Adult ; Aged ; Antineoplastic Agents ; therapeutic use ; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols ; therapeutic use ; Bone Neoplasms ; drug therapy ; secondary ; Endostatins ; therapeutic use ; Epirubicin ; administration & dosage ; Feasibility Studies ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Hemangiosarcoma ; drug therapy ; pathology ; Humans ; Liver Neoplasms ; drug therapy ; secondary ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pubic Bone ; pathology ; Taxoids ; administration & dosage

Objective To explore the expression of miR-146a and its target gene LIN52 in advanced gastric cancer and their potential impact on clinical prognosis.Methods Total RNAs were extracted from 93gastric cancer tissues and their corresponding adjacent non-tumor tissues to quantify the relative expression of miR-146a by using real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR).Expression of LIN52 was detected in tumors and normal tissues by immunohistochemistry.Correlation analysis was assessed between the expression of miR-146a and LIN52 and clinicopathological parameters,including clinical diagnostic specificity,tumor TNM staging,lymph node metastasis,differentiation grade,curative effect and prognosis of gastric cancer.Results The expression of miR-146a in gastric carcinoma was negatively correlated with lymph node metastasis (P ＜0.05).The expression of miR-146a had a significant correlation with the prognosis of the patients (P ＜ 0.01).The patients with high expression of miR-146a had higher survival rate (P ＜ 0.05),but the patients with high expression of LIN52 had lower survival rate (P ＜ 0.05).The receiver operating characteristic curve regression analysis showed that sensitivity and specificity of miR-146a were 94.1％ and 61.5 ％ to diagnose gastric cancer.Conclusions As a tumor suppressor gene in gastric cancer,miR-146a has significantly negative correlation with LIN52.High expression of miR-146a in the gastric cancer tissue might be associated with improved treatment efficacy of chemotherapy,suggesting that miR-146a may be a molecular marker for the diagnosis and prognosis of gastric cancer.

Objective: To investigate the effect of omeprazole on plasma concentration, efficacy and adverse reactions of capecitabine in patients with colon cancer. Methods: Seventy-two patients with colon cancer treated with capecitabine were analysed retrospective. The patients treated with capecitabine combined with omeprazole were identified as experimental group and the capecitabine treatment alone as control group.The differences of blood concentration and the side effects of capecitabine between these two groups were compared. Results: The plasma concentration of 5-Fluorouracilum in experimental group was (126.25±50.59) μg/ml, without significant difference of (123.09±56.70) μg/ml in control group (P=0.121). The incidence of Ⅲ to Ⅳ degree bone marrow suppression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome in experimental group were 13.8%, 0%, 0% and 19.4%, respectively. In control group, the incidence of Ⅲ to Ⅳ degree bone marrow suppression, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and the hand-foot syndrome were 11.1%, 0%, 0% and 19.4%, respectively, without significant difference of experimental group (P>0.05). The incidence of acid reflux and heartburn in the control group was 72.2%, significantly higher than 44.4% of the experimental group (P<0.05). The objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival time (PFS) in these two groups were 30.6% and 33.3%, and 8.0 month and 8.5 month, respectively, without significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion The intravenous omeprazole attenuates reflux and heartburn of colon cancer patients treated with capecitabine, without affecting its plasma concentration and side effects and has no impact on the PFS of these patients.