OBJECTIVE: In this pilot study, we investigated the feasibility of response prediction using digital [ 18 F]FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) and multiparametric MRI before, during, and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients and aimed to select the most promising imaging modalities and timepoints for further investigation in a larger trial. METHODS: Rectal cancer patients scheduled to undergo neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy were prospectively included in this trial, and underwent multiparametric MRI and [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT before, 2 weeks into, and 6-8 weeks after chemoradiation therapy. Two groups were created based on pathological tumor regression grade, that is, good responders (TRG1-2) and poor responders (TRG3-5). Using binary logistic regression analysis with a cutoff value of P  ≤ 0.2, promising predictive features for response were selected. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were included. Of these, 5 were good responders, and 14 were poor responders. Patient characteristics of these groups were similar at baseline. Fifty-seven features were extracted, of which 13 were found to be promising predictors of response. Baseline [T2: volume, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI): apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mean, DWI: difference entropy], early response (T2: volume change, DWI: ADC mean change) and end-of-treatment presurgical evaluation MRI (T2: gray level nonuniformity, DWI: inverse difference normalized, DWI: gray level nonuniformity normalized), as well as baseline (metabolic tumor volume, total lesion glycolysis) and early response PET/CT (Δ maximum standardized uptake value, Δ peak standardized uptake value corrected for lean body mass), were promising features. CONCLUSION: Both multiparametric MRI and [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT contain promising imaging features to predict response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in LARC patients. A future larger trial should investigate baseline, early response, and end-of-treatment presurgical evaluation MRI and baseline and early response PET/CT.@en

When comparing hospitals on their readmission rates as currently done in the Hospital Readmission and Reduction Program (HRRP) in the USA, should we include the competing risk of mortality after discharge, which precludes the readmission, in the analysis? Not including competing risks in current HRRP metrics was raised recently as a limitation with possible unintended consequences, as financial penalties for higher readmission rates are more severe than for higher mortality rates. Incorrectly including or ignoring competing risks can both induce bias. In this paper, we present a framework to clarify situations when competing risks should be taken into account and when they should not. We argue that the research question and the perspective from which it is asked determine whether the competing risk is also of interest and should be included in the analysis, or if only the event of interest should be considered. This information is often not explicitly reported but is needed to interpret whether the results are valid. Using the examples of readmissions and cancer, we show how different research questions fit different perspectives from which these are asked (patient, system, regulatory/insurance). Slightly changing the research question or perspective may thus change the analysis. Even though some may argue that any introduced bias is likely to be small, in the context of the HRRP, even small changes may mean that a hospital will face (higher) financial penalties. The impact of getting it wrong matters.@en

Aging is a multifaceted and intricate physiological process characterized by a gradual decline in functional capacity, leading to increased susceptibility to diseases and mortality. While chronological age serves as a strong risk factor for age-related health conditions, considerable heterogeneity exists in the aging trajectories of individuals, suggesting that biological age may provide a more nuanced understanding of the aging process. However, the concept of biological age lacks a clear operationalization, leading to the development of various biological age predictors without a solid statistical foundation. This paper addresses these limitations by proposing a comprehensive operationalization of biological age, introducing the “AccelerAge” framework for predicting biological age, and introducing previously underutilized evaluation measures for assessing the performance of biological age predictors. The AccelerAge framework, based on Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) models, directly models the effect of candidate predictors of aging on an individual’s survival time, aligning with the prevalent metaphor of aging as a clock. We compare predictors based on the AccelerAge framework to a predictor based on the GrimAge predictor, which is considered one of the best-performing biological age predictors, using simulated data as well as data from the UK Biobank and the Leiden Longevity Study. Our approach seeks to establish a robust statistical foundation for biological age clocks, enabling a more accurate and interpretable assessment of an individual’s aging status.@en

Aging is a multifaceted and intricate physiological process characterized by a gradual decline in functional capacity, leading to increased susceptibility to diseases and mortality. While chronological age serves as a strong risk factor for age-related health conditions, considerable heterogeneity exists in the aging trajectories of individuals, suggesting that biological age may provide a more nuanced understanding of the aging process. However, the concept of biological age lacks a clear operationalization, leading to the development of various biological age predictors without a solid statistical foundation. This paper addresses these limitations by proposing a comprehensive operationalization of biological age, introducing the “AccelerAge” framework for predicting biological age, and introducing previously underutilized evaluation measures for assessing the performance of biological age predictors. The AccelerAge framework, based on Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) models, directly models the effect of candidate predictors of aging on an individual’s survival time, aligning with the prevalent metaphor of aging as a clock. We compare predictors based on the AccelerAge framework to a predictor based on the GrimAge predictor, which is considered one of the best-performing biological age predictors, using simulated data as well as data from the UK Biobank and the Leiden Longevity Study. Our approach seeks to establish a robust statistical foundation for biological age clocks, enabling a more accurate and interpretable assessment of an individual’s aging status.@en

Aging is a multifaceted and intricate physiological process characterized by a gradual decline in functional capacity, leading to increased susceptibility to diseases and mortality. While chronological age serves as a strong risk factor for age-related health conditions, considerable heterogeneity exists in the aging trajectories of individuals, suggesting that biological age may provide a more nuanced understanding of the aging process. However, the concept of biological age lacks a clear operationalization, leading to the development of various biological age predictors without a solid statistical foundation. This paper addresses these limitations by proposing a comprehensive operationalization of biological age, introducing the “AccelerAge” framework for predicting biological age, and introducing previously underutilized evaluation measures for assessing the performance of biological age predictors. The AccelerAge framework, based on Accelerated Failure Time (AFT) models, directly models the effect of candidate predictors of aging on an individual’s survival time, aligning with the prevalent metaphor of aging as a clock. We compare predictors based on the AccelerAge framework to a predictor based on the GrimAge predictor, which is considered one of the best-performing biological age predictors, using simulated data as well as data from the UK Biobank and the Leiden Longevity Study. Our approach seeks to establish a robust statistical foundation for biological age clocks, enabling a more accurate and interpretable assessment of an individual’s aging status.@en

Background and purpose — It is unknown whether different trajectories of pain or function are associated with timing of total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. We investigated this association in early symptomatic OA patients. Patients and methods — Data from the prospective Dutch CHECK cohort (patients with early hip/knee OA complaints) covering 9 years of follow-up were used. Pain and function were measured annually using the WOMAC questionnaires. Changes in pain/function over time were estimated using a linear mixed model adjusted for baseline age, sex, BMI, maximal Kellgren and Lawrence score, number of painful joints, and comorbidities. The same covariates were included in a Cox regression model, with time to first arthroplasty as event. Both were combined in a joint model to assess the association between changes in pain/function and time to arthroplasty. Results — Of the 868 eligible patients, 84 received a TKA/THA during follow-up. Patients receiving arthroplasty were somewhat older, had a higher Kellgren and Lawrence score and worse WOMAC scores at baseline. Irrespective of receiving arthroplasty, about two-thirds of the patients showed at least 1 period of deterioration of pain/function (≥ 10 points WOMAC subscale). In approximately two fifths this deterioration was followed by another deterioration in the following year. Worse pain and function levels increased the hazard of receiving THA/TKA (1.08 [95% CI 1.06–1.10] for pain and 1.07 [CI 1.05–1.08] for function). Changes in pain or function over time were not associated with timing of THA/TKA Interpretation — Worse pain and function levels rather than long-term changes are associated with timing of THA/TKA.@en

Background: Individualized treatment in older patients with breast cancer can be improved by including comorbidity and other-cause mortality in prediction tools, as the other-cause mortality risk strongly increases with age. However, no optimal comorbidity score is established for this purpose. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the predictive value of the Charlson comorbidity index for other-cause mortality with the use of a simple comorbidity count and to assess the impact of frequently occurring comorbidities. Methods: Surgically treated patients with stages I-III breast cancer aged ≥70 years diagnosed between 2003 and 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Competing risk analysis was performed to associate 5-year other-cause mortality with the Charlson index, comorbidity count, and specific comorbidities. Discrimination and calibration were assessed. Results: Overall, 7511 patients were included. Twenty-nine percent had no comorbidities, and 59% had a Charlson score of 0. After five years, in 1974, patients had died (26%), of which 1450 patients without a distant recurrence (19%). Besides comorbidities included in the Charlson index, the psychiatric disease was strongly associated with other-cause mortality (sHR 2.44 (95%-CI 1.70-3.50)). The c-statistics of the Charlson index and comorbidity count were similar (0.65 (95%-CI 0.64-0.65) and 0.64 (95%-CI 0.64-0.65)). Conclusions: The predictive value of the Charlson index for 5-year other-cause mortality was similar to using comorbidity count. As it is easier to use in clinical practice, our findings indicate that comorbidity count can aid in improving individualizing treatment in older patients with breast cancer. Future studies should elicit whether geriatric parameters could improve prediction.@en