| 1. |
-
- 2019
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
- Barretina, Jordi, et al.
(författare)
-
Subtype-specific genomic alterations define new targets for soft-tissue sarcoma therapy.
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Nature genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1546-1718 .- 1061-4036. ; 42:8, s. 715-21
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Soft-tissue sarcomas, which result in approximately 10,700 diagnoses and 3,800 deaths per year in the United States, show remarkable histologic diversity, with more than 50 recognized subtypes. However, knowledge of their genomic alterations is limited. We describe an integrative analysis of DNA sequence, copy number and mRNA expression in 207 samples encompassing seven major subtypes. Frequently mutated genes included TP53 (17% of pleomorphic liposarcomas), NF1 (10.5% of myxofibrosarcomas and 8% of pleomorphic liposarcomas) and PIK3CA (18% of myxoid/round-cell liposarcomas, or MRCs). PIK3CA mutations in MRCs were associated with Akt activation and poor clinical outcomes. In myxofibrosarcomas and pleomorphic liposarcomas, we found both point mutations and genomic deletions affecting the tumor suppressor NF1. Finally, we found that short hairpin RNA (shRNA)-based knockdown of several genes amplified in dedifferentiated liposarcoma, including CDK4 and YEATS4, decreased cell proliferation. Our study yields a detailed map of molecular alterations across diverse sarcoma subtypes and suggests potential subtype-specific targets for therapy.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hurley, Eoghan T., et al.
(författare)
-
Majority of Studies Show Similar Rates of Return to Play After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair or Latarjet Procedure: A Systematic Review
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery. - 0749-8063 .- 1526-3231. ; 40:2, s. 515-522
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: To systematically review the current evidence in the literature to compare return to play following arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Latarjet procedure for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Methods: A literature search was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Comparative studies reporting return to play following arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Latarjet procedure were included. Return to play was compared, with all statistical analysis performed using Review Manager, Version 5.3. Results: Nine studies with 1,242 patients (mean age: 15-30 years) were included. The rate of return to play was 61% to 94.1% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and 72% to 96.8% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure. Two studies (Bessiere et al. and Zimmerman et al.) found a significant difference in favor of the Latarjet procedure (P < .05 for both, I2 = 37%). The rate of return to play at preinjury level was 9% to 83.8% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and 19.4% to 80.6% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure, with no study finding a significant difference (P > .05 for all, I2 = 0%). The mean time of return to play was 5.4 to 7.3 months among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and 5.5 to 6.2 months in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure, with no study finding a significant difference (P > .05 for all, I2 = 39%). Conclusions: Overall, the majority of studies showed no significant difference in rates of return to play or timing following arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure. Furthermore, no study has found a significant difference in rate of return to play at pre-injury level, or rate of return to play among collision athletes. Level of Evidence: III, systematic review of Level I-III studies.
|
|
| 4. |
- Tran, K. B., et al.
(författare)
-
The global burden of cancer attributable to risk factors, 2010-19: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Lancet. - 0140-6736. ; 400:10352, s. 563-591
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Understanding the magnitude of cancer burden attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors is crucial for development of effective prevention and mitigation strategies. We analysed results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 to inform cancer control planning efforts globally. Methods The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate cancer burden attributable to behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risk factors. A total of 82 risk-outcome pairs were included on the basis of the World Cancer Research Fund criteria. Estimated cancer deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in 2019 and change in these measures between 2010 and 2019 are presented. Findings Globally, in 2019, the risk factors included in this analysis accounted for 4.45 million (95% uncertainty interval 4.01-4.94) deaths and 105 million (95.0-116) DALYs for both sexes combined, representing 44.4% (41.3-48.4) of all cancer deaths and 42.0% (39.1-45.6) of all DALYs. There were 2.88 million (2.60-3.18) risk-attributable cancer deaths in males (50.6% [47.8-54.1] of all male cancer deaths) and 1.58 million (1.36-1.84) risk-attributable cancer deaths in females (36.3% [32.5-41.3] of all female cancer deaths). The leading risk factors at the most detailed level globally for risk-attributable cancer deaths and DALYs in 2019 for both sexes combined were smoking, followed by alcohol use and high BMI. Risk-attributable cancer burden varied by world region and Socio-demographic Index (SDI), with smoking, unsafe sex, and alcohol use being the three leading risk factors for risk-attributable cancer DALYs in low SDI locations in 2019, whereas DALYs in high SDI locations mirrored the top three global risk factor rankings. From 2010 to 2019, global risk-attributable cancer deaths increased by 20.4% (12.6-28.4) and DALYs by 16.8% (8.8-25.0), with the greatest percentage increase in metabolic risks (34.7% [27.9-42.8] and 33.3% [25.8-42.0]). Interpretation The leading risk factors contributing to global cancer burden in 2019 were behavioural, whereas metabolic risk factors saw the largest increases between 2010 and 2019. Reducing exposure to these modifiable risk factors would decrease cancer mortality and DALY rates worldwide, and policies should be tailored appropriately to local cancer risk factor burden. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.
|
|
| 5. |
- Zhang, Huai, et al.
(författare)
-
A global survey on the use of the international classification of diseases codes for metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease.
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Hepatology international. - 1936-0541.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- With the implementation of the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) and the publication of the metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) nomenclature in 2020, it is important to establish consensus for the coding of MAFLD in ICD-11. This will inform subsequent revisions of ICD-11.Using the Qualtrics XM and WJX platforms, questionnaires were sent online to MAFLD-ICD-11 coding collaborators, authors of papers, and relevant association members.A total of 890 international experts in various fields from 61 countries responded to the survey. We also achieved full coverage of provincial-level administrative regions in China. 77.1% of respondents agreed that MAFLD should be represented in ICD-11 by updating NAFLD, with no significant regional differences (77.3% in Asia and 76.6% in non-Asia, p=0.819). Over 80% of respondents agreed or somewhat agreed with the need to assign specific codes for progressive stages of MAFLD (i.e. steatohepatitis) (92.2%), MAFLD combined with comorbidities (84.1%), or MAFLD subtypes (i.e., lean, overweight/obese, and diabetic) (86.1%).This global survey by a collaborative panel of clinical, coding, health management and policy experts, indicates agreement that MAFLD should be coded in ICD-11. The data serves as a foundation for corresponding adjustments in the ICD-11 revision.
|
|
