Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 19 de 19
Filtrar
1.
Cell ; 155(1): 57-69, 2013 Sep 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24035192

RESUMEN

The clinical course and eventual outcome, or prognosis, of complex diseases varies enormously between affected individuals. This variability critically determines the impact a disease has on a patient's life but is very poorly understood. Here, we exploit existing genome-wide association study data to gain insight into the role of genetics in prognosis. We identify a noncoding polymorphism in FOXO3A (rs12212067: T > G) at which the minor (G) allele, despite not being associated with disease susceptibility, is associated with a milder course of Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and with increased risk of severe malaria. Minor allele carriage is shown to limit inflammatory responses in monocytes via a FOXO3-driven pathway, which through TGFß1 reduces production of proinflammatory cytokines, including TNFα, and increases production of anti-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-10. Thus, we uncover a shared genetic contribution to prognosis in distinct diseases that operates via a FOXO3-driven pathway modulating inflammatory responses.


Asunto(s)
Artritis Reumatoide/genética , Enfermedad de Crohn/genética , Factores de Transcripción Forkhead/genética , Malaria Falciparum/genética , Polimorfismo de Nucleótido Simple , Animales , Artritis Reumatoide/fisiopatología , Núcleo Celular/metabolismo , Enfermedad de Crohn/fisiopatología , Proteínas de la Matriz Extracelular/inmunología , Proteína Forkhead Box O3 , Factores de Transcripción Forkhead/metabolismo , Variación Genética , Humanos , Inflamación/genética , Malaria Falciparum/fisiopatología , Ratones , Monocitos/inmunología , Transcripción Genética , Factor de Crecimiento Transformador beta/inmunología
2.
N Engl J Med ; 388(17): 1547-1558, 2023 Apr 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36912538

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Between 1999 and 2009 in the United Kingdom, 82,429 men between 50 and 69 years of age received a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Localized prostate cancer was diagnosed in 2664 men. Of these men, 1643 were enrolled in a trial to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, with 545 randomly assigned to receive active monitoring, 553 to undergo prostatectomy, and 545 to undergo radiotherapy. METHODS: At a median follow-up of 15 years (range, 11 to 21), we compared the results in this population with respect to death from prostate cancer (the primary outcome) and death from any cause, metastases, disease progression, and initiation of long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Follow-up was complete for 1610 patients (98%). A risk-stratification analysis showed that more than one third of the men had intermediate or high-risk disease at diagnosis. Death from prostate cancer occurred in 45 men (2.7%): 17 (3.1%) in the active-monitoring group, 12 (2.2%) in the prostatectomy group, and 16 (2.9%) in the radiotherapy group (P = 0.53 for the overall comparison). Death from any cause occurred in 356 men (21.7%), with similar numbers in all three groups. Metastases developed in 51 men (9.4%) in the active-monitoring group, in 26 (4.7%) in the prostatectomy group, and in 27 (5.0%) in the radiotherapy group. Long-term androgen-deprivation therapy was initiated in 69 men (12.7%), 40 (7.2%), and 42 (7.7%), respectively; clinical progression occurred in 141 men (25.9%), 58 (10.5%), and 60 (11.0%), respectively. In the active-monitoring group, 133 men (24.4%) were alive without any prostate cancer treatment at the end of follow-up. No differential effects on cancer-specific mortality were noted in relation to the baseline PSA level, tumor stage or grade, or risk-stratification score. No treatment complications were reported after the 10-year analysis. CONCLUSIONS: After 15 years of follow-up, prostate cancer-specific mortality was low regardless of the treatment assigned. Thus, the choice of therapy involves weighing trade-offs between benefits and harms associated with treatments for localized prostate cancer. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research; ProtecT Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN20141297; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02044172.).


Asunto(s)
Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Andrógenos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Prostatectomía , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Espera Vigilante , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Radioterapia , Medición de Riesgo
3.
JAMA ; 331(17): 1460-1470, 2024 05 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38581198

RESUMEN

Importance: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) reported no effect of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening on prostate cancer mortality at a median 10-year follow-up (primary outcome), but the long-term effects of PSA screening on prostate cancer mortality remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single invitation for PSA screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median 15-year follow-up compared with no invitation for screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of the CAP randomized clinical trial included men aged 50 to 69 years identified at 573 primary care practices in England and Wales. Primary care practices were randomized between September 25, 2001, and August 24, 2007, and men were enrolled between January 8, 2002, and January 20, 2009. Follow-up was completed on March 31, 2021. Intervention: Men received a single invitation for a PSA screening test with subsequent diagnostic tests if the PSA level was 3.0 ng/mL or higher. The control group received standard practice (no invitation). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was reported previously. Of 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, results of 4 were reported previously. The 4 remaining prespecified secondary outcomes at 15-year follow-up were prostate cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, and prostate cancer stage and Gleason grade at diagnosis. Results: Of 415 357 eligible men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 98% were included in these analyses. Overall, 12 013 and 12 958 men with a prostate cancer diagnosis were in the intervention and control groups, respectively (15-year cumulative risk, 7.08% [95% CI, 6.95%-7.21%] and 6.94% [95% CI, 6.82%-7.06%], respectively). At a median 15-year follow-up, 1199 men in the intervention group (0.69% [95% CI, 0.65%-0.73%]) and 1451 men in the control group (0.78% [95% CI, 0.73%-0.82%]) died of prostate cancer (rate ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99]; P = .03). Compared with the control, the PSA screening intervention increased detection of low-grade (Gleason score [GS] ≤6: 2.2% vs 1.6%; P < .001) and localized (T1/T2: 3.6% vs 3.1%; P < .001) disease but not intermediate (GS of 7), high-grade (GS ≥8), locally advanced (T3), or distally advanced (T4/N1/M1) tumors. There were 45 084 all-cause deaths in the intervention group (23.2% [95% CI, 23.0%-23.4%]) and 50 336 deaths in the control group (23.3% [95% CI, 23.1%-23.5%]) (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-1.01]; P = .11). Eight of the prostate cancer deaths in the intervention group (0.7%) and 7 deaths in the control group (0.5%) were related to a diagnostic biopsy or prostate cancer treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, a single invitation for PSA screening compared with standard practice without routine screening reduced prostate cancer deaths at a median follow-up of 15 years. However, the absolute reduction in deaths was small. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Antígeno Prostático Específico , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Estudios de Seguimiento , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Clasificación del Tumor , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/terapia , Gales/epidemiología , Ultrasonografía , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen
4.
Rural Remote Health ; 22(3): 7646, 2022 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35858524

RESUMEN

The Indigenous Cultural Identity of Research Authors Standard (ICIRAS) is based on a gap in research publishing practice where Indigenous peoples' identity is not systematically and rigorously recognised in rural health research publications. There are widespread reforms, in different research areas, to counter the reputation of scientific research as a vehicle of racism and discrimination. Reflecting on these broader movements, the editorial teams of three rural health journals - Rural and Remote Health, the Australian Journal of Rural Health, and the Canadian Journal of Rural Medicine - adopted a policy of 'Nothing about Indigenous Peoples, without Indigenous Peoples'. This meant changing practices so that Indigenous Peoples' identity could be embedded in authorship credentials - such as in the byline. An environmental scan of literature about the inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in research revealed many ways in which editorial boards of journals could improve their process to signal to readers that Indigenous voices are included in rural health research publication governance. Improving the health and wellbeing of Indigenous peoples worldwide requires high-quality research evidence. This quality benchmark needs to explicitly signal the inclusion of Indigenous authors. The ICIRAS is a call to action for research journals and institutions to rigorously improve research governance and leadership to amplify the cultural identity of Indigenous peoples in rural health research.


Asunto(s)
Pueblos Indígenas , Publicaciones Periódicas como Asunto , Australia , Canadá , Humanos , Salud Rural , Identificación Social
5.
JAMA ; 319(9): 883-895, 2018 03 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29509864

RESUMEN

Importance: Prostate cancer screening remains controversial because potential mortality or quality-of-life benefits may be outweighed by harms from overdetection and overtreatment. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a single prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening intervention and standardized diagnostic pathway on prostate cancer-specific mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Cluster Randomized Trial of PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer (CAP) included 419 582 men aged 50 to 69 years and was conducted at 573 primary care practices across the United Kingdom. Randomization and recruitment of the practices occurred between 2001 and 2009; patient follow-up ended on March 31, 2016. Intervention: An invitation to attend a PSA testing clinic and receive a single PSA test vs standard (unscreened) practice. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome: prostate cancer-specific mortality at a median follow-up of 10 years. Prespecified secondary outcomes: diagnostic cancer stage and Gleason grade (range, 2-10; higher scores indicate a poorer prognosis) of prostate cancers identified, all-cause mortality, and an instrumental variable analysis estimating the causal effect of attending the PSA screening clinic. Results: Among 415 357 randomized men (mean [SD] age, 59.0 [5.6] years), 189 386 in the intervention group and 219 439 in the control group were included in the analysis (n = 408 825; 98%). In the intervention group, 75 707 (40%) attended the PSA testing clinic and 67 313 (36%) underwent PSA testing. Of 64 436 with a valid PSA test result, 6857 (11%) had a PSA level between 3 ng/mL and 19.9 ng/mL, of whom 5850 (85%) had a prostate biopsy. After a median follow-up of 10 years, 549 (0.30 per 1000 person-years) died of prostate cancer in the intervention group vs 647 (0.31 per 1000 person-years) in the control group (rate difference, -0.013 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, -0.047 to 0.022]; rate ratio [RR], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.85 to 1.08]; P = .50). The number diagnosed with prostate cancer was higher in the intervention group (n = 8054; 4.3%) than in the control group (n = 7853; 3.6%) (RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.14 to 1.25]; P < .001). More prostate cancer tumors with a Gleason grade of 6 or lower were identified in the intervention group (n = 3263/189 386 [1.7%]) than in the control group (n = 2440/219 439 [1.1%]) (difference per 1000 men, 6.11 [95% CI, 5.38 to 6.84]; P < .001). In the analysis of all-cause mortality, there were 25 459 deaths in the intervention group vs 28 306 deaths in the control group (RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.94 to 1.03]; P = .49). In the instrumental variable analysis for prostate cancer mortality, the adherence-adjusted causal RR was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.29; P = .66). Conclusions and Relevance: Among practices randomized to a single PSA screening intervention vs standard practice without screening, there was no significant difference in prostate cancer mortality after a median follow-up of 10 years but the detection of low-risk prostate cancer cases increased. Although longer-term follow-up is under way, the findings do not support single PSA testing for population-based screening. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN92187251.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Tamizaje Masivo , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Atención Primaria de Salud , Neoplasias de la Próstata/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Clase Social , Reino Unido/epidemiología
8.
Br J Cancer ; 115(1): 90-4, 2016 Jun 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27253172

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Accurate cause of death assignment is crucial for prostate cancer epidemiology and trials reporting prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes. METHODS: We compared death certificate information with independent cause of death evaluation by an expert committee within a prostate cancer trial (2002-2015). RESULTS: Of 1236 deaths assessed, expert committee evaluation attributed 523 (42%) to prostate cancer, agreeing with death certificate cause of death in 1134 cases (92%, 95% CI: 90%, 93%). The sensitivity of death certificates in identifying prostate cancer deaths as classified by the committee was 91% (95% CI: 89%, 94%); specificity was 92% (95% CI: 90%, 94%). Sensitivity and specificity were lower where death occurred within 1 year of diagnosis, and where there was another primary cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: UK death certificates accurately identify cause of death in men with prostate cancer, supporting their use in routine statistics. Possible differential misattribution by trial arm supports independent evaluation in randomised trials.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Anciano , Causas de Muerte , Certificado de Defunción , Humanos , Masculino , Próstata/patología , Neoplasias de la Próstata/patología , Sensibilidad y Especificidad
9.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 15: 6, 2015 Jan 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25613468

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In cancer screening trials where the primary outcome is target cancer-specific mortality, the unbiased determination of underlying cause of death (UCD) is crucial. To minimise bias, the UCD should be independently verified by expert reviewers, blinded to death certificate data and trial arm. We investigated whether standardising the information submitted for UCD assignment in a population-based randomised controlled trial of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer reduced the reviewers' ability to correctly guess the trial arm. METHODS: Over 550 General Practitioner (GP) practices (>415,000 men aged 50-69 years) were cluster-randomised to PSA testing (intervention arm) or the National Health Service (NHS) prostate cancer risk management programme (control arm) between 2001 and 2007. Assignment of UCD was by independent reviews of researcher-written clinical vignettes that masked trial arm and death certificate information. A period of time after the process began (the initial phase), we analysed whether the reviewers could correctly identify trial arm from the vignettes, and the reasons for their choice. This feedback led to further standardisation of information (second phase), after which we re-assessed the extent of correct identification of trial arm. RESULTS: 1099 assessments of 509 vignettes were completed by January 2014. In the initial phase (n = 510 assessments), reviewers were unsure of trial arm in 33% of intervention and 30% of control arm assessments and were influenced by symptoms at diagnosis, PSA test result and study-specific criteria. In the second phase (n = 589), the respective proportions of uncertainty were 45% and 48%. The percentage of cases whereby reviewers were unable to determine the trial arm was greater following the standardisation of information provided in the vignettes. The chances of a correct guess and an incorrect guess were equalised in each arm, following further standardisation. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to mask trial arm from cause of death reviewers, by using their feedback to standardise the information submitted to them. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN92187251.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Registros Médicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Antígeno Prostático Específico/sangre , Neoplasias de la Próstata/diagnóstico , Anciano , Causas de Muerte , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/economía , Médicos Generales/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Registros Médicos/normas , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Próstata/prevención & control , Estándares de Referencia , Proyectos de Investigación , Reino Unido
10.
Ther Drug Monit ; 35(5): 595-9, 2013 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24052063

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cortisol level in hair is increasingly being used as a biomarker of chronic stress. Members of First Nation communities in Canada are experiencing stress related to a higher incidence of chronic diseases, socioeconomic factors, the state of their environment, and cultural oppression. This study aimed to investigate hair cortisol as a biomarker of stress in this population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Hair samples were collected from the posterior vertex of 55 Walpole Island First Nation (WIFN) volunteers and compared with white volunteers living in and around London, ON, Canada. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique was used to measure cortisol content in 1 cm of hair, considered to represent 1 month of growth. In parallel, the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), which measures short-term stress, was also completed. RESULTS: Median hair cortisol level (range) in WIFN volunteers was 177 (93-273) ng/g, significantly higher than the median hair cortisol in the healthy white controls of 116 (26-204) ng/g (P < 0.0001, Mann-Whitney U test). Hair cortisol correlated positively with gender, smoking status, and self-reported diabetes. Unlike hair cortisol, the Perceived Stress Scale did not differentiate between the First Nation and control population. CONCLUSIONS: The increased hair cortisol concentrations among WIFN volunteers compared with volunteers from a non-First Nation community suggests higher levels of chronic stress. The causes for this apparent increased stress are likely due to factors such as socioeconomic and poorer health and are worthy of further evaluation. The results highlight the difference between acute stress measured for short periods of time compared with chronic stress, measured by hair analysis.


Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores/química , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Cabello/química , Cabello/metabolismo , Hidrocortisona/metabolismo , Canadá , Enfermedad Crónica , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda