Search

The accurate identification of mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) is paramount for cancer risk stratification. Cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), the only routinely used test, requires high volumes and has low sensitivity. We aimed to compare the performance of two investigational small-volume biomarkers, glucose and the protease gastricsin, to CEA for PCL classification.We obtained cyst fluid samples from 81 patients with pathologically confirmed PCLs from four institutions between 2003 and 2016. Gastricsin activity was measured using an internally quenched fluorescent substrate. Glucose levels were measured with a standard glucometer. CEA levels were obtained from the medical record. Models using Classification and Regression Trees were created to predict mucinous status. Model performance was evaluated using nested cross-validation.Gastricsin activity, CEA, and glucose levels from patients with mucinous (n = 50) and nonmucinous (n = 31) PCLs were analyzed. Area under the curve (AUC) was similar for individual classifiers (gastricsin volume normalized [GVN] 0.88; gastricsin protein concentration normalized [GPN] 0.95; glucose 0.83; CEA 0.84). The combination of two classifiers did not significantly improve AUC, with CEA + GVN (0.88) performing similarly to CEA + GPN (0.95), GVN + glucose (0.87), GPN + glucose (0.95), and CEA + glucose (0.84). The three-analyte combination performed similarly to single and dual classifiers (GPN + glucose + CEA AUC 0.95; GVN + glucose + CEA AUC 0.87). After multiple comparison corrections, there were no significant differences between the individual, dual, and triple classifiers.Gastricsin and glucose performed similarly to CEA and required5% of the volume required for CEA; these classifiers may be useful in patients with limited cyst fluid. Future multicenter prospective studies are needed to validate and compare these novel small-volume biomarkers.

Disparities following traumatic injury by race/ethnicity and insurance status are well-documented. However, the relationship between limited English proficiency (LEP) and outcomes after trauma is poorly understood. This study describes the association between LEP and morbidity and mortality after traumatic injury.A retrospective cohort study was conducted of adult trauma patients admitted to a level 1 trauma center from 2012 to 2018. Morbidity (length of stay [LOS], intensive care unit admission, intensive care unit LOS, discharge destination) and in-hospital mortality for LEP and English proficient (EP) patients were compared using univariate and multivariable logistic and generalized linear models controlling for patient demographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance) and clinical characteristics (mechanism, activation level, Glasgow Coma Scale, Injury Severity Score, traumatic brain injury).Of the 13,104 patients, 16% were LEP patients. LEP languages included Chinese (44%) and Spanish (38%), and 18% categorized as "Other," including 33 languages. In multivariable models, LEP was statistically significantly associated with increased hospital LOS (P = 0.003) and increased discharge to home with home health services (P = 0.042) or to skilled nursing facility/rehabilitation (P = 0.006). Mortality rate was 7% for LEP versus 4% for EP patients (P 0.0001). In multivariable analysis, speaking an LEP language other than Chinese or Spanish was statistically significantly associated with increased mortality compared to EP (P = 0.006).Following traumatic injury, LEP patients experience increased hospital LOS and are more frequently discharged to home with home health services or to skilled nursing facilities/rehabilitation. LEP patients speaking languages other than Chinese or Spanish experience increased mortality compared to EP patients.