@article{PostemaHoogmanAmbrosinoetal.2021,
  author    = {Postema, Merel C. and Hoogman, Martine and Ambrosino, Sara and Asherson, Philip and Banaschewski, Tobias and Bandeira, Cibele E. and Baranov, Alexandr and Bau, Claiton H.D. and Baumeister, Sarah and Baur-Streubel, Ramona and Bellgrove, Mark A. and Biederman, Joseph and Bralten, Janita and Brandeis, Daniel and Brem, Silvia and Buitelaar, Jan K. and Busatto, Geraldo F. and Castellanos, Francisco X. and Cercignani, Mara and Chaim-Avancini, Tiffany M. and Chantiluke, Kaylita C. and Christakou, Anastasia and Coghill, David and Conzelmann, Annette and Cubillo, Ana I. and Cupertino, Renata B. and de Zeeuw, Patrick and Doyle, Alysa E. and Durston, Sarah and Earl, Eric A. and Epstein, Jeffery N. and Ethofer, Thomas and Fair, Damien A. and Fallgatter, Andreas J. and Faraone, Stephen V. and Frodl, Thomas and Gabel, Matt C. and Gogberashvili, Tinatin and Grevet, Eugenio H. and Haavik, Jan and Harrison, Neil A. and Hartman, Catharina A. and Heslenfeld, Dirk J. and Hoekstra, Pieter J. and Hohmann, Sarah and H{\o}vik, Marie F. and Jernigan, Terry L. and Kardatzki, Bernd and Karkashadze, Georgii and Kelly, Clare and Kohls, Gregor and Konrad, Kerstin and Kuntsi, Jonna and Lazaro, Luisa and Lera-Miguel, Sara and Lesch, Klaus-Peter and Louza, Mario R. and Lundervold, Astri J. and Malpas, Charles B and Mattos, Paulo and McCarthy, Hazel and Namazova-Baranova, Leyla and Nicolau, Rosa and Nigg, Joel T. and Novotny, Stephanie E. and Oberwelland Weiss, Eileen and O'Gorman Tuura, Ruth L. and Oosterlaan, Jaap and Oranje, Bob and Paloyelis, Yannis and Pauli, Paul and Picon, Felipe A. and Plessen, Kerstin J. and Ramos-Quiroga, J. Antoni and Reif, Andreas and Reneman, Liesbeth and Rosa, Pedro G.P. and Rubia, Katya and Schrantee, Anouk and Schweren, Lizanne J.S. and Seitz, Jochen and Shaw, Philip and Silk, Tim J. and Skokauskas, Norbert and Soliva Vila, Juan C. and Stevens, Michael C. and Sudre, Gustavo and Tamm, Leanne and Tovar-Moll, Fernanda and van Erp, Theo G.M. and Vance, Alasdair and Vilarroya, Oscar and Vives-Gilabert, Yolanda and von Polier, Georg G. and Walitza, Susanne and Yoncheva, Yuliya N. and Zanetti, Marcus V. and Ziegler, Georg C. and Glahn, David C. and Jahanshad, Neda and Medland, Sarah E. and Thompson, Paul M. and Fisher, Simon E. and Franke, Barbara and Francks, Clyde},
  title     = {Analysis of structural brain asymmetries in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in 39 datasets},
  series = {Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry},
  volume    = {62},
  journal   = {Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry},
  number    = {10},
  doi       = {10.1111/jcpp.13396},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-239968},
  pages     = {1202 -- 1219},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Objective Some studies have suggested alterations of structural brain asymmetry in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but findings have been contradictory and based on small samples. Here, we performed the largest ever analysis of brain left-right asymmetry in ADHD, using 39 datasets of the ENIGMA consortium. Methods We analyzed asymmetry of subcortical and cerebral cortical structures in up to 1,933 people with ADHD and 1,829 unaffected controls. Asymmetry Indexes (AIs) were calculated per participant for each bilaterally paired measure, and linear mixed effects modeling was applied separately in children, adolescents, adults, and the total sample, to test exhaustively for potential associations of ADHD with structural brain asymmetries. Results There was no evidence for altered caudate nucleus asymmetry in ADHD, in contrast to prior literature. In children, there was less rightward asymmetry of the total hemispheric surface area compared to controls (t = 2.1, p = .04). Lower rightward asymmetry of medial orbitofrontal cortex surface area in ADHD (t = 2.7, p = .01) was similar to a recent finding for autism spectrum disorder. There were also some differences in cortical thickness asymmetry across age groups. In adults with ADHD, globus pallidus asymmetry was altered compared to those without ADHD. However, all effects were small (Cohen's d from -0.18 to 0.18) and would not survive study-wide correction for multiple testing. Conclusion Prior studies of altered structural brain asymmetry in ADHD were likely underpowered to detect the small effects reported here. Altered structural asymmetry is unlikely to provide a useful biomarker for ADHD, but may provide neurobiological insights into the trait.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KuonBlasiUnsoeldetal.2022,
  author    = {Kuon, Jonas and Blasi, Miriam and Uns{\"o}ld, Laura and Vogt, Jeannette and Mehnert, Anja and Alt-Epping, Bernd and Oorschot, Birgitt van and Sistermanns, Jochen and Ahlborn, Miriam and Ritterbusch, Ulrike and Stevens, Susanne and Kahl, Christoph and Ruellan, Anne and Matthias, Kathrin and Kubin, Thomas and Stahlhut, Kerstin and Heider, Andrea and Lordick, Florian and Thomas, Michael},
  title     = {Impact of molecular alterations on quality of life and prognostic understanding over time in patients with incurable lung cancer: a multicenter, longitudinal, prospective cohort study},
  series = {Supportive Care in Cancer},
  volume    = {30},
  journal   = {Supportive Care in Cancer},
  number    = {4},
  organization    = {Arbeitsgemeinschaft Palliativmedizin (APM) of the German Cancer Society (DKG)},
  issn      = {0941-4355},
  doi       = {10.1007/s00520-021-06736-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-308211},
  pages     = {3131-3140},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate changes over time in quality of life (QoL) in incurable lung cancer patients and the impact of determinants like molecular alterations (MA). Methods In a prospective, longitudinal, multicentric study, we assessed QoL, symptom burden, psychological distress, unmet needs, and prognostic understanding of patients diagnosed with incurable lung cancer at the time of the diagnosis (T0) and after 3 (T1), 6 (T2) and 12 months (T3) using validated questionnaires like FACT-L, National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT), PHQ-4, SCNS-SF-34, and SEIQoL. Results Two hundred seventeen patients were enrolled, 22 (10\%) with reported MA. QoL scores improved over time, with a significant trend for DT, PHQ-4, and SCNS-SF-34. Significant determinants for stable or improving scores over time were survival > 6 months, performance status at the time of diagnosis, and presence of MA. Patients with MA showed better QoL scores (FACT-L at T1 104.4 vs 86.3; at T2 107.5 vs 90.0; at T3 100.9 vs 92.8) and lower psychological distress (NCCN DT at T1 3.3 vs 5; at T2 2.7 vs 4.5; at T3 3.7 vs 4.5; PHQ-4 at T1 2.3 vs 4.1; at T2 1.7 vs 3.6; at T3 2.2 vs 3.6), but also a worsening of the scores at 1 year and a higher percentage of inaccurate prognostic understanding (27 vs 17\%) compared to patients without MA. Conclusion Patients with tumors harboring MA are at risk of QoL deterioration during the course of the disease. Physicians should adapt their communication strategies in order to maintain or improve QoL.},
  language  = {en}
}