beta 2-M mediates this process by activating epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) to promote lethal bone and soft tissue metastases in host mice. beta 2-M interacts with its receptor, hemochromatosis (HFE) protein,

to modulate iron responsive pathways in cancer cells. Inhibition of either beta 2-M or HFE results in reversion of EMT. These results demonstrate the role of beta 2-M in cancer metastasis and lethality. Thus, beta 2-M and its downstream signaling pathways are promising prognostic markers of cancer metastases and novel therapeutic targets for cancer therapy. Cancer Res; 71(7); 2600-10. (C)2011 ABT-263 AACR.”
“Purpose\n\nTo investigate the impact of prior-to-transplantation azacitidine (AZA) on patient outcome after allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (alloSCT) for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS).\n\nPatients and Methods\n\nOf the 265 consecutive patients who underwent alloSCT for MDS between October 2005 and December 2009, 163 had received cytoreductive

treatment prior to transplantation, including induction chemotherapy (ICT) alone (ICT group; n = 98), AZA alone (AZA group; n = 48), or AZA preceded or followed by ICT (AZA-ICT group; n = 17). At diagnosis, 126 patients (77%) had an excess of marrow blasts, and 95 patients (58%) had intermediate-2 or high-risk MDS according to the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS). Progression to more advanced disease before alloSCT was recorded in 67 patients. Donors were sibling (n = 75) Luminespib or HLA-matched unrelated (10/10; n = 88). They received blood (n = 142) or marrow (n = 21) grafts following either myeloablative (n = 33) or reduced intensity (n = 130) conditioning.\n\nResults\n\nWith a median follow-up of 38.7 months, 3-year outcomes in the AZA, ICT, and AZA-ICT groups were 55%, 48%, and 32% (P=.07) for overall survival (OS); 42%, 44%, and 29% (P=.14) for event-free survival (EFS); 40%, 37%, and 36% (P=.86) for relapse; and 19%, 20%, and 35% (P=.24) for nonrelapse mortality (NRM), respectively. Multivariate analysis confirmed the absence of

statistical differences between the AZA and the ICT groups in terms of OS, EFS, relapse, and NRM.\n\nConclusion\n\nWith the goal of downstaging underlying disease before Selleck SYN-117 alloSCT, AZA alone led to outcomes similar to those for standard ICT. J Clin Oncol 30:4533-4540. (C) 2012 by American Society of Clinical Oncology”
“Background. Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer is associated with the E-cadherin germline mutations, but genetic determinants have not been identified for familial intestinal gastric carcinoma.. e guidelines for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer are clearly established; however, there are no defined recommendations for the management of familial intestinal gastric carcinoma. Methods. In this study we describe Pope John XXIII’s pedigree that harboured gastric cancer as well as six other family members.