The BDS checklist as measure of illness severity:A cross-sectional cohort study in the Danish general population, primary care and specialised setting

Objective The bodily distress syndrome (BDS) checklist has proven to be useful in the diagnostic categorisation and as screening tool for functional somatic disorders (FSD). This study aims to investigate whether the BDS checklist total sum score (0–100) can be used as a measure of physical symptom burden and FSD illness severity.Design Cross-sectional.Setting Danish general population, primary care and specialised clinical setting.Participants A general population cohort (n=9656), a primary care cohort (n=2480) and a cohort of patients with multiorgan BDS from specialised clinical setting (n=492).Outcome measures All data were self-reported. Physical symptoms were measured with the 25-item BDS checklist. Overall self-perceived health was measured with one item from the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Physical functioning was measured with an aggregate score of four items from the SF-36/SF-12 scales ‘physical functioning’, ‘bodily pain’ and ‘vitality’. Emotional distress was measured with the mental distress subscale (SCL-8) from the Danish version of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-90. Illness worry was measured with the six-item Whiteley Index.Results For all cohorts, bifactor models established that despite some multidimensionality the total sum score of the BDS checklist adequately reflected physical symptom burden and illness severity. The BDS checklist had acceptable convergent validity with measures of overall health (r=0.25–0.58), physical functioning (r=0.22–0.58), emotional distress (r=0.47–0.62) and illness worry (r=0.36–0.55). Acceptability was good with a low number of missing responses to items (<3%). Internal consistency was high (α ≥0.879). BDS score means varied and reflected symptom burden across cohorts (13.03–46.15). We provide normative data for the Danish general population.Conclusions The BDS checklist total sum score can be used as a measure of symptom burden and FSD illness severity across settings. These findings establish the usefulness of the BDS checklist in clinics and in research, both as a diagnostic screening tool and as an instrument to assess illness severity

Genome wide association study of Preserved Ratio Impaired Spirometry (PRISm)

Background: Preserved Ratio Impaired Spirometry (PRISm) is defined as FEV1 &lt;80% predicted, FEV1/FVC ≥0.70. PRISm is associated with respiratory symptoms and co-morbidities. Our objective was to discover novel genetic signals for PRISm and see if they provide insight into the pathogenesis of PRISm and associated co-morbidities.Methods: We undertook a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of PRISm in UK Biobank participants (Stage 1), and selected SNPs reaching genome-wide significance for replication in 13 cohorts (Stage 2). A combined meta-analysis of Stage 1 and Stage 2 was done to determine top SNPs. We used cross-trait Linkage Disequilibrium score regression to estimate genome-wide genetic correlation between PRISM and pulmonary and extra-pulmonary traits. Phenome-wide association studies of top SNPs was performed. Results: 22 signals reached significance in the joint meta-analysis, including four signals novel for lung function. A strong genome-wide genetic correlation (rg) between PRISm and spirometric COPD (rg = 0.62, p-value &lt;0.001) was observed, and genetic correlation with type II diabetes (rg = 0.12, p-value 0.007). PheWAS showed that 18 of 22 signals were associated with diabetic traits and 7 with blood pressure traits.Discussion: This is the first GWAS to successfully identify SNPs associated with PRISm. Four of the signals; rs7652391 (nearest gene MECOM), rs9431040 (HLX), rs62018863 (TMEM114) and rs185937162 (HLA-B) have not been described in association with lung function before, demonstrating the utility of using different lung function phenotypes in GWAS. Genetic factors associated with PRISm are strongly correlated with risk of both other lung diseases and extra-pulmonary co-morbidity.<br/

