Serum chromogranin A for the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms and its association with tumour expression

Clinicopathological Features and Postoperative Survival Analysis of Gastric Carcinoma with Neuroendocrine Differentiation

Objectives

This study aims at investigating the differences of clinicopathological features and postoperative prognosis in three different types of neuroendocrine differentiation-related gastric cancers.

Methods

From January 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016, 47 patients diagnosed with neuroendocrine differentiation-related gastric cancers were collected from 1095 patients with gastric cancer who underwent surgical treatment in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Jiangsu Cancer Hospital. Patients were followed up regularly, and the last follow-up time was October 25, 2021. A total of 38 cases met the inclusion criteria and completed follow-up. The clinicopathological characters and immunohistochemical results of these three special pathological types of gastric cancer (adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation, mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma, and neuroendocrine carcinoma of the stomach) patients were compared. Tissues from these patients were tested with immunohistochemical markers synaptophysin (Syn), chromogranin A (CgA), and Ki-67. The Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test were used to analyze the effect of different histological types of gastric cancer on overall survival (OS). The differences in positive rates of chromogranin A (CgA) and Ki-67 were analyzed by univariate Cox regression analysis as independent risk factors that may affect the survival of gastric cancer patients.

Results

Ki-67 and N staging were significantly correlated with OS in gastric cancer patients and were independent prognostic factors affecting the survival of gastric cancer patients. There was no statistical difference in OS between the two histopathological types (adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation and mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinoma) of gastric cancer patients. There were no significant differences in the positive rates of immunohistochemical markers Syn, CgA, and Ki-67 in gastric cancer patients with different histological types.

Conclusion

The combined detection of Syn and CgA is of great value for the diagnosis of neuroendocrine differentiation-related gastric cancers, Ki-67 is of significance for the prognosis prediction of neuroendocrine differentiation-related gastric cancers, regional lymph node metastasis has a great impact on tumor prognosis, and the N staging determines the necessity of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with neuroendocrine differentiation-related gastric cancer.

Predictive Factors for Resistant Disease with Medical/Radiologic/Liver-Directed Anti-Tumor Treatments in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: Recent Advances and Controversies

Simple Summary

Tumor resistance, both primary and acquired, is leading to increased complexity in the nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced panNENs, which would be greatly helped by reliable prognostic/predictive factors. The importance in identifying resistance is being contributed to by the increased array of possible treatments available for treating resistant advanced disease; the variable clinical course as well as response to any given treatment approach of patients within one staging or grading system, the advances in imaging which are providing increasing promising results/parameters that correlate with grading/outcome/resistance, the increased understanding of the molecular pathogenesis providing promising prognostic markers, all of which can contribute to selecting the best treatment to overcome resistance disease. Several factors have been identified that have prognostic/predictive value for identifying development resistant disease and affecting overall survival (OS)/PFS with various nonsurgical treatments of patients with advanced panNENs. Prognostic factors identified for patients with advanced panNENs for both OS/PFSs include various clinically-related factors (clinical, laboratory/biological markers, imaging, treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological, classification, grading) and molecular factors. Particularly important prognostic factors for the different treatment modalities studies are the recent grading systems. Most prognostic factors for each treatment modality for OS/PFS are not specific for a given treatment option. These advances have generated several controversies and new unanswered questions, particularly those related to their possible role in predicting the possible sequence of different anti-tumor treatments in patients with different presentations. Each of these areas is reviewed in this paper.

Abstract

Purpose: Recent advances in the diagnosis, management and nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs) have led to an emerging need for sensitive and useful prognostic factors for predicting responses/survival. Areas covered: The predictive value of a number of reported prognostic factors including clinically-related factors (clinical/laboratory/imaging/treatment-related factors), pathological factors (histological/classification/grading), and molecular factors, on therapeutic outcomes of anti-tumor medical therapies with molecular targeting agents (everolimus/sunitinib/somatostatin analogues), chemotherapy, radiological therapy with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, or liver-directed therapies (embolization/chemoembolization/radio-embolization (SIRTs)) are reviewed. Recent findings in each of these areas, as well as remaining controversies and uncertainties, are discussed in detail, particularly from the viewpoint of treatment sequencing. Conclusions: The recent increase in the number of available therapeutic agents for the nonsurgical treatment of patients with advanced panNENs have raised the importance of prognostic factors predictive for therapeutic outcomes of each treatment option. The establishment of sensitive and useful prognostic markers will have a significant impact on optimal treatment selection, as well as in tailoring the therapeutic sequence, and for maximizing the survival benefit of each individual patient. In the paper, the progress in this area, as well as the controversies/uncertainties, are reviewed.

