A machine-learning based bio-psycho-social model for the prediction of non-obstructive and obstructive coronary artery disease

Background: Mechanisms of myocardial ischemia in obstructive and non-obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), and the interplay between clinical, functional, biological and psycho-social features, are still far to be fully elucidated. Objectives: To develop a machine-learning (ML) model for the supervised prediction of obstructive versus non-obstructive CAD. Methods: From the EVA study, we analysed adults hospitalized for IHD undergoing conventional coronary angiography (CCA). Non-obstructive CAD was defined by a stenosis < 50% in one or more vessels. Baseline clinical and psycho-socio-cultural characteristics were used for computing a Rockwood and Mitnitski frailty index, and a gender score according to GENESIS-PRAXY methodology. Serum concentration of inflammatory cytokines was measured with a multiplex flow cytometry assay. Through an XGBoost classifier combined with an explainable artificial intelligence tool (SHAP), we identified the most influential features in discriminating obstructive versus non-obstructive CAD. Results: Among the overall EVA cohort (n = 509), 311 individuals (mean age 67 ± 11 years, 38% females; 67% obstructive CAD) with complete data were analysed. The ML-based model (83% accuracy and 87% precision) showed that while obstructive CAD was associated with higher frailty index, older age and a cytokine signature characterized by IL-1β, IL-12p70 and IL-33, non-obstructive CAD was associated with a higher gender score (i.e., social characteristics traditionally ascribed to women) and with a cytokine signature characterized by IL-18, IL-8, IL-23. Conclusions: Integrating clinical, biological, and psycho-social features, we have optimized a sex- and gender-unbiased model that discriminates obstructive and non-obstructive CAD. Further mechanistic studies will shed light on the biological plausibility of these associations. Clinical trial registration: NCT02737982

The Sex-Specific Detrimental Effect of Diabetes and Gender-Related Factors on Pre-admission Medication Adherence Among Patients Hospitalized for Ischemic Heart Disease: Insights From EVA Study

Background: Sex and gender-related factors have been under-investigated as relevant determinants of health outcomes across non-communicable chronic diseases. Poor medication adherence results in adverse clinical outcomes and sex differences have been reported among patients at high cardiovascular risk, such as diabetics. The effect of diabetes and gender-related factors on medication adherence among women and men at high risk for ischemic heart disease (IHD) has not yet been fully investigated.Aim: To explore the role of sex, gender-related factors, and diabetes in pre-admission medication adherence among patients hospitalized for IHD.Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the Endocrine Vascular disease Approach (EVA) (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02737982), a prospective cohort of patients admitted for IHD. We selected patients with baseline information regarding the presence of diabetes, cardiovascular risk factors, and gender-related variables (i.e., gender identity, gender role, gender relations, institutionalized gender). Our primary outcome was the proportion of pre-admission medication adherence defined through a self-reported questionnaire. We performed a sex-stratified analysis of clinical and gender-related factors associated with pre-admission medication adherence.Results: Two-hundred eighty patients admitted for IHD (35% women, mean age 70), were included. Around one-fourth of the patients were low-adherent to therapy before hospitalization, regardless of sex. Low-adherent patients were more likely diabetic (40%) and employed (40%). Sex-stratified analysis showed that low-adherent men were more likely to be employed (58 vs. 33%) and not primary earners (73 vs. 54%), with more masculine traits of personality, as compared with medium-high adherent men. Interestingly, women reporting medication low-adherence were similar for clinical and gender-related factors to those with medium-high adherence, except for diabetes (42 vs. 20%, p = 0.004). In a multivariate adjusted model only employed status was associated with poor medication adherence (OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.31–0.97). However, in the sex-stratified analysis, diabetes was independently associated with medication adherence only in women (OR 0.36; 95%CI 0.13–0.96), whereas a higher masculine BSRI was the only factor associated with medication adherence in men (OR 0.59, 95%CI 0.35–0.99).Conclusion: Pre-admission medication adherence is common in patients hospitalized for IHD, regardless of sex. However, patient-related factors such as diabetes, employment, and personality traits are associated with adherence in a sex-specific manner

Epithelial growth factor receptor expression influences 5-ALA induced glioblastoma fluorescence.

The extent of 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) guided tumor resection has a determining impact in high-grade glioma and glioblastoma surgery. Yet the intensity of the 5-ALA induced fluorescence may vary within the tumor. We aimed to correlate 5-ALA induced fluorescence with the expression of epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) and its constitutively active version EGFRvIII in different glioblastoma (GBM) cell lines. To elucidate the role of EGFR in the metabolism of 5-ALA in GBM cell lines with variable EGFR expression status, we analyzed the activation of EGFR by its primary ligand EGF, and its downstream effect on Heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1), a key enzyme regulating the metabolism of Protoporphyrin IX (PpIX), the fluorescent metabolite of 5-ALA. Effects of direct pharmacological inhibition by Tin(IV)-Protoporphyrin (SnPP) or gene knockdown by small interfering RNA (siRNA) on HO-1 enzyme were analyzed in respect to 5-ALA induced fluorescence. Furthermore, inhibition of EGFR by Gefitinib was tested. A significant difference in 5-ALA induced fluorescence was obtained in U87MG (low EGFR expression) and LN229EGFR cells (EGFR overexpression) compared to BS153 (EGFR overexpression/EGFRvIII+). Treatment of U87MG and LN229EGFR cells with EGF significantly reduced cellular fluorescence, by promoting HO-1 transcription and expression in a concentration-dependent manner. This effect could be reversed by EGFR-specific siRNA treatment, which reduced protein expression of about 80% in U87MG. Remarkably, inhibition of HO-1 activity by SnPP or reduction of HO-1 protein levels by siHO-1 treatment restored fluorescence in all cell lines, independently of EGFR quantitative and qualitative expression. Gefitinib treatment was able to restore fluorescence after EGF stimulation in U87MG cells but not in BS153 cells, overexpressing EGFR/EGFRvIII. In GBM cell lines, 5-ALA induced fluorescence is variable and influenced by EGF-induced downstream activation of HO-1. HO-1 protein expression was identified as a negative regulator of 5-ALA induced fluorescence in GBM cells. We further propose that co-expression of EGFRvIII but not quantitative EGFR expression influence HO-1 activity and therefore cellular fluorescence

NGR-hTNF in combination with best investigator choice in previously treated malignant pleural mesothelioma (NGR015): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background Malignant pleural mesothelioma is an aggressive cancer with highly vascularised tumours. It has poor prognosis and few treatment options after failure of first-line chemotherapy. NGR-hTNF is a vascular-targeting drug that increases penetration of intratumoral chemotherapy and T-cell infiltration by modifying the tumour microenvironment. In this trial, we aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of NGR-hTNF in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma who had progressed during or after a first-line treatment. Methods NGR015 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial done in 41 centres in 12 countries. Eligible participants had malignant pleural mesothelioma of any histological subtype (epithelial, sarcomatoid, or mixed), were aged 18 years or older, and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 and radiologically documented progressive disease after one pemetrexed-based chemotherapy regimen. Participants were randomly assigned to receive weekly NGR-hTNF 0·8 μg/m² intravenously plus best investigator choice (n=200), or placebo plus best investigator choice (n=200). Best investigator choice was decided before random assignment and could be single-agent gemcitabine (1000–1250 mg/m² intravenously), vinorelbine (25 mg/m² intravenously or 60 mg/m² orally), doxorubicin (60–75 mg/m² intravenously), or best supportive care only. Patients were randomised (1:1) with a block size of four after stratification for performance status and best investigator choice. The primary study endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is closed to new participants and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01098266). Findings Between April 12, 2010 and Jan 21, 2013, we enrolled 400 eligible participants. 381 (95%) of 400 patients were selected to receive chemotherapy before all participants were randomly assigned to receive NGF-hTNF plus best investigator choice (n=200) or placebo plus best investigator choice (n=200). At the cutoff date (April 29, 2014), the median follow-up was 18·7 months (IQR 15·1–24·4), and overall survival did not differ between the two treatment groups (median 8·5 months [95% CI 7·2–9·9] in the NGR-hTNF group vs 8·0 months [6·6–8·9] in the placebo group; hazard ratio 0·94, 95% CI 0·75–1·18; p=0·58). Grade 3 or worse study-emergent adverse events occurred in 136 (70%) of patients receiving NGR-hTNF versus 118 (61%) of patients receiving placebo, with the most common being neutropenia (35 [18%] of 193 patients vs 36 [19%] of 193 patients), pain (11 [6%] vs 16 [8%]), dyspnoea (nine [5%] vs seven [4%]), and chills (nine [5%] vs none). 50 (26%) patients in the NGR-hTNF group had a serious adverse event, compared with 47 (24%) in the placebo group. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 17 (9%) patients in the NGR-hTNF group and 20 patients (10%) in the placebo group. There were 12 deaths in the NGR-hTNF group and 13 deaths in the placebo group, but none were treatment related. Interpretation The study did not meet its primary endpoint. The hypothesis-generating findings from the subgroup analyses deserve a confirmatory randomised trial because patients who rapidly progress after first-line treatment have a poor prognosis