University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston

About: University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston is a education organization based out in Houston, Texas, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 27309 authors who have published 42520 publications receiving 2151596 citations. The organization is also known as: UTHealth & The UT Health Science Center at Houston.

Treating spondyloarthritis, including ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis, to target: recommendations of an international task force

Abstract: Background Therapeutic targets have been defined for diseases like diabetes, hypertension or rheumatoid arthritis and adhering to them has improved outcomes. Such targets are just emerging for spondyloarthritis (SpA). Objective To define the treatment target for SpA including ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and develop recommendations for achieving the target, including a treat-to-target management strategy. Methods Based on results of a systematic literature review and expert opinion, a task force of expert physicians and patients developed recommendations which were broadly discussed and voted upon in a Delphi-like process. Level of evidence, grade and strength of the recommendations were derived by respective means. The commonalities between axial SpA, peripheral SpA and PsA were discussed in detail. Results Although the literature review did not reveal trials comparing a treat-to-target approach with another or no strategy, it provided indirect evidence regarding an optimised approach to therapy that facilitated the development of recommendations. The group agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations; 9 of these recommendations related commonly to the whole spectrum of SpA and PsA, and only 2 were designed separately for axial SpA, peripheral SpA and PsA. The main treatment target, which should be based on a shared decision with the patient, was defined as remission, with the alternative target of low disease activity. Follow-up examinations at regular intervals that depend on the patient9s status should safeguard the evolution of disease activity towards the targeted goal. Additional recommendations relate to extra-articular and extramusculoskeletal aspects and other important factors, such as comorbidity. While the level of evidence was generally quite low, the mean strength of recommendation was 9–10 (10: maximum agreement) for all recommendations. A research agenda was formulated. Conclusions The task force defined the treatment target as remission or, alternatively, low disease activity, being aware that the evidence base is not strong and needs to be expanded by future research. These recommendations can inform the various stakeholders about expert opinion that aims for reaching optimal outcomes of SpA.

Guidelines for Clinical Use of the Antinuclear Antibody Test and Tests for Specific Autoantibodies to Nuclear Antigens

Abstract: c The following guideline presents a series of recommendations based on published medical literature for use of the antinuclear antibody (ANA) test and tests for specific autoantibodies to nuclear antigens in the diagnostic evaluation, prognostic assessment, and monitoring of patients with systemic rheumatic diseases. The guideline emphasizes the need for clinical evaluation to improve the usefulness of test results in patient management. Consideration is given to appropriate use of the generic ANA test in the initial evaluation of patients with signs and symptoms of a systemic rheumatic disease, the evaluation of patients suspected of having lupus erythematosus, use in clinical situations in which the ANA test is required to establish a disease diagnosis, and identification of clinical situations in which the ANA test has little value. Sections are also devoted to recommendations aimed at improving the analytic methods used to detect and measure ANA and specific autoantibodies to nuclear antigens and to the appropriate use of tests for specific autoantibodies in several disease situations that commonly occur in patients with suspected or documented systemic rheumatic diseases. Emphasis is placed on the use of these tests only in situations in which the test results can be expected to provide information necessary for clinical decision making. Those tests of limited medical usefulness and situations in which test results are likely to be misleading are also identified. (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:71‐81)

Population-based study of the incidence of sudden unexplained death in epilepsy

Abstract: Objective: To determine the population-based incidence of sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP) and to determine the risk of SUDEP compared with the general population. Background: Prior studies of SUDEP have described a wide range of incidence and have suffered from selection bias and other methodologic limitations. A population-based study of the incidence of SUDEP has never been performed. Furthermore, the risk of sudden death in the epilepsy population has not been compared with that of the general population. Methods: All deaths in persons whose epilepsy was diagnosed between 1935 and 1994 in Rochester, MN, were reviewed. The rate of SUDEP was compared with the expected rate of sudden death in the general population for patients age 20 to 40 years to determine the standardized mortality ratio (SMR). Results: We identified nine cases of SUDEP. SUDEP accounted for 8.6% (7 of 81) of the deaths in persons 15 to 44 years of age. The incidence of SUDEP was 0.35 per 1,000 person-years. SMR for SUDEP was 23.7 (95% confidence interval, 7.7 to 55.0) compared with the general population. Conclusions: The incidence of SUDEP in our study was 0.35 per 1,000 person-years. SUDEP was responsible for 1.7% of deaths in our cohort. SUDEP is a rare cause of death in the epilepsy population but exceeds the expected rate of sudden death in the general population by nearly 24 times.