A novel approach to modelling transcriptional heterogeneity identifies the oncogene candidate CBX2 in invasive breast carcinoma

https://ift.tt/2NBXONr

Validation and Safety of Visual Restoration by Ectopic Expression of Human Melanopsin in Retinal Ganglion Cells

Human Gene Therapy, Ahead of Print.


https://ift.tt/2tHKSwz

Effect of Genetic Modifications on Physical and Functional Titers of Adenoviral Cancer Gene Therapy Constructs

Human Gene Therapy, Ahead of Print.


https://ift.tt/2H6yMoI

Exercise-induced bilateral rectus femoris injury

No abstract available

https://ift.tt/2BXDy4l

Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Shoulder Outcome Measures and Diagnoses: A Systematic Review

Objective Patient-reported outcome scales determine response to treatment. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of these scales is a measure of responsiveness: the smallest change in a score associated with a clinically important change to the patient. This study sought to summarize the literature on MCID for the most commonly reported shoulder outcome scales. Design A literature search of PubMed and EMBASE databases identified 193 citations, twenty-seven of which met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Results For rotator cuff tears, a MCID range of 9-26.9 was reported for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), 8 or 10 for Constant, and 282.6-588.7 for the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC). For patients who underwent arthroplasty, a MCID range of 6.3-20.9 was reported for ASES, 5.7-9.4 for Constant, and 14.1-20.6 for the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). For proximal humeral fractures, a MCID range of 5.4-11.6 was reported for Constant and 8.1-13.0 for Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH). Conclusion A wide range of MCID values was reported for each patient population and instrument. In the future, a uniform outcome instrument and MCID will be useful to measure clinically meaningful change across practices and the spectrum of shoulder diagnoses. Corresponding Author: Nitin B. Jain, MD, MSPH, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2201 Children's Way, Suite 1318, Nashville, TN 37212, United States of America, Phone: (615) 936-8508; Fax: (615) 322-7454, Email: nitin.jain@vanderbilt.edu Source of Funding: Dr. Jain is/was supported by funding from NIAMS 1K23AR059199 and 1U34AR069201. Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

https://ift.tt/2UdyzDT

Assessing the Accuracy of Ultrasound Guided Needle Placement in Sacroiliac Joint Injections

Objective The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of ultrasound guided needle placement for sacroiliac joint injections. Design Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was gained for a prospective cohort study of fifty patients (N=50). Study patients who were referred for sacroiliac joint injections for sacroiliac joint mediate pain, and met inclusion/exclusion criteria, were enrolled in the study. Each patient underwent needle placement with ultrasound guidance in the procedure suite. After the needle was placed with the ultrasound guidance, fluoroscopy was utilized to confirm correct placement via contrast injection confirming a sacroiliac joint arthrogram. The arthrogram was confirmed via the performing physician and radiologist. Results The placement of the needle with ultrasound guidance into the sacroiliac joint was confirmed successful in 96% (48/50) patients by fluoroscopic arthrogram. The two patients with unsuccessful arthrograms following initial placement of the needle with ultrasound were morbidly obese. There was intra-vascular uptake during the arthrogram of one patient who had a successful arthrogram. Conclusions Ultrasound-guided injection of the sacroiliac joint is successful and accurate upon confirmation of fluoroscopic arthrogram and should be utilized as an imaging modality for needle guidance. Correspondence: Arthur Jason De Luigi, DO, MHSA, 10825 N. 140th Way, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, 301793-2136, ajweege@yahoo.com Competing Interests-None for any author Funding or grants or equipment provided for the project from any source-None for any author Financial benefits to the authors-None to any author Details of any previous presentation of the research, manuscript, or abstract in any form: None Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

https://ift.tt/2BX4yBd

Caloric intake relative to total daily energy expenditure using a spinal cord injury-specific correction factor: an analysis by level of injury

Objectives Evaluate the influence of level of spinal cord injury (SCI) on caloric intake relative to total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) and body composition (BC), and develop a SCI-specific correction factor for the TDEE estimation. Design Individuals with paraplegia (PARA; n=28) and tetraplegia (TETRA; n=13) were analyzed. Daily caloric intake, basal metabolic rate (BMR), and TDEE were obtained using dietary recall, indirect calorimetry, and prediction equations, respectively. Caloric intake and TDEE were adjusted to bodyweight. BC was assessed using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Results Total caloric (PARA 1516.4±548.4, TETRA 1619.1±564.3 kcal/d), fat (PARA 58.6±27.4, TETRA 65.8±29.7 g), and protein (PARA 62.7±23.2, TETRA 71.5±30.9 g) intake were significantly higher in TETRA versus PARA (P

https://ift.tt/2UhuAX2