What does my patient's coronary artery calcium score mean? Combining information from the coronary artery calcium score with information from conventional risk factors to estimate coronary heart disease risk

Abstract: Background: The coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is an independent predictor of coronary heart disease. We sought to combine information from the CAC score with information from conventional cardiac risk factors to produce post-test risk estimates, and to determine whether the score may add clinically useful information. Methods: We measured the independent cross-sectional associations between conventional cardiac risk factors and the CAC score among asymptomatic persons referred for non-contrast electron beam computed tomography. Using the resulting multivariable models and published CAC score-specific relative risk estimates, we estimated post-test coronary heart disease risk in a number of different scenarios. Results: Among 9341 asymptomatic study participants (age 35-88 years, 40% female), we found that conventional coronary heart disease risk factors including age, male sex, self-reported hypertension, diabetes and high cholesterol were independent predictors of the CAC score, and we used the resulting multivariable models for predicting post-test risk in a variety of scenarios. Our models predicted, for example, that a 60-year-old non-smoking non-diabetic women with hypertension and high cholesterol would have a 47% chance of having a CAC score of zero, reducing her 10-year risk estimate from 15% (per Framingham) to 6-9%; if her score were over 100, however (a 17% chance), her risk estimate would be markedly higher (25-51% in 10 years). In low risk scenarios, the CAC score is very likely to be zero or low, and unlikely to change management. Conclusion: Combining information from the CAC score with information from conventional risk factors can change assessment of coronary heart disease risk to an extent that may be clinically important, especially when the pre-test 10-year risk estimate is intermediate. The attached spreadsheet makes these calculations easy

Psychometric evaluation of the Osteoporosis Patient Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (OPSAT-Q™), a novel measure to assess satisfaction with bisphosphonate treatment in postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND: The Osteoporosis Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (OPSAT-Q) is a new measure of patient satisfaction with bisphosphonate treatment for osteoporosis. The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric characteristics of the OPSAT-Q. METHODS: The OPSAT-Q contains 16 items in four subscales: Convenience, Confidence with Daily Activities, Side Effects, and Overall Satisfaction. All four subscale scores and an overall composite satisfaction score (CSS) can be computed. The OPSAT-Q, Osteoporosis Targeted Quality of Life (OPTQoL), and sociodemographic/clinical questionnaires, including 3 global items on convenience, functioning and side effects, were self-administered to women with osteoporosis or osteopenia recruited from four US clinics. Analyses included item and scale performance, internal consistency reliability, reproducibility, and construct validity. Reproducibility was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) via a follow-up questionnaire completed by participants 2 weeks post baseline. RESULTS: 104 women with a mean age of 65.1 years participated. The majority were Caucasian (64.4%), living with someone (74%), and not currently employed (58.7%). 73% had osteoporosis and 27% had osteopenia. 80% were taking weekly bisphosphonates and 18% were taking daily medication (2% missing data). On a scale of 0–100, individual patient subscale scores ranged from 17 to 100 and CSS scores ranged from 44 to 100. All scores showed acceptable internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70) (range 0.72 to 0.89). Reproducibility ranged from 0.62 (Daily Activities) to 0.79 (Side Effects) for the subscales; reproducibility for the CSS was 0.81. Significant correlations were found between the OPSAT-Q subscales and conceptually similar global measures (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The findings from this study confirm the validity and reliability of the OPSAT-Q and support the proposed composition of four subscales and a composite score. They also support the use of the OPSAT-Q to examine the impact of bisphosphonate dosing frequency on patient satisfaction

Fever as a Cause of Hypophosphatemia in Patients with Malaria

Hypophosphatemia occurs in 40 to 60% of patients with acute malaria, and in many other conditions associated with elevations of body temperature. To determine the prevalence and causes of hypophosphatemia in patients with malaria, we retrospectively studied all adults diagnosed with acute malaria during a 12-year period. To validate our findings, we analyzed a second sample of malaria patients during a subsequent 10-year period. Serum phosphorus correlated inversely with temperature (n = 59, r = −0.62; P<0.0001), such that each 1°C increase in body temperature was associated with a reduction of 0.18 mmol/L (0.56 mg/dL) in the serum phosphorus level (95% confidence interval: −0.12 to −0.24 mmol/L [−0.37 to −0.74 mg/dL] per 1°C). A similar effect was observed among 19 patients who had repeat measurements of serum phosphorus and temperature. In a multiple linear regression analysis, the relation between temperature and serum phosphorus level was independent of blood pH, PCO2, and serum levels of potassium, bicarbonate, calcium, albumin, and glucose. Our study demonstrates a strong inverse linear relation between body temperature and serum phosphorus level that was not explained by other factors known to cause hypophosphatemia. If causal, this association can account for the high prevalence of hypophosphatemia, observed in our patients and in previous studies of patients with malaria. Because hypophosphatemia has been observed in other clinical conditions characterized by fever or hyperthermia, this relation may not be unique to malaria. Elevation of body temperature should be added to the list of causes of hypophosphatemia

Why Are Clinicians Not Embracing the Results from Pivotal Clinical Trials in Severe Sepsis? A Bayesian Analysis

BACKGROUND: Five pivotal clinical trials (Intensive Insulin Therapy; Recombinant Human Activated Protein C [rhAPC]; Low-Tidal Volume; Low-Dose Steroid; Early Goal-Directed Therapy [EGDT]) demonstrated mortality reduction in patients with severe sepsis and expert guidelines have recommended them to clinical practice. Yet, the adoption of these therapies remains low among clinicians. OBJECTIVES: We selected these five trials and asked: Question 1--What is the current probability that the new therapy is not better than the standard of care in my patient with severe sepsis? Question 2--What is the current probability of reducing the relative risk of death (RRR) of my patient with severe sepsis by meaningful clinical thresholds (RRR >15%; >20%; >25%)? METHODS: Bayesian methodologies were applied to this study. Odds ratio (OR) was considered for Question 1, and RRR was used for Question 2. We constructed prior distributions (enthusiastic; mild, moderate, and severe skeptic) based on various effective sample sizes of other relevant clinical trials (unfavorable evidence). Posterior distributions were calculated by combining the prior distributions and the data from pivotal trials (favorable evidence). MAIN FINDINGS: Answer 1--The analysis based on mild skeptic prior shows beneficial results with the Intensive Insulin, rhAPC, and Low-Tidal Volume trials, but not with the Low-Dose Steroid and EGDT trials. All trials' results become unacceptable by the analyses using moderate or severe skeptic priors. Answer 2--If we aim for a RRR>15%, the mild skeptic analysis shows that the current probability of reducing death by this clinical threshold is 88% for the Intensive Insulin, 62-65% for the Low-Tidal Volume, rhAPC, EGDT trials, and 17% for the Low-Dose Steroid trial. The moderate and severe skeptic analyses show no clinically meaningful reduction in the risk of death for all trials. If we aim for a RRR >20% or >25%, all probabilities of benefits become lower independent of the degree of skepticism. CONCLUSIONS: Our clinical threshold analysis offers a new bedside tool to be directly applied to the care of patients with severe sepsis. Our results demonstrate that the strength of evidence (statistical and clinical) is weak for all trials, particularly for the Low-Dose Steroid and EGDT trials. It is essential to replicate the results of each of these five clinical trials in confirmatory studies if we want to provide patient care based on scientifically sound evidence

C-reactive protein levels and viable Chlamydia pneumoniae in carotid artery atherosclerosis

Background and Purpose - An elevated serum level of C-reactive protein, an inflammatory marker, is an independent predictor of stroke and coronary artery disease. To determine whether chronic infection with Chlamydia pneumoniae, which has been identified in atherosclerotic plaques, is responsible for systemic inflammation, we studied the association between serum C-reactive protein levels and infection of carotid artery atherosclerotic plaque with viable C pneumoniae. Methods - Serum C-reactive protein levels were obtained before endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis. Plaques were tested for C pneumoniae mRNA, an indicator of viability, and DNA by polymerase chain reaction of DNA and cDNA, respectively. Results - Forty-eight samples were studied, of which 18 (38%; 95% CI, 23 to 50) were infected with viable C pneumoniae as evidenced by isolated chlamydial mRNA. All 18 of these samples, plus 1 additional sample, were positive for chlamydial DNA. Serum C-reactive protein levels were higher in those with viable C pneumoniae compared with those without infection (median, 8 mg/L versus undetectable; P=0.045 by Wilcoxon rank-sum test). In multivariable models, the only independent predictor of the presence of viable C pneumoniae was a detectable C-reactive protein level (odds ratio, 4.2: 95% CI, 1.1 to 17; P=0.04). Conclusions - Viable C pneumoniae are present in a substantial portion of carotid artery atherosclerotic plaques and are associated with increased serum C-reactive protein levels. These findings may explain the link between elevated C-reactive protein levels and the risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke but should be reproduced in a larger cohort