<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_452"
                     title="Study Backs Late Cardiotoxicity of Childhood Cancer Treatment (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18384?impressionId=1265817606658"
                     
      A childhood cancer survivor&apos;s risk of dying from cardiovascular causes rises with the dose of radiation his heart received during treatment, researchers in France and the U.K. affirmed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Those whose hearts were exposed had a 60% higher risk of cardiovascular death than the general population, even at a dose of 1 Gy (95% CI 20% to 250%), according to Florent de Vathaire, PhD, of L&apos;Institut National de la Sant&amp;#233; et de la Recherche M&amp;#233;dicale in Paris, and colleagues.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The risk jumped to 12.5-fold for a cumulative radiation dose to the heart of 5 to 14.9 Gy, and to 14.9-fold for a dose of more than 15 Gy (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01 for trend), the researchers reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of Clinical Oncology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The notion that exposing the heart to radiation increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and death is not surprising, according to an accompanying editorial.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this study examined cardiovascular mortality effects of both the dose of radiation and the dose of anthracyclines given to childhood cancer victims in the same cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That&apos;s something previous studies haven&apos;t done, according to editorialists Steven E. Lipshultz, MD, of the University of Miami and Holtz Children&apos;s Hospital in Miami, and M. Jacob Adams, MD, MPH, of the University of Rochester, N.Y.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These are pretty profound findings,&quot; Lipshultz told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;. &quot;These are the exact concerns we&apos;ve had based on careful subclinical assessments of how the heart in these survivors has been working.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;His group was one of the first to report that survivors of childhood cancer faced not only acute cardiotoxicity from treatment, but also late cardiac effects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As more effective treatment for childhood cancers came into play, the dramatic jump in survival rates  --  from less than 50% in the mid-1970s to 80% today  --  yielded a large enough population of survivors to make chronic issues from treatment apparent, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It appears that for some of these survivors we have substituted one fatal disease of childhood  --  cancer  --  for another fatal disease of early adult life,&quot; he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;de Vathaire&apos;s group studied a cohort of 4,122 French and British children diagnosed with childhood solid cancer between 1942 and 1986 and who survived at least five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over an average of 27 years of follow-up, they were at 8.3-fold higher risk of dying from any cause compared with the general populations in France and the U.K. (95% CI 7.6 to 9.0).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The majority of these excess deaths occurred early after diagnosis, five to nine years afterward in this analysis  --  in which all patients survived to five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Based on just 32 deaths from cardiovascular diseases in the cohort, the childhood cancer survivors experienced five times the cardiovascular mortality (95% CI 3.3 to 6.7) expected from the general population (1.7% cumulative at 35 years versus 0.3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This elevation in risk was similar to that seen in large studies from the U.S. and Nordic countries, suggesting generalizability of the results, Lipshultz said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Radiation therapy also conferred a 5.0-fold elevation in risk of cardiovascular disease-related death (95% CI 1.2 to 21.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like radiation, a higher cumulative dose of anthracycline chemotherapy also increased risk of dying from cardiac diseases, compared with the general population (RR 4.4 for a dose over 360 mg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, 95% CI 1.3 to 15.3).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, radiotherapy and chemotherapy did not appear to interact for cardiovascular mortality (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Notably, the vinca alkaloids were also significantly linked to cardiovascular disease-related death risk among childhood cancer survivors, even after adjustment for sex, treatment period, age at diagnosis, follow-up, and all other treatment modalities (RR 3.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 12.9).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Currently, guidelines support regular long-term cardiovascular screening for childhood cancer survivors who received anthracycline-based chemotherapy but provide little to no direction for those treated with nonanthracycline chemotherapy or radiation, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These results suggested all three groups should be getting cardiac follow-up, he told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, because other research has suggested that these individual treatments affect the heart in different ways, such as diastolic rather than systolic dysfunction with radiotherapy, screening modalities may need to account for this as well, he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that cardiovascular disease was probably under-reported as a cause of death in the cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Indeed, 15 of the deaths classified as results of cancer as the principal cause had cardiovascular diseases as the immediate cause,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique; the Agence Fran&amp;#231;aise de S&amp;#233;curit&amp;#233; Sanitaire et Produit de Sant&amp;#233;; Electricit&amp;#233; de France; the Wyeth Foundation for childhood and adolescent health; and a grant from the Foundation of France.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The editorialists reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_315"
                     title="A Few Extra Pounds May Benefit Older People (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.005"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Geriatrics/GeneralGeriatrics/tb/18183?impressionId=1265817606658"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;A little excess weight after age 70 could do the body some good, according to results of a study involving 9,000 older patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overweight participants in the cohort study had the lowest 10-year mortality. Normal-weight and obese participants ages 70 to 75 had a similar and slightly higher risk of death, Leon Flicker, PhD, of the Western Australian Center for Health and Aging in Perth, and colleagues found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings add to evidence suggesting that being overweight in older age is not such a bad thing and might even be beneficial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These results lend further credence to claims that the body mass index [BMI] thresholds for overweight and obese are overly restrictive for older people,&quot; the researchers concluded in an article in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American Geriatrics Society&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors also found that a sedentary lifestyle doubled the mortality risk for older women but did not affect survival of older men.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The World Health Organization has established four BMI thresholds to characterize body weight: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;&amp;lt;18.5 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, underweight&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;18.5 to 24.9 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, normal weight&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;25 to 29.9 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, overweight&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;&amp;#8805;30 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, obese&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors noted that the thresholds were derived primarily from studies of younger and middle-age adults. Whether the cut points for overweight and obese are appropriate for older individuals has remained unclear.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Two systematic reviews and a meta-analysis showed no increased mortality risk associated with a BMI in the overweight range for older people (&lt;em&gt;Arch Intern Med&lt;/em&gt; 2001; 161: 1194-1203, &lt;em&gt;Obesity Rev&lt;/em&gt; 2007; 8: 41-59). However, methodologic differences complicated the comparison of different studies, Flicker and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So they sought to address some of the uncertainty by analyzing data from two large Australian cohort studies involving more than 9,000 individuals ages 70 to 75 (4,677 men, 4,563 women).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The principal objectives were to determine the BMI threshold associated with the lowest mortality in older people and to determine whether the relationship between BMI and mortality differed between men and women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Data for the analysis came from self-reported measures of height and weight, which the authors used to calculate BMI for the study participants. Participants also provided demographic, lifestyle, and health information.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Using the WHO criteria for BMI, the authors found that 1.3% of men and 3.1% of women were underweight; 43.5% of men and 50.3% of women were normal weight; 44.3% of men and 33.5% of women were overweight; and 11% of men and 13.1% of women were obese.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During 10 years of follow-up, overweight study participants had a 13% lower risk of death compared with normal-weight participants (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94). Obese participants had a mortality risk similar to that of normal-weight participants (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.11).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Self-reported sedentary lifestyle doubled the mortality risk for women across all BMI categories (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.41). In contrast, sedentary lifestyle increased the mortality risk for men by 28% (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.44).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Separate analyses involving common causes of death, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer, showed similar relationships between BMI and mortality risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Even after removing the effects of early mortality, those who were overweight were still at lowest risk, a finding consistent with the observation that weight loss in older age groups is associated with greater mortality,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Overweight older people are not at greater mortality risk, and there is little evidence that dieting in this age group confers any benefit,&quot; they added.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors had no relevant disclosures&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_268"
                     title="No Meds Needed for Two Effective OA Regimens (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Rheumatology/GeneralRheumatology/tb/18119?impressionId=1265817606658"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Middle-aged patients with early knee osteoarthritis can benefit from either a self-managment program or strength training, but a combination of the two did not provide additional gains, a study found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During a two-year trial, roughly two-thirds of participants randomized to one of three groups achieved clinically meaningful improvements in functioning, defined as a 26% change from baseline, according to a new report in the Jan. 15 &lt;em&gt;Arthritis Care &amp;amp; Research&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients also achieved clinically meaningful improvements in pain -- defined as a 40% change from baseline -- regardless of treatment group, wrote Patrick E. McKnight, PhD, of George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The functional improvements were 70% for patients in the strength training group, 64% for those in the self-management group, and a 66% improvement in the combined treatment group. For pain, the breakdown was as follows: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Strength training, 65%&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Self-management, 56%&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Combined treatment, 65%&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;McKnight and colleagues wrote that studies in older patients have reported positive changes for both strength training and self-management.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To see if these modalities also could benefit younger patients with milder disease, and whether combining the two would lead to additional benefits, the investigators recruited 273 subjects ages 35 to 64 years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Participants all had pain on most days in at least one knee, had symptoms for less than five years, had radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis, and had self-reported disability.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The strength training program consisted of two phases, the first being nine months focused on stretching and balance, range of motion and flexibility, and isotonic muscle strengthening in three sessions each week.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Phase two involved the development of self-directed long-term exercising habits, following the guidance and advice of trainers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The self-management program also included two phases. During the first nine-month phase, participants attended 12 weekly 90-minute classroom sessions addressing coping and self-efficacy skills, promoting active adaptive strategies and increasing perception of control for physical function and pain management.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Phase two consisted of telephone calls from instructors and problem-solving discussions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The combined treatment group concurrently participated in both strength training and self-management programs, adjusted to maintain equivalent contact time with the other two groups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall compliance was modest, with 55.8% of those in the strength training group completing the study, along with 69.1% and 59.6% of the self-management and combined groups, respectively.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Objective measures of physical functioning consisted of five physical performance tests measured at baseline and at months nine and 24. Pain and disability were self-reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All of these outcomes showed significant changes over time in all three treatment groups, with effect sizes computed using the standard Cohen&apos;s d units: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Leg press, d=0.85&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Range of motion, d=1.00&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Work capacity, d=0.60&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Balance, d=0.59&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Stair climbing, d=0.59&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Pain, d= &amp;#8722;0.51&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Disability, d= &amp;#8722;0.55&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Both men and women improved, although benefits were greater among men, who gained more large muscle mass strength. Study-related adverse effects included accident, injury, or increased pain with strength training.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Within-group and between-group effect sizes were also computed. All within-group effect sizes differed significantly from zero, with the exception of the pain outcome in the strength training group, but none of the between-group effects were significant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The logic behind the combined treatment was that the different factors addressed in physical and psychological treatments might produce an additive effect if administered together. These results suggest otherwise,&quot; the investigators conceded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As to why there were no differences between the three treatment arms, the length of the study and the relative youth of the participants may have contributed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The sample was younger than are included in typical osteoarthritis studies and were higher functioning at baseline, which could mean that there was less opportunity to produce a significant effect, the investigators suggested.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also, the increased burden of the combined treatment may have diluted the effects of the two programs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite the fact that combined treatment in this study had negligible benefits beyond that seen with strength training and self-management, other long-term outcomes such as physical activity level might show a greater response. This remains speculative, but deserves further study, according to the investigators.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Limitations of the study include the fact that the researchers did not assess effects of the treatment on articular cartilage or inflammation, and they did not include a no-treatment arm.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also, there may have been differences in self-medication practices between the groups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, the study findings suggest that the two nonpharmacologic approaches can produce gains in middle-age patients with osteoarthritis, and both can be recommended.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;One co-author is an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb and holds stock and/or stock options in the company.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_235"
                     title="Congenital Anomalies Linked to Mom&apos;s Diabetes (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/Pregnancy/tb/18065?impressionId=1265817606658"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Pregestational maternal diabetes was associated with an increased risk of a major congenital anomaly, but obesity itself was not, a cross-sectional study found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a multivariable logistic model, the major contributor to a rising rate of congenital anomalies was maternal pregestational diabetes (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 6.6), according to Joseph R. Biggio, Jr., MD, and colleagues from the University of Alabama at Birmingham.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Because hyperglycemia is a major contributor to developmental malformations, interventions to address obesity and identify women at risk for diabetes and hyperglycemia should be considered in efforts to reduce the occurrence of congenital anomalies,&quot; they wrote in the February issue of &lt;em&gt;Obstetrics &amp;amp; Gynecology.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Maternal obesity has been linked with numerous problems, including preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, fetal and neonatal death, and birth trauma, but scientists have disagreed over whether it also contributes to the risk of fetal malformations, the researchers noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To help settle the issue, Biggio and colleagues used a perinatal database in their university health system that included all women with singletons delivered between 1991 and 2004.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They divided the cohort into three time periods  --  1991 to 1994, 1995 to 1999, and 2000 to 2004, with a total of 41,902 pregnancies.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For their primary analysis, they defined maternal obesity as a first prenatal visit weight greater than 200 lb, because during the earlier epochs many women did not have body mass index (BMI) calculated. For their secondary analyses they used BMI greater than 29 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; as the criterion for obesity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In each epoch, there were increases in mean maternal weight, mean BMI, the proportion of women weighing more than 200 lb, the proportion with a BMI greater than 29 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, and the prevalence of pregestational diabetes (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001 for all).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Univariable analysis determined that the rate of major anomalies, particularly involving the cardiac and pulmonary systems, also increased during each time period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But there was no independent association between congenital anomalies and maternal obesity using either definition, during any of the three time periods or during the study overall.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although no direct association was seen between congenital malformations and maternal obesity, the investigators reported that the proportion of anomalies that could be attributed to obesity increased from 0% to 23% during the overall study period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The proportion of anomalies that could be attributed to diabetes ranged from 58% to 76%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, for obese women with diabetes the proportion of anomalies attributed to diabetes increased sharply, from 48% in the first epoch to 74% in the third epoch.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In contrast, for the obstetric population as a whole, the population-attributable risk of congenital malformation related to obesity rose from near zero in the first epoch to 6.1% in the third epoch, while that related to diabetes increased from 3.3% to 9.2%, the investigators reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During the course of the study there was a nearly 15-lb increase in maternal weight and a 30% increase in the proportion of women whose BMI exceeded 29 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There also was a nearly twofold increase in the rate of major anomalies  --  and a 250% increase in the prevalence of diabetes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors observed that there has been much interest in the effects of maternal obesity on birth defects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although the pathophysiologic basis for this possible association have not been identified, hypotheses have included increased serum insulin, lower levels of folic acid, chronic hypoxia, and increased inflammatory mediators.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Our study provides evidence that the defects may not be due solely to the maternal obesity per se but may be due to undiagnosed diabetes,&quot; the investigators wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From a public health standpoint, the study findings suggest that efforts to reduce the prevalence of congenital anomalies should be focused less on obesity and aimed more closely at correcting hyperglycemia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;If euglycemia could be achieved before pregnancy, or at least embryogenesis and organogenesis, the majority of these anomalies could potentially be avoided,&quot; they observed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also suggested that even women of normal weight, but with other diabetes risk factors, could benefit from closer attention to glycemic control.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A weakness of the study was the fact that detailed data on glycemic control was not available in the perinatal database, &quot;and therefore we cannot comment on the association between glycemic control and anomaly rates,&quot; the investigators wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported in part by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_229"
                     title="Abnormal Lipid Levels Common in Teens"
                     score="-0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Dyslipidemia/tb/18084?impressionId=1265817606658"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;One in five American adolescents has unhealthy cholesterol and triglyceride levels, suggesting that targeted screening of youths would be a good idea, CDC researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 1999 to 2006 indicated that 20.3% (95% CI 18.0% to 22.8%) of participants 12 to 19 years old had higher-than-normal levels of LDL cholesterol or triglycerides, or low levels of HDL cholesterol, according to Ashleigh L. May and colleagues at the CDC&apos;s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also found that about a third of American youths would be candidates for lipid screening on the basis of body mass index (BMI) value, under guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their findings, based on blood tests in 3,125 young NHANES participants, were published in the Jan. 22 issue of &lt;em&gt;Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;High LDL cholesterol was defined as at least 130 mg/dL. High triglyceride levels were 150 mg/dL or above. HDL cholesterol of 35 mg/dL or below was considered low. These applied equally across age groups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Here is the overall prevalence of each individual lipid abnormality: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;High LDL: 7.6% (95% CI 6.2% to 9.3%)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Low HDL: 7.6% (95% CI 6.3% to 9.2%)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;High triglycerides: 10.2% (95% CI 8.4% to 12.2%)&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those 18 to 19 years old were much more likely to have these abnormalities than younger adolescents: some 28.8% of participants in this age group had at least one, compared with 16.5% to 18.4% of those 17 and younger (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Prevalence of lipid abnormalities was also more common among white youths (22.4%) than among black (14.6%) and Hispanic (18.6%) participants (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;#8804;0.05 for both groups versus whites). Girls were somewhat less likely than boys to have one or more abnormalities (prevalence ratio 0.7, 95% CI 0.5 to 0.9).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Not surprisingly, overweight and obese youths were much more likely than those of normal weight to have unhealthy lipid levels.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some 43% of obese adolescents had at least one abnormality, as did 22% of those considered overweight for their age and height. Both were significantly higher than the 14.2% of normal-weight participants with abnormal lipid levels.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Based solely on their BMI, 32% of all youths would be candidates for lipid screening,&quot; May and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;An unsigned commentary by &lt;em&gt;MMWR&lt;/em&gt;&apos;s editors noted that &quot;untreated abnormal lipid levels in childhood and adolescence are linked to increased risk for cardiovascular disease in adulthood,&quot; but they stopped short of endorsing routine lipid testing for adolescents.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends screening youths with specific risk factors such as overweight and family history. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force looked at the screening issue in 2007 and decided not to recommend for or against routine screening.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &lt;em&gt;MMWR&lt;/em&gt; editors suggested a strategy in line with the pediatrics group&apos;s recommendation. &quot;Targeted screening of youths for abnormal lipid levels can identify those youths who might benefit from interventions that reduce the risk for CVD,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Based on the findings in this study, clinicians should be aware of lipid screening guidelines and recommended interventions for children and youths who are overweight or obese,&quot; the editors added.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Such interventions include behavior and nutrition counseling and, if lipid levels remain abnormal, drug treatment.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the editors pointed out that fewer than 1% of NHANES participants included in the current study &quot;had lipid levels high enough to warrant drug therapy according to AAP guidelines.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;

    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>