University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI. METHODS: Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results. RESULTS: The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed. CONCLUSION: We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.

AUTORES: Daniel J Klionsky1745,1749*, Kotb Abdelmohsen840, Akihisa Abe1237, Md Joynal Abedin1762, Hagai Abeliovich425,
\nAbraham Acevedo Arozena789, Hiroaki Adachi1800, Christopher M Adams1669, Peter D Adams57, Khosrow Adeli1981,
\nPeter J Adhihetty1625, Sharon G Adler700, Galila Agam67, Rajesh Agarwal1587, Manish K Aghi1537, Maria Agnello1826,
\nPatrizia Agostinis664, Patricia V Aguilar1960, Julio Aguirre-Ghiso784,786, Edoardo M Airoldi89,422, Slimane Ait-Si-Ali1376,
\nTakahiko Akematsu2010, Emmanuel T Akporiaye1097, Mohamed Al-Rubeai1394, Guillermo M Albaiceta1294,
\nChris Albanese363, Diego Albani561, Matthew L Albert517, Jesus Aldudo128, Hana Alg€ul1164, Mehrdad Alirezaei1198,
\nIraide Alloza642,888, Alexandru Almasan206, Maylin Almonte-Beceril524, Emad S Alnemri1212, Covadonga Alonso544,
\nNihal Altan-Bonnet848, Dario C Altieri1205, Silvia Alvarez1497, Lydia Alvarez-Erviti1395, Sandro Alves107,
\nGiuseppina Amadoro860, Atsuo Amano930, Consuelo Amantini1554, Santiago Ambrosio1458, Ivano Amelio756,
\nAmal O Amer918, Mohamed Amessou2089, Angelika Amon726, Zhenyi An1538, Frank A Anania291, Stig U Andersen6,
\nUsha P Andley2079, Catherine K Andreadi1690, Nathalie Andrieu-Abadie502, Alberto Anel2027, David K Ann58,
\nShailendra Anoopkumar-Dukie388, Manuela Antonioli832,858, Hiroshi Aoki1791, Nadezda Apostolova2007,
\nSaveria Aquila1500, Katia Aquilano1876, Koichi Araki292, Eli Arama2098, Agustin Aranda456, Jun Araya591,
\nAlexandre Arcaro1472, Esperanza Arias26, Hirokazu Arimoto1225, Aileen R Ariosa1749, Jane L Armstrong1930,
\nThierry Arnould1773, Ivica Arsov2120, Katsuhiko Asanuma675, Valerie Askanas1924, Eric Asselin1867, Ryuichiro Atarashi794,
\nSally S Atherton369, Julie D Atkin713, Laura D Attardi1131, Patrick Auberger1787, Georg Auburger379, Laure Aurelian1727,
\nRiccardo Autelli1992, Laura Avagliano1029,1755, Maria Laura Avantaggiati364, Limor Avrahami1166, Suresh Awale1986,
\nNeelam Azad404, Tiziana Bachetti568, Jonathan M Backer28, Dong-Hun Bae1933, Jae-sung Bae677, Ok-Nam Bae409,
\nSoo Han Bae2117, Eric H Baehrecke1729, Seung-Hoon Baek17, Stephen Baghdiguian1368,
\nAgnieszka Bagniewska-Zadworna2, Hua Bai90, Jie Bai667, Xue-Yuan Bai1133, Yannick Bailly884,
\nKithiganahalli Narayanaswamy Balaji473, Walter Balduini2002, Andrea Ballabio316, Rena Balzan1711, Rajkumar Banerjee239,
\nG abor B anhegyi1052, Haijun Bao2109, Benoit Barbeau1363, Maria D Barrachina2007, Esther Barreiro467, Bonnie Bartel997,
\nAlberto Bartolom e222, Diane C Bassham550, Maria Teresa Bassi1046, Robert C Bast Jr1273, Alakananda Basu1798,
\nMaria Teresa Batista1578, Henri Batoko1336, Maurizio Battino970, Kyle Bauckman2085, Bradley L Baumgarner1909,
\nK Ulrich Bayer1594, Rupert Beale1553, Jean-Fran¸cois Beaulieu1360, George R. Beck Jr48,294, Christoph Becker336,
\nJ David Beckham1595, Pierre-Andr e B edard749, Patrick J Bednarski301, Thomas J Begley1135, Christian Behl1419,
\nChristian Behrends757, Georg MN Behrens406, Kevin E Behrns1627, Eloy Bejarano26, Amine Belaid490,
\nFrancesca Belleudi1041, Giovanni B enard497, Guy Berchem706, Daniele Bergamaschi983, Matteo Bergami1401,
\nBen Berkhout1441, Laura Berliocchi714, Am elie Bernard1749, Monique Bernard1354, Francesca Bernassola1880,
\nAnne Bertolotti791, Amanda S Bess272, S ebastien Besteiro1351, Saverio Bettuzzi1828, Savita Bhalla913,
\nShalmoli Bhattacharyya973, Sujit K Bhutia838, Caroline Biagosch1159, Michele Wolfe Bianchi520,1378,1381,
\nMartine Biard-Piechaczyk210, Viktor Billes298, Claudia Bincoletto1314, Baris Bingol350, Sara W Bird1128, Marc Bitoun1112,
\nIvana Bjedov1258, Craig Blackstone843, Lionel Blanc1183, Guillermo A Blanco1496, Heidi Kiil Blomhoff1812,
\nEmilio Boada-Romero1297, Stefan B€ockler1464, Marianne Boes1423, Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia1835, Lawrence H Boise286,287,
\nAlessandra Bolino2063, Andrea Boman693, Paolo Bonaldo1823, Matteo Bordi897, J€urgen Bosch608, Luis M Botana1308,
\nJoelle Botti1375, German Bou1405, Marina Bouch e1038, Marion Bouchecareilh1331, Marie-Jos ee Boucher1901,
\nMichael E Boulton481, Sebastien G Bouret1926, Patricia Boya133, Micha€el Boyer-Guittaut1345, Peter V Bozhkov1141,
\nNathan Brady374, Vania MM Braga469, Claudio Brancolini1997, Gerhard H Braus353, Jos e M Bravo-San Pedro299,393,508,1374,
\nLisa A Brennan322, Emery H Bresnick2022, Patrick Brest490, Dave Bridges1939, Marie-Agn es Bringer124, Marisa Brini1822,
\nGlauber C Brito1311, Bertha Brodin631, Paul S Brookes1872, Eric J Brown352, Karen Brown1690, Hal E Broxmeyer480,
\nAlain Bruhat486,1339, Patricia Chakur Brum1893, John H Brumell446, Nicola Brunetti-Pierri315,1171,
\nRobert J Bryson-Richardson781, Shilpa Buch1777, Alastair M Buchan1819, Hikmet Budak1022, Dmitry V Bulavin118,505,1789,
\nScott J Bultman1792, Geert Bultynck665, Vladimir Bumbasirevic1470, Yan Burelle1356, Robert E Burke216,217,
\nMargit Burmeister1750, Peter B€utikofer1473, Laura Caberlotto1987, Ken Cadwell896, Monika Cahova112, Dongsheng Cai24,
\nJingjing Cai2099, Qian Cai1018, Sara Calatayud2007, Nadine Camougrand1343, Michelangelo Campanella1700,
\nGrant R Campbell1525, Matthew Campbell1249, Silvia Campello556,1876, Robin Candau1769, Isabella Caniggia1983,
\nLavinia Cantoni560, Lizhi Cao116, Allan B Caplan1656, Michele Caraglia1051, Claudio Cardinali1043, Sandra Morais Cardoso1579, Jennifer S Carew208, Laura A Carleton874, Cathleen R Carlin101, Silvia Carloni2002,
\nSven R Carlsson1267, Didac Carmona-Gutierrez1643, Leticia AM Carneiro312, Oliana Carnevali971, Serena Carra1318,
\nAlice Carrier120, Bernadette Carroll900, Caty Casas1324, Josefina Casas1116, Giuliana Cassinelli324, Perrine Castets1462,
\nSusana Castro-Obregon214, Gabriella Cavallini1841, Isabella Ceccherini568, Francesco Cecconi253,555,1884,
\nArthur I Cederbaum459, Valent ın Ce~na199,1281, Simone Cenci1323,2064, Claudia Cerella444, Davide Cervia1996,
\nSilvia Cetrullo1478, Hassan Chaachouay2028, Han-Jung Chae187, Andrei S Chagin634, Chee-Yin Chai626,628,
\nGopal Chakrabarti1502, Georgios Chamilos1601, Edmond YW Chan1142, Matthew TV Chan181, Dhyan Chandra1003,
\nPallavi Chandra548, Chih-Peng Chang818, Raymond Chuen-Chung Chang1653, Ta Yuan Chang345, John C Chatham1434,
\nSaurabh Chatterjee1910, Santosh Chauhan527, Yongsheng Che62, Michael E Cheetham1263, Rajkumar Cheluvappa1783,
\nChun-Jung Chen1153, Gang Chen598,1676, Guang-Chao Chen9, Guoqiang Chen1078, Hongzhuan Chen1077, Jeff W Chen1514,
\nJian-Kang Chen370,371, Min Chen249, Mingzhou Chen2104, Peiwen Chen1823, Qi Chen1674, Quan Chen172,
\nShang-Der Chen138, Si Chen325, Steve S-L Chen10, Wei Chen2125, Wei-Jung Chen829, Wen Qiang Chen979, Wenli Chen1113,
\nXiangmei Chen1133, Yau-Hung Chen1157, Ye-Guang Chen1250, Yin Chen1447, Yingyu Chen953,955, Yongshun Chen2135,
\nYu-Jen Chen712, Yue-Qin Chen1145, Yujie Chen1208, Zhen Chen339, Zhong Chen2123, Alan Cheng1702,
\nChristopher HK Cheng184, Hua Cheng1728, Heesun Cheong814, Sara Cherry1836, Jason Chesney1703,
\nChun Hei Antonio Cheung817, Eric Chevet1359, Hsiang Cheng Chi140, Sung-Gil Chi656, Fulvio Chiacchiera308,
\nHui-Ling Chiang958, Roberto Chiarelli1826, Mario Chiariello235,567,577, Marcello Chieppa835, Lih-Shen Chin290,
\nMario Chiong1285, Gigi NC Chiu878, Dong-Hyung Cho676, Ssang-Goo Cho650, William C Cho982, Yong-Yeon Cho105,
\nYoung-Seok Cho1064, Augustine MK Choi2095, Eui-Ju Choi656, Eun-Kyoung Choi387,400,685, Jayoung Choi1563,
\nMary E Choi2093, Seung-Il Choi2116, Tsui-Fen Chou412, Salem Chouaib395, Divaker Choubey1574, Vinay Choubey1936,
\nKuan-Chih Chow822, Kamal Chowdhury730, Charleen T Chu1856, Tsung-Hsien Chuang827, Taehoon Chun657,
\nHyewon Chung652, Taijoon Chung978, Yuen-Li Chung1194, Yong-Joon Chwae18, Valentina Cianfanelli254,
\nRoberto Ciarcia1775, Iwona A Ciechomska886, Maria Rosa Ciriolo1876, Mara Cirone1042, Sofie Claerhout1694,
\nMichael J Clague1698, Joan Cl aria1457, Peter GH Clarke1687, Robert Clarke361, Emilio Clementi1045,1398, C edric Cleyrat1781,
\nMiriam Cnop1366, Eliana M Coccia574, Tiziana Cocco1459, Patrice Codogno1375, J€orn Coers271, Ezra EW Cohen1533,
\nDavid Colecchia235,567,577, Luisa Coletto25, N uria S Coll123, Emma Colucci-Guyon516, Sergio Comincini1829,
\nMaria Condello578, Katherine L Cook2073, Graham H Coombs1929, Cynthia D Cooper2076, J Mark Cooper1395,
\nIsabelle Coppens601, Maria Tiziana Corasaniti1387, Marco Corazzari485,1884, Ramon Corbalan1566,
\nElisabeth Corcelle-Termeau251, Mario D Cordero1899, Cristina Corral-Ramos1289, Olga Corti507,1109, Andrea Cossarizza1767,
\nPaola Costelli1993, Safia Costes1518, Susan L Cotman721, Ana Coto-Montes946, Sandra Cottet566,1688, Eduardo Couve1301,
\nLori R Covey1015, L Ashley Cowart762, Jeffery S Cox1536, Fraser P Coxon1427, Carolyn B Coyne1846, Mark S Cragg1919,
\nRolf J Craven1679, Tiziana Crepaldi1995, Jose L Crespo1300, Alfredo Criollo1285, Valeria Crippa558, Maria Teresa Cruz1576,
\nAna Maria Cuervo26, Jose M Cuezva1277, Taixing Cui1907, Pedro R Cutillas987, Mark J Czaja27, Maria F Czyzyk-Krzeska1572,
\nRuben K Dagda2068, Uta Dahmen1404, Chunsun Dai800, Wenjie Dai1187, Yun Dai2059, Kevin N Dalby1940,
\nLuisa Dalla Valle1822, Guillaume Dalmasso1340, Marcello D’Amelio557, Markus Damme188, Arlette Darfeuille-Michaud1340,
\nCatherine Dargemont950, Victor M Darley-Usmar1433, Srinivasan Dasarathy205, Biplab Dasgupta202, Srikanta Dash1254,
\nCrispin R Dass242, Hazel Marie Davey8, Lester M Davids1560, David D avila227, Roger J Davis1731, Ted M Dawson604,
\nValina L Dawson606, Paula Daza1898, Jackie de Belleroche470, Paul de Figueiredo1180,1182,
\nRegina Celia Bressan Queiroz de Figueiredo135, Jos e de la Fuente1023, Luisa De Martino1775,
\nAntonella De Matteis1171, Guido RY De Meyer1443, Angelo De Milito631, Mauro De Santi2002,

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PERIOD COVERED: 2014. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance system that provides estimates of the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) among children aged 8 years whose parents or guardians reside within 11 ADDM sites in the United States (Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Wisconsin). ADDM surveillance is conducted in two phases. The first phase involves review and abstraction of comprehensive evaluations that were completed by professional service providers in the community. Staff completing record review and abstraction receive extensive training and supervision and are evaluated according to strict reliability standards to certify effective initial training, identify ongoing training needs, and ensure adherence to the prescribed methodology. Record review and abstraction occurs in a variety of data sources ranging from general pediatric health clinics to specialized programs serving children with developmental disabilities. In addition, most of the ADDM sites also review records for children who have received special education services in public schools. In the second phase of the study, all abstracted information is reviewed systematically by experienced clinicians to determine ASD case status. A child is considered to meet the surveillance case definition for ASD if he or she displays behaviors, as described on one or more comprehensive evaluations completed by community-based professional providers, consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) diagnostic criteria for autistic disorder; pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS, including atypical autism); or Asperger disorder. This report provides updated ASD prevalence estimates for children aged 8 years during the 2014 surveillance year, on the basis of DSM-IV-TR criteria, and describes characteristics of the population of children with ASD. In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association published the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), which made considerable changes to ASD diagnostic criteria. The change in ASD diagnostic criteria might influence ADDM ASD prevalence estimates; therefore, most (85%) of the records used to determine prevalence estimates based on DSM-IV-TR criteria underwent additional review under a newly operationalized surveillance case definition for ASD consistent with the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Children meeting this new surveillance case definition could qualify on the basis of one or both of the following criteria, as documented in abstracted comprehensive evaluations: 1) behaviors consistent with the DSM-5 diagnostic features; and/or 2) an ASD diagnosis, whether based on DSM-IV-TR or DSM-5 diagnostic criteria. Stratified comparisons of the number of children meeting either of these two case definitions also are reported. RESULTS: For 2014, the overall prevalence of ASD among the 11 ADDM sites was 16.8 per 1,000 (one in 59) children aged 8 years. Overall ASD prevalence estimates varied among sites, from 13.1-29.3 per 1,000 children aged 8 years. ASD prevalence estimates also varied by sex and race/ethnicity. Males were four times more likely than females to be identified with ASD. Prevalence estimates were higher for non-Hispanic white (henceforth, white) children compared with non-Hispanic black (henceforth, black) children, and both groups were more likely to be identified with ASD compared with Hispanic children. Among the nine sites with sufficient data on intellectual ability, 31% of children with ASD were classified in the range of intellectual disability (intelligence quotient [IQ] <70), 25% were in the borderline range (IQ 71-85), and 44% had IQ scores in the average to above average range (i.e., IQ >85). The distribution of intellectual ability varied by sex and race/ethnicity. Although mention of developmental concerns by age 36 months was documented for 85% of children with ASD, only 42% had a comprehensive evaluation on record by age 36 months. The median age of earliest known ASD diagnosis was 52 months and did not differ significantly by sex or race/ethnicity. For the targeted comparison of DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 results, the number and characteristics of children meeting the newly operationalized DSM-5 case definition for ASD were similar to those meeting the DSM-IV-TR case definition, with DSM-IV-TR case counts exceeding DSM-5 counts by less than 5% and approximately 86% overlap between the two case definitions (kappa = 0.85). INTERPRETATION: Findings from the ADDM Network, on the basis of 2014 data reported from 11 sites, provide updated population-based estimates of the prevalence of ASD among children aged 8 years in multiple communities in the United States. The overall ASD prevalence estimate of 16.8 per 1,000 children aged 8 years in 2014 is higher than previously reported estimates from the ADDM Network. Because the ADDM sites do not provide a representative sample of the entire United States, the combined prevalence estimates presented in this report cannot be generalized to all children aged 8 years in the United States. Consistent with reports from previous ADDM surveillance years, findings from 2014 were marked by variation in ASD prevalence when stratified by geographic area, sex, and level of intellectual ability. Differences in prevalence estimates between black and white children have diminished in most sites, but remained notable for Hispanic children. For 2014, results from application of the DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 case definitions were similar, overall and when stratified by sex, race/ethnicity, DSM-IV-TR diagnostic subtype, or level of intellectual ability. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: Beginning with surveillance year 2016, the DSM-5 case definition will serve as the basis for ADDM estimates of ASD prevalence in future surveillance reports. Although the DSM-IV-TR case definition will eventually be phased out, it will be applied in a limited geographic area to offer additional data for comparison. Future analyses will examine trends in the continued use of DSM-IV-TR diagnoses, such as autistic disorder, PDD-NOS, and Asperger disorder in health and education records, documentation of symptoms consistent with DSM-5 terminology, and how these trends might influence estimates of ASD prevalence over time. The latest findings from the ADDM Network provide evidence that the prevalence of ASD is higher than previously reported estimates and continues to vary among certain racial/ethnic groups and communities. With prevalence of ASD ranging from 13.1 to 29.3 per 1,000 children aged 8 years in different communities throughout the United States, the need for behavioral, educational, residential, and occupational services remains high, as does the need for increased research on both genetic and nongenetic risk factors for ASD.

OBJECTIVES: This study proposes methods for blending design components of clinical effectiveness and implementation research. Such blending can provide benefits over pursuing these lines of research independently; for example, more rapid translational gains, more effective implementation strategies, and more useful information for decision makers. This study proposes a "hybrid effectiveness-implementation" typology, describes a rationale for their use, outlines the design decisions that must be faced, and provides several real-world examples. RESULTS: An effectiveness-implementation hybrid design is one that takes a dual focus a priori in assessing clinical effectiveness and implementation. We propose 3 hybrid types: (1) testing effects of a clinical intervention on relevant outcomes while observing and gathering information on implementation; (2) dual testing of clinical and implementation interventions/strategies; and (3) testing of an implementation strategy while observing and gathering information on the clinical intervention's impact on relevant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid typology proposed herein must be considered a construct still in evolution. Although traditional clinical effectiveness and implementation trials are likely to remain the most common approach to moving a clinical intervention through from efficacy research to public health impact, judicious use of the proposed hybrid designs could speed the translation of research findings into routine practice.

BACKGROUND: The main problem in many model-building situations is to choose from a large set of covariates those that should be included in the "best" model. A decision to keep a variable in the model might be based on the clinical or statistical significance. There are several variable selection algorithms in existence. Those methods are mechanical and as such carry some limitations. Hosmer and Lemeshow describe a purposeful selection of covariates within which an analyst makes a variable selection decision at each step of the modeling process. METHODS: In this paper we introduce an algorithm which automates that process. We conduct a simulation study to compare the performance of this algorithm with three well documented variable selection procedures in SAS PROC LOGISTIC: FORWARD, BACKWARD, and STEPWISE. RESULTS: We show that the advantage of this approach is when the analyst is interested in risk factor modeling and not just prediction. In addition to significant covariates, this variable selection procedure has the capability of retaining important confounding variables, resulting potentially in a slightly richer model. Application of the macro is further illustrated with the Hosmer and Lemeshow Worchester Heart Attack Study (WHAS) data. CONCLUSION: If an analyst is in need of an algorithm that will help guide the retention of significant covariates as well as confounding ones they should consider this macro as an alternative tool.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PERIOD COVERED: 2016. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance program that provides estimates of the prevalence of ASD among children aged 8 years whose parents or guardians live in 11 ADDM Network sites in the United States (Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Wisconsin). Surveillance is conducted in two phases. The first phase involves review and abstraction of comprehensive evaluations that were completed by medical and educational service providers in the community. In the second phase, experienced clinicians who systematically review all abstracted information determine ASD case status. The case definition is based on ASD criteria described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. RESULTS: For 2016, across all 11 sites, ASD prevalence was 18.5 per 1,000 (one in 54) children aged 8 years, and ASD was 4.3 times as prevalent among boys as among girls. ASD prevalence varied by site, ranging from 13.1 (Colorado) to 31.4 (New Jersey). Prevalence estimates were approximately identical for non-Hispanic white (white), non-Hispanic black (black), and Asian/Pacific Islander children (18.5, 18.3, and 17.9, respectively) but lower for Hispanic children (15.4). Among children with ASD for whom data on intellectual or cognitive functioning were available, 33% were classified as having intellectual disability (intelligence quotient [IQ] ≤70); this percentage was higher among girls than boys (39% versus 32%) and among black and Hispanic than white children (47%, 36%, and 27%, respectively) [corrected]. Black children with ASD were less likely to have a first evaluation by age 36 months than were white children with ASD (40% versus 45%). The overall median age at earliest known ASD diagnosis (51 months) was similar by sex and racial and ethnic groups; however, black children with IQ ≤70 had a later median age at ASD diagnosis than white children with IQ ≤70 (48 months versus 42 months). INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of ASD varied considerably across sites and was higher than previous estimates since 2014. Although no overall difference in ASD prevalence between black and white children aged 8 years was observed, the disparities for black children persisted in early evaluation and diagnosis of ASD. Hispanic children also continue to be identified as having ASD less frequently than white or black children. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: These findings highlight the variability in the evaluation and detection of ASD across communities and between sociodemographic groups. Continued efforts are needed for early and equitable identification of ASD and timely enrollment in services.

BACKGROUND: Mitoxantrone-based chemotherapy palliates pain without extending survival in men with progressive androgen-independent prostate cancer. We compared docetaxel plus estramustine with mitoxantrone plus prednisone in men with metastatic, hormone-independent prostate cancer. METHODS: We randomly assigned 770 men to one of two treatments, each given in 21-day cycles: 280 mg of estramustine three times daily on days 1 through 5, 60 mg of docetaxel per square meter of body-surface area on day 2, and 60 mg of dexamethasone in three divided doses before docetaxel, or 12 mg of mitoxantrone per square meter on day 1 plus 5 mg of prednisone twice daily. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were progression-free survival, objective response rates, and post-treatment declines of at least 50 percent in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. RESULTS: Of 674 eligible patients, 338 were assigned to receive docetaxel and estramustine and 336 to receive mitoxantrone and prednisone. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the median overall survival was longer in the group given docetaxel and estramustine than in the group given mitoxantrone and prednisone (17.5 months vs. 15.6 months, P=0.02 by the log-rank test), and the corresponding hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.67 to 0.97). The median time to progression was 6.3 months in the group given docetaxel and estramustine and 3.2 months in the group given mitoxantrone and prednisone (P<0.001 by the log-rank test). PSA declines of at least 50 percent occurred in 50 percent and 27 percent of patients, respectively (P<0.001), and objective tumor responses were observed in 17 percent and 11 percent of patients with bidimensionally measurable disease, respectively (P=0.30). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenic fevers (P=0.01), nausea and vomiting (P<0.001), and cardiovascular events (P=0.001) were more common among patients receiving docetaxel and estramustine than among those receiving mitoxantrone and prednisone. Pain relief was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement in median survival of nearly two months with docetaxel and estramustine, as compared with mitoxantrone and prednisone, provides support for this approach in men with metastatic, androgen-independent prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) remain important causes of morbidity and mortality. The consensus definitions of the Infectious Diseases Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group have been of immense value to researchers who conduct clinical trials of antifungals, assess diagnostic tests, and undertake epidemiologic studies. However, their utility has not extended beyond patients with cancer or recipients of stem cell or solid organ transplants. With newer diagnostic techniques available, it was clear that an update of these definitions was essential. METHODS: To achieve this, 10 working groups looked closely at imaging, laboratory diagnosis, and special populations at risk of IFD. A final version of the manuscript was agreed upon after the groups' findings were presented at a scientific symposium and after a 3-month period for public comment. There were several rounds of discussion before a final version of the manuscript was approved. RESULTS: There is no change in the classifications of "proven," "probable," and "possible" IFD, although the definition of "probable" has been expanded and the scope of the category "possible" has been diminished. The category of proven IFD can apply to any patient, regardless of whether the patient is immunocompromised. The probable and possible categories are proposed for immunocompromised patients only, except for endemic mycoses. CONCLUSIONS: These updated definitions of IFDs should prove applicable in clinical, diagnostic, and epidemiologic research of a broader range of patients at high-risk.

Aspergillus species have emerged as an important cause of life-threatening infections in immunocompromised patients. This expanding population is composed of patients with prolonged neutropenia, advanced HIV infection, and inherited immunodeficiency and patients who have undergone allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and/or lung transplantation. This document constitutes the guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America for treatment of aspergillosis and replaces the practice guidelines for Aspergillus published in 2000 The objective of these

New evidence on breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) screening has become available since the American Cancer Society (ACS) last issued guidelines for the early detection of breast cancer in 2003. A guideline panel has reviewed this evidence and developed new recommendations for women at different defined levels of risk. Screening MRI is recommended for women with an approximately 20-25% or greater lifetime risk of breast cancer, including women with a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer and women who were treated for Hodgkin disease. There are several risk subgroups for which the available data are insufficient to recommend for or against screening, including women with a personal history of breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, atypical hyperplasia, and extremely dense breasts on mammography. Diagnostic uses of MRI were not considered to be within the scope of this review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with myeloma who relapse after high-dose chemotherapy have few therapeutic options. Since increased bone marrow vascularity imparts a poor prognosis in myeloma, we evaluated the efficacy of thalidomide, which has antiangiogenic properties, in patients with refractory disease. METHODS: Eighty-four previously treated patients with refractory myeloma (76 with a relapse after high-dose chemotherapy) received oral thalidomide as a single agent for a median of 80 days (range, 2 to 465). The starting dose was 200 mg daily, and the dose was increased by 200 mg every two weeks until it reached 800 mg per day. Response was assessed on the basis of a reduction of the myeloma protein in serum or Bence Jones protein in urine that lasted for at least six weeks. RESULTS: The serum or urine levels of paraprotein were reduced by at least 90 percent in eight patients (two had a complete remission), at least 75 percent in six patients, at least 50 percent in seven patients, and at least 25 percent in six patients, for a total rate of response of 32 percent. Reductions in the paraprotein levels were apparent within two months in 78 percent of the patients with a response and were associated with decreased numbers of plasma cells in bone marrow and increased hemoglobin levels. The microvascular density of bone marrow did not change significantly in patients with a response. At least one third of the patients had mild or moderate constipation, weakness or fatigue, or somnolence. More severe adverse effects were infrequent (occurring in less than 10 percent of patients), and hematologic effects were rare. As of the most recent follow-up, 36 patients had died (30 with no response and 6 with a response). After 12 months of follow-up, Kaplan-Meier estimates of the mean (+/-SE) rates of event-free survival and overall survival for all patients were 22+/-5 percent and 58+/-5 percent, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Thalidomide is active against advanced myeloma. It can induce marked and durable responses in some patients with multiple myeloma, including those who relapse after high-dose chemotherapy.

autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.

Before publication of the original version of this report in 1987, practitioners of bone histomorphometry communicated with each other in a variety of arcane languages, which in general were unintelligible to those outside the field. The need for standardization of nomenclature had been recognized for many years,1 during which there had been much talk but no action. To satisfy this need, B Lawrence Riggs (ASBMR President, 1985 to 1986) asked A Michael Parfitt to convene an ASBMR committee to develop a new and unified system of terminology, suitable for adoption by the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (JBMR) as part of its Instructions to Authors. The resulting recommendations were published in 19872 and were quickly adopted not only by JBMR but also by all respected journals in the bone field. The recommendations improved markedly the ability of histomorphometrists to communicate with each other and with nonhistomorphometrists, leading to a broader understanding and appreciation of histomorphometric data. In 2012, 25 years after the development of the standardized nomenclature system, Thomas L Clemens (Editor in Chief of JBMR) felt that it was time to revise and update the recommendations. The original committee was reconvened by David W Dempster, who appointed one new member, Juliet E Compston. The original document was circulated to the committee members and was extensively revised according to their current recommendations. The key revisions include omission of terminology used before 1987, recommendations regarding the parameters and technical information that should be included in all histomorphometry articles, recommendations on how to handle dynamic parameters of bone formation in settings of low bone turnover, and updating of references. It is generally agreed that a bone is an individual organ of the skeletal system, but the term “bone” has at least three meanings. The first is mineralized bone matrix excluding osteoid; this usage conforms rigorously to the definition of bone as a hard tissue. Osteoid is bone matrix that will be (but is not yet) mineralized, and is sometimes referred to as pre-bone. The second meaning of “bone,” and the one we have adopted, is bone matrix, whether mineralized or not, ie, including both mineralized bone and osteoid. The third meaning of “bone” is a tissue including bone marrow and other soft tissue, as well as bone as just defined. We refer to the combination of bone and associated soft tissue or marrow as “bone tissue.” “Tissue” is defined3 as “an aggregation of similarly specialized cells united in the performance of a particular function.” In this sense, bone, bone marrow, and the contents of osteonal canals are certainly not the same tissue, but in a more general sense, most textbooks of histology recognize only four fundamental tissues—epithelium, nerve, muscle, and connective tissue4—of which the last-named includes bone and all its accompanying nonmineralized tissue. In current clinical and radiologic parlance, “trabecular” and “cortical” refer to contrasting structural types of bone. But “trabecular” does not appear in any standard textbook of anatomy or histology as a name for a type of bone; rather, “spongy” or “cancellous” is used. “Spongiosa” (primary or secondary) is best restricted to the stages of endochondral ossification; “cancellous” is most commonly used in textbooks4, 5 and is the term we have chosen. We retain the noun “trabecula” and its associated adjective “trabecular” to refer to an individual structural element of cancellous bone, in accordance with current practice in histology,4 pathology,6 and biomechanics.7 Etymologically, a trabecula is a beam or rod, and in young people plates rather than rods are the predominant structural elements, both in the spine8 and in the ilium,9 but no convenient alternative is available. The size, shape, and orientation of trabeculae (as just defined) vary considerably between different types of cancellous bone.9, 10 “Density” is a frequent source of confusion in discussions about bone. We propose that the term should be restricted as far as possible to its primary meaning in physics of mass per unit volume,11, 12 with a subsidiary meaning analogous to population density, which is applied mainly to cells. This precludes the use of “density” in its stereologic sense, as will be to the the to which mass is referred be of mineralized bone, bone, bone tissue or or a bone. bone is than bone density, which the of and This is and generally be but is to Bone the of osteoid; bone matrix excluding and has been referred to as bone Bone tissue the of soft tissue, or bone density, referred to as bone density, the of bone tissue, cancellous bone tissue, and marrow a bone, the organ of which is by is in the clinical and In most bone are or formation and all cells on the are or but in the most bone are with to bone We refer to the cells that bone as cells and the term to cells that are bone matrix or with only rather than including all cells that are not cells are of and are to have The term is restricted to cells and are have only one or no for of and whether or should be or A of types of primary be on of a or between or between and histomorphometrists report all only in the for to three be to and the of the or the of an are not this is a but bone be in In other of that as an the is to by the of which is the We that this also should be the of bone are for between between and between different types of bone, for element of bone for of and for many of bone as the of and the of individual But as a it is to on adoption of a stereologic that be and a only in bone the is to the bone its before In the the use of a in the was a convenient of of but this for at an the of the of to most stereologic also that the be meaning that a to any element of has an of in any in not for all cancellous bone, in the there is only and stereologic be used with 25 But it is more to the of a is which is with the use of a but there is no other of canals generally not the by more than stereologic in bone are but of the stereologic to bone has not been we that histomorphometric should one of all and in the and or (as by the only the the and with the an is for each type of of how it was the primary as A of and should not be used in the same The only is the type of primary for which there is no convenient of to three the of the of in three is possible the same be in of and but this has not been applied to bone. as also be The original committee not to the terminology of the of as was at the on Bone use the term “density” in a general to any referred to that is and per unit is the of terminology is in the the of “density” in different the all to at the of bone histomorphometry will need to be with the of many to bone are published in the Journal of which is the of the of of and are of the of tissue and be between only to a which will be or the and in have no and in three but it is convenient to refer to as and to as the is the of and of individual have meaning in and are the only type that not a different and to different that use of is and it is to between used include tissue bone bone and and their or of the the use of as a term The of the is not commonly used as a at but is for with of bone for the of and cancellous bone of or for the of different types of bone and different to as of and of and for in the between and of bone of the as a the possible an to the in of to bone as an be as of the the of the to the mainly on the of the bone at the of be with a the but the of and cancellous tissue in the bone be with type of the be by the of and cancellous bone tissue in the The same be applied to and to bone by the by the as the The individual are in in of their or general are in a the is to be rather than the use of is mainly to time or there is a more for as for other their use in other but confusion is with that be with is not to or the use of and but to that the same are used by To this we have the to and the of new with different meanings. We have included in bone their and commonly used in and as well as for all the structural of bone and of and for of bone with are and in to their one the and in of only is it is and used and a suitable The most commonly used are a have an in many to the second or and the second of the by the are used for that are in to for the primary of and and for in its used in should be by a in the of each is to be as an individual In this any combination of be to which are included in the Bone histomorphometry be applied to many types of but the most are of of bone and of we first the terminology for to the the between and is it is to the of the bone at the for the the term is more is and cancellous for on the their are but it is possible to of their and In this the are generally by their of the and that one be in by or at the time of the but this is The generally has more and tissue than the The other of the is referred to as only the of the have the same as the the more term is the of the is to the of the its are It is convenient to as and of for and cancellous for are by the between and in the to of bone different on on by and with of of of on on cancellous to cancellous the and not and their is used for for the the by the and are the be used to and the of bone bone is similarly and cancellous for or marrow for The between and bone and cancellous or marrow on the of the be at in to the in both and bone it is for to recognize a between and cancellous bone tissue and in and This is not in or of its are not A has been used to this in This be to bone but this has not been all all in with bone marrow are referred to as and are cancellous bone and the is the of the between is to in accordance with and will also on whether the is not in with bone marrow are generally referred to as with as the also be referred to as the or osteonal of the of a bone; is on the and is on the the cancellous bone of the is not bone cancellous marrow The standard and for all should be that the of to as well as to the and are used only as and are used only as to the on which the was whether this was a particular or a particular type of tissue. of the commonly used have been many are by the are restricted to of a as the of a or the of cancellous the same be but the should be in the of on the the source is as it will not be to the source each time a particular is referred only one source is used in an it need only be are their be used as for of in or and in most will need to be only are that confusion between is as only one source is possible and its is The three and the are the key to one to is to in stereologic terminology, and and are to in stereologic are the and by which is for or