Chronic Autoimmune Gastritis: Modern Diagnostic Principles

This article summarizes and systematizes the available data from the literature on chronic autoimmune gastritis (CAG) in order to increase the awareness of specialists about the modern possibilities for diagnosing the disease, including its early stages. The clinical manifestation of the disease includes possible variants such as gastrointestinal, hematological (first of all, the formation of iron deficiency and B12-deficiency anemia), and neurological variants. Patients with chronic autoimmune gastritis are characterized by comorbidity with other autoimmune diseases. In this paper, data on the most informative serological markers for the diagnosis of CAG, as well as laboratory tests to detect micronutrient deficiencies, information on the characteristic changes in the gastric mucosa, and the prognosis of the disease, are presented. The diagnosis of CAG should be based on a multidisciplinary approach that combines a thorough analysis of a patient's complaints with a mandatory assessment of nutritional status, as well as the results of serological, endoscopic, and histological research methods.

Biomarkers in Stress Related Diseases/Disorders: Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Therapeutic Values

Various internal and external factors negatively affect the homeostatic equilibrium of organisms at the molecular to the whole-body level, inducing the so-called state of stress. Stress affects an organism's welfare status and induces energy-consuming mechanisms to combat the subsequent ill effects; thus, the individual may be immunocompromised, making them vulnerable to pathogens. The information presented here has been extensively reviewed, compiled, and analyzed from authenticated published resources available on Medline, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Direct, and other scientific databases. Stress levels can be monitored by the quantitative and qualitative measurement of biomarkers. Potential markers of stress include thermal stress markers, such as heat shock proteins (HSPs), innate immune markers, such as Acute Phase Proteins (APPs), oxidative stress markers, and chemical secretions in the saliva and urine. In addition, stress biomarkers also play critical roles in the prognosis of stress-related diseases and disorders, and therapy guidance. Moreover, different components have been identified as potent mediators of cardiovascular, central nervous system, hepatic, and nephrological disorders, which can also be employed to evaluate these conditions precisely, but with stringent validation and specificity. Considerable scientific advances have been made in the detection, quantitation, and application of these biomarkers. The present review describes the current progress of identifying biomarkers, their prognostic, and therapeutic values.

Biomarkers in Stress Related Diseases/Disorders: Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Therapeutic Values

Various internal and external factors negatively affect the homeostatic equilibrium of organisms at the molecular to the whole-body level, inducing the so-called state of stress. Stress affects an organism's welfare status and induces energy-consuming mechanisms to combat the subsequent ill effects; thus, the individual may be immunocompromised, making them vulnerable to pathogens. The information presented here has been extensively reviewed, compiled, and analyzed from authenticated published resources available on Medline, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Direct, and other scientific databases. Stress levels can be monitored by the quantitative and qualitative measurement of biomarkers. Potential markers of stress include thermal stress markers, such as heat shock proteins (HSPs), innate immune markers, such as Acute Phase Proteins (APPs), oxidative stress markers, and chemical secretions in the saliva and urine. In addition, stress biomarkers also play critical roles in the prognosis of stress-related diseases and disorders, and therapy guidance. Moreover, different components have been identified as potent mediators of cardiovascular, central nervous system, hepatic, and nephrological disorders, which can also be employed to evaluate these conditions precisely, but with stringent validation and specificity. Considerable scientific advances have been made in the detection, quantitation, and application of these biomarkers. The present review describes the current progress of identifying biomarkers, their prognostic, and therapeutic values.