1,721,046 research outputs found

    The correlation between colorectal cancer rates of proliferation and apoptosis and systemic cytokine levels; plus their influence upon survival

    No full text
    Colorectal cancer development is associated with a shift in host immunity with suppression of the cell-mediated immune system (CMI) and a predominance of humoral immunity (HI). Tumour progression is also associated with increased rates of cell proliferation and apoptosis. The aim of this study was to investigate whether these factors correlate and have an influence upon prognosis. Long-term follow-up was performed on 40 patients with colorectal cancer who had levels of tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, interferon (IFN)-gamma and interleukin (IL)-10 measured from stimulated blood cultures before surgery. Their archived tumour specimens were analysed to determine a Ki-67-derived proliferation index (PI) and a M30-derived apoptosis index (AI). Tumour necrosis factor-alpha levels negatively correlated to tumour proliferation (rho=-0.697, P=0.01). Interleukin-10 levels had a positive correlation with tumour proliferation (rho=0.452, P=0.05) and apoptosis (rho=0.587, P=0.01). Patient survival correlates to tumour pathological stage (P=0.0038) and vascular invasion (P=0.0014). An AI or =8148 pg ml(-1) correlate to improved survival (P=0.032, P=0.021). Tumour proliferation and apoptosis correlate to progressive suppression of the CMI-associated cytokine TNF-alpha and to and higher levels of IL-10. Survival is dependent upon the histological stage of the tumour, vascular invasion, rates of apoptosis and proliferation and systemic immunity which are all interconnected

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore