Clozapine-Induced Pericarditis

Objective: To report a case of a patient treated with clozapine who developed pericarditis with pericardial effusion that resolved when the drug was discontinued. Method: Case report of a 21-year-old man with psychotic disorder that had been stable on clozapine therapy for five months (after failure of atypical antipsyhotic agents) presented to the emergency department complaining of chest pain and progressive shortness of breath that had lasted for a few days. Echocardiography showed a pericardial effusion suggestive of a cardiac tamponade, and the fluid was removed by pericardiocentesis. All other possible causes of the pericardial effusion were ruled out and clozapine was suspected as the most likely explanation. Clozapine was discontinued and the patient’s symptoms improved markedly. Discussion: According to the Naranjo probability scale, clozapine is a probable cause of pericarditis. Although clozapine is a known cause of myocarditis and cardiomyopathy, there are only several reports in the literature describing clozapine-induced pericarditis and pericardial effusion. In our patient, the pericardial effusion cleared within several days following clozapine discontinuation. Conclusion: There have been only a few cases of clozapine-induced pericarditis reported in the literature, however this adverse effect of clozapine can occur, as this case report clearly  demonstrates. Cardiac adverse effects of clozapine are potentially life threatening, hence early recognition is essential to prevent serious outcomes.Key words: Clozapine; Pericarditis; Pericardial effusion; Adverse reactio

Relapse in resected lung cancer revisited: does intensified follow up really matter? A prospective study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>beside the well known predominance of distant vs. loco-regional relapse, several aspects of the relapse pattern still have not been fully elucidated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>prospective, controlled study on 88 patients operated for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a 15 months period. Stage IIIA existed in 35(39.8%) patients, whilst stages IB, IIA and IIB existed in 10.2%, 4.5% and 45.5% patients respectively. Inclusion criteria: stage I-IIIA, complete resection, systematic lymphadenectomy with at least 6 lymph node groups examined, no neoadjuvant therapy, exact data of all aspects of relapse, exact data about the outcome of the treatment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>postoperative lung cancer relapse occurred in 50(56.8%) patients. Locoregional, distant and both types of relapse occurred in 26%, 70% and 4% patients respectively. Postoperative cancer relapse occurred in 27/35(77.1%) pts. in the stage IIIA and in 21/40(52.55) pts in the stage IIB. In none of four pts. in the stage IIA cancer relapse occurred, unlike 22.22% pts. with relapse in the stage IB. The mean disease free interval in the analysed group was 34.38 ± 3.26 months.</p> <p>The mean local relapse free and distant relapse free intervals were 55 ± 3.32 and 41.62 ± 3.47 months respectively Among 30 pts. with the relapse onset inside the first 12 month after the lung resection, in 20(66.6%) pts. either T3 tumours or N2 lesions existed. In patients with N0, N1 and N2 lesions, cancer relapse occurred in 30%, 55.6% and 70.8% patients respectively</p> <p>Radiographic aspect T stage, N stage and extent of resection were found as significant in terms of survival. Related to the relapse occurrence, although radiographic aspect and extent of resection followed the same trend as in the survival analysis, only T stage and N stage were found as significant in the same sense as for survival. On multivariate, only T and N stage were found as significant in terms of survival.</p> <p>Specific oncological treatment of relapse was possible in 27/50(54%) patients.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>the intensified follow up did not increase either the proportion of patients detected with asymptomatic relapse or the number of patients with specific oncological treatment of relapse.</p

Clinical and molecular practice of European thoracic pathology laboratories during the COVID-19 pandemic. The past and the near future.

This study evaluated the consequences in Europe of the COVID-19 outbreak on pathology laboratories orientated toward the diagnosis of thoracic diseases. A survey was sent to 71 pathology laboratories from 21 European countries. The questionnaire requested information concerning the organization of biosafety, the clinical and molecular pathology, the biobanking, the workload, the associated research into COVID-19, and the organization of education and training during the COVID-19 crisis, from 15 March to 31 May 2020, compared with the same period in 2019. Questionnaires were returned from 53/71 (75%) laboratories from 18 European countries. The biosafety procedures were heterogeneous. The workload in clinical and molecular pathology decreased dramatically by 31% (range, 3%-55%) and 26% (range, 7%-62%), respectively. According to the professional category, between 28% and 41% of the staff members were not present in the laboratories but did teleworking. A total of 70% of the laboratories developed virtual meetings for the training of residents and junior pathologists. During the period of study, none of the staff members with confirmed COVID-19 became infected as a result of handling samples. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong impact on most of the European pathology laboratories included in this study. Urgent implementation of several changes to the organization of most of these laboratories, notably to better harmonize biosafety procedures, was noted at the onset of the pandemic and maintained in the event of a new wave of infection occurring in Europe

Association between loop diuretic dose changes and outcomes in chronic heart failure: observations from the ESC-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

[Abstract] Aims. Guidelines recommend down-titration of loop diuretics (LD) once euvolaemia is achieved. In outpatients with heart failure (HF), we investigated LD dose changes in daily cardiology practice, agreement with guideline recommendations, predictors of successful LD down-titration and association between dose changes and outcomes. Methods and results. We included 8130 HF patients from the ESC-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry. Among patients who had dose decreased, successful decrease was defined as the decrease not followed by death, HF hospitalization, New York Heart Association class deterioration, or subsequent increase in LD dose. Mean age was 66±13 years, 71% men, 62% HF with reduced ejection fraction, 19% HF with mid-range ejection fraction, 19% HF with preserved ejection fraction. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] LD dose was 40 (25–80) mg. LD dose was increased in 16%, decreased in 8.3% and unchanged in 76%. Median (IQR) follow-up was 372 (363–419) days. Diuretic dose increase (vs. no change) was associated with HF death [hazard ratio (HR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12–2.08; P = 0.008] and nominally with cardiovascular death (HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.96–1.63; P = 0.103). Decrease of diuretic dose (vs. no change) was associated with nominally lower HF (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33–1.07; P = 0.083) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.62 95% CI 0.38–1.00; P = 0.052). Among patients who had LD dose decreased, systolic blood pressure [odds ratio (OR) 1.11 per 10 mmHg increase, 95% CI 1.01–1.22; P = 0.032], and absence of (i) sleep apnoea (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09–0.69; P = 0.008), (ii) peripheral congestion (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29–0.80; P = 0.005), and (iii) moderate/severe mitral regurgitation (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37–0.87; P = 0.008) were independently associated with successful decrease. Conclusion. Diuretic dose was unchanged in 76% and decreased in 8.3% of outpatients with chronic HF. LD dose increase was associated with worse outcomes, while the LD dose decrease group showed a trend for better outcomes compared with the no-change group. Higher systolic blood pressure, and absence of (i) sleep apnoea, (ii) peripheral congestion, and (iii) moderate/severe mitral regurgitation were independently associated with successful dose decrease

Sex- and age-related differences in the management and outcomes of chronic heart failure: an analysis of patients from the ESC HFA EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

Aims: This study aimed to assess age- and sex-related differences in management and 1-year risk for all-cause mortality and hospitalization in chronic heart failure (HF) patients. Methods and results: Of 16 354 patients included in the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry, 9428 chronic HF patients were analysed [median age: 66 years; 28.5% women; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 37%]. Rates of use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) were high (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: 85.7%, 88.7% and 58.8%, respectively). Crude GDMT utilization rates were lower in women than in men (all differences: P\ua0 64 0.001), and GDMT use became lower with ageing in both sexes, at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT prescription; however, age >75 years was a significant predictor of GDMT underutilization. Rates of all-cause mortality were lower in women than in men (7.1% vs. 8.7%; P\ua0=\ua00.015), as were rates of all-cause hospitalization (21.9% vs. 27.3%; P\ua075 years. Conclusions: There was a decline in GDMT use with advanced age in both sexes. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT or adverse outcomes. However, age >75 years independently predicted lower GDMT use and higher all-cause mortality in patients with LVEF 6445%

Mendelian randomization and mediation analysis of leukocyte telomere length and risk of lung and head and neck cancers

Background: Evidence from observational studies of telomere length (TL) has been conflicting regarding its direction of association with cancer risk. We investigated the causal relevance of TL for lung and head and neck cancers using Mendelian Randomization (MR) and mediation analyses. Methods: We developed a novel genetic instrument for TL in chromosome 5p15.33, using variants identified through deep-sequencing, that were genotyped in 2051 cancer-free subjects. Next, we conducted an MR analysis of lung (16 396 cases, 13 013 controls) and head and neck cancer (4415 cases, 5013 controls) using eight genetic instruments for TL. Lastly, the 5p15.33 instrument and distinct 5p15.33 lung cancer risk loci were evaluated using two-sample mediation analysis, to quantify their direct and indirect, telomere-mediated, effects. Results: The multi-allelic 5p15.33 instrument explained 1.49-2.00% of TL variation in our data (p = 2.6 × 10-9). The MR analysis estimated that a 1000 base-pair increase in TL increases risk of lung cancer [odds ratio (OR) = 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20-1.65] and lung adenocarcinoma (OR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.51-2.22), but not squamous lung carcinoma (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.83-1.29) or head and neck cancers (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.70-1.05). Mediation analysis of the 5p15.33 instrument indicated an absence of direct effects on lung cancer risk (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.95-1.04). Analysis of distinct 5p15.33 susceptibility variants estimated that TL mediates up to 40% of the observed associations with lung cancer risk. Conclusions: Our findings support a causal role for long telomeres in lung cancer aetiology, particularly for adenocarcinoma, and demonstrate that telomere maintenance partially mediates the lung cancer susceptibility conferred by 5p15.33 loci

Clinical and molecular practice of European thoracic pathology laboratories during the COVID-19 pandemic The past and the near future

BackgroundThis study evaluated the consequences in Europe of the COVID-19 outbreak on pathology laboratories orientated toward the diagnosis of thoracic diseases.Materials and methodsA survey was sent to 71 pathology laboratories from 21 European countries. The questionnaire requested information concerning the organization of biosafety, the clinical and molecular pathology, the biobanking, the workload, the associated research into COVID-19, and the organization of education and training during the COVID-19 crisis, from 15 March to 31 May 2020, compared with the same period in 2019.ResultsQuestionnaires were returned from 53/71 (75%) laboratories from 18 European countries. The biosafety procedures were heterogeneous. The workload in clinical and molecular pathology decreased dramatically by 31% (range, 3%-55%) and 26% (range, 7%-62%), respectively. According to the professional category, between 28% and 41% of the staff members were not present in the laboratories but did teleworking. A total of 70% of the laboratories developed virtual meetings for the training of residents and junior pathologists. During the period of study, none of the staff members with confirmed COVID-19 became infected as a result of handling samples.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong impact on most of the European pathology laboratories included in this study. Urgent implementation of several changes to the organization of most of these laboratories, notably to better harmonize biosafety procedures, was noted at the onset of the pandemic and maintained in the event of a new wave of infection occurring in Europe

Mendelian Randomization and mediation analysis of leukocyte telomere length and risk of lung and head and neck cancers

L.K. is a fellow in the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Strategic Training in Advanced Genetic Epidemiology (STAGE) programme and is supported by the CIHR Doctoral Research Award from the Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarships (GSD-137441). Transdisciplinary Research for Cancer in Lung (TRICL) of the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO) was supported by the National Institutes of Health (U19-CA148127, CA148127S1). Genotyping for the TRICL-ILCCO OncoArray was supported by in-kind genotyping at Centre for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR) (26820120008i-0–6800068-1). Genotyping for the Head and Neck Cancer OncoArray performed at CIDR was funded by the US National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) grant 1X01HG007780–0. CAPUA study was supported by FIS-FEDER/Spain grant numbers FIS-01/310, FIS-PI03–0365 and FIS-07-BI060604, FICYT/Asturias grant numbers FICYT PB02–67 and FICYT IB09–133, and the University Institute of Oncology (IUOPA), of the University of Oviedo and the Ciber de Epidemiologia y Salud Pública. CIBERESP, SPAIN. The work performed in the CARET study was supported by the National Institute of Health (NIH)/National Cancer Institute (NCI): UM1 CA167462 (PI: Goodman), National Institute of Health UO1-CA6367307 (PIs Omen, Goodman); National Institute of Health R01 CA111703 (PI Chen), National Institute of Health 5R01 CA151989 (PI Doherty). The Liverpool Lung Project is supported by the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation. The Harvard Lung Cancer Study was supported by the NIH (National Cancer Institute) grants CA092824, CA090578 and CA074386. The Multiethnic Cohort Study was partially supported by NIH Grants CA164973, CA033619, CA63464 and CA148127. The work performed in MSH-PMH study was supported by the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (020214), Ontario Institute of Cancer and Cancer Care Ontario Chair Award to R.J.H. and G.L. and the Alan Brown Chair and Lusi Wong Programs at the Princess Margaret Hospital Foundation. The Norway study was supported by Norwegian Cancer Society, Norwegian Research Council. The work in TLC study has been supported in part the James & Esther King Biomedical Research Program (09KN-15), National Institutes of Health Specialized Programs of Research Excellence (SPORE) Grant (P50 CA119997) and by a Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG) at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, an NCI designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (grant number P30-CA76292). The dataset(s) used for the analyses described were obtained from Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s BioVU, which is supported by institutional funding and by the Vanderbilt CTSA grant UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH. Dr Melinda Aldrich is supported by the by NIH/National Cancer Institute 5K07CA172294. The Copenhagen General Population Study (CGPS) was supported by the Chief Physician Johan Boserup and Lise Boserup Fund, the Danish Medical Research Council and Herlev Hospital. The NELCS study: Grant Number P20RR018787 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Kentucky Lung Cancer Research Initiative (KLCRI) was supported by the Department of Defense (Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Program) under award number: 10153006 (W81XWH-11–1-0781). Views and opinions of, and endorsements by the author(s) do not reflect those of the US Army or the Department of Defense. This research was also supported by unrestricted infrastructure funds from the UK Center for Clinical and Translational Science, NIH grant UL1TR000117 and Markey Cancer Center NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (P30 CA177558) Shared Resource Facilities: Cancer Research Informatics, Biospecimen and Tissue Procurement, and Biostatistics and Bioinformatics. The research undertaken by M.D.T., L.V.W. and M.S.A. was partly funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. M.D.T. holds a Medical Research Council Senior Clinical Fellowship (G0902313). The Tampa study was funded by Public Health Service grants P01-CA68384 and R01-DE13158 from the National Institutes of Health. The University of Pittsburgh head and neck cancer case–control study is supported by US National Institutes of Health grants P50 CA097190 and P30 CA047904. The Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Study (CHANCE) was supported by the National Cancer Institute (R01CA90731). The Head and Neck Genome Project (GENCAPO) was supported by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP; grants 04/12054–9 and 10/51168–0). The authors thank all the members of the GENCAPO team. This publication presents data from the Head and Neck 5000 study. The study was a component of independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (RP-PG-0707–10034). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Human papillomavirus (HPV) serology was supported by a Cancer Research UK Programme Grant, the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme (grant number: C18281/A19169). The Alcohol-Related Cancers and Genetic Susceptibility Study in Europe (ARCAGE) was funded by the European Commission’s fifth framework programme (QLK1– 2001-00182), the Italian Association for Cancer Research, Compagnia di San Paolo/FIRMS, Region Piemonte and Padova University (CPDA057222). The Rome Study was supported by the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC) awards IG 2011 10491 and IG 2013 14220 to S.B. and by Fondazione Veronesi to S.B. The IARC Latin American study was funded by the European Commission INCO-DC programme (IC18-CT97–0222), with additional funding from Fondo para la Investigación Científica y Tecnológica (Argentina) and the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (01/01768–2). The IARC Central Europe study was supported by the European Commission’s INCO-COPERNICUS Program (IC15-CT98–0332), US NIH/National Cancer Institute grant CA92039 and World Cancer Research Foundation grant WCRF 99A28. The IARC Oral Cancer Multicenter study was funded by grant S06 96 202489 05F02 from Europe against Cancer; grants FIS 97/0024, FIS 97/0662 and BAE 01/5013 from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias, Spain; the UICC Yamagiwa-Yoshida Memorial International Cancer Study; the National Cancer Institute of Canada; Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro; and the Pan-American Health Organization. Coordination of the EPIC study is financially supported by the European Commission (DG SANCO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer.Peer reviewedPostprin

Integrative and comparative genomic analyses identify clinically relevant pulmonary carcinoid groups and unveil the supra-carcinoids

International audienceThe worldwide incidence of pulmonary carcinoids is increasing, but little is known about their molecular characteristics. Through machine learning and multi-omics factor analysis, we compare and contrast the genomic profiles of 116 pulmonary carcinoids (including 35 atypical), 75 large-cell neuroendocrine carcinomas (LCNEC), and 66 small-cell lung cancers. Here we report that the integrative analyses on 257 lung neuroendocrine neoplasms stratify atypical carcinoids into two prognostic groups with a 10-year overall survival of 88% and 27%, respectively. We identify therapeutically relevant molecular groups of pulmonary car-cinoids, suggesting DLL3 and the immune system as candidate therapeutic targets; we confirm the value of OTP expression levels for the prognosis and diagnosis of these diseases, and we unveil the group of supra-carcinoids. This group comprises samples with carcinoid-like morphology yet the molecular and clinical features of the deadly LCNEC, further supporting the previously proposed molecular link between the low-and high-grade lung neuroendocrine neoplasms