2.Eosinophilic gastroenteritis: Clinical profiles and treatment outcomes, a retrospective study of 18 adult patients in a Singapore Tertiary Hospital
Guan Wee Wong ; Kiat Hon Tony Lim ; Wei Keat Wan ; Su Chong Albert Low ; San Choon Kong
The Medical Journal of Malaysia 2015;70(4):232-237
Background: Eosinophilic gastroenteritis (EG) can mimic
symptoms of common gastrointestinal (GI) disorders but
responds well to appropriate treatment. Accurate diagnosis
is central to effective management. Data on EG in Southeast
Asia is lacking. We aim to describe the clinical profiles and
treatment outcomes of adult patients with EG in a Singapore
Tertiary Hospital.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective study involved
archival search of patients with GI biopsies that showed
eosinophilic infiltration from January 2004 to December
2012. Patients’ clinical data from computerised hospital
records and clinical notes was reviewed. Diagnostic criteria
for EG included presence of GI symptoms with more than 30
eosinophils/high power field on GI biopsies. Patients with
secondary causes for eosinophilia were excluded.
Results: Eighteen patients with EG were identified (mean
age 52 years; male/female: 11/7). Fifteen patients (83%) had
peripheral blood eosinophilia. Seven patients (39%) had
atopic conditions. Most common symptoms were diarrhoea
and abdominal pain. Small intestine was the most common
site involved. Endoscopic finding was non-specific. Ten
patients were treated with corticosteroids (nine
prednisolone, one budesonide): eight patients (89%)
responded clinically to prednisolone but four patients (50%)
relapsed following tapering-off of prednisolone and required
maintenance dose. One patient each responded to diet
elimination and montelukast respectively. Half of the
remaining six patients who were treated with proton-pump
inhibitors, antispasmodic or antidiarrheal agents still
remained symptomatic.
Conclusion: Prednisolone is an effective treatment though
relapses are common. Small intestine is most commonly
involved. EG should be considered in the evaluation of
unexplained chronic recurrent GI symptoms.
Enteritis
;
Gastroenteritis
3.Rare Incidence of ROS1 Rearrangement in Cholangiocarcinoma.
Sun Min LIM ; Jeong Eun YOO ; Kiat Hon LIM ; David Wai MENG TAI ; Byoung Chul CHO ; Young Nyun PARK
Cancer Research and Treatment 2017;49(1):185-192
PURPOSE: The recent discovery and characterization of an oncogenic ROS1 gene rearrangement has raised significant interest because small molecule inhibitors are effective in these tumors. The aim of this study was to determine frequency and clinicopathological features associated with ROS1 rearrangement in patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 261 patients who underwent surgery for CCA between October 1997 and August 2013 were identified from an international, multi-institutional database. ROS1 rearrangement was evaluated by break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization using tissue microarrays of these patients. RESULTS: Of 261 CCA evaluated, three cases (1.1%) showed ROS1 rearrangement by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), all of which were derived from intrahepatic origin. ROS1 protein expression was observed in 38 samples (19.1%). Significantly larger tumor size was observed in ROS1 immunohistochemistry (IHC)–negative patients compared with ROS1 IHC–positive patients. ROS1 FISH–positive patients had a single tumor with a median size of 4 cm and well-to-moderate differentiation. Overall, there was no difference in terms of baseline characteristics, overall survival, and recurrence-free survival between ROS1-positive and -negative patients. CONCLUSION: ROS1 rearrangement was detected in 1.1% of CCA patients. Although rare, conduct of clinical trials using ROS1 inhibitors in these genetically unique patients is warranted.
Cholangiocarcinoma*
;
Fluorescence
;
Gene Rearrangement
;
Humans
;
Immunohistochemistry
;
In Situ Hybridization
;
In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence
;
Incidence*