20 research outputs found

    Sarcoma classification by DNA methylation profiling

    Get PDF
    Sarcomas are malignant soft tissue and bone tumours affecting adults, adolescents and children. They represent a morphologically heterogeneous class of tumours and some entities lack defining histopathological features. Therefore, the diagnosis of sarcomas is burdened with a high inter-observer variability and misclassification rate. Here, we demonstrate classification of soft tissue and bone tumours using a machine learning classifier algorithm based on array-generated DNA methylation data. This sarcoma classifier is trained using a dataset of 1077 methylation profiles from comprehensively pre-characterized cases comprising 62 tumour methylation classes constituting a broad range of soft tissue and bone sarcoma subtypes across the entire age spectrum. The performance is validated in a cohort of 428 sarcomatous tumours, of which 322 cases were classified by the sarcoma classifier. Our results demonstrate the potential of the DNA methylation-based sarcoma classification for research and future diagnostic applications

    Ökotoxikologie — Quo vadis

    No full text

    European association of urology risk stratification predicts outcome in patients receiving PSMA-PET-planned salvage radiotherapy for biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy.

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE The European Association of Urology (EAU) proposed a risk stratification (high vs. low risk) for patients with biochemical recurrence (BR) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Here we investigated whether this stratification accurately predicts outcome, particularly in patients staged with PSMA-PET. METHODS For this study, we used a retrospective database including 1222 PSMA-PET-staged prostate cancer patients who were treated with salvage radiotherapy (SRT) for BR, at 11 centers in 5 countries. Patients with lymph node metastases (pN1 or cN1) or unclear EAU risk group were excluded. The remaining cohort comprised 526 patients, including 132 low-risk and 394 high-risk patients. RESULTS The median follow-up time after SRT was 31.0 months. The 3-year biochemical progression-free survival (BPFS) was 85.7 % in EAU low-risk versus 69.4 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.002). The 3-year metastasis-free survival (MFS) was 94.4 % in low-risk versus 87.6 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.005). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 99.0 % in low-risk versus 99.6 % in high-risk patients (p = 0.925). In multivariate analysis, EAU risk group remained a statistically significant predictor of BPFS (p = 0.003, HR 2.022, 95 % CI 1.262-3.239) and MFS (p = 0.013, HR 2.986, 95 % CI 1.262-7.058). CONCLUSION Our data support the EAU risk group definition. EAU risk grouping for BCR reliably predicted outcome in patients staged lymph node-negative after RP and with PSMA-PET before SRT. To our knowledge, this is the first study validating the EAU risk grouping in patients treated with PSMA-PET-planned SRT

    Patterns of care and follow-up care of patients with uveal melanoma in German-speaking countries: a multinational survey of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG)

    Get PDF
    Purpose Uveal melanoma (UM) is an orphan cancer of high unmet medical need. Current patterns of care and surveillance remain unclear as they are situated in an interdisciplinary setting. Methods A questionnaire addressing the patterns of care and surveillance in the management of patients with uveal melanoma was distributed to 70 skin cancer centers in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Frequency distributions of responses for each item of the questionnaire were calculated. Results 44 of 70 (62.9%) skin cancer centers completed the questionnaire. Thirty-nine hospitals were located in Germany (88.6%), three in Switzerland (6.8%) and two in Austria (4.5%). The majority (68.2%) represented university hospitals. Most patients with metastatic disease were treated in certified skin cancer centers (70.7%, 29/41). Besides, the majority of patients with UM were referred to the respective skin cancer center by ophthalmologists (87.2%, 34/39). Treatment and organization of follow-up of patients varied across the different centers. 35.1% (14/37) of the centers stated to not perform any screening measures. Conclusion Treatment patterns of patients with uveal melanoma in Germany, Austria and Switzerland remain extremely heterogeneous. A guideline for the treatment and surveillance is urgently needed
    corecore