Central Adrenal Insufficiency Is Rare in Adults With Prader-Willi Syndrome

CONTEXT: Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) is associated with several hypothalamic-pituitary hormone deficiencies. There is no agreement on the prevalence of central adrenal insufficiency (CAI) in adults with PWS. In some countries, it is general practice to prescribe stress-dose hydrocortisone during physical or psychological stress in patients with PWS. Side effects of frequent hydrocortisone use are weight gain, osteoporosis, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension-already major problems in adults with PWS. However, undertreatment of CAI can cause significant morbidity-or even mortality. OBJECTIVE: To prevent both over- and undertreatment with hydrocortisone, we assessed the prevalence of CAI in a large international cohort of adults with PWS. As the synacthen test shows variable results in PWS, we only use the metyrapone test (MTP) and insulin tolerance test (ITT). DESIGN: Metyrapone test or ITT in adults with PWS (N = 82) and review of medical files for symptoms of hypocortisolism related to surgery (N = 645). SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-two adults with genetically confirmed PWS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: For MTP, 11-deoxycortisol > 230 nmol/L was considered sufficient. For ITT, cortisol > 500 nmol/L (Dutch, French, and Swedish patients) or > 450 nmol/L (British patients) was considered sufficient. RESULTS: Central adrenal insufficiency was excluded in 81 of 82 patients. Among the 645 patients whose medical files were reviewed, 200 had undergone surgery without perioperative hydrocortisone treatment. None of them had displayed any features of hypocortisolism. CONCLUSIONS: Central adrenal insufficiency is rare (1.2%) in adults with PWS. Based on these results, we recommend against routinely prescribing hydrocortisone stress-doses in adults with PWS

Bone Health in Adults With Prader-Willi Syndrome : Clinical Recommendations Based on a Multicenter Cohort Study

Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) is a rare complex genetic syndrome, characterized by delayed psychomotor development, hypotonia, and hyperphagia. Hormone deficiencies such as hypogonadism, hypothyroidism, and growth hormone deficiency are common. The combination of hypotonia, low physical activity, and hypogonadism might lead to a decrease in bone mass and increase in fracture risk. Moreover, one would expect an increased risk of scoliosis due to hypotonia and low physical activity. To study the prevalence and risk factors for skeletal problems (reduced bone mineral density, fractures, and scoliosis) in adults with PWS. We retrospectively collected patient characteristics, medical history, medication, biochemical measurements, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans, and spinal X-rays and reviewed the current literature. We included 354 adults with PWS (median age 31 years; 43% males), of whom 51 (14%) had osteoporosis (T-score below −2.5) and 143 (54%) had osteopenia (T-score −1 to −2.5). The most prevalent modifiable risk factors for osteoporosis were hypogonadism, insufficient dairy intake, sedentary lifestyle, and corticosteroid use. Male sex was associated with osteoporosis (P =.005). Growth hormone treatment was not associated with osteoporosis. A history of vertebral fractures was present in 10 (3%) and nonvertebral fractures in 59 (17%). Scoliosis was present in 263 (80%), but no modifiable risk factors were identified. Besides scoliosis, osteoporosis is common in adults with PWS. Based on the literature and the risk factors for osteoporosis found in our cohort, we provide practical clinical recommendations to avoid skeletal complications in these vulnerable patients

Thromboembolic Disease in Patients With Cancer and COVID-19: Risk Factors, Prevention and Practical Thromboprophylaxis Recommendations–State-of-the-Art.

Cancer and COVID-19 are both well-established risk factors predisposing to thrombosis. Both disease entities are correlated with increased incidence of venous thrombotic events through multifaceted pathogenic mechanisms involving the interaction of cancer cells or SARS-CoV2 on the one hand and the coagulation system and endothelial cells on the other hand. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for hospitalized patients with active cancer and high-risk outpatients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment. Universal thromboprophylaxis with a high prophylactic dose of low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) or therapeutic dose in select patients, is currentlyindicated for hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Also, prophylactic anticoagulation is recommended for outpatients with COVID-19 at high risk for thrombosis or disease worsening. However, whether there is an additive risk of thrombosis when a patient with cancer is infected with SARS-CoV2 remains unclear In the current review, we summarize and critically discuss the literature regarding the epidemiology of thrombotic events in patients with cancer and concomitant COVID-19, the thrombotic risk assessment, and the recommendations on thromboprophylaxis for this subgroup of patients. Current data do not support an additive thrombotic risk for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Of note, patients with cancer have less access to intensive care unit care, a setting associated with high thrombotic risk. Based on current evidence, patients with cancer and COVID-19 should be assessed with well-established risk assessment models for medically ill patients and receive thromboprophylaxis, preferentially with LMWH, according to existing recommendations. Prospective trials on well-characterized populations do not exist

Results From the Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry

Funding Information: We acknowledge financial support from the ACR and EULAR. The ACR and EULAR were not involved in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. ACR Open Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.Objective: Some patients with rheumatic diseases might be at higher risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We aimed to develop a prediction model for COVID-19 ARDS in this population and to create a simple risk score calculator for use in clinical settings. Methods: Data were derived from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Registry from March 24, 2020, to May 12, 2021. Seven machine learning classifiers were trained on ARDS outcomes using 83 variables obtained at COVID-19 diagnosis. Predictive performance was assessed in a US test set and was validated in patients from four countries with independent registries using area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. A simple risk score calculator was developed using a regression model incorporating the most influential predictors from the best performing classifier. Results: The study included 8633 patients from 74 countries, of whom 523 (6%) had ARDS. Gradient boosting had the highest mean AUC (0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.88) and was considered the top performing classifier. Ten predictors were identified as key risk factors and were included in a regression model. The regression model that predicted ARDS with 71% (95% CI: 61%-83%) sensitivity in the test set, and with sensitivities ranging from 61% to 80% in countries with independent registries, was used to develop the risk score calculator. Conclusion: We were able to predict ARDS with good sensitivity using information readily available at COVID-19 diagnosis. The proposed risk score calculator has the potential to guide risk stratification for treatments, such as monoclonal antibodies, that have potential to reduce COVID-19 disease progression.publishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

Association of the CHEK2 c.1100delC variant, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment with contralateral breast cancer risk and breast cancer-specific survival

Background: Breast cancer (BC) patients with a germline CHEK2 c.1100delC variant have an increased risk of contralateral BC (CBC) and worse BC-specific survival (BCSS) compared to non-carriers.Aim: To assessed the associations of CHEK2 c.1100delC, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment with CBC risk and BCSS.Methods: Analyses were based on 82,701 women diagnosed with a first primary invasive BC including 963 CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers; median follow-up was 9.1 years. Differential associations with treatment by CHEK2 c.1100delC status were tested by including interaction terms in a multivariable Cox regression model. A multi-state model was used for further insight into the relation between CHEK2 c.1100delC status, treatment, CBC risk and death. Results: There was no evidence for differential associations of therapy with CBC risk by CHEK2 c.1100delC status. The strongest association with reduced CBC risk was observed for the combination of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy [HR (95% CI): 0.66 (0.55-0.78)]. No association was observed with radiotherapy.Results from the multi-state model showed shorter BCSS for CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers versus non-carriers also after accounting for CBC occurrence [HR (95% CI): 1.30 (1.09-1.56)].Conclusion: Systemic therapy was associated with reduced CBC risk irrespective of CHEK2 c.1100delC status. Moreover, CHEK2 c.1100delC carriers had shorter BCSS, which appears not to be fully explained by their CBC risk.Peer reviewe

Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability

Background: The NDI, COM and NPQ are evaluation instruments for disability due to NP. There was no Spanish version of NDI or COM for which psychometric characteristics were known. The objectives of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the Spanish version of the Neck Disability Index Questionnaire (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measure (COM), to validate its use in Spanish speaking patients with non-specific neck pain (NP), and to compare their psychometric characteristics with those of the Spanish version of the Northwick Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). Methods: Translation/re-translation of the English versions of the NDI and the COM was done blindly and independently by a multidisciplinary team. The study was done in 9 primary care Centers and 12 specialty services from 9 regions in Spain, with 221 acute, subacute and chronic patients who visited their physician for NP: 54 in the pilot phase and 167 in the validation phase. Neck pain (VAS), referred pain (VAS), disability (NDI, COM and NPQ), catastrophizing (CSQ) and quality of life (SF-12) were measured on their first visit and 14 days later. Patients' self-assessment was used as the external criterion for pain and disability. In the pilot phase, patients' understanding of each item in the NDI and COM was assessed, and on day 1 test-retest reliability was estimated by giving a second NDI and COM in which the name of the questionnaires and the order of the items had been changed. Results: Comprehensibility of NDI and COM were good. Minutes needed to fill out the questionnaires [median, (P25, P75)]: NDI. 4 (2.2, 10.0), COM: 2.1 (1.0, 4.9). Reliability: [ICC, (95%CI)]: NDI: 0.88 (0.80, 0.93). COM: 0.85 (0.75,0.91). Sensitivity to change: Effect size for patients having worsened, not changed and improved between days 1 and 15, according to the external criterion for disability: NDI: -0.24, 0.15, 0.66; NPQ: -0.14, 0.06, 0.67; COM: 0.05, 0.19, 0.92. Validity: Results of NDI, NPQ and COM were consistent with the external criterion for disability, whereas only those from NDI were consistent with the one for pain. Correlations with VAS, CSQ and SF-12 were similar for NDI and NPQ (absolute values between 0.36 and 0.50 on day 1, between 0.38 and 0.70 on day 15), and slightly lower for COM (between 0.36 and 0.48 on day 1, and between 0.33 and 0.61 on day 15). Correlation between NDI and NPQ: r = 0.84 on day 1, r = 0.91 on day 15. Correlation between COM and NPQ: r = 0.63 on day 1, r = 0.71 on day 15. Conclusion: Although most psychometric characteristics of NDI, NPQ and COM are similar, those from the latter one are worse and its use may lead to patients' evolution seeming more positive than it actually is. NDI seems to be the best instrument for measuring NP-related disability, since its results are the most consistent with patient's assessment of their own clinical status and evolution. It takes two more minutes to answer the NDI than to answer the COM, but it can be reliably filled out by the patient without assistance

Age- and Tumor Subtype-Specific Breast Cancer Risk Estimates for CHEK2*1100delC Carriers.

PURPOSE: CHEK2*1100delC is a well-established breast cancer risk variant that is most prevalent in European populations; however, there are limited data on risk of breast cancer by age and tumor subtype, which limits its usefulness in breast cancer risk prediction. We aimed to generate tumor subtype- and age-specific risk estimates by using data from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium, including 44,777 patients with breast cancer and 42,997 controls from 33 studies genotyped for CHEK2*1100delC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CHEK2*1100delC genotyping was mostly done by a custom Taqman assay. Breast cancer odds ratios (ORs) for CHEK2*1100delC carriers versus noncarriers were estimated by using logistic regression and adjusted for study (categorical) and age. Main analyses included patients with invasive breast cancer from population- and hospital-based studies. RESULTS: Proportions of heterozygous CHEK2*1100delC carriers in controls, in patients with breast cancer from population- and hospital-based studies, and in patients with breast cancer from familial- and clinical genetics center-based studies were 0.5%, 1.3%, and 3.0%, respectively. The estimated OR for invasive breast cancer was 2.26 (95%CI, 1.90 to 2.69; P = 2.3 × 10(-20)). The OR was higher for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease (2.55 [95%CI, 2.10 to 3.10; P = 4.9 × 10(-21)]) than it was for ER-negative disease (1.32 [95%CI, 0.93 to 1.88; P = .12]; P interaction = 9.9 × 10(-4)). The OR significantly declined with attained age for breast cancer overall (P = .001) and for ER-positive tumors (P = .001). Estimated cumulative risks for development of ER-positive and ER-negative tumors by age 80 in CHEK2*1100delC carriers were 20% and 3%, respectively, compared with 9% and 2%, respectively, in the general population of the United Kingdom. CONCLUSION: These CHEK2*1100delC breast cancer risk estimates provide a basis for incorporating CHEK2*1100delC into breast cancer risk prediction models and into guidelines for intensified screening and follow-up.NIH