Pooled Analysis of Rivaroxaban therapy for acute venous thromboembolism in FIRST registry, SWIVTER and DRESDEN NOAC registry

Background The direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban is approved for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE), based on the results of large phase III trials. Objectives To confirm rivaroxaban's effectiveness and safety in routine clinical care of patients with VTE. Methods Data were obtained from prospective, noninterventional registries: the FIRST registry (United Kingdom), DRESDEN NOAC registry (Germany), and SWIVTER (Switzerland). Baseline characteristics of these registries and effectiveness and safety outcome rates for the FIRST and DRESDEN NOAC registries were compared. Results A total of 1841 rivaroxaban-treated patients with acute VTE (57.9% male, 76.6% deep vein thrombosis [DVT]; 23.4% pulmonary embolism ± DVT; median age, 61 years) were included: 1217 from the FIRST registry, 418 from the DRESDEN NOAC registry, and 206 from SWIVTER. Median time between VTE diagnosis and initiation of rivaroxaban was 1.4 ± 1.81 days (25th-75th percentile 1-1; range, 0-15 days). On-treatment outcome rates for the FIRST and DRESDEN NOAC registries were 0.74 per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-1.54) versus 0.96 per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 0.46-2.01) for VTE recurrence; 1.16 per 100 patient years (95% CI, 0.64-2.09) versus 2.51 per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 1.58-3.98) for ISTH major bleeding and 1.69 per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 1.21-2.35) versus 1.73 per 100 patient-years (95% CI, 1.27-2.36) for all-cause mortality (intention-to-treat analysis), respectively. Conclusion Overall treatment outcomes were consistent with the results of the phase III rivaroxaban trials in VTE treatment, indicating that the use of rivaroxaban offers acceptable treatment results also in routine care. However, we observed significant differences in patient characteristics and management patterns across Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Germany, limiting direct comparisons of unadjusted outcome event rates between registries

A Leishmania infantum genetic marker associated with miltefosine treatment failure for visceral leishmaniasis

Background: Miltefosine has been used successfully to treat visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in India, but it was unsuccessful for VL in a clinical trial in Brazil. Methods: To identify molecular markers that predict VL treatment failure whole genome sequencing of 26 L. infantum isolates, from cured and relapsed patients allowed a GWAS analysis of SNPs, gene and chromosome copy number variations. Findings: A strong association was identified (p = 0·0005) between the presence of a genetically stable L. infantum Miltefosine Sensitivity Locus (MSL), and a positive response to miltefosine treatment. The risk of treatment failure increased 9·4-fold (95% CI 2·11–53·54) when an isolate did not have the MSL. The complete absence of the MSL predicted miltefosine failure with 0·92 (95% CI 0·65–0·996) sensitivity and 0·78 (95% CI 0·52–0·92) specificity. A genotyping survey of L. infantum (n = 157) showed that the frequency of MSL varies in a cline from 95% in North East Brazil to <5% in the South East. The MSL was found in the genomes of all L. infantum and L. donovani sequenced isolates from the Old World (n = 671), where miltefosine can have a cure rate higher than 93%. Interpretation: Knowledge on the presence or absence of the MSL in L. infantum will allow stratification of patients prior to treatment, helping to establish better therapeutic strategies for VL treatment. Fund: CNPq, FAPES, GCRF MRC and Wellcome Trust

Unifying Gene Expression Measures from Multiple Platforms Using Factor Analysis

In the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project, gene expression of the same set of samples is measured multiple times on different microarray platforms. There are two main advantages to combining these measurements. First, we have the opportunity to obtain a more precise and accurate estimate of expression levels than using the individual platforms alone. Second, the combined measure simplifies downstream analysis by eliminating the need to work with three sets of expression measures and to consolidate results from the three platforms

Comparative effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus sotrovimab and molnupiravir for preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in non-hospitalised high-risk patients during Omicron waves: observational cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform

Background: Timely evidence of the comparative effectiveness between COVID-19 therapies in real-world settings is needed to inform clinical care. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir versus sotrovimab and molnupiravir in preventing severe COVID-19 outcomes in non-hospitalised high-risk COVID-19 adult patients during Omicron waves. Methods: With the approval of NHS England, we conducted a real-world cohort study using the OpenSAFELY-TPP platform. Patient-level primary care data were obtained from 24 million people in England and were securely linked with data on COVID-19 infection and therapeutics, hospital admission, and death, covering a period where both nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab were first-line treatment options in community settings (February 10, 2022–November 27, 2022). Molnupiravir (third-line option) was used as an exploratory comparator to nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, both of which were antivirals. Cox proportional hazards model stratified by area was used to compare the risk of 28-day COVID-19 related hospitalisation/death across treatment groups. Findings: A total of 9026 eligible patients treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (n = 5704) and sotrovimab (n = 3322) were included in the main analysis. The mean age was 52.7 (SD = 14.9) years and 93% (8436/9026) had three or more COVID-19 vaccinations. Within 28 days after treatment initiation, 55/9026 (0.61%) COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths were observed (34/5704 [0.60%] treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and 21/3322 [0.63%] with sotrovimab). After adjusting for demographics, high-risk cohort categories, vaccination status, calendar time, body mass index and other comorbidities, we observed no significant difference in outcome risk between nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab users (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.48–1.63; P = 0.698). Results from propensity score weighted model also showed non-significant difference between treatment groups (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.45–1.52; P = 0.535). The exploratory analysis comparing nirmatrelvir/ritonavir users with 1041 molnupiravir users (13/1041 [1.25%] COVID-19 related hospitalisations/deaths) showed an association in favour of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22–0.94; P = 0.033). Interpretation: In routine care of non-hospitalised high-risk adult patients with COVID-19 in England, no substantial difference in the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes was observed between those who received nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and sotrovimab between February and November 2022, when Omicron subvariants BA.2, BA.5, or BQ.1 were dominant. Funding: UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health and Care Research, and Health Data Research UK

Integrated Genomic Analysis Identifies Clinically Relevant Subtypes of Glioblastoma Characterized by Abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1

The Cancer Genome Atlas Network recently cataloged recurrent genomic abnormalities in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). We describe a robust gene expression-based molecular classification of GBM into Proneural, Neural, Classical, and Mesenchymal subtypes and integrate multidimensional genomic data to establish patterns of somatic mutations and DNA copy number. Aberrations and gene expression of EGFR, NF1, and PDGFRA/IDH1 each define the Classical, Mesenchymal, and Proneural subtypes, respectively. Gene signatures of normal brain cell types show a strong relationship between subtypes and different neural lineages. Additionally, response to aggressive therapy differs by subtype, with the greatest benefit in the Classical subtype and no benefit in the Proneural subtype. We provide a framework that unifies transcriptomic and genomic dimensions for GBM molecular stratification with important implications for future studies

Winner's Curse Correction and Variable Thresholding Improve Performance of Polygenic Risk Modeling Based on Genome-Wide Association Study Summary-Level Data

Recent heritability analyses have indicated that genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have the potential to improve genetic risk prediction for complex diseases based on polygenic risk score (PRS), a simple modelling technique that can be implemented using summary-level data from the discovery samples. We herein propose modifications to improve the performance of PRS. We introduce threshold-dependent winner's-curse adjustments for marginal association coefficients that are used to weight the single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in PRS. Further, as a way to incorporate external functional/annotation knowledge that could identify subsets of SNPs highly enriched for associations, we propose variable thresholds for SNPs selection. We applied our methods to GWAS summary-level data of 14 complex diseases. Across all diseases, a simple winner's curse correction uniformly led to enhancement of performance of the models, whereas incorporation of functional SNPs was beneficial only for selected diseases. Compared to the standard PRS algorithm, the proposed methods in combination led to notable gain in efficiency (25-50% increase in the prediction R2) for 5 of 14 diseases. As an example, for GWAS of type 2 diabetes, winner's curse correction improved prediction R2 from 2.29% based on the standard PRS to 3.10% (P = 0.0017) and incorporating functional annotation data further improved R2 to 3.53% (P = 2×10-5). Our simulation studies illustrate why differential treatment of certain categories of functional SNPs, even when shown to be highly enriched for GWAS-heritability, does not lead to proportionate improvement in genetic risk-prediction because of non-uniform linkage disequilibrium structure

Increasing frailty is associated with higher prevalence and reduced recognition of delirium in older hospitalised inpatients: results of a multi-centre study

Purpose: Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom. Methods: Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Results: The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia. Conclusion: We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes