The prognosis of patients with gastric and oesophageal cancers remains poor but increased knowledge of the factors involved in carcinogenesis and a better understanding of the disease process has led to strategies to improve outcomes. These are discussed under the following headings: (1) Prevention of the disease, (2) early detection of tumours, (3) treatment selection and (4) treatment. The likely impact of developments in each of these areas is considered in relation to population-based data from the Scottish Audit of Gastro-Oesophageal Cancer (SAGOC). Although there are a number of novel developments in the management of gastric and oesophageal cancer it is only by the conduct of controlled trials that the value of these will be determined. More immediate improvements in patient care may be derived from rationalisation of existing resources to ensure that all patients benefit from early diagnosis, the appropriate selection and delivery of treatment. One model of care, which may ensure this is the development of managed clinical networks, would maintain the involvement of all units in the management and treatment of upper GI cancers to a level that is possible with the facilities available. At the same time the patients requiring more specialised treatment would benefit from established referral networks
"The incidence of oesophageal cancer, particularly adenocarcinoma in western populations, is increasing worldwide (Botterweck et al, 2000; Park, 2002; Lagergren, 2005) and carries a poor prognosis, even in the minority with resectable disease (Gilbert et al, 2002; Munro, 2004) for whom 5 years survival ranges from 10% to 35% (Hulscher et al, 2002; Thompson et al, 2007). Trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy have reported mixed results ranging from no difference in curative resection or overall survival (Kelsen et al, 2007) to improved resection rates and survival (MRC, 2002; Geh et al, 2006). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing worldwide but survival remains poor. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can improve survival, but prognostic and predictive biomarkers are required. This study built upon preclinical approaches to identify prognostic plasma proteomic markers in oesophageal cancer.
Plasma samples collected before and during the treatment of oesophageal cancer and non-cancer controls were analysed by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight (SELDI-TOF) mass spectroscopy (MS). Protein peaks were identified by MS in tryptic digests of purified fractions. Associations between peak intensities obtained in the spectra and clinical endpoints (survival, disease-free survival) were tested by univariate (Fisher's exact test) and multivariate analysis (binary logistic regression).
Plasma protein peaks were identified that differed significantly (P<0.05, ANOVA) between the oesophageal cancer and control groups at baseline. Three peaks, confirmed as apolipoprotein A-I, serum amyloid A and transthyretin, in baseline (pre-treatment) samples were associated by univariate and multivariate analysis with disease-free survival and overall survival.
Plasma proteins can be detected prior to treatment for oesophageal cancer that are associated with outcome and merit testing as prognostic and predictive markers of response to guide chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer.
British Journal of Cancer 02/2012; 106(5):955-61. DOI:10.1038/bjc.2012.15 · 4.84 Impact Factor
"The incidence of oesophageal cancer, particularly adenocarcinoma in western populations, is increasing worldwide (Botterweck et al, 2000; Park, 2002; Lagergren, 2005) and carries a poor prognosis, even in the minority with resectable disease (Gilbert et al, 2002; Munro, 2004) for whom 5-year survival ranges from 10 to 35% (Hulscher et al, 2002; Thompson et al, 2007). Trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy have reported mixed results ranging from no difference in curative resection or overall survival (Kelsen et al, 2007) to improved resection rates and survival (MRC Oesophageal Working Party, 2002; Geh et al, 2006). "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The incidence of oesophageal adenocarcinoma is increasing worldwide but survival remains poor. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may improve survival, but targeting treatment to patients who respond to chemotherapy could be improved by the availability of markers of response. This study sought proteomic markers of therapeutic response using an adenocarcinoma xenograft model.
Epirubicin, cisplatin or 5-fluorouracil was administered to severe combined immune-deficient mice bearing OE19 oesophageal adenocarcinoma xenografts. Murine plasma samples from treated and untreated xenografts were analysed by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight mass spectroscopy, and panels of peaks were found using class prediction models that distinguished treatment groups. Proteins in these peaks were identified by mass spectroscopy in tryptic digests of purified fractions. Five paired samples from oesophageal cancer patients before and after chemotherapy were analysed using the same methodology.
Plasma protein peaks were identified that differed significantly (P<0.05, ANOVA) between the treated xenograft and control groups. Marker panels predicted treated vs untreated xenografts with sensitivities of 100%, specificities of 86-100% and test efficiencies of 89-100%. Three of the proteins identified in these panels, apolipoprotein A-I, serum amyloid A and transthyretin were confirmed in the clinical samples.
Plasma protein markers can be detected in response to chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma xenografts and in clinical samples, and have the potential to monitor response and guide chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma.
British Journal of Cancer 07/2010; 103(2):232-8. DOI:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605741 · 4.84 Impact Factor
Note: This list is based on the publications in our database and might not be exhaustive.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.