Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

About: Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai is a education organization based out in New York, New York, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 37488 authors who have published 76057 publications receiving 3704104 citations. The organization is also known as: Mount Sinai School of Medicine.

Drugs and Falls in Older People: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis: I. Psychotropic Drugs

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To evaluate critically the evidence linking psychotropic drugs with falls in older people. DESIGN: Fixed-effects meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: English-language articles in MEDLINE (1966 – March 1996) indexed under accidents or accidental falls and aged or age factors; bibliographies of retrieved papers. STUDY SELECTION: Systematic evaluation of sedative/hypnotic, antidepressant, or neuroleptic use with falling in people aged 60 and older. DATA EXTRACTION: Study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, setting, sample size, response rate, mean age, method of medication verification and fall assessment, fall definition, and the number of fallers and non-fallers taking specific classes of psychotropic drugs. RESULTS: Forty studies, none randomized controlled trials, met eligibility criteria. For one or more falls, the pooled odds ratio (95% confidence interval) was 1.73 (95%CI, 1.52-1.97) for any psychotropic use; 1.50 (95%CI, 1.25-1.79) for neuroleptic use; 1.54 (95%CI, 1.40-1.70) for sedative/hypnotic use; 1.66 (95%CI, 1.4-1.95) for any antidepressant use (mainly TCAs); 1.51 (95%CI, 1.14-2.00) for only TCA use; and 1.48 (95%CI, 1.23-1.77) for benzodiazepine use, with no difference between short and long acting benzodiazepines. For neuroleptics in psychiatric inpatients, the pooled OR was 0.41 (95%CI, 0.21-.82); for all other patients, the pooled OR was 1.66 (95%CI, 1.38-2.00). Comparing ≥1 with ≥ 2 falls, mean subject age >75 versus ≥ 75 years old, communities with >35% versus ≥35% fallers, or subject place of residence did not affect the pooled OR. Increased falls occurred in patients taking more than one psychotropic drug. CONCLUSION: There is a small, but consistent, association between the use of most classes of psychotropic drugs and falls. The evidence to date, however, is based solely on observational data, with minimal adjustment for confounders, dosage, or duration of therapy. The incidence of falls and their consequences in this population necessitate that future large randomized controlled trials of any medication in older persons should measure falls prospectively as an adverse outcome event.

Common variants on chromosome 6p22.1 are associated with schizophrenia

Abstract: Schizophrenia, a devastating psychiatric disorder, has a prevalence of 0.5-1%, with high heritability (80-85%) and complex transmission. Recent studies implicate rare, large, high-penetrance copy number variants in some cases, but the genes or biological mechanisms that underlie susceptibility are not known. Here we show that schizophrenia is significantly associated with single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the extended major histocompatibility complex region on chromosome 6. We carried out a genome-wide association study of common SNPs in the Molecular Genetics of Schizophrenia (MGS) case-control sample, and then a meta-analysis of data from the MGS, International Schizophrenia Consortium and SGENE data sets. No MGS finding achieved genome-wide statistical significance. In the meta-analysis of European-ancestry subjects (8,008 cases, 19,077 controls), significant association with schizophrenia was observed in a region of linkage disequilibrium on chromosome 6p22.1 (P = 9.54 x 10(-9)). This region includes a histone gene cluster and several immunity-related genes--possibly implicating aetiological mechanisms involving chromatin modification, transcriptional regulation, autoimmunity and/or infection. These results demonstrate that common schizophrenia susceptibility alleles can be detected. The characterization of these signals will suggest important directions for research on susceptibility mechanisms.

The diagnostic evaluation and multidisciplinary management of neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2.

Abstract: Objective. —Neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2 are autosomal dominant genetic disorders in which affected individuals develop both benign and malignant tumors at an increased frequency. Since the original National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference in 1987, there has been significant progress toward a more complete understanding of the molecular bases for neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2. Our objective was to determine the diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2, recommendations for the care of patients and their families at diagnosis and during routine follow-up, and the role of DNA diagnostic testing in the evaluation of these disorders. Data Sources. —Published reports from 1966 through 1996 obtained by MEDLINE search and studies presented at national and international meetings. Study Selection. —All studies were reviewed and analyzed by consensus from multiple authors. Data Extraction. —Peer-reviewed published data were critically evaluated by independent extraction by multiple authors. Data Synthesis. —The main results of the review were qualitative and were reviewed by neurofibromatosis clinical directors worldwide through an Internet Web site. Conclusions. —On the basis of the information presented in this review, we propose a comprehensive approach to the diagnosis and treatment of individuals with neurofibromatosis 1 and neurofibromatosis 2.

Gene Expression in Fixed Tissues and Outcome in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Abstract: BACKGROUND It is a challenge to identify patients who, after undergoing potentially curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, are at greatest risk for recurrence. Such high-risk patients could receive novel interventional measures. An obstacle to the development of genome-based predictors of outcome in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma has been the lack of a means to carry out genomewide expression profiling of fixed, as opposed to frozen, tissue. METHODS We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of gene-expression profiling of more than 6000 human genes in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues. We applied the method to tissues from 307 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, from four series of patients, to discover and validate a gene-expression signature associated with survival. RESULTS The expression-profiling method for formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue was highly effective: samples from 90% of the patients yielded data of high quality, including samples that had been archived for more than 24 years. Gene-expression profiles of tumor tissue failed to yield a significant association with survival. In contrast, profiles of the surrounding nontumoral liver tissue were highly correlated with survival in a training set of tissue samples from 82 Japanese patients, and the signature was validated in tissues from an independent group of 225 patients from the United States and Europe (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS We have demonstrated the feasibility of genomewide expression profiling of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues and have shown that a reproducible gene-expression signature correlated with survival is present in liver tissue adjacent to the tumor in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Provisional Clinical Opinion: The Integration of Palliative Care Into Standard Oncology Care

Abstract: Purpose American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) offers timely clinical direction to ASCO’s membership following publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the integration of palliative care services into standard oncology practice at the time a person is diagnosed with metastatic or advanced cancer. Clinical Context Palliative care is frequently misconstrued as synonymous with end-of-life care. Palliative care is focused on the relief of suffering, in all of its dimensions, throughout the course of a patient’s illness. Although the use of hospice and other palliative care services at the end of life has increased, many patients are enrolled in hospice less than 3 weeks before their death, which limits the benefit they may gain from these services. By potentially improving quality of life (QOL), cost of care, and even survival in patients with metastatic cancer, palliative care has increasing relevance for the care of patients with cancer. Until recently, data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating the benefits of palliative care in patients with metastatic cancer who are also receiving standard oncology care have not been available. Recent Data Seven published RCTs form the basis of this PCO. Provisional Clinical Opinion Based on strong evidence from a phase III RCT, patients with metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer should be offered concurrent palliative care and standard oncologic care at initial diagnosis. While a survival benefit from early involvement of palliative care has not yet been demonstrated in other oncology settings, substantial evidence demonstrates that palliative care—when combined with standard cancer care or as the main focus of care—leads to better patient and caregiver outcomes. These include improvement in symptoms, QOL, and patient satisfaction, with reduced caregiver burden. Earlier involvement of palliative care also leads to more appropriate referral to and use of hospice, and reduced use of futile intensive care. While evidence clarifying optimal delivery of palliative care to improve patient outcomes is evolving, no trials to date have demonstrated harm to patients and caregivers, or excessive costs, from early involvement of palliative care. Therefore, it is the Panel’s expert consensus that combined standard oncology care and palliative care should be considered early in the course of illness for any patient with metastatic cancer and/or high symptom burden. Strategies to optimize concurrent palliative care and standard oncology care, with evaluation of its impact on important patient and caregiver outcomes (eg, QOL, survival, health care services utilization, and costs) and on society, should be an area of intense research. NOTE. ASCO’s provisional clinical opinions (PCOs) reflect expert consensus based on clinical evidence and literature available at the time they are written and are intended to assist physicians in clinical decision making and identify questions and settings for further research. Because of the rapid flow of scientific information in oncology, new evidence may have emerged since the time a PCO was submitted for publication. PCOs are not continually updated and may not reflect the most recent evidence. PCOs cannot account for individual variation among patients and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments. It is the responsibility of the treating physician or other health care provider, relying on independent experience and knowledge of the patient, to determine the best course of treatment for the patient. Accordingly, adherence to any PCO is voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patient’s individual circumstances. ASCO PCOs describe the use of procedures and therapies in clinical trials and cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions in the context of clinical practice. ASCO assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of ASCO’s PCOs, or for any errors or omissions.