24 research outputs found

    Quantifying the ki-67 heterogeneity profile in prostate cancer.

    Get PDF
    BackgroundKi-67 is a robust predictive/prognostic marker in prostate cancer; however, tumor heterogeneity in prostate biopsy samples is not well studied.MethodsUsing an MRI/US fusion device, biopsy cores were obtained systematically and by targeting when indicated by MRI. Prostate cores containing cancer from 77 consecutive men were analyzed. The highest Ki-67 was used to determine interprostatic variation. Ki-67 range (highest minus lowest) was used to determine intraprostatic and intralesion variation. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were evaluated in relation to Ki-67.ResultsInterprostatic Ki-67 mean ± standard deviation (SD) values for NCCN low (L), intermediate (I), and high (H) risk patients were 5.1 ± 3.8%, 7.4 ± 6.8%, and 12.0 ± 12.4% (ANOVA P = 0.013). Intraprostatic mean ± SD Ki-67 ranges in L, I, and H risk patients were 2.6 ± 3.6%, 5.3 ± 6.8%, and 10.9 ± 12.3% (ANOVA P = 0.027). Intralesion mean ± SD Ki-67 ranges in L, I, and H risk patients were 1.1 ± 0.9%, 5.2 ± 7.9%, and 8.1 ± 10.8% (ANOVA P = 0.22). ADC values at Ki-67 > and <7.1% were 860 ± 203 and 1036 ± 217, respectively (P = 0.0029).ConclusionsHigh risk patients have significantly higher inter- and intraprostatic Ki-67 heterogeneity. This needs to be considered when utilizing Ki-67 clinically

    Estrogen/progesterone Receptor and HER2 Discordance Between Primary Tumor and Brain Metastases in Breast Cancer and Its Effect on Treatment and Survival

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Breast cancer treatment is based on estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). At the time of metastasis, receptor status can be discordant from that at initial diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of discordance and its effect on survival and subsequent treatment in patients with breast cancer brain metastases (BCBM). METHODS: A retrospective database of 316 patients who underwent craniotomy for BCBM between 2006 and 2017 was created. Discordance was considered present if the ER, PR, or HER2 status differed between the primary tumor and the BCBM. RESULTS: The overall receptor discordance rate was 132/316 (42%), and the subtype discordance rate was 100/316 (32%). Hormone receptors (HR, either ER or PR) were gained in 40/160 (25%) patients with HR-negative primary tumors. HER2 was gained in 22/173 (13%) patients with HER2-negative primary tumors. Subsequent treatment was not adjusted for most patients who gained receptors-nonetheless, median survival (MS) improved but did not reach statistical significance (HR, 17-28 mo, P = 0.12; HER2, 15-19 mo, P = 0.39). MS for patients who lost receptors was worse (HR, 27-18 mo, P = 0.02; HER2, 30-18 mo, P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Receptor discordance between primary tumor and BCBM is common, adversely affects survival if receptors are lost, and represents a missed opportunity for use of effective treatments if receptors are gained. Receptor analysis of BCBM is indicated when clinically appropriate. Treatment should be adjusted accordingly. KEY POINTS: 1. Receptor discordance alters subtype in 32% of BCBM patients.2. The frequency of receptor gain for HR and HER2 was 25% and 13%, respectively.3. If receptors are lost, survival suffers. If receptors are gained, consider targeted treatment

    Quantifying the ki-67 heterogeneity profile in prostate cancer.

    No full text

    Quantifying the ki-67 heterogeneity profile in prostate cancer.

