Biomedical subjects

Jia Fan

Publications and source records attributed to Jia Fan.

59 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

PubMed2000

Lewis Antigens, alpha1,3 Fucosyltransferses and the Metastatic Potential of Human Primary Liver Cancer.

In order to study the expression of Lewis antigens and the subtypes of alpha1,3 fucosyltransferase(alpha1,3FucT) in human primary liver cancer, and their relations with the cancer cell embolus formation, as well as the expression of nm23-H1, a metastatic suppressor gene, Lewis antigens were detected with immunohistochemical method, and the mRNA of alpha1,3 FucTs and nm23-H1 were determined with Northern blot. Results showed that the positive rates of the expression of four Lewis antigens, sialyl Lewis X(Sle(x)), Lewis X(Le(x)), sialyl dimeric Lewis X(SDLe(x)) and sialyl Lewis A(Sle(a)), in human primary liver cancer were about 80%. The expression of Sle(x) was rather higher, Le(x) and Sle(a) were lower, but the expression of SDLe(x) was only in trace amount. The four Lewis antigens were not expressed in the liver regions adjacent to the cancer tissues. The transcriptional level of alpha1,3 FucT-III/VI mRNA in cancer tissues was higher than that in the adjacent regions, especially in the cancer tissues of patients with portal vein cancer cell embolus(CCE). However, the expression of alpha1,3 FucT-III/VI mRNA was not different in the adjacent regions in spite of the presence or absence of CCE in the patients. In contrast, the expression of alpha1,3 FucT-VII was rather lower and identical to each other both in cancer tissues and adjacent regions. In addition, it was found that the expression of nm23-H1, a metastasis suppressor gene, was markedly lower in the cancer tissues of patients with CCE than that in the non-CCE patients and the adjacent regions. Furthermore, the expression of nm23-H1 was negatively related to the expression of alpha1,3 FucT-III/VI. These results indicated that the expression of alpha1,3 FucT-III/VI and its product Sle(x) were correlated with CCE (metastatic potential), and the down-regulation of alpha1,3 FucT-III/VI and Sle(x) may be one of the mechanisms of nm23-H1 to inhibit liver cancer metastasis.

Journal Article↗

PubMedDate not supplied

A comparison of chemoembolization combination with and without radiotherapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effect of transcatheter arterial chem-oembolization combined with external beam radiotherapy on the response rates and sur vival of patients with unresectable hepato-cellular carcinoma. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization is frequently used for the treatment of this cancer, but complete or massive necrosis is seldom observed. Historically, radiotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma has yielded poor long-term survival. Multimodality therapy has been initiated in an effort to improve survival statistics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 203 patients with unresectable hepa-tocellular carcinoma, who were free of tumor thrombus, lymph node involvement, or extrahepatic metastasis based on computed tomography scans of the chest and abdomen. Among the 203 patients who received transcatheter ar terial chemoembolization as initial therapy, 54 also received combination therapy with external beam radiotherapy. Tumor response rate, survival, and failure patterns were analyzed and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Objective responses (complete and partial responses) on computed tomography study were obser ved in 31% and 76% of patients in the non-radiotherapy and radiotherapy groups, respectively. Overall survival rates in the patients in the radiotherapy group were 71.5%, 42.3%, and 24.0% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively, improved over the non-radiotherapy group rates of 59.6%, 26.5%, and 11.1% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. Intrahepatic failure was lower in the radiotherapy group than in the non-radiotherapy group, but the difference was not significant. Side effects from radiotherapy were common, but rarely severe. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that the outcome of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma can be influenced by radiation therapy, but a prospective randomized trial would be necessary to draw definitive conclusions.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Radiation therapy for the locoregional lymph node metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma, phase I clinical trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The patients with lymph node metastasis from hepatocellular carcinoma may survive only a few months. These patients are not suitable for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, percutaneous ethanol injection and surgical resection. External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) could provide a useful treatment, but only 4 hepatocellular carcinoma cases with abdominal lymph nodes involvement were treated with EBRT in the two reports over the last 10 years. In this paper, we report 29 hepatocellular carcinoma patients with abdominal lymph node metastasis who received EBRT over a period of 5 years. METHODOLOGY: Of 29 patients, 20 were pathologically confirmed to have hepatocellular carcinoma and 9 patients were clinically diagnosed to have hepatocellular carcinoma. All of the patients had proven abdominal lymph node metastasis by enhanced abdominal computer tomography scan due to clinical follow-up or abdominal symptoms. EBRT was not the initial treatment in all. The patients received locoregional lymph nodes irradiation. The tumor dose ranged from 30 to 60 Grays (Gy) in daily 2.0-Gy fractions (Fx), 5 times a week. RESULTS: It is of interest to note that an objective regression (complete response and partial response) rate was 100%. The clinical symptoms were relieved. The median survival time was 8 (4-28) months. The overall 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 43.5% and 10.5%, respectively. The median survival time consistently decreased as the lymph node involvement increase follows the natural flow of lymph. CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node metastasis from hepatocellular carcinoma is sensitive to EBRT, although EBRT is palliative in intent, it is useful in the treatment with 50 Gy/25 Fx for those patients.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Factors influencing survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombosis after surgery, with special reference to time dependency: a single-center experience of 381 cases.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The prognosis ofhepatocellular carcinoma with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombosis is extremely poor. The risk factors may differ at different postoperative intervals. This study was undertaken to clarify the surgical outcome and time dependency of factors influencing survival in these patients. METHODOLOGY: We analyzed clinicopathological variables of 381 hepatocellular carcinoma patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombosis who underwent hepatic resection. Survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier method. The stratified Cox models were used to identify factors independently influencing short- and long-term survival, respectively. RESULTS: The cumulative 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates in 381 patients were 47%, 23%, 16%, 12%, 6%, respectively. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates calculated from time of re-resection were 36%, 14% and 0% in patients undergoing re-resection for intrahepatic recurrence within 2 years after first operation, and 85%, 53% and 32% in those more than 2 years after first operation (P<0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that portal vein infusion chemotherapy, serum alpha-fetoprotein > 20 mg/L and positive surgical margin were significant prognostic factors within 2 years after operation. In contrast, alanine aminotransferase > 80 U/L was the only significant factor beyond 2 years after operation. CONCLUSIONS: The survival of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombosis was poor, but the prognosis of patients who had tumor recurrence more than 2 years after operation was much better than those with tumor recurrence within 2 years. Evaluation of time-dependency of risk factors may have important clinical implication in determining the therapeutic strategy.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Consideration of the role of radiotherapy for unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a retrospective analysis of 75 patients.

