44 research outputs found

    Serological assessment of gastric mucosal atrophy in gastric cancer

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Non-invasive tools for gastric cancer screening and diagnosis are lacking. Serological testing with the detection of pepsinogen 1 (PG1), pepsinogen 2 (PG2) and gastrin 17 (G17) offers the possibility to detect preneoplastic gastric mucosal conditions. Aim of this study was to assess the performance of these serological tests in the presence of gastric neoplasia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Histological and serological samples of 118 patients with gastric cancer have been assessed for tumor specific characteristics (Laurén type, localisation), degree of mucosal abnormalities (intestinal metaplasia, atrophy) and serological parameters (PG1, PG2, PG1/2-ratio, G17, <it>H. pylori </it>IgG, CagA status). Association of the general factors to the different serological values have been statistically analyzed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients with intestinal type gastric cancer had lower PG1 levels and a lower PG1/2-ratio compared to those with diffuse type cancer (<it>p </it>= 0.003). The serum levels of PG2 itself and G17 were not significantly altered. <it>H. pylori </it>infection in general had no influence on the levels of PG1, PG2 and G17 in the serum of gastric cancer patients. There was a trend towards lower PG1 levels in case of positive CagA-status (<it>p </it>= 0.058). The degree of both intestinal metaplasia and atrophy correlated inversely with serum levels for PG1 and the PG1/2-ratio (p < 0.01). Laurén-specific analysis revealed that this is only true for intestinal type tumors. Univariate ANOVA revealed atrophy and CagA-status as the only independent factors for low PG1 and a low PG1/2-ratio.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Glandular atrophy and a positive CagA status are determinant factors for decreased pepsinogen 1 levels in the serum of patients with gastric cancer. The serological assessment of gastric atrophy by analysis of serum pepsinogen is only adequate for patients with intestinal type cancer.</p

    Bivalve Assemblages as Hotspots for Biodiversity

    No full text
    Many bivalve species occur in aggregations, and locally cover large partsof the seafloor. Above a certain density they provide a distinct, three dimensional structure and the aggregations are called bivalve beds or reefs. These persistent aggregations form a biogenic habitat for many other species. Bivalve beds, therefore, often have, in comparison with the surrounding areas, a high biodiversity value and can be seen as hotspots for biodiversity. Bivalve have a wide global distribution, on rocky and sedimentary coasts. Different processes and mechanisms influence the presence of associated benthic fauna. This paper reviewed the main drivers that influence the biodiversity, such as the bivalve species involved, the density, the size and the age of the bed, the depth or height in the tidal zone and the substratum type. Bivalve beds not only occur naturally in many subtidal and intertidal areas around the world, but mussels and oysters are also extensively cultured. Addition of physical cultivation structures in the water column or on the bottom allows for development of substantial and diverse communities that have a structure similar to that of natural beds. Dynamics of culture populations may however differ from naturalbivalve reefs as a result of culture site and/or maintenance and operation likeharvesting of the bivalve cultures. We used the outcome of the review on the drivers for wild assemblages to evaluate trade-offs between bivalve aquaculture and biodiversity conservation. Studies comparing natural and cultured assemblages proved to allow for a better understanding of the effect of the culture strategies and, consequently, to forward sustainable bivalve cultures. This is illustrated by a case study in the Dutch Wadden Sea
    corecore