A survey of the clinicopathological and molecular characteristics of patients with suspected Lynch syndrome in Latin America

Background: Genetic counselling and testing for Lynch syndrome (LS) have recently been introduced in several Latin America countries. We aimed to characterize the clinical, molecular and mismatch repair (MMR) variants spectrum of patients with suspected LS in Latin America. Methods: Eleven LS hereditary cancer registries and 34 published LS databases were used to identify unrelated families that fulfilled the Amsterdam II (AMSII) criteria and/or the Bethesda guidelines or suggestive of a dominant colorectal (CRC) inheritance syndrome. Results: We performed a thorough investigation of 15 countries and identified 6 countries where germline genetic testing for LS is available and 3 countries where tumor testing is used in the LS diagnosis. The spectrum of pathogenic MMR variants included MLH1 up to 54%, MSH2 up to 43%, MSH6 up to 10%, PMS2 up to 3% and EPCAM up to 0.8%. The Latin America MMR spectrum is broad with a total of 220 different variants which 80% were private and 20% were recurrent. Frequent regions included exons 11 of MLH1 (15%), exon 3 and 7 of MSH2 (17 and 15%, respectively), exon 4 of MSH6 (65%), exons 11 and 13 of PMS2 (31% and 23%, respectively). Sixteen international founder variants in MLH1, MSH2 and MSH6 were identified and 41 (19%) variants have not previously been reported, thus representing novel genetic variants in the MMR genes. The AMSII criteria was the most used clinical criteria to identify pathogenic MMR carriers although microsatellite instability, immunohistochemistry and family history are still the primary methods in several countries where no genetic testing for LS is available yet. Conclusion: The Latin America LS pathogenic MMR variants spectrum included new variants, frequently altered genetic regions and potential founder effects, emphasizing the relevance implementing Lynch syndrome genetic testing and counseling in all of Latin America countries.Radium Hospital Foundation (Oslo, Norway) in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript, Helse Sør-Øst (Norway) in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript, the French Association Recherche contre le Cancer (ARC) in the analysis, and interpretation of data, the Groupement des Entreprises Françaises dans la Lutte contre le Cancer (Gefluc) in the analysis, and interpretation of data, the Association Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie (ANRT, CIFRE PhD fellowship to H.T.) in the analysis, and interpretation of data and by the OpenHealth Institute in the analysis, and interpretation of data. Barretos Cancer Hospital received financial support by FINEP-CT-INFRA (02/2010)info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Efficacy of ultra-micronized palmitoylethanolamide (um-PEA) in geriatric patients with chronic pain : study protocol for a series of N-of-1 randomized trials

Background: Chronic pain in older people is highly prevalent, often underestimated, and associated with adverse outcomes. Most available analgesic drugs are often either ineffective or not tolerated, with many side effects. Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) is an endogenous widely distributed N-acylethanolamina involved in neuroinflammation and pain-generating processes. Formulations containing ultra-micronized palmitoylethanolamide (um-PEA) are available but their effectiveness on chronic pain in highly heterogeneous geriatric patients is not clear and probably not generalizable. We planned to adopt the N-of-1 trial approach to test the effectiveness of um-PEA objectively at the individual level in our older outpatients. Methods/Design: Persons 65 years or older referring to the Geriatric Unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico of Milan complaining of noncancer chronic pain of any origin will be eligible. Each trial will be a placebo-controlled randomized crossover trial including two um-PEA (600 mg twice a day) and placebo treatment pairs. The um-PEA or placebo 3-week periods will be separated by 2-week washout intervals to overcome possible carryover effects. Pain intensity, need of on-demand analgesic medications, and impact on daily activities will be evaluated. Cognitively impaired patients will be eligible as long as an expression of pain can be recognized and its frequency assessed by a caregiver. Trial results will be discussed with the patient or caregiver and the treating physician to decide whether to continue the treatment. The impact of the N-of-1 approach on the physician's management plan and confidence will be assessed. We will secondarily meta-analyze the performed N-of-1 trials to obtain an estimate of the average effect of um-PEA compared with placebo using a frequentist and Bayesian approach. Discussion: While pursuing an ultimate clinical objective, i.e. to empirically and objectively decide the best treatment choice for an individual older patient with chronic pain, these series of geriatric N-of-1 trials on PEA will bring the principles of evidence-based medicine into the care of patients not usually represented in conventional randomized controlled trials, and realize a patient-centered outcome approach necessary to improve appropriate prescribing in elderly patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02699281. Registered on 3 March 2016

N-of-1 Randomized Trials of Ultra-Micronized Palmitoylethanolamide in Older Patients with Chronic Pain

Background: Ultra-micronized palmitoylethanolamide (um-PEA) represents an attractive option for chronic pain control in complex older patients at higher risk of adverse effects with traditional analgesics. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of um-PEA versus placebo on chronic pain intensity and function in individual geriatric patients. Design: We performed randomized, blinded N-of-1 trials with two 3-week um-PEA versus placebo comparisons, separated by 2-week washout periods. Participants: The study included outpatients aged\ua0 65\ua065\ua0years with chronic, non-cancer, non-ischemic pain in the back, joints, or limbs. Intervention: Patients were randomized to Um-PEA 600\ua0mg or placebo twice daily. Measurements: Pain intensity was measured using an 11-point visual numeric scale. Functional impairment was measured using a Back Pain Functional Scale. Impact of each N-of-1 trial was measured on the clinician\u2019s intention to treat and confidence. Results: Ten of 11 eligible patients consented over 7\ua0months [all female, mean age 83.2\ua0years (SD 4.6)]. Three patients interrupted the trial: one had diarrhea (under placebo), one for low adherence, and one for intercurrent pneumonia. A small statistically significant effect in favor of um-PEA was seen at the mixed method analyses in two patients (effect size equal to 8% of the baseline pain). A statistically significant impact on function was found in one patient. After the trial, um-PEA was prescribed to four patients; in two patients the clinician changed their pre-trial intention to treat; the clinician confidence in the treatment plan either increased (5) or remained the same (2). Conclusions: Our experience confirmed that N-of-1 trials may help make personalized evidence-based decisions in complex older patients, with special feasibility considerations. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02699281

Novel foods in the European Union: Scientific requirements and challenges of the risk assessment process by the European Food Safety Authority

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has been involved in the risk assessment of novel foods since 2003. The implementation of the current novel food regulation in 2018 rendered EFSA the sole entity of the European Union responsible for such safety evaluations. The risk assessment is based on the data submitted by applicants in line with the scientific requirements described in the respective EFSA guidance document. The present work aims to elaborate on the rationale behind the scientific questions raised during the risk assessment of novel foods, with a focus on complex mixtures and whole foods. Novel foods received by EFSA in 2003–2019 were screened and clustered by nature and complexity. The requests for additional or supplementary information raised by EFSA during all risk assessments were analyzed for identifying reoccurring issues. In brief, it is shown that applications concern mainly novel foods derived from plants, microorganisms, fungi, algae, and animals. A plethora of requests relates to the production process, the compositional characterization of the novel food, and the evaluation of the product's toxicological profile. Recurring issues related to specific novel food categories were noted. The heterogeneous nature and the variable complexity of novel foods emphasize the challenge to tailor aspects of the evaluation approach to the characteristics of each individual product. Importantly, the scientific requirements for novel food applications set by EFSA are interrelated, and only a rigorous and cross-cutting approach adopted by the applicants when preparing the respective application dossiers can lead to scientifically sound dossiers. This is the first time that an in-depth analysis of the experience gained by EFSA in the risk assessment of novel foods and of the reasoning behind the most frequent scientific requests by EFSA to applicants is made

Introducing the Library of Guidance for Health Scientists (LIGHTS): a living database for methods guidance

IMPORTANCE: Improving methodological quality is a priority in the health research community. Finding appropriate methods guidance can be challenging due to heterogeneous terminology, poor indexing in medical databases, and variation in formats. The Library of Guidance for Health Scientists (LIGHTS) is a new searchable database for methods guidance articles. OBSERVATIONS: Journal articles that aim to provide guidance for performing (including planning, design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation), reporting, and assessing the quality of health-related research involving humans or human populations (ie, excluding basic and animal research) are eligible for LIGHTS. A team of health researchers, information specialists, and methodologists continuously identifies and manually indexes eligible guidance documents. The search strategy includes focused searches of specific journals, specialized databases, and suggestions from researchers. A current limitation is that a keyword-based search of MEDLINE (and other general databases) and manual screening of records were not feasible because of the large number of hits (n = 915 523). As of September 20, 2022, LIGHTS included 1246 articles (336 reporting guidelines, 80 quality assessment tools, and 830 other methods guidance articles). The LIGHTS website provides a user-oriented search interface including filters for study type, specific methodological topic, research context, guidance type, and development process of the guidance. Automated matching of alternative methodological expressions (eg, enter loss to follow-up and find articles indexed with missing data) enhances search queries. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: LIGHTS is a peer-supported initiative that is intended to increase access to and use of methods guidance relevant to health researchers, statisticians, methods consultants, methods developers, ethics boards, peer reviewers, journal editors, and funding bodies

Detection of triplex PCR for the modified qualitative soybean and maize genetically

A molecular screening method based on multiplex PCR that involves amplification of specific soybean or maize sequences from plant DNA (lectin or zein) and the amplification of 35S promoter and NOS terminator,for the detection of genetically modified soybean and maize was developed. The new method is proposed,for the simulicmeous cletcctimt of tree genetic elements in the.same run as reliable method for rapid detection of genetically, modified plants with sensitivity of 0.1%

2025 focused update of the 2020 ISTH guidelines for management of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura

Background: Over the past few years, new information has emerged in the management of both immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) and congenital (or hereditary) thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (cTTP). Methods: In March 2024, the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) formed a multidisciplinary panel comprising hematologists, intensivists, nephrologists, pathologists, patient representatives, and a methodology team. The panel discussed all treatment questions related to thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method to appraise evidence and formulate recommendations. Results: For patients with cTTP in remission, a new strong recommendation was issued for the use of recombinant ADAMTS-13 over fresh frozen plasma in the context of moderate certainty evidence. The panel also revised a previous recommendation and suggested using fresh frozen plasma over a watch-and-wait approach for patients with cTTP in remission based on very low certainty evidence should recombinant. The panel reviewed and referenced new publications supporting therapeutic efficacy, potential survival benefit, and cost considerations of adding caplacizumab to therapeutic plasma exchange, corticosteroids, and rituximab, but concluded that no change was warranted to the previous recommendations in the management of iTTP. Good practice statements on the concomitant use of antithrombotic agents were marginally modified. Conclusions: For patients with iTTP, no change to 2020's recommendations. For patients with cTTP, the panel supports ADAMTS-13 replacement. Where accessible, recombinant ADAMTS-13 provides the most favorable balance of benefits and risks. Otherwise, fresh frozen plasma may still be effective. Shared decision-making should include the benefits, the potential harms, and the burden of care. (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Safety of iron hydroxide adipate tartrate as a novel food pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 and as a source of iron in the context of Directive 2002/46/EC

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on iron hydroxide adipate tartrate as a novel food (NF) pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 and as a source of iron in the context of Directive 2002/46/EC. The NF is intended to be used in food supplements up to a maximum dose of 100 mg per day, corresponding to a maximum daily intake of iron of 36 mg. The target population proposed by the applicant is the general population above 3 years of age. The NF which is the subject of the application is an engineered nanomaterial having primary particles, of almost spherical morphology, with a diameter typically smaller than 5 nm. The studies provided for absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME) and bioavailability indicate that iron, once taken up into the epithelial cells of the gut, is subject to the same mechanisms of regulation and absorption as that of other forms of iron. Further studies provided in the context of the toxicological assessment indicate that the NF does not lead to iron bioaccumulation in tissues and organs at the doses tested. The Panel notes that the NF contains nickel at concentrations that may increase the risk of flare-up reactions in nickel-sensitised young individuals up to 10 years of age. In the 90-day toxicity study, findings related to haematology, clinical biochemistry and organ weights were observed and the Panel defined a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 231 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day, that is, the mid-dose used in the study. The Panel considers that the NF is a source from which iron is bioavailable and it is safe under the proposed conditions of use