Blood Mercury Reporting in NHANES: Identifying Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, and Multiracial Groups

INTRODUCTION: Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans are a potentially high-risk group for dietary exposure to methylmercury through fish consumption. However, blood mercury levels in this group have not been identified in recent reports of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for the years 1999–2002. METHODS: We used NHANES data from 1999–2002 to obtain population estimates of blood mercury levels among women of childbearing age classified as belonging to the “other” racial/ethnic group (Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, and multiracial; n = 140). Blood mercury levels in this group were compared with those among all other women participants, classified as Mexican American, non-Hispanic black, non-Hispanic white, and “other” Hispanic. RESULTS: An estimated 16.59 ± 4.0% (mean ± SE) of adult female participants who self-identified as Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, or multiracial (n = 140) had blood mercury levels ≥5.8 μg/L, and 27.26 ± 4.22% had levels ≥3.5 μg/L. Among remaining survey participants (n = 3,497), 5.08 ± 0.90% had blood mercury levels ≥5.8 μg/L, and 10.86 ± 1.45% had levels ≥3.5 μg/L. CONCLUSIONS: Study subjects in NHANES who self-identified as Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, or multiracial had a higher prevalence of elevated blood mercury than all other racial/ethnic participants in the survey. Future studies should address reasons for the high mercury levels in this group and explore possible interventions for lowering risk of methylmercury exposure in this population

Late Presentation With HIV in Africa: Phenotypes, Risk, and Risk Stratification in the REALITY Trial.

This article has been accepted for publication in Clinical Infectious Diseases Published by Oxford University PressBackground: Severely immunocompromised human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals have high mortality shortly after starting antiretroviral therapy (ART). We investigated predictors of early mortality and "late presenter" phenotypes. Methods: The Reduction of EArly MortaLITY (REALITY) trial enrolled ART-naive adults and children ≥5 years of age with CD4 counts .1). Results: Among 1711 included participants, 203 (12%) died. Mortality was independently higher with older age; lower CD4 count, albumin, hemoglobin, and grip strength; presence of World Health Organization stage 3/4 weight loss, fever, or vomiting; and problems with mobility or self-care at baseline (all P < .04). Receiving enhanced antimicrobial prophylaxis independently reduced mortality (P = .02). Of five late-presenter phenotypes, Group 1 (n = 355) had highest mortality (25%; median CD4 count, 28 cells/µL), with high symptom burden, weight loss, poor mobility, and low albumin and hemoglobin. Group 2 (n = 394; 11% mortality; 43 cells/µL) also had weight loss, with high white cell, platelet, and neutrophil counts suggesting underlying inflammation/infection. Group 3 (n = 218; 10% mortality) had low CD4 counts (27 cells/µL), but low symptom burden and maintained fat mass. The remaining groups had 4%-6% mortality. Conclusions: Clinical and laboratory features identified groups with highest mortality following ART initiation. A screening tool could identify patients with low CD4 counts for prioritizing same-day ART initiation, enhanced prophylaxis, and intensive follow-up. Clinical Trials Registration: ISRCTN43622374.REALITY was funded by the Joint Global Health Trials Scheme (JGHTS) of the UK Department for International Development, the Wellcome Trust, and Medical Research Council (MRC) (grant number G1100693). Additional funding support was provided by the PENTA Foundation and core support to the MRC Clinical Trials Unit at University College London (grant numbers MC_UU_12023/23 and MC_UU_12023/26). Cipla Ltd, Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare/GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck Sharp & Dohme donated drugs for REALITY, and ready-to-use supplementary food was purchased from Valid International. A. J. P. is funded by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 108065/Z/15/Z). J. A. B. is funded by the JGHTS (grant number MR/M007367/1). The Malawi-Liverpool–Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, University of Malawi College of Medicine (grant number 101113/Z/13/Z) and the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)/Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Kilifi (grant number 203077/Z/16/Z) are supported by strategic awards from the Wellcome Trust, United Kingdom. Permission to publish was granted by the Director of KEMRI. This supplement was supported by funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Thematic analysis of the medical records of patients evaluated for kidney transplant who did not receive a kidney

Abstract Background A potential pitfall of policies intended to promote referral for kidney transplant is that greater numbers of patients may be evaluated for transplant without experiencing the intended benefit of receiving a kidney. Little is known about the potential implications of this experience for patients. Methods We performed a thematic analysis of clinician documentation in the electronic medical records of all adults at a single medical center with advanced kidney disease who were referred to the local transplant coordinator for evaluation between 2008 and 2018 but did not receive a kidney. Results 148 of 209 patients referred to the local kidney transplant coordinator at our center (71%) had not received a kidney by the end of follow-up. Three dominant themes emerged from qualitative analysis of documentation in the medical records of these patients: 1) Forward momentum: patients found themselves engaged in an iterative process of testing and treatment that tended to move forward unless an absolute contraindication to transplant was identified or patients disengaged; 2) Potential for transplant shapes other medical decisions: engagement in the transplant evaluation process could impact many other aspects of patients’ care; and 3) Personal responsibility and psychological burden for patients and families: clinician documentation suggested that patients felt personally responsible for the course of their evaluation and that the process could take an emotional toll on them and their family members. Conclusions Engagement in the kidney transplant evaluation process can be a significant undertaking for patients and families and may impact many other aspects of their care. Policies to promote referral for kidney transplant should be coupled with efforts to strengthen shared decision-making to ensure that the decision to undergo transplant evaluation is framed as an explicit choice with benefits, risks, and alternatives and patients have an opportunity to shape their involvement in this process