1. |
|
|
2. |
|
|
3. |
- Afshin, Ashkan, et al.
(author)
-
Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990-2017 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017
- 2019
-
In: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 393:10184, s. 1958-1972
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Suboptimal diet is an important preventable risk factor for non-communicable diseases (NCDs); however, its impact on the burden of NCDs has not been systematically evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the consumption of major foods and nutrients across 195 countries and to quantify the impact of their suboptimal intake on NCD mortality and morbidity.Methods: By use of a comparative risk assessment approach, we estimated the proportion of disease-specific burden attributable to each dietary risk factor (also referred to as population attributable fraction) among adults aged 25 years or older. The main inputs to this analysis included the intake of each dietary factor, the effect size of the dietary factor on disease endpoint, and the level of intake associated with the lowest risk of mortality. Then, by use of diseasespecific population attributable fractions, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), we calculated the number of deaths and DALYs attributable to diet for each disease outcome.Findings: In 2017, 11 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 10-12) deaths and 255 million (234-274) DALYs were attributable to dietary risk factors. High intake of sodium (3 million [1-5] deaths and 70 million [34-118] DALYs), low intake of whole grains (3 million [2-4] deaths and 82 million [59-109] DALYs), and low intake of fruits (2 million [1-4] deaths and 65 million [41-92] DALYs) were the leading dietary risk factors for deaths and DALYs globally and in many countries. Dietary data were from mixed sources and were not available for all countries, increasing the statistical uncertainty of our estimates.Interpretation: This study provides a comprehensive picture of the potential impact of suboptimal diet on NCD mortality and morbidity, highlighting the need for improving diet across nations. Our findings will inform implementation of evidence-based dietary interventions and provide a platform for evaluation of their impact on human health annually.
|
|
4. |
- Brainin, Michael, et al.
(author)
-
The World Stroke Organization's Declaration for worldwide primary stroke and dementia prevention
- 2020
-
In: Annals of Clinical and Experimental Neurology. - 2075-5473. ; 14:3, s. 5-9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- current strategies of primary stroke and cardiovascular disease prevention are aimed at addressing the main risk factors primarily in patients with higher cardiovascular disease risk. Since the number of people with incident stroke and ischaemic heart disease cases is rapidly growing across all countries of the world, this preventive strategy appears to be not sufficiently effective. World Stroke Organization recently (2020) endorsed a different concept of stroke and dementia prevention based on a population-wide approach to dealing with risk factors, which involves all individuals regardless of their cardiovascular disease risk level. This article describes four main primary prevention strategies suggested by the World Stroke Organization to effectively reduce stroke and dementia incidence by 50% and 30% respectively. These strategies include (1) population-wide prevention; (2) polypill therapy; (3) free e-Health application "Stroke Riskometer"; and (4) active engagement of community health workers.
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
- Chye, Alexander, et al.
(author)
-
Repeated Measures of Modified Rankin Scale Scores to Assess Functional Recovery From Stroke : AFFINITY Study Findings
- 2022
-
In: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 2047-9980. ; 11:16
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Function after acute stroke using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) is usually assessed at a point in time. The analytical implications of serial mRS measurements to evaluate functional recovery over time is not completely understood. We compare repeated-measures and single-measure analyses of the mRS from a randomized clinical trialMethods and Results: Serial mRS data from AFFINITY (Assessment of Fluoxetine in Stroke Recovery), a double-blind placebo randomized clinical trial of fluoxetine following stroke (n=1280) were analyzed to identify demographic and clinical associations with functional recovery (reduction in mRS) over 12 months. Associations were identified using single-measure (day 365) and repeated-measures (days 28, 90, 180, and 365) partial proportional odds logistic regression. Ninety-five percent of participants experienced a reduction in mRS after 12 months. Functional recovery was associated with age at stroke <70 years; no prestroke history of diabetes, coronary heart disease, or ischemic stroke; prestroke history of depression, a relationship partner, living with others, independence, or paid employment; no fluoxetine intervention; ischemic stroke (compared with hemorrhagic); stroke treatment in Vietnam (compared with Australia or New Zealand); longer time since current stroke; and lower baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale & Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores. Direction of associations was largely concordant between single-measure and repeated-measures models. Association strength and variance was generally smaller in the repeated-measures model compared with the single-measure model.Conclusions: Repeated-measures may improve trial precision in identifying trial associations and effects. Further repeated-measures stroke analyses are required to prove methodological value. Registration URL: http://www.anzctr.org.au; Unique identifier: ACTRN12611000774921.
|
|
7. |
- Dennis, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Effects of fluoxetine on functional outcomes after acute stroke (FOCUS) : a pragmatic, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial
- 2019
-
In: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 393:10168, s. 265-274
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Results of small trials indicate that fluoxetine might improve functional outcomes after stroke. The FOCUS trial aimed to provide a precise estimate of these effects.Methods FOCUS was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done at 103 hospitals in the UK. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, were enrolled and randomly assigned between 2 days and 15 days after onset, and had focal neurological deficits. Patients were randomly allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo orally once daily for 6 months via a web-based system by use of a minimisation algorithm. The primary outcome was functional status, measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff, and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Functional status was assessed at 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed according to their treatment allocation. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN83290762.Findings Between Sept 10,2012, and March 31,2017,3127 patients were recruited. 1564 patients were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 allocated placebo. mRS data at 6 months were available for 1553 (99.3%) patients in each treatment group. The distribution across mRS categories at 6 months was similar in the fluoxetine and placebo groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0.951 [95% CI 0.839-1.079]; p=0.439). Patients allocated fluoxetine were less likely than those allocated placebo to develop new depression by 6 months (210 [13.43%] patients vs 269 [17.21%]; difference 3.78% [95% CI 1.26-6.30]; p=0.0033), but they had more bone fractures (45 [2.88%] vs 23 [1.47%]; difference 1.41% [95% CI 0.38-2.43]; p=0.0070). There were no significant differences in any other event at 6 or 12 months.Interpretation Fluoxetine 20 mg given daily for 6 months after acute stroke does not seem to improve functional outcomes. Although the treatment reduced the occurrence of depression, it increased the frequency of bone fractures. These results do not support the routine use of fluoxetine either for the prevention of post-stroke depression or to promote recovery of function.
|
|
8. |
- Dennis, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Fluoxetine and Fractures After Stroke : Exploratory Analyses From the FOCUS Trial
- 2019
-
In: Stroke. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0039-2499 .- 1524-4628. ; 50:11, s. 3280-3282
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background and Purpose- The FOCUS trial (Fluoxetine or Control Under Supervision) showed that fluoxetine did not improve modified Rankin Scale scores (mRS) but increased the risk of fractures. We aimed to describe the fractures, their impact on mRS and factors associated with fracture risk. Methods- A United Kingdom, multicenter, parallel-group, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Patients ≥18 years with a clinical stroke and persisting deficit assessed 2 to 15 days after onset were eligible. Consenting patients were allocated fluoxetine 20 mg or matching placebo for 6 months. The primary outcome was the mRS at 6 months and secondary outcomes included fractures. Results- Sixty-five of 3127 (2.1%) patients had 67 fractures within 6 months of randomization; 43 assigned fluoxetine and 22 placebo. Fifty-nine (90.8%) had fallen and 26 (40%) had fractured their neck of femur. The effect of fluoxetine on mRS (common odds ratio =0.951) was not significantly altered by excluding fracture patients (common odds ratio =0.961). Cox proportional hazards modeling showed that only age >70 year (hazard ratio =1.97; 95% CI, 1.13-3.45; P=0.017), female sex (hazard ratio =2.13; 95% CI, 1.29-3.51; P=0.003), and fluoxetine (hazard ratio =2.00; 95% CI, 1.20-3.34; P=0.008) were independently associated with fractures. Conclusions- Most fractures resulted from falls. Although many fractures were serious, and likely to impair patients' function, the increased fracture risk did not explain the lack of observed effect of fluoxetine on mRS. Only increasing age, female sex, and fluoxetine were independent predictors of fractures. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN83290762.
