The radiomics score (Rad-score) was then calculated. Prediction models based on image features, clinical factors, and a combination of both were constructed. The diagnostic efficiency and clinical usefulness of the models were evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

The combined prediction model included the Rad-score of AP, the Rad-score of PP, Ki-67, and Lauren classification. In the training group, the area under the curve (AUC) of the combined prediction model was 0.83 (95% CI 0.76-0.89), with a sensitivity of 64.52% and a specificity of 92.45%. In the validation group, the AUC was 0.80 (95% CI 0.67-0.89), with a sensitivity of 66.67% and a specificity of 88.89%. DCA indicated that the combined prediction model might have a greater net clinical benefit than the clinical model alone.

CONCLUSION

The integrated models, incorporating enhanced CT radiomics features, Ki-67, and clinical factors, demonstrate significant predictive capability for VI. Moreover, the radiomics model has the potential to optimize personalized clinical treatment selection and patient prognosis assessment.

Malignancies in Patients with Celiac Disease: Diagnostic Challenges and Molecular Advances

Celiac disease (CD) is a multiorgan autoimmune disorder of the chronic intestinal disease group characterized by duodenal inflammation in genetically predisposed individuals, precipitated by gluten ingestion. The pathogenesis of celiac disease is now widely studied, overcoming the limits of the purely autoimmune concept and explaining its hereditability. The genomic profiling of this condition has led to the discovery of numerous genes involved in interleukin signaling and immune-related pathways. The spectrum of disease manifestations is not limited to the gastrointestinal tract, and a significant number of studies have considered the possible association between CD and neoplasms. Patients with CD are found to be at increased risk of developing malignancies, with a particular predisposition of certain types of intestinal cancer, lymphomas, and oropharyngeal cancers. This can be partially explained by common cancer hallmarks present in these patients. The study of gut microbiota, microRNAs, and DNA methylation is evolving to find the any possible missing links between CD and cancer incidence in these patients. However, the literature is extremely mixed and, therefore, our understanding of the biological interplay between CD and cancer remains limited, with significant implications in terms of clinical management and screening protocols. In this review article, we seek to provide a comprehensive overview of the genomics, epigenomics, and transcriptomics data on CD and its relation to the most frequent types of neoplasms that may occur in these patients.

Clinical utility of GI pathology data: implications for practising pathologists

Gastrointestinal (GI) tract pathology represents one of the largest individual specialties within cellular pathology departments globally. As with other specialties, clear communication with clinicians providing primary care for the patient is of utmost importance for optimal management and for appropriate use of resources such as endoscopy. A wide breadth of neoplastic and inflammatory conditions afflicts the GI tract. Here, we aim to illustrate how pathology reporting of GI tract specimens influences patient management and specifically how precise reporting of key parameters in different specimen types and different disease processes can directly impact patient care. We describe the potential clinical relevance of selected pathology data items pertinent to specific conditions and highlight areas of contention with respect to the significance of some pathology features. Recent guidelines are described where a change, for example, in diagnostic criteria for a condition is described, or criteria influencing further management such as endoscopic surveillance. The aim of this review is to focus on the clinical importance of careful written communication between the pathologist and primary clinician, illustrated by selective clinical scenarios involving the upper and lower GI tracts.

Innovations in GI-endoscopy

Gastrointestinal endoscopy covers both diagnosis and therapy. Due to its diagnostic accuracy and minimal invasiveness, several innovations have been made within the last years including artificial intelligence and endoscopic tumor resection. The present review highlights some of these innovation. In addition, a special focus is set on the experience made by our own research group trying to combine the expertise of endoscopists/ physicians as well as engineers and computer scientists.

Histological Diagnostic Yield and Clinical Significance of the First Biopsy in Device-Assisted Enteroscopy in Patients with Small Bowel Diseases: A KASID Multicenter Study

Device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) enables the direct visualization of small bowel lesions with histological diagnosis; however, few studies have described the diagnostic performance of enteroscopic biopsy. We investigated the diagnostic performance of enteroscopic biopsy. We used a nationwide multicenter enteroscopy database to identify patients who underwent DAE with biopsy for small bowel diseases. The patients were classified into the tumor and non-tumor groups according to the final diagnosis. They were also divided into diagnostic and non-diagnostic groups based on the enteroscopic biopsy results. The clinical significance of the first biopsy and histological diagnostic yield of DAE were analyzed. Among the 112 procedures investigated, 32 (28.9%) were diagnosed with tumors, and 80 (71.7%) were diagnosed with non-tumor diseases. The overall histological diagnostic yield of DAE was 43.7%. The histological diagnostic yield was significantly higher in the tumor than in the non-tumor group (81.2% vs. 28.8%, p < 0.001). The mean number of biopsies was significantly higher in the diagnostic than in the non-diagnostic group (5.6 ± 3.3 vs. 3.7 ± 2.1, p = 0.001). In the diagnostic group, 87.7% of the cases were histologically confirmed at the first biopsy. Therefore, the first biopsy should be performed carefully.