Genomic, Epigenomic and Transcriptomic Molecular Characterization of Splenic Marginal Zone Lymphoma Reveals Recurrent Abnormalities in miR-182

Splenic marginal zone lymphoma (SMZL) is a low grade B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The molecular pathology of this entity remains poorly understood. To characterise this lymphoma at the molecular level, we performed an integrated analysis of 1) genome wide genetic copy number alterations 2) gene expression profiles and 3) epigenetic DNA methylation profiles.We have previously shown that SMZL is characterised by recurrent alterations of chromosomes 7q, 6q, 3q, 9q and 18; however, gene resolution oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridisation did not reveal evidence of cryptic amplification or deletion in these regions. The most frequently lost 7q32 region contains a cluster of miRNAs. qRT-PCR revealed that three of these (miR-182/96/183) show underexpression in SMZL, and miR-182 is somatically mutated in >20% of cases of SMZL, as well as in >20% of cases of follicular lymphoma, and between 5-15% of cases of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, MALT-lymphoma and hairy cell leukaemia. We conclude that miR-182 is a strong candidate novel tumour suppressor miRNA in lymphoma.The overall gene expression signature of SMZL was found to be strongly distinct fromthose of other lymphomas. Functional analysis of gene expression data revealed SMZL to be characterised by abnormalities in B-cell receptor signalling (especially through the CD19/21-PI3K/AKT pathway) and apoptotic pathways. In addition, genes involved in the response to viral infection appeared upregulated. SMZL shows a unique epigenetic profile, but analysis of differentially methylated genes showed few with methylation related transcriptional deregulation, suggesting that DNA methylation abnormalities are not a critical component of the SMZL malignant phenotype.

Comparison of two osteoporotic fracture management pathways: experience at 1 year

Introduction: Osteoporosis presenting as low-impact fractures to traumatology units is often undiagnosed and under-treated. Results from the Osteocare study in Lausanne (a nurse based intervention, passive pathway) showed that only 19% of patients received management for osteoporosis, and in the literature [1], the rate is between 10-25%. We have evaluated a different management concept, based on the systematic assessment of patients with osteoporotic fractures during and after hospitalization (active pathway). Methods: Inpatients admitted to the Department of Musculoskeletal Medicine for a fragility fracture were identified by a nurse according to a predefined questionnaire and were then clinically evaluated by a doctor. Based on the results, a management plan was proposed to the patients. Patients could choose between follow up either by their GP or by the Centre of Bone Disease of the CHUV. For patients who chose follow-up in our Centre, we assessed their adherence to medical follow-up 1 year inclusion. The results of patients who had been evaluated in our cohort between the 1 November 2008 and the 1 December 2009 were analysed. Results: 573 inpatients received specific management of their osteoporotic fracture over 18 months. The mean age was 77 y (31-99), 81% were women (203 hip fractures, 40 pelvis fractures, 101 arm fractures, 57 vertebral fractures, 63 ankle fractures, and 25 others sites). During the study period, 303 patients received a proposition of a specific treatment. 39 (13%) chose a follow up with the GP, 19 (6%) dead and 245 (81%) preferred a follow up in our Centre. After 1 year, 166 (67%) patients are under follow up in our outpatient clinic. Conclusion: With an active clinical pathway that starts during the hospitalization, consisting on a nursing evaluation followed by a medical consultation by an expert in osteoporosis, the adherence increased from 19% to 67% in terms of follow up. These results lead us to propose a consultation with a doctor experienced in osteoporosis after all osteoporotic fractures.

Can a targeted psychological intervention be effective for young people following a first manic episode? Results from an 18-month pilot study.

Aim: There is a scarce literature describing psychological interventions for a young, first-episode cohort who have experienced psychotic mania. This study aimed to assess whether a manualized psychological intervention could be effective in reducing symptomatology and relapse, and improve functional outcome in this population. Methods: The study was an open-label design, drawn from a larger pharmacotherapy trial. All participants in the pharmacotherapy trial were offered a manualized psychological intervention in addition to case management. Inclusion in the psychotherapy group was based on participant's choice, and on completion of four or more of the eight modules offered. All clinical files were audited to ensure accuracy of group allocation. Forty young people aged 15 to 25 years old who had experienced a manic episode with psychotic features were recruited into the study, with 20 people in the combined treatment as usual plus psychotherapy group (P+TAU), and an equal number of matched control participants who received treatment as usual (TAU) within the same service. All participants were prescribed antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medication. Symptomatic, functional and relapse measures were taken both at baseline and at 18-month follow-up. Results: Manic symptoms improved significantly for both groups, with no differences between groups. Depression scores and overall symptom severity were significantly lower in the P + TAU group. No differences were evident between groups with regard to numbers or type of relapse. The P + TAU group had significantly better social and occupational functioning after 18 months. Conclusion: This study suggests that a manualized psychological intervention targeted to a first-episode population can be effective in reducing depression and overall symptom severity, and can improve functional outcome following a first episode of psychotic mania.