Coexistence of a colon carcinoma with two distinct renal cell carcinomas: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>We present the case of a patient with two tumors in his left kidney and a synchronous colon cancer. While coexisting tumors have been previously described in the same kidney or the kidney and other organs, or the colon and other organs, to the best of our knowledge no such concurrency of three primary tumors has been reported in the literature to date.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 72-year-old man of Greek nationality presenting with pain in the right hypochondrium underwent a series of examinations that revealed gallstones, a tumor in the hepatic flexure of the colon and an additional tumor in the upper pole of the left kidney. He was subjected to a right hemicolectomy, left nephrectomy and cholecystectomy, and his postoperative course was uneventful. Histopathology examinations showed a mucinous colon adenocarcinoma, plus two tumors in the left kidney, a papillary renal cell carcinoma and a chromophobe renal cell carcinoma.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This case underlines the need to routinely scan patients pre-operatively in order to exclude coexisting tumors, especially asymptomatic renal tumors in patients with colorectal cancer, and additionally to screen concurrent tumors genetically in order to detect putative common genetic alterations.</p

High-resolution DNA copy number and gene expression analyses distinguish chromophobe renal cell carcinomas and renal oncocytomas

Contains fulltext : 80487.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of benign renal oncocytomas (RO) and chromophobe renal cell carcinomas (RCC) based on their morphology remains uncertain in several cases. METHODS: We have applied Affymetrix GeneChip Mapping 250 K NspI high-density oligoarrays to identify small genomic alterations, which may occur beyond the specific losses of entire chromosomes, and also Affymetrix GeneChip HG-U133 Plus2.0 oligoarrays for gene expression profiling. RESULTS: By analysing of DNA extracted from 30 chRCCs and 42 ROs, we have confirmed the high specificity of monosomies of chromosomes 1, 2, 6, 10, 13, 17 and 21 in 70-93% of the chRCCs, while ROs displayed loss of chromosome 1 and 14 in 24% and 5% of the cases, respectively. We demonstrated that chromosomal gene expression biases might correlate with chromosomal abnormalities found in chromophobe RCCs and ROs. The vast majority genes downregulated in chromophobe RCC were mapped to chromosomes 2, 6, 10, 13 and 17. However, most of the genes overexpressed in chromophobe RCCs were located to chromosomes without any copy number changes indicating a transcriptional regulation as a main event. CONCLUSION: The SNP-array analysis failed to detect recurrent small deletions, which may mark loci of genes involved in the tumor development. However, we have identified loss of chromosome 2, 10, 13, 17 and 21 as discriminating alteration between chromophobe RCCs and ROs. Therefore, detection of these chromosomal changes can be used for the accurate diagnosis in routine histology

Using brain cell-type-specific protein interactomes to interpret neurodevelopmental genetic signals in schizophrenia

Genetics have nominated many schizophrenia risk genes and identified convergent signals between schizophrenia and neurodevelopmental disorders. However, functional interpretation of the nominated genes in the relevant brain cell types is often lacking. We executed interaction proteomics for six schizophrenia risk genes that have also been implicated in neurodevelopment in human induced cortical neurons. The resulting protein network is enriched for common variant risk of schizophrenia in Europeans and East Asians, is down-regulated in layer 5/6 cortical neurons of individuals affected by schizophrenia, and can complement fine-mapping and eQTL data to prioritize additional genes in GWAS loci. A sub-network centered on HCN1 is enriched for common variant risk and contains proteins (HCN4 and AKAP11) enriched for rare protein-truncating mutations in individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Our findings showcase brain cell-type-specific interactomes as an organizing framework to facilitate interpretation of genetic and transcriptomic data in schizophrenia and its related disorders

Endocrinologic, neurologic, and visual morbidity after treatment for craniopharyngioma

Craniopharyngiomas are locally aggressive tumors which typically are focused in the sellar and suprasellar region near a number of critical neural and vascular structures mediating endocrinologic, behavioral, and visual functions. The present study aims to summarize and compare the published literature regarding morbidity resulting from treatment of craniopharyngioma. We performed a comprehensive search of the published English language literature to identify studies publishing outcome data of patients undergoing surgery for craniopharyngioma. Comparisons of the rates of endocrine, vascular, neurological, and visual complications were performed using Pearson’s chi-squared test, and covariates of interest were fitted into a multivariate logistic regression model. In our data set, 540 patients underwent surgical resection of their tumor. 138 patients received biopsy alone followed by some form of radiotherapy. Mean overall follow-up for all patients in these studies was 54 ± 1.8 months. The overall rate of new endocrinopathy for all patients undergoing surgical resection of their mass was 37% (95% CI = 33–41). Patients receiving GTR had over 2.5 times the rate of developing at least one endocrinopathy compared to patients receiving STR alone or STR + XRT (52 vs. 19 vs. 20%, χ2P < 0.00001). On multivariate analysis, GTR conferred a significant increase in the risk of endocrinopathy compared to STR + XRT (OR = 3.45, 95% CI = 2.05–5.81, P < 0.00001), after controlling for study size and the presence of significant hypothalamic involvement. There was a statistical trend towards worse visual outcomes in patients receiving XRT after STR compared to GTR or STR alone (GTR = 3.5% vs. STR 2.1% vs. STR + XRT 6.4%, P = 0.11). Given the difficulty in obtaining class 1 data regarding the treatment of this tumor, this study can serve as an estimate of expected outcomes for these patients, and guide decision making until these data are available