The impact of biomarkers in multivariate algorithms for bladder cancer diagnosis in patients with hematuria

BACKGROUND: We appraised 23 biomarkers previously associated with urothelial cancer in a case-control study. Our aim was to determine whether single biomarkers and/or multivariate algorithms significantly improved on the predictive power of an algorithm based on demographics for prediction of urothelial cancer in patients presenting with hematuria. METHODS: Twenty-two biomarkers in urine and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in serum were evaluated using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) and biochip array technology in 2 patient cohorts: 80 patients with urothelial cancer, and 77 controls with confounding pathologies. We used Forward Wald binary logistic regression analyses to create algorithms based on demographic variables designated prior predicted probability (PPP) and multivariate algorithms, which included PPP as a single variable. Areas under the curve (AUC) were determined after receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) analysis for single biomarkers and algorithms. RESULTS: After univariate analysis, 9 biomarkers were differentially expressed (t test; P

Statin use after colorectal cancer diagnosis and survival: a population-based cohort study

PURPOSE: To investigate whether statins used after colorectal cancer diagnosis reduce the risk of colorectal cancer-specific mortality in a cohort of patients with colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 7,657 patients with newly diagnosed stage I to III colorectal cancer were identified from 1998 to 2009 from the National Cancer Data Repository (comprising English cancer registry data). This cohort was linked to the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which provided prescription records, and to mortality data from the Office of National Statistics (up to 2012) to identify 1,647 colorectal cancer-specific deaths. Time-dependent Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) for cancer-specific mortality and 95% CIs by postdiagnostic statin use and to adjust these HRs for potential confounders.

RESULTS: Overall, statin use after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer was associated with reduced colorectal cancer-specific mortality (fully adjusted HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.84). A dose-response association was apparent; for example, a more marked reduction was apparent in colorectal cancer patients using statins for more than 1 year (adjusted HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79). A reduction in all-cause mortality was also apparent in statin users after colorectal cancer diagnosis (fully adjusted HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.84).

CONCLUSION: In this large population-based cohort, statin use after diagnosis of colorectal cancer was associated with longer rates of survival.

An investigation of routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 international jurisdictions, as part of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership: survey development and implementation

Objectives This paper describes the methods used in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 Survey (ICBPM4) which examines time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 jurisdictions. We present the study design with defining and measuring time intervals, identifying patients with cancer, questionnaire development, data management and analyses.
Design and setting Recruitment of participants to the ICBPM4 survey is based on cancer registries in each jurisdiction. Questionnaires draw on previous instruments and have been through a process of cognitive testing and piloting in three jurisdictions followed by standardised translation and adaptation. Data analysis focuses on comparing differences in time intervals and routes to diagnosis in the jurisdictions.
Participants Our target is 200 patients with symptomatic breast, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer in each jurisdiction. Patients are approached directly or via their primary care physician (PCP). Patients’ PCPs and cancer treatment specialists (CTSs) are surveyed, and ‘data rules’ are applied to combine and reconcile conflicting information. Where CTS information is unavailable, audit information is sought from treatment records and databases.
Main outcomes Reliability testing of the patient questionnaire showed that agreement was complete (κ=1) in four items and substantial (κ=0.8, 95% CI 0.333 to 1) in one item. The identification of eligible patients is sufficient to meet the targets for breast, lung and colorectal cancer. Initial patient and PCP survey response rates from the UK and Sweden are comparable with similar published surveys. Data collection was completed in early 2016 for all cancer types.
Conclusion An international questionnaire-based survey of patients with cancer, PCPs and CTSs has been developed and launched in 10 jurisdictions. ICBPM4 will help to further understand international differences in cancer survival by comparing time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis.

Digoxin use after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study

Digoxin has been shown to have an estrogenic effect and is associated with increased risk of gynecomastia and estrogen-sensitive cancers such as breast and uterus cancer. These findings, particularly recent observations of increased breast cancer risk, raise questions about the safety of digoxin use in breast cancer patients. Therefore, we investigated whether digoxin use after breast cancer diagnosis increased the risk of breast cancer-specific mortality in breast cancer patients. A cohort of 17,842 breast cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 was identified from English cancer registries (from the National Cancer Data Repository). This cohort was linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (to provide digoxin and other prescription records) and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (to identify breast cancer-specific deaths). Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to digoxin and breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. In 17,842 breast cancer patients, there were 2219 breast cancer-specific deaths. Digoxin users appeared to have increased breast cancer-specific mortality compared with non-users (HR 1.73; 95 % CI 1.39–2.15) but this association was entirely attenuated after adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 0.91; 95 % CI 0.72–1.14). In this large population-based breast cancer cohort study, there was little evidence of an increase in breast cancer-specific mortality with digoxin use after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that digoxin use is safe in breast cancer patients.

Statin use after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have shown that statins, particularly simvastatin, can prevent growth in breast cancer cell lines and animal models. We investigated whether statins used after breast cancer diagnosis reduced the risk of breast cancer-specific, or all-cause, mortality in a large cohort of breast cancer patients.

METHODS: A cohort of 17,880 breast cancer patients, newly diagnosed between 1998 and 2009, was identified from English cancer registries (from the National Cancer Data Repository). This cohort was linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, providing prescription records, and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (up to 2013), identifying 3694 deaths, including 1469 deaths attributable to breast cancer. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for breast cancer-specific, and all-cause, mortality in statin users after breast cancer diagnosis were calculated using time-dependent Cox regression models. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using multiple imputation methods, propensity score methods and a case-control approach.

RESULTS: There was some evidence that statin use after a diagnosis of breast cancer had reduced mortality due to breast cancer and all causes (fully adjusted HR = 0.84 [95% confidence interval = 0.68-1.04] and 0.84 [0.72-0.97], respectively). These associations were more marked for simvastatin 0.79 (0.63-1.00) and 0.81 (0.70-0.95), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: In this large population-based breast cancer cohort, there was some evidence of reduced mortality in statin users after breast cancer diagnosis. However, these associations were weak in magnitude and were attenuated in some sensitivity analyses.

Digoxin use after diagnosis of colorectal cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND:

Digoxin has been shown to affect a number of pathways that are of relevance to cancer, and its use has been associated with increased risks of breast and uterus cancer and, more recently, a 40% increase in colorectal cancer risk. These findings raise questions about the safety of digoxin use in colorectal cancer patients, and, therefore, we investigated whether digoxin use after colorectal cancer diagnosis increased the risk of colorectal cancer-specific mortality.

METHODS:

A cohort of 10,357 colorectal cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 was identified from English cancer registries and linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (to provide digoxin and other prescription records) and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (to identify 2,724 colorectal cancer-specific deaths). Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the association between postdiagnostic exposure to digoxin and colorectal cancer-specific mortality.

RESULTS:

Overall, 682 (6%) colorectal cancer patients used digoxin after diagnosis. Digoxin use was associated with a small increase in colorectal cancer-specific mortality before adjustment (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.07-1.46), but after adjustment for confounders, the association was attenuated (adjusted HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.91-1.34) and there was no evidence of a dose response.

CONCLUSIONS:

In this large population-based colorectal cancer cohort, there was little evidence of an increase in colorectal cancer-specific mortality with digoxin use after diagnosis.

IMPACT:

These results provide some reassurance that digoxin use is safe in colorectal cancer patients.

Helix pomatia agglutinin lectin-binding oligosaccharides of aggressive breast cancer

Predicting long-term outcome after breast-cancer diagnosis remains problematic, particularly for patients with clinically small, axillary lymph node- negative tumours, Evidence suggests that the lectin Helix pomatia agglutinin (HPA) identifies oligosaccharides associated with poor-prognosis cancer. Our aim was to identify oligosaccharides that bind HPA in aggressive breast cancers. Breast-cancer cell lines (MCF-7, BT-549 and BT-20) and a cell line From human milk (HBL-100), which showed a range of HPA-binding intensities, were used to extract HPA-binding glycoproteins, Oligosaccharides were released using anhydrous hydrazine and separated on a range of HPLC matrices. We investigated whether HPA-binding oligosaccharides from cell lines were present in human breast-cancer tissues, using 69 breast-cancer specimens from patients with between 5 and 10 years' follow-up. A monosialylated oligosaccharide was over-expressed in the cell line that bound HPA strongly. Further analysis by normal-phase HPLC showed that the 2-aminobenzamide-conjugated oligosaccharide had a hydrodynamic volume of 4.58 glucose units (HPAgly 1), Increased expression of HPAgly 1 was associated with HPA staining of breast-cancer specimens (Student's t-test p = 0.025). Analysis of oligosaccharide levels and disease-free survival after treatment for breast cancer indicated a shorter disease-free interval for patients with elevated levels of HPAgly 1, This is the first time that histochemical lectin staining has been correlated with biochemical mapping of oligosaccharides, Using this approach, we have identified a monosialylated HPA lectin-binding oligosaccharide present in breast-cancer cells grown in vitro which is elevated in breast-cancer specimens that bind the lectin, (C) 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Concomitant and antecedent deep venous thrombosis and cancer survival in male US veterans

Survival is reportedly worse in patients with cancer concurrently diagnosed with deep venous thrombosis. However, information on specific malignancies is limited. From a cohort study of male US veterans we identified incident cancer cases (n aEuroS== aEuroS412 008) and compared survival patterns among those with versus without a history of deep venous thrombosis. Using Cox proportional hazard models, we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%% confidence intervals as measures of the relative risk of dying. Individuals with (versus without) a concomitant deep venous thrombosis and cancer diagnosis had a higher risk of dying (HR aEuroS== aEuroS1.38; 1.28--1.49). The most prominent excess mortality (HR aEuroS== aEuroS1.29--2.55) was observed among patients diagnosed with deep venous thrombosis at the time of diagnosis of lung, gastric, prostate, bladder, or kidney cancer. Increased risk of dying was also found among cancer patients diagnosed with deep venous thrombosis 1 year (HR aEuroS== aEuroS1.14; 1.07--1.22), 1--5 years (HR aEuroS== aEuroS1.14; 1.10--1.19), and > 5 years (HR aEuroS== aEuroS1.27; 1.23--1.31) before cancer; this was true for most cancer sites (HR aEuroS== aEuroS1.17--1.64). In summary, antecedent deep venous thrombosis confers a worse prognosis upon cancer patients. Advanced stage at diagnosis, treatment effects, lifestyle factors, and comorbidity could explain differences by cancer site and time frame between a prior deep venous thrombosis diagnosis and cancer outcome.

Dietary fat and breast cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis

As the number of breast cancer survivors increases worldwide(1), there is growing interest in the potential effect of dietary and lifestyle behaviours on overall prognosis. This is especially important as a cancer diagnosis is often referred to as a ‘teachable moment’(2) as patients seek information about lifestyle behaviours and so provision of evidence-based guidelines is essential. A positive association between dietary fat and breast cancer risk has been previously reported(3) but its influence upon breast cancer survival is unclear. The aim of this review and meta-analysis is to critically appraise the literature published to date and to conduct meta-analyses to pool the results of studies to clarify the association between dietary fat and breast cancer survival.
Relevant articles published up to March 2011 that examined dietary fat and breast cancer recurrence and survival were identified from searches in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Meta-analyses were conducted in which we evaluated the risk of all-cause or breast cancer death in women in the highest compared with the lowest categories of total fat intake (g/d) and per 20 g increase in intake of dietary fat. Multivariable adjusted relative risks (RR) and 95% CI from individual studies were weighted and combined using a random-effects model to produce a pooled estimate.
Twelve prospective cohort studies that investigated total fat intake (g) and breast cancer survival, and/or provided information on fat intake from which a linear trend could be estimated, were included in the analyses. There was no evidence of a difference in risk of breast cancer death (RR=1.14; 95% CI 0.86, 1.52; P=0.34) or all cause death (RR=1.73; 95% CI 0.82, 3.6; P=0.15) between the highest and lowest categories of total fat intake. Similarly, no significant difference in risk of breast cancer death (RR=1.03; 95% CI 0.97, 1.10; P=0.261) or all-cause death (RR=1.06; 95% CI 0.88, 1.28; P=0.52) was found per linear (20 g) increase in total fat intake.
The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis do not support an association between total dietary fat and breast cancer survival. Further investigation into the effect of specific types of dietary fat and breast cancer survival is of interest.

A service evaluation of the role of complementary therapies for patients with cancer - By Action Cancer

Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer has resulted in longer survival, meaning that cancer patients are now living with what may be termed a chronic type condition. As a result of this the needs of patients living with a cancer diagnosis has changed, placing a greater emphasis on survivorship which in turn has an effect on quality of life and sleep patterns. Evidence suggests that counselling and complementary therapies have a positive impact not only on the cancer patient’s quality of life but also on family members and friends.

The aim of this study was to determine if there is an improvement in client’s quality of life and sleep patterns after availing of counselling and complementary therapy services as offered by a local cancer charity.

All clients availing of the counselling or complementary therapies offered by the charity were invited to participate in a Service Evaluation. The regulations relating to research involving human participants as outlined by the “Research Governance Framework” at a local university were also adhered to. A seven piece questionnaire was used for evaluation of services.

Access to anonymous data from the cancer patients, their families and carers was granted by the Research and Development Officer within Action Cancer.
A total of 507 participants completed the initial questionnaires immediately before therapy and 255 participants completed the questionnaires immediately after therapy, the total matched sample is 230. When considering counselling and complementary therapies together (therapeutic services) there were statistically significant results indicating improved quality of life and sleep patterns between the two sets of data. However this was not the trend when considering counselling and complementary therapies alone.

While some of the findings closely reflect the literature and on the whole supports the use of therapeutic services in having a positive effect on cancer patient’s quality of life and sleep patterns.

Drugs affecting the renin-angiotensin system and survival from cancer: a population based study of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer patient cohorts

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to the growing number of cancer patients (more than two million in the UK alone) often to treat hypertension. However, increased fatal cancer in ARB users in a randomized trial and increased breast cancer recurrence rates in ACEI users in a recent observational study have raised concerns about their safety in cancer patients. We investigated whether ACEI or ARB use after breast, colorectal or prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with increased risk of cancer-specific mortality.

Methods: Population-based cohorts of 9,814 breast, 4,762 colorectal and 6,339 prostate cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2006 were identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registry linkage. Cancer-specific and all-cause mortality were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data in 2011 (allowing up to 13 years of follow-up). A nested case–control analysis was conducted to compare ACEI/ARB use (from general practitioner prescription records) in cancer patients dying from cancer with up to five controls (not dying from cancer). Conditional logistic regression estimated the risk of cancer-specific, and all-cause, death in ACEI/ARB users compared with non-users.

Results: The main analysis included 1,435 breast, 1,511 colorectal and 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths (and 7,106 breast, 7,291 colorectal and 5,849 prostate cancer controls). There was no increase in cancer-specific mortality in patients using ARBs after diagnosis of breast (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.06 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 1.35), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.82 95% CI 0.64, 1.07) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.79 95% CI 0.61, 1.03). There was also no evidence of increases in cancer-specific mortality with ACEI use for breast (adjusted OR = 1.06 95% CI 0.89, 1.27), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92).

Conclusions: Overall, we found no evidence of increased risks of cancer-specific mortality in breast, colorectal or prostate cancer patients who used ACEI or ARBs after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that these medications are safe in patients diagnosed with these cancers.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Breast cancer; Prostate cancer; Mortality; Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers