
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans
Hospital / health systemNew Orleans, Louisiana, United States
Research output, citation impact, and the most-cited recent papers from Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans (United States). Aggregated across the NobleBlocks index of 300M+ scholarly works.
Top-cited papers from Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans
AUTORES: Daniel J Klionsky1745,1749*, Kotb Abdelmohsen840, Akihisa Abe1237, Md Joynal Abedin1762, Hagai Abeliovich425, \nAbraham Acevedo Arozena789, Hiroaki Adachi1800, Christopher M Adams1669, Peter D Adams57, Khosrow Adeli1981, \nPeter J Adhihetty1625, Sharon G Adler700, Galila Agam67, Rajesh Agarwal1587, Manish K Aghi1537, Maria Agnello1826, \nPatrizia Agostinis664, Patricia V Aguilar1960, Julio Aguirre-Ghiso784,786, Edoardo M Airoldi89,422, Slimane Ait-Si-Ali1376, \nTakahiko Akematsu2010, Emmanuel T Akporiaye1097, Mohamed Al-Rubeai1394, Guillermo M Albaiceta1294, \nChris Albanese363, Diego Albani561, Matthew L Albert517, Jesus Aldudo128, Hana Alg€ul1164, Mehrdad Alirezaei1198, \nIraide Alloza642,888, Alexandru Almasan206, Maylin Almonte-Beceril524, Emad S Alnemri1212, Covadonga Alonso544, \nNihal Altan-Bonnet848, Dario C Altieri1205, Silvia Alvarez1497, Lydia Alvarez-Erviti1395, Sandro Alves107, \nGiuseppina Amadoro860, Atsuo Amano930, Consuelo Amantini1554, Santiago Ambrosio1458, Ivano Amelio756, \nAmal O Amer918, Mohamed Amessou2089, Angelika Amon726, Zhenyi An1538, Frank A Anania291, Stig U Andersen6, \nUsha P Andley2079, Catherine K Andreadi1690, Nathalie Andrieu-Abadie502, Alberto Anel2027, David K Ann58, \nShailendra Anoopkumar-Dukie388, Manuela Antonioli832,858, Hiroshi Aoki1791, Nadezda Apostolova2007, \nSaveria Aquila1500, Katia Aquilano1876, Koichi Araki292, Eli Arama2098, Agustin Aranda456, Jun Araya591, \nAlexandre Arcaro1472, Esperanza Arias26, Hirokazu Arimoto1225, Aileen R Ariosa1749, Jane L Armstrong1930, \nThierry Arnould1773, Ivica Arsov2120, Katsuhiko Asanuma675, Valerie Askanas1924, Eric Asselin1867, Ryuichiro Atarashi794, \nSally S Atherton369, Julie D Atkin713, Laura D Attardi1131, Patrick Auberger1787, Georg Auburger379, Laure Aurelian1727, \nRiccardo Autelli1992, Laura Avagliano1029,1755, Maria Laura Avantaggiati364, Limor Avrahami1166, Suresh Awale1986, \nNeelam Azad404, Tiziana Bachetti568, Jonathan M Backer28, Dong-Hun Bae1933, Jae-sung Bae677, Ok-Nam Bae409, \nSoo Han Bae2117, Eric H Baehrecke1729, Seung-Hoon Baek17, Stephen Baghdiguian1368, \nAgnieszka Bagniewska-Zadworna2, Hua Bai90, Jie Bai667, Xue-Yuan Bai1133, Yannick Bailly884, \nKithiganahalli Narayanaswamy Balaji473, Walter Balduini2002, Andrea Ballabio316, Rena Balzan1711, Rajkumar Banerjee239, \nG abor B anhegyi1052, Haijun Bao2109, Benoit Barbeau1363, Maria D Barrachina2007, Esther Barreiro467, Bonnie Bartel997, \nAlberto Bartolom e222, Diane C Bassham550, Maria Teresa Bassi1046, Robert C Bast Jr1273, Alakananda Basu1798, \nMaria Teresa Batista1578, Henri Batoko1336, Maurizio Battino970, Kyle Bauckman2085, Bradley L Baumgarner1909, \nK Ulrich Bayer1594, Rupert Beale1553, Jean-Fran¸cois Beaulieu1360, George R. Beck Jr48,294, Christoph Becker336, \nJ David Beckham1595, Pierre-Andr e B edard749, Patrick J Bednarski301, Thomas J Begley1135, Christian Behl1419, \nChristian Behrends757, Georg MN Behrens406, Kevin E Behrns1627, Eloy Bejarano26, Amine Belaid490, \nFrancesca Belleudi1041, Giovanni B enard497, Guy Berchem706, Daniele Bergamaschi983, Matteo Bergami1401, \nBen Berkhout1441, Laura Berliocchi714, Am elie Bernard1749, Monique Bernard1354, Francesca Bernassola1880, \nAnne Bertolotti791, Amanda S Bess272, S ebastien Besteiro1351, Saverio Bettuzzi1828, Savita Bhalla913, \nShalmoli Bhattacharyya973, Sujit K Bhutia838, Caroline Biagosch1159, Michele Wolfe Bianchi520,1378,1381, \nMartine Biard-Piechaczyk210, Viktor Billes298, Claudia Bincoletto1314, Baris Bingol350, Sara W Bird1128, Marc Bitoun1112, \nIvana Bjedov1258, Craig Blackstone843, Lionel Blanc1183, Guillermo A Blanco1496, Heidi Kiil Blomhoff1812, \nEmilio Boada-Romero1297, Stefan B€ockler1464, Marianne Boes1423, Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia1835, Lawrence H Boise286,287, \nAlessandra Bolino2063, Andrea Boman693, Paolo Bonaldo1823, Matteo Bordi897, J€urgen Bosch608, Luis M Botana1308, \nJoelle Botti1375, German Bou1405, Marina Bouch e1038, Marion Bouchecareilh1331, Marie-Jos ee Boucher1901, \nMichael E Boulton481, Sebastien G Bouret1926, Patricia Boya133, Micha€el Boyer-Guittaut1345, Peter V Bozhkov1141, \nNathan Brady374, Vania MM Braga469, Claudio Brancolini1997, Gerhard H Braus353, Jos e M Bravo-San Pedro299,393,508,1374, \nLisa A Brennan322, Emery H Bresnick2022, Patrick Brest490, Dave Bridges1939, Marie-Agn es Bringer124, Marisa Brini1822, \nGlauber C Brito1311, Bertha Brodin631, Paul S Brookes1872, Eric J Brown352, Karen Brown1690, Hal E Broxmeyer480, \nAlain Bruhat486,1339, Patricia Chakur Brum1893, John H Brumell446, Nicola Brunetti-Pierri315,1171, \nRobert J Bryson-Richardson781, Shilpa Buch1777, Alastair M Buchan1819, Hikmet Budak1022, Dmitry V Bulavin118,505,1789, \nScott J Bultman1792, Geert Bultynck665, Vladimir Bumbasirevic1470, Yan Burelle1356, Robert E Burke216,217, \nMargit Burmeister1750, Peter B€utikofer1473, Laura Caberlotto1987, Ken Cadwell896, Monika Cahova112, Dongsheng Cai24, \nJingjing Cai2099, Qian Cai1018, Sara Calatayud2007, Nadine Camougrand1343, Michelangelo Campanella1700, \nGrant R Campbell1525, Matthew Campbell1249, Silvia Campello556,1876, Robin Candau1769, Isabella Caniggia1983, \nLavinia Cantoni560, Lizhi Cao116, Allan B Caplan1656, Michele Caraglia1051, Claudio Cardinali1043, Sandra Morais Cardoso1579, Jennifer S Carew208, Laura A Carleton874, Cathleen R Carlin101, Silvia Carloni2002, \nSven R Carlsson1267, Didac Carmona-Gutierrez1643, Leticia AM Carneiro312, Oliana Carnevali971, Serena Carra1318, \nAlice Carrier120, Bernadette Carroll900, Caty Casas1324, Josefina Casas1116, Giuliana Cassinelli324, Perrine Castets1462, \nSusana Castro-Obregon214, Gabriella Cavallini1841, Isabella Ceccherini568, Francesco Cecconi253,555,1884, \nArthur I Cederbaum459, Valent ın Ce~na199,1281, Simone Cenci1323,2064, Claudia Cerella444, Davide Cervia1996, \nSilvia Cetrullo1478, Hassan Chaachouay2028, Han-Jung Chae187, Andrei S Chagin634, Chee-Yin Chai626,628, \nGopal Chakrabarti1502, Georgios Chamilos1601, Edmond YW Chan1142, Matthew TV Chan181, Dhyan Chandra1003, \nPallavi Chandra548, Chih-Peng Chang818, Raymond Chuen-Chung Chang1653, Ta Yuan Chang345, John C Chatham1434, \nSaurabh Chatterjee1910, Santosh Chauhan527, Yongsheng Che62, Michael E Cheetham1263, Rajkumar Cheluvappa1783, \nChun-Jung Chen1153, Gang Chen598,1676, Guang-Chao Chen9, Guoqiang Chen1078, Hongzhuan Chen1077, Jeff W Chen1514, \nJian-Kang Chen370,371, Min Chen249, Mingzhou Chen2104, Peiwen Chen1823, Qi Chen1674, Quan Chen172, \nShang-Der Chen138, Si Chen325, Steve S-L Chen10, Wei Chen2125, Wei-Jung Chen829, Wen Qiang Chen979, Wenli Chen1113, \nXiangmei Chen1133, Yau-Hung Chen1157, Ye-Guang Chen1250, Yin Chen1447, Yingyu Chen953,955, Yongshun Chen2135, \nYu-Jen Chen712, Yue-Qin Chen1145, Yujie Chen1208, Zhen Chen339, Zhong Chen2123, Alan Cheng1702, \nChristopher HK Cheng184, Hua Cheng1728, Heesun Cheong814, Sara Cherry1836, Jason Chesney1703, \nChun Hei Antonio Cheung817, Eric Chevet1359, Hsiang Cheng Chi140, Sung-Gil Chi656, Fulvio Chiacchiera308, \nHui-Ling Chiang958, Roberto Chiarelli1826, Mario Chiariello235,567,577, Marcello Chieppa835, Lih-Shen Chin290, \nMario Chiong1285, Gigi NC Chiu878, Dong-Hyung Cho676, Ssang-Goo Cho650, William C Cho982, Yong-Yeon Cho105, \nYoung-Seok Cho1064, Augustine MK Choi2095, Eui-Ju Choi656, Eun-Kyoung Choi387,400,685, Jayoung Choi1563, \nMary E Choi2093, Seung-Il Choi2116, Tsui-Fen Chou412, Salem Chouaib395, Divaker Choubey1574, Vinay Choubey1936, \nKuan-Chih Chow822, Kamal Chowdhury730, Charleen T Chu1856, Tsung-Hsien Chuang827, Taehoon Chun657, \nHyewon Chung652, Taijoon Chung978, Yuen-Li Chung1194, Yong-Joon Chwae18, Valentina Cianfanelli254, \nRoberto Ciarcia1775, Iwona A Ciechomska886, Maria Rosa Ciriolo1876, Mara Cirone1042, Sofie Claerhout1694, \nMichael J Clague1698, Joan Cl aria1457, Peter GH Clarke1687, Robert Clarke361, Emilio Clementi1045,1398, C edric Cleyrat1781, \nMiriam Cnop1366, Eliana M Coccia574, Tiziana Cocco1459, Patrice Codogno1375, J€orn Coers271, Ezra EW Cohen1533, \nDavid Colecchia235,567,577, Luisa Coletto25, N uria S Coll123, Emma Colucci-Guyon516, Sergio Comincini1829, \nMaria Condello578, Katherine L Cook2073, Graham H Coombs1929, Cynthia D Cooper2076, J Mark Cooper1395, \nIsabelle Coppens601, Maria Tiziana Corasaniti1387, Marco Corazzari485,1884, Ramon Corbalan1566, \nElisabeth Corcelle-Termeau251, Mario D Cordero1899, Cristina Corral-Ramos1289, Olga Corti507,1109, Andrea Cossarizza1767, \nPaola Costelli1993, Safia Costes1518, Susan L Cotman721, Ana Coto-Montes946, Sandra Cottet566,1688, Eduardo Couve1301, \nLori R Covey1015, L Ashley Cowart762, Jeffery S Cox1536, Fraser P Coxon1427, Carolyn B Coyne1846, Mark S Cragg1919, \nRolf J Craven1679, Tiziana Crepaldi1995, Jose L Crespo1300, Alfredo Criollo1285, Valeria Crippa558, Maria Teresa Cruz1576, \nAna Maria Cuervo26, Jose M Cuezva1277, Taixing Cui1907, Pedro R Cutillas987, Mark J Czaja27, Maria F Czyzyk-Krzeska1572, \nRuben K Dagda2068, Uta Dahmen1404, Chunsun Dai800, Wenjie Dai1187, Yun Dai2059, Kevin N Dalby1940, \nLuisa Dalla Valle1822, Guillaume Dalmasso1340, Marcello D’Amelio557, Markus Damme188, Arlette Darfeuille-Michaud1340, \nCatherine Dargemont950, Victor M Darley-Usmar1433, Srinivasan Dasarathy205, Biplab Dasgupta202, Srikanta Dash1254, \nCrispin R Dass242, Hazel Marie Davey8, Lester M Davids1560, David D avila227, Roger J Davis1731, Ted M Dawson604, \nValina L Dawson606, Paula Daza1898, Jackie de Belleroche470, Paul de Figueiredo1180,1182, \nRegina Celia Bressan Queiroz de Figueiredo135, Jos e de la Fuente1023, Luisa De Martino1775, \nAntonella De Matteis1171, Guido RY De Meyer1443, Angelo De Milito631, Mauro De Santi2002,
We have previously shown correction of X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency [SCID-X1, also known as gamma chain (gamma(c)) deficiency] in 9 out of 10 patients by retrovirus-mediated gamma(c) gene transfer into autologous CD34 bone marrow cells. However, almost 3 years after gene therapy, uncontrolled exponential clonal proliferation of mature T cells (with gammadelta+ or alphabeta+ T cell receptors) has occurred in the two youngest patients. Both patients' clones showed retrovirus vector integration in proximity to the LMO2 proto-oncogene promoter, leading to aberrant transcription and expression of LMO2. Thus, retrovirus vector insertion can trigger deregulated premalignant cell proliferation with unexpected frequency, most likely driven by retrovirus enhancer activity on the LMO2 gene promoter.
BACKGROUND: Understanding the epidemiology and clinical course of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) and its temporal association with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is important, given the clinical and public health implications of the syndrome. METHODS: We conducted targeted surveillance for MIS-C from March 15 to May 20, 2020, in pediatric health centers across the United States. The case definition included six criteria: serious illness leading to hospitalization, an age of less than 21 years, fever that lasted for at least 24 hours, laboratory evidence of inflammation, multisystem organ involvement, and evidence of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) based on reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), antibody testing, or exposure to persons with Covid-19 in the past month. Clinicians abstracted the data onto standardized forms. RESULTS: We report on 186 patients with MIS-C in 26 states. The median age was 8.3 years, 115 patients (62%) were male, 135 (73%) had previously been healthy, 131 (70%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR or antibody testing, and 164 (88%) were hospitalized after April 16, 2020. Organ-system involvement included the gastrointestinal system in 171 patients (92%), cardiovascular in 149 (80%), hematologic in 142 (76%), mucocutaneous in 137 (74%), and respiratory in 131 (70%). The median duration of hospitalization was 7 days (interquartile range, 4 to 10); 148 patients (80%) received intensive care, 37 (20%) received mechanical ventilation, 90 (48%) received vasoactive support, and 4 (2%) died. Coronary-artery aneurysms (z scores ≥2.5) were documented in 15 patients (8%), and Kawasaki's disease-like features were documented in 74 (40%). Most patients (171 [92%]) had elevations in at least four biomarkers indicating inflammation. The use of immunomodulating therapies was common: intravenous immune globulin was used in 144 (77%), glucocorticoids in 91 (49%), and interleukin-6 or 1RA inhibitors in 38 (20%). CONCLUSIONS: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with SARS-CoV-2 led to serious and life-threatening illness in previously healthy children and adolescents. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).
Disorders of the brain can exhibit considerable epidemiological comorbidity and often share symptoms, provoking debate about their etiologic overlap. We quantified the genetic sharing of 25 brain disorders from genome-wide association studies of 265,218 patients and 784,643 control participants and assessed their relationship to 17 phenotypes from 1,191,588 individuals. Psychiatric disorders share common variant risk, whereas neurological disorders appear more distinct from one another and from the psychiatric disorders. We also identified significant sharing between disorders and a number of brain phenotypes, including cognitive measures. Further, we conducted simulations to explore how statistical power, diagnostic misclassification, and phenotypic heterogeneity affect genetic correlations. These results highlight the importance of common genetic variation as a risk factor for brain disorders and the value of heritability-based methods in understanding their etiology.
Abstract In the United States, colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer diagnosed among adults and the second leading cause of death from cancer. For this guideline update, the American Cancer Society (ACS) used an existing systematic evidence review of the CRC screening literature and microsimulation modeling analyses, including a new evaluation of the age to begin screening by race and sex and additional modeling that incorporates changes in US CRC incidence. Screening with any one of multiple options is associated with a significant reduction in CRC incidence through the detection and removal of adenomatous polyps and other precancerous lesions and with a reduction in mortality through incidence reduction and early detection of CRC. Results from modeling analyses identified efficient and model‐recommendable strategies that started screening at age 45 years. The ACS Guideline Development Group applied the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria in developing and rating the recommendations. The ACS recommends that adults aged 45 years and older with an average risk of CRC undergo regular screening with either a high‐sensitivity stool‐based test or a structural (visual) examination, depending on patient preference and test availability. As a part of the screening process, all positive results on noncolonoscopy screening tests should be followed up with timely colonoscopy. The recommendation to begin screening at age 45 years is a qualified recommendation . The recommendation for regular screening in adults aged 50 years and older is a strong recommendation . The ACS recommends ( qualified recommendations ) that: 1) average‐risk adults in good health with a life expectancy of more than 10 years continue CRC screening through the age of 75 years; 2) clinicians individualize CRC screening decisions for individuals aged 76 through 85 years based on patient preferences, life expectancy, health status, and prior screening history; and 3) clinicians discourage individuals older than 85 years from continuing CRC screening. The options for CRC screening are: fecal immunochemical test annually; high‐sensitivity, guaiac‐based fecal occult blood test annually; multitarget stool DNA test every 3 years; colonoscopy every 10 years; computed tomography colonography every 5 years; and flexible sigmoidoscopy every 5 years. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:250–281 . © 2018 American Cancer Society .
Previously, several individuals with X-linked SCID (SCID-X1) were treated by gene therapy to restore the missing IL-2 receptor gamma (IL2RG) gene to CD34+ BM precursor cells using gammaretroviral vectors. While 9 of 10 patients were successfully treated, 4 of the 9 developed T cell leukemia 31-68 months after gene therapy. In 2 of these cases, blast cells contained activating vector insertions near the LIM domain-only 2 (LMO2) proto-oncogene. Here, we report data on the 2 most recent adverse events, which occurred in patients 7 and 10. In patient 10, blast cells contained an integrated vector near LMO2 and a second integrated vector near the proto-oncogene BMI1. In patient 7, blast cells contained an integrated vector near a third proto-oncogene,CCND2. Additional genetic abnormalities in the patients' blast cells included chromosomal translocations, gain-of-function mutations activating NOTCH1, and copy number changes, including deletion of tumor suppressor gene CDKN2A, 6q interstitial losses, and SIL-TAL1 rearrangement. These findings functionally specify a genetic network that controls growth in T cell progenitors. Chemotherapy led to sustained remission in 3 of the 4 cases of T cell leukemia, but failed in the fourth. Successful chemotherapy was associated with restoration of polyclonal transduced T cell populations. As a result, the treated patients continued to benefit from therapeutic gene transfer.
IMPORTANCE: Breast cancer is a leading cause of premature mortality among US women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2003 breast cancer screening guideline for women at average risk for breast cancer. PROCESS: The ACS commissioned a systematic evidence review of the breast cancer screening literature to inform the update and a supplemental analysis of mammography registry data to address questions related to the screening interval. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Screening mammography in women aged 40 to 69 years is associated with a reduction in breast cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports breast cancer screening for women 70 years and older who are in good health. Estimates of the cumulative lifetime risk of false-positive examination results are greater if screening begins at younger ages because of the greater number of mammograms, as well as the higher recall rate in younger women. The quality of the evidence for overdiagnosis is not sufficient to estimate a lifetime risk with confidence. Analysis examining the screening interval demonstrates more favorable tumor characteristics when premenopausal women are screened annually vs biennially. Evidence does not support routine clinical breast examination as a screening method for women at average risk. RECOMMENDATIONS: The ACS recommends that women with an average risk of breast cancer should undergo regular screening mammography starting at age 45 years (strong recommendation). Women aged 45 to 54 years should be screened annually (qualified recommendation). Women 55 years and older should transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually (qualified recommendation). Women should have the opportunity to begin annual screening between the ages of 40 and 44 years (qualified recommendation). Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer (qualified recommendation). The ACS does not recommend clinical breast examination for breast cancer screening among average-risk women at any age (qualified recommendation). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These updated ACS guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for breast cancer screening for women at average risk of breast cancer. These recommendations should be considered by physicians and women in discussions about breast cancer screening.
Tumor-derived exosomes (TDEs) participate in formation and progression of different cancer processes, including tumor microenvironment (TME) remodeling, angiogenesis, invasion, metastasis and drug-resistance. Exosomes initiate or suppress various signaling pathways in the recipient cells via transmitting heterogeneous cargoes. In this review we discuss exosome biogenesis, exosome mediated metastasis and chemoresistance. Furthermore, tumor derived exosomes role in tumor microenvironment remodeling, and angiogenesis is reviewed. Also, exosome induction of epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT) is highlighted. More importantly, we discuss extensively how exosomes regulate drug resistance in several cancers. Thus, understanding exosome biogenesis, their contents and the molecular mechanisms and signaling pathways that are responsible for metastasis and drug-resistance mediated by TDEs may help to devise novel therapeutic approaches for cancer progression particularly to overcome therapy-resistance and preventing metastasis as major factors of cancer mortality.
Bacterial pneumonia is an increasing complication of HIV infection and inversely correlates with the CD4(+) lymphocyte count. Interleukin (IL)-17 is a cytokine produced principally by CD4(+) T cells, which induces granulopoiesis via granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) production and induces CXC chemokines. We hypothesized that IL-17 receptor (IL-17R) signaling is critical for G-CSF and CXC chemokine production and lung host defenses. To test this, we used a model of Klebsiella pneumoniae lung infection in mice genetically deficient in IL-17R or in mice overexpressing a soluble IL-17R. IL-17R-deficient mice were exquisitely sensitive to intranasal K. pneumoniae with 100% mortality after 48 h compared with only 40% mortality in controls. IL-17R knockout (KO) mice displayed a significant delay in neutrophil recruitment into the alveolar space, and had greater dissemination of K. pneumoniae compared with control mice. This defect was associated with a significant reduction in steady-state levels of G-CSF and macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-2 mRNA and protein in the lung in response to the K. pneumoniae challenge in IL-17R KO mice. Thus, IL-17R signaling is critical for optimal production of G-CSF and MIP-2 and local control of pulmonary K. pneumoniae infection. These data support impaired IL-17R signaling as a potential mechanism by which deficiency of CD4 lymphocytes predisposes to bacterial pneumonia.
BACKGROUND: In 2010, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries began collecting human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) receptor status for breast cancer cases. METHODS: Breast cancer subtypes defined by joint hormone receptor (HR; estrogen receptor [ER] and progesterone receptor [PR]) and HER2 status were assessed across the 28% of the US population that is covered by SEER registries. Age-specific incidence rates by subtype were calculated for non-Hispanic (NH) white, NH black, NH Asian Pacific Islander (API), and Hispanic women. Joint HR/HER2 status distributions by age, race/ethnicity, county-level poverty, registry, stage, Bloom-Richardson grade, tumor size, and nodal status were evaluated using multivariable adjusted polytomous logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Among case patients with known HR/HER2 status, 36810 (72.7%) were found to be HR(+)/HER2(-), 6193 (12.2%) were triple-negative (HR(-)/HER2(-)), 5240 (10.3%) were HR(+)/HER2(+), and 2328 (4.6%) were HR(-)/HER2(+); 6912 (12%) had unknown HR/HER2 status. NH white women had the highest incidence rate of the HR(+)/HER2(-) subtype, and NH black women had the highest rate of the triple-negative subtype. Compared with women with the HR(+)/HER2(-) subtype, triple-negative patients were more likely to be NH black and Hispanic; HR(+)/HER2(+) patients were more likely to be NH API; and HR(-)/HER2(+) patients were more likely to be NH black, NH API, and Hispanic. Patients with triple-negative, HR(+)/HER2(+), and HR(-)/HER2(+) breast cancer were 10% to 30% less likely to be diagnosed at older ages compared with HR(+)/HER2(-) patients and 6.4-fold to 20.0-fold more likely to present with high-grade disease. CONCLUSIONS: In the future, SEER data can be used to monitor clinical outcomes in women diagnosed with different molecular subtypes of breast cancer for a large portion (approximately 28%) of the US population.
A number of articles in the nursing literature discuss the differences between descriptive and interpretive approaches to doing phenomenology. A review of studies demonstrates, however, that many researchers do not articulate which approach guides the study, nor do they identify the philosophical assumptions on which the study is based. Such lack of clarity makes it difficult for the reader to obtain a sense of how the knowledge produced by the study is to be evaluated and used. In this article, the authors compare the philosophical components of descriptive and interpretive approaches to doing phenomenology and illustrate types of knowledge produced by each through reviewing specific studies. They focus on the various uses of phenomenology in generating useful knowledge for health care practice.
Prostate cancer, a leading cause of cancer death, displays a broad range of clinical behavior from relatively indolent to aggressive metastatic disease. To explore potential molecular variation underlying this clinical heterogeneity, we profiled gene expression in 62 primary prostate tumors, as well as 41 normal prostate specimens and nine lymph node metastases, using cDNA microarrays containing approximately 26,000 genes. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering readily distinguished tumors from normal samples, and further identified three subclasses of prostate tumors based on distinct patterns of gene expression. High-grade and advanced stage tumors, as well as tumors associated with recurrence, were disproportionately represented among two of the three subtypes, one of which also included most lymph node metastases. To further characterize the clinical relevance of tumor subtypes, we evaluated as surrogate markers two genes differentially expressed among tumor subgroups by using immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays representing an independent set of 225 prostate tumors. Positive staining for MUC1, a gene highly expressed in the subgroups with "aggressive" clinicopathological features, was associated with an elevated risk of recurrence (P = 0.003), whereas strong staining for AZGP1, a gene highly expressed in the other subgroup, was associated with a decreased risk of recurrence (P = 0.0008). In multivariate analysis, MUC1 and AZGP1 staining were strong predictors of tumor recurrence independent of tumor grade, stage, and preoperative prostate-specific antigen levels. Our results suggest that prostate tumors can be usefully classified according to their gene expression patterns, and these tumor subtypes may provide a basis for improved prognostication and treatment stratification.
T cells infiltrating tumors have a decreased expression of signal transduction proteins, a diminished ability to proliferate, and a decreased production of cytokines. The mechanisms causing these changes have remained unclear. We demonstrated recently that peritoneal macrophages stimulated with interleukin 4 + interleukin 13 produce arginase I, which decreases the expression of the T-cell receptor CD3zeta chain and impairs T-cell responses. Using a 3LL murine lung carcinoma model we tested whether arginase I was produced in the tumor microenvironment and could decrease CD3zeta expression and impair T-cell function. The results show that a subpopulation of mature tumor-associated myeloid cells express high levels of arginase I, whereas tumor cells and infiltrating lymphocytes do not. Arginase I expression in the tumor was seen on day 7 after tumor injection. Tumor-associated myeloid cells also expressed high levels of cationic amino acid transporter 2B, which allowed them to rapidly incorporate L-Arginine (L-Arg) and deplete extracellular L-Arg in vitro. L-Arg depletion by tumor-associated myeloid cells blocked the re-expression of CD3zeta in stimulated T cells and inhibited antigen-specific proliferation of OT-1 and OT-2 cells. The injection of the arginase inhibitor N-hydroxy-nor-L-Arg blocked growth of s.c. 3LL lung carcinoma in mice. High levels of arginase I were also found in tumor samples of patients with non-small cell carcinoma. Therefore, arginase I production by mature myeloid cells in the tumor microenvironment may be a central mechanism for tumor evasion and may represent a target for new therapies.
We report the sequence and analysis of the 814-megabase genome of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus, a model for developmental and systems biology. The sequencing strategy combined whole-genome shotgun and bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) sequences. This use of BAC clones, aided by a pooling strategy, overcame difficulties associated with high heterozygosity of the genome. The genome encodes about 23,300 genes, including many previously thought to be vertebrate innovations or known only outside the deuterostomes. This echinoderm genome provides an evolutionary outgroup for the chordates and yields insights into the evolution of deuterostomes.
BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate annually to provide updated information regarding cancer occurrence and trends in the U.S. This year's report features a special section on cancer survival. METHODS: Information concerning cancer cases was obtained from the NCI, CDC, and NAACCR and information concerning recorded cancer deaths was obtained from the CDC. The authors evaluated trends in age-adjusted cancer incidence and death rates by regression models and described and compared survival rates over time and across racial/ethnic populations. RESULTS: Incidence rates for all cancers combined decreased from 1991 through 2001, but stabilized from 1995 through 2001 when adjusted for delay in reporting. The incidence rates for female lung cancer decreased (although not statistically significant for delay adjusted) and mortality leveled off for the first time after increasing for many decades. Colorectal cancer incidence rates also decreased. Death rates decreased for all cancers combined (1.1% per year since 1993) and for many of the top 15 cancers occurring in men and women. The 5-year relative survival rates improved for all cancers combined and for most, but not all, cancers over 2 diagnostic periods (1975-1979 and 1995-2000). However, cancer-specific survival rates were lower and the risk of dying from cancer, once diagnosed, was higher in most minority populations compared with the white population. The relative risk of death from all cancers combined in each racial and ethnic population compared with non-Hispanic white men and women ranged from 1.16 in Hispanic white men to 1.69 in American Indian/Alaska Native men, with the exception of Asian/Pacific Islander women, whose risk of 1.01 was similar to that of non-Hispanic white women. CONCLUSIONS: The continued measurable declines for overall cancer death rates and for many of the top 15 cancers, along with improved survival rates, reflect progress in the prevention, early detection, and treatment of cancer. However, racial and ethnic disparities in survival and the risk of death from cancer, and geographic variation in stage distributions suggest that not all segments of the U.S. population have benefited equally from such advances.
Attributes of rigor and quality and suggested best practices for qualitative research design as they relate to the steps of designing, conducting, and reporting qualitative research in health professions educational scholarship are presented. A research question must be clear and focused and supported by a strong conceptual framework, both of which contribute to the selection of appropriate research methods that enhance trustworthiness and minimize researcher bias inherent in qualitative methodologies. Qualitative data collection and analyses are often modified through an iterative approach to answering the research question. Researcher reflexivity, essentially a researcher's insight into their own biases and rationale for decision-making as the study progresses, is critical to rigor. This article reviews common standards of rigor, quality scholarship criteria, and best practices for qualitative research from design through dissemination.
BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT) is widely used as a screening test in patients with minor head injury, although the results are often normal. We performed a study to develop and validate a set of clinical criteria that could be used to identify patients with minor head injury who do not need to undergo CT. METHODS: In the first phase of the study, we recorded clinical findings in 520 consecutive patients with minor head injury who had a normal score on the Glasgow Coma Scale and normal findings on a brief neurologic examination; the patients then underwent CT. Using recursive partitioning, we derived a set of criteria to identify all patients who had abnormalities on CT scanning. In the second phase, the sensitivity and specificity of the criteria for predicting a positive scan were evaluated in a group of 909 patients. RESULTS: Of the 520 patients in the first phase, 36 (6.9 percent) had positive scans. All patients with positive CT scans had one or more of seven findings: headache, vomiting, an age over 60 years, drug or alcohol intoxication, deficits in short-term memory, physical evidence of trauma above the clavicles, and seizure. Among the 909 patients in the second phase, 57 (6.3 percent) had positive scans. In this group of patients, the sensitivity of the seven findings combined was 100 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 95 to 100 percent). All patients with positive CT scans had at least one of the findings. CONCLUSIONS: For the evaluation of patients with minor head injury, the use of CT can be safely limited to those who have certain clinical findings.
