Relative risk of Alzheimer disease and age-at-onset distributions, based on APOE genotypes among elderly African Americans, Caucasians, and Hispanics in New York City.

Apolipoprotein-E epsilon 4 (APOE-epsilon 4) has been consistently associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) and may be responsible for an earlier age at onset. We have previously reported a diminished association between APOE-epsilon 4 and AD in African Americans. Using a new method, which allows inclusion of censored information, we compared relative risks by APOE genotypes in an expanded collection of cases and controls from three ethnic groups in a New York community. The relative risk for AD associated with APOE-epsilon 4 homozygosity was increased in all ethnic groups (African American relative risk [RR]=3.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.5-5.9; Caucasian RR=7.3, 95% CI=2.5-21.6; and Hispanic RR=2.5, 95% CI=1.1-5.7), compared with those with APOE-epsilon 3/epsilon 3 genotypes. The risk was also increased for APOE-epsilon 4 heterozygous Caucasians (RR=2.9, 95% CI=1.7-5.1) and Hispanics (RR=1.6, 95% CI=1.1-2.3), but not for African Americans (RR=0.6, 95% Ci=0.4-0.9). The age distribution of the proportion of Caucasians and Hispanics without AD was consistently lower for APOE-epsilon 4 homozygous and APOE-epsilon 4 heterozygous individuals than for those with other APOE genotypes. In African Americans this relationship was observed only in APOE-epsilon 4 homozygotes. These results confirm that APOE genotypes influence the RR of AD in Caucasians and Hispanics. Differences in risk among APOE-epsilon 4 heterozygote African Americans suggest that other genetic or environmental factors may modify the effect of APOE-epsilon 4 in some populations.     

Mortality rates among patients with end-stage renal disease in Canada, 1981-86.

We assessed the mortality rates by age, sex, race, blood type, primary diagnosis, treatment and transplantation history of 8432 patients in Canada for whom end-stage renal disease (ESRD) was diagnosed between 1981 and 1986. Significant differences in the probability of dying were found between those with and without diabetes mellitus, between those who had received a renal transplant and those who had not, between white and nonwhite patients and between various age groups. The mortality rates of the ESRD patients were at least three times higher than those of the general Canadian population. Primary diagnosis and treatment were significantly associated with the risk of dying among the ESRD patients. For those who had received a transplant, the length of time spent waiting for a transplant was positively associated with the risk of death from ESRD. Patients who had received peritoneal dialysis before transplantation had a higher risk of death than those who had received either hemodialysis (risk ratio 1.3) or transplantation (risk ratio 3.2) as the first treatment. No significant differences were found in the cause of death between those who had received peritoneal dialysis and those who had received hemodialysis. Almost half of the deaths among women without diabetes who had received a transplant were due to infection.     

Frontiers in glycomics: bioinformatics and biomarkers in disease. An NIH white paper prepared from discussions by the focus groups at a workshop on the NIH campus, Bethesda MD (September 11-13, 2006)

Key issues relating to glycomics research were discussed after the workshop entitled "Frontiers in Glycomics: Bioinformatics and Biomarkers in Disease" by two focus groups nominated by the organizers. The groups focused on two themes: (i) glycomics as the new frontier for the discovery of biomarkers of disease and (ii) requirements for the development of informatics for glycomics and glycobiology. The mandate of the focus groups was to build consensus on these issues and develop a summary of findings and recommendations for presentation to the NIH and the greater scientific community. A list of scientific priorities was developed, presented, and discussed at the workshops. Additional suggestions were solicited from workshop participants and collected using the workshop mailing list. The results are summarized in this White Paper, authored by the co-chairs of the focus groups.