Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- ADHD (1)
- Anal cancer (1)
- Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (1)
- Molecular marker (1)
- Survivin (1)
- alcohol use disorder (1)
- fMRI (1)
- impulsivity (1)
- inhibitory control (1)
- response inhibition (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Purpose: To investigate the prognostic value of survivin expression in pretreatment specimens from patients with anal cancer treated with concurrent 5-FU and mitomycin C-based chemoradiation (CRT).
Material and methods: Immunohistochemical staining for survivin was performed in pretreatment biopsies of 62 patients with anal carcinoma. Survivin expression was correlated with clinical and histopathological characteristics as well as local failure free- (LFFS), distant metastases free- (DMFS), cancer specific- (CSS), and overall survival (OS).
Results: Survivin staining intensity was weak in 10%, intermediate in 48% and intense in 42% of the patients. No association between survivin expression and clinicopathologic factors (tumor stage, age and HIV status) could be shown. In univariate analysis, the level of survivin staining was significantly correlated with DMFS (low survivin vs. high survivin: 94% vs. 74%, p=0.04). T-stage, N-stage and the tumor grading were significantly associated with OS and CSS and with DMFS and LFFS, respectively. In multivariate analysis, survivin was confirmed as independent prognostic parameter for DMFS (RR, 0.04; p=0.02) and for OS (RR, 0.27; p=0.04).
Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that the level of pretreatment survivin is correlated with the clinical outcome in patients with anal carcinoma treated with concurrent CRT. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the complex role of survivin for the oncologic treatment and to exploit the protein as a therapeutic target in combined modality treatment of anal cancer.
Rationale: Both attention deficit-/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD) are accompanied by deficits in response inhibition. Furthermore, the prevalence of comorbidity of ADHD and AUD is high. However, there is a lack of research on whether the same neuronal subprocesses of inhibition (i.e., interference inhibition, action withholding and action cancellation) exhibit deficits in both psychiatric disorders. Methods: We examined these three neural subprocesses of response inhibition in patient groups and healthy controls: non-medicated individuals with ADHD (ADHD; N = 16), recently detoxified and abstinent individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD; N = 15), and healthy controls (HC; N = 15). A hybrid response inhibition task covering interference inhibition, action withholding, and action cancellation was applied using a 3T functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Results: Individuals with ADHD showed an overall stronger hypoactivation in attention related brain areas compared to AUD or HC during action withholding. Further, this hypoactivation was more accentuated during action cancellation. Individuals with AUD recruited a broader network, including the striatum, compared to HC during action withholding. During action cancellation, however, they showed hypoactivation in motor regions. Additionally, specific neural activation profiles regarding group and subprocess became apparent. Conclusions: Even though deficits in response inhibition are related to both ADHD and AUD, neural activation and recruited networks during response inhibition differ regarding both neuronal subprocesses and examined groups. While a replication of this study is needed in a larger sample, the results suggest that tasks have to be carefully selected when examining neural activation patterns of response inhibition either in research on various psychiatric disorders or transdiagnostic questions.