Search

ZongYao Wang,1 John S Sundy,1 Catherine M Foss,1 Huiman X Barnhart,2 Scott M Palmer,1 Sallie D Allgood,3 Evan Trudeau,1 Katie M Alexander,3 Marc C Levesque31Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, 2Duke Clinical Research Institute, 3Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USABackground: The CD14 C-159T single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) has been investigated widely as a candidate genetic locus in patients with allergic disease. There are conflicting results for the association of the CD14 C-159T SNP with total serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels and atopy. There are limited data regarding the association of the CD14 C-159T SNP in subjects of African ancestry. The aim of the study was to determine whether the C-159T SNP and other CD14 SNPs (C1188G, C1341T) were associated with total serum IgE levels and with allergy skin test results in nonatopic and atopic subjects; as well as in Caucasian and African American subjects.Methods: A total of 291 participants, 18–40 years old, were screened to determine whether they were atopic and/or asthmatic. Analyses were performed to determine the association between CD14 C-159T, C1188G, or C1341T genotypes with serum IgE levels and with the number of positive skin tests among Caucasian or African American subjects.Results: We found no significant association of serum total IgE level with CD14 C-159T, C1188G, or C1341T genotypes within nonatopic or atopic subjects. Subjects with CD14-159 T alleles had significantly more positive allergen skin tests than subjects without CD14-159 T alleles (P = 0.0388). There was a significant association between the CD14 1188 G allele, but not the CD14 1341 T allele, with the number of positive skin-test results in Caucasians, but not in African Americans.Conclusion: These results support a possible association between CD14 polymorphisms and atopy. CD14-159 T or CD14 1188 G alleles were associated with atopic disease. For subjects with CD14 1188 G alleles, the association with atopic disease was stronger in Caucasians compared to African Americans.Keywords: total serum immunoglobulin E, IgE, skin prick test, SPT, CD14-159T, single nucleotide polymorphism, SNP, lipopolysaccharide, LPS, endotoxin

To assess the perceived outcomes associated with diet/food intake in the general adult population. DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: The Food Benefits Assessment (FBA) questionnaire was developed from subjects' verbatim transcripts (n 18) and after comprehension tests (n 5). Normal-weight (n 130) and overweight (n 67) subjects then completed the final questionnaire twice, 7 d apart. Psychometric properties were assessed, including construct validity by principal components analysis (PCA), concurrent validity (Spearman coefficient) with the Short Form-36scale (SF-36), known-group validity by comparing FBA dimension scores according to lifestyle and clinical variables, internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and test-retest reproducibility in stable subjects over 1 week (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC). RESULTS: PCA and Multitrait analysis confirmed the final version of the FBA comprising forty-one items split into seven dimensions (vitality; digestive comfort; physical appearance; well-being; snacking; disease prevention; aesthetics). All dimensions displayed good item convergent validity(0.44 to 0.80), good concurrent validity (highest correlation between well-being dimension of FBA and mental health scale of SF-36, r=0.83) and good known-group validity and reproducibility (ICC >or= 0.76); internal consistency reliability was good to excellent (Cronbach's alpha=0.79 to 0.91). CONCLUSION: The FBA is the first valid and reliable questionnaire that allows the assessment of diet effectsand impact as perceived by subjects. It is a good candidate in the nutrition field for further use in specific population settings and with a particular food or daily diet. Linguistically validated English (UK and US) and German versionsof the questionnaire are available.

n/a

OBJECTIVE: Summarize the Patient Assessment of Upper GastroIntestinal Disorders-Quality of Life (PAGI-QOL) development and provide results on its reliability and validity from the international psychometric validation in dyspepsia, GastroEsophageal Reflux Disease (GERD), and gastroparesis. METHODS: Subjects completed the pilot PAGI-QOL at baseline and 8 weeks; and a subsample also at 2 weeks. Other assessments were: Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders-Symptom Severity Index, SF-36, number of disability days. RESULTS: 1736 patients completed the PAGI-QOL at baseline. The questionnaire was reduced, producing a 30-item final version covering five domains: Daily Activities, Clothing, Diet and Food Habits, Relationship (REL), and Psychological Well-Being and Distress. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's alpha range: 0.83-0.96). Test-retest reproducibility was good: intraclass correlations coefficients were over 0.70 except for the REL scale (0.61). Concurrent validity between the PAGI-QOL total score and all SF-36 subscale scores was good with moderate (0.52) to strong (0.72) correlations. PAGI-QOL scores showed excellent discriminant properties: patients who had spent some days in bed, had missed some days at work, and were kept from usual activities had much lower PAGI-QOL scores than those who did not (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The PAGI-QOL is a valid and reliable instrument assessing quality of life in patients with dyspepsia, GERD, or gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders-Quality of Life (PAGI-QOL) has been developed and validated to assess quality of life in gastroesophageal reflux disease, dyspepsia, and gastroparesis. The aim of this work was to assess responsiveness of the PAGI-QOL to clinical changes and provide guidance for the interpretation of score changes. METHODS: The analysis was based on 2 observational multicenter, longitudinal, 8-week observation studies, one in the United States and one in 5 European countries. The Overall Treatment Effect scale completed by patients and clinicians at 8 weeks was used to define groups of improved, worsened, and stable patients. Responsiveness was assessed by describing the change in PAGI-QOL scores for each of these groups, comparing these changes over time, and calculating effect sizes and standardized response means. These data were used to define the minimal clinically important difference. RESULTS: A total of 1736 patients with upper gastrointestinal disorders were analyzed. High sensitivity to change over time was demonstrated, with effect sizes and standardized response means in improved patients for the PAGI-QOL total score ranging from 0.79-1.41. A change of 0.4 for the PAGI-QOL total score might be considered as the minimal clinically important difference when comparing pretreatment and post-treatment PAGI-QOL total scores. CONCLUSIONS: The PAGI-QOL questionnaire is a responsive and clinically relevant instrument for assessing quality of life in patients with upper gastrointestinal disorders.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Determining clinically meaningful change of patient-reported outcome measures is important for evaluating effectiveness of treatments for gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. This study evaluates responsiveness of the Patient Assessment of Gastrointestinal Disorders-Symptom Severity Index (PAGI-SYM) in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and dyspepsia. METHODS: The PAGI-SYM was based on a review of the published literature and interviews with patients and clinicians. Items were developed to be linguistically and culturally appropriate for multicountry studies. The PAGI-SYM includes 6 subscales: heartburn/regurgitation, fullness/early satiety, nausea/vomiting, bloating, upper abdominal pain, and lower abdominal pain. Subjects with GERD (n = 810) or dyspepsia (n = 767) participated in this multicountry, observational study. All subjects completed the PAGI-SYM, a global symptom relief questionnaire, and a measure of patient-rated change in GI-related symptoms, the Overall Treatment Effect (OTE) scale. Responsiveness was evaluated at 8 weeks by comparing groups by disease, symptom relief, and OTE (improved, stable, and worsened). RESULTS: Subjects reporting symptom relief reported significantly lower (better) PAGI-SYM scores than those reporting no symptom relief ( P < 0.0001 to P < 0.0005). Subjects with improvements in overall GI symptoms exhibited significant decreases in PAGI-SYM subscale scores compared with those who remained the same or worsened (all P values < 0.0001). Effect sizes ranged from 0.21-1.28, and standard errors of measurement ranged from 0.29-0.63, depending on subscale and disease sample. CONCLUSIONS: The PAGI-SYM is a brief symptom severity instrument that measures common GI symptoms. Results suggest that the PAGI-SYM is responsive and sensitive to change in clinical status in subjects with GERD or dyspepsia.