A methylation-based EWAS on carefully phenotyped individuals with Parkinson's disease (PD) was conducted to reveal prioritised genes and pathways with statistically significant and sizable changes in PD and in the anxiety that often accompanies it. This was followed by subsequent replication of top-ranked CpG sites. Using the Infinium(®) HumanMethylation 450K beadchip (Illumina Inc., USA), twenty unique genes with a sizable difference in methylation (P(adjusted) < 0.05, Δβ ≥ 0.2), after correction for multiple testing, were identified between PD and controls, while seventeen were identified between PD with anxiety and PD without anxiety. Twelve top ranked, significantly associated loci in PD were evaluated in an independent replicate population using Sequenom EpiTYPER for 219 individuals with similar phenotypes to the cross-sectional case-control discovery design. FANCC cg14115740 and TNKS2 cg11963436 show significant differential methylation between PD cases and controls using both techniques and their Δβ values, which have the same direction of effect, are reasonable to warrant further investigation.

Background Many people living and working with rare diseases describe consistent difficulties accessing appropriate information and support. In this study an evaluation of the awareness of rare diseases, alongside related information and educational resources available for patients, their families and healthcare professionals, was conducted in 2018–2019 using an online survey and semi-structured interviews with rare disease collaborative groups (charities, voluntary and community groups) active across Northern Ireland (NI). Methods This study had 2 stages. Stage 1 was an online survey and stage 2 involved semi-structured interviews both with rare disease collaborative groups in Northern Ireland. The surveys and interviews were used to locate existing resources as well as identify gaps where the development of further resources would be appropriate. Results Ninety-nine rare disease collaborative groups engaged with the survey with 31 providing detailed answers. Resources such as information, communication, ‘registries’, online services, training and improvements to support services were queried. Excellent communication is an important factor in delivering good rare disease support. Training for health professionals was also highlighted as an essential element of improving support for those with a rare disease to ensure they approach people with these unique and challenging diseases in an appropriate way. Carers were mentioned several times throughout the study; it is often felt they are overlooked in rare disease research and more support should be in place for them. Current care/support for those with a rare disease was highlighted as inadequate. Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with rare disease collaborative groups. Reoccurring themes included a need for more effective information and communication, training for health professionals, online presence, support for carers, and involvement in research. Conclusions All rare disease collaborative groups agreed that current services for people living and working with a rare disease are not adequate. An important finding to consider in future research within the rare disease field is the inclusion of carers perceptions and experiences in studies. This research provides insight into the support available for rare diseases across Northern Ireland, highlights unmet needs, and suggests approaches to improve rare disease support.

Background Rare cancers comprise almost a quarter of all cancers in Europe, and patients generally have poorer outcomes than those suffering from more common cancers. This is attributed in part to a general lack of knowledge and awareness of rare cancers. This review aims to examine the communication strategies being used throughout the world to inform on rare cancers and to highlight any opportunities for improvement. Methods A systematic review of literature published in English prior to November 2018 will be conducted, screening articles from the electronic databases MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Grey literature databases (GreyLit, OpenGrey) will also be searched in order to screen for any unpublished works. As well as primary literature, reference lists will be examined via forward and reverse citation screening. The review will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Titles and abstracts will first be examined for eligibility, with remaining studies undergoing a full-text screening before being included in the final review. Individual studies will be screened for bias, and a meta-analysis performed provided there is enough data. If insufficient homogenous literature exists, a narrative summary of the literature will be produced. Discussion Despite the broad topic and width of study type that will be considered, this review hopes to provide a reflective summary of the communication strategies available for people living with and working with rare cancer. It aims to reveal any gaps in the resources available, to contribute to the long-term improvement of diagnosis and management of rare cancers. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018099784 Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13643-019-1017-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Many people living and working with rare diseases describe consistent difficulties accessing appropriate information and support. In this study an evaluation of the awareness of rare diseases, alongside related information and educational resources available for patients, their families and healthcare professionals, was conducted in 2018-2019 using an online survey and semi-structured interviews with rare disease collaborative groups (charities, voluntary and community groups) active across Northern Ireland (NI). Results Ninety-nine participants engaged with the survey with 31 respondents providing detailed answers. Resources such as information, communication, registries, online services, training and improvements to support services were queried. Excellent communication is an important factor in delivering good rare disease support. Training for health professionals was also highlighted as an essential element of improving support for those with a rare disease to ensure they approach people with these unique and challenging diseases in an appropriate way. Carers were mentioned several times throughout the study; it is often felt they are overlooked in rare disease research and more support should be in place for them. Current care/support for those with a rare disease was highlighted as inadequate. Nine semi-structured interviews were conducted with rare disease collaborative groups. Reoccurring themes included a need for more effective: information and communication, training for health professionals, online presence, support for carers, and involvement in research. Conclusions All rare disease collaborative groups agreed that current services for people living and working with a rare disease are not adequate. An important finding to consider in future research within the rare disease field is the inclusion of carers perceptions and experiences in studies. Due to the unique role a carer has in the life of a person with a rare disease it is vital that their voice is heard and their needs are listened to. This research provides insight into the support available for rare diseases across Northern Ireland, highlights unmet needs in service provision, and suggests approaches to improve rare disease support prioritising improved information and communication provision, improved access to services, and tailored support for carers of people with a rare disease. Keywords Collaboratives groups; communication; Northern Ireland; online; rare disease semi-structured interview; social media; support; survey

Background International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 reports the first international comparison of ovarian cancer (OC) diagnosis routes and intervals (symptom onset to treatment start), which may inform previously reported variations in survival and stage. Methods Data were collated from 1110 newly diagnosed OC patients aged >40 surveyed between 2013 and 2015 across five countries (51–272 per jurisdiction), their primary-care physicians (PCPs) and cancer treatment specialists, supplement by treatment records or clinical databases. Diagnosis routes and time interval differences using quantile regression with reference to Denmark (largest survey response) were calculated. Results There were no significant jurisdictional differences in the proportion diagnosed with symptoms on the Goff Symptom Index (53%; P = 0.179) or National Institute for Health and Care Excellence NG12 guidelines (62%; P = 0.946). Though the main diagnosis route consistently involved primary-care presentation (63–86%; P = 0.068), onward urgent referral rates varied significantly (29–79%; P < 0.001). In most jurisdictions, diagnostic intervals were generally shorter and other intervals, in particular, treatment longer compared to Denmark. Conclusion This study highlights key intervals in the diagnostic pathway where improvements could be made. It provides the opportunity to consider the systems and approaches across different jurisdictions that might allow for more timely ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment.