The Cardiomyopathy Registry of the EURObservational Research Programme of the European Society of Cardiology: Baseline data and contemporary management of adult patients with cardiomyopathies

Aims The Cardiomyopathy Registry of the EURObservational Research Programme is a prospective, observational, and multinational registry of consecutive patients with four cardiomyopathy subtypes: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), and restrictive cardiomyopathy (RCM). We report the baseline characteristics and management of adults enrolled in the registry. Methods and results A total of 3208 patients were enrolled by 69 centres in 18 countries [HCM (n = 1739); DCM (n = 1260); ARVC (n = 143); and RCM (n = 66)]. Differences between cardiomyopathy subtypes (P < 0.001) were observed for age at diagnosis, history of familial disease, history of sustained ventricular arrhythmia, use of magnetic resonance imaging or genetic testing, and implantation of defibrillators. When compared with probands, relatives had a lower age at diagnosis (P < 0.001), but a similar rate of symptoms and defibrillators. When compared with the Long-Term phase, patients of the Pilot phase (enrolled in more expert centres) had a more frequent rate of familial disease (P < 0.001), were more frequently diagnosed with a rare underlying disease (P < 0.001), and more frequently implanted with a defibrillator (P = 0.023). Comparing four geographical areas, patients from Southern Europe had a familial disease more frequently (P < 0.001), were more frequently diagnosed in the context of a family screening (P < 0.001), and more frequently diagnosed with a rare underlying disease (P < 0.001). Conclusion By providing contemporary observational data on characteristics and management of patients with cardiomyopathies, the registry provides a platform for the evaluation of guideline implementation. Potential gaps with existing recommendations are discussed as well as some suggestions for improvement of health care provision in Europe. © The Author 2017

Htert Promoter Methylation Status In Peripheral Blood Leukocytes As A Molecular Marker Of Head And Neck Cancer Progression

Cancer cells, including head and neck cancer cell carcinoma (HNSCC), are characterized by an increased telomerase activity. This enzymatic complex is active in approximately 80–90% of all malignancies, and is regulated by various factors, including methylation status of hTERT gene promoter. hTERT methylation pattern has been thoroughly studied so far. It was proved that hTERT is aberrantly methylated in tumor tissue versus healthy counterparts. However, such effect has not yet been investigated in PBLs (peripheral blood leukocytes) of cancer patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the hTERT gene promoter methylation status in blood leukocytes. DNA was extracted from PBL of 92 patients with histologically diagnosed HNSCC and 53 healthy controls. Methylation status of whole hTERT promoter fragment with independent analysis of each 19 CpG sites was performed using bisulfide conversion technique followed by sequencing of PCR products. Not significant (p = 0.0532) differences in the general frequency of hTERT CpG sites methylation were detected between patients and healthy controls. However, it was discovered that some of analyzed positions (CpG islands: 1 [p = 0.0235], 5 [p = 0.0462], 8 [p = 0.0343]) are significantly more often methylated in HNSCC patients than in controls. The opposite finding was observed in case of CpG position 2 (p = 0.0210). Furthermore, closer analysis of single CpG positions revealed differences in methylation status dependent on anatomical site and TNM classification. To conclude, hTERT promoter methylation status (general or single CpG sites) would be considered as a molecular markers of HNSCC diagnostics

Htert Gene Knockdown Enhances Response To Radio- And Chemotherapy In Head And Neck Cancer Cell Lines Through A Dna Damage Pathway Modification

The aim of the study was to analyze the effect of hTERT gene knockdown in HNSCC cells by using novel in vitro models of head and neck cancer (HNSCC), as well as improving its personalized therapy. To obtain the most efficient knockdown siRNA, shRNA-bearing lentiviral vectors were used. The efficiency of hTERT silencing was verified with qPCR, Western blot, and immunofluorescence staining. Subsequently, the type of cell death and DNA repair mechanism induction after hTERT knockdown was assessed with the same methods, followed by flow cytometry. The effect of a combined treatment with hTERT gene knockdown on Double-Strand Breaks levels was also evaluated by flow cytometry. Results showed that the designed siRNAs and shRNAs were effective in hTERT knockdown in HNSCC cells. Depending on a cell line, hTERT knockdown led to a cell cycle arrest either in phase G1 or phase S/G2. Induction of apoptosis after hTERT downregulation with siRNA was observed. Additionally, hTERT targeting with lentiviruses, followed by cytostatics administration, led to induction of apoptosis. Interestingly, an increase in Double-Strand Breaks accompanied by activation of the main DNA repair mechanism, NER, was also observed. Altogether, we conclude that hTERT knockdown significantly contributes to the efficacy of HNSCC treatment

Differences between familial and sporadic dilated cardiomyopathy: ESC EORP Cardiomyopathy & Myocarditis registry

International audienceAimsDilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a complex disease where genetics interplay with extrinsic factors. This study aims to compare the phenotype, management, and outcome of familial DCM (FDCM) and non‐familial (sporadic) DCM (SDCM) across Europe.Methods and resultsPatients with DCM that were enrolled in the prospective ESC EORP Cardiomyopathy & Myocarditis Registry were included. Baseline characteristics, genetic testing, genetic yield, and outcome were analysed comparing FDCM and SDCM; 1260 adult patients were studied (238 FDCM, 707 SDCM, and 315 not disclosed). Patients with FDCM were younger (P < 0.01), had less severe disease phenotype at presentation (P < 0.02), more favourable baseline cardiovascular risk profiles (P ≤ 0.007), and less medication use (P ≤ 0.042). Outcome at 1 year was similar and predicted by NYHA class (HR 0.45; 95% CI [0.25–0.81]) and LVEF per % decrease (HR 1.05; 95% CI [1.02–1.08]. Throughout Europe, patients with FDCM received more genetic testing (47% vs. 8%, P < 0.01) and had higher genetic yield (55% vs. 22%, P < 0.01).ConclusionsWe observed that FDCM and SDCM have significant differences at baseline but similar short‐term prognosis. Whether modification of associated cardiovascular risk factors provide opportunities for treatment remains to be investigated. Our results also show a prevalent role of genetics in FDCM and a non‐marginal yield in SDCM although genetic testing is largely neglected in SDCM. Limited genetic testing and heterogeneity in panels provides a scaffold for improvement of guideline adherence

Differences between familial and sporadic dilated cardiomyopathy: ESC EORP Cardiomyopathy & Myocarditis registry

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a complex disease where genetics interplay with extrinsic factors. This study aims to compare the phenotype, management, and outcome of familial DCM (FDCM) and non-familial (sporadic) DCM (SDCM) across Europe