Objective:To investigate the expression of retinoic acid receptor responsive gene 2 (RARRES2), microtubule microfilament cross-linking factor 1 (MACF1), and core protein polysaccharide (DCN) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients with neurosyphilis, and their diagnostic value for neurosyphilis.Methods:A total of 64 non neurosyphilis syphilis patients (syphilis group) and 78 neurosyphilis patients (neurosyphilis group) admitted to the Second Hospital of Nanjing between June 2020 and September 2022 were included. Among neurosyphilis patients, there were 48 early neurosyphilis patients (early group) and 30 late neurosyphilis patients (late group). Patients with neurosyphilis are treated with routine symptomatic therapy and antibiotic therapy to expel syphilis. The mRNA levels of RARRES2, MACF1, and DCN in CSF of patients with neurosyphilis before and after treatment were detected by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was used to evaluate the neurological function of patients with neurosyphilis before and after treatment. The diagnostic value of various indicators for neurosyphilis was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.Results:The mRNA levels of RARRES2, MACF1, and DCN in CSF of patients with neurosyphilis were higher than those in the syphilis group (all P<0.001). The mRNA levels of RARRES2, MACF1, and DCN in the CSF of patients with advanced neurosyphilis were higher than those in the early group (all P<0.001). Compared with before treatment, the NIHSS score and RARRES2, MACF1, and DCN mRNA levels of neurosyphilis patients decreased after treatment (all P<0.001). The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of the combined diagnosis of RARRES2, MACF1, and DCN mRNA in CSF for neurosyphilis were 0.995%, 100.00%, and 93.75%, respectively. The AUC and sensitivity were higher than those of individual diagnosis. Conclusions:The expression of RARRES2, MACF1, and DCN is elevated in CSF of patients with neurosyphilis, and is associated with disease severity and treatment response. These three genes may be candidate biomarkers for diagnosing neurosyphilis.

Objective To evaluate the efficacy, safety and risk factors of endoscopic treatment for patients with early gastric cancer. Methods A retrospective study was conducted in a single center and data was collected from 186 early gastric cancers in 168 pathologically confirmed patients who received endoscopic treatment in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 2006 to December 2015. The cases were divided into different groups according to indications of endoscopic treatment. The curative resection rate and complication rate were analyzed. Post-resection outcomes were evaluated by long-term surveillance. Results The curative resection rate was 86. 9%( 73/84) in the group with absolute indications, 61. 7%(50/81)in the group with expanded indications, and 33. 3%(7/21) in the group beyond indications (P＜0. 01). Multivariate analysis revealed that the significant independent predictors for curative resection included lower third location of stomach, no ulceration,≤2 cm at diameter, no adhesion, and well-differentiation in histopathology. In the expanded indications group, discordance of differentiation type and deeper invasion mainly resulted in non-curative resection in en bloc lesions. The rate of bleeding and perforation was 4. 8%( 9/186) and 3. 8%( 7/186), respectively. The perforation rate was significantly lower in the lesions located in the lower third of stomach, without adhesion or performed by en bloc resection. During a median follow-up period of 22. 3 months, 154 patients were followed successfully. The incidence of synchronous and metachronous gastric cancers in curative resected lesions was 7. 5%( 8/106) and 0. 9%(1/106), respectively. Conclusion Endoscopic resection is an optimal treatment with high curative resection rate for early gastric cancer patients with absolute indications. Patients with expanded indications should take precise preoperative evaluation to avoid higher risk of non-curative resection endoscopically. Close follow-up is necessary for synchronous and metachronous gastric cancers after endoscopic resection.