Citations

Abstract Objective: The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of two forms of menopausal hormone therapy in alleviating vasomotor symptoms, insomnia, and irritability in early postmenopausal women during 4 years. Methods: A total of 727 women, aged 42 to 58, within 3 years of their final menstrual period, were randomized to receive oral conjugated estrogens (o-CEE) 0.45 mg (n = 230) or transdermal estradiol (t-E 2 ) 50 μg (n = 225; both with micronized progesterone 200 mg for 12 d each mo), or placebos (PBOs; n = 275). Menopausal symptoms were recorded at screening and at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months postrandomization. Differences in proportions of women with symptoms at baseline and at each follow-up time point were compared by treatment arm using exact χ 2 tests in an intent-to-treat analysis. Differences in treatment effect by race/ethnicity and body mass index were tested using generalized linear mixed effects modeling. Results: Moderate to severe hot flashes (from 44% at baseline to 28.3% for PBO, 7.4% for t-E 2 , and 4.2% for o-CEE) and night sweats (from 35% at baseline to 19% for PBO, 5.3% for t-E 2 , and 4.7% for o-CEE) were reduced significantly by 6 months in women randomized to either active hormone compared with PBO ( P < 0.001 for both symptoms), with no significant differences between the active treatment arms. Insomnia and irritability decreased from baseline to 6 months postrandomization in all groups. There was an intermittent reduction in insomnia in both active treatment arms versus PBO, with o-CEE being more effective than PBO at 36 and 48 months ( P = 0.002 and 0.05) and t-E 2 being more effective than PBO at 48 months ( P = 0.004). Neither hormone treatment significantly affected irritability compared with PBO. Symptom relief for active treatment versus PBO was not significantly modified by body mass index or race/ethnicity. Conclusions: Recently postmenopausal women had similar and substantial reductions in hot flashes and night sweats with lower-than-conventional doses of oral or transdermal estrogen. These reductions were sustained during 4 years. Insomnia was intermittently reduced compared with PBO for both hormone regimens.

Coffee consumption has been shown in some studies to be associated with lower risk of prostate cancer. However, it is unclear if this association is causal or due to confounding or reverse causality. We conducted a Mendelian randomisation analysis to investigate the causal effects of coffee consumption on prostate cancer risk and progression. We used two genetic variants robustly associated with caffeine intake (rs4410790 and rs2472297) as proxies for coffee consumption in a sample of 46,687 men of European ancestry from 25 studies in the PRACTICAL consortium. Associations between genetic variants and prostate cancer case status, stage and grade were assessed by logistic regression and with all‐cause and prostate cancer‐specific mortality using Cox proportional hazards regression. There was no clear evidence that a genetic risk score combining rs4410790 and rs2472297 was associated with prostate cancer risk (OR per additional coffee increasing allele: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.98,1.03) or having high‐grade compared to low‐grade disease (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97,1.04). There was some evidence that the genetic risk score was associated with higher odds of having nonlocalised compared to localised stage disease (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.06). Amongst men with prostate cancer, there was no clear association between the genetic risk score and all‐cause mortality (HR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.97,1.04) or prostate cancer‐specific mortality (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.98,1.08). These results, which should have less bias from confounding than observational estimates, are not consistent with a substantial effect of coffee consumption on reducing prostate cancer incidence or progression.

Abstract Objective: Several attributes of female reproductive history, including age at natural menopause (ANM), have been related to primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). We assembled 18 previously reported common genetic variants that predict ANM to determine their association with ANM or POAG. Methods: Using data from the Nurses’ Health Study (7,143 women), we validated the ANM weighted genetic risk score in relation to self-reported ANM. Subsequently, to assess the relation with POAG, we used data from 2,160 female POAG cases and 29,110 controls in the National Eye Institute Glaucoma Human Genetics Collaboration Heritable Overall Operational Database (NEIGHBORHOOD), which consists of 8 datasets with imputed genotypes to 5.6+ million markers. Associations with POAG were assessed in each dataset, and site-specific results were meta-analyzed using the inverse weighted variance method. Results: The genetic risk score was associated with self-reported ANM (P = 2.2 × 10–77) and predicted 4.8% of the variance in ANM. The ANM genetic risk score was not associated with POAG (Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.002; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.998, 1.007; P = 0.28). No single genetic variant in the panel achieved nominal association with POAG (P ≥0.20). Compared to the middle 80 percent, there was also no association with the lowest 10th percentile or highest 90th percentile of genetic risk score with POAG (OR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.47, 1.21; P = 0.23 and OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.69; P = 0.65, respectively). Conclusions: A genetic risk score predicting 4.8% of ANM variation was not related to POAG; thus, genetic determinants of ANM are unlikely to explain the previously reported association between the two phenotypes.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in developed countries, and is a target for risk reduction strategies. The effects of alcohol consumption on prostate cancer incidence and survival remain unclear, potentially due to methodological limitations of observational studies. In this study, we investigated the associations of genetic variants in alcohol‐metabolising genes with prostate cancer incidence and survival. We analysed data from 23,868 men with prostate cancer and 23,051 controls from 25 studies within the international PRACTICAL Consortium. Study‐specific associations of 68 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 8 alcohol‐metabolising genes (Alcohol Dehydrogenases (ADHs) and Aldehyde Dehydrogenases (ALDHs)) with prostate cancer diagnosis and prostate cancer‐specific mortality, by grade, were assessed using logistic and Cox regression models, respectively. The data across the 25 studies were meta‐analysed using fixed‐effect and random‐effects models. We found little evidence that variants in alcohol metabolising genes were associated with prostate cancer diagnosis. Four variants in two genes exceeded the multiple testing threshold for associations with prostate cancer mortality in fixed‐effect meta‐analyses. SNPs within ALDH1A2 associated with prostate cancer mortality were rs1441817 (fixed effects hazard ratio, HRfixed = 0.78; 95% confidence interval (95%CI):0.66,0.91; p values = 0.002); rs12910509, HRfixed = 0.76; 95%CI:0.64,0.91; p values = 0.003); and rs8041922 (HRfixed = 0.76; 95%CI:0.64,0.91; p values = 0.002). These SNPs were in linkage disequilibrium with each other. In ALDH1B1, rs10973794 (HRfixed = 1.43; 95%CI:1.14,1.79; p values = 0.002) was associated with prostate cancer mortality in men with low‐grade prostate cancer. These results suggest that alcohol consumption is unlikely to affect prostate cancer incidence, but it may influence disease progression.

Healthcare workers suffer musculoskeletal disorders at rates that exceed most other industries. Despite this, many healthcare facilities do not follow best practices that are proven to reduce risk of injury. This discussion panel will explore the reasons for why the healthcare industry struggles to prevent injuries and will outline successful strategies for protecting workers. The panelists are leaders and advisors for large medical systems and their specialties include ergonomics, safe patient handling, and patient safety. The panelists relate the critical challenges faced when preventing caregiver injuries. Such challenges include underreporting of staff injuries, lack of funding or administrative support, and inability to sell the connections among caregiver safety, caregiver productivity, and patient safety. The panelists also share success stories of when they have achieved positive change and explain the strategies that were effective. Practitioners should gain new insights for implementing successful change, and researchers will be exposed to new and important research questions.

Background The rarity of mutations in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM make it difficult to estimate precisely associated cancer risks. Population-based family studies have provided evidence that at least some of these mutations are associated with breast cancer risk as high as those associated with rare BRCA2 mutations. We aimed to estimate the relative risks associated with specific rare variants in PALB2, CHEK2 and ATM via a multicentre case-control study. Methods We genotyped 10 rare mutations using the custom iCOGS array: PALB2 c.1592delT, c.2816T>G and c.3113G>A, CHEK2 c.349A>G, c.538C>T, c.715G>A, c.1036C>T, c.1312G>T, and c.1343T>G and ATM c.7271T>G. We assessed associations with breast cancer risk (42 671 cases and 42 164 controls), as well as prostate (22 301 cases and 22 320 controls) and ovarian (14 542 cases and 23 491 controls) cancer risk, for each variant. Results For European women, strong evidence of association with breast cancer risk was observed for PALB2 c.1592delT OR 3.44 (95% CI 1.39 to 8.52, p=7.1×10−5), PALB2 c.3113G>A OR 4.21 (95% CI 1.84 to 9.60, p=6.9×10−8) and ATM c.7271T>G OR 11.0 (95% CI 1.42 to 85.7, p=0.0012). We also found evidence of association with breast cancer risk for three variants in CHEK2, c.349A>G OR 2.26 (95% CI 1.29 to 3.95), c.1036C>T OR 5.06 (95% CI 1.09 to 23.5) and c.538C>T OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.67) (p≤0.017). Evidence for prostate cancer risk was observed for CHEK2 c.1343T>G OR 3.03 (95% CI 1.53 to 6.03, p=0.0006) for African men and CHEK2 c.1312G>T OR 2.21 (95% CI 1.06 to 4.63, p=0.030) for European men. No evidence of association with ovarian cancer was found for any of these variants. Conclusions This report adds to accumulating evidence that at least some variants in these genes are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer that is clinically important.