A meta-analysis of trabecular bone score in fracture risk prediction and its relationship to FRAX

Trabecular bone score (TBS) is a grey-level textural index of bone microarchitecture derived from lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images. TBS is a BMD-independent predictor of fracture risk. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine whether TBS predicted fracture risk independently of FRAX probability and to examine their combined performance by adjusting the FRAX probability for TBS. We utilized individual level data from 17,809 men and women in 14 prospective population-based cohorts. Baseline evaluation included TBS and the FRAX risk variables and outcomes during follow up (mean 6.7 years) comprised major osteoporotic fractures. The association between TBS, FRAX probabilities and the risk of fracture was examined using an extension of the Poisson regression model in each cohort and for each sex and expressed as the gradient of risk (GR; hazard ratio per 1SD change in risk variable in direction of increased risk). FRAX probabilities were adjusted for TBS using an adjustment factor derived from an independent cohort (the Manitoba Bone Density Cohort). Overall, the GR of TBS for major osteoporotic fracture was 1.44 (95% CI: 1.35-1.53) when adjusted for age and time since baseline and was similar in men and women (p > 0.10). When additionally adjusted for FRAX 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture, TBS remained a significant, independent predictor for fracture (GR 1.32, 95%CI: 1.24-1.41). The adjustment of FRAX probability for TBS resulted in a small increase in the GR (1.76, 95%CI: 1.65, 1.87 vs. 1.70, 95%CI: 1.60-1.81). A smaller change in GR for hip fracture was observed (FRAX hip fracture probability GR 2.25 vs. 2.22). TBS is a significant predictor of fracture risk independently of FRAX. The findings support the use of TBS as a potential adjustment for FRAX probability, though the impact of the adjustment remains to be determined in the context of clinical assessment guidelines. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Performance of gene-expression profiling test score variability to predict future clinical events in heart transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND A single non-invasive gene expression profiling (GEP) test (AlloMap®) is often used to discriminate if a heart transplant recipient is at a low risk of acute cellular rejection at time of testing. In a randomized trial, use of the test (a GEP score from 0-40) has been shown to be non-inferior to a routine endomyocardial biopsy for surveillance after heart transplantation in selected low-risk patients with respect to clinical outcomes. Recently, it was suggested that the within-patient variability of consecutive GEP scores may be used to independently predict future clinical events; however, future studies were recommended. Here we performed an analysis of an independent patient population to determine the prognostic utility of within-patient variability of GEP scores in predicting future clinical events. METHODS We defined the GEP score variability as the standard deviation of four GEP scores collected ≥315 days post-transplantation. Of the 737 patients from the Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational (CARGO) II trial, 36 were assigned to the composite event group (death, re-transplantation or graft failure ≥315 days post-transplantation and within 3 years of the final GEP test) and 55 were assigned to the control group (non-event patients). In this case-controlled study, the performance of GEP score variability to predict future events was evaluated by the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC ROC). The negative predictive values (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) including 95 % confidence intervals (CI) of GEP score variability were calculated. RESULTS The estimated prevalence of events was 17 %. Events occurred at a median of 391 (inter-quartile range 376) days after the final GEP test. The GEP variability AUC ROC for the prediction of a composite event was 0.72 (95 % CI 0.6-0.8). The NPV for GEP score variability of 0.6 was 97 % (95 % CI 91.4-100.0); the PPV for GEP score variability of 1.5 was 35.4 % (95 % CI 13.5-75.8). CONCLUSION In heart transplant recipients, a GEP score variability may be used to predict the probability that a composite event will occur within 3 years after the last GEP score. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00761787.

Prognostic Relevance of Palliative Primary Tumor Removal in 37,793 Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Population-Based, Propensity Score-Adjusted Trend Analysis

OBJECTIVE To assess whether palliative primary tumor resection in colorectal cancer patients with incurable stage IV disease is associated with improved survival. BACKGROUND There is a heated debate regarding whether or not an asymptomatic primary tumor should be removed in patients with incurable stage IV colorectal disease. METHODS Stage IV colorectal cancer patients were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 1998 and 2009. Patients undergoing surgery to metastatic sites were excluded. Overall survival and cancer-specific survival were compared between patients with and without palliative primary tumor resection using risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression models and stratified propensity score methods. RESULTS Overall, 37,793 stage IV colorectal cancer patients were identified. Of those, 23,004 (60.9%) underwent palliative primary tumor resection. The rate of patients undergoing palliative primary cancer resection decreased from 68.4% in 1998 to 50.7% in 2009 (P < 0.001). In Cox regression analysis after propensity score matching primary cancer resection was associated with a significantly improved overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) of death = 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.39-0.42, P < 0.001] and cancer-specific survival (HR of death = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.38-0.40, P < 0.001). The benefit of palliative primary cancer resection persisted during the time period 1998 to 2009 with HRs equal to or less than 0.47 for both overall and cancer-specific survival. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of this population-based cohort of stage IV colorectal cancer patients, palliative primary tumor resection was associated with improved overall and cancer-specific survival. Therefore, the dogma that an asymptomatic primary tumor never should be resected in patients with unresectable colorectal cancer metastases must be questioned.

