Search

Introduction: The progression of solid cancers is manifested at the systemic level as molecular changes in the metabolome of body fluids, an emerging source of cancer biomarkers. Methods: We analyzed quantitatively the serum metabolite profile using highresolution mass spectrometry. Metabolic profiles were compared between breast cancer patients (n=112) and two groups of healthy women (from Poland and Norway; n=95 and n=112, respectively) with similar age distributions. Results: Despite differences between both cohorts of controls, a set of 43 metabolites and lipids uniformly discriminated against breast cancer patients and healthy women. Moreover, smaller groups of female patients with other types of solid cancers (colorectal, head and neck, and lung cancers) were analyzed, which revealed a set of 42 metabolites and lipids that uniformly differentiated all three cancer types from both cohorts of healthy women. A common part of both sets, which could be called a multi-cancer signature, contained 23 compounds, which included reduced levels of a few amino acids (alanine, aspartate, glutamine, histidine, phenylalanine, and leucine/isoleucine), lysophosphatidylcholines (exemplified by LPC(18:0)), and diglycerides. Interestingly, a reduced concentration of the most abundant cholesteryl ester (CE(18:2)) typical for other cancers was the least significant in the serum of breast cancer patients. Components present in a multi-cancer signature enabled the establishment of a well-performing breast cancer classifier, which predicted cancer with a very high precision in independent groups of women (AUC>0.95). Discussion: In conclusion, metabolites critical for discriminating breast cancer patients from controls included components of hypothetical multi-cancer signature, which indicated wider potential applicability of a general serum metabolome cancer biomarker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The primary aim was to evaluate whether anti-3-[18F]FACBC PET combined with conventional MRI correlated better with histomolecular diagnosis (reference standard) than MRI alone in glioma diagnostics. The ability of anti-3-[18F]FACBC to differentiate between molecular and histopathological entities in gliomas was also evaluated. Methods: In this prospective study, patients with suspected primary or recurrent gliomas were recruited from two sites in Norway and examined with PET/MRI prior to surgery. Anti-3-[18F]FACBC uptake (TBRpeak) was compared to histomolecular features in 36 patients. PET results were then added to clinical MRI readings (performed by two neuroradiologists, blinded for histomolecular results and PET data) to assess the predicted tumor characteristics with and without PET. Results: Histomolecular analyses revealed two CNS WHO grade 1, nine grade 2, eight grade 3, and 17 grade 4 gliomas. All tumors were visible on MRI FLAIR. The sensitivity of contrast-enhanced MRI and anti-3-[18F]FACBC PET was 61% (95%CI [45, 77]) and 72% (95%CI [58, 87]), respectively, in the detection of gliomas. Median TBRpeak was 7.1 (range: 1.4–19.2) for PET positive tumors. All CNS WHO grade 1 pilocytic astrocytomas/gangliogliomas, grade 3 oligodendrogliomas, and grade 4 glioblastomas/astrocytomas were PET positive, while 25% of grade 2–3 astrocytomas and 56% of grade 2–3 oligodendrogliomas were PET positive. Generally, TBRpeak increased with malignancy grade for diffuse gliomas. A significant difference in PET uptake between CNS WHO grade 2 and 4 gliomas (p < 0.001) and between grade 3 and 4 gliomas (p = 0.002) was observed. Diffuse IDH wildtype gliomas had significantly higher TBRpeak compared to IDH1/2 mutated gliomas (p < 0.001). Adding anti-3-[18F]FACBC PET to MRI improved the accuracy of predicted glioma grades, types, and IDH status, and yielded 13.9 and 16.7 percentage point improvement in the overall diagnoses for both readers, respectively. Conclusion: Anti-3-[18F]FACBC PET demonstrated high uptake in the majority of gliomas, especially in IDH wildtype gliomas, and improved the accuracy of preoperatively predicted glioma diagnoses. Clinical trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04111588, URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04111588 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the scarcity of evidence concerning the long-term sexual health of breast cancer (BC) survivors (BC-Pop), we aimed to assess how BC treatments affect short- and long-term sexual functioning, sexual enjoyment, and body image, and compare with aged-matched women in the Norwegian general population (F-GenPop). The 349 patients in BC-Pop treated at Trondheim University Hospital in 2007–2014, were assessed in clinical controls at the hospital; before starting radiotherapy (T1, baseline), immediately after ending radiotherapy (T2), and after 3, 6, and 12 months (T3–T5), and at a long-term follow-up 7–12 years after baseline (T6). Meanwhile, F-GenPop included 2254 age-matched women in the Norwegian general population. The impact of BC treatment on sexual functioning was examined using a Linear Mixed Model. Sexual functioning, sexual enjoyment, and body image were assessed with the EORTC′s QLQ-BR23 scales and compared between the populations in the four age groups (30–49, 50–59, 60–69, and 70+ years) using means with 95% confidence intervals and Student t-test. Linear regression, adjusted for age and comorbidity was applied to estimate individual scores. BC survivors treated with mastectomy had overall lower sexual functioning than patients who had received breast-conserving surgery (p = 0.017). Although BC survivors treated with chemotherapy had lower sexual functioning than those treated without chemotherapy at T1–T5 (p = 0.044), both groups showed the same level of functioning at T6. BC-Pop exhibited significantly poorer sexual functioning (p < 0.001), lower sexual enjoyment (p < 0.05), and better body image (p < 0.001) than F-GenPop in all age groups. The impact of specific BC treatments on sexual functioning was modest; only mastectomy had a persistent negative influence. Nevertheless, all age groups in BC-Pop displayed significantly poorer sexual functioning than F-GenPop at both 12 months and up to 12 years after treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]