Comparing product healthiness according to the Health Star Rating and the NOVA classification system and implications for food labelling systems: An analysis of 25 486 products in Australia

We investigated the extent of alignment between ‘healthiness’ defined by a food classification system that classifies foods and beverages primarily by their nutrient composition, the Health Star Rating (HSR) and a system that considers only the degree of processing of the product, the NOVA classification system. We used data for 25 486 products contained within the George Institute for Global Health's Australian 2022 FoodSwitch Dataset. Agreement between the two systems in the proportion of products classified as ‘healthier’ (HSR ≥3.5 or NOVA group 1–3) or ‘less healthy’ (HSR <3.5 or NOVA group 4) was assessed using the κ statistic. There was ‘fair’ agreement (κ = 0.30, 95%CI: 0.29–0.31) between both systems in the proportion of all products classified as healthier or less healthy. Approximately one-third (n = 8729) of all products were defined as ‘discordant’, including 34.3% (n = 5620) of NOVA group 4 products with HSR ≥3.5 (commonly convenience foods, sports/diet foods, meat alternatives, as well as products containing non-sugar sweeteners) and 34.1% (n = 3109) of NOVA group 1–3 products with HSR <3.5 (commonly single-ingredient foods such as sugars/syrups, full-fat dairy and products specially produced to contain no ultra-processed ingredients). Our analysis strengthens the evidence for the similarities and differences in product healthiness according to a nutrient-based classification system and a processing-based classification system. Although the systems' classifications align for the majority of food and beverage products, the discordance found for some product categories indicates potential for confusion if systems are deployed alongside each other within food policies.     

A comparison of DNA sequencing and gene expression profiling to assist tissue of origin diagnosis in cancer of unknown primary

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a syndrome defined by clinical absence of a primary cancer after standardised investigations. Gene expression profiling (GEP) and DNA sequencing have been used to predict primary tissue of origin (TOO) in CUP and find molecularly guided treatments; however, a detailed comparison of the diagnostic yield from these two tests has not been described. Here, we compared the diagnostic utility of RNA and DNA tests in 215 CUP patients (82% received both tests) in a prospective Australian study. Based on retrospective assessment of clinicopathological data, 77% (166/215) of CUPs had insufficient evidence to support TOO diagnosis (clinicopathology unresolved). The remainder had either a latent primary diagnosis (10%) or clinicopathological evidence to support a likely TOO diagnosis (13%) (clinicopathology resolved). We applied a microarray (CUPGuide) or custom NanoString 18-class GEP test to 191 CUPs with an accuracy of 91.5% in known metastatic cancers for high–medium confidence predictions. Classification performance was similar in clinicopathology-resolved CUPs – 80% had high–medium predictions and 94% were concordant with pathology. Notably, only 56% of the clinicopathology-unresolved CUPs had high–medium confidence GEP predictions. Diagnostic DNA features were interrogated in 201 CUP tumours guided by the cancer type specificity of mutations observed across 22 cancer types from the AACR Project GENIE database (77,058 tumours) as well as mutational signatures (e.g. smoking). Among the clinicopathology-unresolved CUPs, mutations and mutational signatures provided additional diagnostic evidence in 31% of cases. GEP classification was useful in only 13% of cases and oncoviral detection in 4%. Among CUPs where genomics informed TOO, lung and biliary cancers were the most frequently identified types, while kidney tumours were another identifiable subset. In conclusion, DNA and RNA profiling supported an unconfirmed TOO diagnosis in one-third of CUPs otherwise unresolved by clinicopathology assessment alone. DNA mutation profiling was the more diagnostically informative assay. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.     

A case report of prostate adenocarcinoma with leptomeningeal carcinomatosis and intracerebral metastasis

Despite the fact that prostate cancer is the most prevalent cancer in men, metastases to the central nervous system including leptomeningeal involvement by prostate carcinoma is a rare event. The prognosis of metastatic prostate cancer is very poor due to lack of CNS penetrating therapeutic agents.