Publications

BACKGROUND

Many women experience a breast lump. Clinical guidelines suggest that a normal mammogram result alone is not adequate to exclude a diagnosis of cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the characteristics of women with a breast lump and a normal mammogram that were associated with receiving further evaluation, and to examine cancer outcomes.

DESIGN

Observational cohort.

PARTICIPANTS

Women aged 35 to 70 years who participated in a population-based mammography registry and who did not have a history of breast cancer noted at the time of their mammogram that they had a breast lump, and had a "normal" (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 1 or 2) mammogram result (n=771).

MEASUREMENTS

Telephone survey performed 6 months after the mammogram to ascertain information about evaluation. Cancer outcomes within 12 months of the index mammogram were confirmed through linkage with a cancer registry.

RESULTS

Only 56.9% of women reported receiving an adequate evaluation for their breast lump, including a subsequent clinical breast exam, a visit to a breast specialist, an ultrasound, a biopsy, or aspiration. Latinas were less likely than white women to have received adequate evaluation, as were obese women compared with normal-weight women, and uninsured women compared with women with insurance. Among women with at least 12 months of follow-up, 1.4% were diagnosed with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Many women do not receive adequate evaluation for a recent breast lump. Interventions should be designed to improve the follow-up of women with this common clinical problem.

BACKGROUND

With advances in antiretroviral therapy, many human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals are living longer and developing end-stage renal or hepatic disease requiring transplantation. Maintaining the viability of the transplant and suppressing HIV replication requires concomitant use of immunosuppressants (e.g., cyclosporine) and antiretrovirals (e.g., protease inhibitors or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors), which leads to drug interactions. To assist in appropriate clinical management of HIV-infected transplant recipients, the authors describe the pharmacokinetic interactions between cyclosporine and the antiretroviral medications, and required modifications of cyclosporine dosing.

METHODS

Eighteen HIV-infected subjects with end-stage kidney or liver disease underwent transplantation. Subjects had pharmacokinetic studies before transplantation and for up to 2 years posttransplantation (at weeks 2-4, 12, 28, 52, and 104). Protease inhibitors, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and cyclosporine concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry in plasma and whole blood, respectively.

RESULTS

Subjects using protease inhibitors and cyclosporine had a threefold increase in cyclosporine area under the curve (4,190+/-2,180-11,900+/-1,600 ng*hr/mL, P<0.01), necessitating an 85% reduction in cyclosporine dose over a 2-year period (1.3+/-1.5-0.2+/-0.0 mg/kg/dose), leading to a progressive increase in oral cyclosporine bioavailability (R=0.92, P<0.02). Subjects on nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors showed minimal interactions with cyclosporine, and subjects on both HIV treatments had intermediate responses.

CONCLUSIONS

HIV-infected transplant recipients on protease inhibitors require markedly lower doses of cyclosporine, with continued lowering of the cyclosporine dose over time and ongoing cyclosporine trough monitoring because of progressively increasing cyclosporine bioavailability. Medication changes must be carefully managed to avoid insufficient immunosuppression or toxicity resulting from drug interactions.

The purpose of this literature review is to examine recent advances in technique and technology of endoscopic mucosal resection of superficial early cancers of the upper gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) of superficial early cancers of the upper gastrointestinal tract is standard technique in Japan and is increasingly used in Western countries. Newer techniques of EMR allow removal of larger lesions en-bloc. These minimally invasive techniques, when applied correctly, allow safe and efficacious treatment in situations that would otherwise require major surgery. Through the establishment of long-term outcomes data, standardization of endoscopic and pathologic reporting, and newer EMR technology and techniques, the future treatment of early cancers in the upper gastrointestinal tract may be achieved primarily through the endoscope.

BACKGROUND

Neutrophilic airway inflammation, as defined by cell counts in respiratory tract lining fluid (RTLF), is a key end point in many studies of respiratory toxicity in both healthy and asthmatic subjects. BAL and sputum induction (SI) are the most common methods of sampling RTLF in such studies. However, the comparability of these methods (BAL and SI) after experimental treatment has not been investigated in a head-to-head controlled trial.

METHODS

To determine whether BAL and SI are comparable and can be used in place of each other in the assessment of neutrophilic airway inflammation after ozone (O(3)) exposure, we exposed 13 asthmatic subjects to either 0.2 ppm of O(3) or filtered air (FA) followed by either BAL or SI. Subjects then underwent the alternate (O(3) or FA) exposure followed by the same method of RTLF sampling. Next, subjects repeated the same exposure protocol with the alternate method of RTLF sampling. Differences in inflammatory indexes including the percentage of polymorphonuclear neutrophils (%PMNs) between the exposures were then correlated by regression analysis.

RESULTS

The %PMNs in sputum was poorly correlated with that in BAL fluid (R = 0.12). The correlation between the %PMNs in sputum and in the bronchial fraction of BAL (BFx) fluid, however, was somewhat higher (R = 0.50). Furthermore, the uncertainty of the estimate of %PMN values in BFx fluid and BAL fluid based on those of sputum values, using regression models, was almost as great as the magnitude of the O(3) effect itself (ie, 9.7% and 5.5% estimate errors for O(3) effects of 17.0% and 7.5%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

We concluded that SI and BAL indexes are not directly interchangeable in the assessment of O(3)-induced airway inflammation in asthmatic subjects.