Growth arrest-specific transcript 5 associated snoRNA levels are related to p53 expression and DNA damage in colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND The growth arrest-specific transcript 5 gene (GAS5) encodes a long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) and hosts a number of small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) that have recently been implicated in multiple cellular processes and cancer. Here, we investigate the relationship between DNA damage, p53, and the GAS5 snoRNAs to gain further insight into the potential role of this locus in cell survival and oncogenesis both in vivo and in vitro. METHODS We used quantitative techniques to analyse the effect of DNA damage on GAS5 snoRNA expression and to assess the relationship between p53 and the GAS5 snoRNAs in cancer cell lines and in normal, pre-malignant, and malignant human colorectal tissue and used biological techniques to suggest potential roles for these snoRNAs in the DNA damage response. RESULTS GAS5-derived snoRNA expression was induced by DNA damage in a p53-dependent manner in colorectal cancer cell lines and their levels were not affected by DICER. Furthermore, p53 levels strongly correlated with GAS5-derived snoRNA expression in colorectal tissue. CONCLUSIONS In aggregate, these data suggest that the GAS5-derived snoRNAs are under control of p53 and that they have an important role in mediating the p53 response to DNA damage, which may not relate to their function in the ribosome. We suggest that these snoRNAs are not processed by DICER to form smaller snoRNA-derived RNAs with microRNA (miRNA)-like functions, but their precise role requires further evaluation. Furthermore, since GAS5 host snoRNAs are often used as endogenous controls in qPCR quantifications we show that their use as housekeeping genes in DNA damage experiments can lead to inaccurate results

Surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous resection: an international survey among surgeons and pathologists

Background: The aim of this survey was to gain insights in the current surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with portal–superior mesenteric vein resection (VR). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify international expert surgeons (N = 150) and pathologists (N = 40) who published relevant studies between 2009 and 2019. These experts and Dutch surgeons (N = 17) and pathologists (N = 20) were approached to complete an online survey. Results: Overall, 76 (46%) surgeons and 37 (62%) pathologists completed the survey. Most surgeons (71%) estimated that preoperative imaging corresponded correctly with intraoperative findings of venous involvement in 50–75% of patients. An increased complication risk following VR was expected by 55% of surgeons, mainly after Type 4 (segmental resection-venous conduit anastomosis). Most surgeons (61%) preferred Type 3 (segmental resection-primary anastomosis). Most surgeons (75%) always perform the VR themselves. Standard postoperative imaging for patency control was performed by 54% of surgeons and 39% adjusted thromboprophylaxis following VR. Most pathologists (76%) always assessed tumor infiltration in the resected vein and only 54% of pathologists always assess the resection margins of the vein itself. Variation in assessment of tumor infiltration depth was observed. Conclusion: This international survey showed variation in the surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous involvement. This highlights the lack of evidence and emphasizes the need for research on imaging modalities to improve patient selection for VR, surgical techniques, postoperative management and standardization of the pathological assessment

Amsterdam International Consensus Meeting: tumor response scoring in the pathology assessment of resected pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant therapy

Histopathologically scoring the response of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) to neoadjuvant treatment can guide the selection of adjuvant therapy and improve prognostic stratification. However, several tumor response scoring (TRS) systems exist, and consensus is lacking as to which system represents best practice. An international consensus meeting on TRS took place in November 2019 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Here, we provide an overview of the outcomes and consensus statements that originated from this meeting. Consensus (≥80% agreement) was reached on a total of seven statements: (1) TRS is important because it provides information about the effect of neoadjuvant treatment that is not provided by other histopathology-based descriptors. (2) TRS for resected PDAC following neoadjuvant therapy should assess residual (viable) tumor burden instead of tumor regression. (3) The CAP scoring system is considered the most adequate scoring system to date because it is based on the presence and amount of residual cancer cells instead of tumor regression. (4) The defining criteria of the categories in the CAP scoring system should be improved by replacing subjective terms including “minimal” or “extensive” with objective criteria to evaluate the extent of viable tumor. (5) The improved, consensus-based system should be validated retrospectively and prospectively. (6) Prospective studies should determine the extent of tissue sampling that is required to ensure adequate assessment of the residual cancer burden, taking into account the heterogeneity of tumor response. (7) In future scientific publications, the extent of tissue sampling should be described in detail in the “Materials and methods” section

Do we have the right PROMs for measuring outcomes in lumbar spinal surgery?

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become an important part of routine auditing of outcomes in spinal surgery in the UK. PROMs can be used to help assess the quality of care provided by surgical units by determining the comparative health status of patients, before and after surgery. This study was designed to review the PROMs used to assess outcomes in spinal surgery and to determine if they are fit for the purpose.Accepted manuscript, 12 month embarg