The CLIF Consortium Acute Decompensation score (CLIF-C ADs) for prognosis of hospitalised cirrhotic patients without acute-on-chronic liver failure

BACKGROUND & AIMS Cirrhotic patients with acute decompensation frequently develop acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), which is associated with high mortality rates. Recently, a specific score for these patients has been developed using the CANONIC study database. The aims of this study were to develop and validate the CLIF-C AD score, a specific prognostic score for hospitalised cirrhotic patients with acute decompensation (AD), but without ACLF, and to compare this with the Child-Pugh, MELD, and MELD-Na scores. METHODS The derivation set included 1016 CANONIC study patients without ACLF. Proportional hazards models considering liver transplantation as a competing risk were used to identify score parameters. Estimated coefficients were used as relative weights to compute the CLIF-C ADs. External validation was performed in 225 cirrhotic AD patients. CLIF-C ADs was also tested for sequential use. RESULTS Age, serum sodium, white-cell count, creatinine and INR were selected as the best predictors of mortality. The C-index for prediction of mortality was better for CLIF-C ADs compared with Child-Pugh, MELD, and MELD-Nas at predicting 3- and 12-month mortality in the derivation, internal validation and the external dataset. CLIF-C ADs improved in its ability to predict 3-month mortality using data from days 2, 3-7, and 8-15 (C-index: 0.72, 0.75, and 0.77 respectively). CONCLUSIONS The new CLIF-C ADs is more accurate than other liver scores in predicting prognosis in hospitalised cirrhotic patients without ACLF. CLIF-C ADs therefore may be used to identify a high-risk cohort for intensive management and a low-risk group that may be discharged early.

The unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score: a multidisciplinary consensus.

OBJECTIVE We endeavored to develop an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment score (UIATS) model that includes and quantifies key factors involved in clinical decision-making in the management of UIAs and to assess agreement for this model among specialists in UIA management and research. METHODS An international multidisciplinary (neurosurgery, neuroradiology, neurology, clinical epidemiology) group of 69 specialists was convened to develop and validate the UIATS model using a Delphi consensus. For internal (39 panel members involved in identification of relevant features) and external validation (30 independent external reviewers), 30 selected UIA cases were used to analyze agreement with UIATS management recommendations based on a 5-point Likert scale (5 indicating strong agreement). Interrater agreement (IRA) was assessed with standardized coefficients of dispersion (vr*) (vr* = 0 indicating excellent agreement and vr* = 1 indicating poor agreement). RESULTS The UIATS accounts for 29 key factors in UIA management. Agreement with UIATS (mean Likert scores) was 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-4.3) per reviewer for both reviewer cohorts; agreement per case was 4.3 (95% CI 4.1-4.4) for panel members and 4.5 (95% CI 4.3-4.6) for external reviewers (p = 0.017). Mean Likert scores were 4.2 (95% CI 4.1-4.3) for interventional reviewers (n = 56) and 4.1 (95% CI 3.9-4.4) for noninterventional reviewers (n = 12) (p = 0.290). Overall IRA (vr*) for both cohorts was 0.026 (95% CI 0.019-0.033). CONCLUSIONS This novel UIA decision guidance study captures an excellent consensus among highly informed individuals on UIA management, irrespective of their underlying specialty. Clinicians can use the UIATS as a comprehensive mechanism for indicating how a large group of specialists might manage an individual patient with a UIA.

Clinical effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in routine care: A propensity score based comparison between randomized controlled trials and clinical practice

Background: The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for the treatment of depressive disorders has been demonstrated in many randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study investigated whether for CBT similar effects can be expected under routine care conditions when the patients are comparable to those examined in RCTs. Method: N=574 CBT patients from an outpatient clinic were stepwise matched to the patients undergoing CBT in the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program (TDCRP). First, the exclusion criteria of the RCT were applied to the naturalistic sample of the outpatient clinic. Second, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust the remaining naturalistic sample on the basis of baseline covariate distributions. Matched samples were then compared regarding treatment effects using effect sizes, average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) and recovery rates. Results: CBT in the adjusted naturalistic subsample was as effective as in the RCT. However, treatments lasted significantly longer under routine care conditions. Limitations: The samples included only a limited amount of common predictor variables and stemmed from different countries. There might be additional covariates, which could potentially further improve the matching between the samples. Conclusions: CBT for depression in clinical practice might be equally effective as manual-based treatments in RCTs when they are applied to comparable patients. The fact that similar effects under routine conditions were reached with more sessions, however, points to the potential to optimize treatments in clinical practice with respect to their efficiency.

Older patients with low Charlson score and high-risk prostate cancer benefit from radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION The aim of the study was to identify the appropriate level of Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) in older patients (>70 years) with high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) to achieve survival benefit following radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 1008 older patients (>70 years) who underwent RP with pelvic lymph node dissection for high-risk prostate cancer (preoperative prostate-specific antigen >20 ng/mL or clinical stage ≥T2c or Gleason ≥8) from 14 tertiary institutions between 1988 and 2014. The study population was further grouped into CCI < 2 and ≥2 for analysis. Survival rate for each group was estimated with Kaplan-Meier method and competitive risk Fine-Gray regression to estimate the best explanatory multivariable model. Area under the curve (AUC) and Akaike information criterion were used to identify ideal 'Cut off' for CCI. RESULTS The clinical and cancer characteristics were similar between the two groups. Comparison of the survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier curve between two groups for non-cancer death and survival estimations for 5 and 10 years shows significant worst outcomes for patients with CCI ≥ 2. In multivariate model to decide the appropriate CCI cut-off point, we found CCI 2 has better AUC and p value in log rank test. CONCLUSION Older patients with fewer comorbidities harboring high-risk PCa appears to benefit from RP. Sicker patients are more likely to die due to non-prostate cancer-related causes and are less likely to benefit from RP.

Patient outcomes after laminotomy, hemilaminectomy, laminectomy and laminectomy with instrumented fusion for spinal canal stenosis: a propensity score-based study from the Spine Tango registry.

PURPOSE To compare patient outcomes and complication rates after different decompression techniques or instrumented fusion (IF) in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). METHODS The multicentre study was based on Spine Tango data. Inclusion criteria were LSS with a posterior decompression and pre- and postoperative COMI assessment between 3 and 24 months. 1,176 cases were assigned to four groups: (1) laminotomy (n = 642), (2) hemilaminectomy (n = 196), (3) laminectomy (n = 230) and (4) laminectomy combined with an IF (n = 108). Clinical outcomes were achievement of minimum relevant change in COMI back and leg pain and COMI score (2.2 points), surgical and general complications, measures taken due to complications, and reintervention on the index level based on patient information. The inverse propensity score weighting method was used for adjustment. RESULTS Laminotomy, hemilaminectomy and laminectomy were significantly less beneficial than laminectomy in combination with IF regarding leg pain (ORs with 95% CI 0.52, 0.34-0.81; 0.25, 0.15-0.41; 0.44, 0.27-0.72, respectively) and COMI score improvement (ORs with 95% CI 0.51, 0.33-0.81; 0.30, 0.18-0.51; 0.48, 0.29-0.79, respectively). However, the sole decompressions caused significantly fewer surgical (ORs with 95% CI 0.42, 0.26-0.69; 0.33, 0.17-0.63; 0.39, 0.21-0.71, respectively) and general complications (ORs with 95% CI 0.11, 0.04-0.29; 0.03, 0.003-0.41; 0.25, 0.09-0.71, respectively) than laminectomy in combination with IF. Accordingly, the likelihood of required measures was also significantly lower after laminotomy (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17-0.46), hemilaminectomy (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.15-0.53) and after laminectomy (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.22-0.68) in comparison with laminectomy with IF. The likelihood of a reintervention was not significantly different between the treatment groups. DISCUSSION As already demonstrated in the literature, decompression in patients with LSS is a very effective treatment. Despite better patient outcomes after laminectomy in combination with IF, caution is advised due to higher rates of surgical and general complications and consequent required measures. Based on the current study, laminotomy or laminectomy, rather than hemilaminectomy, is recommendable for minimum relevant pain relief.