Amphiregulin (AR) is a heparin-binding, heparin-inhibited member of the epidermal growth factor (EGF) family and an autocrine growth factor for human keratinocytes. Previous studies have shown that ...AR expression is increased in psoriatic epidermis. To test the hypothesis that aberrant AR expression is central to the development of psoriatic lesions, we constructed a transgene (K14-ARGE) encoding a human keratin 14 promoter-driven AR gene. Our results indicate that transgene integration and subsequent expression of AR in basal keratinocytes correlated with a psoriasis-like skin phenotype. Afflicted mice demonstrated shortened life spans, prominent scaling and erythematous skin with alopecia, and occasional papillomatous epidermal growths. Histologic examination revealed extensive areas of marked hyperkeratosis with focal parakeratosis, acanthosis, dermal and epidermal lymphocytic and neutrophilic infiltration, and dilated blood vessels within the papillary dermis. Our results reveal that AR exerts activity in the skin that is distinct from that of transgenic transforming growth factor-alpha or other cytokines, and induces skin pathology with striking similarities to psoriasis. Our observations also link the keratinocyte EGF receptor-ligand system to psoriatic inflammation, and suggest that aberrant expression of AR in the epidermis may represent a critical step in the development or propagation of psoriatic lesions.
The Papanicolaou smear has been a remarkably effective tool in cancer prevention, but it is not a perfect test. Although the most important factor in failure of cervical cancer prevention is lack of ...adequate screening, other factors include problems with sampling, interpretation, and effective clinical follow-up. A small number of rapidly developing cervical cancers probably also arise in the interval between Papanicolaou smear screenings. Consequently, cervical cancer will develop in some women despite appropriate screening. This article will analyze some of the problems relating to diagnostic errors, which include abnormal cells that are few (<100), small, or bland. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175:1110-3.)
No test ever invented has been as successful as the Papanicolaou smear in preventing cancer. Despite its remarkable success in cervical cancer prevention, however, the Papanicolaou smear is not a ...perfect test. Sampling errors account for a significant number of false-negative cases. Diagnostic errors occur in even the finest cytology laboratories. Yet, for women who develop cervical cancer, these errors pale in comparison with failure to screen patients adequately in the first place. This paper examines some of the problems that result in failure of the Papanicolaou smear to prevent cervical cancer, with an emphasis on common problems in Papanicolaou smear interpretation.
A problem in the diagnosis of Papanicolaou smears--the interpretation of "hyperchromatic crowded groups" (HCGs)--is identified and analyzed. HCGs usually represent benign entities such as endometrial ...cells, syncytial aggregates in severe atrophy, or fragments of endocervical tissue, the latter being seen with increasing frequency due to the use of the endocervical brush. Tubal metaplasia is another common, benign source of HCGs. However, occasionally HCGs represent serious lesions, such as carcinoma in situ, invasive squamous cell carcinoma, and glandular neoplasia, either in situ or invasive. The distinction among these various entities is not always easy, but guidelines are presented.
Numerous studies demonstrate associations between serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) and a variety of common disorders, including musculoskeletal, metabolic, cardiovascular, ...malignant, autoimmune, and infectious diseases. Although a causal link between serum 25(OH)D concentrations and many disorders has not been clearly established, these associations have led to widespread supplementation with vitamin D and increased laboratory testing for 25(OH)D in the general population. The benefit-risk ratio of this increase in vitamin D use is not clear, and the optimal vitamin D intake and the role of testing for 25(OH)D for disease prevention remain uncertain.
To develop clinical guidelines for the use of vitamin D (cholecalciferol vitamin D3 or ergocalciferol vitamin D2) to lower the risk of disease in individuals without established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing.
A multidisciplinary panel of clinical experts, along with experts in guideline methodology and systematic literature review, identified and prioritized 14 clinically relevant questions related to the use of vitamin D and 25(OH)D testing to lower the risk of disease. The panel prioritized randomized placebo-controlled trials in general populations (without an established indication for vitamin D treatment or 25OHD testing), evaluating the effects of empiric vitamin D administration throughout the lifespan, as well as in select conditions (pregnancy and prediabetes). The panel defined "empiric supplementation" as vitamin D intake that (a) exceeds the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) and (b) is implemented without testing for 25(OH)D. Systematic reviews queried electronic databases for publications related to these 14 clinical questions. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and guide recommendations. The approach incorporated perspectives from a patient representative and considered patient values, costs and resources required, acceptability and feasibility, and impact on health equity of the proposed recommendations. The process to develop this clinical guideline did not use a risk assessment framework and was not designed to replace current DRI for vitamin D.
The panel suggests empiric vitamin D supplementation for children and adolescents aged 1 to 18 years to prevent nutritional rickets and because of its potential to lower the risk of respiratory tract infections; for those aged 75 years and older because of its potential to lower the risk of mortality; for those who are pregnant because of its potential to lower the risk of preeclampsia, intra-uterine mortality, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age birth, and neonatal mortality; and for those with high-risk prediabetes because of its potential to reduce progression to diabetes. Because the vitamin D doses in the included clinical trials varied considerably and many trial participants were allowed to continue their own vitamin D-containing supplements, the optimal doses for empiric vitamin D supplementation remain unclear for the populations considered. For nonpregnant people older than 50 years for whom vitamin D is indicated, the panel suggests supplementation via daily administration of vitamin D, rather than intermittent use of high doses. The panel suggests against empiric vitamin D supplementation above the current DRI to lower the risk of disease in healthy adults younger than 75 years. No clinical trial evidence was found to support routine screening for 25(OH)D in the general population, nor in those with obesity or dark complexion, and there was no clear evidence defining the optimal target level of 25(OH)D required for disease prevention in the populations considered; thus, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in all populations considered. The panel judged that, in most situations, empiric vitamin D supplementation is inexpensive, feasible, acceptable to both healthy individuals and health care professionals, and has no negative effect on health equity.
The panel suggests empiric vitamin D for those aged 1 to 18 years and adults over 75 years of age, those who are pregnant, and those with high-risk prediabetes. Due to the scarcity of natural food sources rich in vitamin D, empiric supplementation can be achieved through a combination of fortified foods and supplements that contain vitamin D. Based on the absence of supportive clinical trial evidence, the panel suggests against routine 25(OH)D testing in the absence of established indications. These recommendations are not meant to replace the current DRIs for vitamin D, nor do they apply to people with established indications for vitamin D treatment or 25(OH)D testing. Further research is needed to determine optimal 25(OH)D levels for specific health benefits.
Vitamin D, the major steroid hormone that controls mineral ion homeostasis, exerts its actions through the vitamin D receptor (VDR). The VDR is expressed in many tissues, including several tissues ...not thought to play a role in mineral metabolism. Studies in kindreds with VDR mutations (vitamin D-dependent rickets type II, VDDR II) have demonstrated hypocalcemia, hyperparathyroidism, rickets, and osteomalacia. Alopecia, which is not a feature of vitamin D deficiency, is seen in some kindreds. We have generated a mouse model of VDDR II by targeted ablation of the second zinc finger of the VDR DNA-binding domain. Despite known expression of the VDR in fetal life, homozygous mice are phenotypically normal at birth and demonstrate normal survival at least until 6 months. They become hypocalcemic at 21 days of age, at which time their parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels begin to rise. Hyperparathyroidism is accompanied by an increase in the size of the parathyroid gland as well as an increase in PTH mRNA levels. Rickets and osteomalacia are seen by day 35; however, as early as day 15, there is an expansion in the zone of hypertrophic chondrocytes in the growth plate. In contrast to animals made vitamin D deficient by dietary means, and like some patients with VDDR II, these mice develop progressive alopecia from the age of 4 weeks.
Vitamin D plays a critical role in many physiological functions, including calcium metabolism and musculoskeletal health. This commentary aims to explore the intricate relationships among skin ...complexion, race, and 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) levels, focusing on challenges the Endocrine Society encountered during clinical practice guideline development. Given that increased melanin content reduces 25(OH)D production in the skin in response to UV light, the guideline development panel addressed the potential role for 25(OH)D screening in individuals with dark skin complexion. The panel discovered that no randomized clinical trials have directly assessed vitamin D related patient-important outcomes based on participants' skin pigmentation, although race and ethnicity often served as presumed proxies for skin pigmentation in the literature. In their deliberations, guideline panel members and selected Endocrine Society leaders underscored the critical need to distinguish between skin pigmentation as a biological variable and race and ethnicity as socially determined constructs. This differentiation is vital to maximize scientific rigor and, thus, the validity of resulting recommendations. Lessons learned from the guideline development process emphasize the necessity of clarity when incorporating race and ethnicity into clinical guidelines. Such clarity is an essential step toward improving health outcomes and ensuring equitable healthcare practices.
PDF
