Citations

Objective:This guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations on managing hoarseness (dysphonia), defined as a disorder characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces voice‐related quality of life (QOL). Hoarseness affects nearly one‐third of the population at some point in their lives. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where hoarseness would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with hoarseness.Purpose:The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve diagnostic accuracy for hoarseness (dysphonia), reduce inappropriate antibiotic use, reduce inappropriate steroid use, reduce inappropriate use of anti‐reflux medications, reduce inappropriate use of radiographic imaging, and promote appropriate use of laryngoscopy, voice therapy, and surgery. In creating this guideline the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of neurology, speech‐language pathology, professional voice teaching, family medicine, pulmonology, geriatric medicine, nursing, internal medicine, otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, pediatrics, and consumers.ResultsThe panel made strong recommendations that 1) the clinician should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat hoarseness and 2) the clinician should advocate voice therapy for patients diagnosed with hoarseness that reduces voice‐related QOL. The panel made recommendations that 1) the clinician should diagnose hoarseness (dysphonia) in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces voice‐related QOL; 2) the clinician should assess the patient with hoarseness by history and/or physical examination for factors that modify management, such as one or more of the following: recent surgical procedures involving the neck or affecting the recurrent laryngeal nerve, recent endotracheal intubation, radiation treatment to the neck, a history of tobacco abuse, and occupation as a singer or vocal performer; 3) the clinician should visualize the patient's larynx, or refer the patient to a clinician who can visualize the larynx, when hoarseness fails to resolve by a maximum of three months after onset, or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected; 4) the clinician should not obtain computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the patient with a primary complaint of hoarseness prior to visualizing the larynx; 5) the clinician should not prescribe anti‐reflux medications for patients with hoarseness without signs or symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease; 6) the clinician should not routinely prescribe oral corticosteroids to treat hoarseness; 7) the clinician should visualize the larynx before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech‐language pathologist; and 8) the clinician should prescribe, or refer the patient to a clinician who can prescribe, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of hoarseness caused by adductor spasmodic dysphonia. The panel offered as options that 1) the clinician may perform laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with hoarseness, or may refer the patient to a clinician who can visualize the larynx; 2) the clinician may prescribe anti‐reflux medication for patients with hoarseness and signs of chronic laryngitis; and 3) the clinician may educate/counsel patients with hoarseness about control/preventive measures.Disclaimer:This clinical practice guideline is not intended as a sole source of guidance in managing hoarseness (dysphonia). Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence‐based framework for decision‐making strategies. The guideline is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem.

Background— There have been significant bidirectional changes in the prevalence of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors over time in the United States, making the net trend in risk for incident CV disease unknown. We assessed these trends by applying the Framingham Heart Study prediction model to national data. Methods and Results— The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) II (1976–1980), NHANES III (1988–1994), and NHANES 1999–2004 are cross-sectional representative samples of the noninstitutionalized population of the United States. We excluded people with a history of CV disease, pregnant women, participants with missing CV risk factors data, and individuals outside the Framingham age range of 30 to 74 years. The Framingham risk function was used to estimate the 10-year risk for incident symptomatic CV disease. We calculated the slope of change or rate of change per year between NHANES II and III, and between NHANES III and 1999–2004. The difference between slopes was calculated and compared to zero. The average age-adjusted 10-year CV risk between NHANES II and III decreased from 10.0% to 7.9% between NHANES II and III, with a statistically significant slope ( P <0.001). However, the average age-adjusted CV risk decreased at a lesser magnitude between NHANES III and NHANES 1999–2004 from 7.9% to 7.4% ( P <0.001). These slopes were significantly different ( P <0.0001). In women and middle-aged participants, CV risk did not change between NHANES III and NHANES 1999–2004 ( P =0.40). Conclusions— The estimated net risk for CV disease in the US population decreased from 1976–1980 to 1988–1994 but has changed minimally from 1988–1994 to 1999–2004, particularly in women and middle-aged people.