|
|
9. |
- Dennis, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Fluoxetine to improve functional outcomes in patients after acute stroke : the FOCUS RCT
- 2020
-
In: Health technology assessment (Winchester, England). - : National Institute for Health Research. - 2046-4924 .- 1366-5278. ; 24:22, s. 1-
-
Reports (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundOur Cochrane review of selective serotonin inhibitors for stroke recovery indicated that fluoxetine may improve functional recovery, but the trials were small and most were at high risk of bias.ObjectivesThe Fluoxetine Or Control Under Supervision (FOCUS) trial tested the hypothesis that fluoxetine improves recovery after stroke.DesignThe FOCUS trial was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, individually randomised, placebo-controlled trial.SettingThis trial took place in 103 UK hospitals.ParticipantsPatients were eligible if they were aged ≥ 18 years, had a clinical stroke diagnosis, with focal neurological deficits, between 2 and 15 days after onset.InterventionsPatients were randomly allocated 20 mg of fluoxetine once per day or the matching placebo for 6 months via a web-based system using a minimisation algorithm.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale at 6 months. Patients, carers, health-care staff and the trial team were masked to treatment allocation. Outcome was assessed at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Patients were analysed by their treatment allocation as specified in a published statistical analysis plan.ResultsBetween 10 September 2012 and 31 March 2017, we recruited 3127 patients, 1564 of whom were allocated fluoxetine and 1563 of whom were allocated placebo. The modified Rankin Scale score at 6 months was available for 1553 out of 1564 (99.3%) of those allocated fluoxetine and 1553 out of 1563 (99.4%) of those allocated placebo. The distribution across modified Rankin Scale categories at 6 months was similar in the two groups (common odds ratio adjusted for minimisation variables 0.951, 95% confidence interval 0.839 to 1.079; p = 0.439). Compared with placebo, patients who were allocated fluoxetine were less likely to develop a new episode of depression by 6 months [210 (13.0%) vs. 269 (16.9%), difference –3.78%, 95% confidence interval –1.26% to –6.30%; p = 0.003], but had more bone fractures [45 (2.9%) vs. 23 (1.5%), difference 1.41%, 95% confidence interval 0.38% to 2.43%; p = 0.007]. There were no statistically significant differences in any other recorded events at 6 or 12 months. Health economic analyses showed no differences between groups in health-related quality of life, hospital bed usage or health-care costs.LimitationsSome non-adherence to trial medication, lack of face-to-face assessment of neurological status at follow-up and lack of formal psychiatric diagnosis during follow-up.Conclusions20 mg of fluoxetine daily for 6 months after acute stroke did not improve patients’ functional outcome but decreased the occurrence of depression and increased the risk of fractures. These data inform decisions about using fluoxetine after stroke to improve functional outcome or to prevent or treat mood disorders. The Assessment oF FluoxetINe In sTroke recoverY (AFFINITY) (Australasia/Vietnam) and Efficacy oF Fluoxetine – a randomisEd Controlled Trial in Stroke (EFFECTS) (Sweden) trials recruited an additional 2780 patients and will report their results in 2020. These three trials have an almost identical protocol, which was collaboratively developed. Our planned individual patient data meta-analysis will provide more precise estimates of the effects of fluoxetine after stroke and indicate whether or not effects vary depending on patients’ characteristics and health-care setting.
|
|
10. |
- Dichgans, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
METACOHORTS for the study of vascular disease and its contribution to cognitive decline and neurodegeneration : An initiative of the Joint Programme for Neurodegenerative Disease Research
- 2016
-
In: Alzheimer's and Dementia. - : Wiley. - 1552-5260 .- 1552-5279. ; 12:12, s. 1235-1249
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Dementia is a global problem and major target for health care providers. Although up to 45% of cases are primarily or partly due to cerebrovascular disease, little is known of these mechanisms or treatments because most dementia research still focuses on pure Alzheimer's disease. An improved understanding of the vascular contributions to neurodegeneration and dementia, particularly by small vessel disease, is hampered by imprecise data, including the incidence and prevalence of symptomatic and clinically “silent” cerebrovascular disease, long-term outcomes (cognitive, stroke, or functional), and risk factors. New large collaborative studies with long follow-up are expensive and time consuming, yet substantial data to advance the field are available. In an initiative funded by the Joint Programme for Neurodegenerative Disease Research, 55 international experts surveyed and assessed available data, starting with European cohorts, to promote data sharing to advance understanding of how vascular disease affects brain structure and function, optimize methods for cerebrovascular disease in neurodegeneration research, and focus future research on gaps in knowledge. Here, we summarize the results and recommendations from this initiative. We identified data from over 90 studies, including over 660,000 participants, many being additional to neurodegeneration data initiatives. The enthusiastic response means that cohorts from North America, Australasia, and the Asia Pacific Region are included, creating a truly global, collaborative, data sharing platform, linked to major national dementia initiatives. Furthermore, the revised World Health Organization International Classification of Diseases version 11 should facilitate recognition of vascular-related brain damage by creating one category for all cerebrovascular disease presentations and thus accelerate identification of targets for dementia prevention.
|
|