Predictive Value of Depressive Symptoms for All-Cause Mortality: Findings From the PRIME Belfast Study Examining the Role of Inflammation and Cardiovascular Risk Markers

OBJECTIVES: To improve understanding about the potential underlying biological mechanisms in the link between depression and all-cause mortality and to investigate the role that inflammatory and other cardiovascular risk factors may play in the relationship between depressive symptoms and mortality.

METHODS: Depression and blood-based biological markers were assessed in the Belfast PRIME prospective cohort study (N = 2389 men, aged 50-59 years) in which participants were followed up for 18 years. Depression was measured using the 10-item Welsh Pure Depression Inventory. Inflammation markers (C-reactive protein [CRP], neopterin, interleukin [IL]-1 receptor antagonist [IL-1Ra], and IL-18) and cardiovascular-specific risk factors (N-terminal pro-b-type natriuretic peptide, midregion pro-atrial natriuretic peptide, midregion pro-adrenomedullin, C-terminal pro-endothelin-1 [CT-proET]) were obtained at baseline. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to examine the association between depression and biological measures in relation to all-cause mortality and explore the mediating effects.

RESULTS: During follow-up, 418 participants died. Higher levels of depressive symptoms were associated with higher levels of CRP, IL-1Ra, and CT-proET. After adjustment for socioeconomic and life-style risk factors, depressive symptoms were significantly associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio = 1.10 per scale unit, 95% confidence interval = 1.04-1.16). This association was partly explained by CRP (7.3%) suggesting a minimal mediation effect. IL-1Ra, N-terminal pro-b-type natriuretic peptide, midregion pro-atrial natriuretic peptide, midregion pro-adrenomedullin, and CT-proET contributed marginally to the association between depression and subsequent mortality.

CONCLUSIONS: Inflammatory and cardiovascular risk markers are associated with depression and with increased mortality. However, depression and biological measures show additive effects rather than a pattern of meditation of biological factors in the association between depression and mortality.

The prognostic and therapeutic value of EpHA2 in early colorectal cancer (CRC).

Background: EpHA2 is a 130 kD transmembrane glycoprotein belonging to ephrin receptor subfamily and involved in angiogenesis/tumour neovascularisation. High EpHA2 mRNA level has recently been implicated in cetuximab resistance. Previously, we found high EpHA2 levels in a panel of invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) cells, which was associated with high levels of stem-cell marker CD44. Our aim was to investigate the prognostic value of EpHA2 and subsequently correlate expression levels to known clinico-pathological variables in early stage CRC. Methods: Tissue samples from 509 CRC patients were analysed. EpHA2 expression was measured using IHC. Kaplan-Meier graphs were used. Univariate and multivariate analyses employed Cox Proportional Hazards Ratio (HR) method. A backward selection method (Akaike’s information criterion) was used to determine a refined multivariate model. Results: EpHA2 was highly expressed in CRC adenocarcinoma compared to matched normal colon tissue. In support of our preclinical invasive models, strong correlation was found between EpHA2 expression and CD44 and Lgr5 staining (p<0.001). In addition, high EpHA2 expression significantly correlated with vascular invasion (p=0.03).HR for OS for stage II/III patients with high EpHA2 expression was 1.69 (95%CI: 1.164-2.439; p=0.003). When stage II/III was broken down into individual stages, there was significant correlation between high EpHA2 expression and poor 5-years OS in stage II patients (HR: 2.18; 95%CI: 1.28-3.71; p=0.005).HR in the stage III group showed a trend to statistical significance (HR: 1.48; 95%CI=0.87-2.51; p=0.05). In both univariate and multivariate analyses of stage II patients, high EpHA2 expression was the only significant factor and was retained in the final multivariate model. Higher levels of EpHA2 were noted in our RAS and BRAF mutant CRC cells, and silencing EpHA2 resulted in significant decreases in migration/invasion in parental and invasive CRC sublines. Correlation between KRAS/NRAS/BRAFmutational status and EpHA2 expression in clinical samples is ongoing. Conclusions: Taken together, our study is the first to indicate that EpHA2 expression is a predictor of poor clinical outcome and a potential novel target in early stage CRC.

The value of tests in the diagnosis and management of glaucoma.

PURPOSE:

To assess the noneconomic value of tests used in the diagnosis and management of glaucoma, and explore the contexts and factors that determine such value.

DESIGN:

Perspective.

METHODS:

Selected articles from primary and secondary sources were reviewed and interpreted in the context of the authors' clinical and research experience, influenced by our perspectives on the tasks of reducing the global problem of irreversible blindness caused by glaucoma. The value of any test used in glaucoma is addressed by 3 questions regarding: its contexts, its kind of value, and its implicit or explicit benefits.

RESULTS:

Tonometry, slit-lamp gonioscopy, and optic disc evaluation remain the foundation of clinic-based case finding, whether in areas of more or less abundant resources. In resource-poor areas, there is urgency in identifying patients at risk for severe functional loss of vision; screening strategies have proven ineffective, and efforts are hindered by the inadequate allocation of support. In resource-abundant areas, the wider spectrum of glaucoma is addressed, with emphasis on early detection of structural changes of little functional consequence; these are increasingly the focus of new and expensive technologies whose clinical value has not been established in longitudinal and population-based studies. These contrasting realities in part reflect differences among the value ascribed, often implicitly, to the tests used in glaucoma.

CONCLUSIONS:

The value of any test is determined by 3 aspects: its context of usage; its comparative worth and to whom its benefit accrues; and how we define historically what we are testing. These multiple factors