4 resultados para Tract societies.
Resumo:
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been successful in identifying common genetic variation involved in susceptibility to etiologically complex disease. We conducted a GWAS to identify common genetic variation involved in susceptibility to upper aero-digestive tract (UADT) cancers. Genome-wide genotyping was carried out using the Illumina HumanHap300 beadchips in 2,091 UADT cancer cases and 3,513 controls from two large European multi-centre UADT cancer studies, as well as 4,821 generic controls. The 19 top-ranked variants were investigated further in an additional 6,514 UADT cancer cases and 7,892 controls of European descent from an additional 13 UADT cancer studies participating in the INHANCE consortium. Five common variants presented evidence for significant association in the combined analysis (p≤5×10−7). Two novel variants were identified, a 4q21 variant (rs1494961, p = 1×10−8) located near DNA repair related genes HEL308 and FAM175A (or Abraxas) and a 12q24 variant (rs4767364, p = 2×10−8) located in an extended linkage disequilibrium region that contains multiple genes including the aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 (ALDH2) gene. Three remaining variants are located in the ADH gene cluster and were identified previously in a candidate gene study involving some of these samples. The association between these three variants and UADT cancers was independently replicated in 5,092 UADT cancer cases and 6,794 controls non-overlapping samples presented here (rs1573496-ADH7, p = 5×10−8; rs1229984-ADH1B, p = 7×10−9; and rs698-ADH1C, p = 0.02). These results implicate two variants at 4q21 and 12q24 and further highlight three ADH variants in UADT cancer susceptibility.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was developed for the evaluation of colorectal pathology. In this study, our aim was to assess if a dual-camera analysis using CCE allows better evaluation of the whole gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared to a single-camera analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS We included 21 patients (12 males, mean age 56.20 years) submitted for a CCE examination. After standard colon preparation, the colon capsule endoscope (PillCam Colon™) was swallowed after reinitiation from its "sleep" mode. Four physicians performed the analysis: two reviewed both video streams at the same time (dual-camera analysis); one analyzed images from one side of the device ("camera 1"); and the other reviewed the opposite side ("camera 2"). We compared numbers of findings from different parts of the entire GI tract and level of agreement among reviewers. RESULTS A complete evaluation of the GI tract was possible in all patients. Dual-camera analysis provided 16% and 5% more findings compared to camera 1 and camera 2 analysis, respectively. Overall agreement was 62.7% (kappa = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.373-0.510). Esophageal (kappa = 0.611) and colorectal (kappa = 0.595) findings had a good level of agreement, while small bowel (kappa = 0.405) showed moderate agreement. CONCLUSION The use of dual-camera analysis with CCE for the evaluation of the GI tract is feasible and detects more abnormalities when compared with single-camera analysis.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Finding therapeutic alternatives to carbapenems in infections caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli (ESBL-EC) is imperative. Although fosfomycin was discovered more than 40 years ago, it was not investigated in accordance with current standards and so is not used in clinical practice except in desperate situations. It is one of the so-called neglected antibiotics of high potential interest for the future. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The main objective of this project is to demonstrate the clinical non-inferiority of intravenous fosfomycin with regard to meropenem for treating bacteraemic urinary tract infections (UTI) caused by ESBL-EC. This is a 'real practice' multicentre, open-label, phase III randomised controlled trial, designed to compare the clinical and microbiological efficacy, and safety of intravenous fosfomycin (4 g/6 h) and meropenem (1 g/8 h) as targeted therapy for this infection; a change to oral therapy is permitted after 5 days in both arms, in accordance with predetermined options. The study design follows the latest recommendations for designing trials investigating new options for multidrug-resistant bacteria. Secondary objectives include the study of fosfomycin concentrations in plasma and the impact of both drugs on intestinal colonisation by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethical approval was obtained from the Andalusian Coordinating Institutional Review Board (IRB) for Biomedical Research (Referral Ethics Committee), which obtained approval from the local ethics committees at all participating sites in Spain (22 sites). Data will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. DISCUSSION This project is proposed as an initial step in the investigation of an orphan antimicrobial of low cost with high potential as a therapeutic alternative in common infections such as UTI in selected patients. These results may have a major impact on the use of antibiotics and the development of new projects with this drug, whether as monotherapy or combination therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02142751. EudraCT no: 2013-002922-21. Protocol V.1.1 dated 14 March 2014.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) was developed for the evaluation of colorectal pathology. In this study, our aim was to assess if a dual-camera analysis using CCE allows better evaluation of the whole gastrointestinal (GI) tract compared to a single-camera analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS We included 21 patients (12 males, mean age 56.20 years) submitted for a CCE examination. After standard colon preparation, the colon capsule endoscope (PillCam Colon™) was swallowed after reinitiation from its "sleep" mode. Four physicians performed the analysis: two reviewed both video streams at the same time (dual-camera analysis); one analyzed images from one side of the device ("camera 1"); and the other reviewed the opposite side ("camera 2"). We compared numbers of findings from different parts of the entire GI tract and level of agreement among reviewers. RESULTS A complete evaluation of the GI tract was possible in all patients. Dual-camera analysis provided 16% and 5% more findings compared to camera 1 and camera 2 analysis, respectively. Overall agreement was 62.7% (kappa = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.373-0.510). Esophageal (kappa = 0.611) and colorectal (kappa = 0.595) findings had a good level of agreement, while small bowel (kappa = 0.405) showed moderate agreement. CONCLUSION The use of dual-camera analysis with CCE for the evaluation of the GI tract is feasible and detects more abnormalities when compared with single-camera analysis.
