Polymorphisms in DNA-Repair Genes in a Cohort of Prostate Cancer Patients from Different Areas in Spain: Heterogeneity between Populations as a Confounding Factor in Association Studies.

BACKGROUND Differences in the distribution of genotypes between individuals of the same ethnicity are an important confounder factor commonly undervalued in typical association studies conducted in radiogenomics. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the genotypic distribution of SNPs in a wide set of Spanish prostate cancer patients for determine the homogeneity of the population and to disclose potential bias. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS A total of 601 prostate cancer patients from Andalusia, Basque Country, Canary and Catalonia were genotyped for 10 SNPs located in 6 different genes associated to DNA repair: XRCC1 (rs25487, rs25489, rs1799782), ERCC2 (rs13181), ERCC1 (rs11615), LIG4 (rs1805388, rs1805386), ATM (rs17503908, rs1800057) and P53 (rs1042522). The SNP genotyping was made in a Biotrove OpenArray® NT Cycler. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Comparisons of genotypic and allelic frequencies among populations, as well as haplotype analyses were determined using the web-based environment SNPator. Principal component analysis was made using the SnpMatrix and XSnpMatrix classes and methods implemented as an R package. Non-supervised hierarchical cluster of SNP was made using MultiExperiment Viewer. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS We observed that genotype distribution of 4 out 10 SNPs was statistically different among the studied populations, showing the greatest differences between Andalusia and Catalonia. These observations were confirmed in cluster analysis, principal component analysis and in the differential distribution of haplotypes among the populations. Because tumor characteristics have not been taken into account, it is possible that some polymorphisms may influence tumor characteristics in the same way that it may pose a risk factor for other disease characteristics. CONCLUSION Differences in distribution of genotypes within different populations of the same ethnicity could be an important confounding factor responsible for the lack of validation of SNPs associated with radiation-induced toxicity, especially when extensive meta-analysis with subjects from different countries are carried out.

International survey on skin patch test procedures, attitudes and interpretation.

BACKGROUND Skin patch test is the gold standard method in diagnosing contact allergy. Although used for more than 100 years, the patch test procedure is performed with variability around the world. A number of factors can influence the test results, namely the quality of reagents used, the timing of the application, the patch test series (allergens/haptens) that have been used for testing, the appropriate interpretation of the skin reactions or the evaluation of the patient's benefit. METHODS We performed an Internet -based survey with 38 questions covering the educational background of respondents, patch test methods and interpretation. The questionnaire was distributed among all representatives of national member societies of the World Allergy Organization (WAO), and the WAO Junior Members Group. RESULTS One hundred sixty-nine completed surveys were received from 47 countries. The majority of participants had more than 5 years of clinical practice (61 %) and routinely carried out patch tests (70 %). Both allergists and dermatologists were responsible for carrying out the patch tests. We could observe the use of many different guidelines regardless the geographical distribution. The use of home-made preparations was indicated by 47 % of participants and 73 % of the respondents performed 2 or 3 readings. Most of the responders indicated having patients with adverse reactions, including erythroderma (12 %); however, only 30 % of members completed a consent form before conducting the patch test. DISCUSSION The heterogeneity of patch test practices may be influenced by the level of awareness of clinical guidelines, different training backgrounds, accessibility to various types of devices, the patch test series (allergens/haptens) used for testing, type of clinical practice (public or private practice, clinical or research-based institution), infrastructure availability, financial/commercial implications and regulations among others. CONCLUSION There is a lack of a worldwide homogeneity of patch test procedures, and this raises concerns about the need for standardization and harmonization of this important diagnostic procedure.