Olink proteomics profiling platform reveals non-invasive inflammatory related protein biomarkers in autism spectrum disorder.

Background: Owing to the lack of valid biomarkers, the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) diagnosis relies solely on the behavioral phenotypes of children. Several researchers have suggested an association between ASD and inflammation; however, the complex relationship between the two is unelucidated to date. Therefore, the current study aims to comprehensively identify novel circulating ASD inflammatory biomarkers. Methods: Olink proteomics was applied to compare the plasma inflammation-related protein changes in a group of the healthy children (HC, n = 33) and another with ASD (n = 31). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) of the differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) were calculated. The functional analysis of the DEPs was performed using Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia Genes and Genomes. Pearson correlation tests were used employed to analyze the correlation between the DEPs and clinical features. Results: A total of 13 DEPs were significantly up-regulated in the ASD group compared with the HC group. The four proteins, namely, STAMBP, ST1A1, SIRT2, and MMP-10 demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy with the corresponding AUCs (95% confidence interval, CI) of 0.7218 (0.5946-0.8489), 0.7107 (0.5827-0.8387), 0.7016 (0.5713-0.8319), and 0.7006 (0.568-0.8332). Each panel of STAMBP and any other differential protein demonstrated a better classification performance [AUC values from 0.7147 (0.5858-0.8436, STAMBP/AXIN1) to 0.7681 (0.6496-0.8867, STAMBP/MMP-10)]. These DEP profiles were enriched in immune and inflammatory response pathways, including TNF and NOD-like receptor signaling pathways. The interaction between STAMBP and SIRT2 (R = 0.97, p = 8.52 × 10-39) was found to be the most significant. In addition, several DEPs related to clinical features in patients with ASD, particularly AXIN1 (R = 0.36, p = 0.006), SIRT2 (R = 0.34, p = 0.010) and STAMBP (R = 0.34, p = 0.010), were positively correlated with age and parity, indicating that older age and higher parity may be the inflammation-related clinical factors in ASD. Conclusion: Inflammation plays a crucial role in ASD, and the up-regulated inflammatory proteins may serve as potential early diagnostic biomarkers for ASD.

[Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal carcinoma].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy (CTLE) in the treatment of advanced esophageal carcinoma. METHODS: From June 2011 to February 2012, 11 patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by CTLE (clinical stage IIB-IIIA). NP (vinorelbine pin and cisplatin) or TP (program paclitaxel-pin and cisplatin) were applied as preoperative chemotherapy. During the same period, conventional fractionated radiotherapy was used with the radiation dose of 40 Gy/20 F. At four to six weeks after CRT, 11 patients received three-incision CTLE. RESULTS: During chemoradiation, 9 patients developed bone marrow suppression. The interval between completion of chemoradiation and surgery was (49.6±15.4) d. Intraoperative findings revealed local fibrosis in one patient (75 days after chemoradiation) while operative difficulty was not increased in the remaining 10 patients. Compared to 15 patients who received surgery alone, operative time was shorter [(242.3±27.0) min vs.(280.5±27.2) min, P=0.002] and intraoperative blood loss was less [(168.2±95.6) ml vs. (244.5±84.8) ml, P=0.042], the number of removal lymph nodes was similar [(19.5±5.8) vs. (20.5±7.1), P=0.683], postoperative hospital stay was prolonged [(18.9±10.3) d vs. (12.5±4.6) d, P=0.020]. The postoperative complication rate was 36.4% including cervical anastomotic leak with pulmonary infection (n=1), cervical anastomotic fistula and hoarseness (n=1), pulmonary infection with pleural effusion (n=2). Follow up ranged from 1 to 9 months, and no recurrence was found. CONCLUSION: The neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal carcinoma is safe, feasible, and the short-term outcomes are favorable.

[Influence of pulmonary function after combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for the treatment of esophageal carcinoma].

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for early postoperative pulmonary function, and to study the relative factors for postoperative pulmonary complications. METHODS: From September 2009 to December 2010, 61 patients with esophageal cancer had undergone esophagectomy surgery, of which 32 patients had undergone combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy (CTLE group), and 29 patients had undergone open three-field esophagectomy (open group). Pulmonary function, including forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) were measured on the 1(th) preoperative day, 5(th) and 10(th) postoperative day, and arterial blood gas analyses were performed during the same period. Meanwhile, pain scores and other potentially relevant factors were recorded as well. RESULTS: Preoperative pulmonary function and arterial blood gas analysis, including FEV(1)%, FVC%, PaO2 in two groups had no significant difference (t = -1.608 to 0.709, P = 0.113 to 0.481). On the 10(th) postoperative day, FEV(1)%, FVC%, PaO2, and SaO2 of two groups were significantly different (FEV(1)%: 77% ± 17% vs. 53% ± 13%, t = 6.241, P = 0.000; FVC%: 78% ± 13% vs. 57% ± 16%, t = 5.549, P = 0.000; PaO2: (87 ± 9) mmHg vs. (79 ± 14) mmHg, t = 2.477, P = 0.017; SaO2: 96% ± 3% vs. 94% ± 2%, t = 2.313, P = 0.024; 1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa). Pain score of CTLE group was lower than open group, and the scores of two groups had significant difference before the 5(th) day after surgery (t = -4.398 to -1.815, P = 0.000 to 0.049). Postoperative pulmonary complications of CTLE group was lower than open group (6/32 vs. 12/29, χ(2) = 3.745, P = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy has advantages on early postoperative pulmonary function. It can relatively reduce the incidence of pulmonary complications after surgery.

[Clinical comparative study of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma].

OBJECTIVE: To explore and evaluate the feasibility, safety, radicality and the short-term outcome of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. METHODS: From July 2007 to October 2009, 67 patients with esophageal cancer received minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE group), while 38 patients underwent conventional open esophagectomy (OE group: via right thorax, abdomen, left neck). The operative procedures, clinicopathological data and short-term outcome were collected and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The clinical data of the two groups were comparable. No significant differences was found in demographics between the two groups. Median blood loss in MIE group was less than that in OE group (chest: 112.3 ml vs. 175.3 ml, P = 0.035, abdominal: 31.4 ml vs. 100.5 ml, P = 0.026). More patients in OE group were transferred to ICU (P = 0.042) and more obvious pain (P = 0.005). The rate of pulmonary infection and intestinal obstruction in OE group were higher than MIE group (P = 0.046 and 0.045). There were no differences in the number of lymph node dissection for two groups, the average was 20.9 and lymph node metastasis rate was 26.9% in MIE group. Mean follow up was (14.0 ± 2.2) months (range, 2 to 29 months). Recurrence rate and survival rate were no differences. CONCLUSION: The Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is feasible, safe, and reliable short-term effect, and can achieve radical tumor resection, which may lead to better future of surgical treatment for esophageal carcinoma.