Cancer is a severe health problem that continues to be a leading cause of death worldwide. Increasing knowledge of the molecular mechanisms underlying cancer progression has led to the development of a vast number of anticancer drugs. However, the use of chemically synthesized drugs has not significantly improved the overall survival rate over the past few decades. As a result, new strategies and novel chemoprevention agents are needed to complement current cancer therapies to improve efficiency. Naturally occurring compounds from plants known as phytochemicals serve as vital resources for novel drugs and are also sources for cancer therapy. Some typical examples include taxol analogs, vinca alkaloids such as vincristine, vinblastine and podophyllotoxin analogs. These phytochemicals often act via regulating molecular pathways which are implicated in growth and progression of cancer. The specific mechanisms include increasing antioxidant status, carcinogen inactivation, inhibiting proliferation, induction of cell cycle arrest and apoptosis; and regulation of the immune system. The primary objective of this review is to describe what we know to date of the active compounds in the natural products, along with their pharmacologic action and molecular or specific targets. Recent trends and gaps in phytochemical based anticancer drug discovery are also explored. The authors wish to expand the phytochemical research area not only for their scientific soundness but also for their potential druggability. Hence, the emphasis is given to information about anticancer phytochemicals which are evaluated at preclinical and clinical level.
CONTEXT: Atherosclerosis, the underlying cause of coronary heart disease, has been shown to be present even in young adults. OBJECTIVE: To document the extent and severity of atherosclerosis in adolescents and young adults in the United States. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Pathobiological Determinants of Atherosclerosis in Youth Study, a multi-institutional autopsy study conducted in US medical centers. Subjects A total of 2876 study subjects, between 15 and 34 years old, black and white, men and women, who died of external causes and underwent autopsy between June 1, 1987, and August 31, 1994. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extent, prevalence, and topography of atherosclerotic lesions. RESULTS: Intimal lesions appeared in all the aortas and more than half of the right coronary arteries of the youngest age group (15-19 years) and increased in prevalence and extent with age through the oldest age group (30-34 years). Fatty streaks were more extensive in black subjects than in white subjects, but raised lesions did not differ between blacks and whites. Raised lesions in the aortas of women and men were similar, but raised lesions in the right coronary arteries of women were less than those of men. The prevalence of total lesions was lower in the right coronary artery than in the aorta, but the proportion of raised lesions among total lesions was higher in the right coronary artery than in the aorta. CONCLUSIONS: Atherosclerosis begins in youth. Fatty streaks and clinically significant raised lesions increase rapidly in prevalence and extent during the 15- to 34-year age span. Primary prevention of atherosclerosis, as contrasted with primary prevention of clinically manifest atherosclerotic disease, must begin in childhood or adolescence.
The American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends that individuals with a cervix initiate cervical cancer screening at age 25 years and undergo primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing every 5 years through age 65 years (preferred); if primary HPV testing is not available, then individuals aged 25 to 65 years should be screened with cotesting (HPV testing in combination with cytology) every 5 years or cytology alone every 3 years (acceptable) (strong recommendation). The ACS recommends that individuals aged >65 years who have no history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe disease within the past 25 years, and who have documented adequate negative prior screening in the prior 10 years, discontinue all cervical cancer screening (qualified recommendation). These new screening recommendations differ in 4 important respects compared with the 2012 recommendations: 1) The preferred screening strategy is primary HPV testing every 5 years, with cotesting and cytology alone acceptable where access to US Food and Drug Administration-approved primary HPV testing is not yet available; 2) the recommended age to start screening is 25 years rather than 21 years; 3) primary HPV testing, as well as cotesting or cytology alone when primary testing is not available, is recommended starting at age 25 years rather than age 30 years; and 4) the guideline is transitional, ie, options for screening with cotesting or cytology alone are provided but should be phased out once full access to primary HPV testing for cervical cancer screening is available without barriers. Evidence related to other relevant issues was reviewed, and no changes were made to recommendations for screening intervals, age or criteria for screening cessation, screening based on vaccination status, or screening after hysterectomy. Follow-up for individuals who screen positive for HPV and/or cytology should be in accordance with the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors.