| 1. |
- Schiava, M., et al.
(author)
-
Genotype-phenotype correlations in valosin-containing protein disease: a retrospective muticentre study
- 2022
-
In: Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. - : BMJ. - 0022-3050 .- 1468-330X. ; 93:10, s. 1099-1111
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Valosin-containing protein (VCP) disease, caused by mutations in the VCP gene, results in myopathy, Paget's disease of bone (PBD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Natural history and genotype-phenotype correlation data are limited. This study characterises patients with mutations in VCP gene and investigates genotype-phenotype correlations. Methods Descriptive retrospective international study collecting clinical and genetic data of patients with mutations in the VCP gene. Results Two hundred and fifty-five patients (70.0% males) were included in the study. Mean age was 56.8 +/- 9.6 years and mean age of onset 45.6 +/- 9.3 years. Mean diagnostic delay was 7.7 +/- 6 years. Symmetric lower limb weakness was reported in 50% at onset progressing to generalised muscle weakness. Other common symptoms were ventilatory insufficiency 40.3%, PDB 28.2%, dysautonomia 21.4% and FTD 14.3%. Fifty-seven genetic variants were identified, 18 of these no previously reported. c.464G>A (p.Arg155His) was the most frequent variant, identified in the 28%. Full time wheelchair users accounted for 19.1% with a median time from disease onset to been wheelchair user of 8.5 years. Variant c.463C>T (p.Arg155Cys) showed an earlier onset (37.8 +/- 7.6 year) and a higher frequency of axial and upper limb weakness, scapular winging and cognitive impairment. Forced vital capacity (FVC) below 50% was as risk factor for being full-time wheelchair user, while FVC Conclusion This study expands the knowledge on the phenotypic presentation, natural history, genotype-phenotype correlations and risk factors for disease progression of VCP disease and is useful to improve the care provided to patient with this complex disease.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Baldeh, Tejan, et al.
(author)
-
Development and use of health outcome descriptors : a guideline development case study
- 2020
-
In: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. - : BioMed Central. - 1477-7525. ; 18:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: During healthcare guideline development, panel members often have implicit, different definitions of health outcomes that can lead to misunderstandings about how important these outcomes are and how to balance benefits and harms. McMaster GRADE Centre researchers developed ‘health outcome descriptors’ for standardizing descriptions of health outcomes and overcoming these problems to support the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) Guideline Development Group (GDG). We aimed to determine which aspects of the development, content, and use of health outcome descriptors were valuable to guideline developers.Methods: We developed 24 health outcome descriptors related to breast cancer screening and diagnosis for the European Commission Breast Guideline Development Group (GDG). Eighteen GDG members provided feedback in written format or in interviews. We then evaluated the process and conducted two health utility rating surveys.Results: Feedback from GDG members revealed that health outcome descriptors are probably useful for developing recommendations and improving transparency of guideline methods. Time commitment, methodology training, and need for multidisciplinary expertise throughout development were considered important determinants of the process. Comparison of the two health utility surveys showed a decrease in standard deviation in the second survey across 21 (88%) of the outcomes.Conclusions: Health outcome descriptors are feasible and should be developed prior to the outcome prioritization step in the guideline development process. Guideline developers should involve a subgroup of multidisciplinary experts in all stages of development and ensure all guideline panel members are trained in guideline methodology that includes understanding the importance of defining and understanding the outcomes of interest.
|
|
| 4. |
- Giorgi Rossi, Paolo, et al.
(author)
-
Recommendations from the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer for multigene testing to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early breast cancer, hormone receptor positive, HER-2 negative
- 2021
-
In: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 124:9, s. 1503-1512
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Predicting the risk of recurrence and response to chemotherapy in women with early breast cancer is crucial to optimise adjuvant treatment. Despite the common practice of using multigene tests to predict recurrence, existing recommendations are inconsistent. Our aim was to formulate healthcare recommendations for the question “Should multigene tests be used in women who have early invasive breast cancer, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy?”Methods: The European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) Guidelines Development Group (GDG), a multidisciplinary guideline panel including experts and three patients, developed recommendations informed by systematic reviews of the evidence. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used. Four multigene tests were evaluated: the 21-gene recurrence score (21-RS), the 70-gene signature (70-GS), the PAM50 risk of recurrence score (PAM50-RORS), and the 12-gene molecular score (12-MS).Results: Five studies (2 marker-based design RCTs, two treatment interaction design RCTs and 1 pooled individual data analysis from observational studies) were included; no eligible studies on PAM50-RORS or 12-MS were identified and the GDG did not formulate recommendations for these tests.Conclusions: The ECIBC GDG suggests the use of the 21-RS for lymph node-negative women (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence), recognising that benefits are probably larger in women at high risk of recurrence based on clinical characteristics. The ECIBC GDG suggests the use of the 70-GS for women at high clinical risk (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), and recommends not using 70-GS in women at low clinical risk (strong recommendation, low certainty of evidence).
|
|
| 5. |
- Schunemann, Holger J., et al.
(author)
-
Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis : A Synopsis of the European Breast Guidelines
- 2020
-
In: Annals of Internal Medicine. - : Amer Coll Physicians. - 0003-4819 .- 1539-3704. ; 172:1, s. 46-56
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Description: The European Commission Initiative for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis guidelines (European Breast Guidelines) are coordinated by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. The target audience for the guidelines includes women, health professionals, and policymakers.Methods: An international guideline panel of 28 multidisciplinary members, including patients, developed questions and corresponding recommendations that were informed by systematic reviews of the evidence conducted between March 2016 and December 2018. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to structure the process and minimize the influence of competing interests by enhancing transparency. Questions and recommendations, expressed as strong or conditional, focused on outcomes that matter to women and provided a rating of the certainty of evidence.Recommendations: This synopsis of the European Breast Guidelines provides recommendations regarding organized screening programs for women aged 40 to 75 years who are at average risk. The recommendations address digital mammography screening and the addition of hand-held ultrasonography, automated breast ultrasonography, or magnetic resonance imaging compared with mammography alone. The recommendations also discuss the frequency of screening and inform decision making for women at average risk who are recalled for suspicious lesions or who have high breast density.
|
|