Abstract Inherited BRCA1/2 mutations confer elevated ovarian cancer risk. Knowledge of factors that can improve ovarian cancer risk assessment in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers is important because no effective early detection for ovarian cancers exists. A cohort of 1,575 BRCA1 and 856 BRCA2 mutation carriers was used to evaluate haplotypes at ATM, BARD1, BRIP1, CTIP, MRE11, NBS1, RAD50, RAD51, and TOPBP1 in ovarian cancer risk. In BRCA1 carriers, no associations were observed with ATM, BARD1, CTIP, RAD50, RAD51, or TOPBP1. At BRIP1, an association was observed for one haplotype with a multiple testing corrected P (Pcorr) = 0.012, although no individual haplotype was significant. At MRE11, statistically significant associations were observed for one haplotype (Pcorr = 0.007). At NBS1, we observed a Pcorr = 0.024 for haplotypes. In BRCA2 carriers, no associations were observed with CTIP, NBS1, RAD50, or TOPBP1. Rare haplotypes at ATM (Pcorr = 0.044) and BARD1 (Pcorr = 0.012) were associated with ovarian cancer risk. At BRIP1, two common haplotypes were significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk (Pcorr = 0.011). At MRE11, we observed a significant haplotype association (Pcorr = 0.012), and at RAD51, one common haplotype was significantly associated with ovarian cancer risk (Pcorr = 0.026). Variants in genes that interact biologically withBRCA1 and/or BRCA2 may be associated with modified ovarian cancer risk in women who carry BRCA1/2 mutations. [Cancer Res 2009;69(14):5801–10]

Abstract The goal of this study was to assess the performance characteristics of the Automated Cellular Imaging System (ACIS III) for HER2 immunohistochemical analysis. The study was performed on 187 biopsy slides from patients who underwent HER2 testing between January and February 2008. Three scoring methods by the ACIS III were compared with the manual score and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) results for HER2 amplification. The equal distribution score (EQD) method, in which 2 areas each of high-, moderate-, and low-intensity staining were measured, most closely matched the FISH HER2 amplification result. The numbers of immunohistochemically negative (0 or 1+)/FISH+ cases were equivalent for all methods. The EQD method had significantly fewer 2+ cases (n = 16) (P &lt; .001) vs the manual method (n = 35) and yielded a higher positive predictive value (38%) for HER2 amplification compared with the manual method (20%). The EQD method may more accurately identify FISH-amplified HER2 cases with fewer 2+ cases that would be “reflexed” to FISH compared with the manual method.

Abstract Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) is a T cell-mediated autoimmune disease of the CNS. Metformin is the most widely used drug for diabetes and mediates its action via activating AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK). We provide evidence that metformin attenuates the induction of EAE by restricting the infiltration of mononuclear cells into the CNS, down-regulating the expression of proinflammatory cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-17, and inducible NO synthase (iNOS)), cell adhesion molecules, matrix metalloproteinase 9, and chemokine (RANTES). Furthermore, the AMPK activity and lipids alterations (total phospholipids and in free fatty acids) were restored by metformin treatment in the CNS of treated EAE animals, suggesting the possible involvement of AMPK. Metformin activated AMPK in macrophages and thereby inhibited biosynthesis of phospholipids as well as neutral lipids and also down-regulated the expression of endotoxin (LPS)-induced proinflammatory cytokines and their mediators (iNOS and cyclooxygenase 2). It also attenuated IFN-γ and IL-17-induced iNOS and cyclooxygenase 2 expression in RAW267.4 cells, further supporting its anti-inflammatory property. Metformin inhibited T cell-mediated immune responses including Ag-specific recall responses and production of Th1 or Th17 cytokines, while it induced the generation of IL-10 in spleen cells of treated EAE animals. Altogether these findings reveal that metformin may have a possible therapeutic value for the treatment of multiple sclerosis and other inflammatory diseases.

