Search

American football players and other individuals exposed to repetitive head impacts can exhibit a constellation of later-life cognitive and neuropsychiatric symptoms. While tau-based diseases such as chronic traumatic encephalopathy can underpin certain symptoms, contributions from non-tau pathologies from repetitive head impacts are increasingly recognized. We examined cross-sectional associations between myelin integrity using immunoassays for myelin-associated glycoprotein and proteolipid protein 1 with risk factors and clinical outcomes in brain donors exposed to repetitive head impacts from American football. Immunoassays for myelin-associated glycoprotein and proteolipid protein 1 were conducted on dorsolateral frontal white matter tissue samples of 205 male brain donors. Proxies of exposure to repetitive head impacts included years of exposure and age of first exposure to American football play. Informants completed the Functional Activities Questionnaire, Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Version (Behavioral Regulation Index), and Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-11. Associations between myelin-associated glycoprotein and proteolipid protein 1 with exposure proxies and clinical scales were tested. Of the 205 male brain donors who played amateur and professional football, the mean age was 67.17 (SD = 16.78), and 75.9% (n = 126) were reported by informants to be functionally impaired prior to death. Myelin-associated glycoprotein and proteolipid protein 1 correlated with the ischaemic injury scale score, a global indicator of cerebrovascular disease (r = -0.23 and -0.20, respectively, Ps < 0.01). Chronic traumatic encephalopathy was the most common neurodegenerative disease (n = 151, 73.7%). Myelin-associated glycoprotein and proteolipid protein 1 were not associated with chronic traumatic encephalopathy status, but lower proteolipid protein 1 was associated with more severe chronic traumatic encephalopathy (P = 0.03). Myelin-associated glycop

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a neurodegenerative disease associated with a history of repetitive head impacts (RHI). CTE was described in boxers as early as the 1920s and by the 1950s it was widely accepted that hits to the head caused some boxers to become “punch drunk.” However, the recent discovery of CTE in American and Australian-rules football, soccer, rugby, ice hockey, and other sports has resulted in renewed debate on whether the relationship between RHI and CTE is causal. Identifying the strength of the evidential relationship between CTE and RHI has implications for public health and medico-legal issues. From a public health perspective, environmentally caused diseases can be mitigated or prevented. Medico-legally, millions of children are exposed to RHI through sports participation; this demographic is too young to legally consent to any potential long-term risks associated with this exposure. To better understand the strength of evidence underlying the purported causal relationship between RHI and CTE, we examined the medical literature through the Bradford Hill criteria for causation. The Bradford Hill criteria, first proposed in 1965 by Sir Austin Bradford Hill, provide a framework to determine if one can justifiably move from an observed association to a verdict of causation. The Bradford Hill criteria include nine viewpoints by which to evaluate human epidemiologic evidence to determine if causation can be deduced: strength, consistency, specificity, temporality, biological gradient, plausibility, coherence, experiment, and analogy. We explored the question of causation by evaluating studies on CTE as it relates to RHI exposure. Through this lens, we found convincing evidence of a causal relationship between RHI and CTE, as well as an absence of evidence-based alternative explanations. By organizing the CTE literature through this framework, we hope to advance the global conversation on CTE mitigation efforts.

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a neurodegenerative disease associated with a history of repetitive head impacts (RHI). CTE was described in boxers as early as the 1920s and by the 1950s it was widely accepted that hits to the head caused some boxers to become “punch drunk.” However, the recent discovery of CTE in American and Australian-rules football, soccer, rugby, ice hockey, and other sports has resulted in renewed debate on whether the relationship between RHI and CTE is causal. Identifying the strength of the evidential relationship between CTE and RHI has implications for public health and medico-legal issues. From a public health perspective, environmentally caused diseases can be mitigated or prevented. Medico-legally, millions of children are exposed to RHI through sports participation; this demographic is too young to legally consent to any potential long-term risks associated with this exposure. To better understand the strength of evidence underlying the purported causal relationship between RHI and CTE, we examined the medical literature through the Bradford Hill criteria for causation. The Bradford Hill criteria, first proposed in 1965 by Sir Austin Bradford Hill, provide a framework to determine if one can justifiably move from an observed association to a verdict of causation. The Bradford Hill criteria include nine viewpoints by which to evaluate human epidemiologic evidence to determine if causation can be deduced: strength, consistency, specificity, temporality, biological gradient, plausibility, coherence, experiment, and analogy. We explored the question of causation by evaluating studies on CTE as it relates to RHI exposure. Through this lens, we found convincing evidence of a causal relationship between RHI and CTE, as well as an absence of evidence-based alternative explanations. By organizing the CTE literature through this framework, we hope to advance the global conversation on CTE mitigation efforts.

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a neurodegenerative disease associated with a history of repetitive head impacts (RHI). CTE was described in boxers as early as the 1920s and by the 1950s it was widely accepted that hits to the head caused some boxers to become "punch drunk." However, the recent discovery of CTE in American and Australian-rules football, soccer, rugby, ice hockey, and other sports has resulted in renewed debate on whether the relationship between RHI and CTE is causal. Identifying the strength of the evidential relationship between CTE and RHI has implications for public health and medico-legal issues. From a public health perspective, environmentally caused diseases can be mitigated or prevented. Medico-legally, millions of children are exposed to RHI through sports participation; this demographic is too young to legally consent to any potential long-term risks associated with this exposure. To better understand the strength of evidence underlying the possible causal relationship between RHI and CTE, we examined the medical literature through the Bradford Hill criteria for causation. The Bradford Hill criteria, first proposed in 1965 by Sir Austin Bradford Hill, provide a framework to determine if one can justifiably move from an observed association to a verdict of causation. The Bradford Hill criteria include nine viewpoints by which to evaluate human epidemiologic evidence to determine if causation can be deduced: strength, consistency, specificity, temporality, biological gradient, plausibility, coherence, experiment, and analogy. We explored the question of causation by evaluating studies on CTE as it relates to RHI exposure. Through this lens, we found convincing evidence of a causal relationship between RHI and CTE, as well as an absence of evidence-based alternative explanations. By organizing the CTE literature through this framework, we hope to advance the global conversation on CTE mitigation efforts.

BackgroundIn recent years, the understanding of concussion has evolved in the research and medical communities to include more subtle and transient symptoms. The accepted definition of concussion in these communities has reflected this change. However, it is unclear whether this shift is also reflected in the understanding of the athletic community.What is known about the subjectSelf-reported concussion history is an inaccurate assessment of someone's lifetime exposure to concussive brain trauma. However, unfortunately, in many cases it is the only available tool.Hypothesis/purposeWe hypothesize that athletes' self-reported concussion histories will be significantly greater after reading them the current definition of concussion, relative to the reporting when no definition was provided. An increase from baseline to post-definition response will suggest that athletes are unaware of the currently accepted medical definition.Study designCross-sectional study of 472 current and former athletes.MethodsInvestigators conducted structured telephone interviews with current and former athletes between January 2010 and January 2013, asking participants to report how many concussions they had received in their lives. Interviewers then read participants a current definition of concussion, and asked them to re-estimate based on that definition.ResultsTHE TWO ESTIMATES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT (WILCOXON SIGNED RANK TEST: z=15.636, P<0.001). Comparison of the baseline and post-definition medians (7 and 15, respectively) indicated that the post-definition estimate was approximately twice the baseline. Follow-up analyses indicated that this effect was consistent across all levels of competition examined and across type of sport (contact versus non-contact).ConclusionOur results indicate that athletes' current understandings of concussions are not consistent with a currently accepted medical definition. We strongly recommend that clinicians and researchers preface requests for

Clifford A Robbins,1 Daniel H Daneshvar,1,2 John D Picano,1,3 Brandon E Gavett,1,4 Christine M Baugh,1,2 David O Riley,1 Christopher J Nowinski,1,2,5 Ann C McKee,1,2,6–8 Robert C Cantu,1,5,9,10 Robert A Stern1,2,8,91Center for the Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy, 2Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 3School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA; 4Department of Psychology, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, CO, USA; 5Sports Legacy Institute, Waltham MA, USA; 6United States Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA; 7Department of Pathology, 8Alzheimer's Disease Center, 9Department of Neurosurgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 10Department of Neurosurgery, Emerson Hospital, Concord, MA, USABackground: In recent years, the understanding of concussion has evolved in the research and medical communities to include more subtle and transient symptoms. The accepted definition of concussion in these communities has reflected this change. However, it is unclear whether this shift is also reflected in the understanding of the athletic community.What is known about the subject: Self-reported concussion history is an inaccurate assessment of someone's lifetime exposure to concussive brain trauma. However, unfortunately, in many cases it is the only available tool.Hypothesis/purpose: We hypothesize that athletes' self-reported concussion histories will be significantly greater after reading them the current definition of concussion, relative to the reporting when no definition was provided. An increase from baseline to post-definition response will suggest that athletes are unaware of the currently accepted medical definition.Study design: Cross-sectional study of 472 current and former athletes.Methods: Investigators conducted structured telephone interviews with current and former athletes betw