85 research outputs found
A personalized real-time virtual model of whole heart electrophysiology
Computer models capable of representing the intrinsic personal electrophysiology (EP) of the heart in silico are termed virtual heart technologies. When anatomy and EP are tailored to individual patients within the model, such technologies are promising clinical and industrial tools. Regardless of their vast potential, few virtual technologies simulating the entire organ-scale EP of all four-chambers of the heart have been reported and widespread clinical use is limited due to high computational costs and difficulty in validation. We thus report on the development of a novel virtual technology representing the electrophysiology of all four-chambers of the heart aiming to overcome these limitations. In our previous work, a model of ventricular EP embedded in a torso was constructed from clinical magnetic resonance image (MRI) data and personalized according to the measured 12 lead electrocardiogram (ECG) of a single subject under normal sinus rhythm. This model is then expanded upon to include whole heart EP and a detailed representation of the His-Purkinje system (HPS). To test the capacities of the personalized virtual heart technology to replicate standard clinical morphological ECG features under such conditions, bundle branch blocks within both the right and the left ventricles under two different conduction velocity settings are modeled alongside sinus rhythm. To ensure clinical viability, model generation was completely automated and simulations were performed using an efficient real-time cardiac EP simulator. Close correspondence between the measured and simulated 12 lead ECG was observed under normal sinus conditions and all simulated bundle branch blocks manifested relevant clinical morphological features
Effects of intensive blood pressure treatment on orthostatic hypotension a systematic review and individual participant-based meta-analysis
Background: Although intensive blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment reduces risk for cardiovascular disease, there are concerns that it might cause orthostatic hypotension (OH). Purpose: To examine the effects of intensive BP-lowering treatment on OH in hypertensive adults. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception through 7 October 2019, without language restrictions. Study Selection: Randomized trials of BP pharmacologic treatment (more intensive BP goal or active agent) that involved more than 500 adults with hypertension or elevated BP and that were 6 months or longer in duration. Trial comparisons were groups assigned to either less intensive BP goals or placebo, and the outcome was measured OH, defined as a decrease of 20mmHg or more in systolic BP or 10 mm Hg or more in diastolic BP after changing position from seated to standing. Data Extraction: 2 investigators independently abstracted articles and rated risk of bias. Data Synthesis: 5 trials examined BP treatment goals, and 4 examined active agents versus placebo. Trials examining BP treatment goals included 18 466 participants with 127 882 follow-up visits. Trials were open-label, with minimal heterogeneity of effects across trials. Intensive BP treatment lowered risk for OH (odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99]). Effects did not differ by prerandomization OH (P for interaction = 0.80). In sensitivity analyses that included 4 additional placebo-controlled trials, overall and subgroup findings were unchanged. Limitations: Assessments of OH were done while participants were seated (not supine) and did not include the first minute after standing. Data on falls and syncope were not available. Conclusion: Intensive BP-lowering treatment decreases risk for OH. Orthostatic hypotension, before or in the setting of more intensive BP treatment, should not be viewed as a reason to avoid or de-escalate treatment for hypertension
Comparison of m-mode echocardiographic left ventricular mass measured using digital and strip chart readings: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological and clinical studies frequently use echocardiography to measure LV wall thicknesses and chamber dimension for estimating quantitative measures of LV mass. While echocardiographic M-mode LV images have traditionally been measured using hand-held calipers and strip-chart paper tracings, digitized M-mode LV image measurements made directly on the computer screen using electronic calipers have become standard practice. We sought to determine if systematic differences in LV mass occur between the two methods by comparing LV mass measured from simultaneous M-mode strip chart recordings and digitized recordings. METHODS: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study applied the latter method. To determine if systematic differences in LV mass occur between the two methods, LV mass was measured from simultaneous M-mode strip chart recordings and digitized recordings. RESULTS: We found no difference in LV mass (p > .25) and a strong correlation in LV mass between the two methods (r = 0.97). Neither age, sex, nor hypertension status affected the correlation of LV mass between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that digital estimates of LV mass provide unbiased estimates comparable to the strip-chart method
Effect of Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Treatment on Early Trajectories of Virologic and Immunologic Biomarkers in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19
BACKGROUND: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nmAbs) failed to show clear benefit for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Dynamics of virologic and immunologic biomarkers remain poorly understood.
METHODS: Participants enrolled in the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 trials were randomized to nmAb versus placebo. Longitudinal differences between treatment and placebo groups in levels of plasma nucleocapsid antigen (N-Ag), anti-nucleocapsid antibody, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and D-dimer at enrollment, day 1, 3, and 5 were estimated using linear mixed models. A 7-point pulmonary ordinal scale assessed at day 5 was compared using proportional odds models.
RESULTS: Analysis included 2149 participants enrolled between August 2020 and September 2021. Treatment resulted in 20% lower levels of plasma N-Ag compared with placebo (95% confidence interval, 12%-27%; P \u3c .001), and a steeper rate of decline through the first 5 days (P \u3c .001). The treatment difference did not vary between subgroups, and no difference was observed in trajectories of other biomarkers or the day 5 pulmonary ordinal scale.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that nmAb has an antiviral effect assessed by plasma N-Ag among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with no blunting of the endogenous anti-nucleocapsid antibody response. No effect on systemic inflammation or day 5 clinical status was observed.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04501978
Effect of Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody Treatment on Early Trajectories of Virologic and Immunologic Biomarkers in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19
BACKGROUND: Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (nmAbs) failed to show clear benefit for hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Dynamics of virologic and immunologic biomarkers remain poorly understood.
METHODS: Participants enrolled in the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 trials were randomized to nmAb versus placebo. Longitudinal differences between treatment and placebo groups in levels of plasma nucleocapsid antigen (N-Ag), anti-nucleocapsid antibody, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and D-dimer at enrollment, day 1, 3, and 5 were estimated using linear mixed models. A 7-point pulmonary ordinal scale assessed at day 5 was compared using proportional odds models.
RESULTS: Analysis included 2149 participants enrolled between August 2020 and September 2021. Treatment resulted in 20% lower levels of plasma N-Ag compared with placebo (95% confidence interval, 12%-27%; P \u3c .001), and a steeper rate of decline through the first 5 days (P \u3c .001). The treatment difference did not vary between subgroups, and no difference was observed in trajectories of other biomarkers or the day 5 pulmonary ordinal scale.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that nmAb has an antiviral effect assessed by plasma N-Ag among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, with no blunting of the endogenous anti-nucleocapsid antibody response. No effect on systemic inflammation or day 5 clinical status was observed.
CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04501978
Variants at multiple loci implicated in both innate and adaptive immune responses are associated with Sjögrenâs syndrome
Sjögrenâs syndrome is a common autoimmune disease (~0.7% of European Americans) typically presenting as keratoconjunctivitis sicca and xerostomia. In addition to strong association within the HLA region at 6p21 (Pmeta=7.65Ă10â114), we establish associations with IRF5-TNPO3 (Pmeta=2.73Ă10â19), STAT4 (Pmeta=6.80Ă10â15), IL12A (Pmeta =1.17Ă10â10), FAM167A-BLK (Pmeta=4.97Ă10â10), DDX6-CXCR5 (Pmeta=1.10Ă10â8), and TNIP1 (Pmeta=3.30Ă10â8). Suggestive associations with Pmeta<5Ă10â5 were observed with 29 regions including TNFAIP3, PTTG1, PRDM1, DGKQ, FCGR2A, IRAK1BP1, ITSN2, and PHIP amongst others. These results highlight the importance of genes involved in both innate and adaptive immunity in Sjögrenâs syndrome
Tixagevimabâcilgavimab for treatment of patients hospitalised with COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial
Background: Tixagevimabâcilgavimab is a neutralising monoclonal antibody combination hypothesised to improve outcomes for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. We aimed to compare tixagevimabâcilgavimab versus placebo, in patients receiving remdesivir and other standard care. Methods: In a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, adults with symptoms for up to 12 days and hospitalised for COVID-19 at 81 sites in the USA, Europe, Uganda, and Singapore were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive intravenous tixagevimab 300 mgâcilgavimab 300 mg or placebo, in addition to remdesivir and other standard care. Patients were excluded if they had acute organ failure including receipt of invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, vasopressor therapy, mechanical circulatory support, or new renal replacement therapy. The study drug was prepared by an unmasked pharmacist; study participants, site study staff, investigators, and clinical providers were masked to study assignment. The primary outcome was time to sustained recovery up to day 90, defined as 14 consecutive days at home after hospital discharge, with co-primary analyses for the full cohort and for participants who were neutralising antibody-negative at baseline. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as participants who received a complete or partial infusion of tixagevimabâcilgavimab or placebo. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978 and the participant follow-up is ongoing. Findings: From Feb 10 to Sept 30, 2021, 1455 patients were randomly assigned and 1417 in the primary modified intention-to-treat population were infused with tixagevimabâcilgavimab (n=710) or placebo (n=707). The estimated cumulative incidence of sustained recovery was 89% for tixagevimabâcilgavimab and 86% for placebo group participants at day 90 in the full cohort (recovery rate ratio [RRR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·97â1·20]; p=0·21). Results were similar in the seronegative subgroup (RRR 1·14 [0·97â1·34]; p=0·13). Mortality was lower in the tixagevimabâcilgavimab group (61 [9%]) versus placebo group (86 [12%]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·50â0·97]; p=0·032). The composite safety outcome occurred in 178 (25%) tixagevimabâcilgavimab and 212 (30%) placebo group participants (HR 0·83 [0·68â1·01]; p=0·059). Serious adverse events occurred in 34 (5%) participants in the tixagevimabâcilgavimab group and 38 (5%) in the placebo group. Interpretation: Among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 receiving remdesivir and other standard care, tixagevimabâcilgavimab did not improve the primary outcome of time to sustained recovery but was safe and mortality was lower. Funding: US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Operation Warp Speed
Efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies, sotrovimab and BRII-196 plus BRII-198, for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (TICO): a randomised controlled trial
BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19. METHODS: In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged â„18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978. FINDINGS: Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50-72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74-1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67-1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74-1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68-1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91-1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88-1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90. INTERPRETATION: Neither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Speed
World Health Organization cardiovascular disease risk charts: revised models to estimate risk in 21 global regions
BACKGROUND: To help adapt cardiovascular disease risk prediction approaches to low-income and middle-income countries, WHO has convened an effort to develop, evaluate, and illustrate revised risk models. Here, we report the derivation, validation, and illustration of the revised WHO cardiovascular disease risk prediction charts that have been adapted to the circumstances of 21 global regions. METHODS: In this model revision initiative, we derived 10-year risk prediction models for fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular disease (ie, myocardial infarction and stroke) using individual participant data from the Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration. Models included information on age, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total cholesterol. For derivation, we included participants aged 40-80 years without a known baseline history of cardiovascular disease, who were followed up until the first myocardial infarction, fatal coronary heart disease, or stroke event. We recalibrated models using age-specific and sex-specific incidences and risk factor values available from 21 global regions. For external validation, we analysed individual participant data from studies distinct from those used in model derivation. We illustrated models by analysing data on a further 123â743 individuals from surveys in 79 countries collected with the WHO STEPwise Approach to Surveillance. FINDINGS: Our risk model derivation involved 376â177 individuals from 85 cohorts, and 19â333 incident cardiovascular events recorded during 10 years of follow-up. The derived risk prediction models discriminated well in external validation cohorts (19 cohorts, 1â096â061 individuals, 25â950 cardiovascular disease events), with Harrell's C indices ranging from 0·685 (95% CI 0·629-0·741) to 0·833 (0·783-0·882). For a given risk factor profile, we found substantial variation across global regions in the estimated 10-year predicted risk. For example, estimated cardiovascular disease risk for a 60-year-old male smoker without diabetes and with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg and total cholesterol of 5 mmol/L ranged from 11% in Andean Latin America to 30% in central Asia. When applied to data from 79 countries (mostly low-income and middle-income countries), the proportion of individuals aged 40-64 years estimated to be at greater than 20% risk ranged from less than 1% in Uganda to more than 16% in Egypt. INTERPRETATION: We have derived, calibrated, and validated new WHO risk prediction models to estimate cardiovascular disease risk in 21 Global Burden of Disease regions. The widespread use of these models could enhance the accuracy, practicability, and sustainability of efforts to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease worldwide. FUNDING: World Health Organization, British Heart Foundation (BHF), BHF Cambridge Centre for Research Excellence, UK Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research
- âŠ