    No full text
    Background: Ki-67 is a robust predictive/prognostic marker in prostate cancer; however, tumor heterogeneity in prostate biopsy samples is not well studied. Methods: Using an MRI/US fusion device, biopsy cores were obtained systematically and by targeting when indicated by MRI. Prostate cores containing cancer from 77 consecutive men were analyzed. The highest Ki-67 was used to determine interprostatic variation. Ki-67 range (highest minus lowest) was used to determine intraprostatic and intralesion variation. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were evaluated in relation to Ki-67. Results: Interprostatic Ki-67 mean ± standard deviation (SD) values for NCCN low (L), intermediate (I), and high (H) risk patients were 5.1 ± 3.8%, 7.4 ± 6.8%, and 12.0 ± 12.4% (ANOVA P = 0.013). Intraprostatic mean ± SD Ki-67 ranges in L, I, and H risk patients were 2.6 ± 3.6%, 5.3 ± 6.8%, and 10.9 ± 12.3% (ANOVA P = 0.027). Intralesion mean ± SD Ki-67 ranges in L, I, and H risk patients were 1.1 ± 0.9%, 5.2 ± 7.9%, and 8.1 ± 10.8% (ANOVA P = 0.22). ADC values at Ki-67 > and <7.1% were 860 ± 203 and 1036 ± 217, respectively (P = 0.0029). Conclusions: High risk patients have significantly higher inter- and intraprostatic Ki-67 heterogeneity. This needs to be considered when utilizing Ki-67 clinically

    Quantifying the Ki-67 Heterogeneity Profile in Prostate Cancer

    Get PDF
    Background: Ki-67 is a robust predictive/prognostic marker in prostate cancer; however, tumor heterogeneity in prostate biopsy samples is not well studied. Methods: Using an MRI/US fusion device, biopsy cores were obtained systematically and by targeting when indicated by MRI. Prostate cores containing cancer from 77 consecutive men were analyzed. The highest Ki-67 was used to determine interprostatic variation. Ki-67 range (highest minus lowest) was used to determine intraprostatic and intralesion variation. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were evaluated in relation to Ki-67. Results: Interprostatic Ki-67 mean ± standard deviation (SD) values for NCCN low (L), intermediate (I), and high (H) risk patients were 5.1 ± 3.8%, 7.4 ± 6.8%, and 12.0 ± 12.4% (ANOVA P=0.013). Intraprostatic mean ± SD Ki-67 ranges in L, I, and H risk patients were 2.6 ± 3.6%, 5.3 ± 6.8%, and 10.9 ± 12.3% (ANOVA P=0.027). Intralesion mean ± SD Ki-67 ranges in L, I, and H risk patients were 1.1 ± 0.9%, 5.2 ± 7.9%, and 8.1 ± 10.8% (ANOVA P=0.22). ADC values at Ki-67 > and <7.1% were 860 ± 203 and 1036 ± 217, respectively (P=0.0029). Conclusions: High risk patients have significantly higher inter- and intraprostatic Ki-67 heterogeneity. This needs to be considered when utilizing Ki-67 clinically

    Early clinical outcomes of ultrasound-guided CT-planned high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy for primary locally advanced cervical cancer.

    No full text
    To report early clinical outcomes of high-dose-rate interstitial image-guided brachytherapy (BT) in the definitive management of locally advanced cervical cancer.We retrospectively analyzed 31 locally advanced cervical cancer patients treated at our institution between January 2010 and April 2013. About 88% had advanced disease based on the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics guidelines, and 87% received concurrent chemotherapy. All patients were treated with external beam radiation therapy to a median dose of 45&nbsp;Gy (range, 39.6-58&nbsp;Gy) before receiving BT. High-dose-rate BT was delivered in a single implant to a median dose of 6&nbsp;Gy × five fractions to a CT-defined volume. Median total equivalent 2-Gy dose, dose covered by 90% of the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV D90), and HR-CTV were 84, 87.4, and 49.9 cc, respectively. Kaplan-Meier method was used for actuarial survival analysis, and toxicity was graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0.Median followup was 19.3&nbsp;months. Two-year actuarial local control, regional control, and distant metastasis (DM) were 90%, 93%, and 23.6%, respectively. Two-year disease-free survival was 55%. Genitourinary, gastrointestinal, or gynecologic Grade 3 toxicity was seen in 5 patients (3 T4a and 2 T3b) for crude rates of 13%, 7%, and 3%, respectively. Stratifying HR-CTV by &lt;30 and &gt;30 cc and then by HR-CTV D90 of &lt;85, 85-90, and &gt;90&nbsp;Gy showed that 100% of the local failures, regional failures, DM, and G3 toxicity occurred in &gt;30 cc group. The rate of DM was also significantly higher in the &gt;30 cc group (p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.036).An interstitial approach can achieve excellent outcomes in cases where intracavitary and/or hybrid approaches are either not suitable or not available
    corecore