scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Lawrence S. Honig

Bio: Lawrence S. Honig is an academic researcher from Columbia University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Dementia & Alzheimer's disease. The author has an hindex of 55, co-authored 159 publications receiving 17938 citations. Previous affiliations of Lawrence S. Honig include Columbia University Medical Center & University of Hawaii at Manoa.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Most patients with anti-NMDAR encephalitis respond to immunotherapy; second-line immunotherapy is usually effective when first-line treatments fail, and outcomes continued to improve for up to 18 months after symptom onset.
Abstract: Summary Background Anti-NMDA receptor (NMDAR) encephalitis is an autoimmune disorder in which the use of immunotherapy and the long-term outcome have not been defined. We aimed to assess the presentation of the disease, the spectrum of symptoms, immunotherapies used, timing of improvement, and long-term outcome. Methods In this multi-institutional observational study, we tested for the presence of NMDAR antibodies in serum or CSF samples of patients with encephalitis between Jan 1, 2007, and Jan 1, 2012. All patients who tested positive for NMDAR antibodies were included in the study; patients were assessed at symptom onset and at months 4, 8, 12, 18, and 24, by use of the modified Rankin scale (mRS). Treatment included first-line immunotherapy (steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, plasmapheresis), second-line immunotherapy (rituximab, cyclophosphamide), and tumour removal. Predictors of outcome were determined at the Universities of Pennsylvania (PA, USA) and Barcelona (Spain) by use of a generalised linear mixed model with binary distribution. Results We enrolled 577 patients (median age 21 years, range 8 months to 85 years), 211 of whom were children ( Interpretation Most patients with anti-NMDAR encephalitis respond to immunotherapy. Second-line immunotherapy is usually effective when first-line treatments fail. In this cohort, the recovery of some patients took up to 18 months. Funding The Dutch Cancer Society, the National Institutes of Health, the McKnight Neuroscience of Brain Disorders award, The Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias, and Fundacio la Marato de TV3.

2,226 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Adam C. Naj1, Gyungah Jun2, Gary W. Beecham1, Li-San Wang3  +153 moreInstitutions (38)
TL;DR: The Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium performed a genome-wide association study of late-onset Alzheimer disease using a three-stage design consisting of a discovery stage (stage 1), two replication stages (stages 2 and 3), and both joint analysis and meta-analysis approaches were used.
Abstract: The Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium (ADGC) performed a genome-wide association study of late-onset Alzheimer disease using a three-stage design consisting of a discovery stage (stage 1) and two replication stages (stages 2 and 3). Both joint analysis and meta-analysis approaches were used. We obtained genome-wide significant results at MS4A4A (rs4938933; stages 1 and 2, meta-analysis P (P(M)) = 1.7 × 10(-9), joint analysis P (P(J)) = 1.7 × 10(-9); stages 1, 2 and 3, P(M) = 8.2 × 10(-12)), CD2AP (rs9349407; stages 1, 2 and 3, P(M) = 8.6 × 10(-9)), EPHA1 (rs11767557; stages 1, 2 and 3, P(M) = 6.0 × 10(-10)) and CD33 (rs3865444; stages 1, 2 and 3, P(M) = 1.6 × 10(-9)). We also replicated previous associations at CR1 (rs6701713; P(M) = 4.6 × 10(-10), P(J) = 5.2 × 10(-11)), CLU (rs1532278; P(M) = 8.3 × 10(-8), P(J) = 1.9 × 10(-8)), BIN1 (rs7561528; P(M) = 4.0 × 10(-14), P(J) = 5.2 × 10(-14)) and PICALM (rs561655; P(M) = 7.0 × 10(-11), P(J) = 1.0 × 10(-10)), but not at EXOC3L2, to late-onset Alzheimer's disease susceptibility.

1,743 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE ε4 carriers.
Abstract: Background Bapineuzumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta monoclonal antibody, is in clinical development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Methods We conducted two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials involving patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease--one involving 1121 carriers of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) e4 allele and the other involving 1331 noncarriers. Bapineuzumab or placebo, with doses varying by study, was administered by intravenous infusion every 13 weeks for 78 weeks. The primary outcome measures were scores on the 11-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog11, with scores ranging from 0 to 70 and higher scores indicating greater impairment) and the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicating less impairment). A total of 1090 carriers and 1114 noncarriers were included in the efficacy analysis. Secondary outcome measures included findings on positron-emission tomographic amyloid imaging with the use of Pittsburgh compound B (PIB-PET) and cerebrospinal fluid phosphorylated tau (phospho-tau) concentrations. Results There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcomes. At week 78, the between-group differences in the change from baseline in the ADAS-cog11 and DAD scores (bapineuzumab group minus placebo group) were -0.2 (P=0.80) and -1.2 (P=0.34), respectively, in the carrier study; the corresponding differences in the noncarrier study were -0.3 (P=0.64) and 2.8 (P=0.07) with the 0.5-mg-per-kilogram dose of bapineuzumab and 0.4 (P=0.62) and 0.9 (P=0.55) with the 1.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. The major safety finding was amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema among patients receiving bapineuzumab, which increased with bapineuzumab dose and APOE e4 allele number and which led to discontinuation of the 2.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. Between-group differences were observed with respect to PIB-PET and cerebrospinal fluid phospho-tau concentrations in APOE e4 allele carriers but not in noncarriers. Conclusions Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE e4 carriers. (Funded by Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy and Pfizer; Bapineuzumab 301 and 302 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00575055 and NCT00574132, and EudraCT number, 2009-012748-17.).

1,579 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) increased with the number of vascular risk factors, but clusters including hypertension and heart disease also increased the risk of AD.
Abstract: Background: The prevalence of Alzheimer disease (AD) is increasing in the elderly, and vascular risk factors may increase its risk. Objective: To explore the association of the aggregation of vascular risk factors with AD. Methods: The authors followed 1,138 individuals without dementia at baseline (mean age 76.2) for a mean of 5.5 years. The presence of vascular risk factors was related to incident possible and probable AD. Results: Four risk factors (diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, and current smoking) were associated with a higher risk of AD ( p p for trend Conclusions: The risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) increased with the number of vascular risk factors. Diabetes and current smoking were the strongest risk factors, but clusters including hypertension and heart disease also increased the risk of AD. These associations are unlikely to be explained by misclassification of the outcome, given strong associations when only probable AD is considered.

765 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Rebecca Sims1, Sven J. van der Lee2, Adam C. Naj3, Céline Bellenguez4  +484 moreInstitutions (120)
TL;DR: Three new genome-wide significant nonsynonymous variants associated with Alzheimer's disease are observed, providing additional evidence that the microglia-mediated innate immune response contributes directly to the development of Alzheimer's Disease.
Abstract: We identified rare coding variants associated with Alzheimer's disease in a three-stage case–control study of 85,133 subjects. In stage 1, we genotyped 34,174 samples using a whole-exome microarray. In stage 2, we tested associated variants (P < 1 × 10−4) in 35,962 independent samples using de novo genotyping and imputed genotypes. In stage 3, we used an additional 14,997 samples to test the most significant stage 2 associations (P < 5 × 10−8) using imputed genotypes. We observed three new genome-wide significant nonsynonymous variants associated with Alzheimer's disease: a protective variant in PLCG2 (rs72824905: p.Pro522Arg, P = 5.38 × 10−10, odds ratio (OR) = 0.68, minor allele frequency (MAF)cases = 0.0059, MAFcontrols = 0.0093), a risk variant in ABI3 (rs616338: p.Ser209Phe, P = 4.56 × 10−10, OR = 1.43, MAFcases = 0.011, MAFcontrols = 0.008), and a new genome-wide significant variant in TREM2 (rs143332484: p.Arg62His, P = 1.55 × 10−14, OR = 1.67, MAFcases = 0.0143, MAFcontrols = 0.0089), a known susceptibility gene for Alzheimer's disease. These protein-altering changes are in genes highly expressed in microglia and highlight an immune-related protein–protein interaction network enriched for previously identified risk genes in Alzheimer's disease. These genetic findings provide additional evidence that the microglia-mediated innate immune response contributes directly to the development of Alzheimer's disease.

