The Gulf War Era Cohort and Biorepository: A Longitudinal Research Resource of Veterans of the 1990-1991 Gulf War Era.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Gulf War Era Cohort and Biorepository (GWECB) is a nationally representative longitudinal cohort of US veterans who served during the 1990-1991 Gulf War era. The GWECB combines survey data, such as demographic, health behavior, and environmental exposure data; medical records; and a linked biorepository of blood specimens that can support a broad range of future research regarding health concerns unique to veterans of this era. To build this resource, the VA Cooperative Studies Program initiated a pilot study (2014-2016) to establish the GWECB and evaluate the processes required to build and maintain the resource. Participants (n = 1,275) consented to future sharing of their data and biospecimens for research purposes. Here we describe the pilot study, including recruitment and enrollment procedures, data collection and management, quality control, and challenges experienced. The GWECB data available to investigators under approved sharing mechanisms and the procedures for accessing them are extensively detailed. The study's consenting documents and a website link for the research survey are provided. Our hope is that new research drawing on the GWECB data and biospecimens will result in effective treatments and improved approaches to address the health concerns of Gulf War-era veterans.

An assessment of survey measures used across key epidemiologic studies of United States Gulf War I Era veterans.

Over the past two decades, 12 large epidemiologic studies and 2 registries have focused on U.S. veterans of the 1990-1991 Gulf War Era. We conducted a review of these studies' research tools to identify existing gaps and overlaps of efforts to date, and to advance development of the next generation of Gulf War Era survey tools. Overall, we found that many of the studies used similar instruments. Questions regarding exposures were more similar across studies than other domains, while neurocognitive and psychological tools were the most variable. Many studies focused on self-reported survey results, with a range of validation practices. However, physical exams, biomedical assessments, and specimen storage were not common. This review suggests that while research may be able to pool data from past surveys, future surveys need to consider how their design can yield data comparable with previous surveys. Additionally, data that incorporate recent technologies in specimen and genetic analyses would greatly enhance such survey data. When combined with existing data on deployment-related exposures and post-deployment health conditions, longitudinal follow-up of existing studies within this collaborative framework could represent an important step toward improving the health of veterans.

The cost effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's esophagus.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) reduces the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD), but its effects in patients without dysplasia are debatable. We analyzed the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of RFA for the management of BE. METHODS: We constructed a decision analytic Markov model. We conducted separate analyses of hypothetical cohorts of patients with BE with dysplasia (HGD or low-grade [LGD]) and without dysplasia. In the analysis of the group with HGD, we compared results of initial RFA with endoscopic surveillance with surgery when cancer was detected. In analyzing the group with LGD or no dysplasia, we compared 3 strategies: endoscopic surveillance with surgery when cancer was detected (S1), endoscopic surveillance with RFA when HGD was detected (S2), and initial RFA followed by endoscopic surveillance (S3). RESULTS: Among patients with HGD, initial RFA was more effective and less costly than endoscopic surveillance. Among patients with LGD, when S3 was compared with S2, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $18,231/quality-adjusted life-year, assuming an annual rate of progression rate from LGD to EAC of 0.5%/year. For patients without dysplasia, S2 was more effective and less costly than S1. In a comparison of S3 with S2, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $205,500, $124,796, and $118,338/quality-adjusted life-year using annual rates of progression of no dysplasia to EAC of 0.12%, 0.33%, or 0.5% per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: By using updated data, initial RFA might not be cost effective for patients with BE without dysplasia, within the range of plausible rates of progression of BE to EAC, and be prohibitively expensive, from a policy perspective. RFA might be cost effective for confirmed and stable LGD. Initial RFA is more effective and less costly than endoscopic surveillance in HGD.

Comorbidity, age, race and stage at diagnosis in colorectal cancer: a retrospective, parallel analysis of two health systems.

BACKGROUND: Stage at diagnosis plays a significant role in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival. Understanding which factors contribute to a more advanced stage at diagnosis is vital to improving overall survival. Comorbidity, race, and age are known to impact receipt of cancer therapy and survival, but the relationship of these factors to stage at diagnosis of CRC is less clear. The objective of this study is to investigate how comorbidity, race and age influence stage of CRC diagnosis. METHODS: Two distinct healthcare populations in the United States (US) were retrospectively studied. Using the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance Consortium database, we identified CRC patients treated at 15 Veterans Administration (VA) hospitals from 2003-2007. We assessed metastatic CRC patients treated from 2003-2006 at 10 non-VA, fee-for-service (FFS) practices. Stage at diagnosis was dichotomized (non-metastatic, metastatic). Race was dichotomized (white, non-white). Charlson comorbidity index and age at diagnosis were calculated. Associations between stage, comorbidity, race, and age were determined by logistic regression. RESULTS: 342 VA and 340 FFS patients were included. Populations differed by the proportion of patients with metastatic CRC at diagnosis (VA 27% and FFS 77%) reflecting differences in eligibility criteria for inclusion. VA patients were mean (standard deviation; SD) age 67 (11), Charlson index 2.0 (1.0), and were 63% white. FFS patients were mean age 61 (13), Charlson index 1.6 (1.0), and were 73% white. In the VA cohort, higher comorbidity was associated with earlier stage at diagnosis after adjusting for age and race (odds ratio (OR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-1.00; p = 0.045); no such significant relationship was identified in the FFS cohort (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82-1.44; p = 0.57). In both cohorts, no association was found between stage at diagnosis and either age or race. CONCLUSION: Higher comorbidity may lead to earlier stage of CRC diagnosis. Multiple factors, perhaps including increased interactions with the healthcare system due to comorbidity, might contribute to this finding. Such increased interactions are seen among patients within a healthcare system like the VA system in the US versus sporadic interactions which may be seen with FFS healthcare.

Do patient preferences influence decisions on treatment for patients with steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis?

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis face a difficult treatment decision between colectomy and therapy with infliximab or cyclosporine. The aim of this study was to understand how individual patient preferences for the various treatment outcomes influence the optimal treatment decision for a given patient. METHODS: A Markov model was used to simulate treatment with total colectomy with an ileo pouch-anal anastomosis (TC/IPAA), cyclosporine (CSA), infliximab (INFLX), and infliximab followed by cyclosporine for treatment failures (INFLX-->CSA). Utility weights for treatment outcomes were elicited from 48 patients using both time trade-off and visual rating scale methods. Preference sets were applied to the model to identify the therapy that maximized quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each patient. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess model robustness. RESULTS: Optimal treatment was highly variable among patients (INFLX-->CSA = 42%, 20/48; TC/IPAA = 37%, 18/48; CSA = 21%, 10/48; INFLX = 0%, 0/48). However, when average preference weights from our sample were applied to the model, medical treatments were superior to TC (CSA = .26 QALYs gained vs TC/IPAA; INFLX-->CSA = .25 QALYs gained vs TC/IPAA). CONCLUSIONS: Patient preferences have a clear impact on the optimal treatment for steroid-refractory ulcerative colitis. Although averaged preferences support the use of medical interventions, a third of individual patients may benefit most from proceeding directly to colectomy. Failure to fully assess individual preferences may result in suboptimal treatment for these patients.