Search

Purpose The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is widely used for measurements of scar quality. This encompasses visual, tactile and sensory characteristics of the scar. The Patient Scale of previous POSAS versions was lacking input from patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop the POSAS3.0, Patient Scale with involvement of adults patients with all scar types, complying with the highest clinimetric standards. Methods From February 2018 to April 2019, a series of six focus group interviews were performed in the Netherlands and Australia to identify scar quality characteristics that adults with scars consider to be important. All focus groups were transcribed, anonymized and analysed using a thematic analysis. Relevant characteristics were formulated into items, resulting in a Dutch and English version of the Patient Scale. These drafts were pilot tested in Australia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, and refined accordingly. Results A total of 21 relevant scar quality characteristics were identified during the focus groups. Two distinct versions of the POSAS3.0, Patient Scale were developed. The Generic version contains 16 items and can be used for all scar types, except linear scars. The Linear Scar version of the Patient Scale contains the same 16 items, with an extra item referring to the widening of scar margins. All included items are rated on a verbal rating scale with five response options. Conclusion Two versions of the POSAS3.0 Patient Scale were developed. Further field tests are being performed to establish the measurement properties and scoring algorithm of the scales.

Introduction: The quality of scars has become an important outcome of burn care. Objective scar assessment through scar surface area measurement enables quantification of scar formation and evaluation of treatment efficacy. 3D technology has proven valid and reliable but often remains cumbersome, expensive, and time-consuming. 3D technology with depth sensors on mobile devices has become available and might surpass these limitations. This study provides a clinimetric assessment of the validity and reliability of a 3D system with a depth sensor for scar surface area measurement. Methods: A technology involving a depth sensor mounted on a mobile device was used. Images and analyses were made with a custom-made software application. A standardized one-keyframe image capturing procedure was followed. To assess validity, stickers with predefined dimensions (8.01 cm2 – 77.70 cm2) were imaged in a single observer setting on various body parts of healthy volunteers. To assess reliability, hypertrophic scars, keloids, and normotrophic scars were imaged and rated by two observers independently. Data are expressed as mean (+/-SD), Coefficient of Variation (CV), Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC), and Limits of Agreements (LoA). Results: Eighty stickers placed on 20 healthy volunteers showed validity with CV between 0.62%− 1.67% for observer A and 0.75%− 1.19% for observer B. For the reliability study, 69 scars on 36 patients were included. Mean scar surface area ranged from 0.83 cm2 to 155.59 cm2. Mean scar surface area measurement was 13.83 cm2 (SD 23.06) for observer A and 13.59 cm2 (SD 23.31) for observer B. Adjusted interobserver CV for trained observers is estimated as 5.59%, with corresponding LoA = 0 ± 0.15 x mean surface area. Interobserver ICCs were 0.99–1.00. Conclusion: This 3D technology with a depth sensor for measuring scar surface area provides valid and reliable data and thereby surpasses expensive and time-consuming 3D cameras.

Contains fulltext : 287833.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) Risk-stratified treatment strategies have the potential to increase survival and lower toxicity in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R cHL) patients. This study investigated the prognostic value of serum (s)TARC, vitamin D and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), TARC immunohistochemistry and quantitative PET parameters in 65 R/R cHL patients who were treated with brentuximab vedotin (BV) and DHAP followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) within the Transplant BRaVE study (NCT02280993). At a median follow-up of 40 months, the 3-year progression free survival (PFS) was 77% (95% CI: 67-88%) and the overall survival was 95% (90-100%). Significant adverse prognostic markers for progression were weak/negative TARC staining of Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg cells in the baseline biopsy, and a high standard uptake value (SUV)mean or SUVpeak on the baseline PET scan. After one cycle of BV-DHAP, sTARC levels were strongly associated with the risk of progression using a cutoff of 500 pg/ml. On the pre-ASCT PET scan, SUVpeak was highly prognostic for progression post-ASCT. Vitamin D, LDH and metabolic tumor volume had low prognostic value. In conclusion, we established the prognostic impact of sTARC, TARC staining, and quantitative PET parameters for R/R cHL, allowing the use of these parameters in prospective risk-stratified clinical trials. Trial registration: NCT02280993.

Diagnostic accuracy studies are, like other clinical studies, at risk of bias due to shortcomings in design and conduct, and the results of a diagnostic accuracy study may not apply to other patient groups and settings. Readers of study reports need to be informed about study design and conduct, in sufficient detail to judge the trustworthiness and applicability of the study findings. The STARD statement (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) was developed to improve the completeness and transparency of reports of diagnostic accuracy studies. STARD contains a list of essential items that can be used as a checklist, by authors, reviewers and other readers, to ensure that a report of a diagnostic accuracy study contains the necessary information. STARD was recently updated. All updated STARD materials, including the checklist, are available at http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard. Here, we present the STARD 2015 explanation and elaboration document. Through commented examples of appropriate reporting, we clarify the rationale for each of the 30 items on the STARD 2015 checklist, and describe what is expected from authors in developing sufficiently informative study reports.

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively describe the natural history of vanishing white matter (VWM), aiming at improving counseling of patients/families and providing natural history data for future therapeutic trials.METHODS: We performed a longitudinal multicenter study among 296 genetically confirmed VWM patients. Clinical information was obtained via disease-specific clinical questionnaire, Health Utilities Index and Guy's Neurological Disability Scale assessments, and chart review.RESULTS: First disease signs occurred at a median age of 3 years (mode = 2 years, range = before birth to 54 years); 60% of patients were symptomatic before the age of 4 years. The nature of the first signs varied for different ages of onset. Overall, motor problems were the most common presenting sign, especially in children. Adolescent and adult onset patients were more likely to exhibit cognitive problems early after disease onset. One hundred two patients were deceased. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed a positive relation between age at onset and both preservation of ambulation and survival. Absence of stress-provoked episodes and absence of seizures predicted more favorable outcome. In patients with onset before 4 years, earlier onset was associated with more severe disability and higher mortality. For onset from 4 years on, disease course was generally milder, with a wide variation in severity. There were no significant differences for sex or for the 5 eIF2B gene groups. The results confirm the presence of a genotype-phenotype correlation.INTERPRETATION: The VWM disease spectrum consists of a continuum with extremely wide variability. Age at onset is a strong predictor for disease course. Ann Neurol 2018;84:274-288.