6-gene promoter methylation assay is potentially applicable for prostate cancer clinical staging based on urine collection following prostatic massage

The detection of prostate cancer (PCa) biomarkers in bodily fluids, a process known as liquid biopsy, is a promising approach and particularly beneficial when performed in urine samples due to their maximal non‑invasiveness requirement of collection. A number of gene panels proposed for this purpose have allowed discrimination between disease‑free prostate and PCa; however, they bear no significant prognostic value. With the purpose to develop a gene panel for PCa diagnosis and prognosis, the methylation status of 17 cancer-associated genes were analyzed in urine cell‑free DNA obtained from 31 patients with PCa and 33 control individuals using methylation‑specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP). Among these, 13 genes indicated the increase in methylation frequency in patients with PCa compared with controls. No prior association has been reported between adenomatosis polyposis coli 2 (APC2), homeobox A9, Wnt family member 7A (WNT7A) and N‑Myc downstream‑regulated gene 4 protein genes with PCa. The 6‑gene panel consisting of APC2, cadherin 1, forkhead box P1, leucine rich repeat containing 3B, WNT7A and zinc family protein of the cerebellum 4 was subsequently developed providing PCa detection with 78% sensitivity and 100% specificity. The number of genes methylated (NGM) value introduced for this panel was indicated to rise monotonically from 0.27 in control individuals to 4.6 and 4.25 in patients with highly developed and metastatic T2/T3 stage cancer, respectively. Therefore, the approach of defining the NGM value may not only allow for the detection of PCa, but also provide a rough evaluation of tumor malignancy and metastatic potential by non‑invasive MSP analysis of urine samples

Edoxaban versus warfarin for the treatment of symptomatic venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Whether the oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban can be an alternative to warfarin in patients with venous thromboembolism is unclear. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study, we randomly assigned patients with acute venous thromboembolism, who had initially received heparin, to receive edoxaban at a dose of 60 mg once daily, or 30 mg once daily (e.g., in the case of patients with creatinine clearance of 30 to 50 ml per minute or a body weight below 60 kg), or to receive warfarin. Patients received the study drug for 3 to 12 months. The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent symptomatic venous thromboembolism. The principal safety outcome was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4921 patients presented with deep-vein thrombosis, and 3319 with a pulmonary embolism. Among patients receiving warfarin, the time in the therapeutic range was 63.5%. Edoxaban was noninferior to warfarin with respect to the primary efficacy outcome, which occurred in 130 patients in the edoxaban group (3.2%) and 146 patients in the warfarin group (3.5%) (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.13; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The safety outcome occurred in 349 patients (8.5%) in the edoxaban group and 423 patients (10.3%) in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.004 for superiority). The rates of other adverse events were similar in the two groups. A total of 938 patients with pulmonary embolism had right ventricular dysfunction, as assessed by measurement of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels; the rate of recurrent venous thromboembolism in this subgroup was 3.3% in the edoxaban group and 6.2% in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Edoxaban administered once daily after initial treatment with heparin was noninferior to high-quality standard therapy and caused significantly less bleeding in a broad spectrum of patients with venous thromboembolism, including those with severe pulmonary embolism. (Funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; Hokusai-VTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00986154.)