Mantle Cell Lymphoma Under the Scope of Personalized Medicine: Perspective and Directions.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare, incurable non-Hodgkin's lymphoma characterized by naive B cells infiltrating the lymphoid follicle's mantle zone. A key feature of MCL is the cytogenetic abnormality t(11;14) (q13:q14), found in 95% of cases, leading to Cyclin D1 overexpression resulting in uncontrolled cell cycle progression and genetic instability. Occasionally, Cyclin D2 or D3 overexpression can substitute for Cyclin D1, causing similar effects. The transcription factor SOX11 is a hallmark of classical Cyclin D1-positive MCL and also in cases without the typical t(11;14) abnormality, making it an important diagnostic marker. MCL's development necessitates secondary genetic changes, including mutations in the ATM, TP53, and NOTCH1 genes, with the TP53 mutation being the only genetic biomarker with established clinical prognostic value. The Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score, which considers age, performance status, serum LDH levels, and leukocyte count, stratifies patients into risk groups. Histologic variants of MCL, such as classic, blastoid, and pleomorphic, offer additional prognostic information. Recent research highlights new mutations potentially tied to specific populations among MCL patients, suggesting the benefit of personalized management for better predicting outcomes like progression-free survival. This approach could lead to more effective, risk-adapted treatment strategies. However, challenges remain in patient stratification and in developing new therapeutic targets for MCL. This review synthesizes current knowledge on genetic mutations in MCL and their impact on prognosis. It aims to explore the prognostic value of genetic markers related to population traits, emphasizing the importance of tailored molecular medicine in MCL.

[Prognostic factors of mortality one year after a hip fragility fracture. Anoia hip study]. / Factores pronósticos de mortalidad al año de una fractura de cadera por fragilidad ósea. Estudio Maluc Anoia.

INTRODUCTION: Most of the patients who had a hip fragility fracture are characterized by advanced age, frailty, multimorbidity and high mortality rate into the first year. Our aim is to describe the prognostic factors of mortality one year after a hip fragility fracture. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Observational prospective study. During the study period we included patients older than 69 years with hip fragility fracture who were admitted to the Acute Geriatric Unit. RESULTS: We have followed 364 patients, 100 of them died (27.5%). The independent prognostic factors of mortality one year after a hip fragility fracture had been: have a less basis score in Lawton and Brody Scale 0.603 (0.505-0.721) (p< 0.001); have a higher score in Charlson Comorbidity Index 2.332 (1.308-4.157) p = 0.04); have a surgical waiting time ≥ 3 days 3.013 (1.330-6.829) p = 0.008); finding hydroelectrolytic disorders and/or deterioration of glomerular filtration 1.212 (1.017-1.444) p = 0.031) during hospital stay; discriminatory capacity of the area under the curve (AUC) (± 95%): 0.888 (0.880-0.891). CONCLUSIONS: Prognostic predictors of mortality at one year after a hip fragility fracture are those variables that reflect a worse state of health, complications during hospital stay and a longer surgical waiting time.

Prognostic factors for discharge to home and residing at home 12 months after hip fracture: an Anoia hip study.

OBJECTIVES: Hip fracture is often associated with loss of physical function and institutionalization. The aim of this study is to describe the prognostic factors for discharge to home and residing there 12 months after a hip fracture. METHODS: A prospective study that includes patients aged ≥ 69 years that live at home before the fracture, admitted from June 1st, 2010, to May 31st, 2013. We registered the demographic data, presurgical function and cognitive assessment, surgical waiting time, type of fracture and complications during hospitalization. RESULTS: We included 273 patients (mean age 84.8 ± 6.1 years; 80% women), 130 (47.6%) were discharged directly to their own home. The predictors of discharge to home were a lower Geriatrics Dementia Scale score (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.17-1.71; p < 0.001), a higher Barthel Index score at discharge (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.05-1.10; p < 0.001) and a longer hospital stay (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.02-1.27; p = 0.019). At 12 months, 169 (63.5%) were still residing at home. Predictors of residing at home 12 months after the hip fracture were age (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.02-1.12; p = 0.010), the discharge Barthel Index score (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.94-0.98; p < 0.001), the Geriatrics Dementia Scale score (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.05-1.52; p = 0.013), the surgical waiting time (OR 3.42; 95% CI 1.077-10.89; p = 0.037) and Charlson comorbidity index (OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.05-1.55; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Prognostic factors for discharging to home and remaining there 12 months after a hip fracture are those that reflect a better health condition prior to the fracture and better functionality at the hospital discharge for hip fracture.

Mejorando la atención del paciente mayor ingresado por fractura de cadera. ¿Hemos de avanzar? / Improving the care of the elderly patient admitted for hip fracture. Should we move forward?

No disponible

Advantages of care for patients with hip fractures in the acute geriatric unit: Hip study Anoia.

AIM: Hip fracture as a result of bone fragility is characterized by poor health outcomes in the medium and long term. Our goal was to compare a new orthogeriatric model with the old trauma model and evaluate improvements in clinical management. METHODS: We carried out a comparative unicentric study, a historical sample (trauma model) collected from 1 June 2007 to 31 May 2010, versus a prospective sample (orthogeriatric model) collected from 1 June 2010 until 31 May 2013. We included all patients aged >69 years with hip fracture as a result of bone fragility. RESULTS: A total of 792 patients were evaluated (mean age 84.3 years). The surgical waiting period went from 2.70 days in the trauma model to 1.86 days in the orthogeriatric model (P < 0.001); the average stay was 15.76 days in the trauma model, and for the orthogeriatric model was reduced to 5.90 days (P < 0.001); mortality went from 4.5% to 1.3% (P ≤ 0.010); 1 month readmission for hip dislocation was reduced from 2.3% to 0.5% (P = 0.032). After a 6-month follow up, we had 302 trauma model patients and 287 orthogeriatric model patients. After 1 year, we had 288 patients in the trauma model and 264 patients in the orthogeriatric model. The main cause of abandonment was death, 108 patients (27.3%) in the trauma model and 100 patients (27.5%) in the orthogeriatric model (P = 0.951). CONCLUSIONS: When we compared the two models, we found statistically significant better results in the preoperative waiting period, average stay, hospital mortality and 1 month readmission as a result of hip prosthesis luxation in favor of the orthogeriatric model. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2018; 18: 407-414.