Citations

Background and objectives Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) requires exclusion of diseases that could better explain the clinical and paraclinical findings. A systematic process for exclusion of alternative diagnoses has not been defined. An International Panel of MS experts developed consensus perspectives on MS differential diagnosis. Methods Using available literature and consensus, we developed guidelines for MS differential diagnosis, focusing on exclusion of potential MS mimics, diagnosis of common initial isolated clinical syndromes, and differentiating between MS and non-MS idiopathic inflammatory demyelinating diseases. Results We present recommendations for 1) clinical and paraclinical red flags suggesting alternative diagnoses to MS; 2) more precise definition of “clinically isolated syndromes” (CIS), often the first presentations of MS or its alternatives; 3) algorithms for diagnosis of three common CISs related to MS in the optic nerves, brainstem, and spinal cord; and 4) a classification scheme and diagnosis criteria for idiopathic inflammatory demyelinating disorders of the central nervous system. Conclusions Differential diagnosis leading to MS or alternatives is complex and a strong evidence base is lacking. Consensus-determined guidelines provide a practical path for diagnosis and will be useful for the non-MS specialist neurologist. Recommendations are made for future research to validate and support these guidelines. Guidance on the differential diagnosis process when MS is under consideration will enhance diagnostic accuracy and precision.

Abstract This analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide + dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) previously treated with thalidomide. Of 704 patients, 39% were thalidomide exposed. Thalidomide-exposed patients had more prior lines of therapy and longer duration of myeloma than thalidomide-naive patients. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone led to higher overall response rate (ORR), longer time to progression (TTP), and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo + dexamethasone despite prior thalidomide exposure. Among lenalidomide + dexamethasone-treated patients, ORR was higher in thalidomide-naive versus thalidomide-exposed patients (P = .04), with longer median TTP (P = .04) and PFS (P = .02). Likewise for dexamethasone alone-treated patients (P = .03 for ORR, P = .03 for TTP, P = .06 for PFS). Prior thalidomide did not affect survival in lenalidomide + dexamethasone-treated patients (36.1 vs 33.3 months, P > .05). Thalidomide-naive and thalidomide-exposed patients had similar toxicities. Lenalidomide + dexamethasone resulted in higher rates of venous thromboembolism, myelosuppression, and infections versus placebo + dexamethasone, independent of prior thalidomide exposure. Lenalido-mide + dexamethasone was superior to placebo + dexamethasone, independent of prior thalidomide exposure. Although prior thalidomide may have contributed to inferior TTP and PFS compared with thalidomide-naive patients, these parameters remained superior compared with placebo + dexamethasone; similar benefits compared with placebo + dexamethasone were not evident for thalidomide-exposed patients in terms of overall survival. Studies were registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov under NCT00056160 and NCT00424047.

AbstractUnderstanding patterns of etiologic commonality and heterogeneity for non-Hodgkin lymphomas may illuminate lymphomagenesis. We present the first systematic comparison of risks by lymphoma subtype for a broad range of putative risk factors in a population-based case-control study, including diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL; N = 416), follicular (N = 318), and marginal zone lymphomas (N = 106), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL; N = 133). We required at least 2 of 3 analyses to support differences in risk: (1) polytomous logistic regression, (2) homogeneity tests, or (3) dichotomous logistic regression, analyzing all 7 possible pairwise comparisons among the subtypes, corresponding to various groupings by clinical behavior, genetic features, and differentiation. Late birth order and high body mass index (≥ 35) kg/m2) increased risk for DLBCL alone. Autoimmune conditions increased risk for marginal zone lymphoma alone. The tumor necrosis factor G-308A polymorphism (rs1800629) increased risks for both DLBCL and marginal zone lymphoma. Exposure to certain dietary heterocyclic amines from meat consumption increased risk for CLL/SLL alone. We observed no significant risk factors for follicular lymphoma alone. These data clearly support both etiologic commonality and heterogeneity for lymphoma subtypes, suggesting that immune dysfunction is of greater etiologic importance for DLBCL and marginal zone lymphoma than for CLL/SLL and follicular lymphoma.

Objective: To assess the association between self-assessed stair-climbing limitation and weight control among family medicine patients, after adjustment for age, gender, marital status, body mass index (BMI), and co-morbidity. Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 840 adult family medicine patient records drawn from a large family medicine department in Rochester, Minnesota. Weight control was measured as no change or decline in BMI over approximately 1 year. Results: Adjusting for co-morbidity and other confounders using multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that limited stair-climbing ability was unrelated to weight control over approximately 1 year. Instead, patients with BMI ≥ 30 were more likely to control their weight (p<0.01), and age exhibited a non-linear relationship with weight control. The odds of weight control were lower for patients between the ages of 36 and 45 years than for those aged 18—35 years (p<0.01). Conclusions: In our sample of family medicine patients, self-assessed stair-climbing limitations did not preclude weight control. Weight gain prevention programmes might be targeted at patients who are entering middle age.