The Prognostic Impact of Protein Expression of E-Cadherin-Catenin Complexes Differs between Rectal and Colon Carcinoma

The E-cadherin-catenin complex provides cell-cell adhesion. In order for a carcinoma to metastasize, cancer cells must let go of their hold of neighboring cells in the primary tumor. The presence of components of the E-cadherin-catenin complex in 246 rectal adenocarcinomas was examined by immunohistochemistry and compared to their presence in 219 colon carcinomas. The expression data were correlated to clinical information from the patients' records. There were statistically significant differences in protein expression between the rectal and the colon carcinomas regarding membranous β-catenin, γ-catenin, p120-catenin, and E-cadherin, as well as nuclear β-catenin. In the rectal carcinomas, there was a significant inverse association between the expression of p120-catenin in cell membranes of the primary tumors and the occurrence of local recurrence, while membranous protein expression of β-catenin was inversely related to distant metastases

Differences in Protein Expression and Gene Amplification of Cyclins between Colon and Rectal Adenocarcinomas

Adenocarcinomas of rectum and colon may be different with regard to the cellular biological basis for cancer development. A material of 246 rectal cancers removed surgically at Akershus University Hospital in the years 1992–2000 was investigated and was compared to a material of 219 colon cancers operated on at Akershus University Hospital during the years 1988, 1990 and 1997–2000. There were highly significant differences between the rectal and the colon cancers in the protein expression of cyclin D1, cyclin D3, cyclin E, nuclear β-catenin, and c-Myc and in gene amplification of cyclin A2, cyclin B1, cyclin D1, and cyclin E. Gene amplification and protein expression in the rectal cancers correlated significantly for the cyclins B1, D3, and E. A statistically significant relation was observed between overexpression of cyclin A2 and local relapse of rectal carcinomas, as higher expression of cyclin A2 was associated with lower local recurrence rate

Reduserte klimagassutslipp 2050. Teknologiske kilder. Innspill til Lavutslippsutvalget

publishedVersio

Reduserte klimagassutslipp 2050. Teknologiske kilder. Innspill til Lavutslippsutvalget

publishedVersio

A pragmatic approach to sonothrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke: The Norwegian randomised controlled sonothrombolysis in acute stroke study (NOR-SASS)

Background: Ultrasound accelerates thrombolysis with tPA (sonothrombolysis). Ultrasound in the absence of tPA also accelerates clot break-up (sonolysis). Adding intravenous gaseous microbubbles may potentiate the effect of ultrasound in both sonothrombolysis and sonolysis. The Norwegian Sonothrombolysis in Acute Stroke Study aims in a pragmatic approach to assess the effect and safety of contrast enhanced ultrasound treatment in unselected acute ischaemic stroke patients. Methods/Design: Acute ischaemic stroke patients ≥18 years, with or without visible arterial occlusion on computed tomography angiography (CTA) and treatable ≤ 4½ hours after symptom onset, are included in NOR-SASS. NOR-SASS is superimposed on a separate trial randomising patients with acute ischemic stroke to either tenecteplase or alteplase (The Norwegian Tenecteplase Stroke Trial NOR-TEST). The NOR-SASS trial has two arms: 1) the thrombolysis-arms (NOR-SASS A and B) includes patients given intravenous thrombolysis (tenecteplase or alteplase), and 2) the no-thrombolysis-arm (NOR-SASS C) includes patients with contraindications to thrombolysis. First step randomisation of NOR-SASS A is embedded in NOR-TEST as a 1:1 randomisation to either tenecteplase or alteplase. Second step NOR-SASS randomisation is 1:1 to either contrast enhanced sonothrombolysis (CEST) or sham CEST. Randomisation in NOR-SASS B (routine alteplase group) is 1:1 to either CEST or sham CEST. Randomisation of NOR-SASS C is 1:1 to either contrast enhanced sonolysis (CES) or sham CES. Ultrasound is given for one hour using a 2-MHz pulsed-wave diagnostic ultrasound probe. Microbubble contrast (SonoVue®) is given as a continuous infusion for ~30 min. Recanalisation is assessed at 60 min after start of CEST/CES. Magnetic resonance imaging and angiography is performed after 24 h of stroke onset. Primary study endpoints are 1) major neurological improvement measured with NIHSS score at 24 h and 2) favourable functional outcome defined as mRS 0–1 at 90 days. Discussion: NOR-SASS is the first randomised controlled trial designed to test the superiority of contrast enhanced ultrasound treatment given ≤4½ hours after stroke onset in an unselected acute ischaemic stroke population eligible or not eligible for intravenous thrombolysis, with or without a defined arterial occlusion on CTA. If a positive effect and safety can be proven, contrast enhanced ultrasound treatment will be an option for all acute ischaemic stroke patients. EudraCT No 201200032341; www.​clinicaltrials.​gov NCT01949961

The Norwegian tenecteplase stroke trial (NOR-TEST): randomised controlled trial of tenecteplase vs. alteplase in acute ischaemic stroke

Background: Alteplase is the only approved thrombolytic agent for acute ischaemic stroke. The overall benefit from alteplase is substantial, but some evidence indicates that alteplase also has negative effects on the ischaemic brain. Tenecteplase may be more effective and less harmfull than alteplase, but large randomised controlled phase 3 trials are lacking. The Norwegian Tenecteplase Stroke Trial (NOR-TEST) aims to compare efficacy and safety of tenecteplase vs. alteplase. Methods/Design: NOR-TEST is a multi-centre PROBE (prospective randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint) trial designed to establish superiority of tenecteplase 0.4 mg/kg (single bolus) as compared with alteplase 0.9 mg/kg (10% bolus + 90% infusion/60 minutes) for consecutively admitted patients with acute ischaemic stroke eligible for thrombolytic therapy, i.e. patients a) admitted <4½ hours after symptoms onset; b) admitted <4½ hours after awakening with stroke symptoms c) receiving bridging therapy before embolectomy. Randomisation tenecteplase:alteplase is 1:1. The primary study endpoint is favourable functional outcome defined as modified Rankin Scale 0–1 at 90 days. Secondary study endpoints are: 1) haemorrhagic transformation (haemorrhagic infarct/haematoma); 2) symptomatic cerebral haemorrhage on CT 24–48 hours; 3) major neurological improvement at 24 hours; 4) recanalisation at 24–36 hours; 5) death. Discussion: NOR-TEST may establish a novel approach to acute ischaemic stroke treatment. A positive result will lead to a more effective, safer and easier treatment for all acute ischaemic stroke pasients. NOR-TEST is reviewed and approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (2011/2435), and The Norwegian Medicines Agency (12/01402). NOR-TEST is registered with EudraCT No 2011-005793-33 and in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01949948)

Radiologist-initiated double reading of abdominal CT: retrospective analysis of the clinical importance of changes to radiology reports

Background Misinterpretation of radiological examinations is an important contributing factor to diagnostic errors. Consultant radiologists in Norwegian hospitals frequently request second reads by colleagues in real time. Our objective was to estimate the frequency of clinically important changes to radiology reports produced by these prospectively obtained double readings. Methods We retrospectively compared the preliminary and final reports from 1071 consecutive double-read abdominal CT examinations of surgical patients at five public hospitals in Norway. Experienced gastrointestinal surgeons rated the clinical importance of changes from the preliminary to final report. The severity of the radiological findings in clinically important changes was classified as increased, unchanged or decreased. Results Changes were classified as clinically important in 146 of 1071 reports (14%). Changes to 3 reports (0.3%) were critical (demanding immediate action), 35 (3%) were major (implying a change in treatment) and 108 (10%) were intermediate (requiring further investigations). The severity of the radiological findings was increased in 118 (81%) of the clinically important changes. Important changes were made less frequently when abdominal radiologists were first readers, more frequently when they were second readers, and more frequently to urgent examinations. Conclusion A 14% rate of clinically important changes made during double reading may justify quality assurance of radiological interpretation. Using expert second readers and a targeted selection of urgent cases and radiologists reading outside their specialty may increase the yield of discrepant cases