Diagnostic Accuracy of Fine Needle Biopsy for Metastatic Melanoma and Its Implications for Patient Management

The use of fine needle biopsy (FNB) for the diagnosis of metastatic melanoma can lead to the early removal and treatment of metastases, reduce the frequency of unnecessary surgery, and facilitate the staging of patients enrolled in clinical trials of adjuvant therapies. In this study, the accuracy of FNB for the diagnosis of metastatic melanoma was investigated. A retrospective cohort study was performed with 2204 consecutive FNBs performed on 1416 patients known or suspected to have metastatic melanoma. Almost three-quarters (1582) of these FNBs were verified by either histopathologic diagnosis following surgical resection or clinical follow-up. FNB for metastatic melanoma was found to have an overall sensitivity of 92.1% and a specificity of 99.2%, with 69 false-negative and 5 false-positive findings identified. The sensitivity of the procedure was found to be influenced by six factors. The use of immunostains, reporting of the specimen by a cytopathologist who had reported >500 cases, lesions located in the skin and subcutis, and patients with ulcerated primary melanomas were factors associated with a significant improvement in the sensitivity of the test. However, FNBs performed in masses located in lymph nodes of the axilla and FNBs that required more than one needle pass to obtain a sample were far more likely to result in false-negative results. FNB is a rapid, accurate, and clinically useful technique for the assessment of disease status in patients with suspected metastatic melanoma

The value of diffusion-weighted imaging in assessing the ADC changes of tissues adjacent to breast carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To define a threshold value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) with which malignant breast lesions can be distinguished from benign lesions, and to evaluate the ADC change of peri-tumor tissue in breast carcinoma by echo planar-diffusion weighted imaging (EPI-DWI).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>57 breast lesions were scanned by routine MRI and EPI-DWI. The ADC values were compared between malignant and benign lesions. The sensitivity and specificity of EPI-DWI and the threshold ADC value were evaluated by Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC). The ADC values of malignant lesion and layered peri-tumor tissues (from innermost layer 1 to outermost layer 4 with 5 mm every layer) in different directions were compared and the ADC values among different layers were compared.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The ADC value of 35 malignant lesions was statistically lower than that of 22 benign lesions (P < 0.05). In ROC curve, the threshold value was 1.24 +/- 0.25*10E-3 mm²/s (b = 500) or 1.20 +/- 0.25*10E-3 mm²/s (b = 1000). The ADC value of malignant lesions was statistically lower than that of peri-tumor tissues in different directions (P < 0.05). For peri-tumor tissues, the ADC values increased gradually from layer 1 to layer 4 and there was a significant difference between the ADC values of layer 1 and layer 2 (P < 0.05); while from layer 2 outwards, there was no statistical difference among different layers.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>ADC value was a sensitive and specific parameter that could help to differentiate benign and malignant breast lesions. ADC changes in tissues adjacent to breast carcinoma could be detected by EPI-DWI, which made EPI-DWI a promising method for helping to determine surgical scope of breast carcinoma.</p

PPARβ activation inhibits melanoma cell proliferation involving repression of the Wilms’ tumour suppressor WT1

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are ligand-activated transcription factors that strongly influence molecular signalling in normal and cancer cells. Although increasing evidence suggests a role of PPARs in skin carcinogenesis, only expression of PPARγ has been investigated in human melanoma tissues. Activation of PPARα has been shown to inhibit the metastatic potential, whereas stimulation of PPARγ decreased melanoma cell proliferation. We show here that the third member of the PPAR family, PPARβ/δ is expressed in human melanoma samples. Specific pharmacological activation of PPARβ using GW0742 or GW501516 in low concentrations inhibits proliferation of human and murine melanoma cells. Inhibition of proliferation is accompanied by decreased expression of the Wilms’ tumour suppressor 1 (WT1), which is implicated in melanoma proliferation. We demonstrate that PPARβ directly represses WT1 as (1) PPARβ activation represses WT1 promoter activity; (2) in chromatin immunoprecipitation and electrophoretic mobility shift assays, we identified a binding element for PPARβ in the WT1 promoter; (3) deletion of this binding element abolishes repression by PPARβ and (4) the WT1 downstream molecules nestin and zyxin are down-regulated upon PPARβ activation. Our findings elucidate a novel mechanism of signalling by ligands of PPARβ, which leads to suppression of melanoma cell growth through direct repression of WT1

Identification of Mammalian Protein Quality Control Factors by High-Throughput Cellular Imaging

Protein Quality Control (PQC) pathways are essential to maintain the equilibrium between protein folding and the clearance of misfolded proteins. In order to discover novel human PQC factors, we developed a high-content, high-throughput cell-based assay to assess PQC activity. The assay is based on a fluorescently tagged, temperature sensitive PQC substrate and measures its degradation relative to a temperature insensitive internal control. In a targeted screen of 1591 siRNA genes involved in the Ubiquitin-Proteasome System (UPS) we identified 25 of the 33 genes encoding for 26S proteasome subunits and discovered several novel PQC factors. An unbiased genome-wide siRNA screen revealed the protein translation machinery, and in particular the EIF3 translation initiation complex, as a novel key modulator of misfolded protein stability. These results represent a comprehensive unbiased survey of human PQC components and establish an experimental tool for the discovery of genes that are required for the degradation of misfolded proteins under conditions of proteotoxic stress

Standardized and reproducible methodology for the comprehensive and systematic assessment of surgical resection margins during breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The primary goal of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is to completely excise the tumor and achieve "adequate" or "negative" surgical resection margins while maintaining an acceptable level of postoperative cosmetic outcome. Nevertheless, precise determination of the adequacy of BCS has long been debated. In this regard, the aim of the current paper was to describe a standardized and reproducible methodology for comprehensive and systematic assessment of surgical resection margins during BCS.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Retrospective analysis of 204 BCS procedures performed for invasive breast cancer from August 2003 to June 2007, in which patients underwent a standard BCS resection and systematic sampling of nine standardized re-resection margins (superior, superior-medial, superior-lateral, medial, lateral, inferior, inferior-medial, inferior-lateral, and deep-posterior). Multiple variables (including patient, tumor, specimen, and follow-up variables) were evaluated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>6.4% (13/204) of patients had positive BCS specimen margins (defined as tumor at inked edge of BCS specimen) and 4.4% (9/204) of patients had close margins (defined as tumor within 1 mm or less of inked edge but not at inked edge of BCS specimen). 11.8% (24/204) of patients had at least one re-resection margin containing additional disease, independent of the status of the BCS specimen margins. 7.1% (13/182) of patients with negative BCS specimen margins (defined as no tumor cells seen within 1 mm or less of inked edge of BCS specimen) had at least one re-resection margin containing additional disease. Thus, 54.2% (13/24) of patients with additional disease in a re-resection margin would not have been recognized by a standard BCS procedure alone (P < 0.001). The nine standardized resection margins represented only 26.8% of the volume of the BCS specimen and 32.6% of the surface area of the BCS specimen.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our methodology accurately assesses the adequacy of surgical resection margins for determination of which individuals may need further resection to the affected breast in order to minimize the potential risk of local recurrence while attempting to limit the volume of additional breast tissue excised, as well as to determine which individuals are not realistically amendable to BCS and instead need a completion mastectomy to successfully remove multifocal disease.</p

Contraindications of sentinel lymph node biopsy: Áre there any really?

BACKGROUND: One of the most exciting and talked about new surgical techniques in breast cancer surgery is the sentinel lymph node biopsy. It is an alternative procedure to standard axillary lymph node dissection, which makes possible less invasive surgery and side effects for patients with early breast cancer that wouldn't benefit further from axillary lymph node clearance. Sentinel lymph node biopsy helps to accurately evaluate the status of the axilla and the extent of disease, but also determines appropriate adjuvant treatment and long-term follow-up. However, like all surgical procedures, the sentinel lymph node biopsy is not appropriate for each and every patient. METHODS: In this article we review the absolute and relative contraindications of the procedure in respect to clinically positive axilla, neoadjuvant therapy, tumor size, multicentric and multifocal disease, in situ carcinoma, pregnancy, age, body-mass index, allergies to dye and/or radio colloid and prior breast and/or axillary surgery. RESULTS: Certain conditions involving host factors and tumor biologic characteristics may have a negative impact on the success rate and accuracy of the procedure. The overall fraction of patients unsuitable or with multiple risk factors that may compromise the success of the sentinel lymph node biopsy, is very small. Nevertheless, these patients need to be successfully identified, appropriately advised and cautioned, and so do the surgeons that perform the procedure. CONCLUSION: When performed by an experienced multi-disciplinary team, the SLNB is a highly effective and accurate alternative to standard level I and II axillary clearance in the vast majority of patients with early breast cancer