A validation of the Nottingham Clavicle Score: a clavicle, acromioclavicular joint and sternoclavicular joint–specific patient-reported outcome measure

Background Patients with acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) and sternoclavicular joint (SCJ) injuries and with clavicle fractures are typically younger and more active than those with other shoulder pathologies. We developed the Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS) specifically for this group of patients to improve sensitivity for assessing the outcomes of treatment of these conditions compared with the more commonly used Constant Score (CS) and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS). Materials and methods This was a cohort study in which the preoperative and 6-month postoperative NCS evaluations of outcome in 90 patients were compared with the CS, OSS, Imatani Score (IS), and the EQ-5D scores. Reliability was assessed using the Cronbach α. Reproducibility of the NCS was assessed using the test/retest method. Effect sizes were calculated for each score to assess sensitivity to change. Validity was examined by correlations between the NCS and the CS, OSS, IS, and EQ-5D scores obtained preoperatively and postoperatively. Results Significant correlations were demonstrated preoperatively with the OSS (P = .025) and all subcategories of the EQ-5D (P < .05) and postoperatively with the OSS (P < .001), CS (P = .008), IS (P < .001), and all subcategories of EQ-5D (P < .02). The NCS had the largest effect size (1.92) of the compared scores. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach α = 0.87). Conclusion The NCS has been proven to be a valid, reliable and sensitive outcome measure that accurately measures the level of function and disability in the ACJ, SCJ and clavicle after traumatic injury and in degenerative disease

Lipoprotein‐Associated Phospholipase A2 Activity Is a Marker of Risk But Not a Useful Target for Treatment in Patients With Stable Coronary Heart Disease

Background: We evaluated lipoprotein‐associated phospholipase A2 (Lp‐PLA2) activity in patients with stable coronary heart disease before and during treatment with darapladib, a selective Lp‐PLA2 inhibitor, in relation to outcomes and the effects of darapladib in the STABILITY trial. Methods and Results: Plasma Lp‐PLA2 activity was determined at baseline (n=14 500); at 1 month (n=13 709); serially (n=100) at 3, 6, and 18 months; and at the end of treatment. Adjusted Cox regression models evaluated associations between Lp‐PLA2 activity levels and outcomes. At baseline, the median Lp‐PLA2 level was 172.4 μmol/min per liter (interquartile range 143.1–204.2 μmol/min per liter). Comparing the highest and lowest Lp‐PLA2 quartile groups, the hazard ratios were 1.50 (95% CI 1.23–1.82) for the primary composite end point (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), 1.95 (95% CI 1.29–2.93) for hospitalization for heart failure, 1.42 (1.07–1.89) for cardiovascular death, and 1.37 (1.03–1.81) for myocardial infarction after adjustment for baseline characteristics, standard laboratory variables, and other prognostic biomarkers. Treatment with darapladib led to a ≈65% persistent reduction in median Lp‐PLA2 activity. There were no associations between on‐treatment Lp‐PLA2 activity or changes of Lp‐PLA2 activity and outcomes, and there were no significant interactions between baseline and on‐treatment Lp‐PLA2 activity or changes in Lp‐PLA2 activity levels and the effects of darapladib on outcomes. Conclusions: Although high Lp‐PLA2 activity was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events, pharmacological lowering of Lp‐PLA2 activity by ≈65% did not significantly reduce cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary heart disease, regardless of the baseline level or the magnitude of change of Lp‐PLA2 activity

Large-scale, prospective, observational studies in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: A systematic and critical review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Observational studies, if conducted appropriately, play an important role in the decision-making process providing invaluable information on effectiveness, patient-reported outcomes and costs in a real-world environment. We conducted a systematic review of large-scale, prospective, cohort studies with the aim of (a) summarising design characteristics, the interventions or aspects of the disease studied and the outcomes measured and (b) investigating methodological quality.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We included prospective, cohort studies which included at least 100 adults with psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis. Studies were identified through searches in electronic databases (Pubmed, Medline, Cochrane library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination). Information on study characteristics were extracted and tabulated and quality assessment, using a checklist of 18 questions, was conducted.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Thirty five papers covering 16 cohorts met the inclusion criteria. There were ten treatment-related studies, only two of which provided a comparison between treatments, and six non-treatment studies which examined a number of characteristics of the disease including mortality, morbidity, cost of illness and health-related quality of life. All studies included a clinical outcome measure and 11 included patient-reported outcomes, however only two studies reported information on patient utilities and two on costs. The quality of the assessed studies varied widely. Studies did well on a number of quality assessment questions including having clear objectives, documenting selection criteria, providing a representative sample, defining interventions/characteristics under study, defining and using appropriate outcomes, describing results clearly and using appropriate statistical tests. The quality assessment criteria least adhered to involved questions regarding sample size calculations, describing potential selection bias, defining and adjusting for confounders and losses to follow-up, and defining and describing a comparison group.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The review highlights the need for well designed prospective observational studies on the effectiveness, patient-reported outcomes and economic impact of treatment regimes for patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in a real-world environment.</p

