Increased serum pigment epithelium derived factor levels in Type 2 diabetes patients

Serum PEDF levels (mean (S.D.)) were increased in 96 Type 2 diabetic vs. 54 non-diabetic subjects; 5.3 (2.8) vs. 3.2 (2.0)mug/ml, p

A novel single base deletion in the LDLR gene (211delG):Effect on serum lipid profiles and the influence of other genetic polymorphisms in the ACE, APOE and APOB genes

A single base deletion (211delG) in the low density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) gene was shown to cause familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) in a large family from Northern Ireland. Twenty-four of 52 family members tested had this mutation, 13 of which were newly diagnosed. Mutation-positive individuals had significantly higher mean total-cholesterol (TC) and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) than those without 211delG. LDL-C was a more accurate indicator of disease status than TC, When TC levels alone were considered, in individuals over 16 years, a false negative rate (TC <7.5 mmol/l) of 40% was found; however, this fell to 13% based on inclusion of LDL-C levels. Individuals with coronary artery disease (CAD) had significantly higher TC levels than those without CAD and tended to have tendinous xanthomas (TX) and corneal arcus (CA). Genetic polymorphisms in the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) and apolipoprotein (ape) B genes did not appear to be associated with lipid levels or with the clinical severity of the disease; however, the apo E e4 allele did show a lipid-raising effect in individuals with the mutation.

Serum apolipoprotein AI and B are stronger biomarkers of diabetic retinopathy than traditional lipids

OBJECTIVE - To describe and compare the associations of serum lipoproteins and apolipoproteins with diabetic retinopathy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - This was a cross-sectional study of 224 diabetic patients (85 type 1 and 139 type 2) froma diabetes clinic. Diabetic retinopathy was graded from fundus photographs according to the Airlie House Classification system and categorized into mild, moderate, and vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy (VTDR). Serum traditional lipids (total, LDL, non-HDL, and HDL cholesterol and triglycerides) and apolipoprotein AI (apoAI), apolipoprotein B (apoB), and the apoB-to-apoAI ratio were assessed. RESULTS - Diabetic retinopathy was present in 133 (59.4%) individuals. After adjustment for age, sex, diabetes duration, A1C, systolic blood pressure, and diabetes medications, the HDL cholesterol level was inversely associated with diabetic retinopathy (odds ratio 0.39 [95% CI 0.16-0.94], highest versus lowest quartile; P = 0.017). The ApoAI level was inversely associated with diabetic retinopathy (per SD increase, 0.76 [95% CI 0.59-0.98]), whereas apoB (per SD increase, 1.31 [1.02-1.68]) and the apoB-to-apoAI ratio (per SD increase, 1.48 [1.13-1.95]) were positively associated with diabetic retinopathy. Results were similar for mild to moderate diabetic retinopathy and VTDR. Traditional lipid levels improved the area under the receiver operating curve by 1.8%, whereas apolipoproteins improved the area by 8.2%. CONCLUSIONS - ApoAI and apoB and the apoB-to-apoAI ratio were significantly and independently associated with diabetic retinopathy and diabetic retinopathy severity and improved the ability to discriminate diabetic retinopathy by 8%. Serum apolipoprotein levels may therefore be stronger biomarkers of diabetic retinopathy than traditional lipid measures. © 2011 by the American Diabetes Association.

Description and predictors of hospital costs of oesophageal cancer during the first year following diagnosis in Northern Ireland

The cost-effectiveness of novel interventions in the treatment of cancer is well researched; however, relatively little attention is paid to the cost of many aspects of routine care. Oesophageal cancer is the ninth most common cancer in the UK and sixth most common cause of cancer death. It usually presents late and has a poor prognosis. The hospital costs incurred by oesophageal cancer patients diagnosed in Northern Ireland in 2005 (n = 198) were determined by review of medical records. The average cost of hospital care per patient in the 12 months from presentation was £7847. Variations in total hospital costs by age at diagnosis, gender, cancer stage, histological type, mortality at 1 year, co-morbidity count and socio-economic status were analysed using multiple regression analyses. Higher costs were associated with earlier stages of cancer and cancer stage remained a significant predictor of costs after controlling for cancer type, patient age and mortality at 1 year. Thus, although early detection of cancer usually improves survival, this would mean increased costs in the first year. Deprivation achieved borderline significance with those from more deprived areas having lower resource consumption relative to the more affluent. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Breast cancer survival and stage at diagnosis in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK, 2000-2007:A population-based study

Background: We investigate whether differences in breast cancer survival in six high-income countries can be explained by differences in stage at diagnosis using routine data from population-based cancer registries. Methods: We analysed the data on 257 362 women diagnosed with breast cancer during 2000-7 and registered in 13 population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Flexible parametric hazard models were used to estimate net survival and the excess hazard of dying from breast cancer up to 3 years after diagnosis.Results:Age-standardised 3-year net survival was 87-89% in the UK and Denmark, and 91-94% in the other four countries. Stage at diagnosis was relatively advanced in Denmark: only 30% of women had Tumour, Nodes, Metastasis (TNM) stage I disease, compared with 42-45% elsewhere. Women in the UK had low survival for TNM stage III-IV disease compared with other countries. Conclusion: International differences in breast cancer survival are partly explained by differences in stage at diagnosis, and partly by differences in stage-specific survival. Low overall survival arises if the stage distribution is adverse (e.g. Denmark) but stage-specific survival is normal; or if the stage distribution is typical but stage-specific survival is low (e.g. UK). International differences in staging diagnostics and stage-specific cancer therapies should be investigated. © 2013 Cancer Research UK. All rights reserved.

Predictions of survival up to 10 years after diagnosis for European women with breast cancer in 2000-2002

Few studies have addressed longer-term survival for breast cancer in European women. We have made predictions of 10-year survival for European women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2000-2002. Data for 114,312 adult women (15-99 years) diagnosed with a first primary malignant cancer of the breast during 2000-2002 were collected in the EUROCARE-4 study from 24 population-based cancer registries in 14 European countries. We estimated relative survival at 1, 5, and 10 years after diagnosis for women who were alive at some point during 2000-2002, using the period approach. We also estimated 10-year survival conditional on survival to 1 and 5 years after diagnosis. Ten-year survival exceeded 70% in most regions, but was only 54% in Eastern Europe, with the highest value in Northern Europe (about 75%). Ten-year survival conditional on survival for 1 year was 2-6% higher than 10-year survival in all European regions, and geographic differences were smaller. Ten-year survival for women who survived at least 5 years was 88% overall, with the lowest figure in Eastern Europe (79%) and the highest in the UK (91%). Women aged 50-69 years had higher overall survival than older and younger women (79%). Six cancer registries had adequate information on stage at diagnosis; in these jurisdictions, 10-year survival was 89% for local, 62% for regional and 10% for metastatic disease. Data on stage are not collected routinely or consistently, yet these data are essential for meaningful comparison of population-based survival, which provides vital information for improving breast cancer control. What's new? Policy-makers and health-care planners need accurate data on long-term survival to improve cancer control. This Europe-wide study of 10-year survival identified low survival in Eastern Europe for women with breast cancer in 2000-2002, and wide variation by age at diagnosis. Data on stage at diagnosis are crucial for meaningful comparison of population-based survival, and fundamental for improving breast cancer control, but our analyses confirmed that stage data are not collected routinely or consistently Copyright © 2012 UICC.

Lung cancer survival and stage at diagnosis in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK:A population-based study, 2004-2007

Background: The authors consider whether differences in stage at diagnosis could explain the variation in lung cancer survival between six developed countries in 2004-2007. Methods: Routinely collected population-based data were obtained on all adults (15-99 years) diagnosed with lung cancer in 2004-2007 and registered in regional and national cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Stage data for 57 352 patients were consolidated from various classification systems. Flexible parametric hazard models on the log cumulative scale were used to estimate net survival at 1 year and the excess hazard up to 18 months after diagnosis. Results: Age-standardised 1-year net survival from non-small cell lung cancer ranged from 30% (UK) to 46% (Sweden). Patients in the UK and Denmark had lower survival than elsewhere, partly because of a more adverse stage distribution. However, there were also wide international differences in stage-specific survival. Net survival from TNM stage I non-small cell lung cancer was 16% lower in the UK than in Sweden, and for TNM stage IV disease survival was 10% lower. Similar patterns were found for small cell lung cancer. Conclusions: There are comparability issues when using population-based data but, even given these constraints, this study shows that, while differences in stage at diagnosis explain some of the international variation in overall lung cancer survival, wide disparities in stage-specific survival exist, suggesting that other factors are also important such as differences in treatment. Stage should be included in international cancer survival studies and the comparability of population-based data should be improved.

Stage at diagnosis and colorectal cancer survival in six high-income countries:A population-based study of patients diagnosed during 2000-2007

Background. Large international differences in colorectal cancer survival exist, even between countries with similar healthcare. We investigate the extent to which stage at diagnosis explains these differences. Methods. Data from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK were analysed for 313 852 patients diagnosed with colon or rectal cancer during 2000-2007. We compared the distributions of stage at diagnosis. We estimated both stage-specific net survival and the excess hazard of death up to three years after diagnosis, using flexible parametric models on the log-cumulative excess hazard scale. Results. International differences in colon and rectal cancer stage distributions were wide: Denmark showed a distribution skewed towards later-stage disease, while Australia, Norway and the UK showed high proportions of 'regional' disease. One-year colon cancer survival was 67% in the UK and ranged between 71% (Denmark) and 80% (Australia and Sweden) elsewhere. For rectal cancer, one-year survival was also low in the UK (75%), compared to 79% in Denmark and 82-84% elsewhere. International survival differences were also evident for each stage of disease, with the UK showing consistently lowest survival at one and three years. Conclusion. Differences in stage at diagnosis partly explain international differences in colorectal cancer survival, with a more adverse stage distribution contributing to comparatively low survival in Denmark. Differences in stage distribution could arise because of differences in diagnostic delay and awareness of symptoms, or in the thoroughness of staging procedures. Nevertheless, survival differences also exist for each stage of disease, suggesting unequal access to optimal treatment, particularly in the UK. © 2013 Informa Healthcare.

Stage at diagnosis and ovarian cancer survival:Evidence from the international cancer benchmarking partnership

Objective: We investigate what role stage at diagnosis bears in international differences in ovarian cancer survival. Methods: Data from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, and the UK were analysed for 20,073 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer during 2004-07. We compare the stage distribution between countries and estimate stage-specific one-year net survival and the excess hazard up to 18 months after diagnosis, using flexible parametric models on the log cumulative excess hazard scale. Results: One-year survival was 69% in the UK, 72% in Denmark and 74-75% elsewhere. In Denmark, 74% of patients were diagnosed with FIGO stages III-IV disease, compared to 60-70% elsewhere. International differences in survival were evident at each stage of disease; women in the UK had lower survival than in the other four countries for patients with FIGO stages III-IV disease (61.4% vs. 65.8-74.4%). International differences were widest for older women and for those with advanced stage or with no stage data. Conclusion: Differences in stage at diagnosis partly explain international variation in ovarian cancer survival, and a more adverse stage distribution contributes to comparatively low survival in Denmark. This could arise because of differences in tumour biology, staging procedures or diagnostic delay. Differences in survival also exist within each stage, as illustrated by lower survival for advanced disease in the UK, suggesting unequal access to optimal treatment. Population-based data on cancer survival by stage are vital for cancer surveillance, and global consensus is needed to make stage data in cancer registries more consistent. © 2012 Elsevier Inc.

Achalasia: A review of clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes

Achalasia is a neurodegenerative motility disorder of the oesophagus resulting in deranged oesophageal peristalsis and loss of lower oesophageal sphincter function. Historically, annual achalasia incidence rates were believed to be low, approximately 0.5-1.2 per 100000. More recent reports suggest that annual incidence rates have risen to 1.6 per 100000 in some populations. The aetiology of achalasia is still unclear but is likely to be multi-factorial. Suggested causes include environmental or viral exposures resulting in inflammation of the oesophageal myenteric plexus, which elicits an autoimmune response. Risk of achalasia may be elevated in a sub-group of genetically susceptible people. Improvement in the diagnosis of achalasia, through the introduction of high resolution manometry with pressure topography plotting, has resulted in the development of a novel classification system for achalasia. This classification system can evaluate patient prognosis and predict responsiveness to treatment. There is currently much debate over whether pneumatic dilatation is a superior method compared to the Heller's myotomy procedure in the treatment of achalasia. A recent comparative study found equal efficacy, suggesting that patient preference and local expertise should guide the choice. Although achalasia is a relatively rare condition, it carries a risk of complications, including aspiration pneumonia and oesophageal cancer. The risk of both squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus is believed to be significantly increased in patients with achalasia, however the absolute excess risk is small. Therefore, it is currently unknown whether a surveillance programme in achalasia patients would be effective or cost-effective.