Safety and Acceptability of Esophageal Cytosponge Cell Collection Device in a Pooled Analysis of Data From Individual Patients.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Diagnosis and surveillance of Barrett's esophagus (BE) and eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) have become emerging public health issues. Cytosponge is a novel, minimally invasive esophageal cell collection device. We aimed to assess the data on safety and acceptability of this device. METHODS: We performed a patient-level review of 5 prospective trials assessing Cytosponge performance in patients with reflux disease, BE and EoE in primary and secondary care. Acceptability of Cytosponge and subsequent endoscopy were recorded with visual analogue scale (VAS), wherein 0 and 10 denoted lowest and highest acceptability. Median VAS scores were compared using a Mann-Whitney test. The number of attempts, failures in swallowing the device and occurrence of adverse events were analyzed. Risk factors for failure in swallowing were analyzed using a multivariate regression model. RESULTS: In total, 2672 Cytosponge procedures were performed, in 2418 individuals from 2008 through 2017. There were 2 adverse events related to the device: a minor pharyngeal bleed and a case of detachment (<1:2000). The median acceptability score for the Cytosponge was 6.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 5.0-8.0), which was higher than the score for endoscopy without sedation (median 5.0; IQR, 3.0-7.0; P < .001) and lower than the score for endoscopy with sedation (median 8.0; IQR, 5.0-9.0; P < .001). Nearly all patients (91.1%) successfully swallowed the Cytosponge, most on the first attempt (90.1%). Failure to swallow the device was more likely to occur in secondary care (odds ratio, 5.13; 95% CI, 1.48-17.79; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The Cytosponge test is a safe procedure with good acceptability ratings in a variety of health care settings.

Clinical outcome in patients with peripherally-sited atypical lipomatous tumours and dedifferentiated liposarcoma.

The reported incidence of local recurrence of peripheral atypical lipomatous tumours is highly variable and is likely to reflect the different inclusion criteria of cases, and the design of previous studies. We aimed to study the incidence of local recurrence of 90 cases of atypical lipomatous tumours and an additional 18 cases of de novo dedifferentiated liposarcoma. All tumours were diagnosed on the basis of MDM2 amplification: all patients had their first treatment in the same specialist sarcoma unit and were followed for a minimum of 60 months. The tumours were diagnosed between 1997 and 2009 and followed until the end of 2014. Seventy cases (78%) of atypical lipomatous tumours were located in the thigh (mean size 195 mm on presentation). Eight atypical lipomatous tumours (8.9%) recurred locally, of which 50% recurred after 60 months. The only two tumours with intralesional excisions recurred. Seven of the eight recurrent tumours were detected by the patient by self-examination. One case recurred a second time as a dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Seventeen per cent of the de novo dedifferentiated liposarcomas recurred within 60 months of presentation. Extending the study period revealed that atypical lipomatous tumour could recur up to 40 years after the first surgery. Furthermore, of 26 tumours that recurred in the extended study, 27% recurred more than once, and three of the seven that recurred more than once transformed into a dedifferentiated liposarcoma. We recommend that, following post-operative wound care, patients with atypical lipomatous tumour are referred back to their general practitioner for follow up, but that in the event of a suspected recurrence they have rapid access back to the specialist unit using a 'supported discharge' scheme. In the event of an intralesional excision and if a lesion recurs, patients are followed in a specialist unit at regular intervals: whether MRI scanning is a valuable means of monitoring such patients is unclear and requires an evidence base.

Fibroblastic growth factor receptor 1 amplification in osteosarcoma is associated with poor response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

Osteosarcoma, the most common primary bone sarcoma, is a genetically complex disease with no widely accepted biomarker to allow stratification of patients for treatment. After a recent report of one osteosarcoma cell line and one tumor exhibiting fibroblastic growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) gene amplification, the aim of this work was to assess the frequency of FGFR1 amplification in a larger cohort of osteosarcoma and to determine if this biomarker could be used for stratification of patients for treatment. About 352 osteosarcoma samples from 288 patients were analyzed for FGFR1 amplification by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization. FGFR1 amplification was detected in 18.5% of patients whose tumors revealed a poor response to chemotherapy, and no patients whose tumors responded well to therapy harbored this genetic alteration. FGFR1 amplification is present disproportionately in the rarer histological variants of osteosarcoma. This study provides a rationale for inclusion of patients with osteosarcoma in clinical trials using FGFR kinase inhibitors.