Abstract We recently identified HSulf-1 as a down-regulated gene in ovarian carcinomas. Our previous analysis indicated that HSulf-1 inactivation in ovarian cancers is partly mediated by loss of heterozygosity and epigenetic silencing. Here, we show that variant hepatic nuclear factor 1 (vHNF1), encoded by transcription factor 2 gene (TCF2, HNF1β), negatively regulates HSulf-1 expression in ovarian cancer. Immunoblot assay revealed that vHNF1 is highly expressed in HSulf-1–deficient OV207, SKOV3, and TOV-21G cell lines but not in HSulf-1–expressing OSE, OV167, and OV202 cells. By short hairpin RNA–mediated down-regulation of vHNF1 in TOV-21G cells and transient enhanced vHNF1 expression in OV202 cells, we showed that vHNF1 suppresses HSulf-1 expression in ovarian cancer cell lines. Reporter assay and chromatin immunoprecipitation experiments showed that vHNF1 is specifically recruited to HSulf-1 promoter at two different vHNF1-responsive elements in OV207 and TOV-21G cells. Additionally, down-regulation of vHNF1 expression in OV207 and TOV-21G cells increased cisplatin- or paclitaxel-mediated cytotoxicity as determined by both 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide and clonogenic assays and this effect was reversed by down-regulation of HSulf-1. Moreover, nude mice bearing TOV-21G cell xenografts with stably down-regulated vHNF1 were more sensitive to cisplatin- or paclitaxel-induced cytotoxicity compared with xenografts of TOV-21G clonal lines with nontargeted control short hairpin RNA. Finally, immunohistochemical analysis of 501 ovarian tumors including 140 clear-cell tumors on tissue microarrays showed that vHNF1 inversely correlates to HSulf-1 expression. Collectively, these results indicate that vHNF1 acts as a repressor of HSulf-1 expression and might be a molecular target for ovarian cancer therapy. [Cancer Res 2009;69(11):4843–50]

Background— Better insight into the psychosocial factors associated with prehospital delays in seeking care for acute coronary syndromes is needed to inform the design of future interventions. Delay in presenting for care after the onset of symptoms is common, limits the potential benefit of acute reperfusion, and has not been reduced by interventions tested thus far. Methods and Results— Seven hundred ninety-six patients with suspected ischemic heart disease scheduled for clinically indicated imaging stress tests completed questionnaires concerning psychological distress and attachment styles (worthiness to receive care, trustworthiness of others to provide care). The primary dependent variable for this study was response to a question from the rapid early action for coronary treatment trial concerning intention to “wait until very sure” before seeking care for a possible “heart attack.” Responses to this question were strongly associated with actual emergency department-reported and self-reported care delay in the rapid early action for coronary treatment trial. In multivariable ordinal regression models, a more negative view of the trustworthiness of others, greater physical limitations from angina, and no previous revascularization were independently associated with increased intention to wait to seek care for a myocardial infarction. Intention to wait was not associated with inducible ischemia or self-perceived risk of myocardial infarction. Conclusions— Intention to delay seeking care for acute coronary syndromes is associated with a patient’s view of the trustworthiness of others, previous experience with revascularization, and functional limitations, even after adjustment for objective and perceived acute coronary syndromes risk. These findings provide insight into novel factors contributing to longer delay times and may inform future interventions to reduce delay time.

Purpose The primary goal of this multicenter phase III trial was to determine whether overall survival (OS) of fluorouracil (FU) -refractory patients was noninferior when treated with second-line infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4; arm B) versus irinotecan (arm A). Cross-over to the other treatment on disease progression was mandated. Patients and Methods Patients who experienced treatment failure with one prior FU-based therapy and had not received prior irinotecan or oxaliplatin, either for metastatic disease or within 6 months of adjuvant FU therapy, were randomly assigned to arm A (irinotecan 350 or 300 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) or arm B (FOLFOX4). Results A total of 491 patients were randomly assigned (arm A, n = 245; arm B, n = 246); 288 (59%) had experienced treatment failure with FU for metastatic colorectal cancer. Two hundred twenty-seven patients (46%) received protocol-mandated third-line therapy (arm A, 43%; arm B, 57%). Median survival was 13.8 months (95% CI, 12.2 to 15.0 months) for initial treatment with FOLFOX4 and 14.3 months (95% CI, 12.0 to 15.9 months) for irinotecan (P = .38; hazard ratio = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.8 to 1.1). Response rates (RR; 28% v 15.5%; P = .0009) and time to progression (TTP; 6.2 v 4.4 months; P = .0009) were significantly superior with FOLFOX4. In the nonrandom subset of patients who crossed over, RR and TTP improvements with FOLFOX4 continued into third-line treatment. Irinotecan therapy was associated with more grade 3 nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and febrile neutropenia; FOLFOX4 was associated with more neutropenia and paresthesias. Conclusion In patients who experienced treatment failure with front-line FU therapy, OS does not significantly differ whether second-line therapy begins with irinotecan or FOLFOX4. FOLFOX4 produces higher RR and longer TTP. Both arms had notable OS in patients who experienced treatment failure with first-line FU therapy.