Effect of intranasally administered insulin on cerebral blood flow and perfusion:a randomized experiment in young and older adults

Pathophysiology, epidemiology and therapy of agein

Visit-to-visit lipid variability: clinical significance, effects of lipid-lowering treatment, and (pharmaco)genetics

In recent years, visit-to-visit variability of serum lipids has been linked to both clinical outcomes and surrogate markers for vascular disease. In this article, we present an overview of the current evidence connecting this intraindividual variability to these outcome measures, discuss its interplay with lipid-lowering treatment, and describe the literature regarding genetic factors of possible interest. In addition, we undertook an explorative genome-wide association analysis on visit-to-visit variability of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, examining additive effects in 2530 participants from the placebo arm of the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk trial. While we identified suggestive associations (P < 1 × 10−6) at 3 different loci (KIAA0391, amiloride-sensitive cation channel 1 neuronal [ACCN1], and Dickkopf WNT signaling pathway inhibitor 3 [DKK3]), previously published data from the genome-wide association study literature did not suggest plausible mechanistic pathways. Given the large degree of both clinical and methodological heterogeneity in the literature, additional research is needed to harmonize visit-to-visit variability parameters across studies and to definitively assess the possible role of (pharmaco)genetic factors

A potential harmful effect of dexamethasone in non-severe COVID-19:results from the COPPER-pilot study

This study suggests caution when prescribing systemic corticosteroids to patients with #COVID19 who show mild-to-moderate pulmonary symptoms because a harmful effect cannot be excluded https://bit.ly/3P4nOjQ

Natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in acute heart failure:a pragmatic randomized trial

Measurement of natriuresis has been suggested as a reliable, easily obtainable biomarker for assessment of the response to diuretic treatment in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). Here, to assess whether natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in patients with AHF improves natriuresis and clinical outcomes, we conducted the pragmatic, open-label Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure trial, in which 310 patients (45% female) with AHF requiring treatment with intravenous loop diuretics were randomly assigned to natriuresis-guided therapy or standard of care (SOC). In the natriuresis-guided arm, natriuresis was determined at set timepoints, prompting treatment intensification if spot urinary sodium levels were &lt;70 mmol l -1. The dual primary endpoints were 24 h urinary sodium excretion and a combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or adjudicated heart failure rehospitalization at 180 days. The first primary endpoint was met, as natriuresis in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms was 409 ± 178 mmol arm versus 345 ± 202 mmol, respectively (P = 0.0061). However, there were no significant differences between the two arms for the combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or first heart failure rehospitalization, which occurred in 46 (31%) and 50 (31%) of patients in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.62-1.38], P = 0.6980). These findings suggest that natriuresis-guided therapy could be a first step towards personalized treatment of AHF. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04606927 . </p

Natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in acute heart failure:a pragmatic randomized trial

Measurement of natriuresis has been suggested as a reliable, easily obtainable biomarker for assessment of the response to diuretic treatment in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). Here, to assess whether natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in patients with AHF improves natriuresis and clinical outcomes, we conducted the pragmatic, open-label Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure trial, in which 310 patients (45% female) with AHF requiring treatment with intravenous loop diuretics were randomly assigned to natriuresis-guided therapy or standard of care (SOC). In the natriuresis-guided arm, natriuresis was determined at set timepoints, prompting treatment intensification if spot urinary sodium levels were &lt;70 mmol l -1. The dual primary endpoints were 24 h urinary sodium excretion and a combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or adjudicated heart failure rehospitalization at 180 days. The first primary endpoint was met, as natriuresis in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms was 409 ± 178 mmol arm versus 345 ± 202 mmol, respectively (P = 0.0061). However, there were no significant differences between the two arms for the combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or first heart failure rehospitalization, which occurred in 46 (31%) and 50 (31%) of patients in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.62-1.38], P = 0.6980). These findings suggest that natriuresis-guided therapy could be a first step towards personalized treatment of AHF. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04606927 . </p

Natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in acute heart failure:a pragmatic randomized trial

Measurement of natriuresis has been suggested as a reliable, easily obtainable biomarker for assessment of the response to diuretic treatment in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). Here, to assess whether natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in patients with AHF improves natriuresis and clinical outcomes, we conducted the pragmatic, open-label Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure trial, in which 310 patients (45% female) with AHF requiring treatment with intravenous loop diuretics were randomly assigned to natriuresis-guided therapy or standard of care (SOC). In the natriuresis-guided arm, natriuresis was determined at set timepoints, prompting treatment intensification if spot urinary sodium levels were &lt;70 mmol l -1. The dual primary endpoints were 24 h urinary sodium excretion and a combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or adjudicated heart failure rehospitalization at 180 days. The first primary endpoint was met, as natriuresis in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms was 409 ± 178 mmol arm versus 345 ± 202 mmol, respectively (P = 0.0061). However, there were no significant differences between the two arms for the combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or first heart failure rehospitalization, which occurred in 46 (31%) and 50 (31%) of patients in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.62-1.38], P = 0.6980). These findings suggest that natriuresis-guided therapy could be a first step towards personalized treatment of AHF. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04606927 . </p

Natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in acute heart failure:a pragmatic randomized trial

Measurement of natriuresis has been suggested as a reliable, easily obtainable biomarker for assessment of the response to diuretic treatment in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). Here, to assess whether natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in patients with AHF improves natriuresis and clinical outcomes, we conducted the pragmatic, open-label Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure trial, in which 310 patients (45% female) with AHF requiring treatment with intravenous loop diuretics were randomly assigned to natriuresis-guided therapy or standard of care (SOC). In the natriuresis-guided arm, natriuresis was determined at set timepoints, prompting treatment intensification if spot urinary sodium levels were &lt;70 mmol l -1. The dual primary endpoints were 24 h urinary sodium excretion and a combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or adjudicated heart failure rehospitalization at 180 days. The first primary endpoint was met, as natriuresis in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms was 409 ± 178 mmol arm versus 345 ± 202 mmol, respectively (P = 0.0061). However, there were no significant differences between the two arms for the combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or first heart failure rehospitalization, which occurred in 46 (31%) and 50 (31%) of patients in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.62-1.38], P = 0.6980). These findings suggest that natriuresis-guided therapy could be a first step towards personalized treatment of AHF. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04606927 . </p

Natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in acute heart failure:a pragmatic randomized trial

Measurement of natriuresis has been suggested as a reliable, easily obtainable biomarker for assessment of the response to diuretic treatment in patients with acute heart failure (AHF). Here, to assess whether natriuresis-guided diuretic therapy in patients with AHF improves natriuresis and clinical outcomes, we conducted the pragmatic, open-label Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure trial, in which 310 patients (45% female) with AHF requiring treatment with intravenous loop diuretics were randomly assigned to natriuresis-guided therapy or standard of care (SOC). In the natriuresis-guided arm, natriuresis was determined at set timepoints, prompting treatment intensification if spot urinary sodium levels were &lt;70 mmol l -1. The dual primary endpoints were 24 h urinary sodium excretion and a combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or adjudicated heart failure rehospitalization at 180 days. The first primary endpoint was met, as natriuresis in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms was 409 ± 178 mmol arm versus 345 ± 202 mmol, respectively (P = 0.0061). However, there were no significant differences between the two arms for the combined endpoint of time to all-cause mortality or first heart failure rehospitalization, which occurred in 46 (31%) and 50 (31%) of patients in the natriuresis-guided and SOC arms, respectively (hazard ratio 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.62-1.38], P = 0.6980). These findings suggest that natriuresis-guided therapy could be a first step towards personalized treatment of AHF. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04606927 . </p

Replication of LDL SWAs hits in PROSPER/PHASE as validation for future (pharmaco)genetic analyses

&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Background:&lt;/b&gt; The PHArmacogenetic study of Statins in the Elderly at risk (PHASE) is a genome wide association study in the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at risk for vascular disease (PROSPER) that investigates the genetic variation responsible for the individual variation in drug response to pravastatin. Statins lower LDL-cholesterol in general by 30%, however not in all subjects. Moreover, clinical response is highly variable and adverse effects occur in a minority of patients. In this report we first describe the rationale of the PROSPER/PHASE project and second show that the PROSPER/PHASE study can be used to study pharmacogenetics in the elderly.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Methods:&lt;/b&gt; The genome wide association study (GWAS) was conducted using the Illumina 660K-Quad beadchips following manufacturer's instructions. After a stringent quality control 557,192 SNPs in 5,244 subjects were available for analysis. To maximize the availability of genetic data and coverage of the genome, imputation up to 2.5 million autosomal CEPH HapMap SNPs was performed with MACH imputation software. The GWAS for LDL-cholesterol is assessed with an additive linear regression model in PROBABEL software, adjusted for age, sex, and country of origin to account for population stratification.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Results:&lt;/b&gt; Forty-two SNPs reached the GWAS significant threshold of p = 5.0e-08 in 5 genomic loci (APOE/APOC1; LDLR; FADS2/FEN1; HMGCR; PSRC1/CELSR5). The top SNP (rs445925, chromosome 19) with a p-value of p = 2.8e-30 is located within the APOC1 gene and near the APOE gene. The second top SNP (rs6511720, chromosome 19) with a p-value of p = 5.22e-15 is located within the LDLR gene. All 5 genomic loci were previously associated with LDL-cholesterol levels, no novel loci were identified. Replication in WOSCOPS and CARE confirmed our results.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Conclusion:&lt;/b&gt; With the GWAS in the PROSPER/PHASE study we confirm the previously found genetic associations with LDL-cholesterol levels. With this proof-of-principle study we show that the PROSPER/PHASE study can be used to investigate genetic associations in a similar way to population based studies. The next step of the PROSPER/PHASE study is to identify the genetic variation responsible for the variation in LDL-cholesterol lowering in response to statin treatment in collaboration with other large trials.&lt;/p&gt

Factors associated with health status and exacerbations in COPD maintenance therapy with dry powder inhalers

Funding Information: J.K. reports grants, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, GSK and Boehringer Ingelheim; grants and personal fees from Chiesi Pharmaceuticals and TEVA; grants from Mundipharma; personal fees from MSD and COVIS Pharma; and also holds 72.5% of shares in the General Practitioners Research Institute. H.W. has received grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, which is the financial and scientific partner of GPRI for the submitted study, and from AstraZeneca, Novartis and Chiesi for scientific projects in the area of COPD/asthma. S.B.-A. has received grants from TEVA, and personal fees from TEVA, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, GSK, Sanofi and Mylan. J.C.d.S. reports or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bial, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Medinfar, Mundipharma and Sanofi. B.C. received honorarium from GSK and Sanofi. J.v.C., L.D., I.v.G.-P., I.v.d.H., Y.J., M.K., B.M., K.S., N.S., M.H., B.M. and M.T.L. were employed by General Practitioners Research Institute (GPRI) at the time of the study. In the past three years (2019–2021), GPRI conducted investigator- and sponsor-initiated research funded by non-commercial organizations, academic institutes, and pharmaceutical companies (including AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GSK, Mundipharma, Novartis, and Teva). R.D. has received grants and personal fees from TEVA, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, GSK, Chiesi, Focus Care, and Glenmark. R.G. has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, GSK and Chiesi. E.D. holds 27.5% of shares in the General Practitioners Research Institute. M.G.P. receives grants from AstraZeneca, GSK and Boehringer Ingelheim. A.G. and A.d.l.H. are employees of Boehringer Ingelheim. F.L. received grants and personal fees from GSK, personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Menarini International, Novartis, Orion, and Trudell International, outside the submitted work. T.M. is an Assoicate Editor at npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine. J.M. received grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, during the conduct of the study; and grants from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Novartis, and GSK, outside the submitted work. D.P. reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Mylan, Novartis, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi Genzyme, Theravance and Zentiva (Sanofi Generics); grants from the British Lung Foundation, Respiratory Effectiveness Group, UK National Health Service, and AKL Research and Development Ltd; personal fees from Cipla, GlaxoSmithKline, Kyorin, Merck, Mundipharma, Airway Vista Secretariat, EPG Communication Holdings Ltd, FIECON Ltd, Fieldwork International, OM Pharma SA, PeerVoice, Phadia AB, Spirosure Inc, Strategic North Limited, Synapse Research Management Partners S.L., Talos Health Solutions, and WebMD Global LLC; non-financial support from Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme and Health Technology Assessment; stock/stock options from AKL Research and Development Ltd, which produces phytopharmaceuticals; owns 74% of the social enterprise Optimum Patient Care Ltd (Australia and UK) and 92.61% of Observational and Pragmatic Research Institute Pte Ltd (Singapore); and 5% shareholding in Timestamp, which develops adherence monitoring technology. M.R.-R. receives grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and GSK; and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Menarini, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, TEVA and BIAL. I.T. reports grants and personal fees from GSK, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Menarini, Novartis, Chiesi and Elpen. O.U. reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edmond Pharma, Chiesi and GSK; grants from Edmond Pharma; and personal fees from Napp, Mundipharma, Sandoz, Takeda, Cipla, COVIS, Novartis, Mereobiopharma, Orion, and Menarini. S.B.-A. and T.M. are Associate Editors at npj Primary Care Respiratory Medicine, and I.T. is Editor in Chief. These authors were not involved in the journal’s review of, or decisions related to, this manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD