Understanding Women's Transitions from Military to Department of Veterans Affairs Care.

Background: Over the past two decades, increasing numbers of women have served in the military, with women now comprising 17.3% of active-duty personnel and 21.4% of National Guard and reserves. During military service, women often incur painful musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries related to carrying heavy loads and wearing ill-fitting gear. While women may receive initial care for these injuries under the auspices of the Department of Defense (DoD), these injuries often linger and further treatment in required as women transition to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) care. However, little is known about this transition process, and whether women are given adequate information and support regarding how to access VA care after their military service has ended. Research Design: To better understand these issues, we interviewed 65 women veterans with military service-related MSK injuries about their transition from DoD to VA care. Results: Six major themes emerged from the interviews. Those themes were: (1) Military injuries are often related to ill-fitting gear or carrying heavy loads; (2) Stigma/discrimination related to military injuries; (3) Limited assistance with transition between DoD and VA to manage ongoing injuries and pain; (4) Women have a difficult time managing perceptions and expectations of their weight after military service; (5) Childcare is a substantial burden for veterans in self-care; and (6) veterans desire peer-support services to help them stay healthy. Conclusions: Based on these findings, DoD and VA should continue to work together to develop programs to educate and support women as they transition from military to VA care. Furthermore, VA should consider developing peer support programs for women Veterans who may require additional support to maintain health, especially among Veteran mothers who have complex family responsibilities that may limit their ability to focus on their own health.

Asthma morbidity measures across Black ethnic subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Black adults are disproportionately affected by asthma and are often considered a homogeneous group in research studies despite cultural and ancestral differences. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine if asthma morbidity differs across adults in Black ethnic subgroups. METHODS: Adults with moderate-severe asthma were recruited across the continental United States and Puerto Rico for the PREPARE (PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief) trial. Using self-identifications, we categorized multiethnic Black (ME/B) participants (n = 226) as Black Latinx participants (n = 146) or Caribbean, continental African, or other Black participants (n = 80). African American (AA/B) participants (n = 518) were categorized as Black participants who identified their ethnicity as being American. Baseline characteristics and retrospective asthma morbidity measures (self-reported exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids [SCs], emergency department/urgent care [ED/UC] visits, hospitalizations) were compared across subgroups using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Compared with AA/B participants, ME/B participants were more likely to be younger, residing in the US Northeast, and Spanish speaking and to have lower body mass index, health literacy, and <1 comorbidity, but higher blood eosinophil counts. In a multivariable analysis, ME/B participants were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.04-1.72) and SC use (IRR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.00-1.62) for asthma than AA/B participants. Of the ME/B subgroups, Puerto Rican Black Latinx participants (n = 120) were significantly more likely to have ED/UC visits (IRR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.22-2.21) and SC use for asthma (IRR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.06-1.92) than AA/B participants. There were no significant differences in hospitalizations for asthma among subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: ME/B adults, specifically Puerto Rican Black Latinx adults, have higher risk of ED/UC visits and SC use for asthma than other Black subgroups.

What Patients Call Their Inhalers Is Associated with "Asthma Attacks".

BACKGROUND: Clinician-patient miscommunication contributes to worse asthma outcomes. What patients call their asthma inhalers and its relationship with asthma morbidity are unknown. METHODS: Inhaler names were ascertained from Black and Latinx adults with moderate-severe asthma and categorized as "standard" if based on brand/generic name or inhaler type (i.e., controller vs. rescue) or "non-standard" for other terms (i.e., color, device type, e.g., "puffer," or unique names). Clinical characteristics and asthma morbidity measures were evaluated at baseline: self-reported asthma exacerbations one year before enrollment (i.e., systemic corticosteroid bursts, emergency department (ED)/urgent care (UC) visits, or hospitalizations), and asthma control and quality of life. Multivariable regression models tested the relationship between non-standard names and asthma morbidity measures, with adjustments. RESULTS: Forty-four percent (502/1150) of participants used non-standard inhaler names. These participants were more likely to be Black (p=0.006), from the Southeast (p<0.001), and have fewer years with asthma (p=0.012) relative to those who used standard names. Non-standard inhaler names was associated with an incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 1.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.50, p=0.001; 1.8 vs. 1.5 events) for corticosteroid bursts for asthma, an IRR=1.43 (95% CI, 1.21-1.69, p<0.001; 1.9 vs. 1.4 events) for ED/UC visits for asthma, and an odds ratio=1.57 (95% CI, 1.12-2.18, p=0.008; 0.5 vs. 0.3 events) for asthma hospitalizations after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who use non-standard names for asthma inhalers experience increased asthma morbidity. Ascertaining what patients call their inhalers may be a quick method to identify those at higher risk of poor outcomes.

Preference for and impact of telehealth vs in-person asthma visits among Black and Latinx adults.

BACKGROUND: Black and Latinx adults experience disproportionate asthma-related morbidity and limited specialty care access. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic expanded telehealth use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate visit type (telehealth [TH] vs in-person [IP]) preferences and the impact of visit type on asthma outcomes among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma. METHODS: For this PREPARE trial ancillary study, visit type preference was surveyed by e-mail or telephone post-trial. Emergency medical record data on visit types and asthma outcomes were available for a subset (March 2020 to April 2021). Characteristics associated with visit type preferences, and relationships between visit type and asthma outcomes (control [Asthma Control Test] and asthma-related quality of life [Asthma Symptom Utility Index]), were tested using multivariable regression. RESULTS: A total of 866 participants consented to be surveyed, with 847 respondents. Among the participants with asthma care experience with both visit types, 42.0% preferred TH for regular checkups, which associated with employment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.39; P = .02), lower asthma medication adherence (OR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .03), and having more historical emergency department and urgent care asthma visits (OR = 1.10 for each additional visit; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18; P = .02), after adjustment. Emergency medical record data were available for 98 participants (62 TH, 36 IP). Those with TH visits were more likely Latinx, from the Southwest, employed, using inhaled corticosteroid-only controller therapy, with lower body mass index, and lower self-reported asthma medication adherence vs those with IP visits only. Both groups had comparable Asthma Control Test (18.4 vs 18.9, P = .52) and Asthma Symptom Utility Index (0.79 vs 0.84, P = .16) scores after adjustment. CONCLUSION: TH may be similarly efficacious as and often preferred over IP among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, especially for regular checkups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02995733.

Comparing asthma control assessment using the Asthma Control Test and the Asthma APGAR in African American/Black and Hispanic/Latinx populations.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this analysis was to compare the Asthma Control Test (ACT) and the Asthma APGAR asthma control assessment tools in African-Ancestry/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) adults with moderate to severe asthma. METHODS: This pre-planned sub-study of the PREPARE clinical trial compares the baseline ACT and Asthma APGAR scores for the PREPARE populations using correlation coefficients, generalized linear modeling and receiver operating curve (ROC) analyses. Correlations were also assessed for both control tests and the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI). RESULTS: Among the 1201 adults (603 AA/B and 598 H/L) with moderate to severe asthma, most had uncontrolled asthma by both the ACT and the Asthma APGAR. Correlation coefficients between the ACT, Asthma APGAR and ASUI were strong and did not differ significantly by race/ethnicity. The ACT consistently assessed more patients as uncontrolled compared with the Asthma APGAR. The differences in ACT and Asthma APGAR scores did not differ by age, gender, race/ethnicity, self-reported health literacy or medication adherence but did differ by education level. Both the ACT and Asthma APGAR had similar ROCs for predicting an asthma exacerbation in the next 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Both the ACT and the Asthma APGAR can be used for asthma control assessment in AA/B and H/L populations with moderate to severe asthma, providing comparable rates of uncontrolled asthma and similar limited ability to predict exacerbations. Further work is required to better understand the basis and clinical implications of the higher rates of uncontrolled asthma identified using the ACT.

Caribbean Latinx with moderate-severe asthma bear greater asthma morbidity than other Latinx.

