Family history and perceptions about risk and prevention for chronic diseases in primary care: a report from the Family HealthwareTM Impact Trial.
Genet Med. 2010 Mar 3;
Authors: Acheson LS, Wang C, Zyzanski SJ, Lynn A, Ruffin MT, Gramling R, Rubinstein WS, Oʼneill SM, Nease DE,
PURPOSE:: To determine whether family medical history as a risk factor for six common diseases is related to patients’ perceptions of risk, worry, and control over getting these diseases. METHODS:: We used data from the cluster-randomized, controlled Family Healthware Impact Trial (FHITr). At baseline, healthy primary care patients reported their perceptions about coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and breast, ovarian, and colon cancers. Immediately afterward, intervention group participants used Family Healthware to record family medical history; this web-based tool stratified familial disease risks. Multivariate and multilevel regression analyses measured the association between familial risk and patient perceptions for each disease, controlling for personal health and demographics. RESULTS:: For the 2330 participants who used Family Healthware immediately after providing baseline data, perceived risk and worry for each disease were strongly associated with family history risk, adjusting for personal risk factors. The magnitude of the effect of family history on perceived risk ranged from 0.35 standard deviation for ovarian cancer to 1.12 standard deviations for colon cancer. Family history was not related to perceived control over developing diseases. Risk perceptions seemed optimistically biased, with 48-79% of participants with increased familial risk for diseases reporting that they were at average risk or below. CONCLUSIONS:: Participants’ ratings of their risk for developing common diseases, before feedback on familial risk, parallels but is often lower than their calculated risk based on family history. Having a family history of a disease increases its salience and does not change one’s perceived ability to prevent the disease.
PMID: 20216073 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
Go here to see the original:
Family history and perceptions about risk and prevention for chronic diseases in primary care: a report from the Family…
Lasofoxifene in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
N Engl J Med. 2010 Feb 25;362(8):686-96
Authors: Cummings SR, Ensrud K, Delmas PD, LaCroix AZ, Vukicevic S, Reid DM, Goldstein S, Sriram U, Lee A, Thompson J, Armstrong RA, Thompson DD, Powles T, Zanchetta J, Kendler D, Neven P, Eastell R,
BACKGROUND: The effects of lasofoxifene on the risk of fractures, breast cancer, and cardiovascular disease are uncertain. METHODS: In this randomized trial, we assigned 8556 women who were between the ages of 59 and 80 years and had a bone mineral density T score of -2.5 or less at the femoral neck or spine to receive once-daily lasofoxifene (at a dose of either 0.25 mg or 0.5 mg) or placebo for 5 years. Primary end points were vertebral fractures, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, and nonvertebral fractures; secondary end points included major coronary heart disease events and stroke. RESULTS: Lasofoxifene at a dose of 0.5 mg per day, as compared with placebo, was associated with reduced risks of vertebral fracture (13.1 cases vs. 22.4 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.70), nonvertebral fracture (18.7 vs. 24.5 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.91), ER-positive breast cancer (0.3 vs. 1.7 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.56), coronary heart disease events (5.1 vs. 7.5 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.93), and stroke (2.5 vs. 3.9 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.99). Lasofoxifene at a dose of 0.25 mg per day, as compared with placebo, was associated with reduced risks of vertebral fracture (16.0 vs. 22.4 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.83) and stroke (2.4 vs. 3.9 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.96) Both the lower and higher doses, as compared with placebo, were associated with an increase in venous thromboembolic events (3.8 and 2.9 cases vs. 1.4 cases per 1000 person-years; hazard ratios, 2.67 [95% CI, 1.55 to 4.58] and 2.06 [95% CI, 1.17 to 3.60], respectively). Endometrial cancer occurred in three women in the placebo group, two women in the lower-dose lasofoxifene group, and two women in the higher-dose lasofoxifene group. Rates of death per 1000 person-years were 5.1 in the placebo group, 7.0 in the lower-dose lasofoxifene group, and 5.7 in the higher-dose lasofoxifene group. CONCLUSIONS: In postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, lasofoxifene at a dose of 0.5 mg per day was associated with reduced risks of nonvertebral and vertebral fractures, ER-positive breast cancer, coronary heart disease, and stroke but an increased risk of venous thromboembolic events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00141323.)
PMID: 20181970 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
View post:
Lasofoxifene in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.
T cell Ig and mucin domain proteins and immunity.
J Immunol. 2010 Mar 15;184(6):2743-9
Authors: Kane LP
Proteins of the transmembrane (or T cell) Ig and mucin domain (TIM) family are expressed by multiple cell types within the immune systems of rodents and humans. Studies over the last several years have suggested that these proteins may be promising targets for therapeutic manipulation of immune responses. This review discusses the progress that has been made in understanding TIM protein function in the immune system, as well as some of the unresolved issues that remain on the road to eventually targeting TIM proteins for enhancing or inhibiting immunity.
PMID: 20200285 [PubMed - in process]
…more
