METHODS: Data from the Malaysian Elders Longitudinal Research subset of the Transforming Cognitive Frailty into Later-Life Self-Sufficiency cohort study was utilized. From 2013-2015, participants aged ≥55 years were selected from the electoral rolls of three parliamentary constituencies in Klang Valley. Risk categorisation was performed using baseline data. Falls prediction values were determined using follow-up data from wave 2 (2015-2016), wave 3 (2019) and wave 4 (2020-2022).

RESULTS: Of 1,548 individuals recruited, 737 were interviewed at wave 2, 858 at wave 3, and 742 at wave 4. Falls were reported by 13.4 %, 29.8 % and 42.9 % of the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups at wave 2, 19.4 %, 25.5 % and 32.8 % at wave 3, and 25.8 %, 27.7 % and 27.0 % at wave 4, respectively. At wave 2, the algorithm generated a sensitivity of 51.3 % (95 %CI, 43.1-59.2) and specificity of 80.1 % (95 %CI, 76.6-83.2). At wave 3, sensitivity was 29.4 % (95 %CI, 23.1-36.6) and specificity was 81.6 % (95 %CI, 78.5-84.5). At wave 4, sensitivity was 26.0 % (95 %CI, 20.2-32.8) and specificity was 78.4 % (95 %CI, 74.7-81.8).

METHODS: Children with KD who were admitted to five selected hospitals in Malaysia between 2008 and 2018 and received 2 g/kg of IVIG within 10 days from the onset of illness were included. Predictors of IVIG resistance in KD were determined using multiple logistic regression analysis. An optimal cut-off point was set using receiver operative characteristic curve and a final multiple logistic regression analysis was performed entering these cut-off points. A new scoring system was constructed.

MATERIALS AND METHOD: 180 SNPs, shown to be previously associated with prostate cancer, were used to develop a PHS model in men with European ancestry. A machine-learning approach, LASSO-regularized Cox regression, was used to select SNPs and to estimate their coefficients in the training set (75,596 men). Performance of the resulting model was evaluated in the testing/validation set (6,411 men) with two metrics: (1) hazard ratios (HRs) and (2) positive predictive value (PPV) of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. HRs were estimated between individuals with PHS in the top 5% to those in the middle 40% (HR95/50), top 20% to bottom 20% (HR80/20), and bottom 20% to middle 40% (HR20/50). PPV was calculated for the top 20% (PPV80) and top 5% (PPV95) of PHS as the fraction of individuals with elevated PSA that were diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer on biopsy.

RESULTS: 166 SNPs had non-zero coefficients in the Cox model (PHS166). All HR metrics showed significant improvements for PHS166 compared to PHS46: HR95/50 increased from 3.72 to 5.09, HR80/20 increased from 6.12 to 9.45, and HR20/50 decreased from 0.41 to 0.34. By contrast, no significant differences were observed in PPV of PSA testing for clinically significant prostate cancer.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the capacity of FFR-CT and CCTA to rule out significant lesions in high-risk NSTE-ACS patients, using ICA with invasive FFR as the gold standard.

METHODS: High-risk NSTE-ACS patients admitted to 4 European centres were enrolled in this single-arm, prospective core lab-adjudicated study. Patients underwent CCTA with FFR-CT analysis, followed by ICA with invasive FFR.

RESULTS: Out of the 250 initially planned NSTE-ACS patients, 168 were included, of whom 151 (92%) had sufficient CCTA image quality to undergo CCTA and FFR-CT analysis. The median high-sensitivity troponin T level at 1 hour post-hospitalisation was 5.3 (interquartile range: 1.8-18.6) times the upper reference limit. At the patient level, the diagnostic performance of FFR-CT was numerically higher as compared to CCTA though not statistically significant (sensitivity: 94% vs 93%, specificity: 63% vs 54%, positive predictive value: 83% vs 79%, negative predictive value: 85% vs 80% and accuracy: 83% vs 79%; p=0.58), suggesting an enhanced capability to avoid unnecessary ICA. At the lesion level, the ability of FFR-CT to detect significant lesions was significantly better than that of CCTA (receiver operating characteristic curves: 0.84 vs 0.65 respectively; p<0.01).

METHODS: Patients referred to the Endoscopic Unit for colonoscopy were recruited for the study. Stool samples were collected prior to bowel preparation, and tested for occult blood with both gFOBT and FIT. Dietary restriction was not imposed. To assess the validity of either tests or in combination to detect a neoplasm or cancer in the colon, their false positive rates, their sensitivity (true positive rate) and the specificity (true negative rate) were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS: One hundred and three patients were analysed. The sensitivity for picking up any neoplasia was 53% for FIT, 40% for gFOBT and 23.3% for the combination. The sensitivities for picking up only carcinoma were 77.8% , 66.7% and 55.5%, respectively. The specificity for excluding any neoplasia was 91.7% for FIT, 74% for gFOBT and 94.5% for a combination, whereas for excluding only carcinomas they were 84%, 73.4% and 93.6%. Of the 69 with normal colonoscopic findings, FOBT was positive in 4.3%, 23.2 %and 2.9% for FIT, gFOBT, or combination of tests respectively.