| 1. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Abbadessa, G, et al.
(författare)
-
Unsung hero Robert C. Gallo
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Science (New York, N.Y.). - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 1095-9203 .- 0036-8075. ; 323:5911, s. 206-207
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 5. |
- Chelban, V., et al.
(författare)
-
Neurofilament light levels predict clinical progression and death in multiple system atrophy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Brain. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0006-8950 .- 1460-2156. ; 145:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this large multiple system atrophy cohort, Chelban et al. show that plasma NfL correlates with clinical disease severity, progression and prognosis, and could help inform patient stratification and monitor treatment responses in future trials of putative disease-modifying agents. Disease-modifying treatments are currently being trialled in multiple system atrophy. Approaches based solely on clinical measures are challenged by heterogeneity of phenotype and pathogenic complexity. Neurofilament light chain protein has been explored as a reliable biomarker in several neurodegenerative disorders but data on multiple system atrophy have been limited. Therefore, neurofilament light chain is not yet routinely used as an outcome measure in multiple system atrophy. We aimed to comprehensively investigate the role and dynamics of neurofilament light chain in multiple system atrophy combined with cross-sectional and longitudinal clinical and imaging scales and for subject trial selection. In this cohort study, we recruited cross-sectional and longitudinal cases in a multicentre European set-up. Plasma and CSF neurofilament light chain concentrations were measured at baseline from 212 multiple system atrophy cases, annually for a mean period of 2 years in 44 multiple system atrophy patients in conjunction with clinical, neuropsychological and MRI brain assessments. Baseline neurofilament light chain characteristics were compared between groups. Cox regression was used to assess survival; receiver operating characteristic analysis to assess the ability of neurofilament light chain to distinguish between multiple system atrophy patients and healthy controls. Multivariate linear mixed-effects models were used to analyse longitudinal neurofilament light chain changes and correlated with clinical and imaging parameters. Polynomial models were used to determine the differential trajectories of neurofilament light chain in multiple system atrophy. We estimated sample sizes for trials aiming to decrease neurofilament light chain levels. We show that in multiple system atrophy, baseline plasma neurofilament light chain levels were better predictors of clinical progression, survival and degree of brain atrophy than the neurofilament light chain rate of change. Comparative analysis of multiple system atrophy progression over the course of disease, using plasma neurofilament light chain and clinical rating scales, indicated that neurofilament light chain levels rise as the motor symptoms progress, followed by deceleration in advanced stages. Sample size prediction suggested that significantly lower trial participant numbers would be needed to demonstrate treatment effects when incorporating plasma neurofilament light chain values into multiple system atrophy clinical trials in comparison to clinical measures alone. In conclusion, neurofilament light chain correlates with clinical disease severity, progression and prognosis in multiple system atrophy. Combined with clinical and imaging analysis, neurofilament light chain can inform patient stratification and serve as a reliable biomarker of treatment response in future multiple system atrophy trials of putative disease-modifying agents.
|
|
| 6. |
- Dent, E., et al.
(författare)
-
International Clinical Practice Guidelines for Sarcopenia (ICFSR) : Screening, Diagnosis and Management
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1279-7707 .- 1760-4788. ; 22:10, s. 1148-1161
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Sarcopenia, defined as an age-associated loss of skeletal muscle function and muscle mass, occurs in approximately 6 - 22 % of older adults. This paper presents evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for screening, diagnosis and management of sarcopenia from the task force of the International Conference on Sarcopenia and Frailty Research (ICSFR).Methods: To develop the guidelines, we drew upon the best available evidence from two systematic reviews paired with consensus statements by international working groups on sarcopenia. Eight topics were selected for the recommendations: (i) defining sarcopenia; (ii) screening and diagnosis; (iii) physical activity prescription; (iv) protein supplementation; (v) vitamin D supplementation; (vi) anabolic hormone prescription; (vii) medications under development; and (viii) research. The ICSFR task force evaluated the evidence behind each topic including the quality of evidence, the benefit harm balance of treatment, patient preferences/values, and cost-effectiveness. Recommendations were graded as either strong or conditional (weak) as per the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Consensus was achieved via one face-to-face workshop and a modified Delphi process.Recommendations: We make a conditional recommendation for the use of an internationally accepted measurement tool for the diagnosis of sarcopenia including the EWGSOP and FNIH definitions, and advocate for rapid screening using gait speed or the SARC-F. To treat sarcopenia, we strongly recommend the prescription of resistance-based physical activity, and conditionally recommend protein supplementation/a protein-rich diet. No recommendation is given for Vitamin D supplementation or for anabolic hormone prescription. There is a lack of robust evidence to assess the strength of other treatment options.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
