Unveiling electrotransformation of Moraxella catarrhalis as a process of natural transformation

The human respiratory tract pathogen Moraxella catarrhalis is a naturally competent microorganism. However, electrotransformation has long been used to introduce foreign DNA into this organism. This study demonstrated that electrotransformants obtained with linear or circular nonreplicating plasmid DNA originated exclusively from natural transformation processes taking place during the recovery phase after the application of current. Only replicating plasmid DNA could be introduced into M. catarrhalis by electrotransformation, in a type IV pilus-independent manner. Electrotransformation with homologous genomic DNA indicated that restriction of double-stranded DNA was independent of type III restriction-methylation systems. Nontransformability of M. catarrhalis by electrotransformation was observed using double- as well as single-stranded DNA. In addition, the study showed that natural competence is a very constant feature of M. catarrhalis.

The role of the number of uninvolved lymph nodes in predicting locoregional recurrence in breast cancer

PURPOSE: To identify groups of early breast cancer patients with substantial risk (10-year risk > 20%) for locoregional failure (LRF) who might benefit from postmastectomy radiotherapy (RT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prognostic factors for LRF were evaluated among 6,660 patients (2,588 node-negative patients, 4,072 node-positive patients) in International Breast Cancer Study Group Trials I to IX treated with chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy, and observed for a median of 14 years. In total, 1,251 LRFs were detected. All patients were treated with mastectomy without RT. RESULTS: No group with 10-year LRF risk exceeding 20% was found among patients with node-negative disease. Among patients with node-positive breast cancer, increasing numbers of uninvolved nodes were significantly associated with decreased risk of LRF, even after adjustment for other prognostic factors. The highest quartile of uninvolved nodes was compared with the lowest quartile. Among premenopausal patients, LRF risk was decreased by 35% (P = .0010); among postmenopausal patients, LRF risk was decreased by 46% (P < .0001). The 10-year cumulative incidence of LRF was 20% among patients with one to three involved lymph nodes and fewer than 10 uninvolved nodes. Age younger than 40 years and vessel invasion were also associated significantly with increased risk. Among patients with node-positive disease, overall survival was significantly greater in those with higher numbers of uninvolved nodes examined (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with one to three involved nodes and a low number of uninvolved nodes, vessel invasion, or young age have an increased risk of LRF and may be candidates for a similar treatment as those with at least four lymph node metastases.

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation for relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma: prognostic features and outcomes

Between January 1990 and April 2001, 115 patients received high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). With a median follow-up of 58 months (range, 1 - 175 months), 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 46% and 58%, respectively. Twelve patients with primary refractory disease had a 5-year PFS of 41% and OS of 58%, not significantly different from those of the remaining cohort. Early and overall regimen related mortality were 7% and 16%, respectively. Male gender (P = 0.04) and a time to relapse (TTR) < 12 months (P = 0.03) were associated with decreased OS by univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, TTR < 12 months remained statistically significant (P = 0.04). We have confirmed that HDT and ASCT result in long-term survival for a proportion of patients with relapsed or refractory HL. All patients, including those with primary refractory disease, benefited from HDT and ASCT.

Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias

BACKGROUND: The increased use of meta-analysis in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions has highlighted several types of bias that can arise during the completion of a randomised controlled trial. Study publication bias has been recognised as a potential threat to the validity of meta-analysis and can make the readily available evidence unreliable for decision making. Until recently, outcome reporting bias has received less attention. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We review and summarise the evidence from a series of cohort studies that have assessed study publication bias and outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials. Sixteen studies were eligible of which only two followed the cohort all the way through from protocol approval to information regarding publication of outcomes. Eleven of the studies investigated study publication bias and five investigated outcome reporting bias. Three studies have found that statistically significant outcomes had a higher odds of being fully reported compared to non-significant outcomes (range of odds ratios: 2.2 to 4.7). In comparing trial publications to protocols, we found that 40-62% of studies had at least one primary outcome that was changed, introduced, or omitted. We decided not to undertake meta-analysis due to the differences between studies. CONCLUSIONS: Recent work provides direct empirical evidence for the existence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. There is strong evidence of an association between significant results and publication; studies that report positive or significant results are more likely to be published and outcomes that are statistically significant have higher odds of being fully reported. Publications have been found to be inconsistent with their protocols. Researchers need to be aware of the problems of both types of bias and efforts should be concentrated on improving the reporting of trials.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence, the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association (STREGA) studies initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information into the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and issues of data volume that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Classic and overlap chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) is associated with superior outcome after extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP)

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) classification of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a significant improvement over prior classifications, and has prognostic implications. We hypothesized that the NIH classification of GVHD would predict the survival of patients with GVHD treated with extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP). Sixty-four patients with steroid refractory/dependent GVHD treated with ECP were studied. The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] 13-59). Progressive GVHD was seen in 39% of patients with any acute GVHD (aGVHD) (classic acute, recurrent acute, overlap) compared to 3% of patients with classic chronic GVHD (cGVHD) (P=.002). OS was superior for patients with classic cGVHD (median survival, not reached) compared to overlap GVHD (median survival, 395 days, 95% CI 101 to not reached) and aGVHD (delayed, recurrent or persistent) (median survival, 72 days, 95% CI 39-152). In univariate analyses, significant predictors of survival after ECP included GVHD subtype, bilirubin, platelet count, and steroid dose. In multivariate analyses overlap plus classic cGVHD was an independent prognostic feature predictive of superior survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.34, 95% CI 0.14-0.8, p=.014). This study suggests that NIH classification can predict outcome after ECP for steroid refractory/dependent GVHD.

Global change revealed by palaeolimnological records from remote lakes: a review

Over recent decades, palaeolimnological records from remote sites have provided convincing evidence for the onset and development of several facets of global environmental change. Remote lakes, defined here as those occurring in high latitude or high altitude regions, have the advantage of not being overprinted by local anthropogenic processes. As such, many of these sites record broad-scale environmental changes, frequently driven by regime shifts in the Earth system. Here, we review a selection of studies from North America and Europe and discuss their broader implications. The history of investigation has evolved synchronously with the scope and awareness of environmental problems. An initial focus on acid deposition switched to metal and other types of pollutants, then climate change and eventually to atmospheric deposition-fertilising effects. However, none of these topics is independent of the other, and all of them affect ecosystem function and biodiversity in profound ways. Currently, remote lake palaeolimnology is developing unique datasets for each region investigated that benchmark current trends with respect to past, purely natural variability in lake systems. Fostering conceptual and methodological bridges with other environmental disciplines will upturn contribution of remote lake palaeolimnology in solving existing and emerging questions in global change science and planetary stewardship.