A genomic biomarker-based model for cancer risk stratification of non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus patients after extended follow up; results from Dutch surveillance cohorts.

Barrett's esophagus is the only known mucosal precursor for the highly malignant esophageal adenocarcinoma. Malignant degeneration of non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus occurs in < 0.6% per year in Dutch surveillance cohorts. Therefore, it has been proposed to increase the surveillance intervals from 3 to 5 years, potentially increasing development of advanced stage interval cancers. To prevent such cases robust biomarkers for more optimal stratification over longer follow up periods for non-dysplastic Barrett's patients are required. In this multi-center study, aberrations for chromosomes 7, 17, and structural abnormalities for c-MYC, CDKN2A, TP53, Her-2/neu and 20q assessed by DNA fluorescence in situ hybridization on brush cytology specimens, were used to determine marker scores and to perform clonal diversity measurements, as described previously. In this study, these genetic biomarkers were combined with clinical variables and analyzed to obtain the most efficient cancer prediction model after an extended period of follow-up (median time of 7 years) by applying Cox regression modeling, bootstrapping and leave-one-out analyses. A total of 334 patients with Barrett's esophagus without dysplasia from 6 community hospitals (n = 220) and one academic center (n = 114) were included. The annual progression rate to high grade dysplasia and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma was 1.3%, and to adenocarcinoma alone 0.85%. A prediction model including age, Barrett circumferential length, and a clonicity score over the genomic set including chromosomes 7, 17, 20q and c-MYC, resulted in an area under the curve of 0.88. The sensitivity and specificity of this model were 0.91 and 0.38. The positive and negative predictive values were 0.13 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.19) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.99). We propose the implementation of the model to identify non-dysplastic Barrett's patients, who are required to remain in surveillance programs with 3-yearly surveillance intervals from those that can benefit from less frequent or no surveillance.

The influence of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy during preoperative staging of non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

AIM: To determine whether somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) influences the preoperative staging and clinical management of non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-pNETs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All SRS examinations performed between 2002-2013 were selected. Patients with NF-pNET were included if both computed tomography (CT) and SRS was performed during preoperative staging. The diagnostic accuracy of CT and SRS for detecting NF-pNET metastases was analysed. Altered TNM classification and changed clinical management were calculated. Changed management was defined as a change from surgical resection into systemic treatment or vice versa. NF-pNETs were defined as tumours without clinical symptoms of hormonal hypersecretion. RESULTS: Overall, 62 patients with NF-pNET were included with a mean age of 57 years (SD: 12.4)(2). In 28 patients (45%), CT and SRS were correct and in agreement in the detection of primary tumour/metastases. In 34 patients (55%), one of the techniques was incorrect and therefore, there was no agreement. SRS altered the TNM classification in 14 patients (23%) and clinical management in nine patients (15%). In patients without metastases on CT, SRS detected lymph node metastases in one patient. The sensitivity to detect the primary tumour with CT was 95% and with SRS was 73%. In detecting metastases, the sensitivity and specificity were both 85% for CT versus 80% and 90% for SRS. CONCLUSION: Overall, CT and SRS were in agreement in the detection of NF-pNET. In NF-pNET without suspicious metastatic lesions on CT, SRS has limited value. SRS may be indicated to confirm lesions suspicious for neuroendocrine tumours metastases.

The incidence of mild and severe hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with sulfonylureas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using sulfonylurea derivatives or insulin may experience hypoglycaemia. However, recent data regarding the incidence of hypoglycaemia are scarce. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus that experience hypoglycaemia when treated with sulfonylurea or insulin. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials that compared incretin-based drugs to sulfonylureas or insulin and assessed hypoglycaemia incidence in the latter therapies. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to study possible associations with potential risk factors for hypoglycaemia. Data of 25 studies were extracted, 22 for sulfonylurea and 3 for insulin. Hypoglycaemia with glucose ≤3.1 mmol/L or ≤2.8 mmol/L was experienced by 10.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.3-13.8%] and 5.9% (95% CI 2.5-13.4%) of patients with any sulfonylurea treatment. Severe hypoglycaemia was experienced by 0.8% (95% CI 0.5-1.3%) of patients. Hypoglycaemia with glucose ≤3.1 mmol/L and severe hypoglycaemia occurred least frequently with gliclazide: in 1.4% (95% CI 0.8-2.4%) and 0.1% (95% CI 0-0.7%) of patients, respectively. None of the risk factors were significant in a stepwise multivariate meta-regression analysis. Too few studies had insulin as comparator, so these data could not be meta-analysed. The majority of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on sulfonylurea therapy in clinical trials remain free of any relevant hypoglycaemia. Gliclazide was associated with the lowest risk of hypoglycaemia. Because participants in randomized controlled trials differ from the general population, care should be taken when translating these data into clinical practice.