Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

Breast cancer polygenic risk score and contralateral breast cancer risk

Previous research has shown that polygenic risk scores (PRSs) can be used to stratify women according to their risk of developing primary invasive breast cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the association between a recently validated PRS of 313 germline variants (PRS313) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk. We included 56,068 women of European ancestry diagnosed with first invasive breast cancer from 1990 onward with follow-up from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Metachronous CBC risk (N = 1,027) according to the distribution of PRS313 was quantified using Cox regression analyses. We assessed PRS313 interaction with age at first diagnosis, family history, morphology, ER status, PR status, and HER2 status, and (neo)adjuvant therapy. In studies of Asian women, with limited follow-up, CBC risk associated with PRS313 was assessed using logistic regression for 340 women with CBC compared with 12,133 women with unilateral breast cancer. Higher PRS313 was associated with increased CBC risk: hazard ratio per standard deviation (SD) = 1.25 (95%CI = 1.18–1.33) for Europeans, and an OR per SD = 1.15 (95%CI = 1.02–1.29) for Asians. The absolute lifetime risks of CBC, accounting for death as competing risk, were 12.4% for European women at the 10th percentile and 20.5% at the 90th percentile of PRS313. We found no evidence of confounding by or interaction with individual characteristics, characteristics of the primary tumor, or treatment. The C-index for the PRS313 alone was 0.563 (95%CI = 0.547–0.586). In conclusion, PRS313 is an independent factor associated with CBC risk and can be incorporated into CBC risk prediction models to help improve stratification and optimize surveillance and treatment strategies

Validation of the familial chylomicronaemia syndrome (FCS) score in an ethnically diverse cohort from UK FCS registry: implications for diagnosis and differentiation from multifactorial chylomicronaemia syndrome (MCS)

Background and aimsPrognosis and management differ between familial chylomicronaemia syndrome (FCS), a rare autosomal recessive disorder, and multifactorial chylomicronaemia syndrome (MCS) or severe mixed hyperlipidaemia. A clinical scoring tool to differentiate these conditions has been devised but not been validated in other populations. The objective of this study was to validate this score in the UK population and identify any additional factors that might improve it.MethodsA retrospective validation study was conducted using data from 151 patients comprising 75 FCS and 76 MCS patients. All participants had undergone genetic testing for genes implicated in FCS. Validation was performed by standard methods. Additional variables were identified from clinical data by logistic regression analysis.ResultsAt the recommended FCS score threshold ≥10 points, the sensitivity and specificity of the score in the UK population were 96% and 75%, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.83–0.94, p &lt; 0.001). This study identified non-European (predominantly South Asian) ethnicity, parental consanguinity, body mass index (BMI) &lt; 25 kg/m2, and recurrent pancreatitis as additional positive predictors, while BMI &gt;30 kg/m2 was found to be a negative predictor for FCS. However, inclusion of additional FCS predictors had no significant impact on performance of standard FCS score.ConclusionsOur study validates the FCS score in the UK population to distinguish FCS from MCS. While additional FCS predictors were identified, they did not improve further the score diagnostic performance.<br/