Background and Purpose-Research based on administrative data has advantages, including large numbers, consistent data, and low cost. This study was designed to compare different methods of stroke classification using administrative data. Methods-Administrative hospital discharge data and medical record review of 206 patients were used to evaluate 3 algorithms for classifying stroke patients. These algorithms were based on all (algorithm 1), the first 2 (algorithm 2), or the primary (algorithm 3) administrative discharge diagnosis code(s). The diagnoses after review of medical record data were considered the gold standard. Then, using a large administrative data set, we compared patients with a primary discharge diagnosis of stroke with patients with their stroke discharge diagnosis code in a nonprimary position. Results-Compared with the gold standard, algorithm 1 had the highest for classifying ischemic stroke, with a sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 95%, positive predictive value of 90%, and ϭ0.82. Algorithm 3 had the highest values for intracerebral hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage. For intracerebral hemorrhage, the sensitivity was 85%, specificity was 96%, positive predictive value was 89%, and ϭ0.82. For subarachnoid hemorrhage, those values were 90%, 97%, 94%, and 0.88, respectively. Nonprimary position ischemic stroke patients had significantly greater comorbidity and 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 3.2) than primary position ischemic stroke patients. Conclusions-Stroke classification in these administrative data were optimal using all discharge diagnoses for ischemic stroke and primary discharge diagnosis only for intracerebral and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Selecting ischemic stroke patients on the basis of primary discharge diagnosis may bias administrative samples toward more benign, unrepresentative outcomes and should be avoided.

IntroductionLate-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD, onset age > 60 years) is the most prevalent dementia in the elderly 1 , and risk is partially driven by genetics 2 . Many of the loci responsible for this genetic risk were identified by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) [3][4][5][6][7][8] . To identify additional LOAD risk loci, the we performed the largest GWAS to date (89,769 individuals), analyzing both common and rare variants. We confirm 20 previous LOAD risk loci and identify four new genome-wide loci (IQCK, ACE, ADAM10, and ADAMTS1). Pathway analysis of these data implicates the immune system and lipid metabolism, and for the first time tau binding proteins and APP metabolism. These findings show that genetic variants affecting APP and Aβ processing are not only associated with early-onset autosomal dominant AD but also with LOAD. Analysis of AD risk genes and pathways show enrichment for rare variants (P = 1.32 x 10 -7 ) indicating that additional rare variants remain to be identified. Main TextOur previous work identified 19 genome-wide significant common variant signals in addition to APOE 9 , that influence risk for LOAD. These signals, combined with 'subthreshold' common variant associations, account for ~31% of the genetic variance of LOAD 2 , leaving the majority of genetic risk uncharacterized 10 . To search for additional signals, we conducted a GWAS metaanalysis of non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) using a larger sample (17 new, 46 total datasets) from our group, the International Genomics of Alzheimer's Project (IGAP) (composed of four AD consortia: ADGC, CHARGE, EADI, and GERAD). This sample increases our previous discovery sample (Stage 1) by 29% for cases and 13% for controls (N=21,982 cases; 41,944 controls) ( Supplementary Table 1 and 2, and Supplementary Note). To sample both common and rare variants (minor allele frequency MAF ≥ 0.01, and MAF < 0.01, respectively), we imputed the discovery datasets using a 1000 Genomes reference panel consisting of . CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. It is made available under a 11 36,648,992 single-nucleotide variants, 1,380,736 insertions/deletions, and 13,805 structural variants. After quality control, 9,456,058 common variants and 2,024,574 rare variants were selected for analysis (a 63% increase from our previous common variant analysis in 2013).Genotype dosages were analyzed within each dataset, and then combined with meta-analysis ( Supplementary Figures 1 and 2 and Supplementary Table 3). The Stage 1 discovery metaanalysis was first followed by Stage 2 using the I-select chip we previously developed in Lambert et al (including 11,632 variants, N=18,845) and finally stage 3A (N=6,998). The final sample was 33,692 clinical AD cases and 56,077 controls.Meta-analysis of Stages 1 and 2 produced 21 associations with P ≤ 5x10 -8 (Table 1 and Figure 1). Of these, 18 were previously reported as genome-wide significant and three of them are signals not initially described in Lambert et al: the rare R47H TREM2 coding va...

No abstract

SummaryBackgroundVarious genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been done in ischaemic stroke, identifying a few loci associated with the disease, but sample sizes have been 3500 cases or less. We established the METASTROKE collaboration with the aim of validating associations from previous GWAS and identifying novel genetic associations through meta-analysis of GWAS datasets for ischaemic stroke and its subtypes.MethodsWe meta-analysed data from 15 ischaemic stroke cohorts with a total of 12 389 individuals with ischaemic stroke and 62 004 controls, all of European ancestry. For the associations reaching genome-wide significance in METASTROKE, we did a further analysis, conditioning on the lead single nucleotide polymorphism in every associated region. Replication of novel suggestive signals was done in 13 347 cases and 29 083 controls.FindingsWe verified previous associations for cardioembolic stroke near PITX2 (p=2·8×10−16) and ZFHX3 (p=2·28×10−8), and for large-vessel stroke at a 9p21 locus (p=3·32×10−5) and HDAC9 (p=2·03×10−12). Additionally, we verified that all associations were subtype specific. Conditional analysis in the three regions for which the associations reached genome-wide significance (PITX2, ZFHX3, and HDAC9) indicated that all the signal in each region could be attributed to one risk haplotype. We also identified 12 potentially novel loci at p<5×10−6. However, we were unable to replicate any of these novel associations in the replication cohort.InterpretationOur results show that, although genetic variants can be detected in patients with ischaemic stroke when compared with controls, all associations we were able to confirm are specific to a stroke subtype. This finding has two implications. First, to maximise success of genetic studies in ischaemic stroke, detailed stroke subtyping is required. Second, different genetic pathophysiological mechanisms seem to be associated with different stroke subtypes.FundingWellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council (MRC), Australian National and Medical Health Research Council, National Institutes of Health (NIH) including National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS).