Relational Transgressions in Romantic Relationships: How Individuals Negotiate the Revelation and Concealment of Transgression Information within the Social Network

This study examined how individuals negotiate the revelation and concealment of information following an act of infidelity within the social network. Research has shown that individuals experience a tension when deciding to reveal and/or conceal information regarding a relational transgression (Baxter, 1994, Baxter & Braithwaite, 2007). Drawing on dialectical tensions (Baxter, 1990), relational transgressions (Roloff & Cloven, 1994), and support networks (Cutrona and Suhr, 1992; Klein & Milardo, 2000), this project posed a number of research questions. Interviews were conducted with 22 participants regarding their communication following the discovery of an act of infidelity. Participants were asked to discuss who they did or did not tell about the infidelity, why they did or did not tell those individuals, and how they told them about the infidelity. Data from these interviews revealed participants view individuals who are sympathetic, trustworthy, and calm as supportive, and individuals who blame or pass judgment as critical. Participants also reported that revealing information to gain support, primarily informational and emotional support, was the most common motive for revealing, while concealing information to avoid evaluation was the most common reason for concealing. Individuals who were revealed to were considered both supportive and unsupportive when they provided advice to the participant. However, when network members failed to provide support to a participant, or tried to minimize the situation, they were seen as unsupportive. Participants experienced a number of tensions when deciding to reveal or conceal, including a desire to conceal the information but an expectation to reveal it due to the nature of the relationship. Participants used a few strategies to negotiate these tensions, including cyclic alternation, segmentation, and selection. These findings may have theoretical implications for dialectical tension research, particularly in the area of praxis patterns. Furthermore, they may be important in helping network members with future communication with individuals seeking support

Multicenter evaluation of the Xpert Norovirus assay for detection of norovirus genogroups I and II in fecal specimens

Norovirus is the most common cause of sporadic gastroenteritis and outbreaks worldwide. The rapid identification of norovirus has important implications for infection prevention measures and may reduce the need for additional diagnostic testing. The Xpert Norovirus assay recently received FDA clearance for the detection and differentiation of norovirus genogroups I and II (GI and GII), which account for the vast majority of infections. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the Xpert Norovirus assay with both fresh, prospectively collected ( n = 914) and frozen, archived ( n = 489) fecal specimens. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) composite reference method was used as the gold standard for comparison. For both prospective and frozen specimens, the Xpert Norovirus assay showed positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) values of 98.3% and 98.1% for GI and of 99.4% and 98.2% for GII, respectively. Norovirus prevalence in the prospective specimens (collected from March to May of 2014) was 9.9% ( n = 90), with the majority of positives caused by genogroup II (82%, n = 74). The positive predictive value (PPV) of the Xpert Norovirus assay was 75% for GI-positive specimens, whereas it was 86.5% for GII-positive specimens. The negative predictive values (NPV) for GI and GII were 100% and 99.9%, respectively

Delineating the autistic phenotype in children with neurofibromatosis type 1

Background Existing research has demonstrated elevated autistic behaviours in children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), but the autistic phenotype and its relationship to other neurodevelopmental manifestations of NF1 remains unclear. To address this gap, we performed detailed characterisation of autistic behaviours in children with NF1 and investigated their association with other common NF1 child characteristics. Methods Participants were drawn from a larger cross-sectional study examining autism in children with NF1. The population analysed in this study scored above threshold on the Social Responsiveness Scale-Second Edition (T-score ≥ 60; 51% larger cohort) and completed the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) and/or the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Second Edition (ADOS-2). All participants underwent evaluation of their intellectual function, and behavioural data were collected via parent questionnaires. Results The study cohort comprised 68 children (3–15 years). Sixty-three per cent met the ADOS-2 ‘autism spectrum’ cut-off, and 34% exceeded the more stringent threshold for ‘autistic disorder’ on the ADI-R. Social communication symptoms were common and wide-ranging, while restricted and repetitive behaviours (RRBs) were most commonly characterised by ‘insistence on sameness’ (IS) behaviours such as circumscribed interests and difficulties with minor changes. Autistic behaviours were weakly correlated with hyperactive/impulsive attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms but not with inattentive ADHD or other behavioural characteristics. Language and verbal IQ were weakly related to social communication behaviours but not to RRBs. Limitations Lack of genetic validation of NF1, no clinical diagnosis of autism, and a retrospective assessment of autistic behaviours in early childhood. Conclusions Findings provide strong support for elevated autistic behaviours in children with NF1. While these behaviours were relatively independent of other NF1 comorbidities, the importance of taking broader child characteristics into consideration when interpreting data from autism-specific measures in this population is highlighted. Social communication deficits appear similar to those observed in idiopathic autism and are coupled with a unique RRB profile comprising prominent IS behaviours. This autistic phenotype and its relationship to common NF1 comorbidities such as anxiety and executive dysfunction will be important to examine in future research. Current findings have important implications for the early identification of autism in NF1 and clinical management

Genome-wide association of familial prostate cancer cases identifies evidence for a rare segregating haplotype at 8q24.21

Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of prostate cancer risk focused on cases unselected for family history and have reported over 100 significant associations. The International Consortium for Prostate Cancer Genetics (ICPCG) has now performed a GWAS of 2511 (unrelated) familial prostate cancer cases and 1382 unaffected controls from 12 member sites. All samples were genotyped on the Illumina 5M+exome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) platform. The GWAS identified a significant evidence for association for SNPs in six regions previously associated with prostate cancer in population-based cohorts, including 3q26.2, 6q25.3, 8q24.21, 10q11.23, 11q13.3, and 17q12. Of note, SNP rs138042437 (p = 1.7e−8) at 8q24.21 achieved a large estimated effect size in this cohort (odds ratio = 13.3). 116 previously sampled affected relatives of 62 risk-allele carriers from the GWAS cohort were genotyped for this SNP, identifying 78 additional affected carriers in 62 pedigrees. A test for an excess number of affected carriers among relatives exhibited strong evidence for co-segregation of the variant with disease (p = 8.5e−11). The majority (92 %) of risk-allele carriers at rs138042437 had a consistent estimated haplotype spanning approximately 100 kb of 8q24.21 that contained the minor alleles of three rare SNPs (dosage minor allele frequencies <1.7 %), rs183373024 (PRNCR1), previously associated SNP rs188140481, and rs138042437 (CASC19). Strong evidence for co-segregation of a SNP on the haplotype further characterizes the haplotype as a prostate cancer pre-disposition locus

Risk Analysis of Prostate Cancer in PRACTICAL, a Multinational Consortium, Using 25 Known Prostate Cancer Susceptibility Loci.

BACKGROUND: Genome-wide association studies have identified multiple genetic variants associated with prostate cancer risk which explain a substantial proportion of familial relative risk. These variants can be used to stratify individuals by their risk of prostate cancer. METHODS: We genotyped 25 prostate cancer susceptibility loci in 40,414 individuals and derived a polygenic risk score (PRS). We estimated empirical odds ratios (OR) for prostate cancer associated with different risk strata defined by PRS and derived age-specific absolute risks of developing prostate cancer by PRS stratum and family history. RESULTS: The prostate cancer risk for men in the top 1% of the PRS distribution was 30.6 (95% CI, 16.4-57.3) fold compared with men in the bottom 1%, and 4.2 (95% CI, 3.2-5.5) fold compared with the median risk. The absolute risk of prostate cancer by age of 85 years was 65.8% for a man with family history in the top 1% of the PRS distribution, compared with 3.7% for a man in the bottom 1%. The PRS was only weakly correlated with serum PSA level (correlation = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Risk profiling can identify men at substantially increased or reduced risk of prostate cancer. The effect size, measured by OR per unit PRS, was higher in men at younger ages and in men with family history of prostate cancer. Incorporating additional newly identified loci into a PRS should improve the predictive value of risk profiles. IMPACT: We demonstrate that the risk profiling based on SNPs can identify men at substantially increased or reduced risk that could have useful implications for targeted prevention and screening programs.D F. Easton was recipient of the CR-UK grant C1287/A10118. R A. Eeles was recipient of the CR-UK grant C5047/A10692 and B E. Henderson was recipient of the NIH grant 1U19CA148537-01This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available via AACR at http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2015/04/02/1055-9965.EPI-14-0317.long

The CHEK2 Variant C.349A>G Is Associated with Prostate Cancer Risk and Carriers Share a Common Ancestor.

The identification of recurrent founder variants in cancer predisposing genes may have important implications for implementing cost-effective targeted genetic screening strategies. In this study, we evaluated the prevalence and relative risk of the CHEK2 recurrent variant c.349A>G in a series of 462 Portuguese patients with early-onset and/or familial/hereditary prostate cancer (PrCa), as well as in the large multicentre PRACTICAL case-control study comprising 55,162 prostate cancer cases and 36,147 controls. Additionally, we investigated the potential shared ancestry of the carriers by performing identity-by-descent, haplotype and age estimation analyses using high-density SNP data from 70 variant carriers belonging to 11 different populations included in the PRACTICAL consortium. The CHEK2 missense variant c.349A>G was found significantly associated with an increased risk for PrCa (OR 1.9; 95% CI: 1.1-3.2). A shared haplotype flanking the variant in all carriers was identified, strongly suggesting a common founder of European origin. Additionally, using two independent statistical algorithms, implemented by DMLE+2.3 and ESTIAGE, we were able to estimate the age of the variant between 2300 and 3125 years. By extending the haplotype analysis to 14 additional carrier families, a shared core haplotype was revealed among all carriers matching the conserved region previously identified in the high-density SNP analysis. These findings are consistent with CHEK2 c.349A>G being a founder variant associated with increased PrCa risk, suggesting its potential usefulness for cost-effective targeted genetic screening in PrCa families

Atlas of prostate cancer heritability in European and African-American men pinpoints tissue-specific regulation.

Although genome-wide association studies have identified over 100 risk loci that explain ∼33% of familial risk for prostate cancer (PrCa), their functional effects on risk remain largely unknown. Here we use genotype data from 59,089 men of European and African American ancestries combined with cell-type-specific epigenetic data to build a genomic atlas of single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) heritability in PrCa. We find significant differences in heritability between variants in prostate-relevant epigenetic marks defined in normal versus tumour tissue as well as between tissue and cell lines. The majority of SNP heritability lies in regions marked by H3k27 acetylation in prostate adenoc7arcinoma cell line (LNCaP) or by DNaseI hypersensitive sites in cancer cell lines. We find a high degree of similarity between European and African American ancestries suggesting a similar genetic architecture from common variation underlying PrCa risk. Our findings showcase the power of integrating functional annotation with genetic data to understand the genetic basis of PrCa.This work was supported by NIH fellowship F32 GM106584 (AG), NIH grants R01 MH101244(A.G.), R01 CA188392 (B.P.), U01 CA194393(B.P.), R01 GM107427 (M.L.F.), R01 CA193910 (M.L.F./M.P.) and Prostate Cancer Foundation Challenge Award (M.L.F./M.P.). This study makes use of data generated by the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. A full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium data is available on www.wtccc.org.uk. Funding for the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium project was provided by the Wellcome Trust under award 076113. This study makes use of data generated by the UK10K Consortium. A full list of the investigators who contributed to the generation of the data is available online (http://www.UK10K.org). The PRACTICAL consortium was supported by the following grants: European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175), Cancer Research UK Grants C5047/A7357, C1287/A10118, C5047/A3354, C5047/A10692, C16913/A6135 and The National Institute of Health (NIH) Cancer Post-Cancer GWAS initiative Grant: no. 1 U19 CA 148537-01 (the GAME-ON initiative); Cancer Research UK (C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384, C5047/A15007 and C5047/A10692), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112—the GAME-ON initiative), the Department of Defense (W81XWH-10-1-0341), A Linneus Centre (Contract ID 70867902), Swedish Research Council (grant no K2010-70X-20430-04-3), the Swedish Cancer Foundation (grant no 09-0677), grants RO1CA056678, RO1CA082664 and RO1CA092579 from the US National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health; US National Cancer Institute (R01CA72818); support from The National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia (126402, 209057, 251533, 396414, 450104, 504700, 504702, 504715, 623204, 940394 and 614296); NIH grants CA63464, CA54281 and CA098758; US National Cancer Institute (R01CA128813, PI: J.Y. Park); Bulgarian National Science Fund, Ministry of Education and Science (contract DOO-119/2009; DUNK01/2–2009; DFNI-B01/28/2012); Cancer Research UK grants [C8197/A10123] and [C8197/A10865]; grant code G0500966/75466; NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (projects 96/20/06 and 96/20/99); Cancer Research UK grant number C522/A8649, Medical Research Council of England grant number G0500966, ID 75466 and The NCRI, UK; The US Dept of Defense award W81XWH-04-1-0280; Australia Project Grant [390130, 1009458] and Enabling Grant [614296 to APCB]; the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Australia (Project Grant [PG7] and Research infrastructure grant [to APCB]); NIH grant R01 CA092447; Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center (P30 CA68485); Cancer Research UK [C490/A10124] and supported by the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at the University of Cambridge; Competitive Research Funding of the Tampere University Hospital (9N069 and X51003); Award Number P30CA042014 from the National Cancer Institute.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/0.1038/ncomms1097