A genome-wide association study identifies risk alleles in plasminogen and P4HA2 associated with giant cell arteritis

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is the most common form of vasculitis in individuals older than 50 years in Western countries. To shed light onto the genetic background influencing susceptibility for GCA, we performed a genome-wide association screening in a well-powered study cohort. After imputation, 1,844,133 genetic variants were analysed in 2,134 cases and 9,125 unaffected controls from ten independent populations of European ancestry. Our data confirmed HLA class II as the strongest associated region (independent signals: rs9268905, P = 1.94E-54, per-allele OR = 1.79; and rs9275592, P = 1.14E-40, OR = 2.08). Additionally, PLG and P4HA2 were identified as GCA risk genes at the genome-wide level of significance (rs4252134, P = 1.23E-10, OR = 1.28; and rs128738, P = 4.60E-09, OR = 1.32, respectively). Interestingly, we observed that the association peaks overlapped with different regulatory elements related to cell types and tissues involved in the pathophysiology of GCA. PLG and P4HA2 are involved in vascular remodelling and angiogenesis, suggesting a high relevance of these processes for the pathogenic mechanisms underlying this type of vasculitis

Estimating overdiagnosis in giant cell arteritis diagnostic pathways using genetic data: genetic association study

Objectives GCA can be confirmed by temporal artery biopsy (TAB) but false negatives can occur. GCA may be overdiagnosed in TAB-negative cases, or if neither TAB nor imaging is done. We used HLA genetic association of TAB-positive GCA as an ‘unbiased umpire’ test to estimate historic overdiagnosis of GCA. Methods Patients diagnosed with GCA between 1990 and 2014 were genotyped. During this era, vascular imaging alone was rarely used to diagnose GCA. HLA region variants were jointly imputed from genome-wide genotypic data of cases and controls. Per-allele frequencies across all HLA variants with P < 1.0 × 10−5 were compared with population control data to estimate overdiagnosis rates in cases without a positive TAB. Results Genetic data from 663 GCA patients were compared with data from 2619 population controls. TAB-negative GCA (n = 147) and GCA without TAB result (n = 160) had variant frequencies intermediate between TAB-positive GCA (n = 356) and population controls. For example, the allele frequency of HLA-DRB1*04 was 32% for TAB-positive GCA, 29% for GCA without TAB result, 27% for TAB-negative GCA and 20% in population controls. Making several strong assumptions, we estimated that around two-thirds of TAB-negative cases and one-third of cases without TAB result may have been overdiagnosed. From these data, TAB sensitivity is estimated as 88%. Conclusions Conservatively assuming 95% specificity, TAB has a negative likelihood ratio of around 0.12. Our method for utilizing standard genotyping data as an ‘unbiased umpire’ might be used as a way of comparing the accuracy of different diagnostic pathways

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme