Biospecimen Repositories in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Insights From an American University of Beirut and Memorial Sloan Kettering Collaboration.

PURPOSE: Biobanking helps source tissue and blood for studying cancer genomics. Access to biorepository resources in low- and middle-income countries is lacking. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) and the American University of Beirut (AUB) established a joint tissue biorepository at AUB in Beirut, Lebanon. The undertaking encountered key challenges that were unanticipated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients age 18 years or older were eligible for enrollment at AUB. After consent, biospecimens were obtained at the time of routine diagnostic and/or therapeutic interventions. Both normal and abnormal tissue and solid and/or liquid specimens were collected from varied body sites. Early on, declining consent was frequently observed, and this was highlighted for investigation to understand potential participants reasoning. RESULTS: Of 850 patients approached, 704 (70.8%) elected to consent and 293 (29.5%) declined participation. The number of declined consents led to an amendment permitting the documentation of reasons for same. Of 100 potential participants who declined to consent and to whom outreach was undertaken, 63% indicated lack of research awareness and 27% deferral to their primary physician or family member. A financial gain for AUB was cited as concern by 5%, cultural boundaries in 4%, and 1% expressed concern about confidentiality. Of the patients who elected to consent, 682 biospecimens were procured. CONCLUSION: The AUB-MSK biospecimen repository has provided a unique resource for interrogation. Patient participation rate was high, and analyses of those who elected not to consent (29%) provide important insights into educational need and the local and cultural awareness and norms.

Giant primary malignant mesothelioma of the liver: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Malignant mesothelioma is a rare neoplasm of mesothelial cells arising most frequently in the pleura or peritoneum and less frequently in the liver. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a case of primary hepatic mesothelioma of 41year old woman. She had no history of asbestos exposure or cancer. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) showed 21cm intrahepatic mass in the right lobe with many cystic lesions and few small calcifications. Pathology showed a biphasic cellular pattern. In addition, the tumor cells were positive for Calretinin, Creatine Kinase (CK)5/6, CK7, CKAEI 1/3, Wilms Tumor protein (WT-1), and Vimentin, but were negative for Alpha Feto protein (AFP), Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura (TTP-1), Anti-Hepatocyte Specific Antigen (HSA), Synaptophysin, CK20, and Homeobox protein (CDx-2). DISCUSSION: Primary intrahepatic mesothelioma (PIHMM) is not included in the classification of the World Health Organization classification of hepatic tumors. Mesothelial cells are not normally found in the liver, but some reported cases suggest it may grow from the mesothelial cells of the Glisson's capsule. CONCLUSION: The probability of hepatic mesothelioma should not be ruled out, even in a young woman without a clear history of asbestos exposure.

Mesh-wrapping for the treatment of fractured liver-A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Major liver trauma is a potentially fatal injury. Management of liver injuries has considerably changed over the past decades with a trend towards a multidisciplinary approach. Most liver injuries can be managed conservatively; however, some cases need operative management. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We present a case of a 73year old female who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy that was complicated by a life-threatening liver fracture and was successfully managed by staged laparotomies and liver mesh-wrapping. DISCUSSION: Mesh wrapping is an effective approach for achieving hemostasis by a temponading effect. An alternative to liver packing would be the resection of the affected segmented, however this should be assessed based on the extent of the injury as well as on the hemodynamic stability of the patient who, in majority, are hemodynamically compromised. The advantage however of liver wrapping is that there is no need for reoperation to remove the mesh, the hazard of re-bleeding is diminished because the mesh is left in place, and the incidence of septic complications is low. In this case, the mesh was sutured to the diaphragmatic crus as well as to the falciform ligament to secure the mesh on two anchoring points. CONCLUSION: Using an absorbable mesh on a traumatized and fragmented liver appears to be a safe and effective approach to high grade liver injury. The judicious use of cauterization, beaming or suturing to the liver bed to control oozing or bleeding should be advocated in order to avoid this highly morbid complication.