National Institutes of Health Career Development Awards for Cardiovascular Physician-Scientists: Recent Trends and Strategies for Success

Nurturing the development of cardiovascular physician-scientist investigators is critical for sustained progress in cardiovascular science and improving human health. The transition from an inexperienced trainee to an independent physician-scientist is a multifaceted process requiring a sustained commitment from the trainee, mentors, and institution. A cornerstone of this training process is a career development (K) award from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). These awards generally require 75% of the awardee's professional effort devoted to research aims and diverse career development activities carried out in a mentored environment over a 5-year period. We report on recent success rates for obtaining NIH K awards, provide strategies for preparing a successful application and navigating the early career period for aspiring cardiovascular investigators, and offer cardiovascular division leadership perspectives regarding K awards in the current era. Our objective is to offer practical advice that will equip trainees considering an investigator path for success

Challenges facing early career academic cardiologists

Early career academic cardiologists currently face unprecedented challenges that threaten a highly valued career path. A team consisting of early career professionals and senior leadership members of American College of Cardiology completed this white paper to inform the cardiovascular medicine profession regarding the plight of early career cardiologists and to suggest possible solutions. This paper includes: 1) definition of categories of early career academic cardiologists; 2) general challenges to all categories and specific challenges to each category; 3) obstacles as identified by a survey of current early career members of the American College of Cardiology; 4) major reasons for the failure of physician-scientists to receive funding from National Institute of Health/National Heart Lung and Blood Institute career development grants; 5) potential solutions; and 6) a call to action with specific recommendations

Incidence and Sequelae of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch in Transcatheter Versus Surgical Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis A PARTNER Trial Cohort-A Analysis

AbstractBackgroundLittle is known about the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and its impact on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).ObjectivesThe objectives of this study were: 1) to compare the incidence of PPM in the TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) randomized control trial (RCT) arms of the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves) I Trial cohort A; and 2) to assess the impact of PPM on regression of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy and mortality in these 2 arms and in the TAVR nonrandomized continued access (NRCA) registry cohort.MethodsThe PARTNER Trial cohort A randomized patients 1:1 to TAVR or bioprosthetic SAVR. Postoperative PPM was defined as absent if the indexed effective orifice area (EOA) was >0.85 cm2/m2, moderate if the indexed EOA was ≥0.65 but ≤0.85 cm2/m2, or severe if the indexed EOA was <0.65 cm2/m2. LV mass regression and mortality were analyzed using the SAVR-RCT (n = 270), TAVR-RCT (n = 304), and TAVR-NRCA (n = 1,637) cohorts.ResultsThe incidence of PPM was 60.0% (severe: 28.1%) in the SAVR-RCT cohort versus 46.4% (severe: 19.7%) in the TAVR-RCT cohort (p < 0.001) and 43.8% (severe: 13.6%) in the TAVR-NRCA cohort. In patients with an aortic annulus diameter <20 mm, severe PPM developed in 33.7% undergoing SAVR compared with 19.0% undergoing TAVR (p = 0.002). PPM was an independent predictor of less LV mass regression at 1 year in the SAVR-RCT (p = 0.017) and TAVR-NRCA (p = 0.012) cohorts but not in the TAVR-RCT cohort (p = 0.35). Severe PPM was an independent predictor of 2-year mortality in the SAVR-RCT cohort (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.78; p = 0.041) but not in the TAVR-RCT cohort (HR: 0.58; p = 0.11). In the TAVR-NRCA cohort, severe PPM was not a predictor of 1-year mortality in all patients (HR: 1.05; p = 0.60) but did independently predict mortality in the subset of patients with no post-procedural aortic regurgitation (HR: 1.88; p = 0.02).ConclusionsIn patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk, PPM is more frequent and more often severe after SAVR than TAVR. Patients with PPM after SAVR have worse survival and less LV mass regression than those without PPM. Severe PPM also has a significant impact on survival after TAVR in the subset of patients with no post-procedural aortic regurgitation. TAVR may be preferable to SAVR in patients with a small aortic annulus who are susceptible to PPM to avoid its adverse impact on LV mass regression and survival. (The PARTNER Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894

Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.

Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options

Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.

Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options

Calcific aortic stenosis.

Calcific aortic stenosis (AS) is the most prevalent heart valve disorder in developed countries. It is characterized by progressive fibro-calcific remodelling and thickening of the aortic valve leaflets that, over years, evolve to cause severe obstruction to cardiac outflow. In developed countries, AS is the third-most frequent cardiovascular disease after coronary artery disease and systemic arterial hypertension, with a prevalence of 0.4% in the general population and 1.7% in the population >65 years old. Congenital abnormality (bicuspid valve) and older age are powerful risk factors for calcific AS. Metabolic syndrome and an elevated plasma level of lipoprotein(a) have also been associated with increased risk of calcific AS. The pathobiology of calcific AS is complex and involves genetic factors, lipoprotein deposition and oxidation, chronic inflammation, osteoblastic transition of cardiac valve interstitial cells and active leaflet calcification. Although no pharmacotherapy has proved to be effective in reducing the progression of AS, promising therapeutic targets include lipoprotein(a), the renin-angiotensin system, receptor activator of NF-kappaB ligand (RANKL; also known as TNFSF11) and ectonucleotidases. Currently, aortic valve replacement (AVR) remains the only effective treatment for severe AS. The diagnosis and staging of AS are based on the assessment of stenosis severity and left ventricular systolic function by Doppler echocardiography, and the presence of symptoms. The introduction of transcatheter AVR in the past decade has been a transformative therapeutic innovation for patients at high or prohibitive risk for surgical valve replacement, and this new technology might extend to lower-risk patients in the near future