We have genotyped 292 affected sibling pairs (ASPs) with Alzheimer's disease (AD) according to NINCDS-ADRDA diagnostic criteria and with onset ages of >/=65 years using 237 microsatellite markers separated by an average distance of 16.3 cM. Data were analysed by SPLINK and MAPMAKER/SIBS on the whole sample of 292 ASPs and subsets of 162 ASPs where both members possessed an apolipoprotein E (APOE)straightepsilon4 allele and 63 pairs where neither possessed anstraightepsilon4 allele. Sixteen peaks with a multipoint lod score (MLS) >1 either in the whole sample, the straightepsilon4-positive or -negative subgroups were observed on chromosomes 1 (two peaks), 2, 5, 6, 9 (two peaks), 10 (two peaks), 12, 13, 14, 19, 21 and X (two peaks). Simulation studies revealed that these findings exceeded those expected by chance, although many are likely to be false positives. The highest lod scores on chromosomes 1 (MLS 2.67), 9 (MLS 2.38), 10 (MLS 2.27) and 19 (MLS 1.79) fulfilLander and Kruglyak's definition of 'suggestive' in that they would be expected to occur by chance once or less per genome scan. Several other peaks were only marginally less significant than this, in particular those on chromosomes 14 (MLS 2.16), 5 (MLS 2.00), 12, close to alpha2-macroglobulin (MLS 1.91), and 21, close to amyloid precursor protein (MLS 1.77). This is the largest genome scan to date in AD and shows for the first time that this is a genetically complex disorder involving several, perhaps many, genes in addition to APOE. Moreover, our data will be of interest to those hoping to identify positional candidate genes using information emerging from neurobiological studies of AD.

We performed a two-stage genome screen to search for novel risk factors for late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD). The first stage involved genotyping 292 affected sibling pairs using 237 markers spaced at approximately 20 cM intervals throughout the genome. In the second stage, we genotyped 451 affected sibling pairs (ASPs) with an additional 91 markers, in the 16 regions where the multipoint LOD score was greater than 1 in stage I. Ten regions maintained LOD scores in excess of 1 in stage II, on chromosomes 1 (peak B), 5, 6, 9 (peaks A and B), 10, 12, 19, 21, and X. Our strongest evidence for linkage was on chromosome 10, where we obtained a peak multipoint LOD score (MLS) of 3.9. The linked region on chromosome 10 spans approximately 44 cM from D10S1426 (59 cM) to D10S2327 (103 cM). To narrow this region, we tested for linkage disequilibrium with several of the stage II microsatellite markers. Of the seven markers we tested in family-based and case control samples, the only nominally positive association we found was with the 167 bp allele of marker D10S1217 (chi-square=7.11, P=0.045, df=1).

The apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene is the only genetic risk factor that has so far been linked to risk for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD). However, 50 percent of Alzheimer's disease cases do not carry an APOE4 allele, suggesting that other risk factors must exist. We performed a two-stage genome-wide screen in sibling pairs with LOAD to detect other susceptibility loci. Here we report evidence for an Alzheimer's disease locus on chromosome 10. Our stage one multipoint lod score (logarithm of the odds ratio for linkage/no linkage) of 2.48 (266 sibling pairs) increased to 3.83 in stage 2 (429 sibling pairs) close to D10S1225 (79 centimorgans). This locus modifies risk for Alzheimer's disease independent of APOE genotype.

The real-time beam-target correction method, electromagnetic transponder-guided MLC tracking, has been translated to the clinic. This achievement represents a milestone in improving geometric and dosimetric accuracy, and by inference treatment outcomes, in cancer radiotherapy.

Summary Most cancer radiation therapy accelerators purchased today have gantry-mounted imagers, typically used to image the patient prior to treatment. We imaged prostate cancer patients during their treatment. Combining images with marker segmentation software and a 2- to 3-dimensional reconstruction method, we were able to measure prostate motion during the treatment to within submillimeter accuracy. Because intrafraction prostate monitoring method uses widely available clinical equipment, intratreatment prostate motion monitoring could become routine. Purpose Most linear accelerators purchased today are equipped with a gantry-mounted kilovoltage X-ray imager which is typically used for patient imaging prior to therapy. A novel application of the X-ray system is kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring (KIM), in which the 3-dimensional (3D) tumor position is determined during treatment. In this paper, we report on the first use of KIM in a prospective clinical study of prostate cancer patients undergoing intensity modulated arc therapy (IMAT). Methods and Materials Ten prostate cancer patients with implanted fiducial markers undergoing conventionally fractionated IMAT (RapidArc) were enrolled in an ethics-approved study of KIM. KIM involves acquiring kV images as the gantry rotates around the patient during treatment. Post-treatment, markers in these images were segmented to obtain 2D positions. From the 2D positions, a maximum likelihood estimation of a probability density function was used to obtain 3D prostate trajectories. The trajectories were analyzed to determine the motion type and the percentage of time the prostate was displaced ≥3, 5, 7, and 10 mm. Independent verification of KIM positional accuracy was performed using kV/MV triangulation. Results KIM was performed for 268 fractions. Various prostate trajectories were observed (ie, continuous target drift, transient excursion, stable target position, persistent excursion, high-frequency excursions, and erratic behavior). For all patients, 3D displacements of ≥3, 5, 7, and 10 mm were observed 5.6%, 2.2%, 0.7% and 0.4% of the time, respectively. The average systematic accuracy of KIM was measured at 0.46 mm. Conclusions KIM for prostate IMAT was successfully implemented clinically for the first time. Key advantages of this method are (1) submillimeter accuracy, (2) widespread applicability, and (3) a low barrier to clinical implementation. A disadvantage is that KIM delivers additional imaging dose to the patient.