Plexin-B1 and semaphorin 4D cooperate to promote perineural invasion in a RhoA/ROK-dependent manner

Perineural invasion (PNI) is a tropism of tumor cells for nerve bundles located in the surrounding stroma. It is a pathological feature observed in certain tumors, referred to as neurotropic malignancies, that severely limits the ability to establish local control of disease and results in pain, recurrent growth, and distant metastases. Despite the importance of PNI as a prognostic indicator, its biological mechanisms are poorly understood. The semaphorins and their receptors, the plexins, compose a family of proteins originally shown to be important in nerve cell adhesion, axon migration, and proper central nervous system development. Emerging evidence has demonstrated that these factors are expressed in tissues outside of the nervous system and represent a widespread signal transduction system that is involved in the regulation of motility and adhesion in different cell types. We believe that the plexins and semaphorins, which are strongly expressed in both axons and many carcinomas, play a role in PNI. In this study, we show that plexin-B1 is overexpressed in tissues and cell lines from neurotropic malignancies and is attracted to nerves that express its ligand, semaphorin 4D, in a Rho/Rho kinase-dependent manner. We also demonstrate that nerves are attracted to tumors through this same system of proteins, suggesting that both plexin-B1 and semaphorin 4D are important in the promotion of PN

Curative treatment of oesophageal carcinoma: current options and future developments

Since the 1980s major advances in surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy have established multimodal approaches as curative treatment options for oesophageal cancer. In addition the introduction of functional imaging modalities such as PET-CT created new opportunities for a more adequate patient selection and therapy response assessment

Minimally invasive surgery and cancer: controversies part 1

Perhaps there is no more important issue in the care of surgical patients than the appropriate use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for patients with cancer. Important advances in surgical technique have an impact on early perioperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, pain management, and quality of life issues, as clearly proved with MIS. However, for oncology patients, historically, the most important clinical questions have been answered in the context of prospective randomized trials. Important considerations for MIS and cancer have been addressed, such as what are the important immunologic consequences of MIS versus open surgery and what is the role of laparoscopy in the staging of gastrointestinal cancers? This review article discusses many of the key controversies in the minimally invasive treatment of cancer using the pro–con debate format