T. Kiet

The inhibition of miR-21 promotes apoptosis and chemosensitivity in ovarian cancer☆

BACKGROUND MicroRNAs have been implicated in tumorigenesis, drug resistance, and prognosis in cancer. We investigated the role of microRNA-21 (miR-21) in regulating ovarian cancer drug resistance. METHODS We used parental and cisplatin resistant ovarian cell lines to demonstrate the role of miR-21 in drug resistance and investigated the gene targets of miR-21. Fresh tumor specimens were used to validate our in vitro findings. RESULTS Cisplatin resistant ovarian cells were four-fold more resistant compared to the parental cell line. MiR-21 was overexpressed in the resistant cell line on microRNA microarray, which was subsequently validated with qRT-PCR. Using anti-microRNA inhibitors, we demonstrated that miR-21 attenuation reversed the drug resistant phenotype in both the resistant and parental cell lines. The inhibition of miR-21 induced apoptosis based on annexin V-FITC immunostaining. Using Western blot analysis, miR-21 knockdown enhanced the expression of tumor suppressor PDCD4, and attenuated apoptosis inhibitor c-IAP2. Using 101 specimens from advanced ovarian cancer patients enrolled in The Cancer Genome Atlas, we found that women with tumors that overexpressed miR-21 were associated with a shorter progression-free survival. CONCLUSION Our data suggest that miR-21 regulates drug resistance via apoptosis and cellular survival pathways. Targeting miR-21 may have clinical utility in the treatment of resistant ovarian cancer.

An economic analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: Costs, charges and reimbursements to hospitals and professionals

OBJECTIVE To determine the actual costs, charges, and reimbursements associated with robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer. METHODS Data were collected from hospital billing records, MD professional group billing records, tumor registry, and medical records on operations performed by a single surgeon from one institution between 2008 and 2010. For comparison, surgical groups were matched based on age, histology, and stage of disease over the same time period. RESULTS Of 54 patients, 27 underwent robotic surgery (RS) and 27 had laparoscopic surgery (LS). The median age was 57 years. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups based on age, stage, and histology. The hospital charges for RS were higher at

Characteristics of success in mentoring and research productivity - a case-control study of academic centers.

64,266 vs.

MiR-378 as a biomarker for response to anti-angiogenic treatment in ovarian cancer

55,130 for LS (p=0.036). However, the reimbursement to the hospital was not statistically different at

Bevacizumab in Treatment of High-Risk Ovarian Cancer—A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

13,003 for RS and

Utilization of and charges for robotic versus laparoscopic versus open surgery for endometrial cancer.

10,245 for LS (p=0.29). Operating suite, room and board, anesthesia, post anesthesia care unit, and pathology accounted for over 90% of hospital charges. The surgeon charges for RS and LS were

Predictors of high symptom burden in gynecologic oncology outpatients: Who should be referred to outpatient palliative care?

6824 and

A prognostic nomogram to predict overall survival in women with recurrent ovarian cancer treated with bevacizumab and chemotherapy.

6327, respectively (p=0.033) and the anesthesiologist charges were

Applications for Oncologic Drugs: A Descriptive Analysis of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee Reviews

4049 and

Factors associated with publication of plenary presentations at the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists annual meeting.

2985, respectively (p=0.001). However, there were no differences in reimbursement to the surgeon (p=0.74) and anesthesiologist (p=0.84) between the two operative approaches. CONCLUSIONS Our data showed that the direct costs and charges associated with robotic surgery were higher compared to laparoscopic surgery. However, actual reimbursements to the hospital, surgeon, and anesthesiologist were not significantly different between the two surgical approaches.