| 1. |
- Hess, Timo, et al.
(författare)
-
Dissecting the genetic heterogeneity of gastric cancer
- 2023
-
Ingår i: EBioMedicine. - : Elsevier. - 2352-3964. ; 92
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is clinically heterogenous according to location (cardia/non-cardia) and histopathology (diffuse/intestinal). We aimed to characterize the genetic risk architecture of GC according to its subtypes. Another aim was to examine whether cardia GC and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) and its precursor lesion Barrett's oesophagus (BO), which are all located at the gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ), share polygenic risk architecture.Methods: We did a meta-analysis of ten European genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of GC and its subtypes. All patients had a histopathologically confirmed diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma. For the identification of risk genes among GWAS loci we did a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS) and expression quantitative trait locus (eQTL) study from gastric corpus and antrum mucosa. To test whether cardia GC and OAC/BO share genetic aetiology we also used a European GWAS sample with OAC/BO.Findings: Our GWAS consisting of 5816 patients and 10,999 controls highlights the genetic heterogeneity of GC according to its subtypes. We newly identified two and replicated five GC risk loci, all of them with subtype-specific association. The gastric transcriptome data consisting of 361 corpus and 342 antrum mucosa samples revealed that an upregulated expression of MUC1, ANKRD50, PTGER4, and PSCA are plausible GC-pathomechanisms at four GWAS loci. At another risk locus, we found that the blood-group 0 exerts protective effects for non-cardia and diffuse GC, while blood-group A increases risk for both GC subtypes. Furthermore, our GWAS on cardia GC and OAC/BO (10,279 patients, 16,527 controls) showed that both cancer entities share genetic aetiology at the polygenic level and identified two new risk loci on the single-marker level.Interpretation: Our findings show that the pathophysiology of GC is genetically heterogenous according to location and histopathology. Moreover, our findings point to common molecular mechanisms underlying cardia GC and OAC/BO.
|
|
| 2. |
- Koch, Raphael, et al.
(författare)
-
Zoledronic Acid Add-on Therapy for Standard-Risk Ewing Sarcoma Patients in the Ewing 2008R1 Trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. - 1078-0432. ; 29:24, s. 5057-5068
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: The phase III, open-label, prospective, multicenter, randomized Ewing 2008R1 trial (EudraCT2008-003658-13) was conducted in 12 countries to evaluate the effect of zoledronic acid (ZOL) maintenance therapy compared with no add-on regarding event-free survival (EFS, primary endpoint) and overall survival (OS) in standard-risk Ewing sarcoma (EWS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had localized EWS with either good histologic response to induction chemotherapy and/or small tumors (<200 mL). Patients received six cycles of VIDE induction and eight cycles of VAI (male) or eight cycles of VAC (female) consolidation. ZOL treatment started parallel to the sixth consolidation cycle. Randomization was stratified by tumor site (pelvis/other). The two-sided adaptive inverse-normal four-stage design (planned sample size 448 patients, significance level 5%, power 80%) was changed after the first interim analysis using the Müller-Schäfer method. RESULTS: Between April 2010 and November 2018, 284 patients were randomized (142 ZOL/142 no add-on). With a median follow-up of 3.9 years, EFS was not significantly different between ZOL and no add-on group in the adaptive design (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.43-1.28, P = 0.27, intention-to-treat). Three-year EFS rates were 84.0% (95% CI, 77.7%-90.8%) for ZOL vs. 81.7% (95% CI, 75.2%-88.8%) for no add-on. Results were similar in the per-protocol collective. OS was not different between groups. The 3-year OS was 92.8% (95% CI, 88.4%-97.5%) for ZOL and 94.6% (95% CI, 90.9%-98.6%) for no add-on. Noticeable more renal, neurologic, and gastrointestinal toxicities were observed for ZOL (P < 0.05). Severe renal toxicities occurred more often in the ZOL arm (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with standard-risk localized EWS, there is no additional benefit from maintenance treatment with ZOL.
|
|
