An index of geospatial disadvantage predicts both obesity and unmeasured body weight.

Neighborhood context impacts health. Using an index of geospatial disadvantage measures to predict neighborhood socioeconomic disparities would support area-based allocation of preventative resources, as well as the use of location as a clinical risk factor in care of individual patients. This study tested the association of the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a neighborhood-based index of socioeconomic contextual disadvantage, with elderly obesity risk. We sampled 5066 Medicare beneficiaries at the University of Missouri between September 1, 2013 and September 1, 2014. We excluded patients with unknown street addresses, excluded body mass index (BMI) lower than 18 or higher than 62 as probable errors, and excluded patients with missing BMI data. We used a plot of simple proportions to examine the association between ADI and prevalence of obesity, defined as BMI of 30 and over. We found that obesity was significantly less prevalent in the least-disadvantaged ADI decile (decile 1) than in all other deciles (p < 0.05) except decile 7. Obesity prevalence within the other deciles (2-6 and 8-10) was not significantly distinguishable except that decile 2 was significantly lower than decile 4. Patients with missing BMI data were more likely to reside in the most disadvantaged areas. There was a positive association between neighborhood disadvantage and obesity in this Midwestern United States Medicare population. The association of missing BMI information with neighborhood disadvantage may reflect unmeasured gaps in care delivery to the most disadvantaged patients. These preliminary results support the continued study of neighborhood socioeconomic measures to identify health disparities in populations.

The neurosurgical treatment of craniofacial pain syndromes: current surgical indications and techniques.

Craniofacial pain syndromes are comprised of multiple pathological entities resulting in pain referred to the scalp, face, or deeper cranial structures. In a small subset of patients affected by those syndromes, pharmacological and physical therapies fail in alleviating pain. In some of those refractory patients surgical procedures aimed at relieving pain are indicated and have been adopted with variable results and safety profiles. In this review, the authors describe craniofacial pain syndromes that most commonly fail to respond to pharmacological therapies and may be amenable to tailored surgical procedures. In particular, trigeminal, glossopharyngeal, and occipital neuralgias are considered, as well as some primary headache syndromes such as cluster headache, short unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing/short unilateral neuralgiform headache with autonomic symptoms, and migraine. Surgical techniques, including the implantation of deep brain or peripheral nerve electrodes with subsequent chronic stimulation, microvascular decompression of neurovascular conflicts, and percutaneous lesioning of neural structures are described. Finally, surgical indications, outcomes, and safety of these procedures are presented.

Radiosurgery to the Postoperative Tumor Bed for Metastatic Carcinoma Versus Whole Brain Radiation After Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The treatment paradigm from postoperative whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) to post-operative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to the tumor bed has shifted with little data to evaluate whether each treatment modality confers equivalent tumor control and survival outcomes. METHODS: Patients with surgical resection of single brain metastases from January 2010 to December 2014 were treated postoperatively with either WBRT or SRS. Retrospective patient data was compared for local control, distant brain recurrence, overall survival, and radiation complications. RESULTS: Forty-six received WBRT, and 37 received tumor bed SRS. Twelve of 35 (34%) SRS patients experienced local recurrence compared to 17 of 31 (55%) WBRT patients (p = 0.09). The median survival was 440 days (14.7 months) for SRS and 202 days (6.7 months) for WBRT (p = 0.062, log-rank). SRS demonstrated improved survival benefit in the first six months (p = 0.0034; Wilcoxon). Radiation-related adverse changes after SRS (22%) were not statistically different from WBRT (8.7%) (p = 0.152). Age (p = 0.08), systemic cancer status (p = 0.30), Graded Prognostic Assessment (p = 0.28), number of brain metastases at diagnosis (p = 0.65), tumor volume at diagnosis (p = 0.13), new brain lesions (p = 0.74) and neurologic versus systemic cause of death (p = 0.11) did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Following surgical resection, tumor bed SRS can be used effectively in lieu of WBRT to treat brain metastases with comparable local control and distant control and without significantly more adverse events.

Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and prognosis among cancer patients: a systematic review.

Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) is associated with a reduction in risk of some cancers, but its association with prognosis among patients with cancer is poorly understood. In view of the increasing number of cancer survivors in the United States and the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency among patients with cancer, an evaluation of the role of circulating 25-OHD in prognosis among patients with cancer is essential. We conducted a systematic review of studies published in the following databases-PubMed, OvidSP, BioMed Central, EMBASE, and Scopus till September 2013 using the following search terms: "vitamin D," "25-hydroxyvitamin D," "calcidiol," "cancer," "survival," "mortality," and "prognosis." Our search yielded 1,397 articles. From the 1,397 articles, we identified 26 studies that evaluated the associations of circulating 25-OHD with prognosis among patients with cancer. Evidence suggests that circulating 25-OHD levels may be associated with better prognosis in patients with breast and colorectal cancer, but there is a paucity of information on its association with prognosis in other cancers. This review highlights the need for further studies evaluating the role of vitamin D in prognosis among patients with cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 23(6); 917-33. ©2014 AACR.