Three-Tiered Risk Stratification Model to Predict Progression in Barrett's Esophagus Using Epigenetic and Clinical Features

Barrett's esophagus predisposes to esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, the value of endoscopic surveillance in Barrett's esophagus has been debated because of the low incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus. Moreover, high inter-observer and sampling-dependent variation in the histologic staging of dysplasia make clinical risk assessment problematic. In this study, we developed a 3-tiered risk stratification strategy, based on systematically selected epigenetic and clinical parameters, to improve Barrett's esophagus surveillance efficiency

Reconstructing Native American Population History

The peopling of the Americas has been the subject of extensive genetic, archaeological and linguistic research; however, central questions remain unresolved1–5. One contentious issue is whether the settlement occurred via a single6–8 or multiple streams of migration from Siberia9–15. The pattern of dispersals within the Americas is also poorly understood. To address these questions at higher resolution than was previously possible, we assembled data from 52 Native American and 17 Siberian groups genotyped at 364,470 single nucleotide polymorphisms. We show that Native Americans descend from at least three streams of Asian gene flow. Most descend entirely from a single ancestral population that we call “First American”. However, speakers of Eskimo-Aleut languages from the Arctic inherit almost half their ancestry from a second stream of Asian gene flow, and the Na-Dene-speaking Chipewyan from Canada inherit roughly one-tenth of their ancestry from a third stream. We show that the initial peopling followed a southward expansion facilitated by the coast, with sequential population splits and little gene flow after divergence, especially in South America. A major exception is in Chibchan-speakers on both sides of the Panama Isthmus, who have ancestry from both North and South America

A Multicenter, Double-Blinded Validation Study of Methylation Biomarkers for Progression Prediction in Barrett's Esophagus

Esophageal adenocarcinoma risk in Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is increased 30- to 125-fold versus the general population. Among all BE patients, however, neoplastic progression occurs only once per 200 patient-years. Molecular biomarkers are therefore needed to risk-stratify patients for more efficient surveillance endoscopy and to improve the early detection of progression. We therefore performed a retrospective, multicenter, double-blinded validation study of 8 BE progression prediction methylation biomarkers. Progression or nonprogression were determined at 2 years (tier 1) and 4 years (tier 2). Methylation was assayed in 145 nonprogressors (NPs) and 50 progressors (Ps) using real-time quantitative methylation-specific PCR. Ps were significantly older than NPs (70.6 vs. 62.5 years, p < 0.001). We evaluated a linear combination of the 8 markers, using coefficients from a multivariate logistic regression analysis. Areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) were high in the 2-, 4-year and combined data models (0.843, 0.829 and 0.840; p<0.001, p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). In addition, even after rigorous overfitting correction, the incremental AUCs contributed by panels based on the 8 markers plus age vs. age alone were substantial (Δ-AUC = 0.152, 0.114 and 0.118, respectively) in all three models. A methylation biomarker-based panel to predict neoplastic progression in BE has potential clinical value in improving both the efficiency of surveillance endoscopy and the early detection of neoplasia

Accounting: A General Commentary on an Empirical Science

Many researchers have questioned the view of accounting as a science. Some maintain that it is a service activity rather than a science, yet others entertain the view that it is an art or merely a technology. While it is true that accounting provides a service and is a technology (a methodology for recording and reporting), that fact does not prevent accounting from being a science. Based upon the structure and knowledge base of the discipline, this paper presents the case for accounting as an empirical science