UNLABELLED: The role of radiotherapy in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is controversial. We undertook this study to determine if radiotherapy is appropriate for patients with unresectable or lymph node metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The records of 75 patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were reviewed and analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards analysis. Thirty-eight patients who received limited local external-beam radiotherapy were classified as the radiotherapy group. This group included nine patients with resected intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with macroscopic residual lymph nodes receiving postoperative external-beam radiotherapy, seven patients with postoperative recurrences in lymph nodes receiving external-beam radiotherapy for salvage failure after treatment with surgery alone, and 22 patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. The median total dose was 50 Gy (range, 30-60 Gy) in daily doses of 2 Gy/fraction, five times a week. Thirty-seven patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (including 14 with resectable disease and synchronous or asynchronous lymph node metastases, and 23 with unresectable disease) who did not receive external-beam radiotherapy were selected from hospitalized patients in the same period and were classified as the nonexternal-beam radiotherapy group. Parameters observed included survival rates and tumor response to external-beam radiotherapy demonstrated both by clinical symptoms and by computed tomography scan/magnetic resonance image. RESULTS: Objective responses to external-beam radiotherapy were 36.4% for intrahepatic tumors in 22 patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and 52% for lymph node metastases in 25 patients with resectable or unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Pain was relieved in 90% of the patients who received external-beam radiotherapy. The survival rates at 1 and 2 years for patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma treated with external-beam radiotherapy (n = 22) compared with those who did not receive external-beam radiotherapy (n = 23) were 36.1% versus 19.0% and 5.2% versus 4.7%, respectively (log-rank P = 0.021). The survival experience of the 16 patients with lymph node metastases (synchronous or asynchronous) who underwent hepatectomy combined with external-beam radiotherapy was superior to that of the group (n = 14) who did not receive external-beam radiotherapy (median survival, 468 and 211 days, respectively; log-rank P = 0.075). These results show that external-beam radiotherapy influenced the survival in the patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or lymph node metastases. The most common reason for death was liver failure caused by uncontrolled intrahepatic disease. Grade 3 toxicity in the external-beam radiotherapy group was infrequent. CONCLUSION: External-beam radiotherapy seems to improve the prognosis of patients with unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and deserves further study.

Bile Duct Neoplasms↗