Citations

Background and Purpose— One in 3 individuals will experience a stroke, dementia or both. Moreover, twice as many individuals will have cognitive impairment short of dementia as either stroke or dementia. The commonly used stroke scales do not measure cognition, while dementia criteria focus on the late stages of cognitive impairment, and are heavily biased toward the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. No commonly agreed standards exist for identifying and describing individuals with cognitive impairment, particularly in the early stages, and especially with cognitive impairment related to vascular factors, or vascular cognitive impairment. Methods— The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and the Canadian Stroke Network (CSN) convened researchers in clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, neuropsychology, brain imaging, neuropathology, experimental models, biomarkers, genetics, and clinical trials to recommend minimum, common, clinical and research standards for the description and study of vascular cognitive impairment. Results— The results of these discussions are reported herein. Conclusions— The development of common standards represents a first step in a process of use, validation and refinement. Using the same standards will help identify individuals in the early stages of cognitive impairment, will make studies comparable, and by integrating knowledge, will accelerate the pace of progress.

Abstract The relationship between use of corticosteroids and fracture risk was estimated in a meta-analysis of data from seven cohort studies of ∼42,000 men and women. Current and past use of corticosteroids was an important predictor of fracture risk that was independent of prior fracture and BMD. Introduction: The aims of this study were to validate that corticosteroid use is a significant risk factor for fracture in an international setting and to explore the effects of age and sex on this risk. Materials and Methods: We studied 42,500 men and women from seven prospectively studied cohorts followed for 176,000 patient-years. The cohorts comprised the EPOS/EVOS study, CaMos, the Rotterdam Study, Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study (DOES), and prospective cohorts at Sheffield, Rochester, and Gothenburg. The effect of ever use of corticosteroids, BMD, age, and sex on all fracture, osteoporotic fracture, and hip fracture risk alone was examined using Poisson regression in each cohort and for each sex. The results of the different studies were merged from the weighted β coefficients. Results: Previous corticosteroid use was associated with a significantly increased risk of any fracture, osteoporotic fracture, and hip fracture when adjusted for BMD. Relative risk of any fracture ranged from 1.98 at the age of 50 years to 1.66 at the age of 85 years. For osteoporotic fracture, the range of relative risk was 2.63-1.71, and for hip fracture 4.42-2.48. The estimate of relative risk was higher at younger ages, but not significantly so. No significant difference in risk was seen between men and women. The risk was marginally and not significantly upwardly adjusted when BMD was excluded from the model. The risk was independent of prior fracture. In the three cohorts that documented current corticosteroid use, BMD was significantly reduced at the femoral neck, but fracture risk was still only partly explained by BMD. Conclusion: We conclude that prior and current exposure to corticosteroids confers an increased risk of fracture that is of substantial importance beyond that explained by the measurement of BMD. Its identification on an international basis validates the use of this risk factor in case-finding strategies.

Abstract The relationship between BMD and fracture risk was estimated in a meta-analysis of data from 12 cohort studies of ∼39,000 men and women. Low hip BMD was an important predictor of fracture risk. The prediction of hip fracture with hip BMD also depended on age and z score. Introduction: The aim of this study was to quantify the relationship between BMD and fracture risk and examine the effect of age, sex, time since measurement, and initial BMD value. Materials and Methods: We studied 9891 men and 29,082 women from 12 cohorts comprising EVOS/EPOS, EPIDOS, OFELY, CaMos, Rochester, Sheffield, Rotterdam, Kuopio, DOES, Hiroshima, and 2 cohorts from Gothenburg. Cohorts were followed for up to 16.3 years and a total of 168,366 person-years. The effect of BMD on fracture risk was examined using a Poisson model in each cohort and each sex separately. Results of the different studies were then merged using weighted coefficients. Results: BMD measurement at the femoral neck with DXA was a strong predictor of hip fractures both in men and women with a similar predictive ability. At the age of 65 years, risk ratio increased by 2.94 (95% CI = 2.02-4.27) in men and by 2.88 (95% CI = 2.31-3.59) in women for each SD decrease in BMD. However, the effect was dependent on age, with a significantly higher gradient of risk at age 50 years than at age 80 years. Although the gradient of hip fracture risk decreased with age, the absolute risk still rose markedly with age. For any fracture and for any osteoporotic fracture, the gradient of risk was lower than for hip fractures. At the age of 65 years, the risk of osteoporotic fractures increased in men by 1.41 per SD decrease in BMD (95% CI = 1.33-1.51) and in women by 1.38 per SD (95% CI = 1.28-1.48). In contrast with hip fracture risk, the gradient of risk increased with age. For the prediction of any osteoporotic fracture (and any fracture), there was a higher gradient of risk the lower the BMD. At a z score of -4 SD, the risk gradient was 2.10 per SD (95% CI = 1.63-2.71) and at a z score of -1 SD, the risk was 1.73 per SD (95% CI = 1.59-1.89) in men and women combined. A similar but less pronounced and nonsignificant effect was observed for hip fractures. Data for ultrasound and peripheral measurements were available from three cohorts. The predictive ability of these devices was somewhat less than that of DXA measurements at the femoral neck by age, sex, and BMD value. Conclusions: We conclude that BMD is a risk factor for fracture of substantial importance and is similar in both sexes. Its validation on an international basis permits its use in case finding strategies. Its use should, however, take account of the variations in predictive value with age and BMD.

Abstract Global aging superimposed on existing infectious diseases and trauma will aggravate competition for health care resources to diagnose and treat osteoporosis. Efforts to implement public health measures are needed, but the targeted approach to assessment and treatment of high-risk individuals must also be refined. Increases in the elderly population worldwide will cause a dramatic rise in osteoporotic fractures, but other age-related diseases will increase as well. Changes will be superimposed on existing public health problems (e.g., malaria, alcoholism), and these acute health care needs will take priority in some areas. Societies in most parts of the world may have to limit osteoporosis control to broad public health measures, and such efforts (e.g., calcium and vitamin D supplementation) should be supported. In these regions, clinical decision-making will generally be limited to treating patients with fractures (who presumably have already failed any public health measures in place), or in a few wealthy countries, to patients with low bone density identified by case-finding. Case-finding approaches will vary with the resources available, although unselective (mass) screening by bone densitometry is largely ineffective and unaffordable anywhere. The key to clinical decision-making on behalf of individuals will be an assessment of absolute fracture risk, and the tools needed to predict the risk of an osteoporotic fracture over the next 10 years are now being developed. These include bone density measures, but also incorporate other risk factors (e.g., fracture history, corticosteroid use), which may allow extension of fracture risk prediction to nonwhite populations and to men. Even with a universal risk prediction tool, cost-effective treatment thresholds will vary by country based on the level of fracture risk in the region and on the resources available for health care. To better compete for these resources, efforts should be made to lower the cost of osteoporosis interventions. Additionally, evidence is needed that these interventions are really effective in reducing fractures in the community.

Purpose There is a need for a simple, reliable staging system for multiple myeloma that can be applied internationally for patient classification and stratification. Patients and Methods Clinical and laboratory data were gathered on 10,750 previously untreated symptomatic myeloma patients from 17 institutions, including sites in North America, Europe, and Asia. Potential prognostic factors were evaluated by univariate and multivariate techniques. Three modeling approaches were then explored to develop a staging system including two nontree and one tree survival assessment methodologies. Results Serum beta 2 -microglobulin (Sβ 2 M), serum albumin, platelet count, serum creatinine, and age emerged as powerful predictors of survival and were then used in the tree analysis approach. A combination of Sβ 2 M and serum albumin provided the simplest, most powerful and reproducible three-stage classification. This new International Staging System (ISS) was validated in the remaining patients and consists of the following stages: stage I, Sβ 2 M less than 3.5 mg/L plus serum albumin ≥ 3.5 g/dL (median survival, 62 months); stage II, neither stage I nor III (median survival, 44 months); and stage III, Sβ 2 M ≥ 5.5 mg/L (median survival, 29 months). The ISS system was further validated by demonstrating effectiveness in patients in North America, Europe, and Asia; in patients less than and ≥ 65 years of age; in patients with standard therapy or autotransplantation; and in comparison with the Durie/Salmon staging system. Conclusion The new ISS is simple, based on easy to use variables (Sβ 2 M and serum albumin), and recommended for early adoption and widespread use.

Objective: To provide recommendations on the use of disease-modifying agents in the management of multiple sclerosis (MS) and to ensure that treatment will be available to those patients who may benefit. Methods: An initial draft of the consensus statement was prepared by the Steering Committee and amended in the light of written comments from a group of MS specialists. At a subsequent workshop, the wording of the consensus statement was discussed, modified if necessary, and the participants indicated their level of support using an electronic voting system. A new draft of the statement was then sent to a much larger group of international opinion leaders in MS for further comment. Results: A number of statements were agreed, which outline the criteria for consideration of disease-modifying therapy for MS and recommendations for treatment. Each statement was accepted completely, or with only minor reservations by 95% or more of those present at the workshop. Conclusions: Periodic reviews and modifications to the statement will be required, as new approaches to the treatment of MS and other therapeutic agents become available.