Citations

The Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS) is a multidimensional cognitive measure popular with clinicians for its brevity, diagnostic validity, and utility in monitoring impairment severity. In spite of the test’s significant value, one task can cause discomfort because the patient is asked to name items the examiner is wearing. This task also creates possible cultural bias and standardization issues. We studied 102 MDRS profiles that included this item. Adjusted scores were calculated by giving all patients full credit for the apparel-naming item. The average adjustment was just one point, and the resulting dementia-severity ratings remained unchanged in 97% of the patients. These results show that administration of the item can be defensibly skipped if there is concern about its appropriateness with an individual patient. The adjusted scores provide a viable and fair alternative that preserves the psychometric properties of this useful instrument.

Key Points In combination with cyclophosphamide, intravenous busulfan is associated with better leukemia-free and overall survival in AML than TBI.

AbstractBackground: It is widely accepted that chronic inflammation plays a role in the etiology of colorectal cancer. Using a two-stage design, we examined the associations between colorectal cancer and common variation in 37 key genes in the inflammation and innate immunity pathways.Methods: In the discovery stage, 2,322 discordant sibships (2,535 cases, 3,915 sibling controls) from the Colorectal Cancer Family Registry were genotyped for more than 600 tagSNPs and 99 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) were selected for further examination based on strength of association. In the second stage, 351 SNPs tagging gene regions covered by the 99 SNPs were tested in 4,783 Multiethnic Cohort subjects (2,153 cases, 2,630 controls).Results: The association between rs9858822 in the PPARG gene and colorectal cancer was statistically significant at the end of the second stage (OR per allele = 1.36, Bonferroni-adjusted P = 0.045), based on the “effective” number of markers in stage II (n = 306). The risk allele C was common (frequency 0.3) in African Americans but rare (frequency < 0.03) in whites, Japanese Americans, Latinos, and Native Hawaiians. No statistically significant heterogeneity of effects across race/ethnicity, body mass index (BMI) levels, regular aspirin use, or pack-years of smoking was detected for this SNP. Suggestive associations were also observed for several SNPs in close vicinity to rs9858822.Conclusions: Our results provide new evidence of association between PPARG variants and colorectal cancer risk.Impact: Further replication in independent samples is warranted. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 22(11); 2094–101. ©2013 AACR.

Background: We used simulation modeling to relate glucose meter performance criteria to insulin dosing errors for patients on a moderate glycemic control protocol (glucose target, 110–150 mg/dL) and empirically validated assumptions from simulation models using observed glucose meter and laboratory glucose values obtained nearly simultaneously. Subjects and Methods: The 25,948 glucose values from 1,513 patients on a moderate glycemic control protocol were used to represent the expected distribution of glucose values in this patient population. Simulation models were used to relate glucose meter analytical performance to insulin dosing errors assuming 10%, 15%, or 20% total allowable error (TEa). In addition, 4,017 paired glucose meter and serum laboratory glucose measurements drawn within 5 min of each other were used to generate an empiric dataset to validate simulation model assumptions relating glucose meter performance to insulin dosing errors. Results: Large (three or more category) insulin dosing errors are predicted to occur only under the 20% TEa condition. Two category insulin dosing errors were common (6–20% of all insulin dosing decisions) when 20% TEa was assumed, but frequency decreased to only 0.2% of dosing decisions when 10% TEa was modeled. When insulin dosing error rates were measured empirically by comparing paired glucose meter and laboratory glucose values, insulin dosing error rates were very similar to those predicted for the 20% TEa condition. Conclusions: Both simulation models and empiric data demonstrate that glucose meters that perform at ≥20% TEa allow large insulin dosing errors during a moderate glycemic control protocol.