Taylor S.,I.c Gomes Consulting &amp; Investment Inc. |
Taylor S.,Tarleton State University |
Bennett K.M.,I.c Gomes Consulting &amp; Investment Inc. |
Bennett K.M.,Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center |
And 10 more authors.
Journal of Molecular Diagnostics | Year: 2014
Molecular diagnostics is a rapidly growing specialty in the clinical laboratory assessment of pathology. Educational programs in medical laboratory science and specialized programs in molecular diagnostics must address the training of clinical scientists in molecular diagnostics, but the educational curriculum for this field is not well defined. Moreover, our understanding of underlying genetic contributions to specific diseases and the technologies used in molecular diagnostics laboratories change rapidly, challenging providers of training programs in molecular diagnostics to keep their curriculum current and relevant. In this article, we provide curriculum recommendations to molecular diagnostics training providers at both the baccalaureate and master's level of education. We base our recommendations on several factors. First, we considered National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences guidelines for accreditation of molecular diagnostics programs, because educational programs in clinical laboratory science should obtain its accreditation. Second, the guidelines of several of the best known certifying agencies for clinical laboratory scientists were incorporated into our recommendations. Finally, we relied on feedback from current employers of molecular diagnostics scientists, regarding the skills and knowledge that they believe are essential for clinical scientists who will be performing molecular testing in their laboratories. We have compiled these data into recommendations for a molecular diagnostics curriculum at both the baccalaureate and master's level of education. © 2014 American Society for Investigative Pathology and the Association for Molecular Pathology.
The relative renal safety of iodixanol and low-osmolar contrast media in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Insights from blue cross blue shield of Michigan cardiovascular consortium (BMC2)
Reed M.C.,University of Michigan |
Moscucci M.,University of Miami |
Smith D.E.,University of Michigan |
Share D.,Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan |
And 6 more authors.
Journal of Invasive Cardiology | Year: 2010
Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is a common complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Current guidelines support the use of iodixanol (Visipaque®, GE Healthcare, Princeton, New Jersey) in patients at high risk for CI-AKI. Recent trials and meta-analyses have shown no difference in CI-AKI when iodixanol is compared to low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM). We evaluated the incidence of CI-AKI, in-hospital dialysis and in-hospital death in 58,957 patients who underwent PCI in 2007 and 2008 in a large regional consortium of 31 hospitals and who were treated with iodixanol (n ≤ 17,814) or LOCM (n ≤ 41,143). Propensity-matched analysis was performed to adjust for differences in baseline variables. Patients treated with iodixanol compared to those treated with LOCM were slightly older, had more medical comorbidities and a higher baseline creatinine (1.35 ± 1.07 mg/dL versus 1.10 ± 0.85 mg/dL; p < 0.0001). In propensity-matched, risk-adjusted models, there was no significant difference between iodixanol and LOCM in the risk of CIAKI (4.54 vs. 4.14; p ≤ 0.14), need for dialysis (0.37 vs. 0.43; p ≤ 0.35) or death (1.46 vs. 1.39; p ≤ 0.18). Among patients undergoing PCI, the use of iodixanol was more frequent in older patients with more comorbidities and worse baseline renal function. There was no difference in the adjusted risk of CI-AKI among patients treated with iodixanol compared with those treated with LOCM.
Simon M.S.,Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute |
Desai P.,New York Medical College |
Wallace R.,University of Iowa |
Wu C.,Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center |
And 8 more authors.
Cancer Causes and Control | Year: 2016
Purpose: To determine whether HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are associated with a lower risk of pancreatic cancer. Methods: The population included 160,578 postmenopausal women enrolled in the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) in which 385 incident cases of pancreatic cancer were identified over an average of 8.69 (SD ±4.59) years. All diagnoses were confirmed by medical record and pathology review. Information on statin use and other risk factors was collected at baseline and during follow-up. Multivariable-adjusted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) evaluating the relationship between prior statin use (at baseline only as well as in a time-dependent manner) and risk of pancreatic cancer were computed from Cox proportional hazards regression analyses after adjusting for appropriate confounders. We also evaluated the effect of statin type, potency, lipophilic status, and duration of use. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Statins were used at baseline by 12,243 (7.5 %) women. The annualized rate of pancreatic cancer in statin users and nonusers, respectively, was 0.0298 versus 0.0271 %. The multivariable-adjusted HR for statin users versus nonusers at baseline was 0.92 and 95 % CI 0.57–1.48. In a time-dependent model, the HR for low-potency statins was 0.46, 95 % CI 0.20–1.04. There was no significant effect seen by statin lipophilicity or duration of use. Conclusions: There was no significant relationship between statins and pancreatic cancer risk in the WHI; however, there was a marginal inverse association noted for low-potency statins. Analyses of larger numbers of cases are needed to further explore this relationship. © 2016, Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
Desai P.,New York Medical College |
Lehman A.,Ohio State University |
Chlebowski R.T.,University of California at Los Angeles |
Kwan M.L.,Kaiser Permanente |
And 11 more authors.
Cancer Causes and Control | Year: 2015
Purpose: To evaluate the association between statins and breast cancer stage and mortality in the Women’s Health Initiative.Methods: The study population included 128,675 postmenopausal women aged 50–79 years, out of which there were 7,883 newly diagnosed cases of in situ (19 %), local (61 %)-, regional (19 %)- and distant (1 %)-stage breast cancer and 401 deaths due to breast cancer after an average of 11.5 (SD = 3.7) years of follow-up. Stage was coded using SEER criteria and was stratified into early (in situ and local)- versus late (regional and distant)-stage disease. Information on statins and other risk factors were collected by self- and interviewer-administered questionnaires. Cause of death was based on medical record review. Multivariable-adjusted hazards ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) evaluating the relationship between statin use (at baseline only and in a time-dependent manner) and diagnosis of late-stage breast cancer and breast cancer-specific mortality were computed from Cox proportional hazards analyses after adjusting for appropriate confounders.Results: Statins were used by 10,474 women (8 %) at baseline. In the multivariable-adjusted time-dependent model, use of lipophilic statins was associated with a reduction in diagnosis of late-stage breast cancer (HR 0.80, 95 % CI 0.64–0.98, p = 0.035) which was also significant among women with estrogen receptor-positive disease (HR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.56–0.93, p = 0.012). Breast cancer mortality was marginally lower in statin users compared with nonusers (HR 0.59, 95 % CI 0.32–1.06, p = 0.075).Conclusions: Prior statin use is associated with lower breast cancer stage at diagnosis. © 2015, Springer International Publishing Switzerland.