Blood Pressure, Hypertension, and Antihypertensive Medication Use and Risk of Total and Fatal Prostate Cancer in Black and White Men in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study.

Black men are disproportionately burdened by hypertension and prostate cancer (PCa), and some cohorts suggest hypertension is associated with increased PCa risk. We investigated the association of hypertension and antihypertensive use with total (N = 889; 290 Black, 599 White) and fatal (N = 127; 42 Black, 85 White) PCa risk in 6658 (1578 Black, 5080 White) men in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study. In adjusted Cox models, time-updated untreated stage 1 hypertension (systolic/diastolic blood pressure 130-139/80-89 mmHg) was associated with a higher risk of fatal PCa compared to untreated normal blood pressure (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.95; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.03-3.70). Compared to untreated normal/elevated blood pressure (combined given few events in those with untreated normal blood pressure), the association was significant in Black (HR = 3.35; 95% CI = 1.27-8.83), but not White (HR = 1.21; 95% CI = 0.58-2.55) men. Ever antihypertensive use was associated with a lower risk of fatal PCa compared to never use (HR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.31-0.87), including short-term (< 10 years) and long-term (310 years) use (p-trend = 0.02) with similar inverse associations in Black and White men. Hypertension and antihypertensive use were not significantly associated with total PCa. The positive association of untreated stage 1 hypertension and fatal PCa warrants additional confirmation, especially in Black men, and characterization of the underlying mechanism.

Total-, LDL-, and HDL-cholesterol, apolipoproteins, and triglycerides with risk of total and fatal prostate cancer in Black and White men in the ARIC study.

BACKGROUND: Cholesterol reduction is considered a mechanism through which cholesterol-lowering drugs including statins are associated with a reduced aggressive prostate cancer risk. While prior cohort studies found positive associations between total cholesterol and more advanced stage and grade in White men, whether associations for total cholesterol, low (LDL)- and high (HDL)-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B (LDL particle) and A1 (HDL particle), and triglycerides are similar for fatal prostate cancer and in Black men, who experience a disproportionate burden of total and fatal prostate cancer, is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of 1553 Black and 5071 White cancer-free men attending visit 1 (1987-1989) of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. A total of 885 incident prostate cancer cases were ascertained through 2015, and 128 prostate cancer deaths through 2018. We estimated multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of total and fatal prostate cancer per 1-standard deviation increments and for tertiles (T1-T3) of time-updated lipid biomarkers overall and in Black and White men. RESULTS: Greater total cholesterol concentration (HR per-1 SD = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.00-1.58) and LDL cholesterol (HR per-1 SD = 1.26; 95% CI = 0.99-1.60) were associated with higher fatal prostate cancer risk in White men only. Apolipoprotein B was nonlinearly associated with fatal prostate cancer overall (T2 vs. T1: HR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.05-2.64) and in Black men (HR = 3.59; 95% CI = 1.53-8.40) but not White men (HR = 1.13; 95% CI = 0.65-1.97). Tests for interaction by race were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: These findings may improve the understanding of lipid metabolism in prostate carcinogenesis by disease aggressiveness, and by race while emphasizing the importance of cholesterol control.

Lipid-Lowering Drug Use and Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the ARIC Study.

Background: Lipid-lowering drugs, particularly statins, are associated with reduced incidence of certain cancers in some studies. Associations with cancer mortality are not well studied, and whether associations are similar across race is unknown. Methods: We conducted a prospective analysis of 12 997 cancer-free participants in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study who were never users at visit 1 (1987-1989). Ever use, duration of use, and age at first use were modeled as time-dependent variables using Cox regression to estimate associations with total, obesity- and smoking-associated, bladder, breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Results: We ascertained 3869 cancer cases and 1661 cancer deaths in 237 999 or more person-years. At 6 years of follow-up, 70.8% of lipid-lowering drug use was a statin. Compared with never use, ever use was associated with lower total, obesity- and smoking-associated cancer mortality and with colorectal cancer mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.32 to 0.79) and incidence (HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.53 to 0.92). Inverse associations were consistent by sex and race. Shorter-term use was associated with bladder cancer incidence in men (<10 years: HR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.02 to 2.73). First use at age 60 years or older was inversely associated with: total mortality, obesity- and smoking-associated mortality, and colorectal cancer mortality; and total incidence, obesity- and smoking-associated incidence, and breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer incidence. Conclusions: This study provides additional evidence for inverse associations between lipid-lowering drug use and cancer incidence and mortality but a positive association with bladder cancer incidence in men. Evaluation of the impact of chemoprevention strategies that include lipid-lowering drugs on population-level cancer burden is needed.

An umbrella review of the evidence associating diet and cancer risk at 11 anatomical sites.

There is evidence that diet and nutrition are modifiable risk factors for several cancers, but associations may be flawed due to inherent biases. Nutritional epidemiology studies have largely relied on a single assessment of diet using food frequency questionnaires. We conduct an umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational studies to evaluate the strength and validity of the evidence for the association between food/nutrient intake and risk of developing or dying from 11 primary cancers. It is estimated that only few single food/nutrient and cancer associations are supported by strong or highly suggestive meta-analytic evidence, and future similar research is unlikely to change this evidence. Alcohol consumption is positively associated with risk of postmenopausal breast, colorectal, esophageal, head & neck and liver cancer. Consumption of dairy products, milk, calcium and wholegrains are inversely associated with colorectal cancer risk. Coffee consumption is inversely associated with risk of liver cancer and skin basal cell carcinoma.

Association between pre-diagnostic circulating adipokines and colorectal cancer and adenoma in the CLUE II cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity is a known risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC) and adenoma. Obese individuals have higher circulating concentrations of certain endocrine and immune factors produced by adipocytes thought to partially underlie the association between obesity and colorectal neoplasia. Thus, we evaluated the association of plasma concentrations of adiponectin, leptin, and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor-2 (sTNFR2) with CRC and adenoma. METHODS: We ascertained 193 CRC cases and 193 matched controls, and 131 colorectal adenoma cases and 131 matched controls who had had an endoscopy nested in the CLUE II cohort of Washington County, MD. Plasma markers were measured using ELISA. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated from conditional logistic regression for quartiles of the plasma markers separately for CRC and adenoma. RESULTS: Adjusting for leptin and adiponectin, sTNFR2 was positively associated with CRC only in men (Q4 vs. Q1: OR = 3.14, 95% CI 1.11-8.86), which was unchanged adjusting for BMI (3.46, 95% CI 1.19-10.06). Leptin and adiponectin were not associated with CRC risk overall or in men or women. Adiponectin, leptin, and sTNFR2 were not associated with adenoma risk overall or in men or women. CONCLUSION: In this study, leptin and adiponectin were not associated with colorectal carcinogenesis and thus do not appear to underlie the association between obesity and colorectal carcinogenesis. sTNFR2, which we measured as a correlate of TNF-α, was positively associated with CRC in men adjusting for BMI, suggesting that TNF-α may influence colorectal carcinogenesis independent of adipocyte production.

Use of Aspirin and Statins in Relation to Inflammation in Benign Prostate Tissue in the Placebo Arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial.

Aspirin and statin use may lower the risk of advanced/fatal prostate cancer, possibly by reducing intraprostatic inflammation. To test this hypothesis, we investigated the association of aspirin and statin use with the presence and extent of intraprostatic inflammation, and the abundance of specific immune cell types, in benign prostate tissue from a subset of men from the placebo arm of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. Men were classified as aspirin or statin users if they reported use at baseline or during the 7-year trial. Presence and extent of inflammation were assessed, and markers of specific immune cell types (CD4, CD8, FoxP3, CD68, and c-KIT) were scored, in slides from end-of-study prostate biopsies taken irrespective of clinical indication, per trial protocol. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations between medication use and inflammation measures, adjusted for potential confounders. Of 357 men included, 61% reported aspirin use and 32% reported statin use. Prevalence and extent of inflammation were not associated with medication use. However, aspirin users were more likely to have low FoxP3, a T regulatory cell marker [OR, 5.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-27.07], and statin users were more likely to have low CD68, a macrophage marker (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.81-3.27). If confirmed, these results suggest that these medications may alter the immune milieu of the prostate, which could potentially mediate effects of these medications on advanced/fatal prostate cancer risk.

Adding the Team into T1 Translational Research: A Case Study of Multidisciplinary Team Science in the Evaluation of Biomarkers of Prostate Cancer Risk and Prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Given translational research challenges, multidisciplinary team science is promoted to increase the likelihood of moving from discovery to health effect. We present a case study documenting the utility of multidisciplinary team science in prostate cancer tissue biomarker validation. METHODS: We used primary data generated by a team consisting of a pathologist, cancer biologists, a biostatistician, and epidemiologists. We examined their contributions by phase of biomarker evaluation to identify when, through the practice of team science, threats to internal validity were recognized and solved. Next, we quantified the extent of bias avoided in evaluating the association of Ki67 (immunohistochemistry), stromal cell telomere length (fluorescence in situ hybridization), and microRNA (miRNA) (miR-21, miR-141, miR-221; quantitative RT-PCR) with prostate cancer risk or recurrence in nested case-control studies. RESULTS: Threats to validity were tissue storage time (Ki67, miRNA) and laboratory equipment maintenance (telomeres). Solutions were all in the data analysis phase and involved using tissue storage-time specific cutpoints and/or batch-specific cutpoints. Bias in the regression coefficient for quantiles of each biomarker ranged from 24% to 423%, and the coefficient for the test for trend ranged from 15% to 910%. The interpretation of the associations changed as follows: Ki67, null to positive; stromal cell telomere length, null to positive; miR-21 and miR-141 remained null; miR-221, weak to moderate inverse. CONCLUSIONS: In this case study, we documented the inferential benefits of multidisciplinary team science when the team's collaboration and coordination led to the identification of threats to validity and the implementation of appropriate solutions.

Hyperglycemia, Classified with Multiple Biomarkers Simultaneously in Men without Diabetes, and Risk of Fatal Prostate Cancer.

The association between hyperglycemia and prostate cancer risk is inconsistent, and its association with prostate cancer mortality is understudied. Thus, we investigated the association between hyperglycemia and prostate cancer risk and mortality using multiple biomarkers simultaneously to classify hyper- and normoglycemia. We conducted a prospective analysis of 5,162 cancer-free men attending visit 2 (1990-1992) of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study followed for total (N = 671) and lethal (N = 69) prostate cancer incidence and prostate cancer mortality (N = 64) through 2012. Men without diagnosed diabetes were classified as normo- or hyperglycemic using joint categories of fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and glycated albumin (or fructosamine) defined by clinical or research cutpoints. We evaluated the multivariable-adjusted association of hyperglycemia with prostate cancer incidence and mortality using Cox proportional hazards regression; men with diagnosed diabetes were included as a separate exposure category. Among 4,753 men without diagnosed diabetes, 61.5% were classified as having hyperglycemia (high on ≥1 biomarker). HbA1c and glycated albumin together classified 61.9% of 1,736 men with normal fasting glucose as normoglycemic. Compared with men who were normal on all three biomarkers, men who were high on ≥1 biomarker had an increased risk of lethal [HR, 2.50; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12-5.58] and fatal (HR, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.26-8.48) disease, but not total prostate cancer incidence (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.20); associations were similar including fructosamine instead of glycated albumin. Our findings indicate hyperglycemia is associated with an increased risk of lethal and fatal prostate cancer, but not total prostate cancer incidence.

When Is Enough, Enough? When Are More Observational Epidemiologic Studies Needed to Resolve a Research Question: Illustrations Using Biomarker-Cancer Associations.

BACKGROUND: Research reproducibility is vital for translation of epidemiologic findings. However, repeated studies of the same question may be undertaken without enhancing existing knowledge. To identify settings in which additional research is or is not warranted, we adapted research synthesis metrics to determine number of additional observational studies needed to change the inference from an existing meta-analysis. METHODS: The fail-safe number (FSN) estimates number of additional studies of average weight and null effect needed to drive a statistically significant meta-analysis to null (P ≥ 0.05). We used conditional power to determine number of additional studies of average weight and equivalent heterogeneity to achieve 80% power in an updated meta-analysis to detect the observed summary estimate as statistically significant. We applied these metrics to a curated set of 98 meta-analyses on biomarkers and cancer risk. RESULTS: Both metrics were influenced by number of studies, heterogeneity, and summary estimate size in the existing meta-analysis. For the meta-analysis on Helicobacter pylori and gastric cancer with 15 studies [OR = 2.29; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.71-3.05], FSN was 805 studies, supporting futility of further study. For the meta-analysis on dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate and prostate cancer with 7 studies (OR = 1.29; 95% CI, 0.99-1.69), 5 more studies would be needed for 80% power, suggesting further study could change inferences. CONCLUSIONS: Along with traditional assessments, these metrics could be used by stakeholders to decide whether additional studies addressing the same question are needed. IMPACT: Systematic application of these metrics could lead to more judicious use of resources and acceleration from discovery to population-health impact.

Autologous serum eye drops for dry eye.

BACKGROUND: Theoretically, autologous serum eye drops (AS) offer a potential advantage over traditional therapies on the assumption that AS not only serve as a lacrimal substitute to provide lubrication but contain other biochemical components that allow them to mimic natural tears more closely. Application of AS has gained popularity as second-line therapy for patients with dry eye. Published studies on this subject indicate that autologous serum could be an effective treatment for dry eye. OBJECTIVES: We conducted this review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AS given alone or in combination with artificial tears as compared with artificial tears alone, saline, placebo, or no treatment for adults with dry eye. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to July 2016), Embase (January 1980 to July 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to July 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We also searched the Science Citation Index Expanded database (December 2016) and reference lists of included studies. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 5 July 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared AS versus artificial tears for treatment of adults with dry eye. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts and assessed full-text reports of potentially eligible trials. Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias and characteristics of included trials. We contacted investigators to ask for missing data. For both primary and secondary outcomes, we reported mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes. We did not perform meta-analysis owing to differences in outcome assessments across trials. MAIN RESULTS: We identified five eligible RCTs (92 participants) that compared AS versus artificial tears or saline in individuals with dry eye of various origins (Sjögren's syndrome-related dry eye, non-Sjögren's syndrome dry eye, and postoperative dry eye induced by laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK)). We assessed the certainty of evidence as low or very low because of lack of reporting of quantitative data for most outcomes and unclear or high risk of bias among trials. We judged most risk of bias domains to have unclear risk in two trials owing to insufficient reporting of trial characteristics, and we considered one trial to have high risk of bias for most domains. We judged the remaining two trials to have low risk of bias; however, these trials used a cross-over design and did not report data in a way that could be used to compare outcomes between treatment groups appropriately. Incomplete outcome reporting and heterogeneity among outcomes and follow-up periods prevented inclusion of these trials in a summary meta-analysis.Three trials compared AS with artificial tears; however, only one trial reported quantitative data for analysis. Low-certainty evidence from one trial suggested that AS might provide some improvement in participant-reported symptoms compared with artificial tears after two weeks of treatment; the mean difference in mean change in symptom score measured on a visual analogue scale (range 0 to 100, with higher scores representing worse symptoms) was -12.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) -20.16 to -3.84; 20 participants). This same trial found mixed results with respect to ocular surface outcomes; the mean difference in mean change in scores between AS and artificial tears was -0.9 (95% CI -1.47 to -0.33; 20 participants; low-certainty evidence) for fluorescein staining and -2.2 (95% CI -2.73 to -1.67; 20 participants; low-certainty evidence) for Rose Bengal staining. Both staining scales range from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating worse results. The mean change in tear film break-up time was 2.00 seconds longer (95% CI 0.99 to 3.01; 20 participants; low-certainty evidence) in the AS group than in the artificial tears group. Investigators reported no clinically meaningful differences in Schirmer's test scores between groups (mean difference -0.40 mm, 95% CI -2.91 to 2.11; 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of these three trials reported tear hyperosmolarity and adverse events.Two trials compared AS versus saline; however, only one trial reported quantitative data for analysis of only one outcome (Rose Bengal staining). Trial investigators of the two studies reported no differences in symptom scores, fluorescein staining scores, tear film break-up times, or Schirmer's test scores between groups at two to four weeks' follow-up. Very low-certainty evidence from one trial suggested that AS might provide some improvement in Rose Bengal staining scores compared with saline after four weeks of treatment; the mean difference in Rose Bengal staining score (range from 0 to 9, with higher scores showing worse results) was -0.60 (95% CI -1.11 to -0.09; 35 participants). Neither trial reported tear hyperosmolarity outcomes. One trial reported adverse events; two of 12 participants had signs of conjunctivitis with negative culture that did resolve. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, investigators reported inconsistency in possible benefits of AS for improving participant-reported symptoms and other objective clinical measures. There might be some benefit in symptoms with AS compared with artificial tears in the short-term, but we found no evidence of an effect after two weeks of treatment. Well-planned, large, high-quality RCTs are warranted to examine participants with dry eye of different severities by using standardized questionnaires to measure participant-reported outcomes, as well as objective clinical tests and objective biomarkers to assess the benefit of AS therapy for dry eye.

Population-Based Precision Cancer Screening: A Symposium on Evidence, Epidemiology, and Next Steps.

Precision medicine, an emerging approach for disease treatment that takes into account individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle, is under consideration for preventive interventions, including cancer screening. On September 29, 2015, the National Cancer Institute sponsored a symposium entitled "Precision Cancer Screening in the General Population: Evidence, Epidemiology, and Next Steps". The goal was two-fold: to share current information on the evidence, practices, and challenges surrounding precision screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers, and to allow for in-depth discussion among experts in relevant fields regarding how epidemiology and other population sciences can be used to generate evidence to inform precision screening strategies. Attendees concluded that the strength of evidence for efficacy and effectiveness of precision strategies varies by cancer site, that no one research strategy or methodology would be able or appropriate to address the many knowledge gaps in precision screening, and that issues surrounding implementation must be researched as well. Additional discussion needs to occur to identify the high priority research areas in precision cancer screening for pertinent organs and to gather the necessary evidence to determine whether further implementation of precision cancer screening strategies in the general population would be feasible and beneficial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(11); 1449-55. ©2016 AACR.

A 22 Gene-expression Assay, Decipher® (GenomeDx Biosciences) to Predict Five-year Risk of Metastatic Prostate Cancer in Men Treated with Radical Prostatectomy.

Among the estimated 230,000 men diagnosed with prostate cancer in the US each year there has been a rise in the number of radical prostatectomies (RP). There is some debate over the value of immediate adjuvant therapy following RP in men with high-risk pathological features versus delayed salvage radiation therapy when signs of disease progression are observed. Thus, it would be potentially useful to inform post-RP management strategies by more clearly identifying those patients at higher risk of progression and death from prostate cancer. A 22 gene-expression assay, Decipher® (GenomeDx Biosciences), has been developed in men treated with radical prostatectomy to predict the five-year risk of metastatic prostate cancer. Published and unpublished literature was evaluated to determine the analytic validity, clinical validity and clinical utility of Decipher. Limited information is available on the analytic validity of Decipher. In both discovery and validation studies, Decipher was shown to have good performance in discriminating men with metastasis from men without metastasis five years after surgery (AUC 0.75 to 0.90). In terms of clinical utility, no evidence was found reporting improved outcomes (lower prostate cancer specific mortality and treatment related adverse effects) from using this test to guide post-operative treatment. Four studies provided weak indirect evidence of clinical utility in which 31% to 43% of post-operative treatment recommendations were changed in men with high-risk prostate cancer based on test results, with 27% to 52% of treatment recommendations changing from any treatment to no treatment.

Opportunities for translational epidemiology: the important role of observational studies to advance precision oncology.

Within current oncology practice, several genomic applications are being used to inform treatment decisions with molecularly targeted therapies in breast, lung, colorectal, melanoma, and other cancers. This commentary introduces a conceptual framework connecting the full spectrum of biomedical research disciplines, including fundamental laboratory research, clinical trials, and observational studies in the translation of genomic applications into clinical practice. The conceptual framework illustrates the contribution that well-designed observational epidemiologic studies provide to the successful translation of these applications, and characterizes the role observational epidemiology plays in driving the dynamic and iterative bench-to-bedside, and bedside-to-bench translation continuum. We also discuss how the principles of this conceptual model, emphasizing integration of multidisciplinary research, can be applied to the evolving paradigm in "precision oncology" focusing on multiplex tumor sequencing, and we identify opportunities for observational studies to contribute to the successful and efficient translation of this paradigm.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(3); 484-9. ©2015 AACR.

Blood pressure control for diabetic retinopathy.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy is a common complication of diabetes and a leading cause of visual impairment and blindness. Research has established the importance of blood glucose control to prevent development and progression of the ocular complications of diabetes. Simultaneous blood pressure control has been advocated for the same purpose, but findings reported from individual studies have supported varying conclusions regarding the ocular benefit of interventions on blood pressure. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this review was to summarize the existing evidence regarding the effect of interventions to control or reduce blood pressure levels among diabetics on incidence and progression of diabetic retinopathy, preservation of visual acuity, adverse events, quality of life, and costs. A secondary aim was to compare classes of anti-hypertensive medications with respect to the same outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched a number of electronic databases including CENTRAL as well as ongoing trial registries. We last searched the electronic databases on 25 April 2014. We also reviewed reference lists of review articles and trial reports selected for inclusion. In addition, we contacted investigators of trials with potentially pertinent data. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included in this review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which either type 1 or type 2 diabetic participants, with or without hypertension, were assigned randomly to intense versus less intense blood pressure control, to blood pressure control versus usual care or no intervention on blood pressure, or to different classes of anti-hypertensive agents versus placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts from electronic and manual searches and the full text of any document that appeared to be relevant. We assessed included trials independently for risk of bias with respect to outcomes reported in this review. We extracted data regarding trial characteristics, incidence and progression of retinopathy, visual acuity, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness at annual intervals after study entry whenever provided in published reports and other documents available from included trials. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs, conducted primarily in North America and Europe, that had enrolled 4157 type 1 and 9512 type 2 diabetic participants, ranging from 16 to 2130 participants in individual trials. In 10 of the 15 RCTs, one group of participants was assigned to one or more anti-hypertensive agents and the control group received placebo. In three trials, intense blood pressure control was compared to less intense blood pressure control. In the remaining two trials, blood pressure control was compared with usual care. Five of the 15 trials enrolled type 1 diabetics, and 10 trials enrolled type 2 diabetics. Six trials were sponsored entirely by pharmaceutical companies, seven trials received partial support from pharmaceutical companies, and two studies received support from government-sponsored grants and institutional support.Study designs, populations, interventions, and lengths of follow-up (range one to nine years) varied among the included trials. Overall, the quality of the evidence for individual outcomes was low to moderate. For the primary outcomes, incidence and progression of retinopathy, the quality of evidence was downgraded due to inconsistency and imprecision of estimates from individual studies and differing characteristics of participants.For primary outcomes among type 1 diabetics, one of the five trials reported incidence of retinopathy and one trial reported progression of retinopathy after 4 to 5 years of treatment and follow-up; four of the five trials reported a combined outcome of incidence and progression over the same time interval. Among type 2 diabetics, 5 of the 10 trials reported incidence of diabetic retinopathy and 3 trials reported progression of retinopathy; one of the 10 trials reported a combined outcome of incidence and progression during a 4- to 5-year follow-up period. One trial in which type 2 diabetics participated had reported no primary (or secondary) outcome targeted for this review.The evidence from these trials supported a benefit of more intensive blood pressure control intervention with respect to 4- to 5-year incidence of diabetic retinopathy (estimated risk ratio (RR) 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 0.92) and the combined outcome of incidence and progression (estimated RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.97). The available evidence provided less support for a benefit with respect to 4- to 5-year progression of diabetic retinopathy (point estimate was closer to 1 than point estimates for incidence and combined incidence and progression, and the CI overlapped 1; estimated RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05). The available evidence regarding progression to proliferative diabetic retinopathy or clinically significant macular edema or moderate to severe loss of best-corrected visual acuity did not support a benefit of intervention on blood pressure: estimated RRs and 95% CIs 0.95 (0.83 to 1.09) and 1.06 (0.85 to 1.33), respectively, after 4 to 5 years of follow-up. Findings within subgroups of trial participants (type 1 and type 2 diabetics; participants with normal blood pressure levels at baseline and those with elevated levels) were similar to overall findings.The adverse event reported most often (7 of 15 trials) was death, yielding an estimated RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.14). Hypotension was reported from three trials; the estimated RR was 2.08 (95% CI 1.68 to 2.57). Other adverse ocular events were reported from single trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension is a well-known risk factor for several chronic conditions in which lowering blood pressure has proven to be beneficial. The available evidence supports a beneficial effect of intervention to reduce blood pressure with respect to preventing diabetic retinopathy for up to 4 to 5 years. However, the lack of evidence to support such intervention to slow progression of diabetic retinopathy or to prevent other outcomes considered in this review, along with the relatively modest support for the beneficial effect on incidence, weakens the conclusion regarding an overall benefit of intervening on blood pressure solely to prevent diabetic retinopathy.

Clinical utility of gene-expression profiling in women with early breast cancer: an overview of systematic reviews.

PURPOSE: This overview systematically evaluates the clinical utility of using Oncotype DX and MammaPrint gene-expression profiling tests to direct treatment decisions in women with breast cancer. The findings are intended to inform an updated recommendation from the Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Working Group. METHODS: Evidence reported in systematic reviews evaluating the clinical utility of Oncotype DX and MammaPrint, as well as the ability to predict treatment outcomes, change in treatment decisions, and cost-effectiveness, was qualitatively synthesized. RESULTS: Five systematic reviews found no direct evidence of clinical utility for either test. Indirect evidence showed Oncotype DX was able to predict treatment effects of adjuvant chemotherapy, whereas no evidence of predictive value was found for MammaPrint. Both tests influenced a change in treatment recommendations in 21 to 74% of participants. The cost-effectiveness of Oncotype DX varied with the alternative compared. For MammaPrint, lack of evidence of the predictive value led to uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: No studies were identified that provided direct evidence that using gene-expression profiling tests to direct treatment decisions improved outcomes in women with breast cancer. Three ongoing studies may provide direct evidence for determining the clinical utility of gene-expression profiling testing.

Multi-marker Solid Tumor Panels Using Next-generation Sequencing to Direct Molecularly Targeted Therapies.

In contemporary oncology practices there is an increasing emphasis on concurrent evaluation of multiple genomic alterations within the biological pathways driving tumorigenesis. At the foundation of this paradigm shift are several commercially available tumor panels using next-generation sequencing to develop a more complete molecular blueprint of the tumor. Ideally, these would be used to identify clinically actionable variants that can be matched with available molecularly targeted therapy, regardless of the tumor site or histology. Currently, there is little information available on the post-analytic processes unique to next-generation sequencing platforms used by the companies offering these tests. Additionally, evidence of clinical validity showing an association between the genetic markers curated in these tests with treatment response to approved molecularly targeted therapies is lacking across all solid-tumor types. To date, there is no published data of improved outcomes when using the commercially available tests to guide treatment decisions. The uniqueness of these tests from other genomic applications used to guide clinical treatment decisions lie in the sequencing platforms used to generate large amounts of genomic data, which have their own related issues regarding analytic and clinical validity, necessary precursors to the evaluation of clinical utility. The generation and interpretation of these data will require new evidentiary standards for establishing not only clinical utility, but also analytical and clinical validity for this emerging paradigm in oncology practice.

Autologous serum eye drops for dry eye.

BACKGROUND: =Theoretically, autologous serum eye drops (AS) have a potential advantage over traditional therapies based on the assumption that ASserve not only as a lacrimal substitute to provide lubrication, but also contain other biochemical components mimicking natural tears more closely. The application of AS in dry eye treatment has gained popularity as a second-line therapy in the treatment of dry eye.Published studies on the subject indicate that autologous serum could be an effective treatment for dry eye. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of AS compared to artificial tears for treating dry eye. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 3),Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE,(January 1950 to April 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences(LILACS) (January 1982 to April 2013), themetaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov(www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We also searched the Science Citation Index Expanded database (September 2013) and reference lists of included studies. We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 15 April 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which AS was compared to artificial tears in the treatment of dry eye in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts and assessed full-text articles of potentially eligible trials. Two review authors extracted data and assessed the methodological quality and characteristics of the included trials.We contacted investigators for missing data. For both primary and secondary outcomes, we reported mean differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals(CIs) for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We identified four eligible RCTs in which AS was compared with artificial tear treatment or saline in individuals (n = 72 participants)with dry eye of various etiologies (Sjögren's syndrome-related dry eye, non-Sjögren's syndrome dry eye and postoperative dry eye induced by laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK)). The quality of the evidence provided by these trials was variable. A majority of the risk of bias domains were judged to have an unclear risk of bias in two trials owing to insufficient reporting of trial characteristics.One trial was considered to have a low risk of bias for most domains while another was considered to have a high risk of bias for most domains. Incomplete outcome reporting and heterogeneity in the participant populations and follow-up periods prevented the inclusion of these trials in a summary meta-analysis. For the primary outcome, improvement in participant-reported symptoms at one month, one trial (12 participants) showed no difference in participant-reported symptoms between 20% AS and artificial tears. Based on the results of two trials in 32 participants, 20% AS may provide some improvement in participant-reported symptoms compared to traditional artificial tears after two weeks of treatment. One trial also showed positive results with a mean difference in tear breakup time (TBUT) of 2.00 seconds (95% CI 0.99 to 3.01 seconds) between 20% AS and artificial tears after two weeks, which were not similar to findings from the other trials. Based on all other objective clinical assessments included in this review, AS was not associated with improvements in aqueous tear production measured by Schirmer's test (two trials, 33 participants), ocular surface condition with fluorescein (four trials, 72 participants) or Rose Bengal staining (three trials, 60 participants), and epithelial metaplasia by impression cytology compared to artificial tears (one trial, 12 participants). Data on adverse effects were not reported by three of the included studies. In one study, there were no serious adverse events reported with the collection of and treatment with AS. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall there was inconsistency in the possible benefits of AS in improving participant-reported symptoms and TBUT and lack of effect based on other objective clinical measures. Well-planned, large, high-quality RCTs are warranted, in different severities of dry eye and using standardized questionnaires to measure participant-reported outcomes and objective clinical tests as well as objective biomarkers to assess the benefit of AS therapy for dry eye.

Use of genomic panels to determine risk of developing type 2 diabetes in the general population: a targeted evidence-based review.

This evidence review addresses whether type 2 diabetes genomic risk panels improve health outcomes (e.g., reduce rates of developing type 2 diabetes) in low- or high-risk adults; two clinical scenarios promulgated by commercial companies offering such testing. Evidence for the analytic validity of available genomic profiles was inadequate. Clinical validity ranged from inadequate to convincing for 30 variants identified on five type 2 diabetes genomic panels and by genome-wide association studies. Eight common variants were identified for general population use; evidence credibility based on published criteria was strong for two variants, moderate for two variants, and weak for four variants. TCF7L2 had the largest per-allele odds ratio of 1.39 (95% confidence interval 1.33-1.46). Models combining the best four, best eight, and all 30 variants used summary effect sizes, reported genotype frequencies, and assumed independent effects. Areas under the curve were 0.547, 0.551, and 0.570, respectively. In high-risk populations, per-allele odds ratios for TCF7L2 alone were similar to those of the general population. TCF7L2, in combination with other variants, yielded minimal improvement in risk reclassification. Evidence on TCF7L2 clinical validity was adequate. Three studies addressed the clinical utility of intervention effectiveness, stratified by TCF7L2 genotype; none found significant interactions. Clinical utility evidence was inadequate. In addition to analytic validity and clinical utility knowledge gaps, additional gaps were identified regarding how to inform, produce, and evaluate models combining multiple variants.

Improving the efficiency and relevance of evidence-based recommendations in the era of whole-genome sequencing: an EGAPP methods update.

To provide an update on recent revisions to Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) methods designed to improve efficiency, and an assessment of the implications of whole genome sequencing for evidence-based recommendation development. Improvements to the EGAPP approach include automated searches for horizon scanning, a quantitative ranking process for topic prioritization, and the development of a staged evidence review and evaluation process. The staged process entails (i) triaging tests with minimal evidence of clinical validity, (ii) using and updating existing reviews, (iii) evaluating clinical validity prior to analytic validity or clinical utility, (iv) using decision modeling to assess potential clinical utility when direct evidence is not available. EGAPP experience to date suggests the following approaches will be critical for the development of evidence based recommendations in the whole genome sequencing era: (i) use of triage approaches and frameworks to improve efficiency, (ii) development of evidence thresholds that consider the value of further research, (iii) incorporation of patient preferences, and (iv) engagement of diverse stakeholders. The rapid advances in genomics present a significant challenge to traditional evidence based medicine, but also an opportunity for innovative approaches to recommendation development.