Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 12848902

The Ischemic Stroke Genetics Study (ISGS) Protocol.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The molecular basis for the genetic risk of ischemic stroke is likely to be multigenic and influenced by environmental factors. Several small case-control studies have suggested associations between ischemic stroke and polymorphisms of genes that code for coagulation cascade proteins and platelet receptors. Our aim is to investigate potential associations between hemostatic gene polymorphisms and ischemic stroke, with particular emphasis on detailed characterization of the phenotype. METHODS/DESIGN: The Ischemic Stroke Genetic Study is a prospective, multicenter genetic association study in adults with recent first-ever ischemic stroke confirmed with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Patients are evaluated at academic medical centers in the United States and compared with sex- and age-matched controls. Stroke subtypes are determined by central blinded adjudication using standardized, validated mechanistic and syndromic classification systems. The panel of genes to be tested for polymorphisms includes beta-fibrinogen and platelet glycoprotein Ia, Iba, and IIb/IIIa. Immortalized cell lines are created to allow for time- and cost-efficient testing of additional candidate genes in the future. DISCUSSION: The study is designed to minimize survival bias and to allow for exploring associations between specific polymorphisms and individual subtypes of ischemic stroke. The data set will also permit the study of genetic determinants of stroke outcome. Having cell lines will permit testing of future candidate risk factor genes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

James F Meschia, Thomas G Brott, Robert D Brown, Richard J P Crook, Michael Frankel, John Hardy, José G Merino, Stephen S Rich, Scott Silliman, Bradford Burke Worrall, Ischemic Stroke Genetics Study. 2003-07-08. The Ischemic Stroke Genetics Study (ISGS) Protocol.. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-3-4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Challenges in drug development for muscle disease: a stakeholders' meeting.

Current treatment benefits for patients with muscle disease are limited, but progress in legislative and scientific initiatives have set the stage for the development of new therapies. The MD-CARE Act (Public Law 107-84), which allocates federal resources to muscular dystrophy, was approved by Congress and signed into law by the President of the United States in 2001. This has shifted the emphasis toward translational research. To facilitate a push toward therapy for muscle disorders, the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA) sponsored a meeting with representatives from industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other government agencies and academia. Each contributed in different ways. The FDA helped define the necessary data to support investigational new drug (IND) applications including the design of proof-of-principle studies, outcome measures for clinical trials, and the pathway for developing surrogate measures for fast-tracking promising new drugs. The NIH, other government agencies, and the MDA described potential funding sources for translational research. Industry delineated a complementary role with academia, and academic investigators elucidated the current strengths and weaknesses of available clinical endpoints. The meeting provided a format for communication for diverse disciplines that usually have no common meeting ground, helping to lay the foundation for bringing products to market in a timely fashion.

Academic Medical Centers↗

Reporting of adverse drug reactions: predictors of under-reporting in Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: Malaysia like many other countries worldwide uses spontaneous reporting systems as a mean of collecting data on suspected adverse drug reaction (ADR). However, compared to other countries, which use the system, the reporting rate in Malaysia is very low. Why some physicians do not report ADRs is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors, which would predict physicians' failure to send ADR reports. DESIGN AND SETTING: Face-to-face interview using a structured questionnaire involving physicians working at the University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia. RESULTS: About a third of the physicians in the Centre participated. Sixty-five of the 415 approached refused to participate. A high proportion of the respondents (81.4%) indicated that they had suspected an ADR but did not report it, while about 40% of the respondents were not aware of the existence of the national reporting system in Malaysia. Logistic regression modelling identified the variable 'ADR considered to be too trivial or too well known to report' as the strongest predictor of not reporting, followed by physicians' category and uncertainty that the reaction had been definitely caused by a drug. CONCLUSION: Important predictor variables, which limit physicians from reporting ADR in Malaysia, were related to uncertainty of types of reaction to report, lack of awareness about the existence, function and purpose of national ADR reporting. The findings could be useful for planning strategies to improve the reporting rate.

Academic Medical Centers↗