Aberrant intestinal microbiota in individuals with prediabetes

Aims/hypothesis: Individuals with type 2 diabetes have aberrant intestinal microbiota. However, recent studies suggest that metformin alters the composition and functional potential of gut microbiota, thereby interfering with the diabetes-related microbial signatures. We tested whether specific gut microbiota profiles are associated with prediabetes (defined as fasting plasma glucose of 6.1-7.0 mmol/l or HbA1c of 42-48 mmol/mol [6.0-6.5%]) and a range of clinical biomarkers of poor metabolic health. Methods: In the present case-control study, we analysed the gut microbiota of 134 Danish adults with prediabetes, overweight, insulin resistance, dyslipidaemia and low-grade inflammation and 134 age-and sex-matched individuals with normal glucose regulation. Results: We found that five bacterial genera and 36 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) were differentially abundant between individuals with prediabetes and those with normal glucose regulation. At the genus level, the abundance of Clostridium was decreased (mean log2 fold change -0.64 (SEM 0.23), p adj = 0.0497), whereas the abundances of Dorea, [Ruminococcus], Sutterella and Streptococcus were increased (mean log2 fold change 0.51 (SEM 0.12), p adj = 5 x 10-4; 0.51 (SEM 0.11), p adj = 1 x 10-4; 0.60 (SEM 0.21), p adj = 0.0497; and 0.92 (SEM0.21), p adj = 4 x 10-4, respectively). The two OTUs that differed the most were a member of the order Clostridiales (OTU 146564) and Akkermansia muciniphila, which both displayed lower abundance among individuals with prediabetes (mean log2 fold change -1.74 (SEM0.41), p adj = 2 x 10-3 and -1.65 (SEM0.34), p adj = 4 x 10-4, respectively). Faecal transfer from donors with prediabetes or screen-detected, drug-naive type 2 diabetes to germfree Swiss Webster or conventional C57BL/6 J mice did not induce impaired glucose regulation in recipient mice. Conclusions/interpretation: Collectively, our data show that individuals with prediabetes have aberrant intestinal microbiota characterised by a decreased abundance of the genus Clostridium and the mucin-degrading bacterium A. muciniphila. Our findings are comparable to observations in overt chronic diseases characterised by low-grade inflammation

A European research agenda for somatic symptom disorders, bodily distress disorders, and functional disorders: Results of an estimate-talk-estimate delphi expert study

Background: Somatic Symptom Disorders (SSD), Bodily Distress Disorders (BDD) and functional disorders (FD) are associated with high medical and societal costs and pose a substantial challenge to the population and health policy of Europe. To meet this challenge, a specific research agenda is needed as one of the cornerstones of sustainable mental health research and health policy for SSD, BDD, and FD in Europe. Aim: To identify the main challenges and research priorities concerning SSD, BDD, and FD from a European perspective. Methods: Delphi study conducted from July 2016 until October 2017 in 3 rounds with 3 workshop meetings and 3 online surveys, involving 75 experts and 21 European countries. EURONET-SOMA and the European Association of Psychosomatic Medicine (EAPM) hosted the meetings. Results: Eight research priorities were identified: (1) Assessment of diagnostic profiles relevant to course and treatment outcome. (2) Development and evaluation of new, effective interventions. (3) Validation studies on questionnaires or semi-structured interviews that assess chronic medical conditions in this context. (4) Research into patients preferences for diagnosis and treatment. (5) Development of new methodologic designs to identify and explore mediators and moderators of clinical course and treatment outcomes (6). Translational research exploring how psychological and somatic symptoms develop from somatic conditions and biological and behavioral pathogenic factors. (7) Development of new, effective interventions to personalize treatment. (8) Implementation studies of treatment interventions in different settings, such as primary care, occupational care, general hospital and specialty mental health settings. The general public and policymakers will benefit from the development of new, effective, personalized interventions for SSD, BDD, and FD, that will be enhanced by translational research, as well as from the outcomes of research into patient involvement, GP-patient communication, consultation-liaison models and implementation. Conclusion: Funding for this research agenda, targeting these challenges in coordinated research networks such as EURONET-SOMA and EAPM, and systematically allocating resources by policymakers to this critical area in mental and physical well-being is urgently needed to improve efficacy and impact for diagnosis and treatment of SSD, BDD, and FD across Europe