8 research outputs found
Salivary Glands and Its Myriad Forms of Cancers , Diagnosis And Therapy
Salivary gland is a complex, compoundsecretory tissue seen in the oral cavity, which produces saliva and maintains oral homeostasis.Salivary gland diseases can range from swelling of the gland to Malignancies. In order to understand the localization and the diagnosis of the salivary gland diseases, it is important to understand the development, structure and function of the gland. This review article summaries the biology, diseases and the diagnostic tool available to investigate and evaluate the disease.nbs
Exososome: Potential Biomarker for Cancer
Transformation is a common phenomenon that occurs in a cancer environment. As a result of tumorogenesis, normal cells are transformed into cancer cells. Researchers have shown that multicellular vesicles known as exosomes secreted by Malignant cells have the potential to induce this normal cell transformation. Accumulating evidence indicates that exosomes play important roles in cancer. Exosomes are known to play decisive roles in tumorogenesis, growth, progression, metastasis, and drug resistance by transferring oncogenic proteins and nucleic acids that modulates the activity of recipient cells. In this review, we will unveil the role of exosomes as communication molecules in cancer. Exosome shuttle proteins and nucleic acids and so have been suggested as novel diagnostic and prognostic indicators for a variety of cancers. Currently, tumor-derived exosomes are utilized as vaccines and as carriers for drugs and small molecules in pre-clinical studies and clinical trials
Activation of the ERK1/2 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Cascade by Dentin Matrix Protein 1 Promotes Osteoblast Differentiation
DMP1 has been shown to play many roles in osteogenesis. We recently demonstrated that calcium-mediated stress kinase activation by DMP1 leads to osteoblast differentiation. In this study we demonstrate that DMP1 can also activate the extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)-MAPK pathway. This activation was mediated through the RGD integrin-binding domain in DMP1. Further, we demonstrate that Runx2, an essential transcription factor, is stimulated by the ERK-MAPK pathway
Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: Prospective External and Temporal Validation of the HAL and HOMER Models
BACKGROUND: Two models, the Help with the Assessment of Adenopathy in Lung cancer (HAL) and Help with Oncologic Mediastinal Evaluation for Radiation (HOMER), were recently developed to estimate the probability of nodal disease in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) as determined by endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA). The objective of this study was to prospectively externally validate both models at multiple centers.
RESEARCH QUESTION: Are the HAL and HOMER models valid across multiple centers?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicenter prospective observational cohort study enrolled consecutive patients with PET-CT clinical-radiographic stages T1-3, N0-3, M0 NSCLC undergoing EBUS-TBNA staging. HOMER was used to predict the probability of N0 vs N1 vs N2 or N3 (N2|3) disease, and HAL was used to predict the probability of N2|3 (vs N0 or N1) disease. Model discrimination was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC-AUC), and calibration was assessed using the Brier score, calibration plots, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test.
RESULTS: Thirteen centers enrolled 1,799 patients. HAL and HOMER demonstrated good discrimination: HAL ROC-AUC = 0.873 (95%CI, 0.856-0.891) and HOMER ROC-AUC = 0.837 (95%CI, 0.814-0.859) for predicting N1 disease or higher (N1|2|3) and 0.876 (95%CI, 0.855-0.897) for predicting N2|3 disease. Brier scores were 0.117 and 0.349, respectively. Calibration plots demonstrated good calibration for both models. For HAL, the difference between forecast and observed probability of N2|3 disease was +0.012; for HOMER, the difference for N1|2|3 was -0.018 and for N2|3 was +0.002. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test was significant for both models (P = .034 and .002), indicating a small but statistically significant calibration error.
INTERPRETATION: HAL and HOMER demonstrated good discrimination and calibration in multiple centers. Although calibration error was present, the magnitude of the error is small, such that the models are informative
Effects of once-weekly exenatide on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes
BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo