Diferencias entre los pacientes con sarcoidosis con y sin compromiso articular atendidos durante quince años en un hospital de tercer nivel de complejidad

IntroductionSarcoidosis is a complex disease of unknown etiology, with a variable course and highly different forms of presentation. Our objective was to characterize all our patients with sarcoidosis with emphasis on their clinical presentation and to establish differences between patients with sarcoidosis with and without joint involvement.MethodsWe reviewed the medical records of all patients with a diagnosis of sarcoidosis who were treated at the outpatient or inpatient services of the Pablo Tobón Uribe Hospital in Medellín, Colombia, from January 2002 to April 2017.ResultsWe identified 22 patients with sarcoidosis. There were joint symptoms in 13 of them. All but one of the patients with sarcoidosis affecting the joints had concomitant skin involvement (92%), which was much less frequent in patients without joint involvement (22%) (odds ratio = 4.2; P < .001).ConclusionsPatients with sarcoidosis who have joint involvement have a much higher frequency of concomitant skin involvement. The absence of cutaneous findings in a patient with joint symptoms decreases the likelihood of sarcoidosis.     

Evidence-making hepatitis C cure: Towards a science that knows more carefully

There has been some controversy concerning the curative potential of new treatments for hepatitis C. This follows a systematic review of the Cochrane Collaboration questioning the clinical benefits of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs). This controversy has been debated as a matter of methods regarding how best to evidence treatment in an evidence-based medicine (EBM) approach. Drawing from science and technology studies (STS), we offer an alternative perspective. We propose a different way of thinking with evidence; one which treats ‘evidencing as performative’. Using the Cochrane review and its linked published responses as a resource for this analysis, we consider how hepatitis C cure is differently made-up through the knowledge-making practices performing it. We show how matters of apparent fact in evidence-based science are enacted as matters of clinical, social and ethico-political concern. We notice hepatitis C cure as a fluid object in negotiation. We highlight the limits of current debate to advocate a more critical and careful practice-based approach to knowing hepatitis C cure. This calls upon public health researchers to reflect on the performative work of their evidencing. We propose a ‘more-than’ EBM approach which treats ‘evidence-based’ science as an ‘evidence-making intervention’. We consider the implications of such an approach for the evidencing of public health interventions and for treating hepatitis C in the DAA era of ‘viral elimination’.     

Transcultural adaptation and validation of a French version of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility 12-item Short-Form (PLUS-M/FC-12) in active amputees

BackgroundThe PLUS-M 12-item Short-Form is a self-questionnaire that assesses the perceived capacity of lower limb amputees (LLAs) to perform a number of daily-life activities. Its psychometric properties are excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.9, fast administration and scoring, normative data available), and it can be used in clinical practice or for research purposes.ObjectiveWe aimed to develop a French version of this questionnaire and to assess its psychometric properties.MethodsWe followed international recommendations for translation and cross-cultural validation of questionnaires. In total, 52 LLAs (age 53 ± 16, 40 males, 28/12/12 transtibial/Gritti-Stokes/transfemoral, 20/28/4 ischemic/traumatic/other) participated. Criterion and construct validities were assessed with the Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) between the PLUS-M 12-item Short-Form and other constructs (Prosthetic-Profile-of-the-Amputee-Locomotor Capabilities Index, Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale, 2-min walking test and Timed Up and Go test), internal consistency with the Cronbach α and reliability with the ICC in 46 individuals who completed the questionnaire twice in a 7-day interval.ResultsThe mean (SD) PLUS-M 12-item Short-Form T-score was 56.1 (7.8; range 40.3 to 71.4). Construct and criterion validity, internal consistency and reliability ranged from low to excellent (r = 0.43 to 0.84, P < 10⁻² to 0.002; Cronbach α = 0.90, ICC = 0.89 [0.81–0.94]). We found no floor or ceiling effect.ConclusionsThe French version of the PLUS-M 12-item Short-Form has good to excellent psychometric properties, comparable to those of the original version. Its use could definitely be proposed for both clinical and research purposes, once its validation is completed by assessing other psychometric qualities, especially sensitivity to change.     

Disqualification of Neoadjuvant Rectal Score Based on Data of 6596 Patients From the Netherlands Cancer Registry

BackgroundThe neoadjuvant rectal score (NAR) was developed as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment. We aimed to validate the NAR score in patients from the Netherlands Cancer Registry database.Patients and MethodsWe studied patients with rectal cancer treated with long-course neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery in the Netherlands between 2007 and 2014. The probability of concordance with overall survival and the goodness of fit of several models were evaluated using Harrell's concordance index (c index) and the Akaike information criterion (AIC), which is used to compare the quality of statistical models.ResultsThe NAR score resulted in a c index of 0.665. We found that single pathologic parameters (pT or pN) have similar concordance as the NAR formula (c index of 0.663 and 0.655, respectively). A combination of pT and pN resulted in better concordance with the true endpoint, overall survival (c index 0.684), and a simple Cox regression model with the 3 parameters included in the NAR formula (cT, pT, and pN) improved the concordance even more (c index 0.689). When the AIC index was compared for all models, the NAR score model showed the worst fit to the true endpoint.ConclusionWe found no additional value for using the NAR formula as a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy.