Effects of tamoxifen on normal breast tissue histological composition: Results from a randomised six-arm placebo-controlled trial in healthy women

Tamoxifen prevents recurrence of breast cancer and is suggested for preventive risk-reducing therapy. Tamoxifen reduces mammographic density, a proxy for therapy response, but little is known about its effects in remodelling normal breast tissue. Our study, a substudy within the double-blinded dose-determination trial KARISMA, investigated tamoxifen-specific changes in breast tissue composition and histological markers in healthy women. We included 83 healthy women randomised to 6 months daily intake of 20, 10, 5, 2.5, 1 mg of tamoxifen or placebo. The groups were combined to “no dose” (0-1 mg), “low-dose” (2.5-5 mg) or “high-dose” (10-20 mg) of tamoxifen. Ultrasound-guided biopsies were collected before and after tamoxifen exposure. In each biopsy, epithelial, stromal and adipose tissues was quantified, and expression of epithelial and stromal Ki67, oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) analysed. Mammographic density using STRATUS was measured at baseline and end-of-tamoxifen-exposure. We found that different doses of tamoxifen reduced mammographic density and glandular-epithelial area in premenopausal women and associated with reduced epithelium and increased adipose tissue. High-dose tamoxifen also decreased epithelial ER and PR expressions in premenopausal women. Premenopausal women with the greatest reduction in proliferation also had the greatest epithelial reduction. In postmenopausal women, high-dose tamoxifen decreased the epithelial area with no measurable density decrease. Tamoxifen at both low and high doses influences breast tissue composition and expression of histological markers in the normal breast. Our findings connect epithelial proliferation with tissue remodelling in premenopausal women and provide novel insights to understanding biological mechanisms of primary prevention with tamoxifen.     

RWMAs in critically ill patients with non-obstructed coronary arteries

Introduction

Left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is estimated to occur in 10%–25% of the general intensive care unit (ICU) population and is frequently seen as regional wall motion abnormalities (RWMAs). Although RWMA is mostly attributed to myocardial ischemia or infarction, some studies have suggested that nonischemic RWMA might also be prevalent. We sought to establish that RWMA can be seen in critically ill patients with normal coronary arteries and to explore reasons for RWMA in this population.

Methods

In this retrospective study, data from the hospital angiography register and the ICU register were collated between 2012 and 2019. Patients were identified who underwent angiography in conjunction with their ICU stay and had RWMA on echocardiography. Patients were divided into either those with non-obstructed or those with obstructed coronary arteries. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) examinations were reviewed if they had been performed on patients with non-obstructed coronaries.

Results

We identified 53 patients with RWMA and non-obstructed coronary arteries and 204 patients with RWMA and obstructed coronary arteries. Patients with non-obstructed coronary arteries were more often female, younger, and had fewer cardiovascular risk factors. They less commonly had ST elevation, but more frequently had T-wave inversion or serious arrhythmias. Troponin levels were higher in patients with obstructed coronary arteries, but NT-proBNP was similar between the groups. There were no differences in risk-adjusted 90-day mortality between patients with non-obstructed versus obstructed coronary arteries (OR 1.21, [95% CI 0.56–2.64], p = .628). In those with non-obstructed coronary arteries, follow-up echocardiography was available for 38 patients, of whom 30 showed normalization of cardiac function. Of the 14 patients with non-obstructed coronary arteries on whom cMRI was performed, 7 had a tentative diagnosis of Takotsubo syndrome or myocardial stunning; 4 had a myocardial infarction (preexisting in 3 cases); 1 patient had acute myocarditis; 1 patient had post-myocarditis; and 1 patient was diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy.

Conclusion

RWMA can be seen to occur in critically ill patients in the absence of coronary artery obstruction. Several conditions can cause regional hypokinesia, and cMRI is useful to evaluate the underlying etiology.     

Correction: Thrombotic and bleeding events,mortality, and anticoagulant use among 546,656 hospitalized patients with COVID‑19 in the United States: a retrospective cohort study

Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis -     

锁骨钩钢板内固定术后钢板钩与肩峰匹配性影像学研究

目的通过测量锁骨钩钢板内固定术后患者影像学资料，分析发生肩峰骨侵蚀的原因是否与钢板钩-肩峰匹配度相关。 方法回顾性分析2015年8月1日至2018年8月31日期间在上海市浦东医院骨科就诊的210例患者的影像学资料，210例患者均因肩锁关节脱位或锁骨远端骨折行锁骨钩钢板内固定治疗，其中男110例、女100例；年龄24~76岁，平均（44.60±8.75）岁；肩锁关节脱位70例，锁骨远端骨折140例。测量术后及终末随访患者肩锁关节正位X线片相关数据，按锁骨钩钢板术后是否发生肩峰骨侵蚀，将纳入患者分为3组：无骨侵蚀组（A组）、伴钢板钩移位骨侵蚀组（B组）、不伴移位的骨侵蚀组（C组），分别测量钢板钩-肩峰的匹配度（β），统计分析术后发生肩峰骨侵蚀与钢板钩-肩峰匹配度之间的关系。 结果纳入研究的210例患者术后随访24~64周，平均（32.0±6.5）周。A组患者115例，B组患者54例，C组患者41例。A组匹配度β（3.72±0.48）mm与B组β¹（6.91±0.84）mm比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；A组匹配度β（3.72±0.48）mm与C组β²（5.88±0.65）mm比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；B组匹配度β¹（6.91±0.84）mm与C组β²（5.88±0.65）mm比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。 结论锁骨钩钢板内固定术后是否发生肩峰骨侵蚀与钢板钩-肩峰匹配度β存在明显相关性，钢板钩与肩峰之间的匹配度越好，β值越小，发生肩峰骨侵蚀的可能性更小。     

腹腔镜与开腹手术治疗长径5~10 cm中危原发性胃间质瘤的安全性和有效性比较

目的　比较腹腔镜和开腹手术治疗长径5~10 cm的中危胃间质瘤的安全性和有效性，并评估患者术后使用伊马替尼辅助治疗是否有明显益处。方法　回顾性分析2010年1月—2020年7月在南京大学医学院附属鼓楼医院接受手术治疗的72例长径在5~10 cm的中危胃间质瘤患者资料。其中腹腔镜手术组28例，开腹手术组44例。比较两组患者基本资料、病理特征、围手术期结果、住院总费用。对比术后使用和不使用伊马替尼辅助治疗的生存率。结果　开腹组和腹腔镜组临床病理特征差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。腹腔镜组术后并发症发生率为32.1%（9/28），开腹组为52.3%（23/44），两组比较差异无统计学意义（P=0.094）。与开腹组相比，腹腔镜组总住院时间明显缩短［（12.5±3.2） d比（15.0±3.5） d，P=0.004］；术后中位住院天数明显缩短（7.5 d 比 9.0 d，P=0.006）；首次排气时间明显缩短（P=0.003）。中位随访时间58个月（13~129个月），期间未出现与肿瘤相关的死亡病例。开腹组有2例死亡，分别因乳腺癌和心脏病；腹腔镜组有1例死亡，死亡原因与胃间质瘤无关。72例患者中，40例术后接受伊马替尼辅助治疗，开腹组22例（50.0%），腹腔镜组18例（64.3%），两组接受伊马替尼辅助治疗的患者例数占比差异无统计学意义（χ2=1.414，P=0.234）。术后使用伊马替尼辅助治疗组总体生存率与未使用伊马替尼辅助治疗组相比差异有统计学意义 （P=0.015）。结论　与开腹手术相比，腹腔镜治疗长径在5~10 cm的中危胃间质瘤是一种安全有效的方法。实现R0切除的长径在5~10 cm的中危胃间质瘤患者术后使用伊马替尼辅助治疗未增加生存率，且未使用伊马替尼者未出现与肿瘤相关的死亡、复发及转移。