RESUMO
Although patient-derived xenografts (PDX) are commonly used for preclinical modeling in cancer research, a standard approach to in vivo tumor growth analysis and assessment of antitumor activity is lacking, complicating the comparison of different studies and determination of whether a PDX experiment has produced evidence needed to consider a new therapy promising. We present consensus recommendations for assessment of PDX growth and antitumor activity, providing public access to a suite of tools for in vivo growth analyses. We expect that harmonizing PDX study design and analysis and assessing a suite of analytical tools will enhance information exchange and facilitate identification of promising novel therapies and biomarkers for guiding cancer therapy.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Ensaios Antitumorais Modelo de Xenoenxerto , Humanos , Animais , Neoplasias/patologia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , National Cancer Institute (U.S.) , Estados Unidos , Camundongos , Antineoplásicos/farmacologia , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , ConsensoRESUMO
Background: Cancer is the leading cause of death among Latinos, the largest minority population in the United States (US). To address cancer challenges experienced by Latinos, we conducted a catchment area population assessment (CAPA) using validated questions from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) population health assessment supplement at our NCI-designated cancer center in California. Methods: A mixed-methods CAPA was administered by bilingual-bicultural staff, with a focus on understanding the differences between foreign-born and US-born Latinos. Results: 255 Latinos responded to the survey conducted between August 2019 and May 2020. Most respondents were foreign-born (63.9%), female (78.2%), and monolingual Spanish speakers (63.2%). Results showed that compared to US-born Latinos, foreign-born individuals were older, had lower educational attainment, were most likely to be monolingual Spanish speakers, were low-income, and were more likely to be uninsured. Foreign-born Latinos had lower levels of alcohol consumption and higher consumption of fruits and vegetables. The rate of preventive cancer screenings for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer did not differ by birthplace, although a low fraction (35.3%) of foreign-born Latinas who were up-to-date compared to US-born Latinas (83.3%) with colorectal cancer screening was observed. Time since the last routine check-up for all preventable cancers (cervical p=0.0002, breast p=0.0039, and colorectal p=0.0196) is significantly associated with being up to date with cancer screening. Individuals who had a check-up of two or more years ago are 84% less likely to be up to date with pap smears than those who had a check-up within the year (p=0.0060). Individuals without health insurance are 94% less likely to be up to date with mammograms and colonoscopy/FIT tests (p=0.0016 and p=0.0133, respectively) than those who are insured. There is no significant association between screening and nativity. Conclusions: Considerable differences in socio-economic and environmental determinants of health and colorectal cancer screening rates were observed between US-born and foreign-born Latinos. The present study represents the foundation for future targeted intervention among immigrant populations at our cancer center's catchment area.
Assuntos
COVID-19/etnologia , Disparidades nos Níveis de Saúde , Hispânico ou Latino/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/virologia , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Pandemias , Distância Psicológica , Saúde Pública/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/fisiologia , Classe Social , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
There are well-established disparities in cancer incidence and outcomes by race/ethnicity that result from the interplay between structural, socioeconomic, socio-environmental, behavioural and biological factors. However, large research studies designed to investigate factors contributing to cancer aetiology and progression have mainly focused on populations of European origin. The limitations in clinicopathological and genetic data, as well as the reduced availability of biospecimens from diverse populations, contribute to the knowledge gap and have the potential to widen cancer health disparities. In this review, we summarise reported disparities and associated factors in the United States of America (USA) for the most common cancers (breast, prostate, lung and colon), and for a subset of other cancers that highlight the complexity of disparities (gastric, liver, pancreas and leukaemia). We focus on populations commonly identified and referred to as racial/ethnic minorities in the USA-African Americans/Blacks, American Indians and Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians/other Pacific Islanders and Hispanics/Latinos. We conclude that even though substantial progress has been made in understanding the factors underlying cancer health disparities, marked inequities persist. Additional efforts are needed to include participants from diverse populations in the research of cancer aetiology, biology and treatment. Furthermore, to eliminate cancer health disparities, it will be necessary to facilitate access to, and utilisation of, health services to all individuals, and to address structural inequities, including racism, that disproportionally affect racial/ethnic minorities in the USA.
Assuntos
Disparidades nos Níveis de Saúde , Grupos Minoritários/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias/etnologia , Etnicidade/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/etnologiaRESUMO
In 2016, the UC Davis Latino Aging Research Resource Center and UC Davis Alzheimer's Disease Center brought together experts from across the country to consolidate current knowledge and identify future directions in aging and diversity research. This report disseminates the research priorities that emerged from this conference, building on an earlier Gerontological Society of America preconference. We review key racial/ethnic differences in cognitive aging and dementia and identify current knowledge gaps in the field. We advocate for a systems-level framework for future research whereby environmental, sociocultural, behavioral, neuropathological, genetic, and psychometric levels of analysis are examined together to identify pathways and mechanisms that influence disparities. We then discuss steps to increase the recruitment and retention of racial/ethnic minorities in aging studies, as none of the recommendations will be possible without strong collaboration between racial/ethnic minority communities and researchers. This approach is consistent with the National Institute on Aging Health Disparities Research Framework.
Assuntos
Envelhecimento , Doença de Alzheimer , Pesquisa Biomédica , Grupos Minoritários , Grupos Raciais , Doença de Alzheimer/epidemiologia , Doença de Alzheimer/etnologia , Disparidades nos Níveis de Saúde , Hispânico ou Latino , Humanos , Seleção de Pacientes , Estados UnidosRESUMO
The role of transforming growth factor beta receptor type 1 (TGFBR1) polymorphisms, particularly a coding CGC insertion (rs11466445, TGFBR1*6A/9A) in exon 1, has been extensively investigated in regard to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk. These investigations have generated conflicting results. More recently, allele-specific expression (ASE) of TGFBR1 mRNA has been suggested as predisposing to CRC, with a relative risk of nearly 10-fold and a population attributable risk of approximately 10%. Owing to the potential importance of TGFBR1 variants in CRC, we performed a comprehensive examination of tagging SNPs at and around the gene in 3,101 CRC cases and 3,334 controls of northern European ancestry. To test whether rare or subpolymorphic TGFBR1 variants were associated with CRC risk, we sequenced the gene's exons in a subset of patients. We also evaluated TGFBR1 ASE in a panel of CRC cases and controls. Overall, we found no association between TGFBR1 polymorphisms and CRC risk. The rare variant screen did not identify any changes of potentially pathogenic effects. No evidence of greater ASE in cases than controls was detected, and no haplotype around TGFBR1 could account for the ASE reported in other studies. We conclude that neither genetic variation nor ASE at TGFBR1 is likely to be a major CRC risk factor.