64 research outputs found

    Diabetes and risk of pancreatic cancer: a pooled analysis from the pancreatic cancer cohort consortium

    Get PDF
    Diabetes is a suspected risk factor for pancreatic cancer, but questions remain about whether it is a risk factor or a result of the disease. This study prospectively examined the association between diabetes and the risk of pancreatic adenocarcinoma in pooled data from the NCI pancreatic cancer cohort consortium (PanScan). The pooled data included 1,621 pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases and 1,719 matched controls from twelve cohorts using a nested case-control study design. Subjects who were diagnosed with diabetes near the time (< 2 years) of pancreatic cancer diagnosis were excluded from all analyses. All analyses were adjusted for age, race, gender, study, alcohol use, smoking, BMI, and family history of pancreatic cancer. Self-reported diabetes was associated with a forty percent increased risk of pancreatic cancer (OR = 1.40, 95 % CI: 1.07, 1.84). The association differed by duration of diabetes; risk was highest for those with a duration of 2-8 years (OR = 1.79, 95 % CI: 1.25, 2.55); there was no association for those with 9+ years of diabetes (OR = 1.02, 95 % CI: 0.68, 1.52). These findings provide support for a relationship between diabetes and pancreatic cancer risk. The absence of association in those with the longest duration of diabetes may reflect hypoinsulinemia and warrants further investigation

    The Methodology of Modern Macroeconomics and the Descriptive Approach to Discounting

    Full text link
    Critics of modern macroeconomics often raise concerns about unwarranted welfare conclusions and data mining. This paper illustrates these concerns with a thought experiment, based on the debate in environmental economics about the appropriate discount rate in climate change analyses: I set up an economy where a social evaluator wants to determine the optimal time path of emission levels, and seeks advice for this from an old-style neo-classical macroeconomist and a new neo-classical (modern) macroeconomist; I then describe how both economists analyze the economy, their policy advice, and their mistakes. I then use the insights from this thought experiment to point out some pitfalls of the modern macroeconomic methodology

    Case Reports1. A Late Presentation of Loeys-Dietz Syndrome: Beware of TGFβ Receptor Mutations in Benign Joint Hypermobility

    Get PDF
    Background: Thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA) and dissections are not uncommon causes of sudden death in young adults. Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) is a rare, recently described, autosomal dominant, connective tissue disease characterized by aggressive arterial aneurysms, resulting from mutations in the transforming growth factor beta (TGFβ) receptor genes TGFBR1 and TGFBR2. Mean age at death is 26.1 years, most often due to aortic dissection. We report an unusually late presentation of LDS, diagnosed following elective surgery in a female with a long history of joint hypermobility. Methods: A 51-year-old Caucasian lady complained of chest pain and headache following a dural leak from spinal anaesthesia for an elective ankle arthroscopy. CT scan and echocardiography demonstrated a dilated aortic root and significant aortic regurgitation. MRA demonstrated aortic tortuosity, an infrarenal aortic aneurysm and aneurysms in the left renal and right internal mammary arteries. She underwent aortic root repair and aortic valve replacement. She had a background of long-standing joint pains secondary to hypermobility, easy bruising, unusual fracture susceptibility and mild bronchiectasis. She had one healthy child age 32, after which she suffered a uterine prolapse. Examination revealed mild Marfanoid features. Uvula, skin and ophthalmological examination was normal. Results: Fibrillin-1 testing for Marfan syndrome (MFS) was negative. Detection of a c.1270G > C (p.Gly424Arg) TGFBR2 mutation confirmed the diagnosis of LDS. Losartan was started for vascular protection. Conclusions: LDS is a severe inherited vasculopathy that usually presents in childhood. It is characterized by aortic root dilatation and ascending aneurysms. There is a higher risk of aortic dissection compared with MFS. Clinical features overlap with MFS and Ehlers Danlos syndrome Type IV, but differentiating dysmorphogenic features include ocular hypertelorism, bifid uvula and cleft palate. Echocardiography and MRA or CT scanning from head to pelvis is recommended to establish the extent of vascular involvement. Management involves early surgical intervention, including early valve-sparing aortic root replacement, genetic counselling and close monitoring in pregnancy. Despite being caused by loss of function mutations in either TGFβ receptor, paradoxical activation of TGFβ signalling is seen, suggesting that TGFβ antagonism may confer disease modifying effects similar to those observed in MFS. TGFβ antagonism can be achieved with angiotensin antagonists, such as Losartan, which is able to delay aortic aneurysm development in preclinical models and in patients with MFS. Our case emphasizes the importance of timely recognition of vasculopathy syndromes in patients with hypermobility and the need for early surgical intervention. It also highlights their heterogeneity and the potential for late presentation. Disclosures: The authors have declared no conflicts of interes

    Detectable clonal mosaicism and its relationship to aging and cancer

    Get PDF
    In an analysis of 31,717 cancer cases and 26,136 cancer-free controls from 13 genome-wide association studies, we observed large chromosomal abnormalities in a subset of clones in DNA obtained from blood or buccal samples. We observed mosaic abnormalities, either aneuploidy or copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity, of >2 Mb in size in autosomes of 517 individuals (0.89%), with abnormal cell proportions of between 7% and 95%. In cancer-free individuals, frequency increased with age, from 0.23% under 50 years to 1.91% between 75 and 79 years (P = 4.8 × 10(-8)). Mosaic abnormalities were more frequent in individuals with solid tumors (0.97% versus 0.74% in cancer-free individuals; odds ratio (OR) = 1.25; P = 0.016), with stronger association with cases who had DNA collected before diagnosis or treatment (OR = 1.45; P = 0.0005). Detectable mosaicism was also more common in individuals for whom DNA was collected at least 1 year before diagnosis with leukemia compared to cancer-free individuals (OR = 35.4; P = 3.8 × 10(-11)). These findings underscore the time-dependent nature of somatic events in the etiology of cancer and potentially other late-onset diseases

    Randomized Trial of Facilitated Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy vs Sequential Fecal-Based Blood Test

    No full text
    Background & Aims: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines include screening colonoscopy and sequential high-sensitivity fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT), with expectation of similar effectiveness based on the assumption of similar high adherence. However, adherence to screening colonoscopy compared with sequential HSgFOBT has not been reported. In this randomized clinical trial, we assessed adherence and pathology findings for a single screening colonoscopy vs sequential and nonsequential HSgFOBTs. Methods: Participants aged 40–69 years were enrolled at 3 centers representing different clinical settings. Participants were randomized into a single screening colonoscopy arm vs sequential HSgFOBT arm composed of 4–7 rounds. Initial adherence to screening colonoscopy and sequential adherence to HSgFOBT, follow-up colonoscopy for positive HSgFOBT tests, crossover to colonoscopy, and detection of advanced neoplasia or large serrated lesions (ADN-SERs) were measured. Results: There were 3523 participants included in the trial; 1761 and 1762 participants were randomized to the screening colonoscopy and HSgFOBT arms, respectively. Adherence was 1473 (83.6%) for the screening colonoscopy arm vs 1288 (73.1%) for the HSgFOBT arm after 1 round (relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10–1.19; P ≤.001), but only 674 (38.3%) over 4 sequential HSgFOBT rounds (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 2.05–2.33). Overall adherence to any screening increased to 1558 (88.5%) in the screening colonoscopy arm during the entire study period and 1493 (84.7%) in the HSgFOBT arm (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02–1.07). Four hundred thirty-six participants (24.7%) crossed over to screening colonoscopy during the first 4 rounds. ADN-SERs were detected in 121 of the 1473 participants (8.2%) in the colonoscopy arm who were adherent to protocol in the first 12 months of the study, whereas detection of ADN-SERs among those who were not sequentially adherent (n = 709) to HSgFOBT was subpar (0.6%) (RR, 14.72; 95% CI, 5.46–39.67) compared with those who were sequentially adherent (3.3%) (n = 647) (RR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.61–3.98) to HSgFOBT in the first 4 rounds. When including colonoscopies from HSgFOBT patients who were never positive yet crossed over (n = 1483), 5.5% of ADN-SERs were detected (RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.15–1.96) in the first 4 rounds. Conclusions: Observed adherence to sequential rounds of HSgFOBT was suboptimal compared with a single screening colonoscopy. Detection of ADN-SERs was inferior when nonsequential HSgFOBT adherence was compared with sequential adherence. However, the greatest number of ADN-SERs was detected among those who crossed over to colonoscopy and opted to receive a colonoscopy. The effectiveness of an HSgFOBT screening program may be enhanced if crossover to screening colonoscopy is permitted. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00102011

    Family history of cancer and risk of pancreatic cancer: a pooled analysis from the Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium (PanScan).

    No full text
    A family history of pancreatic cancer has consistently been associated with increased risk of pancreatic cancer. However, uncertainty remains about the strength of this association. Results from previous studies suggest a family history of select cancers (i.e., ovarian, breast and colorectal) could also be associated, although not as strongly, with increased risk of pancreatic cancer. We examined the association between a family history of 5 types of cancer (pancreas, prostate, ovarian, breast and colorectal) and risk of pancreatic cancer using data from a collaborative nested case-control study conducted by the Pancreatic Cancer Cohort Consortium. Cases and controls were from cohort studies from the United States, Europe and China, and a case-control study from the Mayo Clinic. Analyses of family history of pancreatic cancer included 1,183 cases and 1,205 controls. A family history of pancreatic cancer in a parent, sibling or child was associated with increased risk of pancreatic cancer [multivariate-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) = 1.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.19-2.61]. A family history of prostate cancer was also associated with increased risk (OR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.12-1.89). There were no statistically significant associations with a family history of ovarian cancer (OR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.52-1.31), breast cancer (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.97-1.51) or colorectal cancer (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.93-1.47). Our results confirm a moderate sized association between a family history of pancreatic cancer and risk of pancreatic cancer and also provide evidence for an association with a family history of prostate cancer worth further study
    corecore