The radiologic classification of patients with lepidic adenocarcinomas is associated with similar oncologic and survival outcomes compared with the pathologic classification and may guide decision making in the approach to surgical resection.
After spinal cord injury (SCI), patients face many physical and psychological issues including intestinal dysfunction and comorbidities, strongly affecting quality of life. The gut microbiota has recently been suggested to influence the course of the disease in these patients. However, to date only two studies have profiled the gut microbiota in SCI patients, months after a traumatic injury. Here we characterized the gut microbiota in a large Italian SCI population, within a short time from a not only traumatic injury. Feces were collected within the first week at the rehabilitation center (no later than 60 days after SCI), and profiled by 16S rRNA gene-based next-generation sequencing. Microbial profiles were compared to those publicly available of healthy age- and gender-matched Italians, and correlated to patient metadata, including type of SCI, spinal unit location, nutrition and concomitant antibiotic therapies. The gut microbiota of SCI patients shows distinct dysbiotic signatures, i.e. increase in potentially pathogenic, pro-inflammatory and mucus-degrading bacteria, and depletion of short-chain fatty acid producers. While robust to most host variables, such dysbiosis varies by lesion level and completeness, with the most neurologically impaired patients showing an even more unbalanced microbial profile. The SCI-related gut microbiome dysbiosis is very likely secondary to injury and closely related to the degree of completeness and severity of the lesion, regardless of etiology and time interval. This microbial layout could variously contribute to increased gut permeability and inflammation, potentially predisposing patients to the onset of severe comorbidities.
This work was supported by the Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico: Ricerca Corrente [grant number RC2014/519-02] to M.M. and from ASM onlus 2010-2011 to M.M. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
BackgroundAfter implementation of the PREDICA annual chest X-ray (CXR) screening program in smokers in the general practice setting of Varese-Italy a significant reduction in lung cancer-specific mortality (18 %) was observed. The objective of this study covering July 1997 through December 2006 was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of this intervention.MethodsWe examined detailed information on lung cancer (LC) cases that occurred among smokers invited to be screened in the PREDICA study (Invitation-to-screening Group, n = 5815 subjects) to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from LC diagnosis until death. The control group consisted of 156 screening-eligible smokers from the same area, uninvited and unscreened, who developed LC and were treated by usual care. We calculated the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) by comparing LC management in screening participants (n = 1244 subjects) and in the Invitation-to-screening group versus control group.ResultsThe average number of QALYs since LC diagnosis was 1.7, 1.49 and 1.07, respectively, in screening participants, the invitation-to-screening group, and the control group. The average total cost (screening + management) per LC case was higher in screening participants (€17,516) and the Invitation-to-screening Group (€16,167) than in the control group (€15,503). Assuming a maximum willingness to pay of €30,000/QALY, we found that the intervention was cost-effective with high probability: 79 % for screening participation (screening participants vs. control group) and 95 % for invitation-to-screening (invitation-to-screening group vs. control group).ConclusionsBased on the PREDICA study, annual CXR screening of high-risk smokers in a general practice setting has high probability of being cost-effective with a maximum willingness to pay of €30,000/QALY.
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.