| 1. |
- Arne, Gabriella, et al.
(författare)
-
Expression profiling of GIST: CD133 is associated with KIT exon 11 mutations, gastric location, and poor prognosis.
- 2011
-
Ingår i: International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer. - : Wiley. - 1097-0215 .- 0020-7136. ; 129:5, s. 1149-1161
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs), KIT exon 11 deletions are associated with poor prognosis. The aim of this study was to determine the gene expression profiles of GISTs carrying KIT exon 11 deletions and to identify genes associated with poor prognosis. Expression profiling was performed on 9 tumors with KIT exon 11 deletions and 7 without KIT exon 11 mutations using oligonucleotide microarrays. In addition, gene expression profiles for 35 GISTs were analyzed by meta-analysis. Expression of CD133 (prominin-1) protein was examined by tissue microarray (TMA) analysis of 204 GISTs from a population-based study in western Sweden. Survival analysis was performed on patients subjected to R0 resection (n=180) using the Cox proportional hazards model. Gene expression profiling, meta-analysis, and qPCR showed up regulation of CD133 in GISTs carrying KIT exon 11 deletions. Immunohistochemical analysis on TMA confirmed CD133 expression in 28% of all tumors. CD133 positivity was more frequent in gastric GISTs (48%) than in small intestinal GISTs (4%). CD133 positivity was also more frequent in GISTs with KIT exon 11 mutations (41%) than in tumors with mutations in KIT exon 9, PDGFRA, or wild-type tumors (0-17%). Univariate survival analysis showed a significant correlation between the presence of CD133 protein and shorter overall survival (hazard ratio=2.23, P=0.027). Multivariate analysis showed that CD133 provided additional information on patient survival compared to age, sex, NIH risk group and mutational status. CD133 is expressed in a subset of predominantly gastric GISTs with KIT exon 11 mutations and poor prognosis.
|
|
| 2. |
- Månsson, Jörgen, 1958, et al.
(författare)
-
Reasons for encounters, investigations, referrals, diagnoses and treatments in general practice in Sweden - a multicentre pilot study using electronic patient records
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of General Practice. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1381-4788 .- 1751-1402. ; 17:2, s. 87-94
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To investigate reasons for encounters, investigations, referrals, diagnoses and treatments in everyday general practice, using electronic patient records (EPR), and possible related differences concerning gender, socio-economic status (SES) and practice location. Method: Four Swedish primary care centres using EPR participated. Distributions of symptoms, investigations, diagnoses and prescribed drugs were registered. Results: In 1055 encounters, the mean patient age was 53; 59% were women. The most common reasons for the encounter were musculoskeletal (21.5%) and respiratory (15.2%) symptoms. A total of 1534 diagnoses were coded, on average 1.5 per encounter. The predominant diagnostic groups, i.e. ICD-10 chapters, were musculoskeletal (17.2%) and respiratory (12.4%). The most common specific diagnoses were essential hypertension (8.1%) and acute upper respiratory infections (3.7%). A total of 1687 prescriptions were issued, on average 1.6 per encounter. The most frequent pharmaceutical groups were nervous (17.7%), respiratory system (16.2%), and cardiovascular (15.7%). The most frequent drugs were phenoxymethyl penicillin (3.7%), diclofenac (2.9%) and acetylsalicylic acid (2.5%). An average of 1.3 laboratory tests was performed per encounter. In 7.5% of encounters, radiology referrals were made; in 12.3% referrals were made to other specialists/therapists, while sick-list certificates were written in 11.7%. There were significant differences concerning symptoms, diagnoses and investigations between female and male patients, urban and rural practices and SES. Conclusion: The musculoskeletal, respiratory and circulatory systems predominated, both as reasons for the encounter and in the diagnoses, but with significant differences concerning gender, SES and practice location.
|
|
