Dysregulation of p53 and phosphoinositide (PIPn) signaling are both key drivers of oncogenesis and metastasis. Our recent findings reveal a previously unrecognized interaction between these pathways, converging in the nucleus to form a PIPn-p53 signalosome that modulates nuclear AKT activation and downstream signaling, thereby influencing cancer cell survival and motility. This review examines recent insights into nuclear PIPn signaling in the context of established roles for p53 in cell dynamics and migration while also deliberating current research on how nuclear PIPns interact with p53 to form signalosomes that affect cell motility. We emphasize the critical role of PIPns in stabilizing p53 and activating de novo nuclear AKT signaling, which subsequently modulates key motility-related pathways. Understanding the unique operation and function of the PIPn-p53 signalosome in nuclear phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)-AKT activation offers novel therapeutic strategies for controlling cancer metastasis by targeting pertinent interactions and events.
Humans ; Tumor Suppressor Protein p53/metabolism* ; Signal Transduction ; Cell Movement ; Cell Nucleus/metabolism* ; Phosphatidylinositols/metabolism* ; Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt/metabolism* ; Animals ; Neoplasms/pathology* ; Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases/metabolism*

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

Objective To evaluate the predictive performance of the Alberta stroke program early computed tomography score(ASPECTS),the Lausanne stroke scale(ASTRAL),DRAGON,START,and the total healthy risks for patients with vascular events calculated(THRIVE-c)score prediction models for the prognosis of patients with acute ischemic stroke(AIS)in Baoding advanced stroke centers,Hebei Province.Methods Clinical data of 909 patients with AIS who were admitted for intravenous thrombolysis in the department of emergency of the advanced stroke center of the Baoding NO.1 Central Hospital from January 2016 to August 2022 were collected and scored using the ASPECTS,ASTRAL,DRAGON,START,and THRIVE-c scales.The 3-month modified Rankin scale(mRS)score was observed for each score,with a score of 0-2 as a good prognosis and 3-6 as a poor prognosis,and multivariate Logistic regression coefficients for the variables in the 5 scores were compared with the original derivation cohort.The predictive efficacy of each scoring model for 3-month poor prognosis of AIS patients was analyzed by using the receiver operator characteristic curve(ROC curve),and area under the curve(AUC)was calculated;the degree of fit of each model to the actual prognostic results was assessed by using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test;at the same time,the calibration curves and Brier scores were used as an evaluation of the model's calibration performance indicators.Results A total of 786 patients were enrolled and 340 had a poor prognosis.Comparison of the validation cohort with the original cohort for model construction showed that the mean age in the validation cohort was 65 years old,with a relatively small proportion of 33.84%females,and a median glycemic value of 8.09 mmol/L.The proportion of poor prognosis was lower in the validation cohort compared to the original ASPECTS and THRIVE-c cohort(43.68%vs.51.90%,43.68%vs.50.30%)and higher in the validation cohort compared to the original cohorts of ASTRAL,DRAGON,and START(43.68%vs.34.00%,43.68%vs.35.20%,43.68%vs.39.10%,all P<0.05).ROC curve analysis showed that ASPECTS,ASTRAL,DRAGON,START and THRIVE-c scores all had predictive value for the prognosis of patients with AIS,with AUC and 95%confidence intervals(95%CI)of 0.848(0.820-0.876),0.825(0.795-0.855),0.833(0.805-0.861),0.838(0.811-0.866),and 0.727(0.691-0.762);in the anterior circulation it was 0.852(0.821-0.883),0.817(0.782-0.853),0.815(0.781-0.849),and 0.833(0.800-0.866),0.710(0.668-0.751);and 0.841(0.781-0.902),0.850(0.792-0.908),0.874(0.816-0.931),0.854(0.800-0.908),and 0.775(0.704-0.846)in the posterior loops,respectively.Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test showed that the DRAGON model curve had a smaller gap from the middle diagonal and was better calibrated(χ2=1.483,P=0.993).The Brier score showed that the ASPECTS scoring model had the smallest Brier score was 0.150 and the best performance.Conclusions The ASPECTS,ASTRAL,DRAGON,START,and THRIVE-c scoring models have been shown to be effective in predicting poor prognosis in patients with AIS treated with intravenous thrombolytic therapy at 3 months,with the ASPECTS model showing the most outstanding predictive performance.For anterior infarcts,the ASPECTS score demonstrated the highest predictive efficacy,whereas for posterior infarcts,the DRAGON score had the best predictive performance.The probability of the ASPECTS score in predicting prognosis in the prediction model was in good agreement with the actual probability.