Intensive complex physical therapy combined with intermittent pneumatic compression versus Kinesio taping for treating breast cancer-related lymphedema of the upper limb: A randomised cross-over clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of complex physical therapy combined with intermittent pneumatic compression (CPT + IPC) versus Kinesio taping (KT) for breast cancer-related lymphedema. METHODS: A cross-over clinical trial was conducted in 43 women with lymphedema. All participants received two interventions: CPT + IPC and KT, both lasting 3 weeks and a washout period. The main outcome variable was the relative volume change (RVC). The secondary variables were Satisfaction Questionnaire about Textile Therapeutic Devices used for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, motion range of upper limb and lymphedema-related symptoms. RESULTS: The RVC reduction was greater with CPT + IPC (-2.2%, SD = 4.7) versus KT (-0.9%, SD = 1.7) (P = 0.002). KT was more satisfactory than multilayer bandaging (8.9 points difference, P < 0.001) and improved DASH score more than CPT + IPC (14.3 points difference, P = 0.002). Regarding motion ranges, only shoulder movements showed significant improvement with CPT + IPC compared with KT (differences between 5.6° and 11.4°). Of the symptoms assessed, only pain reduction showed a significant improvement with KT versus CPT + IPC (0.5 points, P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: CPT + IPC achieved higher RVC and greater improvement in th shoulder motion range than KT. Conversely, KT was more satisfactory than multilayer bandaging, obtained better DASH scores and relieved pain more than CPT + IPC. CLINICAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial registration number: NCT03051750 (date of registration 14 February 2017).

MINDIN Exerts Protumorigenic Actions on Primary Prostate Tumors via Downregulation of the Scaffold Protein NHERF-1.

Advanced prostate cancer preferential metastasis to bone is associated with osteomimicry. MINDIN is a secreted matrix protein upregulated in prostate tumors that overexpresses bone-related genes during prostate cancer progression. Na+/H+ exchanger regulatory factor (NHERF-1) is a scaffold protein that has been involved both in tumor regulation and osteogenesis. We hypothesize that NHERF-1 modulation is a mechanism used by MINDIN to promote prostate cancer progression. We analyzed the expression of NHERF-1 and MINDIN in human prostate samples and in a premetastatic prostate cancer mouse model, based on the implantation of prostate adenocarcinoma TRAMP-C1 (transgenic adenocarcinoma of the mouse prostate) cells in immunocompetent C57BL/6 mice. The relationship between NHERF-1 and MINDIN and their effects on cell proliferation, migration, survival and osteomimicry were evaluated. Upregulation of MINDIN and downregulation of NHERF-1 expression were observed both in human prostate cancer samples and in the TRAMP-C1 model. MINDIN silencing restored NHERF-1 expression to control levels in the mouse model. Stimulation with MINDIN reduced NHERF-1 expression and triggered its mobilization from the plasma membrane to the cytoplasm in TRAMP-C1 cells. MINDIN-dependent downregulation of NHERF-1 promoted tumor cell migration and proliferation without affecting osteomimicry and adhesion. We propose that MINDIN downregulates NHERF-1 expression leading to promotion of processes involved in prostate cancer progression.

Utility of the EAT-10 in the detection of dysphagia in high-risk hospitalisation units at a university hospital: a cross-sectional study / Utilidad del EAT-10 en la detección de la disfagia en las unidades de hospitalización de alto riesgo de un hospital universitario: un estudio transversal

INTRODUCTION: the objective was to assess the utility of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) in hospitalisation units with patients at high risk of dysphagia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: a cross-sectional study was conducted in the Neurology and Internal Medicine wards; patients with admission < 24 hours and in a terminal stage of disease were excluded. In the first 24-48 hours of admission the presence of dysphagia as assessed with the EAT-10, the risk of malnutrition as assessed with the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tools (MUST), and comorbidities using the Charlson index were screened. RESULTS: a total of 169 patients were recruited (76.0 years, 52 % women); 19.5 % were at risk of malnutrition. The EAT-10 instrument could be administered in 80.6 % of the patients, and was positive in 26.6 % (women 34.1 % vs. men 18.4 %; p = 0.025). When comparing patients with higher comorbidity with those with a lower Charlson index, a lower response rate to EAT-10 was observed (78.4 % vs. 93.9 %; p = 0.038), without differences in screening positivity (28.3 % vs. 19.4 %; p = 0.310). The prevalence of dysphagia risk was higher in the Internal Medicine unit than in the Neurology unit (30.4 % vs. 19.6 %; p = 0.133), as was the percentage of cases in which screening could not be performed (21.1 % vs. 11.1 %; p = 0.011). There were no significant differences in risk of malnutrition, mortality, hospital stay, or readmission according to the EAT-10. CONCLUSIONS: the EAT-10 has limited utility in the studied hospitalisation units due to a high rate of unfeasible tests, especially among patients at higher risk of dysphagia

INTRODUCCIÓN: el objetivo del estudio fue evaluar la utilidad del Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) en unidades de hospitalización con pacientes de alto riesgo de disfagia. PACIENTES Y MÉTODOS: estudio transversal de pacientes hospitalizados en Medicina Interna y Neurología; los pacientes con ingreso < 24 horas y en fase terminal de la enfermedad fueron excluidos. En las primeras 24-48 horas de ingreso se cribó la disfagia con el EAT-10, el riesgo de desnutrición con el Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) y la comorbilidad con el índice de Charlson. RESULTADOS: se reclutaron 196 pacientes (76,0 años, 52 % mujeres). El 19,5 % estaban en riesgo de desnutrición. El EAT-10 se pudo realizar en el 80,6 % de la muestra y fue positivo en el 26,6 % (mujeres 34,1 % vs. hombres 18,4 %; p = 0,025). Al comparar a los pacientes con mayor comorbilidad con aquellos que tenían un índice de Charlson más bajo, se observó una tasa de respuesta más baja al EAT-10 (78,4 % vs. 93,9 %; p = 0,038), sin diferencias en la positividad del cribado (28,3 % vs. 19,4 %; p = 0,310). La prevalencia del riesgo de disfagia fue mayor en la unidad de Medicina Interna que en la de Neurología (30,4 % vs. 19,6 %; p = 0,133), así como el número de casos en que no se pudo realizar el cribado (21,1 % vs. 11,1 %; p = 0,011). No hubo diferencias significativas en el riesgo de desnutrición, mortalidad, estancia hospitalaria o reingreso según el EAT-10. CONCLUSIONES: el EAT-10 tiene una utilidad limitada en las unidades de hospitalización estudiadas debido a una alta tasa de pruebas no realizables, especialmente entre los pacientes con mayor riesgo de disfagia