Search

BACKGROUND: Hypothetically, delay between melanoma diagnosis and SLNB could affect outcomes, either adversely by allowing growth and dissemination of metastases, or beneficially by allowing development of an anti-melanoma immune response. Available data are conflicting about the effect of SLNB delay on patient survival. Our objective was to determine whether delay between initial diagnosis and SLNB affects outcomes in patients with cutaneous melanoma.STUDY DESIGN: We performed query and analysis of a large prospectively maintained database of patients with primary cutaneous melanomas undergoing SLNB. An independent dataset from MSLT-1 (Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial-1) was used for validation. Primary outcomes included disease-free survival and melanoma-specific survival.RESULTS: Early and delayed SLNB were defined as less than 30 and 30 or more days from initial diagnosis, respectively. There were 2,483 patients that met inclusion criteria. Positive sentinel lymph nodes were identified in 17.4% (n = 432). Among all patients, 42% had SLNB 30 or more days after diagnosis and 37% of positive sentinel lymph nodes were at 30 or more days. No differences in sex, anatomic site, or histopathologic features were identified between the 2 groups. There was no difference in melanoma-specific survival or diseasefree survival between those undergoing early or delayed SLNB. Examination of MSLT-1 trial data similarly demonstrated no difference in survival outcomes.CONCLUSIONS: This, the largest study on this subject to date, found no adverse impact on long-term clinical outcomes of patients due to delay of SLNB beyond 30 days. The MSLT-1 data confirm this result. Patients can be reassured that if the operation is performed 30 or more days after diagnosis, it will not cause harm. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American College of Surgeons.

BACKGROUND Biomarkers are needed for noninvasive early detection of gastric cancer (GC). We investigated salivary extracellular RNA (exRNA) biomarkers as potential clinical evaluation tools for GC. METHODS Unstimulated whole saliva samples were prospectively collected from 294 individuals (163 GC and 131 non-GC patients) who underwent endoscopic evaluation at the Samsung Medical Center in Korea. Salivary transcriptomes of 63 GC and 31 non-GC patients were profiled, and mRNA biomarker candidates were verified with reverse transcription quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR). In parallel, microRNA (miRNA) biomarkers were profiled and verified with saliva samples from 10 GC and 10 non-GC patients. Candidate biomarkers were validated with RT-qPCR in an independent cohort of 100/100 saliva samples from GC and non-GC patients. Validated individual markers were configured into a best performance panel. RESULTS We identified 30 mRNA and 15 miRNA candidates whose expression pattern associated with the presence of GC. Among them, 12 mRNA and 6 miRNA candidates were verified with the discovery cohort by RT-qPCR and further validated with the independent cohort (n = 200). The configured biomarker panel consisted of 3 mRNAs (SPINK7, PPL, and SEMA4B) and 2 miRNAs (MIR140-5p and MIR301a), which were all significantly down-regulated in the GC group, and yielded an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72–0.89). When combined with demographic factors, the AUC of the biomarker panel reached 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80–0.93). CONCLUSIONS We have discovered and validated a panel of salivary exRNA biomarkers with credible clinical performance for the detection of GC. Our study demonstrates the potential utility of salivary exRNA biomarkers in screening and risk assessment for GC.

Lung cancer is usually disseminated at diagnosis making prognosis poor. Smokers are at high risk for lung cancer and are targets for prevention and early detection strategies. Sputum is a potential source for lung cancer biomarkers, but no test is currently available with sufficient sensitivity and specificity for clinical screening utility. Chromosomal aneusomy (CA) was measured in sputum samples collected prospectively from 100 incident lung cancer cases and 96 controls matched on age, gender, and date of collection. The CA-FISH assay was performed using a four-target DNA FISH probe including EGFR, MYC, 5p15 and CEP6. Sensitivity for a positive CA-FISH assay (abnormal for ≥ 2 of the 4 markers) was substantially higher for samples collected within 18 months (76%) than >18 months before lung cancer diagnosis (31%). Specificity for a positive FISH by this same definition was 85%. Among subjects providing sputum sample within 18 months before diagnosis, sensitivity was higher for squamous cell cancers (94%) than for other histologic types (69%). The adjusted odds ratios for specimens collected within 18 months of cancer diagnosis were higher using the CA-FISH assay (OR=27.2, 95% CI 7.8 to 94.1) than previous studies assessing cytologic atypia (OR=2.3, CI 0.8 to 6.4) or gene promoter methylation (OR=6.5; CI 1.2 to 35.5). In conclusion, chromosomal aneusomy in sputum is a promising biomarker for prediction of lung cancer risk. Evaluation of the 4-DNA targets was more effective than any single marker and had highest sensitivity for samples collected ≤ 18 months to lung cancer diagnosis and patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma.