http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Prognostic Factors in Adult Patients with Solid Cancers and Bone Marrow Metastases
Hung, Yu-Shin,Chou, Wen-Chi,Chen, Tai-Di,Chen, Tse-Ching,Wang, Po-Nan,Chang, Hung,Hsu, Hung-Chih,Shen, Wen-Chi,Cheng, Wei-Hong,Chen, Jen-Shi Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2014 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.15 No.1
Background: Solid cancers with bone marrow metastases are rare but lethal. This study aimed to identify clinical factors predictive of survival in adult patients with solid cancers and bone marrow metastases. Methods: A total of 83 patients were enrolled consecutively between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012. Bone marrow metastases were confirmed by biopsies. Patient clinical features and laboratory data were analyzed for associations. Results: The median age of the patients was 54 years (range, 23-88 years), and 58% were male. The 3 most common primary tumor locations were the stomach (32 patients, 39%), prostate (16 patients, 19%), and lungs (12 patients, 15%). The median overall survival was 49 days (range, 3-1423 days). Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1, cancers of prostate origin, platelet counts over 50,000/ml, and undergoing antitumor therapies had a significantly better prognosis in the multivariate analysis. The median survival times were 173 and 33 days for patients with 2-3 more favorable parameters (n=24) and those with 0-1 (n=69), respectively (hazard ratio 0.30; 95% CI 0.17-0.52, p<0.001). Conclusions: Solid cancers with bone marrow metastases are dismal and incurable diseases. Understanding prognostic factors to these diseases helps medical personnel to provide appropriate treatments and better inform patients about outcomes. Antitumor therapies may improve outcomes in selected patient cohorts.
Genotypespecific methylation of HPV in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
Yaw-Wen Hsu,Rui-Lan Huang,Po-Hsuan Su,Yu-Chih Chen,Hui-Chen Wang,Chi-Chun Liao,Hung-Cheng Lai 대한부인종양학회 2017 Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Vol.28 No.4
Objective: Hypermethylation of human papillomavirus (HPV) and host genes has beenreported in cervical cancer. However, the degree of methylation of different HPV typesrelative to the severity of the cervical lesions remains controversial. Studies of the degree ofmethylation associated with the host gene and the HPV genome to the severity of cervicallesions are rare. We examined the association of methylation status between host genes andlate gene 1 (L1) regions of HPV16, 18, 52, and 58 in cervical brushings. Methods: Cervical brushings from 147 HPV-infected patients were obtained. The samplescomprised normal (n=28), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 1 (n=45), CIN2 (n=13), andCIN3/carcinoma in situ (n=61). The methylation status of HPV and host genes was measuredusing bisulfite pyrosequencing and quantitative methylation-specific polymerase chainreaction (PCR). Results: The degree of methylation of L1 in HPV16, 18, and 52 was associated with theseverity of the cervical lesion. In HPV52, C-phosphate-G (CpG) sites 6368m, 6405m, and6443m showed significantly higher methylation in lesions ≥CIN3 (p=0.005, 0.003, and0.026, respectively). Methylation of most HPV types except HPV52 (r<−0.1) was positivelycorrelated with the degree of methylation of host genes including PAX1 and SOX1 (0.4≤r≤0.7). Combining HPV methylation with PAX1 methylation improved the clustering for ≥CIN2. Conclusion: Our study showed that the degree of L1 methylation of HPV16, 18, and 52but not 58 is associated with the severity of cervical lesions. The association betweenHPV methylation and host gene methylation suggests different responses of host cellularepigenetic machinery to different HPV genotypes.
Cheng, Wei-Hong,Kao, Chen-Yi,Hung, Yu-Shin,Su, Po-Jung,Hsieh, Chia-Hsun,Chen, Jen-Shi,Wang, Hung-Ming,Chou, Wen-Chi Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2012 Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention Vol.13 No.6
Background: The aim of our study was to assess the practical utility of the palliative prognostic index (PPI) as a prognostic tool used by nurse specialists in a hospice consultation setting in Taiwan. Methods: In total, 623 terminal cancer patients under hospice consultation care from one medical center in northern Taiwan were enrolled between January 1 and June 30, 2011. PPI was assessed by a nurse specialist at first hospice consultation and patients categorized into groups by prognosis (good, intermediate, poor). Patient survival was analyzed retrospectively to determine significance of between-group differences. Results: By PPI sum score, 37.2% of patients were in the good prognosis group, 18% in the intermediate prognosis group and 44.8% in the poor prognosis group. The death rates were 56%, 81.2% and 89.6% and median survivals were 76, 18 and 7 days, respectively. The hazard ratio was 0.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10-0.24, p<0.001) for the poor versus good prognosis group and 0.54 (95% CI 0.43-0.69, p<0.001) for the poor versus intermediate prognosis group. The sensitivity and specificity for the poor prognosis group was 66% and 71%; the positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 81% and 52%, respectively, to predict patient death within 21 days (area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic was 0.68). Conclusions: Assessment by PPI can accurately predict survival of terminal cancer patients receiving hospice consultation care. PPI is a simple tool and can be administered by nurse members of hospice consultation teams.