The Effect of Protein Supplementation versus Carbohydrate Supplementation on Muscle Damage Markers and Soreness Following a 15-km Road Race:A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

We assessed whether a protein supplementation protocol could attenuate running-induced muscle soreness and other muscle damage markers compared to iso-caloric placebo supplementation. A double-blind randomized controlled trial was performed among 323 recreational runners (age 44 ± 11 years, 56% men) participating in a 15-km road race. Participants received milk protein or carbohydrate supplementation, for three consecutive days post-race. Habitual protein intake was assessed using 24 h recalls. Race characteristics were determined and muscle soreness was assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory at baseline and 1–3 days post-race. In a subgroup (n = 149) muscle soreness was measured with a strain gauge algometer and creatine kinase (CK) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) concentrations were measured. At baseline, no group-differences were observed for habitual protein intake (protein group: 79.9 ± 26.5 g/d versus placebo group: 82.0 ± 26.8 g/d, p = 0.49) and muscle soreness (protein: 0.45 ± 1.08 versus placebo: 0.44 ± 1.14, p = 0.96). Subjects completed the race with a running speed of 12 ± 2 km/h. With the Intention-to-Treat analysis no between-group differences were observed in reported muscle soreness. With the per-protocol analysis, however, the protein group reported higher muscle soreness 24 h post-race compared to the placebo group (2.96 ± 2.27 versus 2.46 ± 2.38, p = 0.039) and a lower pressure muscle pain threshold in the protein group compared to the placebo group (71.8 ± 30.0 N versus 83.9 ± 27.9 N, p = 0.019). No differences were found in concentrations of CK and LDH post-race between groups. Post-exercise protein supplementation is not more preferable than carbohydrate supplementation to reduce muscle soreness or other damage markers in recreational athletes with mostly a sufficient baseline protein intake running a 15-km road race. View Full-Tex

Predictors of bleeding complications during catHeter-dirEcted thrombolysis for peripheral arterial occlusions (POCHET)

Introduction The risk of major bleeding complications in catheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) for acute limb ischemia (ALI) remains high, with reported major bleeding complication rates in up to 1 in every 10 treated patients. Fibrinogen was the only predictive marker used for bleeding complications in CDT, despite the lack of high quality evidence to support this. Therefore, recent international guidelines recommend against the use of fibrinogen during CDT. However, no alternative biomarkers exist to effectively predict CDT-related bleeding complications. The aim of the POCHET biobank is to prospectively assess the rate and etiology of bleeding complications during CDT and to provide a biobank of blood samples to investigate potential novel biomarkers to predict bleeding complications during CDT. Methods The POCHET biobank is a multicentre prospective biobank. After informed consent, all consecutive patients with lower extremity ALI eligible for CDT are included. All patients are treated according to a predefined standard operating procedure which is aligned in all participating centres. Baseline and follow-up data are collected. Prior to CDT and subsequently every six hours, venous blood samples are obtained and stored in the biobank for future analyses. The primary outcome is the occurrence of non-access related major bleeding complications, which is assessed by an independent adjudication committee. Secondary outcomes are non-major bleeding complications and other CDT related complications. Proposed biomarkers to be investigated include fibrinogen, to end the debate on its usefulness, anti-plasmin and D-Dimer. Discussion and conclusion The POCHET biobank provides contemporary data and outcomes of patients during CDT for ALI, coupled with their blood samples taken prior and during CDT. Thereby, the POCHET biobank is a real world monitor on biomarkers during CDT, supporting a broad spectrum of future research for the identification of patients at high risk for bleeding complications during CDT and to identify new biomarkers to enhance safety in CDT treatment

Rare and low-frequency coding variants alter human adult height

Height is a highly heritable, classic polygenic trait with ~700 common associated variants identified so far through genome - wide association studies . Here , we report 83 height - associated coding variants with lower minor allele frequenc ies ( range of 0.1 - 4.8% ) and effects of up to 2 16 cm /allele ( e.g. in IHH , STC2 , AR and CRISPLD2 ) , >10 times the average effect of common variants . In functional follow - up studies, rare height - increasing alleles of STC2 (+1 - 2 cm/allele) compromise d proteolytic inhibition of PAPP - A and increased cleavage of IGFBP - 4 in vitro , resulting in higher bioavailability of insulin - like growth factors . The se 83 height - associated variants overlap genes mutated in monogenic growth disorders and highlight new biological candidates ( e.g. ADAMTS3, IL11RA, NOX4 ) and pathways ( e.g . proteoglycan/ glycosaminoglycan synthesis ) involved in growth . Our results demonstrate that sufficiently large sample sizes can uncover rare and low - frequency variants of moderate to large effect associated with polygenic human phenotypes , and that these variants implicate relevant genes and pathways

The Changing Landscape for Stroke\ua0Prevention in AF: Findings From the GLORIA-AF Registry Phase 2

Background GLORIA-AF (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is a prospective, global registry program describing antithrombotic treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke. Phase 2 began when dabigatran, the first non\u2013vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), became available. Objectives This study sought to describe phase 2 baseline data and compare these with the pre-NOAC era collected during phase 1. Methods During phase 2, 15,641 consenting patients were enrolled (November 2011 to December 2014); 15,092 were eligible. This pre-specified cross-sectional analysis describes eligible patients\u2019 baseline characteristics. Atrial fibrillation disease characteristics, medical outcomes, and concomitant diseases and medications were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Of the total patients, 45.5% were female; median age was 71 (interquartile range: 64, 78) years. Patients were from Europe (47.1%), North America (22.5%), Asia (20.3%), Latin America (6.0%), and the Middle East/Africa (4.0%). Most had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age  6575 years, Diabetes mellitus, previous Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65 to 74 years, Sex category] score  652; 86.1%); 13.9% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc = 1). Overall, 79.9% received oral anticoagulants, of whom 47.6% received NOAC and 32.3% vitamin K antagonists (VKA); 12.1% received antiplatelet agents; 7.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. For comparison, the proportion of phase 1 patients (of N = 1,063 all eligible) prescribed VKA was 32.8%, acetylsalicylic acid 41.7%, and no therapy 20.2%. In Europe in phase 2, treatment with NOAC was more common than VKA (52.3% and 37.8%, respectively); 6.0% of patients received antiplatelet treatment; and 3.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. In North America, 52.1%, 26.2%, and 14.0% of patients received NOAC, VKA, and antiplatelet drugs, respectively; 7.5% received no antithrombotic treatment. NOAC use was less common in Asia (27.7%), where 27.5% of patients received VKA, 25.0% antiplatelet drugs, and 19.8% no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusions The baseline data from GLORIA-AF phase 2 demonstrate that in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, NOAC have been highly adopted into practice, becoming more frequently prescribed than VKA in Europe and North America. Worldwide, however, a large proportion of patients remain undertreated, particularly in Asia and North America. (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [GLORIA-AF]; NCT01468701

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570