Pathological Features of Breast Cancer seen in Northwestern Tanzania: A Nine Years Retrospective Study.

Breast cancer is more common in Western Countries compared to African populations. However in African population, it appears that the disease tends to be more aggressive and occurring at a relatively young age at the time of presentation. The aim of this study was to describe the trend of Breast Cancer in Northwestern Tanzania. This was a retrospective study which involved all cases of breast cancer diagnosed histologically at Bugando Medical Center from 2002 to 2010. Histological results and slides were retrieved from the records in the Pathology department, clinical information and demographic data for patients were retrieved from surgical wards and department of medical records. Histology slides were re-evaluated for the histological type, grade (By modified Bloom-Richardson score), and presence of necrosis and skin involvement. Data was entered and analyzed by SPSS computer software version 15. There were 328 patients histologically confirmed to have breast cancer, the mean age at diagnosis was 48.7 years (+/- 13.1). About half of the patients (52.4%) were below 46 years of age, and this group of patients had significantly higher tendency for lymph node metastasis (p = 0.012). The tumor size ranged from 1 cm to 18 cm in diameter with average (mean) of 5.5 cm (+/- 2.5), and median size of 6 cm. Size of the tumor (above 6 cm in diameter) and presence of necrosis within the tumor was significantly associated with high rate of lymph node metastasis (p = 0.000). Of all patients, 64% were at clinical stage III (specifically IIIB) and 70.4% had lymph node metastasis at the time of diagnosis. Only 4.3% of the patients were in clinical stage I at the time of diagnosis. Majority of the patients had invasive ductal carcinoma (91.5%) followed by mucinous carcinoma (5.2%), Invasive lobular carcinoma (3%) and in situ ductal carcinoma (0.3%). In all patients, 185 (56.4%) had tumor with histological grade 3. Breast cancer in this region show a trend towards relative young age at diagnosis with advanced stage at diagnosis and high rate of lymph node metastasis. Poor Referral system, lack of screening programs and natural aggressive biological behavior of tumor may contribute to advanced disease at the time of diagnosis

Efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate throughout the day in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder:results from a randomized, controlled trial

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is a long-acting, prodrug stimulant therapy for patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This randomized placebo-controlled trial of an optimized daily dose of LDX (30, 50 or 70 mg) was conducted in children and adolescents (aged 6–17 years) with ADHD. To evaluate the efficacy of LDX throughout the day, symptoms and behaviors of ADHD were evaluated using an abbreviated version of the Conners’ Parent Rating Scale-Revised (CPRS-R) at 1000, 1400 and 1800 hours following early morning dosing (0700 hours). Osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) was included as a reference treatment, but the study was not designed to support a statistical comparison between LDX and OROS-MPH. The full analysis set comprised 317 patients (LDX, n = 104; placebo, n = 106; OROS-MPH, n = 107). At baseline, CPRS-R total scores were similar across treatment groups. At endpoint, differences (active treatment − placebo) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline CPRS-R total scores were statistically significant (P < 0.001) throughout the day for LDX (effect sizes: 1000 hours, 1.42; 1400 hours, 1.41; 1800 hours, 1.30) and OROS-MPH (effect sizes: 1000 hours, 1.04; 1400 hours, 0.98; 1800 hours, 0.92). Differences in LS mean change from baseline to endpoint were statistically significant (P < 0.001) for both active treatments in all four subscales of the CPRS-R (ADHD index, oppositional, hyperactivity and cognitive). In conclusion, improvements relative to placebo in ADHD-related symptoms and behaviors in children and adolescents receiving a single morning dose of LDX or OROS-MPH were maintained throughout the day and were ongoing at the last measurement in the evening (1800 hours)

Inhibition, flexibility, working memory and planning in autism spectrum disorders with and without comorbid ADHD-symptoms

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recent studies have not paid a great deal of attention to comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms in autistic children even though it is well known that almost half of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) suffer from hyperactivity, inattention and impulsivity. The goal of this study was to evaluate and compare executive functioning (EF) profiles in children with ADHD and in children with ASD with and without comorbid ADHD.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Children aged 6 to 18 years old with ADHD (n = 20) or ASD (High-Functioning autism or Asperger syndrome) with (n = 20) and without (n = 20) comorbid ADHD and a typically developing group (n = 20) were compared on a battery of EF tasks comprising inhibition, flexibility, working memory and planning tasks. A MANOVA, effect sizes as well as correlations between ADHD-symptomatology and EF performance were calculated. Age- and IQ-corrected z scores were used.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There was a significant effect for the factor group (F = 1.55; dF = 42; p = .02). Post-hoc analysis revealed significant differences between the ADHD and the TD group on the inhibition task for false alarms (p = .01) and between the ADHD group, the ASD+ group (p = .03), the ASD- group (p = .02) and the TD group (p = .01) for omissions. Effect sizes showed clear deficits of ADHD children in inhibition and working memory tasks. Participants with ASD were impaired in planning and flexibility abilities. The ASD+ group showed compared to the ASD- group more problems in inhibitory performance but not in the working memory task.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings replicate previous results reporting impairment of ADHD children in inhibition and working memory tasks and of ASD children in planning and flexibility abilities. The ASD + group showed similarities to the ADHD group with regard to inhibitory but not to working memory deficits. Nevertheless the heterogeneity of these and previous results shows that EF assessment is not useful for differential diagnosis between ADHD and ASD. It might be useful for evaluating strengths and weaknesses in individual children.</p

A modelled economic evaluation comparing atomoxetine with methylphenidate in the treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in Spain

Background Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurobehavioural disorder, affecting 3–6% of school age children and adolescents in Spain. Methylphenidate (MPH), a mild stimulant, had long been the only approved medication available for ADHD children in Spain. Atomoxetine is a non-stimulant alternative in the treatment of ADHD with once-a-day oral dosing. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of atomoxetine compared to MPH. In addition, atomoxetine is compared to 'no medication' for patient populations who are ineligible for MPH (i.e. having stimulant-failure experience or co-morbidities precluding stimulant medication). Methods An economic model with Markov processes was developed to estimate the costs and benefits of atomoxetine versus either MPH or 'no medication'. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was calculated for atomoxetine relative to the comparators. The Markov process incorporated 14 health states, representing a range of outcomes associated with treatment options. Utility values were obtained from the utility valuation survey of 83 parents of children with ADHD. The clinical data were based on a thorough review of controlled clinical trials and other clinical literature, and validated by international experts. Costs and outcomes were estimated using Monte Carlo simulation over a 1-year duration, with costs estimated from the perspective of the National Health Service in Spain. Results For stimulant-naïve patients without contra-indications to stimulants, the incremental costs per QALY gained for atomoxetine were € 34 308 (compared to an immediate-release MPH) and € 24 310 (compared to an extended-release MPH). For those patients who have stimulant-failure experience or contra-indications to stimulants, the incremental costs per QALY gained of atomoxetine compared to 'no medication' were € 23 820 and € 23 323, respectively. Conclusion The economic evaluation showed that atomoxetine is an effective alternative across a range of ADHD populations and offers value-for money in the treatment of ADHD