Folate intake and the risk of oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer: A pooled analysis within the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium.

There are suggestions of an inverse association between folate intake and serum folate levels and the risk of oral cavity and pharyngeal cancers (OPCs), but most studies are limited in sample size, with only few reporting information on the source of dietary folate. Our study aims to investigate the association between folate intake and the risk of OPC within the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology (INHANCE) Consortium. We analyzed pooled individual-level data from ten case-control studies participating in the INHANCE consortium, including 5,127 cases and 13,249 controls. Odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for the associations between total folate intake (natural, fortification and supplementation) and natural folate only, and OPC risk. We found an inverse association between total folate intake and overall OPC risk (the adjusted OR for the highest vs. the lowest quintile was 0.65, 95% CI: 0.43-0.99), with a stronger association for oral cavity (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43-0.75). A similar inverse association, though somewhat weaker, was observed for folate intake from natural sources only in oral cavity cancer (OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.45-0.91). The highest OPC risk was observed in heavy alcohol drinkers with low folate intake as compared to never/light drinkers with high folate (OR = 4.05, 95% CI: 3.43-4.79); the attributable proportion (AP) owing to interaction was 11.1% (95% CI: 1.4-20.8%). Lastly, we reported an OR of 2.73 (95% CI:2.34-3.19) for those ever tobacco users with low folate intake, compared with nevere tobacco users and high folate intake (AP of interaction =10.6%, 95% CI: 0.41-20.8%). Our project of a large pool of case-control studies supports a protective effect of total folate intake on OPC risk.

The interface between oral and systemic health: the need for more collaboration.

The focus of this review is to highlight the need for improved communication between medical and dental professionals in order to deliver more effective care to patients. The need for communication is increasingly required to capitalise on recent advances in the biological sciences and in medicine for the management of patients with chronic diseases. Improvements in longevity have resulted in populations with increasing special oral-care needs, including those who have cancer of the head and neck, those who are immunocompromised due to HIV/AIDS, advanced age, residence in long-term care facilities or the presence of life-long conditions, and those who are receiving long-term prescription medications for chronic conditions (e.g., anti-hypertensives, anticoagulants, immunosuppressants, antidepressants). These medications can cause adverse reactions in the oral cavity, such as xerostomia and ulceration. Patients with xerostomia are at increased risk of tooth decay, periodontal disease and infection. The ideal management of such individuals should involve the collaborative efforts of physicians, nurses, dentists and dental hygienists, thus optimising treatment and minimising secondary complications deriving from the oral cavity.

Teaching motivational interviewing to medical students : a pre-post test pilot study

Objective: To test the efficacy of teaching motivational interviewing (MI) to medical students. Methods: Thirteen 4th year medical students volunteered to participate. Seven days before and 7 days after an 8-hour interactive training MI workshop, each student performed a videorecorded interview with two standardized patients: a 60 year old alcohol dependent woman and a 50 year old cigarette smoking man. Students' counseling skills were coded by two blinded clinicians using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 3.0 (MITI). Inter-rater reliability was calculated for all interviews and a test-retest was completed in a sub-sample of 10 consecutive interviews three days apart. Difference between MITI scores before and after training were calculated and tested using non-parametric tests. Effect size was approximated by calculating the probability that posttest scores are greater than pretest scores (P*=P(Pre<Post)+1/2P(Pre=Post)), P*>1/2 indicating greater scores in posttest, P*=1/2 no effect, and P*<1/2 smaller scores in posttest. Results: Median differences between MITI scores before and after MI training indicated a general progression in MI skills: MI spirit global score (median difference=1.5, Inter quartile range=1.5, p<0.001, P*=0.90); Empathy global score (med diff=1, IQR=0.5, p<0.001, P*=0.85); Percentage of MI adherent skills (med diff=36.6, IQR=50.5, p<0.001, P*=0.85); Percentage of open questions (med diff=18.6, IQR=21.6, p<0.001, P*=0.96); reflections/ questions ratio (med diff=0.2, IQR=0.4, p<0.001, P*=0.81). Only Direction global score and the percentage of complex reflections were not significantly improved (med diff=0, IQR=1, p=0.53, P*=0.44, and med diff=4.3, IQR=24.8, p=0.48, P*=0.62, respectively). Inter-rater reliability indicated weighted kappa ranged between 0.14 for Direction to 0.51 for Collaboration and ICC ranged between 0.28 for Simple reflection to 0.95 for Closed question. Test-retests indicated weighted kappa ranged between 0.27 for Direction to 0.80 for Empathy and ICC ranged between 0.87 for Complex reflection to 0.98 for Closed question. Conclusion: This pilot study indicated that an 8-hour training in MI for voluntary 4th year medical students resulted in significant improvement of MI skills. Larger sample of unselected medical students should be studied to generalize the benefit of MI training to medical students. Interrater reliability and test-retests suggested that coders' training should be intensified.

Development of the first disease activity index for eosinophilic esophagitis: update on the EEsAI in 2012

Background and Aims: The international E EsAI s tudy g roup is currently d eveloping the first activity index ( EEsAI) specific for E osinophilic Esophagitis (EoE). G oal: T o develop, e valuate and validate the EEsAI. Methods: T he development c omprises three p hases: 1. Selection of c andidate items ( completed); 2. Evaluation of t he activity index i n a first patient cohort (in progress, p atient recruitment completed); and 3. Validation in a s econd EoE patient cohort. F ocus group interviews with patients were used in p hase 1 to g enerate patient r eported outcomes (PRO) according to g uidelines o f regulatory authorities (FDA a nd EMA), whereas the section of biologic items was developed by Delphi rounds o f international E oE experts from E urope and North America. Results: T he EEsAI has a modular c omposition to a ssess the following components o f EoE activity: p atient r eported outcomes, e ndoscopic activity, histologic activity, laboratory activity, a nd quality of l ife (QoL). Definitions for a ll aspects o f endoscopic and histologic appearance were e stablished by consensus r ounds a mong E oE experts. S ymptom a ssessment tools were c reated that t ake into account d ifferent food consistencies as w ell as f ood avoidance and specific processing strategies. The EEsAI i s currently e valuated in a cohort of a dult EoE patients since M arch 2 011 (patient recruitment completed). Conclusions: The EEsAI standardizes outcome assessment in EoE t rials. T he collaboration with i nternational E oE e xperts a s well as f ollowing o f the guidelines f rom regulatory authorities will lead to its wide applicability.

FRAX® International Task Force of the 2010 Joint International Society for Clinical Densitometry & International Osteoporosis Foundation Position Development Conference.

Osteoporosis is a serious worldwide epidemic. FRAX® is a web-based tool developed by the Sheffield WHO Collaborating Center team, that integrates clinical risk factors and femoral neck BMD and calculates the 10 year fracture probability in order to help health care professionals identify patients who need treatment. However, only 31 countries have a FRAX® calculator. In the absence of a FRAX® model for a particular country, it has been suggested to use a surrogate country for which the epidemiology of osteoporosis most closely approximates the index country. More specific recommendations for clinicians in these countries are not available. In North America, concerns have also been raised regarding the assumptions used to construct the US ethnic specific FRAX® calculators with respect to the correction factors applied to derive fracture probabilities in Blacks, Asians and Hispanics in comparison to Whites. In addition, questions were raised about calculating fracture risk in other ethnic groups e.g., Native Americans and First Canadians. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) in conjunction with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) assembled an international panel of experts that ultimately developed joint Official Positions of the ISCD and IOF advising clinicians regarding FRAX® usage. As part of the process, the charge of the FRAX® International Task Force was to review and synthesize data regarding geographic and race/ethnic variability in hip fractures, non-hip osteoporotic fractures, and make recommendations about the use of FRAX® in ethnic groups and countries without a FRAX® calculator. This synthesis was presented to the expert panel and constitutes the data on which the subsequent Official Positions are predicated. A summary of the International Task Force composition and charge is presented here.