| Title |
Histologic and Immunohistochemical Alterations Associated with Cytoreductive Surgery and Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-015-4580-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Wagner, Brian Boone, Lekshmi Ramalingam, Heather Jones, Amer Zureikat, Matthew Holtzman, Steven Ahrendt, James Pingpank, Herbert Zeh, Haroon Choudry, David Bartlett |
| Abstract |
Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are used to treat peritoneal carcinomatosis from a variety of primary tumor sites. Little is known about the in vivo effects of CRS and HIPEC. We examined tumor and non-neoplastic peritoneal tissue samples from 38 patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC for appendiceal or colorectal carcinomatosis, using conventional histologic analysis and immunohistochemical analysis for markers of early DNA damage (phosphorylated H2AX, γH2AX) and early necrosis (extracellular HMGB1). Findings were correlated with clinicopathologic features and oncologic outcome. Histologic findings corresponding with CRS and HIPEC included extensive submesothelial inflammatory infiltrate, endothelial activation, mesothelial karyolysis and surface fibrin deposition. Endothelial activation in submesothelial vessels exhibited high specificity for samples obtained following HIPEC relative to samples obtained following CRS but prior to HIPEC. Mesothelial nuclear γH2AX staining and submesothelial extracellular HMGB1 staining increased progressively following CRS and HIPEC, consistent with DNA damage and necrosis. No significant increase in tumor staining for markers was seen with CRS or HIPEC. Submesothelial HMGB1 staining was associated with increased progression-free survival on univariate analysis. The immediate histologic effects of CRS and HIPEC are defined and provide evidence that DNA damage and early steps of necrosis are underway in mesothelial tissues at the conclusion of the procedure. Further research will be necessary to investigate the impact of these findings on long-term oncologic outcome, and may provide insight into the downstream effects of CRS and HIPEC that could facilitate refinement of regional therapeutic regimens for carcinomatosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 47% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 May 2015.
All research outputs
#20,271,607
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#5,490
of 6,463 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,641
of 264,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#52
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,463 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.