Prognostic impact of Claudin 18.2 in gastric and esophageal adenocarcinomas

Introduction: The tight junction molecule Claudin 18.2 is selectively expressed in healthy and malignant gastric epithelial tissue and is a promising therapy target for high Claudin 18.2 expressing adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction and stomach (AEG/S). Methods: This study analyzed the prevalence, characteristics and prognostic impact of Claudin 18.2 expression in primary tumor, lymph node and distant metastasis in a large Caucasian AGE/S cohort with 414 patients. Results: Claudin 18.2 was highly expressed in 17.1% of primary tumors, 26.7% of lymph node metastasis and 16.7% of distant metastasis. High Claudin 18.2 expression in lymph node metastasis and primary tumors correlated significantly (p < 0.001). High expression of Claudin 18.2 was neither associated with histomorphogical subtype, or tumor state, nor with overall survival. Conclusion: In Caucasian AEG/S patients, 17.1% appeared to be eligible for an anti-Claudin 18.2 therapy. Claudin 18.2 expression itself has no impact on prognosis and is not related to any tumor subtype

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-like disease in a case of a 33-year old man with glycogenosis 1b

Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-like conditions in glycogen storage disease (GSD) type Ib have been predominantly described in children. Signs and symptoms of GSD type Ib are hypoglycemia, pancytopenia and hepatosplenomegaly. Based on few published cases, there is evidence that granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with glycogenosis–related pancytopenia might ameliorate the IBD-like disease through leukocyte increase. Case presentation Here we firstly describe a case of an adult 33-year-old Caucasian male patient with GSD type Ib accompanied with IBD-like disease with persistent pancytopenia despite moderate-dose G-CSF treatment. Recent vomiting and abdominal discomfort were due to a high-grade stenosis in the transverse colon. A dose increase of the G-CSF successfully normalized his leukocyte count. However, the stenosis worsened and surgical therapy was needed. Conclusion We suggest that symptomatic patients with GSD type Ib should undergo endoscopic examination in order to detect IBD-like disease and to initiate early treatment

PuraStat in gastrointestinal bleeding: results of a prospective multicentre observational pilot study

Background: A recently developed haemostatic peptide gel for endoscopic application has been introduced to improve the management of gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, efficacy and indication profiles of PuraStat in a clinical setting. Methods: In this prospective observational multicentre pilot study, patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (upper and lower) were included. Primary and secondary application of PuraStat was evaluated. Haemoglobin, prothrombin time, platelets and transfusion behaviour were documented before and after haemostasis. The efficacy of PuraStat was assessed during the procedure, at 3 days and 1 week after application. Results: 111 patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding were recruited into the study. 70 percent (78/111) of the patients had upper gastrointestinal bleeding and 30% (33/111) had lower gastrointestinal bleeding. After primary application of PuraStat, initial haemostatic success was achieved in 94% of patients (74/79, 95% CI 88-99%), and in 75% of the patients when used as a secondary haemostatic product, following failure of established techniques (24/32, 95% CI 59-91%). The therapeutic success rates (absence of rebleeding) after 3 and 7 days were 91% and 87% after primary use, and 87% and 81% in all study patients. Overall rebleeding rate at 30 day follow-up was 16% (18/111). In the 5 patients who finally required surgery (4.5%), PuraStat allowed temporary haemostasis and stabilisation. Conclusions: PuraStat expanded the therapeutic toolbox available for an effective treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding sources. It could be safely applied and administered without complications as a primary or secondary therapy. PuraStat may additionally serve as a bridge to surgery in order to achieve temporary haemostasis in case of refractory severe bleeding, possibly playing a role in preventing immediate emergency surgery

Inhibition of MACC1-Induced Metastasis in Esophageal and Gastric Adenocarcinomas

Esophageal and Gastric Adenocarcinomas (AGE/S) are characterized by early metastasis and poor survival. MACC1 (Metastasis Associated in Colon Cancer 1) acts in colon cancer as a metastasis inducer and is linked to reduced survival. This project illuminates the role and potential for the inhibition of MACC1 in AGE/S. Using 266 of 360 TMAs and survival data of AGE/S patients, we confirm the value of MACC1 as an independent negative prognostic marker in AGE/S patients. MACC1 gene expression is correlated with survival and morphological characteristics. In vitro analysis of lentivirally MACC1-manipulated subclones of FLO-1 and OE33 showed enhanced migration induced by MACC1 in both cell line models, which could be inhibited by the MEK1 inhibitor selumetinib. In vivo, the efficacy of selumetinib on tumor growths and metastases of MACC1-overexpressing FLO-1 cells xenografted intrasplenically in NOG mice was tested. Mice with high-MACC1-expressing cells developed faster and larger distant metastases. Treatment with selumetinib led to a significant reduction in metastasis exclusively in the MACC1-positive xenografts. MACC1 is an enhancer of tumor aggressiveness and a predictor of poor survival in AGE/S. This effect can be inhibited by selumetinib

Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer—Update Based on the Current Consort Recommendations

