Alzheimer's disease marker phospho-tau181 is not elevated in the first year after moderate-to-severe TBI

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is associated with the tauopathies Alzheimer's disease and chronic traumatic encephalopathy. Advanced immunoassays show significant elevations in plasma total tau (t-tau) early post-TBI, but concentrations subsequently normalise rapidly. Tau phosphorylated at serine-181 (p-tau181) is a well-validated Alzheimer's disease marker that could potentially seed progressive neurodegeneration. We tested whether post-traumatic p-tau181 concentrations are elevated and relate to progressive brain atrophy. METHODS: Plasma p-tau181 and other post-traumatic biomarkers, including total-tau (t-tau), neurofilament light (NfL), ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), were assessed after moderate-to-severe TBI in the BIO-AX-TBI cohort (first sample mean 2.7 days, second sample within 10 days, then 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months, n=42). Brain atrophy rates were assessed in aligned serial MRI (n=40). Concentrations were compared patients with and without Alzheimer's disease, with healthy controls. RESULTS: Plasma p-tau181 concentrations were significantly raised in patients with Alzheimer's disease but not after TBI, where concentrations were non-elevated, and remained stable over one year. P-tau181 after TBI was not predictive of brain atrophy rates in either grey or white matter. In contrast, substantial trauma-associated elevations in t-tau, NfL, GFAP and UCH-L1 were seen, with concentrations of NfL and t-tau predictive of brain atrophy rates. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma p-tau181 is not significantly elevated during the first year after moderate-to-severe TBI and levels do not relate to neuroimaging measures of neurodegeneration

Spectrum and prevalence of genetic predisposition in medulloblastoma: a retrospective genetic study and prospective validation in a clinical trial cohort.

BACKGROUND: Medulloblastoma is associated with rare hereditary cancer predisposition syndromes; however, consensus medulloblastoma predisposition genes have not been defined and screening guidelines for genetic counselling and testing for paediatric patients are not available. We aimed to assess and define these genes to provide evidence for future screening guidelines. METHODS: In this international, multicentre study, we analysed patients with medulloblastoma from retrospective cohorts (International Cancer Genome Consortium [ICGC] PedBrain, Medulloblastoma Advanced Genomics International Consortium [MAGIC], and the CEFALO series) and from prospective cohorts from four clinical studies (SJMB03, SJMB12, SJYC07, and I-HIT-MED). Whole-genome sequences and exome sequences from blood and tumour samples were analysed for rare damaging germline mutations in cancer predisposition genes. DNA methylation profiling was done to determine consensus molecular subgroups: WNT (MBWNT), SHH (MBSHH), group 3 (MBGroup3), and group 4 (MBGroup4). Medulloblastoma predisposition genes were predicted on the basis of rare variant burden tests against controls without a cancer diagnosis from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC). Previously defined somatic mutational signatures were used to further classify medulloblastoma genomes into two groups, a clock-like group (signatures 1 and 5) and a homologous recombination repair deficiency-like group (signatures 3 and 8), and chromothripsis was investigated using previously established criteria. Progression-free survival and overall survival were modelled for patients with a genetic predisposition to medulloblastoma. FINDINGS: We included a total of 1022 patients with medulloblastoma from the retrospective cohorts (n=673) and the four prospective studies (n=349), from whom blood samples (n=1022) and tumour samples (n=800) were analysed for germline mutations in 110 cancer predisposition genes. In our rare variant burden analysis, we compared these against 53 105 sequenced controls from ExAC and identified APC, BRCA2, PALB2, PTCH1, SUFU, and TP53 as consensus medulloblastoma predisposition genes according to our rare variant burden analysis and estimated that germline mutations accounted for 6% of medulloblastoma diagnoses in the retrospective cohort. The prevalence of genetic predispositions differed between molecular subgroups in the retrospective cohort and was highest for patients in the MBSHH subgroup (20% in the retrospective cohort). These estimates were replicated in the prospective clinical cohort (germline mutations accounted for 5% of medulloblastoma diagnoses, with the highest prevalence [14%] in the MBSHH subgroup). Patients with germline APC mutations developed MBWNT and accounted for most (five [71%] of seven) cases of MBWNT that had no somatic CTNNB1 exon 3 mutations. Patients with germline mutations in SUFU and PTCH1 mostly developed infant MBSHH. Germline TP53 mutations presented only in childhood patients in the MBSHH subgroup and explained more than half (eight [57%] of 14) of all chromothripsis events in this subgroup. Germline mutations in PALB2 and BRCA2 were observed across the MBSHH, MBGroup3, and MBGroup4 molecular subgroups and were associated with mutational signatures typical of homologous recombination repair deficiency. In patients with a genetic predisposition to medulloblastoma, 5-year progression-free survival was 52% (95% CI 40-69) and 5-year overall survival was 65% (95% CI 52-81); these survival estimates differed significantly across patients with germline mutations in different medulloblastoma predisposition genes. INTERPRETATION: Genetic counselling and testing should be used as a standard-of-care procedure in patients with MBWNT and MBSHH because these patients have the highest prevalence of damaging germline mutations in known cancer predisposition genes. We propose criteria for routine genetic screening for patients with medulloblastoma based on clinical and molecular tumour characteristics. FUNDING: German Cancer Aid; German Federal Ministry of Education and Research; German Childhood Cancer Foundation (Deutsche Kinderkrebsstiftung); European Research Council; National Institutes of Health; Canadian Institutes for Health Research; German Cancer Research Center; St Jude Comprehensive Cancer Center; American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities; Swiss National Science Foundation; European Molecular Biology Organization; Cancer Research UK; Hertie Foundation; Alexander and Margaret Stewart Trust; V Foundation for Cancer Research; Sontag Foundation; Musicians Against Childhood Cancer; BC Cancer Foundation; Swedish Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare; Swedish Research Council; Swedish Cancer Society; the Swedish Radiation Protection Authority; Danish Strategic Research Council; Swiss Federal Office of Public Health; Swiss Research Foundation on Mobile Communication; Masaryk University; Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic; Research Council of Norway; Genome Canada; Genome BC; Terry Fox Research Institute; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research; Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario; The Family of Kathleen Lorette and the Clark H Smith Brain Tumour Centre; Montreal Children's Hospital Foundation; The Hospital for Sick Children: Sonia and Arthur Labatt Brain Tumour Research Centre, Chief of Research Fund, Cancer Genetics Program, Garron Family Cancer Centre, MDT's Garron Family Endowment; BC Childhood Cancer Parents Association; Cure Search Foundation; Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation; Brainchild; and the Government of Ontario

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Variation in general supportive and preventive intensive care management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study

Abstract Background General supportive and preventive measures in the intensive care management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) aim to prevent or limit secondary brain injury and optimize recovery. The aim of this survey was to assess and quantify variation in perceptions on intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with TBI in European neurotrauma centers. Methods We performed a survey as part of the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. We analyzed 23 questions focused on: 1) circulatory and respiratory management; 2) fever control; 3) use of corticosteroids; 4) nutrition and glucose management; and 5) seizure prophylaxis and treatment. Results The survey was completed predominantly by intensivists (n = 33, 50%) and neurosurgeons (n = 23, 35%) from 66 centers (97% response rate). The most common cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) target was > 60 mmHg (n = 39, 60%) and/or an individualized target (n = 25, 38%). To support CPP, crystalloid fluid loading (n = 60, 91%) was generally preferred over albumin (n = 15, 23%), and vasopressors (n = 63, 96%) over inotropes (n = 29, 44%). The most commonly reported target of partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2) was 36–40 mmHg (4.8–5.3 kPa) in case of controlled intracranial pressure (ICP) < 20 mmHg (n = 45, 69%) and PaCO2 target of 30–35 mmHg (4–4.7 kPa) in case of raised ICP (n = 40, 62%). Almost all respondents indicated to generally treat fever (n = 65, 98%) with paracetamol (n = 61, 92%) and/or external cooling (n = 49, 74%). Conventional glucose management (n = 43, 66%) was preferred over tight glycemic control (n = 18, 28%). More than half of the respondents indicated to aim for full caloric replacement within 7 days (n = 43, 66%) using enteral nutrition (n = 60, 92%). Indications for and duration of seizure prophylaxis varied, and levetiracetam was mostly reported as the agent of choice for both seizure prophylaxis (n = 32, 49%) and treatment (n = 40, 61%). Conclusions Practice preferences vary substantially regarding general supportive and preventive measures in TBI patients at ICUs of European neurotrauma centers. These results provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research, since a more evidence-based uniformity in good practices in general ICU management could have a major impact on TBI outcome