730 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: The using multivariate statistics is universally compatible with any devices to read, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of the authors' books like this one.
Abstract: Thank you for downloading using multivariate statistics. As you may know, people have look hundreds times for their favorite novels like this using multivariate statistics, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of tea in the afternoon, instead they juggled with some harmful bugs inside their laptop. using multivariate statistics is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our books collection saves in multiple locations, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Merely said, the using multivariate statistics is universally compatible with any devices to read.

14,604 citations

01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.
Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

9,618 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This research framework seeks to create a common language with which investigators can generate and test hypotheses about the interactions among different pathologic processes (denoted by biomarkers) and cognitive symptoms and envision that defining AD as a biological construct will enable a more accurate characterization and understanding of the sequence of events that lead to cognitive impairment that is associated with AD.
Abstract: In 2011, the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association created separate diagnostic recommendations for the preclinical, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia stages of Alzheimer's disease. Scientific progress in the interim led to an initiative by the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association to update and unify the 2011 guidelines. This unifying update is labeled a "research framework" because its intended use is for observational and interventional research, not routine clinical care. In the National Institute on Aging and Alzheimer's Association Research Framework, Alzheimer's disease (AD) is defined by its underlying pathologic processes that can be documented by postmortem examination or in vivo by biomarkers. The diagnosis is not based on the clinical consequences of the disease (i.e., symptoms/signs) in this research framework, which shifts the definition of AD in living people from a syndromal to a biological construct. The research framework focuses on the diagnosis of AD with biomarkers in living persons. Biomarkers are grouped into those of β amyloid deposition, pathologic tau, and neurodegeneration [AT(N)]. This ATN classification system groups different biomarkers (imaging and biofluids) by the pathologic process each measures. The AT(N) system is flexible in that new biomarkers can be added to the three existing AT(N) groups, and new biomarker groups beyond AT(N) can be added when they become available. We focus on AD as a continuum, and cognitive staging may be accomplished using continuous measures. However, we also outline two different categorical cognitive schemes for staging the severity of cognitive impairment: a scheme using three traditional syndromal categories and a six-stage numeric scheme. It is important to stress that this framework seeks to create a common language with which investigators can generate and test hypotheses about the interactions among different pathologic processes (denoted by biomarkers) and cognitive symptoms. We appreciate the concern that this biomarker-based research framework has the potential to be misused. Therefore, we emphasize, first, it is premature and inappropriate to use this research framework in general medical practice. Second, this research framework should not be used to restrict alternative approaches to hypothesis testing that do not use biomarkers. There will be situations where biomarkers are not available or requiring them would be counterproductive to the specific research goals (discussed in more detail later in the document). Thus, biomarker-based research should not be considered a template for all research into age-related cognitive impairment and dementia; rather, it should be applied when it is fit for the purpose of the specific research goals of a study. Importantly, this framework should be examined in diverse populations. Although it is possible that β-amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tau deposits are not causal in AD pathogenesis, it is these abnormal protein deposits that define AD as a unique neurodegenerative disease among different disorders that can lead to dementia. We envision that defining AD as a biological construct will enable a more accurate characterization and understanding of the sequence of events that lead to cognitive impairment that is associated with AD, as well as the multifactorial etiology of dementia. This approach also will enable a more precise approach to interventional trials where specific pathways can be targeted in the disease process and in the appropriate people.

5,126 citations

01 Feb 2015
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes generated as part of the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression.
Abstract: The reference human genome sequence set the stage for studies of genetic variation and its association with human disease, but epigenomic studies lack a similar reference. To address this need, the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium generated the largest collection so far of human epigenomes for primary cells and tissues. Here we describe the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes generated as part of the programme, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression. We establish global maps of regulatory elements, define regulatory modules of coordinated activity, and their likely activators and repressors. We show that disease- and trait-associated genetic variants are enriched in tissue-specific epigenomic marks, revealing biologically relevant cell types for diverse human traits, and providing a resource for interpreting the molecular basis of human disease. Our results demonstrate the central role of epigenomic information for understanding gene regulation, cellular differentiation and human disease.

4,409 citations