Expert consensus document: A 'diamond' approach to personalized treatment of angina.

In clinical guidelines, drugs for symptomatic angina are classified as being first choice (β-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, short-acting nitrates) or second choice (ivabradine, nicorandil, ranolazine, trimetazidine), with the recommendation to reserve second-choice medications for patients who have contraindications to first-choice agents, do not tolerate them, or remain symptomatic. No direct comparisons between first-choice and second-choice treatments have demonstrated the superiority of one group of drugs over the other. Meta-analyses show that all antianginal drugs have similar efficacy in reducing symptoms, but provide no evidence for improvement in survival. The newer, second-choice drugs have more evidence-based clinical data that are more contemporary than is available for traditional first-choice drugs. Considering some drugs, but not others, to be first choice is, therefore, difficult. Moreover, double or triple therapy is often needed to control angina. Patients with angina can have several comorbidities, and symptoms can result from various underlying pathophysiologies. Some agents, in addition to having antianginal effects, have properties that could be useful depending on the comorbidities present and the mechanisms of angina, but the guidelines do not provide recommendations on the optimal combinations of drugs. In this Consensus Statement, we propose an individualized approach to angina treatment, which takes into consideration the patient, their comorbidities, and the underlying mechanism of disease

Genetic Sharing with Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors and Diabetes Reveals Novel Bone Mineral Density Loci.

Bone Mineral Density (BMD) is a highly heritable trait, but genome-wide association studies have identified few genetic risk factors. Epidemiological studies suggest associations between BMD and several traits and diseases, but the nature of the suggestive comorbidity is still unknown. We used a novel genetic pleiotropy-informed conditional False Discovery Rate (FDR) method to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with BMD by leveraging cardiovascular disease (CVD) associated disorders and metabolic traits. By conditioning on SNPs associated with the CVD-related phenotypes, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, high density lipoprotein, low density lipoprotein, triglycerides and waist hip ratio, we identified 65 novel independent BMD loci (26 with femoral neck BMD and 47 with lumbar spine BMD) at conditional FDR < 0.01. Many of the loci were confirmed in genetic expression studies. Genes validated at the mRNA levels were characteristic for the osteoblast/osteocyte lineage, Wnt signaling pathway and bone metabolism. The results provide new insight into genetic mechanisms of variability in BMD, and a better understanding of the genetic underpinnings of clinical comorbidity

New genetic loci link adipose and insulin biology to body fat distribution.

Body fat distribution is a heritable trait and a well-established predictor of adverse metabolic outcomes, independent of overall adiposity. To increase our understanding of the genetic basis of body fat distribution and its molecular links to cardiometabolic traits, here we conduct genome-wide association meta-analyses of traits related to waist and hip circumferences in up to 224,459 individuals. We identify 49 loci (33 new) associated with waist-to-hip ratio adjusted for body mass index (BMI), and an additional 19 loci newly associated with related waist and hip circumference measures (P < 5 × 10(-8)). In total, 20 of the 49 waist-to-hip ratio adjusted for BMI loci show significant sexual dimorphism, 19 of which display a stronger effect in women. The identified loci were enriched for genes expressed in adipose tissue and for putative regulatory elements in adipocytes. Pathway analyses implicated adipogenesis, angiogenesis, transcriptional regulation and insulin resistance as processes affecting fat distribution, providing insight into potential pathophysiological mechanisms

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks. DESIGN: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). PARTICIPANTS: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk. RESULTS: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)