METHODS: A 10-year retrospective analysis of SCARs cases in Penang General Hospital was carried out from January 2006 to December 2015. Data collection is based on the Malaysian Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee registry and dermatology clinic records.
RESULTS: A total of 189 cases of SCARs were encountered (F:M ratio; 1.2:1.0; mean age of 45 year). The commonest manifestation was Stevens-Johnson Syndrome [SJS] (55.0%), followed by toxic epidermal necrolysis [TEN] (23.8%), drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms [DRESS] (12.7%), acute generalised exanthematous pustulosis [AGEP] (4.8%), SJS/TEN overlap syndrome (2.6%) and generalised bullous fixed drug eruptions [GBFDE] (1.1%). Mean time to onset for TEN/SJS/Overlap syndrome was 10.5±13 days; AGEP, three days; GBFDE, 2.5±0.7 days, and DRESS, 29.4±5.7 days. The most common drugs implicated were antibiotics (33.3%), followed by allopurinol (18.9%) and anticonvulsant (18.4%). Out of 154 cases of SJS/TEN/overlap syndrome, allopurinol was the commonest causative agents (20.1%). In DRESS, allopurinol accounts for 45.8% of the cases. The mortality rate in SJS, TEN and DRESS were 1.9%, 13.3% and 12.5% respectively. No mortality was observed in AGEP and GBFDE.
CONCLUSION: The commonest manifestations of SCARs in our setting were SJS, TEN and DRESS. Allopurinol was the most common culprit. Thus, judicious allopurinol use is advocated and pre-emptive genetic screening for HLAB *5801 should be considered.
METHODS: Keratoconic (n = 74) and control subjects (n = 96) were recruited based on clinical diagnostic tests and selection criteria. DNA extracted from the blood samples was used to genotype VSX1 polymorphisms. In-house designed primers and optimization of PCR conditions were carried out to amplify exons 1 and 3 of the VSX1 gene. PCR conditions including percentage GC content, melting temperatures, and differences in melting temperatures of primers were evaluated to produce sensitive and specific DNA amplifications.
RESULTS: Genotyping was successfully carried out in 4 exons of the VSX1 gene. Primer annealing temperatures were observed to be crucial in enhancing PCR sensitivity and specificity. Annealing temperatures were carefully evaluated to produce increased specificity, yet not allowing sensitivity to be compromised. In addition, exon 1 of the VSX1 gene was amplified using 2 different sets of primers to produce 2 smaller amplified products with absence of non-specific bands. DNA amplification of exons 1 and 3 consistently showed single band products which were successfully sequenced to yield reproducible data.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of in-house designed primers and optimized PCR conditions allowed sensitive and specific DNA amplifications that produced distinct single bands. The in-house designed primers and DNA amplification protocols established in this study provide an addition to the current repertoire of primers for accurate molecular characterization of VSX1 gene polymorphisms in keratoconus research.
METHODS: We conducted focus groups among healthy English-speaking Malay women in Singapore, aged 40 to 69 years, using a structured guide developed through literature review, expertise input and participant refinement. Thematic analysis was conducted to extract dominant themes representing key motivators and barriers to screening and genetic testing. We used grounded theory to interpret results and derive a framework of understanding, with implications for improving uptake of services.
RESULTS: Five focus groups (four to six participants per group) comprising 27 women were conducted to theme saturation. Major themes were (a) spiritual and religious beliefs act as barriers towards uptake of screening and genetic testing; (b) preference for traditional medicine competes with Western medicine recommendations; (c) family and community influence health-related decisions, complexed by differences in intergenerational beliefs creating contrasting attitudes towards screening and prevention.
CONCLUSIONS: Decisions to participate in breast cancer screening and genetic testing are influenced by cultural, traditional, spiritual/religious, and intergenerational beliefs. Strategies to increase uptake should include acknowledgement and integration of these beliefs into counseling and education and collaboration with key influential Malay stakeholders and leaders.
CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of LPI is usually not suspected by clinical findings alone, and specific laboratory investigations and molecular analysis are important to get a definitive diagnosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Original research studies associating genetic features and normal tissue complications following radiotherapy were identified from PubMed. The use of dosimetric data was determined by mining the statement of prescription dose, dose fractionation, target volume selection or arrangement and dose distribution. The consideration of the dosimetric data as covariates was based on the statement mentioned in the statistical analysis section. The significance of these covariates was extracted from the results section. Descriptive analyses were performed to determine their completeness and inclusion as covariates.
RESULTS: A total of 174 studies were found to satisfy the inclusion criteria. Studies published ≥2010 showed increased use of dose distribution information (p = 0.07). 33% of studies did not include any dose features in the analysis of gene-toxicity associations. Only 29% included dose distribution features as covariates and reported the results. 59% of studies which included dose distribution features found significant associations to toxicity.
CONCLUSION: A large proportion of studies on the correlation of genetic markers with radiotherapy-related side effects considered no dosimetric parameters. Significance of dose distribution features was found in more than half of the studies including these features, emphasizing their importance. Completeness of radiation-specific clinical data may have increased in recent years which may improve gene-toxicity association studies.