Can ABCF2 protein expression predict the prognosis of uterine cancer?

Uterine cervical and endometrial cancers are common malignant solid neoplasms for which there are no useful prognostic markers. In this study, we evaluate the relationship between ATP-binding cassette superfamily F2 (ABCF2) expression and clinical factors including clinical stage, histologic type, grade and prognosis in uterine cervical and endometrial cancer. Two hundred and sixty seven cervical and 103 endometrial cancers were studied. ATP-binding cassette superfamily F2 cytoplasmic expression was detected by immunohistochemical staining and scored as positive or negative. Among cervical cancer cases, 149 (55.8%) expressed ABCF2. The overall survival was longer in ABCF2-negative than ABCF2-positive cases (P=0.0069). Statistically significant prognostic factors for survival were ABCF2 positivity (risk ratio (rr)=1.437), old age (rr=1.550) and advanced stage (rr=2.577). ATP-binding cassette superfamily F2 positivity was an independent prognostic factor by multivariate proportional hazard test (P=0.0002). Among endometrial cancer cases, 72 (69.9%) were cytoplasmic ABCF2 positive. However, there was no significant relationship between ABCF2 expression and age, clinical stage, histologic type, histologic grade, oestrogen receptor status or prognosis. ATP-binding cassette superfamily F2 expression may be a useful prognostic marker in cervical but not endometrial cancer. The role of ABCF2 protein may differ depending on the type of cancer

Use of lymphoscintigraphy to differentiate primary versus secondary lower extremity lymphedema after surgical lymphadenectomy: a retrospective analysis

Background: When managing patients with cancer, lymphedema of the lower limbs (LLL) is commonly reported as secondary to the surgical excision and/or irradiation of lymph nodes (LNs). In the framework of lymphoscintigraphic imaging performed to evaluate secondary LLL, some lympho-nodal presentations have been observed that could not be explained by the applied treatments, suggesting that these LLL might be primary. Therefore, all our lymphoscintigraphic examinations that were performed in patients for LLL after surgery for gynecological or urological cancer were retrospectively analyzed in order to evaluate the frequency in which these LLL might not be secondary (either completely or partially) but primary in origin. Methods: Lymphoscintigraphies performed in 33 patients who underwent LN dissection (limited to the intra-abdominal LN) with or without radiotherapy for histologically confirmed ovarian cancer (n = 6), uterine cancer (n = 14 with cervical cancer and n = 7 with endometrial cancer), or prostate cancer (n = 6) were compared to lymphoscintigraphies obtained in primary LLL. Results: In 12 (33% of the) patients (3 men plus 9 women, 4 with cervical cancer and 5 with endometrial cancer), scintigraphy of the lower limbs revealed lympho-nodal presentation that did not match with the expected consequences of the surgical and/or radiological treatments and were either suggestive or typical of primary lymphedema. Conclusions: This retrospective analysis of a limited but well-defined series of patients suggests that the appearance of LLL might not be related to cancer treatment(s) but that these LLL may represent the development of a primary lymphatic disease latent prior to the therapeutic interventions.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe