1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Pulit, S. L., et al.
(author)
-
Atrial fibrillation genetic risk differentiates cardioembolic stroke from other stroke subtypes
- 2018
-
In: Neurology-Genetics. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 2376-7839. ; 4:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective We sought to assess whether genetic risk factors for atrial fibrillation (AF) can explain cardioembolic stroke risk. We evaluated genetic correlations between a previous genetic study of AF and AF in the presence of cardioembolic stroke using genome-wide genotypes from the Stroke Genetics Network (N = 3,190 AF cases, 3,000 cardioembolic stroke cases, and 28,026 referents). We tested whether a previously validated AF polygenic risk score (PRS) associated with cardioembolic and other stroke subtypes after accounting for AF clinical risk factors. We observed a strong correlation between previously reported genetic risk for AF, AF in the presence of stroke, and cardioembolic stroke (Pearson r = 0.77 and 0.76, respectively, across SNPs with p < 4.4 x 10(-4) in the previous AF meta-analysis). An AF PRS, adjusted for clinical AF risk factors, was associated with cardioembolic stroke (odds ratio [OR] per SD = 1.40, p = 1.45 x 10(-48)), explaining similar to 20% of the heritable component of cardioembolic stroke risk. The AF PRS was also associated with stroke of undetermined cause (OR per SD = 1.07,p = 0.004), but no other primary stroke subtypes (all p > 0.1). Genetic risk of AF is associated with cardioembolic stroke, independent of clinical risk factors. Studies are warranted to determine whether AF genetic risk can serve as a biomarker for strokes caused by AF.
|
|
4. |
- Marini, S., et al.
(author)
-
Association of Apolipoprotein E With Intracerebral Hemorrhage Risk by Race/Ethnicity A Meta-analysis
- 2019
-
In: Jama Neurology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6149 .- 2168-6157. ; 76:4, s. 480-491
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- IMPORTANCE Genetic studies of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) have focused mainly on white participants, but genetic risk may vary or could be concealed by differing nongenetic coexposures in nonwhite populations. Transethnic analysis of risk may clarify the role of genetics in ICH risk across populations. OBJECTIVE To evaluate associations between established differences in ICH risk by race/ethnicity and the variability in the risks of apolipoprotein E (APOE) epsilon 4 alleles, the most potent genetic risk factor for ICH. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This case-control study of primary ICH meta-analyzed the association of APOE allele status on ICH risk, applying a 2-stage clustering approach based on race/ethnicity and stratified by a contributing study. A propensity score analysis was used to model the association of APOE with the burden of hypertension across race/ethnic groups. Primary ICH cases and controls were collected from 3 hospital- and population-based studies in the United States and 8 in European sites in the International Stroke Genetic Consortium. Participants were enrolled from January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2017. Participants with secondary causes of ICH were excluded from enrollment. Controls were regionally matched within each participating study. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Clinical variables were systematically obtained from structured interviews within each site. APOE genotype was centrally determined for all studies. RESULTS In total, 13 124 participants (7153 [54.5%] male with a median [interquartile range] age of 66 [56-76] years) were included. In white participants, APOE epsilon 2 (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% CI, 1.24-1.80; P < .001) and APOE epsilon 4 (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.23-1.85; P < .001) were associated with lobar ICH risk; however, within self-identified Hispanic and black participants, no associations were found. After propensity score matching for hypertension burden, APOE epsilon 4 was associated with lobar ICH risk among Hispanic (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.28; P = .01) but not in black (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.98-1.07; P = .25) participants. APOE epsilon 2 and epsilon 4 did not show an association with nonlobar ICH risk in any race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE APOE epsilon 4 and epsilon 2 alleles appear to affect lobar ICH risk variably by race/ethnicity, associations that are confirmed in white individuals but can be shown in Hispanic individuals only when the excess burden of hypertension is propensity score-matched; further studies are needed to explore the interactions between APOE alleles and environmental exposures that vary by race/ethnicity in representative populations at risk for ICH.
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
|
|
9. |
- Hinman, R. S., et al.
(author)
-
Development of a core capability framework for qualified health professionals to optimise care for people with osteoarthritis : an OARSI initiative
- 2020
-
In: Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. - : Elsevier BV. - 1063-4584. ; 28:2, s. 154-166
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: Develop a generic trans-disciplinary, skills-based capability framework for health professionals providing care for people with OA. Design: e-Delphi survey. An international inter-professional Delphi Panel (researchers; clinicians; consumer representatives) considered a draft framework (adapted from elsewhere) of 131 specific capabilities mapped to 14 broader capability areas across four domains (A: person-centred approaches; B: assessment, investigation and diagnosis; C: management, interventions and prevention; D: service and professional development). Over three rounds, the Panel rated their agreement (Likert or numerical rating scales) on whether each specific capability in Domains B and C was essential (core) for all health professionals when providing care for all people with OA. Those achieving consensus (≥80% of Panel) rating of ≥ seven out of ten (Round 3) were retained. Generic domains (A and D) were included in the final framework and amended based on Panel comments. Results: 173 people from 31 countries, spanning 18 disciplines and including 26 consumer representatives, participated. The final framework comprised 70 specific capabilities across 13 broad areas i) communication; ii) person-centred care; iii) history-taking; iv) physical assessment; v) investigations and diagnosis; vi) interventions and care planning; vii) prevention and lifestyle interventions; viii) self-management and behaviour change; ix) rehabilitative interventions; x) pharmacotherapy; xi) surgical interventions; xii) referrals and collaborative working; and xiii) evidence-based practice and service development). Conclusion: Experts agree that health professionals require an array of skills in person-centred approaches; assessment, investigation and diagnosis; management, interventions and prevention; and service and professional development to provide optimal care for people with OA.
|
|
10. |
- Zhang, W., et al.
(author)
-
EULAR evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of hand osteoarthritis: report of a task force of ESCISIT
- 2009
-
In: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 68:1, s. 8-17
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To develop evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of hand osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline development group, representing 15 European countries, generated 10 key propositions regarding diagnosis using a Delphi consensus approach. For each recommendation, research evidence was searched for systematically. Whenever possible, the sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio (LR) were calculated; relative risk and odds ratios were estimated for risk factors for hand OA. Quality of evidence was categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) hierarchy, and strength of recommendation was assessed by the EULAR visual analogue scale. Results: Diagnostic topics included clinical manifestations, radiographic features, subgroups, differential diagnosis, laboratory tests, risk factors and comorbidities. The sensitivity, specificity and LR varied between tests depending upon the cut-off level, gold standard and controls. Overall, no single test could be used to define hand OA on its own (LR,10) but a composite of the tests greatly increased the chance of the diagnosis. The probability of a subject having hand OA was 20% when Heberden nodes alone were present, but this increased to 88% when in addition the subject was over 40 years old, had a family history of nodes and had joint space narrowing in any finger joint. Conclusion: Ten key recommendations for diagnosis of hand OA were developed using research evidence and expert consensus. Diagnosis of hand OA should be based on assessment of a composite of features.
|
|