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) is an autosomal dominant inherited cancer syndrome that has been associated with a mutation of the CDH1, and rarely the CTNNA1 gene, respectively. HDGC is characterized histologically by multifocal growth and signet ring cells in the gastric mucosa and lobular type breast cancer. In cases of a proven pathogenic CDH1 mutation, a prophylactic gastrectomy, or alternatively, an annual surveillance gastroscopy in expert centers is recommended. Additionally, MR imaging of the breast should be performed annually starting from the age of 30, to detect lobular breast cancer. In 2020, the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) additionally defined new clinical groups with specific recommendations: (1) the group of patients with a proven mutation in the CDH1 gene, but exclusive manifestation as lobular breast cancer, was defined as hereditary lobular breast cancer (HLBC); (2) the group, which clinically fulfills familial HDGC criteria, in the absence of a relevant mutation, was designated as HDGC-like. This update summarizes relevant aspects of hereditary gastric cancer and the current recommendation criteria of the IGCLC published in 2020

Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer&mdash;Update Based on the Current Consort Recommendations

Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) is an autosomal dominant inherited cancer syndrome that has been associated with a mutation of the CDH1, and rarely the CTNNA1 gene, respectively. HDGC is characterized histologically by multifocal growth and signet ring cells in the gastric mucosa and lobular type breast cancer. In cases of a proven pathogenic CDH1 mutation, a prophylactic gastrectomy, or alternatively, an annual surveillance gastroscopy in expert centers is recommended. Additionally, MR imaging of the breast should be performed annually starting from the age of 30, to detect lobular breast cancer. In 2020, the International Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) additionally defined new clinical groups with specific recommendations: (1) the group of patients with a proven mutation in the CDH1 gene, but exclusive manifestation as lobular breast cancer, was defined as hereditary lobular breast cancer (HLBC); (2) the group, which clinically fulfills familial HDGC criteria, in the absence of a relevant mutation, was designated as HDGC-like. This update summarizes relevant aspects of hereditary gastric cancer and the current recommendation criteria of the IGCLC published in 2020

Prognostic Relevance of Weight and Weight Loss during Multimodal Therapy for Oesophagogastric Tumours

The prognostic meaning of weight loss (WL) during standard treatment for operable oesophagogastric cancer is still unclear. The aim of this study is to analyse the prognostic effect of WL during perioperative chemotherapy (PC) for gastric cancer (GC) and oesophageal adenocarcinomas (OAC). We retrospectively analysed data from 128 patients (pts) with GC and OAC who underwent surgery in the context of multimodal treatment with PC. We collected data on WL during different steps of therapy together with other histopathologic and demographic information. We analysed the effects on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Pts with WL &ge; 5% during neoadjuvant chemotherapy exhibited significantly worse OS compared with pts with WL &lt; 5% (median OS: 23.6 months [95% CI: 4.4&ndash;42.9] vs. 63.5 months [95% CI: 50.7&ndash;76.2], p = 0.007) and DFS (median DFS: 12.5 months [95% CI: 2.9&ndash;22.1] vs. 63.5 months [95% CI: 31.6&ndash;95.4], p = 0.016). Pts with WL &ge; 14% during the whole treatment exhibited significantly worse OS compared with pts with WL &lt; 14% (median OS: 43.7 months [95% CI: 13.2&ndash;74.2] vs. not reached, p = 0.028) and DFS (median DFS: 34.3 months [95% CI: 14.0&ndash;54.5] vs. not reached, p = 0.038). Conclusion: WL patterns during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and during the whole treatment correlate with a significantly worse prognosis in operated pts with curative GC or OAC in the context of a multimodal treatment with PC. A validation of this prognostic effect in prospective studies is warranted

Prognostic Relevance of Weight and Weight Loss during Multimodal Therapy for Oesophagogastric Tumours

The prognostic meaning of weight loss (WL) during standard treatment for operable oesophagogastric cancer is still unclear. The aim of this study is to analyse the prognostic effect of WL during perioperative chemotherapy (PC) for gastric cancer (GC) and oesophageal adenocarcinomas (OAC). We retrospectively analysed data from 128 patients (pts) with GC and OAC who underwent surgery in the context of multimodal treatment with PC. We collected data on WL during different steps of therapy together with other histopathologic and demographic information. We analysed the effects on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: Pts with WL ≥ 5% during neoadjuvant chemotherapy exhibited significantly worse OS compared with pts with WL p = 0.007) and DFS (median DFS: 12.5 months [95% CI: 2.9–22.1] vs. 63.5 months [95% CI: 31.6–95.4], p = 0.016). Pts with WL ≥ 14% during the whole treatment exhibited significantly worse OS compared with pts with WL p = 0.028) and DFS (median DFS: 34.3 months [95% CI: 14.0–54.5] vs. not reached, p = 0.038). Conclusion: WL patterns during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and during the whole treatment correlate with a significantly worse prognosis in operated pts with curative GC or OAC in the context of a multimodal treatment with PC. A validation of this prognostic effect in prospective studies is warranted