BACKGROUND: Hispanic/Latinx (HL) ethnicity encompasses racially and culturally diverse subgroups. Studies suggest that Puerto Ricans (PR) may bear greater asthma-related morbidity than Mexicans, but these were conducted in children or had limited clinical characterization. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether disparities in asthma morbidity exist among HL adult subgroups. METHODS: Adults with moderate-severe asthma were recruited from US clinics, including from Puerto Rico, for the Person Empowered Asthma Relief (PREPARE) trial. Considering the shared heritage between PR and other Caribbean HL (Cubans and Dominicans [C&D]), the investigators compared baseline self-reported clinical characteristics between Caribbean HL (CHL) (PR and C&D: n = 457) and other HLs (OHL) (Mexicans, Spaniards, Central/South Americans; n = 141), and between CHL subgroups (C&D [n = 56] and PR [n = 401]). This study compared asthma morbidity measures (self-reported exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits, hospitalizations, health care utilization) through negative binomial regression. RESULTS: CHL compared to OHL were similar in age, body mass index, poverty status, blood eosinophils, and fractional exhaled nitric oxide but were prescribed more asthma controller therapies. Relative to OHL, CHL had significantly increased odds of asthma exacerbations (odds ratio [OR]: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.4-2.4), ED/UC visits (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.4-2.5), hospitalization (OR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.06-3.7), and health care utilization (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.44-2.53). Of the CHL subgroups, PR had significantly increased odds of asthma exacerbations, ED/UC visits, hospitalizations, and health care utilization compared to OHL, whereas C&D only had increased odds of exacerbations compared to OHL. PR compared to C&D had greater odds of ED/UC and health care utilization. CONCLUSIONS: CHL adults, compared with OHL, adults reported nearly twice the asthma morbidity; these differences are primarily driven by PR. Novel interventions are needed to reduce morbidity in this highly impacted population.

Socioeconomic status associates with worse asthma morbidity among Black and Latinx adults.

BACKGROUND: Asthma disproportionately affects African American/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) patients and individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES), but the relationship between SES and asthma morbidity within these racial/ethnic groups is inadequately understood. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between SES and asthma morbidity among AA/B and H/L adults with moderate to severe asthma using multidomain SES frameworks and mediation analyses. METHODS: We analyzed enrollment data from the PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief randomized trial, evaluating inhaled corticosteroid supplementation to rescue therapy. We tested for direct and indirect relationships between SES and asthma morbidity using structural equation models. For SES, we used a latent variable defined by poverty, education, and unemployment. For asthma morbidity, we used self-reported asthma exacerbations in the year before enrollment (corticosteroid bursts, emergency room/urgent care visits, or hospitalizations), and Asthma Control Test scores. We tested for mediation via health literacy, perceived stress, and self-reported discrimination. All models adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, ethnicity, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 990 AA/B and H/L adults, low SES (latent variable) was directly associated with hospitalizations (ß = 0.24) and worse Asthma Control Test scores (ß = 0.20). Stress partially mediated the relationship between SES and increased emergency room/urgent care visits and worse asthma control (ß = 0.03 and = 0.05, respectively). Individual SES domains were directly associated with asthma morbidity. Stress mediated indirect associations between low educational attainment and unemployment with worse asthma control (ß = 0.05 and = 0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Lower SES is directly, and indirectly through stress, associated with asthma morbidity among AA/B and H/L adults. Identification of stressors and relevant management strategies may lessen asthma-related morbidity among these populations.

Reliever-Triggered Inhaled Glucocorticoid in Black and Latinx Adults with Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Black and Latinx patients bear a disproportionate burden of asthma. Efforts to reduce the disproportionate morbidity have been mostly unsuccessful, and guideline recommendations have not been based on studies in these populations. METHODS: In this pragmatic, open-label trial, we randomly assigned Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma to use a patient-activated, reliever-triggered inhaled glucocorticoid strategy (beclomethasone dipropionate, 80 µg) plus usual care (intervention) or to continue usual care. Participants had one instructional visit followed by 15 monthly questionnaires. The primary end point was the annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations. Secondary end points included monthly asthma control as measured with the Asthma Control Test (ACT; range, 5 [poor] to 25 [complete control]), quality of life as measured with the Asthma Symptom Utility Index (ASUI; range, 0 to 1, with lower scores indicating greater impairment), and participant-reported missed days of work, school, or usual activities. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 1201 adults (603 Black and 598 Latinx), 600 were assigned to the intervention group and 601 to the usual-care group. The annualized rate of severe asthma exacerbations was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 0.78) in the intervention group and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73 to 0.92) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 0.999; P = 0.048). ACT scores increased by 3.4 points (95% CI, 3.1 to 3.6) in the intervention group and by 2.5 points (95% CI, 2.3 to 2.8) in the usual-care group (difference, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.2); ASUI scores increased by 0.12 points (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.13) and 0.08 points (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.09), respectively (difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.05). The annualized rate of missed days was 13.4 in the intervention group and 16.8 in the usual-care group (rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95). Serious adverse events occurred in 12.2% of the participants, with an even distribution between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among Black and Latinx adults with moderate-to-severe asthma, provision of an inhaled glucocorticoid and one-time instruction on its use, added to usual care, led to a lower rate of severe asthma exacerbations. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute and others; PREPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02995733.).

Socioeconomic impact of COVID-19 and willingness to be vaccinated in African American/Black and Hispanic/Latinx adults.

PURPOSE: To describe the socioeconomic and healthcare-related effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and willingness to receive a free COVID-19 vaccine, among African American/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) adults with asthma currently enrolled in a large trial. METHODS: The present analysis is a sub-study of the PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief (PREPARE) study, a pragmatic study of 1201 AA/B and H/L adults with asthma. A monthly questionnaire was completed by a subset of PREPARE participants (n = 325) during May-August, 2020. The 5-item questionnaire assessed self-reported impact of COVID-19 on respondents' ability to obtain asthma medications, medical care quality, employment, income and ability to pay bills; and willingness to get a free COVID-19 vaccine. Bivariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were performed to investigate factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: Of 325 survey respondents (25% AA/B, 75% H/L), the majority reported no impact of COVID-19 on medical care or ability to get asthma medications. Approximately half of employed respondents experienced a lower level of employment or job loss, and approximately half reported having difficulty paying bills during the pandemic. Thirty-five percent of respondents reported unwillingness and 31% reported being somewhat likely to receive a free COVID-19 vaccine. AA/B race/ethnicity and poorer reported physical health were associated with a higher likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSION: AA/B and H/L adults with asthma may experience changes in the quality of their asthma care and increased socioeconomic stressors as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and may be hesitant or unwilling to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.

Nebulizer Use by Black and Latinx Adults with Moderate to Severe Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Generally, a short-acting beta-2 agonist (SABA) delivered via metered-dose inhaler (MDI) is recommended for quick relief of asthma symptoms. However, in the PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief (PREPARE) pragmatic trial, 67% of patients reported having used a nebulizer for SABA administration. OBJECTIVE: To understand preferences, experiences, and decision making regarding the use of nebulizers in Black and Latinx adults with uncontrolled asthma. METHODS: We interviewed 40 of the 1,201 PREPARE patients employing a matrix analysis. Those interviewed were Black (n = 20) and Latinx (n = 20) adults with uncontrolled asthma seeking primary or specialty care in clinics throughout the United States. Data were analyzed used a Rapid Assessment Procedures qualitative methodology, informed by grounded theory. RESULTS: Substudy participants, on average, reported using a nebulizer 3.5 times/wk. Daily use was common, and frequency ranged from less than daily to up to 6 times daily. Nearly all participants reported a longstanding history of nebulizer use. Participants tended to use their nebulizer at home, and some shared it with others in the home. Many reported preferring a nebulizer over an MDI for relief of severe symptoms and to avoid emergency room visits or hospitalizations. The extent to which cost affected nebulizer use varied among participants. CONCLUSIONS: Despite asthma guideline recommendations that MDIs be used rather than nebulizers for SABA administration, nebulizer use was common among PREPARE study participants. Clinicians should explore patients' history and experiences with nebulizer use as part of evaluation of asthma control.

A randomized, open-label, pragmatic study to assess reliever-triggered inhaled corticosteroid in African American/Black and Hispanic/Latinx adults with asthma: Design and methods of the PREPARE trial.

BACKGROUND: Asthma prevalence, morbidity, and mortality disproportionately impact African American/Black (AA/B) and Hispanic/Latinx (H/L) communities. Adherence to daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), recommended by asthma guidelines in all but the mildest cases of asthma, is generally poor. As-needed ICS has shown promise as a patient-empowering asthma management strategy, but it has not been rigorously studied in AA/B or H/L patients or in a real-world setting. Design and Aim The PeRson EmPowered Asthma RElief (PREPARE) Study is a randomized, open-label, pragmatic study which aims to assess whether a patient-guided, reliever-triggered ICS strategy called PARTICS (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered Inhaled CorticoSteroid) can improve asthma outcomes in AA/B and H/L adult patient populations. In designing and implementing the study, the PREPARE research team has relied heavily on advice from AA/B and H/L Patient Partners and other stakeholders. Methods PREPARE is enrolling 1200 adult participants (600 AA/Bs, 600H/Ls) with asthma. Participants are randomized to PARTICS + Usual Care (intervention) versus Usual Care (control). Following a single in-person enrollment visit, participants complete monthly questionnaires for 15 months. The primary endpoint is annualized asthma exacerbation rate. Secondary endpoints include asthma control; preference-based quality of life; and days lost from work, school, or usual activities. Discussion The PREPARE study features a pragmatic design allowing for the real-world assessment of a patient-centered, reliever-triggered ICS strategy in AA/B and H/L patients. Outcomes of this study have the potential to offer powerful evidence supporting PARTICS as an effective asthma management strategy in patient populations that suffer disproportionately from asthma morbidity and mortality.

Adherence to adding inhaled corticosteroids to rescue therapy in a pragmatic trial with adults with asthma: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Underuse of guideline-recommended inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) controller therapy is a risk factor for greater asthma burden. ICS concomitantly used with rescue inhalers (Patient-Activated Reliever-Triggered ICS ['PARTICS']) reduced asthma exacerbations in efficacy trials, but whether PARTICS is effective in pragmatic trials is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this pilot to determine the feasibility of executing a large-scale pragmatic PARTICS trial and to improve study protocols. METHODS: Four sites recruited 33 Hispanic or black adults with persistent asthma, randomized them approximately 3:1 to intervention or usual care, and followed them for 12 weeks. All participants received asthma guideline-based educational videos; intervention participants received video-based instructions on implementing PARTICS plus usual medications. The study involved 1 randomization visit and monthly questionnaires. Timely questionnaire responses (±2 weeks) were monitored. Participants underwent qualitative phone interviews to assess self-reported adherence to PARTICS and understand barriers to completing study procedures. RESULTS: Timely questionnaire response rates were 61%, 64%, and 70% at 4, 8, and 12 weeks, respectively. Self-reported adherence to PARTICS was 76% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58%-94% [n = 21]), 88% (95%CI, 72%-100% [n = 16]), and 62% (95%CI, 36%-88% [n = 13]) at weeks 1, 6, and 12, respectively. Barriers to completing study procedures included difficulties with questionnaire access, remembering to use ICS and rescue inhalers together, and obtaining refills. Only 22% of participants recognized their short-acting bronchodilator as "reliever" or "rescue." CONCLUSION: Recruitment was feasible within the allocated period. Adherence to PARTICS was incomplete, questionnaire completion was suboptimal, and common rescue inhaler nomenclature usage was limited. We have modified the full study protocol to attempt to improve adherence to PARTICS and minimize barriers to study procedures. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: pilot study for 'PeRson EmPowered Asthma Relief' (PREPARE, NCT02995733).

Sex Differences in Veterans' Cardiovascular Health.

Background: In the U.S. civilian population, sex differences have been identified in cardiovascular health; these differences have been used to inform care. Our objective is to determine if the same sex differences are present in Veterans who use the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System given the additional stressors associated with military service. Materials and Methods: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and conditions among women and men Veterans using VA in fiscal year (FY) 2014 were identified through the presence of International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes in VA administrative records. ICD-9-CM codes were grouped into conditions; prevalence was examined by gender overall, by age, and by race/ethnicity. Results: Within the FY 2014 cohort of VA Veteran patients included in this analysis, 7.1% (n = 412,901) were women and 92.9% were men (n = 5,376,749). Compared with men, women in this cohort were younger and more ethnically diverse. Overall, women were less likely to have traditional CVD risk factors, but more likely to have a nontraditional CVD risk factor (depression) compared with men. Women had higher odds of chest pain/angina (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.03, confidence interval [95% CI] 1.02-1.05), palpitations (AOR 2.04; 95% CI 1.98-2.10), and valvular disease (AOR 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.08), but lower odds of coronary artery disease (AOR 0.29; 95% CI 0.29-0.30), acute MI (AOR 0.46; 95% CI 0.43-0.49), and heart failure (AOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.53-0.56) compared with men, overall. Conclusions: In age-adjusted comparisons, sex differences in the prevalence of CVD risk factors and conditions among the VA Veteran patient population was similar in that seen in the civilian population with a few exceptions.

Anti-superoxide dismutase antibodies are associated with survival in patients with sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Our objective was to test the hypothesis that aberrantly modified forms of superoxide dismutase (SOD1) influence the disease course for sporadic amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (SALS). We probed for anti-SOD1 antibodies (IgM and IgG) against both the normal and aberrantly oxidized-SOD1 (SODox) antigens in sera from patients with SALS, subjects diagnosed with other neurological disorders and healthy individuals, and correlated the levels of these antibodies to disease duration and/or severity. Anti-SOD1 antibodies were detected in all cohorts; however, a subset of ∼5-10% of SALS cases exhibited elevated levels of anti-SOD1 antibodies. Those SALS cases with relatively high levels of IgM antibodies against SODox exhibit a longer survival of 6.4 years, compared to subjects lacking these antibodies. By contrast, SALS subjects expressing higher levels of IgG antibodies reactive for the normal WT-SOD1 antigen exhibit a shorter survival of 4.1 years. Anti-SOD1 antibody levels did not correlate with disease severity in either the Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease cohorts. In conclusion, the association of longer survival with elevated levels of anti-SODox antibodies suggests that these antibodies may be protective. By extension, these data implicate aberrantly modified forms of WT-SOD1 (e.g. oxidized SOD1) in SALS pathogenesis. In contrast, an immune response against the normal WT-SOD1 appears to be disadvantageous in SALS, possibly because the anti-oxidizing activity of normal WT-SOD1 is beneficial to SALS individuals.

Association of SNCA with Parkinson: replication in the Harvard NeuroDiscovery Center Biomarker Study.

BACKGROUND: Mutations in the α-synuclein gene (SNCA) cause autosomal dominant forms of Parkinson's disease, but the substantial risk conferred by this locus to the common sporadic disease has only recently emerged from genome-wide association studies. METHODS: We genotyped a prioritized noncoding variant in SNCA intron 4 in 344 patients with Parkinson's disease and 275 controls from the longitudinal Harvard NeuroDiscovery Center Biomarker Study. RESULTS: The common minor allele of rs2736990 was associated with elevated disease susceptibility (odds ratio, 1.40; P = .0032). CONCLUSIONS: This result increases confidence in the notion that in many clinically well-characterized patients, genetic variation in SNCA contributes to "sporadic" disease.

Low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of rheumatoid arthritis: the Women's Health Study.

OBJECTIVE: Low-dose aspirin may reduce the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) through its effect on cyclooxygenase activity and its antioxidant pathways. Previous randomized trial data have demonstrated a beneficial effect of low-dose aspirin in reducing other inflammatory diseases, such as asthma and colorectal adenomas, but no trial has evaluated the role of aspirin in RA prevention. METHODS: The Women's Health Study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between 1992 and 2004 designed to evaluate the risks and benefits of low-dose aspirin (100 mg every other day) and vitamin E in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer among 39,876 female health care professionals age > or =45 years throughout the US. After excluding women with RA at baseline, 39,144 women were evaluated for the present study. A definite diagnosis of RA was assessed during followup by self-report and confirmed using a connective tissue disease screening questionnaire, followed by a medical record review by a rheumatologist for American College of Rheumatology criteria. RESULTS: During an average followup of 10 years, 106 women developed definite RA (48 women in the aspirin group and 58 in the placebo group). There was a nonsignificant risk for RA (relative risk [RR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.56-1.21; P = 0.33) associated with aspirin. There were 64 seropositive RA cases (60%) and 42 seronegative RA cases (40%). Aspirin also had no significant effect on either seropositive RA (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.61-1.63) or seronegative RA (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.33-1.15). CONCLUSION: One hundred milligrams of aspirin taken every other day was not associated with a significant reduction in the risk of developing RA among women in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Hand bone mineral density is associated with both total hip and lumbar spine bone mineral density in post-menopausal women with RA.

OBJECTIVE: RA is associated with localized bone loss in the hands, as well as generalized osteoporosis. We evaluated the relationship between hand digital X-ray radiogrammetry BMD (DXR-BMD) and total hip and lumbar spine BMD. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 138 post-menopausal women with RA. The DXR-BMD was calculated based on digitized hand radiographs. Measurements of the total hip and lumbar spine BMD were performed by a DXA-BMD (BMDa) scan. Patient and physician questionnaires and laboratory samples supplied information on relevant covariates. Separate multivariate linear regression models were constructed to determine the cross-sectional relationship between hand DXR-BMD (independent variable) and total hip or lumbar spine BMD (dependent variables). RESULTS: The cohort comprised women with a median age of 61 years and RA disease duration of 13 years. Seventy-six per cent were either RF and/or anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) positive and most had moderate disease activity [median disease activity score-28 joint count (DAS28) 3.7]. Hand DXR-BMD was significantly associated with total hip BMD (beta = 0.61; P < 0.0001) and lumbar spine BMD (beta = 0.62; P < 0.0008) in adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that hand DXR-BMD is associated with both the total hip and lumbar spine BMD among post-menopausal women with RA. The relationship between bone loss in the hands and generalized osteoporosis should be further explored in longitudinal studies of patients with RA.

Behavioral and attitudes survey about Lyme disease among a Brazilian population in the endemic area of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts.

Disease prevention models have shown individuals are more likely to engage in precautionary behavior if they have confidence in their ability to identify disease symptoms and understand health risks. In immigrant populations, communicating the risks poses greater challenges since linguistic and cultural barriers may impede acceptance of the new behavior. The Brazilian population on Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, is at high risk for Lyme disease (LD), the most common vector-borne illness in the United States largely preventable by limiting tick exposure. We surveyed 103 Brazilians on MV about their health beliefs and perceptions of LD risk and assessed their level of precautionary behaviors and the cultural factors influencing them. The population had only a moderate perception of risk and little understanding of LD. Forty-one percent did not think LD posed a risk, while 79% were not sure they could recognize symptoms. Accordingly, the population as a whole reported taking few precautions.

Adults with cerebral palsy: a workshop to define the challenges of treating and preventing secondary musculoskeletal and neuromuscular complications in this rapidly growing population.

Although the neurological injury associated with cerebral palsy (CP) is non-progressive, adults with the disorder often develop musculoskeletal and neurological symptoms, such as severe pain, chronic fatigue, and a premature decline in mobility and function, as they age. Little is known about how to manage, much less prevent, these symptoms. This paper summarizes the findings of a multi-disciplinary workshop, sponsored by the Cerebral Palsy International Research Foundation, the American Academy for Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine, and Reaching for the Stars, convened to review current knowledge and begin to develop a blueprint for future research. The goals of the workshop were to (1) define the current incidence and prevalence of CP, (2) review the known complications for persons aging with CP, (3) review current understanding of physiological processes that may contribute to loss of function and premature aging in CP, (4) evaluate current treatment interventions in terms of long-term outcomes, (5) identify cutting-edge technologies in neurorehabilitation that may help prevent or treat the effects of accelerated aging for persons diagnosed with CP, and (6) identify strategies to ensure that individuals with CP receive evidence-based care as they transition from pediatric to adult-care services.