Public Health Research Institute

About: Public Health Research Institute is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Randomized controlled trial. The organization has 4889 authors who have published 8149 publications receiving 276945 citations.

GWAS and colocalization analyses implicate carotid intima-media thickness and carotid plaque loci in cardiovascular outcomes

Abstract: Carotid artery intima media thickness (cIMT) and carotid plaque are measures of subclinical atherosclerosis associated with ischemic stroke and coronary heart disease (CHD). Here, we undertake meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in 71,128 individuals for cIMT, and 48,434 individuals for carotid plaque traits. We identify eight novel susceptibility loci for cIMT, one independent association at the previously-identified PINX1 locus, and one novel locus for carotid plaque. Colocalization analysis with nearby vascular expression quantitative loci (cis-eQTLs) derived from arterial wall and metabolic tissues obtained from patients with CHD identifies candidate genes at two potentially additional loci, ADAMTS9 and LOXL4. LD score regression reveals significant genetic correlations between cIMT and plaque traits, and both cIMT and plaque with CHD, any stroke subtype and ischemic stroke. Our study provides insights into genes and tissue-specific regulatory mechanisms linking atherosclerosis both to its functional genomic origins and its clinical consequences in humans.

Blood n-3 fatty acid levels and total and cause-specific mortality from 17 prospective studies

Abstract: The health effects of omega-3 fatty acids have been controversial. Here we report the results of a de novo pooled analysis conducted with data from 17 prospective cohort studies examining the associations between blood omega-3 fatty acid levels and risk for all-cause mortality. Over a median of 16 years of follow-up, 15,720 deaths occurred among 42,466 individuals. We found that, after multivariable adjustment for relevant risk factors, risk for death from all causes was significantly lower (by 15–18%, at least p < 0.003) in the highest vs the lowest quintile for circulating long chain (20–22 carbon) omega-3 fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic, docosapentaenoic, and docosahexaenoic acids). Similar relationships were seen for death from cardiovascular disease, cancer and other causes. No associations were seen with the 18-carbon omega-3, alpha-linolenic acid. These findings suggest that higher circulating levels of marine n-3 PUFA are associated with a lower risk of premature death. Associations between of omega-3 fatty acids and mortality are not clear. Here the authors report that, based on a pooled analysis of 17 prospective cohort studies, higher blood omega-3 fatty acid levels correlate with lower risk of all-cause mortality.

ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Working Group/Spondylitis Association of America recommendations for conducting clinical trials in ankylosing spondylitis.

Abstract: Within the field of research in spondylarthritis, there has been an increasing interest in proposing new sets of recommendations, integrating current knowledge, for conducting clinical research in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). In May 2001, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested assistance from all interested outside parties in the development of a document for pharmaceutical and medical-device industries that would provide guidance on the approval of drugs, biologic products, and devices for the treatment of AS. Both the ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (ASAS) International Working Group and the Spondylitis Association of America (SAA; a patient advocacy organization) expressed interest in the development of the document and formed a steering committee. Members of this coalition held a consensus meeting to provide written recommendations that could serve as a basis for the FDA guidance document for AS. This document may serve a broader goal of providing recommendations on trial design and outcome assessment in AS for the rheumatology community. Prior work of the ASAS International Working Group provided a basis for development of the document. The ASAS International Working Group and the SAA formed a steering committee that identified 6 topics on which to focus: scope of the disease, definition of claims, assessment of signs and symptoms, assessment of function, assessment of structural damage, and trial design. These topics reflected the structure of FDA guidance documents for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA). Planning committees corresponding to each of the topics were identified by the steering committee and prepared background information based on literature review and consensus work already done by the ASAS International Working Group as well as the personal expertise of the group members. Members of these committees are listed in Appendix A. Based on this information, each group made a proposal for further discussion of its topic, at a public meeting that was held on October 30 and 31, 2002, in Bethesda, Maryland. This meeting was convened to permit interested parties the opportunity to review and comment on the draft criteria developed by the planning committees and was attended by 90 representatives, as follows: 45 from the ASAS International Working Group, 23 from the SAA, 15 from pharmaceutical companies, and 11 from government (the FDA and the National Institutes of Health). After wide advertisement in the rheumatology community, the interested parties were self-selected. No formal voting occurred during the public meeting, but there was open communication regarding various aspects of the topics. All discussions were taped, and the tapes were transcribed. Based on these transcriptions, the chair of the planning committee for each topic produced a summary with conclusions and recommendations, and this was again discussed by the steering Desiree van der Heijde, MD, PhD: University Hospital Maastricht, and the Care and Public Health Research Institute of the University Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Maxime Dougados, MD, PhD: Universite Rene Descartes, Hopital Cochin, Paris, France; John Davis, MD, MPH: University of California, San Francisco; Michael H. Weisman, MD, David S. Hallegua, MD: CedarsSinai Medical Center, and University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine; Walter Maksymowych, FRCP: University of Alberta, Alberta, Edmonton, Canada; Jurgen Braun, MD: Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet, Herne, Germany, and Free University, Berlin, Germany; Jane Bruckel, RN, BSN: Spondylitis Association of America, Sherman Oaks, California. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Desiree van der Heijde, MD, PhD, University Hospital Maastricht, Department of Internal Medicine/Rheumatology, PO Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands. E-mail: dhe@sint.azm.nl. Submitted for publication January 6, 2004; accepted in revised form October 26, 2004.

Perceived employer-related barriers and facilitators for work participation of cancer survivors: A systematic review of employers' and survivors' perspectives.

Abstract: Objective To identify employer-related barriers and facilitators for work participation of cancer survivors from the perspective of both employers and cancer survivors, and to synthesise these perceived barriers and facilitators to understand their perceived consequences. Methods A systematic review of qualitative studies focusing on employers' and cancer survivors' perspectives on the work participation of cancer survivors was performed. Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Business Source Premier) were systematically searched, and the quality of studies included was assessed using the CASP checklist. Perceived barriers and facilitators were extracted and synthesised to conduct a content analysis. Results Five studies representing the employers' perspectives and 47 studies representing the cancer survivors' perspectives were included. Employers perceived barriers and facilitators related to support, communication, RTW policies, knowledge about cancer, balancing interests and roles, and attitude. Survivors perceived barriers and facilitators related to support, communication, work environment, discrimination, and perception of work ability. The synthesis found that the employers' willingness to support can be understood by perceptions they have of the survivor, goals of the employer, and national or organisational policies. Employers require knowledge about cancer and RTW policies to be able to support survivors. Conclusions This review identified a plurality of and a large variety in perceived employer-related barriers and facilitators for work participation of cancer survivors, which can be understood to be related to both employers' willingness and ability to support. There is a need for interventions targeting employers, with the aim of enhancing the sustainable work participation of cancer survivors.