Quantitative detection of molecular markers ProEx C (minichromosome maintenance protein 2 and topoisomerase IIa) and MIB-1 in liquid-based cervical squamous cell cytology.

none5BACKGROUND: In this study, the authors conducted a comparative quantitative evaluation of the proliferation markers ProEx C (an aberrant S-phase induction marker, human papillomavirus E6-E7 correlated) and MIB-1 in squamous intraepithelial lesions (SIL) to identify a biomolecular profile informative for the diagnosis of high-grade SIL/cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3 or greater that was complementary to the morphologic Papanicolaou (Pap) test ("biomolecular Pap test"). METHODS: After the cytologic diagnosis, reflex immunocytochemistry was carried out on 76 unstained SurePath cell samples (20 routine samples that were negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy and 56 positive samples that were selected with matching histology). Both a morphometric analysis with a software imaging analysis system and a quantitative analysis of atypical squamous clusters were performed. RESULTS: The quantitative evaluation revealed an excellent, direct correlation between the 2 markers, although ProEx C was more selective and more informative for the progression of low- and moderate-grade lesions, because it only revealed cells in aberrant S-phase cell cycle. The quantitative morphometric analysis revealed the increased presence of atypical, positive clusters and the percentage of positive cells within, both paralleling the severity of the lesions. The threshold of a 3% ProEx C-positive nuclear area was useful for splitting lesions into groups with a low risk or high risk of progression. CONCLUSIONS: Both ProEx C and MIB-1 were valid proliferation markers in cytologic preparations, and nuclear positivity was quantified successfully by using computer-assisted analysis. The analysis of atypical clusters may be a valuable tool in the diagnosis of SIL. The presence of atypical clusters and their positivity for proliferation markers are good first-glance indicators of lesion grade.noneMD. Beccati; C. Buriani; M. Pedriali; S. Rossi; I. NenciBeccati, M. D.; C., Buriani; Pedriali, Massimo; S., Rossi; Nenci, Ital

Role of Ultrasonographic/Clinical Profile, Cytology, and BRAF V600E Mutation Evaluation in Thyroid Nodule Screening for Malignancy: A Prospective Study

Context: Ultrasound (US)-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) is the most reliable nonsurgical test for distinguishing benign from malignant thyroid nodules. However, there is no consensus on which nodules should undergo FNAB.Aims:The aims of this study were to evaluate the utility of US-guided FNAB in the diagnostic assessment of nodules with or without clinical/US features suggestive for malignancy and to investigate the additional contribution of BRAF V600E mutation analysis in the detection of differentiated thyroid cancer.Design and Methods:Thyroid cytoaspirates from 2421 nodules at least 4 mm in diameter were performed in 1856 patients who underwent cytological evaluation and biomolecular analysis.Results:Cytology showed high positive predictive value and specificity for the diagnosis of malignant lesions. BRAF V600E mutation was found in 115 samples, 80 of which were also cytologically diagnosed as papillary thyroid cancer. BRAF mutation analysis significantly enhanced the diagnostic value of cytology, increasing FNAB diagnostic sensitivity for malignant nodules by approximately 28%. Micro PTC (63% of diagnosed papillary thyroid carcinoma) showed a high prevalence of multifocality, extrathyroidal extension, and lymph node metastases, underlining the malignant potential of thyroid microcarcinomas. Each investigated US/clinical characteristic of suspected malignancy correlated with the presence of a thyroid cancer in thyroid nodules with diameter of at least 4 mm.Conclusions:These data indicate that nodules of at least 4 mm may underlie a thyroid cancer independently of US/clinical characteristics of suspected malignancy, suggesting the need to perform FNAB. The diagnostic sensitivity for thyroid cancer is significantly increased by BRAF V600E mutation analysis, indicating that the screening for BRAF mutation in FNAB samples has a relevant diagnostic potential

Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of osteoporotic patients admitted in internal medicine wards in Italy between 2010 and 2016 (the REPOSI Register)

Purpose: To evaluate clinical features, treatments, and outcomes of osteoporotic patients admitted to internal medicine and geriatric wards compared with non-osteoporotic patients (REPOSI registry). Methods: We studied 4714 patients hospitalized between 2010 and 2016. We reported age, sex, educational level, living status, comorbidities and drugs taken, Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), Barthel Index, Short-Blessed Test, 4-item Geriatric Depression Scale, serum hemoglobin, creatinine, and clinical outcomes. Osteoporosis was defined based on the diagnoses recorded at admission, according to the following ICD9: 733, 805–813, 820–823. Results: Twelve percent of the patients had a preadmission diagnosis of osteoporosis. Only 20% of these had been prescribed oral bisphosphonates; 34% were taking vitamin D supplements. Osteoporotic patients were significantly older, with lower BMI, higher CIRS, and taking more drugs. They were significantly more depressed, less independent, with a higher severity of cognitive impairment compared with non-osteoporotic patients. At discharge, the number of patients receiving treatment for osteoporosis did not change. Length of stay and inhospital mortality did not differ between groups. Osteoporotic patients were more frequently nonhome discharged compared with those without osteoporosis (14.8 vs. 7.9%, p = 0.0007), mostly discharged to physical therapy or rehabilitation (8.8 vs. 2.5% of patients, p < 0.0001). Among osteoporotic patients deceased 3 months after discharge, the number of those treated with vitamin D, with or without calcium supplements, was significantly lower compared with survivors (12 vs. 32%, p = 0.0168). Conclusions: The diagnosis of osteoporosis is poorly considered both during hospital stay and at discharge; osteoporotic patients are frailer compared to non-osteoporotic patients