Effects of 6 Months of Exercise-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation on Autonomic Function and Neuro-Cardiovascular Stress Reactivity in Coronary Artery Disease Patients

Background Autonomic dysregulation represents a hallmark of coronary artery disease (CAD). Therefore, we investigated the effects of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) on autonomic function and neuro-cardiovascular stress reactivity in CAD patients. Methods and Results Twenty-two CAD patients (4 women; 62±8 years) were studied before and following 6 months of aerobic- and resistance-training-based CR. Twenty-two similarly aged, healthy individuals (CTRL; 7 women; 62±11 years) served as controls. We measured blood pressure, muscle sympathetic nerve activity, heart rate, heart rate variability (linear and nonlinear), and cardiovagal (sequence method) and sympathetic (linear relationship between burst incidence and diastolic blood pressure) baroreflex sensitivity during supine rest. Furthermore, neuro-cardiovascular reactivity during short-duration static handgrip (20s) at 40% maximal effort was evaluated. Six months of CR lowered resting blood pressure (P\u3c0.05), as well as muscle sympathetic nerve activity burst frequency (48±8 to 39±11 bursts/min; P\u3c0.001) and burst incidence (81±7 to 66±17 bursts/100 heartbeats; P\u3c0.001), to levels that matched CTRL and improved sympathetic baroreflex sensitivity in CAD patients (P\u3c0.01). Heart rate variability (all P\u3e0.05) and cardiovagal baroreflex sensitivity (P=0.11) were unchanged following CR, yet values were not different pre-CR from CTRL (all P\u3e0.05). Furthermore, before CR, CAD patients displayed greater blood pressure and muscle sympathetic nerve activity reactivity to static handgrip versus CTRL (all P\u3c0.05); yet, responses were reduced following CR (all P\u3c0.05) to levels observed in CTRL. Conclusions Six months of exercise-based CR was associated with marked improvement in baseline autonomic function and neuro-cardiovascular stress reactivity in CAD patients, which may play a role in the reduced cardiac risk and improved survival observed in patients following exercise training

Clinical relevance assessment of animal preclinical research (RAA) tool: development and explanation.

Only a small proportion of preclinical research (research performed in animal models prior to clinical trials in humans) translates into clinical benefit in humans. Possible reasons for the lack of translation of the results observed in preclinical research into human clinical benefit include the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical studies. There is currently no formal domain-based assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical research. To address this issue, we have developed a tool for the assessment of the clinical relevance of preclinical studies, with the intention of assessing the likelihood that therapeutic preclinical findings can be translated into improvement in the management of human diseases. We searched the EQUATOR network for guidelines that describe the design, conduct, and reporting of preclinical research. We searched the references of these guidelines to identify further relevant publications and developed a set of domains and signalling questions. We then conducted a modified Delphi-consensus to refine and develop the tool. The Delphi panel members included specialists in evidence-based (preclinical) medicine specialists, methodologists, preclinical animal researchers, a veterinarian, and clinical researchers. A total of 20 Delphi-panel members completed the first round and 17 members from five countries completed all three rounds. This tool has eight domains (construct validity, external validity, risk of bias, experimental design and data analysis plan, reproducibility and replicability of methods and results in the same model, research integrity, and research transparency) and a total of 28 signalling questions and provides a framework for researchers, journal editors, grant funders, and regulatory authorities to assess the potential clinical relevance of preclinical animal research. We have developed a tool to assess the clinical relevance of preclinical studies. This tool is currently being piloted

Sex difference in the influence of central blood volume mobilization on the exercise pressor response

© 2015, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Purpose: To determine the sex difference in the impact of central venous pressure (CVP) on the pressor response induced by ischemic handgrip exercise. Methods: Twelve young healthy individuals (six males, 25 ± 3 years) performed ischemic handgrip exercise during mild levels of lower body negative pressure (LBNP, −5 mmHg) and during a 10° head-down tilt (HDT) to lower and increase CVP, respectively. The protocol consisted of 3 min of baseline ischemia, followed by 2 min of isometric handgrip exercise at 35 % of maximal voluntary contraction force, and 2 min of post-exercise circulatory occlusion. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was assessed continuously by finger plethysmography and CVP was estimated from the venous pressure of the non-exercising dependent arm. Results: Baseline CVP was greater during HDT than LBNP (8.4 ± 1.8 vs. 6.5 ± 1.8 mmHg, p \u3c 0.01). MAP was greater during LBNP than HDT throughout the protocol (p = 0.05). During ischemic handgrip exercise, CVP increased in males but not in females (Group × protocol interaction: p = 0.01). A group × condition interaction was also observed for MAP, with males showing a greater MAP during LBNP than HDT (110 ± 2 vs. 103 ± 2 mmHg, p \u3c 0.01). Conclusions: Baseline CVP inversely affected the pressor response to handgrip exercise in all individuals, with a greater MAP response observed during LBNP than HDT. Increase in CVP in males may be due to a greater splanchnic vasoconstrictor response to ischemic handgrip exercise. Therefore, combined baseline CVP and changes in CVP likely contributed to the greater MAP response observed during LBNP in males

Chronic immune-related adverse events in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are toxicities resulting from use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). These side effects persist in some patients despite withholding therapy and using immunosuppressive and immune-modulating agents. Little is known about chronic irAEs and they are felt to be rare. We performed a systematic review to characterize non-endocrine chronic irAEs reported in the literature and describe their management. Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for reports of adult patients with solid cancers treated with ICIs who experienced chronic (>12 weeks) non-endocrine irAEs. Patient, treatment and toxicity data were collected. Of 6843 articles identified, 229 studies including 323 patients met our inclusion criteria. The median age was 65 (IQR 56–72) and 58% were male. Most patients (75%) had metastatic disease and the primary cancer site was melanoma in 43% and non-small cell lung cancer in 31% of patients. The most common ICIs delivered were pembrolizumab (24%) and nivolumab (37%). The chronic irAEs experienced were rheumatological in 20% of patients, followed by neurological in 19%, gastrointestinal in 16% and dermatological in 14%. The irAE persisted for a median (range) of 180 (84–2370) days and 30% of patients had ongoing symptoms or treatment. More than half (52%) of patients had chronic irAEs that persisted for >6 months. The ICI was permanently discontinued in 60% of patients and 76% required oral and/or intravenous steroids. This is the first systematic review to assess and report on moderate/severe chronic non-endocrine irAEs after treatment with ICI in the literature. These toxicities persisted for months-years and the majority required discontinuation of therapy and initiation of immunosuppression. Further research is needed to better understand chronic irAEs, which hold potential substantial clinical significance considering the expanded use of ICIs and their integration into the (neo)adjuvant settings

Assessment of safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stromal cell therapy in preclinical models of acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review protocol

Abstract Background Despite advances in treatment, acute myocardial infarction (MI) is still associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in patients with extensive damage and scar formation. Based on some promising preclinical studies, there is interest in the use of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to promote cardiac repair after acute MI. However, there is a need for a systematic review of this evidence to summarize the efficacy and safety of MSCs in preclinical models of MI. This will better inform the translation of MSC therapy for acute MI and guide the design of a future clinical trial. Methods/design A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews will be conducted. We will identify comparative preclinical studies (randomized and non-randomized) of myocardial infarction that include animals given MSC therapy versus a vehicle/placebo. The primary outcome will be left ventricular ejection fraction. Secondary and tertiary outcomes will include death, infarct size, measures of cardiac function, biochemical outcomes, and MSC retention and differentiation. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Subgroup analyses will be performed to measure how various sources of preclinical study heterogeneity affect the direction and magnitude of the primary outcome. We will meta-analyze data using inverse variance random effects modeling. Discussion This systematic review of preclinical evidence will provide a summary of the efficacy and safety of MSCs in animal models of MI. The results will help determine whether sufficient evidence exists to conduct a clinical trial in humans and inform its design

Coronary artery disease affects cortical circuitry associated with brain-heart integration during volitional exercise

© 2015 the American Physiological Society. This study tested the hypothesis that coronary artery disease (CAD) alters the cortical circuitry associated with exercise. Observations of changes in heart rate (HR) and in cortical blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) images were made in 23 control subjects [control; 8 women; 63 ± 11 yr; mean arterial pressure (MAP): 90 ± 9 mmHg] (mean ± SD) and 17 similarly aged CAD patients (4 women; 59 ± 9 yr; MAP: 87 ± 10 mmHg). Four repeated bouts each of 30%, 40%, and 50% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force (LAB session), and seven repeated bouts of isometric handgrip (IHG) at 40% MVC force (fMRI session), were performed, with each contraction lasting 20 s and separated by 40 s of rest. There was a main effect of group (P = 0.03) on HR responses across all IHG intensities. Compared with control, CAD demonstrated less task-dependent deactivation in the posterior cingulated cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, and reduced activation in the right anterior insula, bilateral precentral cortex, and occipital lobe (P \u3c 0.05). When correlated with HR, CAD demonstrated reduced activation in the bilateral insula and posterior cingulate cortex, and reduced deactivation in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and bilateral precentral cortex (P \u3c 0.05). The increased variability in expected autonomic regions and decrease in total cortical activation in response to the IHG task are associated with a diminished HR response to volitional effort in CAD. Therefore, relative to similarly aged and healthy individuals, CAD impairs the heart rate response and modifies the cortical patterns associated with cardiovascular control during IHG

Assessment of safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stromal cell therapy in preclinical models of acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review protocol

Abstract Background Despite advances in treatment, acute myocardial infarction (MI) is still associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in patients with extensive damage and scar formation. Based on some promising preclinical studies, there is interest in the use of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to promote cardiac repair after acute MI. However, there is a need for a systematic review of this evidence to summarize the efficacy and safety of MSCs in preclinical models of MI. This will better inform the translation of MSC therapy for acute MI and guide the design of a future clinical trial. Methods/design A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews will be conducted. We will identify comparative preclinical studies (randomized and non-randomized) of myocardial infarction that include animals given MSC therapy versus a vehicle/placebo. The primary outcome will be left ventricular ejection fraction. Secondary and tertiary outcomes will include death, infarct size, measures of cardiac function, biochemical outcomes, and MSC retention and differentiation. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Subgroup analyses will be performed to measure how various sources of preclinical study heterogeneity affect the direction and magnitude of the primary outcome. We will meta-analyze data using inverse variance random effects modeling. Discussion This systematic review of preclinical evidence will provide a summary of the efficacy and safety of MSCs in animal models of MI. The results will help determine whether sufficient evidence exists to conduct a clinical trial in humans and inform its design

Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature

Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature

Reporting preclinical anesthesia study (REPEAT): Evaluating the quality of reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature