Results 1 - 10 of 6937
Results 1 - 10 of 6937. Search took: 0.037 seconds
|Sort by: date | relevance|
[en] The study described in this report enters into a number of possible functions of UV radiation in the arising of melanomas. From the results it turns out that UV radiation probably does not induce melanomas directly, which pleads for a more direct function of UV radiation possibly via suppression of the defence system against tumour cells. (H.W.). 20 refs
[en] The evidence for cellular effects of exposure to electromagnetic (EM) fields has been reviewed. The cellular responses which may be relevant to carcinogenesis have been briefly identified, and evidence for modulation of these responses by EM field exposure has been discussed. Experimental evidence indicates that EM field exposure does not produce adverse genetic effects and is unlikely to have a direct effect on tumour initiation. There are, however, some reports suggesting that exposure may lead to subtle changes in cell behaviour, including effects on cell division. Such responses could be consistent with an effect at the level of tumour promotion. Furthermore, some reports indicate that EM field exposure may induce alterations in cellular characteristics of a similar nature to those resulting from tumour progression. It is emphasised, however, that available evidence is frequently of poor quality, and falls far short of indicating a definite effect of EM fields on carcinogenesis. (Author)
[en] The aim of these proceedings was to review the current knowledge on more theoretical or experimental aspects of carcinogenesis, as a basis for the design of new approaches in preventive oncology. Owing to the high level of the contributions, Participants were exposed to an outstanding, up-to-date overview on the many aspects of this field, from molecular level to the cell, tissue, organism and finally at the environmental level. It also became apparent that conceptual and even terminological differences clearly exist between the various 'subfields'; differences which however, could be partially reduced or were, at least, better identified during the discussions, or during the workshop which followed the symposium. refs.; figs.; tabs
[en] This work aims to investigate the expression pattern and clinicopathologic significance of centromere protein H (CENP-H) in uterine cervical cancer (UCC). The level of CENP-H expression in the paraffin sections of 62 UCC cases was determined by the SP immunohistochemical method, with complete clinicopathologic data in all cases. Statistical analysis was conducted to evaluate the prognostic and diagnostic significance of CENP-H using SPSS13.0 software package. Immunohistochemical assay showed strong CENP-H expression in 61.29% (38/62) of the paraffin-embedded cervical cancer tissues. Statistical analysis revealed a strong correlation between the CENP-H expression and the clinical classification (P=0.038) of the cervical carcinoma. The expression increased with rise of the stages. The analysis of Cox proportional hazards regression model suggested that CENP-H expression (P=0.002) and tumor stage (P=0.001) were independent prognostic markers for the survival of UCC patients. The survival analysis showed that the survival rate was significantly lower in patients with high expression of CENP-H than in those with low expression of CENP-H (P=0.001). CENP-H is likely to be a valuable marker for carcinogenesis and progression of UCC. It might be used as the important diagnostic and prognostic marker for cervical carcinoma patients, especially for those at early stage
[en] TO THE EDITOR: The recent article by Demir et al. in your esteemed journal provided for highly stimulating and interesting reading. Interestingly, over the past few years artemin has been identified as a significant player in the enhancement of oncogenicity of various other tumors besides pancreatic cancers.
[en] Background and Aim: Androgen plays a fundamental role in the growth and differentiation of prostate. Androgen receptor (AR) expression may represent a potential marker of prognosis in prostate cancer. However, there have been variable results regarding its ability to predict clinical progression. Despite the oncogenic properties of DJ-1, its significance in prostate cancer development and progression is not well understood. This research shed some light on the possible role of immunohistochemical expression of DJ-1 in clinically localized prostatic carcinoma in relation to the established role of AR and other clinico pathologic parameters. Materials and Methods: The immunohistochemical expression of AR and DJ-1 was evaluated in 129 samples including benign hyperplasia (n = 60) and prostatic carcinoma (n = 69). Results: The mean value of AR immunostaining was significantly higher in prostatic carcinomas than in benign hyperplasia (P = 0.001). A significant inverse correlation was found between AR immunostaining and the grade of prostatic carcinomas. A significantly higher median DJ-1 score was found in prostatic carcinoma than in benign hyperplasia (P = 0.0001). There was a significant direct correlation between AR and DJ-1 score (P = 0.0001). AR is more sensitive in predicting prostatic carcinoma than DJ-1 but DJ-1 is more specific than AR. Conclusion: AR nuclear expression was consistently present in benign and adenocarcinoma epithelium. But, there may be limited clinical use for AR expression in localized carcinoma due to its constant heterogeneity. DJ-1 with its oncogenic properties, specificity for prostatic carcinoma and homogenous expression gives an ideal complementary role to AR in the detection and treatment of prostatic carcinomas.