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury

Background: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. Methods: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Results: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. Conclusion: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care

Mapping social vulnerability to floods. A comprehensive framework using a vulnerability index approach and PCA analysis

In recent years, the analysis of social vulnerability to floods became an integrated part of the flood risk management process, the strategies and policies developed focusing on risk reduction methods that increase the resilience of vulnerable communities. Therefore, reliable and robust social vulnerability approaches are needed, which is also highlighted by the increasing socio-economic growth and climate change related effects that can lead to unpredictable consequences. The use of vulnerability indices is the most widespread methodology that allows the identification of the most vulnerable communities and the understanding of the factors that increase vulnerability to floods. However, due to the lack of a standard procedure, the existing studies are often characterized by uncertainties related to subjective selection of indicators, lack of inclusion of all vulnerability dimensions, equal or subjective weighting methods, and reduced number of variables due to data unavailability. The present paper is addressing these gaps by developing a comprehensive methodology approach which: includes a large set of indicators that are selected considering the local socio-economic context, includes the hazard dimension in the analysis considering flood related variables, and applies objective weighting methods based on the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method. Furthermore, flood vulnerability maps are developed using Geographic Information System (GIS) tools, to provide a rapid and easy way to identify highly vulnerable areas. The results showed that the integration of statistical methods and GIS tools in the social vulnerability index construction provides a better understanding of the factors that increase the social vulnerability and offers an overview of the mitigation and adaptation measures that must be implemented by authorities in order to improve the flood risk management

Axonal marker neurofilament light predicts long-term outcomes and progressive neurodegeneration after traumatic brain injury

Axonal injury is a key determinant of long-term outcomes after traumatic brain injury (TBI) but has been difficult to measure clinically. Fluid biomarker assays can now sensitively quantify neuronal proteins in blood. Axonal components such as neurofilament light (NfL) potentially provide a diagnostic measure of injury. In the multicenter BIO-AX-TBI study of moderate-severe TBI, we investigated relationships between fluid biomarkers, advanced neuroimaging, and clinical outcomes. Cerebral microdialysis was used to assess biomarker concentrations in brain extracellular fluid aligned with plasma measurement. An experimental injury model was used to validate biomarkers against histopathology. Plasma NfL increased after TBI, peaking at 10 days to 6 weeks but remaining abnormal at 1 year. Concentrations were around 10 times higher early after TBI than in controls (patients with extracranial injuries). NfL concentrations correlated with diffusion MRI measures of axonal injury and predicted white matter neurodegeneration. Plasma TAU predicted early gray matter atrophy. NfL was the strongest predictor of functional outcomes at 1 year. Cerebral microdialysis showed that NfL concentrations in plasma and brain extracellular fluid were highly correlated. An experimental injury model confirmed a dose-response relationship of histopathologically defined axonal injury to plasma NfL. In conclusion, plasma NfL provides a sensitive and clinically meaningful measure of axonal injury produced by TBI. This reflects the extent of underlying damage, validated using advanced MRI, cerebral microdialysis, and an experimental model. The results support the incorporation of NfL sampling subacutely after injury into clinical practice to assist with the diagnosis of axonal injury and to improve prognostication.</p

Research and Science Today Supplement No. 1/2013

RESEARCH AND SCIENCE TODAY is a biannual science journal established in 2011. The journal is an informational platform that publishes assessment articles and the results of various scientific research carried out by academics. We provide the authors with the opportunity to create and/or perfect their science writing skills. Thus, each issue of the journal (two per year and at least two supplements) will contain professional articles from any academic field, authored by domestic and international academics. The goal of this journal is to pass on relevant information to undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate students as well as to fellow academics and researchers; the topics covered are unlimited, considering its multi-disciplinary profile. Regarding the national and international visibility of Research and Science Today, it is indexed in over 30 international databases (IDB) and is present in over 200 online libraries and catalogues; therefore, anybody can easily consult the articles featured in each issue by accessing the databases or simply the website

Traumatic brain injury : integrated approaches to improve prevention, clinical care, and research

Rahul Raj on työryhmän InTBIR Participants Investigators jäsen.Peer reviewe