High alcohol consumption is associated with a higher risk of alcohol-related medical events among those with low compared with high education. This interaction may be explained by differences in vulnerability and drinking patterns across educational groups.See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B267.
Breast cancer patients with BRCA1/2-driven tumors may benefit from targeted therapy. It is not clear whether current BRCA screening guidelines are effective at identifying these patients. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the prevalence of inherited BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants in a large, clinically representative breast cancer cohort and to estimate the proportion of BRCA1/2 carriers not detected by selectively screening individuals with the highest probability of being carriers according to current clinical guidelines. The study included 5,122 unselected Swedish breast cancer patients diagnosed from 2001 to 2008. Target sequence enrichment (48.48 Fluidigm Access Arrays) and sequencing were performed (Illumina Hi-Seq 2,500 instrument, v4 chemistry). Differences in patient and tumor characteristics of BRCA1/2 carriers who were already identified as part of clinical BRCA1/2 testing routines and additional BRCA1/2 carriers found by sequencing the entire study population were compared using logistic regression models. Ninety-two of 5,099 patients with valid variant calls were identified as BRCA1/2 carriers by screening all study participants (1.8%). Only 416 study participants (8.2%) were screened as part of clinical practice, but this identified 35 out of 92 carriers (38.0%). Clinically identified carriers were younger, less likely postmenopausal and more likely to be associated with familiar ovarian cancer compared to the additional carriers identified by screening all patients. More BRCA2 (34/42, 81.0%) than BRCA1 carriers (23/50, 46%) were missed by clinical screening. In conclusion, BRCA1/2 mutation prevalence in unselected breast cancer patients was 1.8%. Six in ten BRCA carriers were not detected by selective clinical screening of individuals.
AimLong-term prognostic impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) severity in stable post-myocardial infarction (MI) patients is not well known. We examined the impact of CAD severity and co-morbidity on the long-term (1 year and beyond) risk of cardiovascular events post-MI.Methods and resultsFrom nationwide administrative and clinical registers, we identified 55 747 MI patients, during 2004–2010, who had not experienced subsequent MI, stroke, or death within 7 days post-discharge. The risk for primary composite endpoint (MI, stroke, or cardiovascular death) was estimated for the first 365 days after MI (index MI) and from day 366 to study completion (stable post-MI population), corresponding to a mean follow-up of 3.6 (2.2) years. Risk was assessed using cumulative incidence, multivariable adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models. The 1-year cumulative incidence for primary endpoint was 20.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), (19.6–20.3)]. Correspondingly, the 4-year cumulative incidence for primary endpoint was 21.0% (95% CI, 20.6–21.4) in patients without events on the first year. In multivariable models with no significant stenosis as reference, CAD severity was the most important risk factor for cardiovascular events the first 365 days [left main stenosis (LMS): odds ratio and 95% CI, 4.37, 3.69–5.17; 3-vessel disease (VD), 4.18, 3.66–4.77; 2-VD, 3.23, 2.81–3.72; 1-VD, 2.12,–1.85–2.43] and remained from day 366 to study completion [LMS: hazard ratio and 95% CI, 1.91, 1.64–2.22; 3-VD, 1.85,1.65–2.07; 2-VD, 1.55, 1.38–1.74; 1-VD, 1.30, 1.16–1.45].ConclusionDespite contemporary treatment at baseline, stable post-MI patients’ 4-year outcome was similar to 1-year outcome after MI, and CAD severity remained a critical risk factor the first year and thereafter.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.