@article{LichthardtKerscherDietzetal.2016, author = {Lichthardt, Sven and Kerscher, Alexander and Dietz, Ulrich A. and Jurowich, Christian and Kunzmann, Volker and von Rahden, Burkhard H. A. and Germer, Christoph-Thomas and Wiegering, Armin}, title = {Original article: role of adjuvant chemotherapy in a perioperative chemotherapy regimen for gastric cancer}, series = {BMC Cancer}, volume = {16}, journal = {BMC Cancer}, number = {650}, doi = {10.1186/s12885-016-2708-0}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-147743}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Background Multimodal treatment strategies - perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) and radical surgery - are currently accepted as treatment standard for locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the role of adjuvant postoperative CTx (postCTx) in addition to neoadjuvant preoperative CTx (preCTx) in this setting remains controversial. Methods Between 4/2006 and 12/2013, 116 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer were treated with preCTx. 72 patients (62 \%), in whom complete tumor resection (R0, subtotal/total gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy) was achieved, were divided into two groups, one of which receiving adjuvant therapy (n = 52) and one without (n = 20). These groups were analyzed with regard to survival and exclusion criteria for adjuvant therapy. Results Postoperative complications, as well as their severity grade, did not correlate with fewer postCTx cycles administered (p = n.s.). Long-term survival was shorter in patients receiving postCTx in comparison to patients without postCTx, but did not show statistical significance. In per protocol analysis by excluding two patients with perioperative death, a shorter 3-year survival rate was observed in patients receiving postCTx compared to patients without postCTx (3-year survival: 71.2 \% postCTx group vs. 90.0 \% non-postCTx group; p = 0.038). Conclusion These results appear contradicting to the anticipated outcome. While speculative, they question the value of post-CTx. Prospectively randomized studies are needed to elucidate the role of postCTx.}, language = {en} } @article{OttoHahlbrockEichetal.2016, author = {Otto, Christoph and Hahlbrock, Theresa and Eich, Kilian and Karaaslan, Ferdi and J{\"u}rgens, Constantin and Germer, Christoph-Thomas and Wiegering, Armin and K{\"a}mmerer, Ulrike}, title = {Antiproliferative and antimetabolic effects behind the anticancer property of fermented wheat germ extract}, series = {BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine}, volume = {16}, journal = {BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine}, number = {160}, doi = {10.1186/s12906-016-1138-5}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-146013}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Background Fermented wheat germ extract (FWGE) sold under the trade name Avemar exhibits anticancer activity in vitro and in vivo. Its mechanisms of action are divided into antiproliferative and antimetabolic effects. Its influcence on cancer cell metabolism needs further investigation. One objective of this study, therefore, was to further elucidate the antimetabolic action of FWGE. The anticancer compound 2,6-dimethoxy-1,4-benzoquinone (DMBQ) is the major bioactive compound in FWGE and is probably responsible for its anticancer activity. The second objective of this study was to compare the antiproliferative properties in vitro of FWGE and the DMBQ compound. Methods The IC\(_{50}\) values of FWGE were determined for nine human cancer cell lines after 24 h of culture. The DMBQ compound was used at a concentration of 24 μmol/l, which is equal to the molar concentration of DMBQ in FWGE. Cell viability, cell cycle, cellular redox state, glucose consumption, lactic acid production, cellular ATP levels, and the NADH/NAD\(^+\) ratio were measured. Results The mean IC\(_{50}\) value of FWGE for the nine human cancer cell lines tested was 10 mg/ml. Both FWGE (10 mg/ml) and the DMBQ compound (24 μmol/l) induced massive cell damage within 24 h after starting treatment, with changes in the cellular redox state secondary to formation of intracellular reactive oxygen species. Unlike the DMBQ compound, which was only cytotoxic, FWGE exhibited cytostatic and growth delay effects in addition to cytotoxicity. Both cytostatic and growth delay effects were linked to impaired glucose utilization which influenced the cell cycle, cellular ATP levels, and the NADH/NAD\(^+\) ratio. The growth delay effect in response to FWGE treatment led to induction of autophagy. Conclusions FWGE and the DMBQ compound both induced oxidative stress-promoted cytotoxicity. In addition, FWGE exhibited cytostatic and growth delay effects associated with impaired glucose utilization which led to autophagy, a possible previously unknown mechanism behind the influence of FWGE on cancer cell metabolism.}, language = {en} }