Combined Comprehensive Risk Score of the Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress and C-Reactive Protein-to-Albumin Ratio Is a Strong Prognostic Indicator of Long-term Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In patients with colorectal cancer, both C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio and comprehensive risk score of the estimation of physiologic ability and surgical stress have demonstrated prognostic significance. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical value of the combined use of C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio and comprehensive risk score for predicting prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective study. SETTINGS: The cohort was divided into 3 groups based on a combined score derived from the value of C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio and comprehensive risk score (low/mid /high). PATIENTS: Patients who underwent curative resection between 2010 and 2019 at multiple institutions were enrolled in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall and recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 2207 patients (801 in low cohort, 817 in mid cohort, and 589 in high cohort) were included in this study. Multivariate analysis revealed that combined score was an independent prognostic factor for both overall and recurrence-free survival, irrespective of disease stage (p < 0.05). Furthermore, Harrell's C-Index indicated that the predictive power of combined score was significantly superior to that of C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio or comprehensive risk score (p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study had a retrospective design, and data on genetic markers were not included. CONCLUSION: The synergistic combination of C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio and comprehensive risk score contributes to the robust definition of combined score, a potent prognostic factor, regardless of disease stage. This finding has the potential to provide novel insights into the management of patients with CRC who have undergone curative resection. See Video Abstract.

Profilin 2 isoform expression is associated with lung metastasis of colorectal cancer according to a comprehensive gene expression study using a mouse model.

Lung metastasis is the second most common type of metastasis in colorectal cancer. Specific treatments for lung metastasis have not been developed since the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. The present study aimed to elucidate the molecular basis of lung metastasis in colorectal cancer. In a mouse model, cell lines that were highly metastatic to the lungs were established by injecting colorectal cancer cells through the tail vein and removing them from the lungs. Differential gene expression comparing the transfected cells with their parental cells was investigated using DNA microarrays. The results were functionally interpreted using gene enrichment analysis and validated using reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR). The isoforms of the identified genes were examined by melting curve analysis. The present study established colorectal cancer cell lines that were highly metastatic to the lungs. DNA microarray experiments revealed that genes (N-cadherin, VE-cadherin, Six4, Akt and VCAM1) involved in motility, proliferation and adhesion were upregulated, and genes (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-3 and PAX6) with tumor-suppressive functions were downregulated in metastatic cells. Profilin 2 (PFN2) expression was upregulated in multiple metastatic cell lines using RT-qPCR. Two PFN2 isoforms were overexpressed in metastatic cells. In vitro and in vivo models were established and genes associated with lung metastasis were identified to overcome the heterogeneity of the disease. Overall, aberrant PFN2 expression is unreported in lung metastasis in colorectal cancer. In the present study, two PFN2 isoforms with differential tissue distribution were upregulated in metastatic cells, suggesting that they promote lung metastasis in colorectal cancer.

Correlation Analysis of Clinician- and Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Japanese Adults with Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic relapsing condition with high disease burden and impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Correlations between clinician- and patient-reported outcomes tend to be poor, and limited data in Asian patients are available. METHODS: ADDRESS-J was a prospective, non-interventional, longitudinal study that evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of AD treatment in Japanese adults (aged 20-59 years) with moderate-to-severe AD. Three clinician-reported AD severity outcomes (Investigator's Global Assessment, Eczema Area and Severity Index, and body surface area affected), three dermatological patient-reported outcomes (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, Dermatology Life Quality Index, and Worst Itch Numerical Rating Scale), and two general HRQoL patient-reported outcomes (5-dimension EuroQoL questionnaire and EuroQol Visual Analog Scale) were collected at baseline and every 3 months throughout the 24-month observation period. Four biomarkers were also analyzed when available (thymus and activation-regulated chemokine [TARC], lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], total immunoglobulin E [IgE], and peripheral blood eosinophil counts [PB EOS]). Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated using all available pooled data from baseline through 24 months. RESULTS: Correlations between the three clinician-reported outcomes were high/very high (Spearman's correlation coefficients 0.76-0.92); those between the three dermatological patient-reported outcomes were moderate (0.53-0.64), and those between the clinician-reported and dermatological patient-reported outcomes were low/moderate (0.37-0.51). Correlations between the general HRQoL patient-reported outcomes and the clinician-reported and dermatological patient-reported outcomes were negligible-moderate (0.26-0.60). Biomarker correlations with the clinician-reported and dermatological patient-reported outcomes were low/moderate for TARC and LDH (0.44-0.63), but negligible/low for PB EOS and total IgE (0.01-0.41). CONCLUSIONS: These results show that clinician- and patient-reported outcomes do not necessarily correlate well in Japanese adults with AD. This highlights the importance of including patient-reported outcomes when assessing disease severity/impact, planning treatment, and assessing response to treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) Identifier UMIN000022623.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a long-term recurring skin disease that needs monitoring over time. Various measures (outcomes) are used to assess the severity of AD and its effect on patients. Some outcomes are based on examinations used by clinicians (doctors). Others are based on questionnaires used by patients themselves to report how severe they feel their AD is, and how it affects their lives. It is not known how well these different measures correlate with one another (how a severity score given by one outcome agrees with that given by another outcome), especially in Asian patients. This analysis used information from ADDRESS-J, a study that followed Japanese adults with moderate-to-severe AD who were treated for AD in the real world for a period of 2 years. It used a statistical method to compare three clinician-reported severity outcomes, three dermatological (skin-related) patient-reported outcomes, and two general health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. Agreement between the three clinician-reported outcomes was high or very high. Agreement between the three dermatological patient-reported outcomes was moderate. However, importantly, agreement between the clinician-reported outcomes and the dermatological patient-reported outcomes was low or moderate. Agreement between the general health-related quality of life outcomes and all other dermatological outcomes (whether clinician- or patient-reported) was low or moderate. The study showed that clinician-reported and patient-reported AD outcomes do not necessarily agree well in Japanese adults with AD. This highlights the importance of including patient-reported outcomes when evaluating AD, planning treatment, or judging how well patients are responding to treatment.