Oncotarget · 2016
Cooperation of ETV6/RUNX1 and BCL2 enhances immunoglobulin production and accelerates glomerulonephritis in transgenic mice.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bauer Eva, Schlederer Michaela, Scheicher Ruth, Horvath Jaqueline, Aigner Petra, Schiefer Ana-Iris, Kain Renate, Regele Heinz, Hoermann Gregor, Steiner Günter, Kenner Lukas, Sexl Veronika, Villunger Andreas, Moriggl Richard, Stoiber Dagmar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a relatively new diagnosis, where until recently a specific international classification of disease code was missing. One way to identify patients with EoE is to use histopathology codes. We validated the clinicopathological EoE diagnosis based on histopathology reports and patient charts to establish these data sources as the basis for a nationwide EoE patient cohort.
METHODS: Through the Epidemiology Strengthened by histoPathology Reports in Sweden (ESPRESSO) study, we randomly selected 165 patients from five Swedish health care regions with a histopathologic diagnosis of EoE. Patients were assigned a histopathology diagnosis of EoE if they had ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field or, in the absence of eosinophil quantification, the pathologist interpreted the biopsy as consistent with EoE. Patient charts were scrutinized to see if the other diagnostic criteria were fulfilled. Of the 131 received patient charts, 111 (85%) had sufficient information to be included in the study.
RESULTS: Of the 111 validated patients, 99 had EoE, corresponding to a positive predictive value of 89% (95% confidence interval = 82-94%). Dysphagia was the most common symptom (n = 78, 70%), followed by food impaction (n = 64, 58%) and feeding difficulties (n = 37, 33%). Twelve patients had coexisting asthma (11%) and 16 allergic rhinitis (14%). Seventeen patients underwent esophageal dilatation (15%), of which seven had more than one dilatation. Ninety-seven (87%) patients had a proton-pump inhibitor treatment ≤2 years before or after the diagnosis. Forty-two patients (38%) had been prescribed inhalation steroids and 64 (58%) had undergone esophageal radiology.
CONCLUSION: Histopathology reports from the ESPRESSO cohort with esophageal eosinophilic inflammation are suggestive of EoE.
METHODS: Through the Epidemiology Strengthened by histoPathology Reports in Sweden (ESPRESSO) study, we randomly selected 165 patients from five Swedish health care regions with a histopathologic diagnosis of EoE. Patients were assigned a histopathology diagnosis of EoE if they had ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field or, in the absence of eosinophil quantification, the pathologist interpreted the biopsy as consistent with EoE. Patient charts were scrutinized to see if the other diagnostic criteria were fulfilled. Of the 131 received patient charts, 111 (85%) had sufficient information to be included in the study.
RESULTS: Of the 111 validated patients, 99 had EoE, corresponding to a positive predictive value of 89% (95% confidence interval = 82-94%). Dysphagia was the most common symptom (n = 78, 70%), followed by food impaction (n = 64, 58%) and feeding difficulties (n = 37, 33%). Twelve patients had coexisting asthma (11%) and 16 allergic rhinitis (14%). Seventeen patients underwent esophageal dilatation (15%), of which seven had more than one dilatation. Ninety-seven (87%) patients had a proton-pump inhibitor treatment ≤2 years before or after the diagnosis. Forty-two patients (38%) had been prescribed inhalation steroids and 64 (58%) had undergone esophageal radiology.
CONCLUSION: Histopathology reports from the ESPRESSO cohort with esophageal eosinophilic inflammation are suggestive of EoE.