by which has been for cancellous The with that the be and and to in stereologic terminology and are with the and a of the bone is as a and are to and it be to to the mineralized as an alternative to the more bone and of bone formation be to the or to the of as well as to or bone it be to use the between mineralized bone and or bone as a for the of or of the is are In many as only one is used for each the need only be and not each time the is more than one is with the same be to are with in both and in have been but need is used for of mineralized bone and is by Osteoid need to be as or as the in the between which to a and which to a for all are with the is a general term to all tissue that is not and includes marrow in cancellous bone and and canals in bone. both types of tissue, with on individual as cells or The be as an of tissue, by use of the is the of all referred to the of tissue and in The also be as individual by of a is the of individual confusion is the term be as or in be to in the are in be used to but it is to this as Osteoid not that should be for of We the formation and the of current be and for the same we the is with or and the and the individual also be as or cells and are for and the cells on the or cells. is with or the term that will at The of connective tissue the cells on should not be referred to as It is possible that by cells should be as rather than as In all be in by at or by of and The is more and a and a standard as well as a but that be The is and to The is used for between and and and the is used for and are used for and The is for the the between individual at particular and at particular during the The by in an individual be the in a of is the the to the between bone and It is used in and in different types of and different stages of in the should be to the between and is on an individual it has been used in the for of the of and in as an of in is the between on of a as for the is an of bone the but is of the of bone to the most of the but that are the of be restricted to the of the of are but to and need for a be In most the will be an or but of also be per is the of per to bone in cancellous bone tissue, a that with as and as are are and are in a that has been to of its The of to in a is an of be structural or of the are on that are but not rigorously and individual to use or of the that we have is with and time are L and but have other in the according to the as which is to of for cancellous the alternative is with by To between the alternative this is to the with It should be that there is in the term which has been a different by the ASBMR with with the it as the between rather than between is according to the as or as This by is an of the marrow to the and a is by but be in any to the of the marrow as the between is by and also be The of in at a particular time is by the of the resulting at that The of the of is to the of the first and second the of the of are available. of the term or a between the of the the second it is in time to the the only one was in of the or after the the and of the and of the of are the of the and should be be in to a variety of is to the of during which It should be that of individual on the Parfitt and that were than of the in which were This should be in the of and and it is to a is used to in bone formation in a Mineral is the between the or between the of by the time between the of the the of for and the of the vary with the of the which be and We the and to confusion between and and are used in to refer to the bone formation is no convenient of between the and by different that the is it is that the be used is as and the or the bone formation the It is analogous to the and is with formation and “bone formation but of alternative is The is in a and in the of the is the best a of the of the of formation of mineralized bone and of bone matrix, the including of and are their are of and the term be used. We refer to and as rather than as formation to the that an has meaning at a on the a formation has meaning only in to of tissue, or in the of a of but a formation is by the of and on the of as well as on their The rather than the is as the unit the of the on the of its members as well as on their individual Mineral formation is the of mineralized bone per unit as the of and as this term be as to the of the more term mineralized bone formation be used. In a and in the of the formation is with the bone formation and the is the and more term should be used. is a bone formation to each possible for and Bone formation the is to the as bone formation per unit of bone most on bone Bone formation per unit of bone is to the bone which bone and of Bone formation per unit of tissue most of bone the tissue is and its to the The of the was Bone be by histomorphometry but be as the bone formation or by an or of of bone that all are in to the same or of bone a be by and and osteonal with in but it be that bone formation at the current the time which the of bone of the of bone turnover, most the that and formation are is than the of but it is more to that mineralized in to or of bone alternative is to use to the in bone which is for a of but to in a it is be in to a variety of different including time is the time between and of any of matrix, the of the and is by The is in the understanding of and the of it be that to the and of individual of has been as for and be time which is the time between the of matrix and the of at each The name that the of the matrix, as In the and are but in is and than be as and has also been referred to as rather than but it is more to by the of than but it be more convenient for use it is in that be applied to as and information about the of which be with and dynamic of bone is the time to a new bone structural unit or the to the bone at a and is by It includes or or other to the between and that be to and be as by or by or of a that to a between and is the of during the of bone formation is low to of or of of to its has also been referred to as is the key for of all other of the In a of are to of that is any other than including and but will the in are and their of their current and in the by be used to The of the and formation is the which is the of a of bone at any on a bone is a of or than the of bone that a of the for a the bone or the many are much than a including both and and the of many is much than the of a or a not commonly it is this that is the for of a new after any or it is used and in key an for this is an alternative that the and use of The of the and the is the which is the time between the of at the same on the The of is the which is the that a new of will at any on the by the of also be in the more as the of of or and in to the in the is that current does not of the in cancellous bone. It be that which is be as the of bone per were first for of parameters of bone of low were in bone in with the and use of are in which are low that there are no or only in cancellous for of is that the was not or This sometimes be by the of in in the or on the The that a of a low be by low for parameters of bone as or a for the and of the and a In there are no in an we that be as a and that the of in a be in the of the In this it is to a of for and to include in the of for In only or are to be and in the be as a or one has the of a to have been or on the for in the first or the in the The for in the the is also be used. are in of the the the for in that be used or one use the for for the to which the In any of is in three the should be applied The of a to only are is that a of be used to for and parameters as with the that for and the parameters be of will have the The key is that all the of in a with the with only and the and the of with is to the both have applied to for the this a to be on the of in a that have it does not the and the be to the information are low or in an it is that will be low or in the of the The or of and should be for and cancellous The recommendations for and also in the in which only one is primary of and and primary of and should be with the on and the of the most information in of rather than after the are for and and for the between in different and we rather than in this the be used to the and unit of are not used for the be by the type of only We as their with to three 10 also not to the and it more to that the is should be in all primary and in or and all in should be in with as an alternative for should be as and formation with as and should be in or years as most and in We recognize that many who bone histomorphometry or its will on most need to use only a of the we a of its most but this is not to on its to the of the We also a of parameters that should be included in all histomorphometry are in only the most are The term “bone” to bone matrix whether mineralized or not and “bone to bone as with its associated marrow or other soft tissue. Bone tissue is or the between which is the of the is referred to as A trabecula is an individual structural element of cancellous bone tissue, whether or in The term to bone matrix that in the of will mineralized, and does not include the of connective tissue that bone cells on all The between and mineralized bone is referred to as the “bone more The term is restricted to cells that are to be bone and does not refer to all cells with The and are not are that as and are the and are used. The of is referred to as of how it is The used for its be and A the whether or is referred to as a and the term is generally used only are on the be use of only or only terminology and the same or the same are referred to as and in and as and in three the type of primary be only are is the of should be and its The terminology and of the of will not be used. the term “density” its primary meaning in physics of mass per unit this in no the of stereologic for and or is only as an of the of tissue for which should be the term is not used in any other the four types of primary only be a which will be and or in the are possible for all the be and this is as and are and should not be used. only one is or with the same are the need to be only but it be each time there is any of of the first in the same as the in the or has only one as in and no in the of is are used for the most frequent a and an for frequent and a for that are in to be by in the of each is to be as a The same is used for all The source is the type of or a on which the was and will most commonly be bone tissue cancellous bone tissue or but many other are in use or be the in which the source be the name are in the of the practice is in this have only been on cancellous bone tissue, the source is for bone and for and The need for and the to were The most commonly used are tissue bone bone and bone but many other be for particular The are by the to in stereologic and in stereologic we a type with an of at least for and information be with and with rather than but the of that be is more The tissue to be is and the bone is We that be at least three the at about the and by to the tissue and bone The of and the tissue and bone should be in all The committee that a of be used to be with but in that the of used to in a of should be 5 a of and should be and in all histomorphometry with their and that the are on for and and for time and and that is for It is to between and dynamic the not but it is more to between primary and primary is not the but the use of no more of the than is to in of a or to by a as the time between more and on one or more that should be should not be the primary which are that have no of the first of the other and revised this and

Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2020. Description of System: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance program that provides estimates of the prevalence of ASD among children aged 8 years. In 2020, there were 11 ADDM Network sites across the United States (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin). To ascertain ASD among children aged 8 years, ADDM Network staff review and abstract developmental evaluations and records from community medical and educational service providers. A child met the case definition if their record documented 1) an ASD diagnostic statement in an evaluation, 2) a classification of ASD in special education, or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code. Results: For 2020, across all 11 ADDM sites, ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years ranged from 23.1 in Maryland to 44.9 in California. The overall ASD prevalence was 27.6 per 1,000 (one in 36) children aged 8 years and was 3.8 times as prevalent among boys as among girls (43.0 versus 11.4). Overall, ASD prevalence was lower among non-Hispanic White children (24.3) and children of two or more races (22.9) than among non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black), Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (A/PI) children (29.3, 31.6, and 33.4 respectively). ASD prevalence among non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) children (26.5) was similar to that of other racial and ethnic groups. ASD prevalence was associated with lower household income at three sites, with no association at the other sites.Across sites, the ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years based exclusively on documented ASD diagnostic statements was 20.6 (range = 17.1 in Wisconsin to 35.4 in California). Of the 6,245 children who met the ASD case definition, 74.7% had a documented diagnostic statement of ASD, 65.2% had a documented ASD special education classification, 71.6% had a documented ASD ICD code, and 37.4% had all three types of ASD indicators. The median age of earliest known ASD diagnosis was 49 months and ranged from 36 months in California to 59 months in Minnesota.Among the 4,165 (66.7%) children with ASD with information on cognitive ability, 37.9% were classified as having an intellectual disability. Intellectual disability was present among 50.8% of Black, 41.5% of A/PI, 37.8% of two or more races, 34.9% of Hispanic, 34.8% of AI/AN, and 31.8% of White children with ASD. Overall, children with intellectual disability had earlier median ages of ASD diagnosis (43 months) than those without intellectual disability (53 months). Interpretation: For 2020, one in 36 children aged 8 years (approximately 4% of boys and 1% of girls) was estimated to have ASD. These estimates are higher than previous ADDM Network estimates during 2000-2018. For the first time among children aged 8 years, the prevalence of ASD was lower among White children than among other racial and ethnic groups, reversing the direction of racial and ethnic differences in ASD prevalence observed in the past. Black children with ASD were still more likely than White children with ASD to have a co-occurring intellectual disability. Public Health Action: The continued increase among children identified with ASD, particularly among non-White children and girls, highlights the need for enhanced infrastructure to provide equitable diagnostic, treatment, and support services for all children with ASD. Similar to previous reporting periods, findings varied considerably across network sites, indicating the need for additional research to understand the nature of such differences and potentially apply successful identification strategies across states.

CONTEXT: The cognitive and behavioral outcomes of school-aged children who were born preterm have been reported extensively. Many of these studies have methodological flaws that preclude an accurate estimate of the long-term outcomes of prematurity. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of preterm birth on cognition and behavior in school-aged children. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE search (1980 to November 2001) for English-language articles, supplemented by a manual search of personal files maintained by 2 of the authors. STUDY SELECTION: We included case-control studies reporting cognitive and/or behavioral data of children who were born preterm and who were evaluated after their fifth birthday if the attrition rate was less than 30%. From the 227 reviewed studies, cognitive data from 15 studies and behavioral data from 16 studies were selected. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on population demographics, study characteristics, and cognitive and behavioral outcomes were extracted from each study, entered in a customized database, and reviewed twice to minimize error. Differences between the mean cognitive scores of cases and controls were pooled. Homogeneity across studies was formally tested using a general variance-based method and graphically using Galbraith plots. Linear meta-analysis regression models were fitted to explore the impact of birth weight and gestational age on cognitive outcomes. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) were calculated for the incidence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and pooled. Quality assessment of the studies was performed based on a 10-point scale. Publication bias was examined using Begg modified funnel plots and formally tested using the Egger weighted-linear regression method. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among 1556 cases and 1720 controls, controls had significantly higher cognitive scores compared with children who were born preterm (weighted mean difference, 10.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.2-12.5). The mean cognitive scores of preterm-born cases and term-born controls were directly proportional to their birth weight (R(2) = 0.51; P<.001) and gestational age (R(2) = 0.49; P<.001). Age at evaluation had no significant correlation with mean difference in cognitive scores (R(2) = 0.12; P =.20). Preterm-born children showed increases in externalizing and internalizing behaviors in 81% of studies and had more than twice the RR for developing ADHD (pooled RR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.85-3.78). No differences were noted in cognition and behaviors based on the quality of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Children who were born preterm are at risk for reduced cognitive test scores and their immaturity at birth is directly proportional to the mean cognitive scores at school age. Preterm-born children also show an increased incidence of ADHD and other behaviors.

The adult skeleton regenerates by temporary cellular structures that comprise teams of juxtaposed osteoclasts and osteoblasts and replace periodically old bone with new. A considerable body of evidence accumulated during the last decade has shown that the rate of genesis of these two highly specialized cell types, as well as the prevalence of their apoptosis, is essential for the maintenance of bone homeostasis; and that common metabolic bone disorders such as osteoporosis result largely from a derangement in the birth or death of these cells. The purpose of this article is 3-fold: 1) to review the role and the molecular mechanism of action of regulatory molecules, such as cytokines and hormones, in osteoclast and osteoblast birth and apoptosis; 2) to review the evidence for the contribution of changes in bone cell birth or death to the pathogenesis of the most common forms of osteoporosis; and 3) to highlight the implications of bone cell birth and death for a better understanding of the mechanism of action and efficacy of present and future pharmacotherapeutic agents for osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND: Studies have documented the underrepresentation of women and blacks in clinical trials, and their recruitment is now federally mandated. However, little is known about the level of participation of elderly patients. We determined the rates of enrollment of patients 65 years of age or older in trials of treatment for cancer. METHODS: We analyzed data on 16,396 patients consecutively enrolled in 164 Southwest Oncology Group treatment trials between 1993 and 1996 according to sex, race (black or white), and age under 65 years or 65 or older. These rates were compared with the corresponding rates in the general population of patients with cancer, derived from the 1990 U.S. Census and from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program for the period from 1992 through 1994. Fifteen types of cancer were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The overall proportions of women and blacks enrolled in Southwest Oncology Group trials were similar to or the same as the estimated proportions in the U.S. population of patients with cancer (women, 41 percent and 43 percent; blacks, 10 percent and 10 percent, respectively). In contrast, patients 65 years of age or older were underrepresented overall (25 percent vs. 63 percent, P<0.001) and in trials involving all 15 types of cancer except lymphoma. The underrepresentation was particularly notable in trials of treatment for breast cancer (9 percent vs. 49 percent, P<0.001). The findings were similar when data on patients who were 70 years of age or older were analyzed, when 15 trials that excluded older patients were eliminated from the analysis, and when community-based enrollment was analyzed separately from enrollment at academic centers. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in studies of treatment for cancer. The reasons should be clarified, and policies adopted to correct this underrepresentation.

IMPORTANCE: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. OBJECTIVE: To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). FINDINGS: In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PERIOD COVERED: 2012. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance system that provides estimates of the prevalence and characteristics of ASD among children aged 8 years whose parents or guardians reside in 11 ADDM Network sites in the United States (Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin). Surveillance to determine ASD case status is conducted in two phases. The first phase consists of screening and abstracting comprehensive evaluations performed by professional service providers in the community. Data sources identified for record review are categorized as either 1) education source type, including developmental evaluations to determine eligibility for special education services or 2) health care source type, including diagnostic and developmental evaluations. The second phase involves the review of all abstracted evaluations by trained clinicians to determine ASD surveillance case status. A child meets the surveillance case definition for ASD if one or more comprehensive evaluations of that child completed by a qualified professional describes behaviors that are consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision diagnostic criteria for any of the following conditions: autistic disorder, pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (including atypical autism), or Asperger disorder. This report provides ASD prevalence estimates for children aged 8 years living in catchment areas of the ADDM Network sites in 2012, overall and stratified by sex, race/ethnicity, and the type of source records (education and health records versus health records only). In addition, this report describes the proportion of children with ASD with a score consistent with intellectual disability on a standardized intellectual ability test, the age at which the earliest known comprehensive evaluation was performed, the proportion of children with a previous ASD diagnosis, the specific type of ASD diagnosis, and any special education eligibility classification. RESULTS: For 2012, the combined estimated prevalence of ASD among the 11 ADDM Network sites was 14.5 per 1,000 (one in 69) children aged 8 years. Estimated prevalence was significantly higher among boys aged 8 years (23.4 per 1,000) than among girls aged 8 years (5.2 per 1,000). Estimated ASD prevalence was significantly higher among non-Hispanic white children aged 8 years (15.3 per 1,000) compared with non-Hispanic black children (13.1 per 1,000), and Hispanic (10.2 per 1,000) children aged 8 years. Estimated prevalence varied widely among the 11 ADDM Network sites, ranging from 8.2 per 1,000 children aged 8 years (in the area of the Maryland site where only health care records were reviewed) to 24.6 per 1,000 children aged 8 years (in New Jersey, where both education and health care records were reviewed). Estimated prevalence was higher in surveillance sites where education records and health records were reviewed compared with sites where health records only were reviewed (17.1 per 1,000 and 10.4 per 1,000 children aged 8 years, respectively; p<0.05). Among children identified with ASD by the ADDM Network, 82% had a previous ASD diagnosis or educational classification; this did not vary by sex or between non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black children. A lower percentage of Hispanic children (78%) had a previous ASD diagnosis or classification compared with non-Hispanic white children (82%) and with non-Hispanic black children (84%). The median age at earliest known comprehensive evaluation was 40 months, and 43% of children had received an earliest known comprehensive evaluation by age 36 months. The percentage of children with an earliest known comprehensive evaluation by age 36 months was similar for boys and girls, but was higher for non-Hispanic white children (45%) compared with non-Hispanic black children (40%) and Hispanic children (39%). INTERPRETATION: Overall estimated ASD prevalence was 14.5 per 1,000 children aged 8 years in the ADDM Network sites in 2012. The higher estimated prevalence among sites that reviewed both education and health records suggests the role of special education systems in providing comprehensive evaluations and services to children with developmental disabilities. Disparities by race/ethnicity in estimated ASD prevalence, particularly for Hispanic children, as well as disparities in the age of earliest comprehensive evaluation and presence of a previous ASD diagnosis or classification, suggest that access to treatment and services might be lacking or delayed for some children. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: The ADDM Network will continue to monitor the prevalence and characteristics of ASD among children aged 8 years living in selected sites across the United States. Recommendations from the ADDM Network include enhancing strategies to 1) lower the age of first evaluation of ASD by community providers in accordance with the Healthy People 2020 goal that children with ASD are evaluated by age 36 months and begin receiving community-based support and services by age 48 months; 2) reduce disparities by race/ethnicity in identified ASD prevalence, the age of first comprehensive evaluation, and presence of a previous ASD diagnosis or classification; and 3) assess the effect on ASD prevalence of the revised ASD diagnostic criteria published in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.

Trehalose is a nonreducing disaccharide in which the two glucose units are linked in an alpha,alpha-1,1-glycosidic linkage. This sugar is present in a wide variety of organisms, including bacteria, yeast, fungi, insects, invertebrates, and lower and higher plants, where it may serve as a source of energy and carbon. In yeast and plants, it may also serve as a signaling molecule to direct or control certain metabolic pathways or even to affect growth. In addition, it has been shown that trehalose can protect proteins and cellular membranes from inactivation or denaturation caused by a variety of stress conditions, including desiccation, dehydration, heat, cold, and oxidation. Finally, in mycobacteria and corynebacteria, trehalose is an integral component of various glycolipids that are important cell wall structures. There are now at least three different pathways described for the biosynthesis of trehalose. The best known and most widely distributed pathway involves the transfer of glucose from UDP-glucose (or GDP-glucose in some cases) to glucose 6-phosphate to form trehalose-6-phosphate and UDP. This reaction is catalyzed by the trehalose-P synthase (TPS here, or OtsA in Escherichia coli ). Organisms that use this pathway usually also have a trehalose-P phosphatase (TPP here, or OtsB in E. coli) that converts the trehalose-P to free trehalose. A second pathway that has been reported in a few unusual bacteria involves the intramolecular rearrangement of maltose (glucosyl-alpha1,4-glucopyranoside) to convert the 1,4-linkage to the 1,1-bond of trehalose. This reaction is catalyzed by the enzyme called trehalose synthase and gives rise to free trehalose as the initial product. A third pathway involves several different enzymes, the first of which rearranges the glucose at the reducing end of a glycogen chain to convert the alpha1,4-linkage to an alpha,alpha1,1-bond. A second enzyme then releases the trehalose disaccharide from the reducing end of the glycogen molecule. Finally, in mushrooms there is a trehalose phosphorylase that catalyzes the phosphorolysis of trehalose to produce glucose-1-phosphate and glucose. This reaction is reversible in vitro and could theoretically give rise to trehalose from glucose-1-P and glucose. Another important enzyme in trehalose metabolism is trehalase (T), which may be involved in energy metabolism and also have a regulatory role in controlling the levels of trehalose in cells. This enzyme may be important in lowering trehalose concentrations once the stress is alleviated. Recent studies in yeast indicate that the enzymes involved in trehalose synthesis (TPS, TPP) exist together in a complex that is highly regulated at the activity level as well as at the genetic level.