RESUMO
Introduction: The incidence of early-onset gastric adenocarcinoma (patients <50 years, EOGA) is rising. Tumors in younger patients are associated with prognostically unfavorable features. The impact of EOGA on patient survival, however, remains unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate early-onset age as a prognostic factor compared to late-onset gastric adenocarcinoma (LOGA, >50years) in a surgical cohort and assess treatment options. Methods: We analyzed 738 patients (129 early-onset/609 late-onset) operated in curative intent from 2002 to 2021. Data was extracted from a prospectively managed database of an academic tertiary referral hospital. Differences in perioperative as well as oncological outcomes were calculated by chi-square test. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: EOGA patients were more often treated with neoadjuvant therapy (62.8% vs. 43.7%, p<0.001) and extended surgical resections e.g. through additional resections (36.4% vs. 26.8%, p=0.027). EOGA was more often metastasized into regional lymph nodes (pN+ 67.4% vs. 55.3%, p=0.012) and to distant sites (pM+: 23.3% vs. 12.0%, p=0.001) and was more often poorly differentiated (G3/G4: 91.1% vs. 67.2%, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in overall complication rates (31.0% vs. 36.6%, p=0.227). Survival analysis showed shorter DFS (median DFS 25.6 months vs. not reached, p=0.006) but similar OS (median OS: 50.5 months vs. not reached, p=0.920) in EOGA compared to LOGA. Conclusions: This analysis confirmed that EOGA is associated with more aggressive tumor characteristics. Early-Onset was not a prognostic factor in the multivariate analysis. EOGA patients may be more capable to undergo intensive multimodal therapy including perioperative chemotherapy and extended surgery.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) is a pleiotropic cytokine and master regulator of the immune system. It acts through two receptors resulting in often opposing biological effects, which may explain the lack of therapeutic potential obtained so far in multiple sclerosis (MS) with non-receptor-specific anti-TNF therapeutics. Under neuroinflammatory conditions, such as MS, TNF receptor-1 (TNFR1) is believed to mediate the pro-inflammatory activities associated with TNF, whereas TNF receptor-2 (TNFR2) may instead induce anti-inflammatory effects as well as promote remyelination and neuroprotection. In this study, we have investigated the therapeutic potential of blocking TNFR1 whilst simultaneously stimulating TNFR2 in a mouse model of MS. METHODS: Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) was induced with myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG35-55) in humanized TNFR1 knock-in mice. These were treated with a human-specific TNFR1-selective antagonistic antibody (H398) and a mouse-specific TNFR2 agonist (EHD2-sc-mTNFR2), both in combination and individually. Histopathological analysis of spinal cords was performed to investigate demyelination and inflammatory infiltration, as well as axonal and neuronal degeneration. Retinas were examined for any protective effects on retinal ganglion cell (RGC) degeneration and neuroprotective signalling pathways analysed by Western blotting. RESULTS: TNFR modulation successfully ameliorated symptoms of EAE and reduced demyelination, inflammatory infiltration and axonal degeneration. Furthermore, the combinatorial approach of blocking TNFR1 and stimulating TNFR2 signalling increased RGC survival and promoted the phosphorylation of Akt and NF-κB, both known to mediate neuroprotection. CONCLUSION: These results further support the potential of regulating the balance of TNFR signalling, through the co-modulation of TNFR1 and TNFR2 activity, as a novel therapeutic approach in treating inflammatory demyelinating disease.
