Junior Recital, Eric Liverman, trumpet

The presentation of this junior recital will fulfill in part the requirements for the Bachelor of Music degree in Music Education. Eric Liverman studies trumpet with Kevin Maloney and Rex Richardson

Coronary heart disease and mortality following a breast cancer diagnosis

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality for breast cancer survivors, yet the joint effect of adverse cardiovascular health (CVH) and cardiotoxic cancer treatments on post-treatment CHD and death has not been quantified. METHODS: We conducted statistical and machine learning approaches to evaluate 10-year risk of these outcomes among 1934 women diagnosed with breast cancer during 2006 and 2007. Overall CVH scores were classified as poor, intermediate, or ideal for 5 factors, smoking, body mass index, blood pressure, glucose/hemoglobin A1c, and cholesterol from clinical data within 5 years prior to the breast cancer diagnosis. The receipt of potentially cardiotoxic breast cancer treatments was indicated if the patient received anthracyclines or hormone therapies. We modeled the outcomes of post-cancer diagnosis CHD and death, respectively. RESULTS: Results of these approaches indicated that the joint effect of poor CVH and receipt of cardiotoxic treatments on CHD (75.9%) and death (39.5%) was significantly higher than their independent effects [poor CVH (55.9%) and cardiotoxic treatments (43.6%) for CHD, and poor CVH (29.4%) and cardiotoxic treatments (35.8%) for death]. CONCLUSIONS: Better CVH appears to be protective against the development of CHD even among women who had received potentially cardiotoxic treatments. This study determined the extent to which attainment of ideal CVH is important not only for CHD and mortality outcomes among women diagnosed with breast cancer

The Utility of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring for Diagnosing White Coat Hypertension in Older Adults

The beneficial effect of antihypertensive medication on reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events is supported by data from randomized controlled trials of older adults with hypertension. However, in clinical practice, overtreatment of hypertension in older adults may lead to side effects and an increased risk of falls. The diagnosis and treatment of hypertension is primarily based on blood pressure measurements obtained in the clinic setting. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) complements clinic blood pressure by measuring blood pressure in the out-of-clinic setting. ABPM can be used to identify white coat hypertension, defined as elevated clinic blood pressure and non-elevated ambulatory blood pressure. White coat hypertension is common in older adults but does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of CVD events among this population. Herein, we review the current literature on ABPM in the diagnoses of white coat hypertension in older adults, including its potential role in preventing overtreatment

Is Isolated Nocturnal Hypertension A Reproducible Phenotype?

BACKGROUND: Isolated nocturnal hypertension (INH), defined as nocturnal without daytime hypertension on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM), has been observed to be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and mortality. The aim of this study was to determine the short-term reproducibility of INH. METHODS: The Improving the Detection of Hypertension Study enrolled a community-based sample of adults (N = 282) in upper Manhattan without CVD, renal failure, or treated hypertension. Each participant completed two 24-hour ABPM recordings (ABPM1: first recording and ABPM2: second recording) with a mean ± SD time interval of 33 ± 17 days between recordings. Daytime hypertension was defined as mean awake systolic/diastolic BP ≥ 135/85 mm Hg; nocturnal hypertension as mean sleep systolic/diastolic BP ≥ 120/70 mm Hg; INH as nocturnal without daytime hypertension; isolated daytime hypertension (IDH) as daytime without nocturnal hypertension; day and night hypertension (DNH) as daytime and nocturnal hypertension, and any ambulatory hypertension as having daytime and/or nocturnal hypertension. RESULTS: On ABPM1, 26 (9.2%), 21 (7.4%), and 50 (17.7%) participants had INH, IDH, and DNH, respectively. On ABPM2, 24 (8.5%), 19 (6.7%), and 54 (19.1%) had INH, IDH, and DNH, respectively. The kappa statistics were 0.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.38), 0.25 (95% CI 0.06-0.44), and 0.65 (95% CI 0.53-0.77) for INH, IDH, and DNH respectively; and 0.72 (95% CI 0.63-0.81) for having any ambulatory hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that INH and IDH are poorly reproducible phenotypes, and that ABPM should be primarily used to identify individuals with daytime hypertension and/or nocturnal hypertension

Differences in night-time and daytime ambulatory blood pressure when diurnal periods are defined by self-report, fixed-times, and actigraphy: Improving the Detection of Hypertension study

To determine whether defining diurnal periods by self-report, fixed-time or actigraphy produce different estimates of nighttime and daytime ambulatory blood pressure (ABP)

Cardiovascular Disease Risk of Abdominal Obesity vs. Metabolic Abnormalities

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/93656/1/oby.2010.168.pd

Prevalence and Correlates of Low Medication Adherence in Apparent Treatment-Resistant Hypertension

Low medication adherence may explain part of the high prevalence of apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH). The authors assessed medication adherence and aTRH among 4026 participants taking ≥3 classes of antihypertensive medication in the population-based Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) trial using the 4-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS). Low adherence was defined as an MMAS score ≥2. Overall, 66% of participants taking ≥3 classes of antihypertensive medication had aTRH. Perfect adherence on the MMAS was reported by 67.8% and 70.9% of participants with and without aTRH, respectively. Low adherence was present among 8.1% of participants with aTRH and 5.0% of those without aTRH (P<.001). Among those with aTRH, female sex, residence outside the US stroke belt or stroke buckle, physical inactivity, elevated depressive symptoms, and a history of coronary heart disease were associated with low adherence. In the current study, a small percentage of participants with aTRH had low adherence

Visit-to-Visit Variability of Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Disease and All-Cause Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure (BP) has been associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality in some but not all studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between visit-to-visit variability of BP and CVD and all-cause mortality. Medical databases were searched through June 4, 2014, for studies meeting the following eligibility criteria: adult participants; BP measurements at ≥3 visits; follow-up for CVD, coronary heart disease, stroke, or mortality outcomes; events confirmed via database, death certificate, or event ascertainment committee; and adjustment for confounders. Data were extracted by 2 reviewers and pooled using a random-effects model. Overall, 8870 abstracts were identified of which 37 studies, representing 41 separate cohorts, met inclusion criteria. Across studies, visit-to-visit variability of systolic BP and diastolic BP showed significant associations with outcomes in 181 of 312 (58.0%) and 61 of 188 (32.4%) analyses, respectively. Few studies provided sufficient data for pooling risk estimates. For each 5 mm Hg higher SD of systolic BP, the pooled hazard ratio for stroke across 7 cohorts was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07–1.28), for coronary heart disease across 4 cohorts was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.07–1.51), for CVD across 5 cohorts was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.98–1.28), for CVD mortality across 5 cohorts was 1.22 (95% CI, 1.09–1.35), and for all-cause mortality across 4 cohorts was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.05–1.36). In summary, modest associations between visit-to-visit variability of BP and CVD and all-cause mortality are present in published studies. However, these findings are limited by the small amount of data available for meta-analysis