Health-Related Quality of Life in Premature Acute Coronary Syndrome: Does Patient Sex or Gender Really Matter?

Background-Limited data exist as to the relative contribution of sex and gender on health-related quality of life (HRQL) among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study aims to evaluate the effect of sex and gender-related variables on long-term HRQL among young adults with ACS. Methods and Results-GENESIS-PRAXY (GENdEr and Sex determInantS of cardiovascular disease: from bench to beyond-Premature Acute Coronary SYndrome) is a multicenter, prospective cohort study (January 2009 to August 2013) of adults aged 18 to 55 years, hospitalized with ACS. HRQL was measured at baseline, 1, 6, and 12 months using the Short Form-12 and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) among 1213 patients. Median age was 49 years. Women reported worse HRQL than men over time post-ACS, both in terms of physical and mental functioning. Gender-related factors were more likely to be predictors of HRQL than sex. Femininity score, social support, and housework responsibility were the most common gender-related predictors of HRQL at 12 months. We observed an interaction between female sex and social support (beta=0.44 [95% confidence interval, 0.01, 0.88]; P=0.047) for the physical limitation subscale of the SAQ. Conclusions-Young women with ACS report significantly poorer HRQL than young men. Gender appears to be more important than sex in predicting long-term HRQL post-ACS. Specific gender-related factors, such as social support, may be amenable to interventions and could improve the HRQL of patients with premature ACS.CIHRHeart and Stroke Foundation of QuebecHeart and Stroke Foundation of Nova ScotiaHeart and Stroke Foundation of AlbertaHeart and Stroke Foundation of OntarioHeart and Stroke Foundation of YukonHeart and Stroke Foundation of British Columbia, CanadaJames McGill Chair at McGill Universit

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

Subsequent Event Risk in Individuals with Established Coronary Heart Disease:Design and Rationale of the GENIUS-CHD Consortium

BACKGROUND: The "GENetIcs of sUbSequent Coronary Heart Disease" (GENIUS-CHD) consortium was established to facilitate discovery and validation of genetic variants and biomarkers for risk of subsequent CHD events, in individuals with established CHD. METHODS: The consortium currently includes 57 studies from 18 countries, recruiting 185,614 participants with either acute coronary syndrome, stable CHD or a mixture of both at baseline. All studies collected biological samples and followed-up study participants prospectively for subsequent events. RESULTS: Enrollment into the individual studies took place between 1985 to present day with duration of follow up ranging from 9 months to 15 years. Within each study, participants with CHD are predominantly of self-reported European descent (38%-100%), mostly male (44%-91%) with mean ages at recruitment ranging from 40 to 75 years. Initial feasibility analyses, using a federated analysis approach, yielded expected associations between age (HR 1.15 95% CI 1.14-1.16) per 5-year increase, male sex (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.13-1.21) and smoking (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.35-1.51) with risk of subsequent CHD death or myocardial infarction, and differing associations with other individual and composite cardiovascular endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: GENIUS-CHD is a global collaboration seeking to elucidate genetic and non-genetic determinants of subsequent event risk in individuals with established CHD, in order to improve residual risk prediction and identify novel drug targets for secondary prevention. Initial analyses demonstrate the feasibility and reliability of a federated analysis approach. The consortium now plans to initiate and test novel hypotheses as well as supporting replication and validation analyses for other investigators

Sex Differences in the Effectiveness of Angiotensin‐Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers, and Sacubitril–Valsartan for the Treatment of Heart Failure

Background PARAGON‐HF (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction) suggested a potential benefit of sacubitril–valsartan in women with preserved ejection fraction. Among patients with heart failure previously treated with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), we studied whether effectiveness of treatment with sacubitril–valsartan compared with ACEI/ARB monotherapy differed between men and women for both preserved and reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results Data were derived from the Truven Health MarketScan Databases between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2018. We included patients with a primary diagnosis of heart failure on treatment with ACEIs, ARBs, or sacubitril–valsartan on the basis of the first prescription after diagnosis. A total of 7181 patients treated with sacubitril–valsartan, 25 408 patients using an ACEI, and 16 177 patients treated with ARBs were included. A total of 790 readmissions or deaths occurred among 7181 patients in the sacubitril–valsartan group and 11 901 events in 41 585 patients treated with an ACEI/ARB. Adjusted for covariates, the hazard ratio (HR) for treatment with sacubitril–valsartan compared with an ACEI or ARB was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68–0.80). The protective effect of sacubitril–valsartan was evident for men and women (women: HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.66–0.86]; P<0.01; men: HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.64–0.79]; P<0.01; P interaction 0.03). A protective effect for both sexes was seen only among those with systolic dysfunction. Conclusions Treatment with sacubitril–valsartan is more effective at reducing death and admission to the hospital for heart failure compared with ACEIs/ARBs similarly among men and women with systolic dysfunction; sex differences in the effectiveness of sacubitril–valsartan in diastolic dysfunction requires further investigation

Treatment Discontinuation and Clinical Events in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Treated with Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors or NPH Insulin as Third-Line Therapy

Objective. To compare dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors with neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, in terms of effectiveness and safety for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) not controlled on metformin and sulfonylureas. Methods. A retrospective cohort study of individuals with DM2 newly dispensed with either DPP-4 inhibitors or NPH as third-line therapy, after metformin and sulfonylurea. Treatment discontinuation, macrovascular outcomes, and hypoglycemia were compared using multivariable Cox regression models, adjusted for sex, age, year of cohort entry, place of residence, hypertension, past history of hypoglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, comorbidities, and number of visits to emergency departments, outpatient physician, and hospitalizations. Results. Treatment discontinuation and hypoglycemia occurred more frequently with NPH than with DPP-4 inhibitor users. In the adjusted Cox model, the use of NPH compared to that of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with a higher risk of discontinuation (HR: 1.33; 95% CI 1.27–1.40) and hypoglycemia (HR: 2.98; 95% CI 2.72–3.28). Risk of cardiovascular events was similar across groups. Conclusions. This real-world analysis suggests that DM2 patients initiating third-line therapy with NPH have poorer control of diabetes when compared to DPP-4 inhibitor initiators

Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis during treatment of granulomatosis with polyangiitis with rituximab in the United States of America: a retrospective cohort study

Abstract Background Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended during ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) induction. We aimed to describe the frequency, persistence, and factors associated with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) use in an adult population sample with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) treated with rituximab (RTX). Methods We identified adults with GPA treated with RTX within the Merative™ Marketscan® Research Databases (2011–2020). TMP-SMX prophylaxis was defined as a $$\ge$$ ≥ 28-day prescription dispensed within a month of starting RTX. We estimated TMP-SMX persistence, allowing prescription refill gaps of 30 days. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression assessed the factors associated with baseline TMP-SMX use and persistence, respectively. Covariates included age, sex, calendar year, insurance type, immunosuppressant use, hospitalization, and co-morbidities. Results Among 1877 RTX-treated GPA patients, the mean age was 50.9, and 54% were female. A minority (n = 426, 23%) received TMP-SMX with a median persistence of 141 (IQR 83–248) days. In multivariable analyses, prophylaxis was associated with prednisone use in the month prior to RTX ( $$\ge$$ ≥ 20 mg/day vs none, OR 3.96; 95% CI 3.0–5.2; 1–19 mg/day vs none, OR 2.63; 95% CI 1.8–3.8), and methotrexate use (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.04–2.1), intensive care (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.4–2.7), and non-intensive care hospitalization (OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.2–2.1) in the 6 months prior to RTX. Female sex (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.5–0.8) was negatively associated with TMP-SMX use. Conclusions TMP-SMX was dispensed to a minority of RTX-treated GPA patients, more often to those on glucocorticoids and with recent hospitalization. Further research is needed to determine the optimal use and duration of TMP-SMX prophylaxis following RTX in AAV

Novel glucose lowering agents are associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular and adverse events in type 2 diabetes: A population based analysis

Background: Recent randomized control trials have described a protective cardiovascular effect of novel glucose lowering drugs in patients at high cardiovascular risk. Whether these second-line agents have similar effects in the general population is unknown. We aimed to compare the risk of major cardiovascular and adverse events in new users of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP- 4i), glucagon-like peptide 1 agonist (GLP-1a), and sulfonylurea in T2DM patients not controlled on metformin therapy. Methods: Retrospective cohort study using the MarketScan database (2011–2015). We selected T2DM individuals who were newly dispensed sulfonylureas, SGLT-2i, DPP-4i, or GLP-1a, as second-line therapy, added to metformin. Cohort entry was defined by the date of the first prescription of the second-line agent. Time to first non-fatal cardiovascular or adverse event was compared using Cox regression models adjusted for confounders. Results: Among 118,341 T2DM patients using metformin (mean age: 56), most were at low cardiovascular risk (4% with a previous cardiovascular or cerebrovascular event). During a median follow-up of 10 months compared with sulfonylureas users, cardiovascular risk was lower in users of SGLT-2i (aHR=0.61; 95% CI: 0.40–0.97), DPP- 4i (aHR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69–0.90) and GLP-1a (aHR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.48–0.89). Serious adverse events were rare but compared with sulfonylurea, the risk was lower in new users of novel glucose-lowering agents. Conclusion: In our analyses, which included patients with and without prior cardiovascular disease, initiating novel glucose-lowering drugs as second-line therapy for T2DM was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular and adverse events than sulfonylurea initiatio