Hypertension

LOS ANGELES – While uncontrolled hypertension is an established risk factor for dementias including Alzheimer’s disease, the pathways by which it might lead to dementia remain poorly understood.

GlobalStock/Getty Images

In research presented at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference, Jérémie Lespinasse, PharmD, an investigator with the University of Bordeaux and INSERM U1219 in Bordeaux, France, presented data showing that hypertension-linked increases in the brain’s load of white matter hyperintensities – an imaging biomarker linked to small-vessel disease – was associated with cognitive decline independent of amyloid cascade biomarkers.

“We know that hypertension is related to cognitive decline and dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia,” Carole Dufouil, PhD, the study’s last author and the research director at INSERM U1219, said in an interview. “But we didn’t know the pathway. It could go through what’s more typical of vascular pathology or it could go through what’s more typical of AD – and that’s what we wanted to test.”

The researchers found that the impact of hypertension on cognition doesn’t “go through amyloid,” Dr. Dufouil said, but rather a typically vascular pathway of white matter hyperintensities and neurodegeneration. “This is a big difference from other brain markers for which you know they exist, but you don’t know how to treat them,” she said. “This one is treatable.”

For their research, Dr. Lespinasse, Dr. Dufouil, and colleagues used a cross-sectional sample of data from the MEMENTO study, a 5-year observational cohort of 2,323 patients recruited at 26 memory centers in France between 2011 and 2014. Of the patients in MEMENTO, 62% were women, and the mean age was 71. All patients were deemed free of dementia and had isolated cognitive complaints or mild cognitive impairment at baseline. A total of 60% had hypertension, and 17% had uncontrolled hypertension defined as above 140/90 mm Hg despite treatment. Cognitive testing and MRI was conducted on all patients, while 60% also had ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET scanning and a minority, 18%, had cerebrospinal fluid samples.


The investigators found in using a structural equation model that the uncontrolled hypertension subjects had significantly lower cognition when compared against those without (P = .001). About half of the harmful effect of uncontrolled hypertension on brain functions was mediated by white matter hyperintensities load (P = .021) and neurodegeneration (P = .024) but not by cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for amyloid-beta 42/40 ratio or tau.

The study’s main limitation was its use of cross-sectional data, the investigators said, while its strength was in a multifactorial model that allowed for a more integrative look at the relationships among hypertension, Alzheimer’s biomarkers, white matter hyperintensities, and cognition.

The investigators stressed the importance of controlling hypertension generally – and for all clinicians to be more aware of its cognitive impacts. Dr. Dufouil said that memory clinics should make blood pressure monitoring a key part of their workups, and should ensure that people are well controlled. “Up until recently it hasn’t been obvious” that control of hypertension has a key role in dementia prevention.

“It’s now obvious,” she said.

Dr. Lespinasse and Dr. Dufouil disclosed no industry relationships.

LOS ANGELES – While uncontrolled hypertension is an established risk factor for dementias including Alzheimer’s disease, the pathways by which it might lead to dementia remain poorly understood.

GlobalStock/Getty Images

In research presented at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference, Jérémie Lespinasse, PharmD, an investigator with the University of Bordeaux and INSERM U1219 in Bordeaux, France, presented data showing that hypertension-linked increases in the brain’s load of white matter hyperintensities – an imaging biomarker linked to small-vessel disease – was associated with cognitive decline independent of amyloid cascade biomarkers.

“We know that hypertension is related to cognitive decline and dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia,” Carole Dufouil, PhD, the study’s last author and the research director at INSERM U1219, said in an interview. “But we didn’t know the pathway. It could go through what’s more typical of vascular pathology or it could go through what’s more typical of AD – and that’s what we wanted to test.”

The researchers found that the impact of hypertension on cognition doesn’t “go through amyloid,” Dr. Dufouil said, but rather a typically vascular pathway of white matter hyperintensities and neurodegeneration. “This is a big difference from other brain markers for which you know they exist, but you don’t know how to treat them,” she said. “This one is treatable.”

For their research, Dr. Lespinasse, Dr. Dufouil, and colleagues used a cross-sectional sample of data from the MEMENTO study, a 5-year observational cohort of 2,323 patients recruited at 26 memory centers in France between 2011 and 2014. Of the patients in MEMENTO, 62% were women, and the mean age was 71. All patients were deemed free of dementia and had isolated cognitive complaints or mild cognitive impairment at baseline. A total of 60% had hypertension, and 17% had uncontrolled hypertension defined as above 140/90 mm Hg despite treatment. Cognitive testing and MRI was conducted on all patients, while 60% also had ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET scanning and a minority, 18%, had cerebrospinal fluid samples.


The investigators found in using a structural equation model that the uncontrolled hypertension subjects had significantly lower cognition when compared against those without (P = .001). About half of the harmful effect of uncontrolled hypertension on brain functions was mediated by white matter hyperintensities load (P = .021) and neurodegeneration (P = .024) but not by cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for amyloid-beta 42/40 ratio or tau.

The study’s main limitation was its use of cross-sectional data, the investigators said, while its strength was in a multifactorial model that allowed for a more integrative look at the relationships among hypertension, Alzheimer’s biomarkers, white matter hyperintensities, and cognition.

The investigators stressed the importance of controlling hypertension generally – and for all clinicians to be more aware of its cognitive impacts. Dr. Dufouil said that memory clinics should make blood pressure monitoring a key part of their workups, and should ensure that people are well controlled. “Up until recently it hasn’t been obvious” that control of hypertension has a key role in dementia prevention.

“It’s now obvious,” she said.

Dr. Lespinasse and Dr. Dufouil disclosed no industry relationships.

LOS ANGELES – While uncontrolled hypertension is an established risk factor for dementias including Alzheimer’s disease, the pathways by which it might lead to dementia remain poorly understood.

GlobalStock/Getty Images

In research presented at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference, Jérémie Lespinasse, PharmD, an investigator with the University of Bordeaux and INSERM U1219 in Bordeaux, France, presented data showing that hypertension-linked increases in the brain’s load of white matter hyperintensities – an imaging biomarker linked to small-vessel disease – was associated with cognitive decline independent of amyloid cascade biomarkers.

“We know that hypertension is related to cognitive decline and dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia,” Carole Dufouil, PhD, the study’s last author and the research director at INSERM U1219, said in an interview. “But we didn’t know the pathway. It could go through what’s more typical of vascular pathology or it could go through what’s more typical of AD – and that’s what we wanted to test.”

The researchers found that the impact of hypertension on cognition doesn’t “go through amyloid,” Dr. Dufouil said, but rather a typically vascular pathway of white matter hyperintensities and neurodegeneration. “This is a big difference from other brain markers for which you know they exist, but you don’t know how to treat them,” she said. “This one is treatable.”

For their research, Dr. Lespinasse, Dr. Dufouil, and colleagues used a cross-sectional sample of data from the MEMENTO study, a 5-year observational cohort of 2,323 patients recruited at 26 memory centers in France between 2011 and 2014. Of the patients in MEMENTO, 62% were women, and the mean age was 71. All patients were deemed free of dementia and had isolated cognitive complaints or mild cognitive impairment at baseline. A total of 60% had hypertension, and 17% had uncontrolled hypertension defined as above 140/90 mm Hg despite treatment. Cognitive testing and MRI was conducted on all patients, while 60% also had ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET scanning and a minority, 18%, had cerebrospinal fluid samples.


The investigators found in using a structural equation model that the uncontrolled hypertension subjects had significantly lower cognition when compared against those without (P = .001). About half of the harmful effect of uncontrolled hypertension on brain functions was mediated by white matter hyperintensities load (P = .021) and neurodegeneration (P = .024) but not by cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for amyloid-beta 42/40 ratio or tau.

The study’s main limitation was its use of cross-sectional data, the investigators said, while its strength was in a multifactorial model that allowed for a more integrative look at the relationships among hypertension, Alzheimer’s biomarkers, white matter hyperintensities, and cognition.

The investigators stressed the importance of controlling hypertension generally – and for all clinicians to be more aware of its cognitive impacts. Dr. Dufouil said that memory clinics should make blood pressure monitoring a key part of their workups, and should ensure that people are well controlled. “Up until recently it hasn’t been obvious” that control of hypertension has a key role in dementia prevention.

“It’s now obvious,” she said.

Dr. Lespinasse and Dr. Dufouil disclosed no industry relationships.

SAN DIEGO – The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is substantially lower using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services apnea-hypopnea index definition of OSA than using the one recommended by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

In addition, among individuals who did not have OSA using the CMS definition but met criteria using the AASM definition of OSA, an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of five events or greater per hour was associated with a greater likelihood of having hypertension.

The findings come from an analysis which set out to assess the relationship between OSA and hypertension using the AASM-recommended definition and the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology blood pressure guidelines, and to determine if there is an association between hypertension and OSA among individuals who did not meet the CMS definition of OSA.

“Given the substantial morbidity associated with hypertension, these results suggest that universal adoption of the AASM AHI definition would be a reasonable step in ensuring appropriate diagnosis and treatment of OSA,” lead study author Stuart F. Quan, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies.

Dr. Quan, of the division of sleep and circadian disorders at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, noted that a number of studies have demonstrated that OSA is a risk factor for hypertension and a variety of other medical conditions. “Rightly or wrongly, the most important metric for determining whether OSA is present and determining its severity, is the apnea-hypopnea index,” he said. “It’s the most common metric used for determining OSA severity, and mostly importantly, Medicare and some other insurers use this metric to determine whether a person is eligible for treatment. If a person falls above the line, they can get continuous positive airway pressure, for example. If they’re below the line, that’s too bad; they don’t have OSA insofar as the insurance company is concerned.”

There is no controversy as to what constitutes apnea, he continued, but some disagreement exists on the definition of hypopnea. The AASM recommends using a 3% oxygen desaturation or an arousal, while Medicare uses a definition of hypopnea requiring only a 4% oxygen desaturation. Hypertension definitions have changed recently as well. Before 2018, the definition of hypertension was greater than 140/90 mm Hg for people younger than age 65 years and 150/80 mm Hg for people age 65 years and older. In 2018, the AHA and ACC changed the hypertension guidelines, defining normal as less than 120/80 mm Hg.

“Previous studies linking OSA and hypertension used older definitions, but to my knowledge there are no current studies examining the association between OSA and hypertension using new definitions,” Dr. Quan said.

He reported on results from an analysis of 6,307 participants in the Sleep Heart Health Study who underwent home polysomnography. Their AHI defined by a 3% oxygen desaturation or an arousal was classified into four categories of OSA severity: fewer than 5 events per hour (normal sleep), 5-14 events per hour (mild sleep apnea), 15-29 events per hour (moderate sleep apnea), and 30 or more events per hour (severe sleep apnea).

The researchers used three definitions of dichotomous BP elevation: elevated (greater than 120/80 mm Hg or use of hypertension medications [meds]), stage 1 (greater than 130/80 mm Hg or meds), or stage 2 (greater than 140/90 mm Hg or meds). They used logistic regression to assess the association between elevated BP and/or hypertension and OSA severity, controlling for demographics and body mass index. Additional analyses utilized multiple linear regression to determine the relationship between natural log AHI and systolic and diastolic BP, controlling for the same covariates.

For all definitions of elevated BP, increasing OSA severity was associated with greater likelihood of an elevated or hypertensive status in fully adjusted models. Specifically, the odds ratios among those with elevated BP was 1.30 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.54), 1.41 (95% CI, 1.15-1.72), and 1.69 (95% CI, 1.32-2.17) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea, respectively. The ORs among those with stage 1 BP was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.09-1.49), 1.36 (95% CI, 1.13-1.63), 1.58 (95% CI, 1.27-1.97) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea, while the OR among those with stage 2 BP was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.26), 1.22 (95% CI, 1.02-1.45), 1.38 (95% CI, 1.12-1.69) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea. Linear regression found that AHI was associated with both systolic and diastolic BP in fully adjusted models.

“Using the AASM and CMS AHI definitions, increasing severity of AHI is associated with greater likelihood of having an elevated blood pressure or hypertension,” Dr. Quan concluded. “However, the prevalence of OSA was substantially lower using the CMS definition of OSA. In fact, 218 of these individuals had moderate to severe OSA when the AASM definition was applied.”

He characterized the study as “a practical analysis, a way to help identify patients who might benefit from treatment. This is not the issue of whether the science of 3% AHI is better than 4%.”

The Sleep Heart Health Study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Quan reported that he helped draft the AASM AHI recommendations but had no other relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Quan SF et al. SLEEP 2019, Abstract 0501.

SAN DIEGO – The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is substantially lower using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services apnea-hypopnea index definition of OSA than using the one recommended by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

In addition, among individuals who did not have OSA using the CMS definition but met criteria using the AASM definition of OSA, an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of five events or greater per hour was associated with a greater likelihood of having hypertension.

The findings come from an analysis which set out to assess the relationship between OSA and hypertension using the AASM-recommended definition and the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology blood pressure guidelines, and to determine if there is an association between hypertension and OSA among individuals who did not meet the CMS definition of OSA.

“Given the substantial morbidity associated with hypertension, these results suggest that universal adoption of the AASM AHI definition would be a reasonable step in ensuring appropriate diagnosis and treatment of OSA,” lead study author Stuart F. Quan, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies.

Dr. Quan, of the division of sleep and circadian disorders at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, noted that a number of studies have demonstrated that OSA is a risk factor for hypertension and a variety of other medical conditions. “Rightly or wrongly, the most important metric for determining whether OSA is present and determining its severity, is the apnea-hypopnea index,” he said. “It’s the most common metric used for determining OSA severity, and mostly importantly, Medicare and some other insurers use this metric to determine whether a person is eligible for treatment. If a person falls above the line, they can get continuous positive airway pressure, for example. If they’re below the line, that’s too bad; they don’t have OSA insofar as the insurance company is concerned.”

There is no controversy as to what constitutes apnea, he continued, but some disagreement exists on the definition of hypopnea. The AASM recommends using a 3% oxygen desaturation or an arousal, while Medicare uses a definition of hypopnea requiring only a 4% oxygen desaturation. Hypertension definitions have changed recently as well. Before 2018, the definition of hypertension was greater than 140/90 mm Hg for people younger than age 65 years and 150/80 mm Hg for people age 65 years and older. In 2018, the AHA and ACC changed the hypertension guidelines, defining normal as less than 120/80 mm Hg.

“Previous studies linking OSA and hypertension used older definitions, but to my knowledge there are no current studies examining the association between OSA and hypertension using new definitions,” Dr. Quan said.

He reported on results from an analysis of 6,307 participants in the Sleep Heart Health Study who underwent home polysomnography. Their AHI defined by a 3% oxygen desaturation or an arousal was classified into four categories of OSA severity: fewer than 5 events per hour (normal sleep), 5-14 events per hour (mild sleep apnea), 15-29 events per hour (moderate sleep apnea), and 30 or more events per hour (severe sleep apnea).

The researchers used three definitions of dichotomous BP elevation: elevated (greater than 120/80 mm Hg or use of hypertension medications [meds]), stage 1 (greater than 130/80 mm Hg or meds), or stage 2 (greater than 140/90 mm Hg or meds). They used logistic regression to assess the association between elevated BP and/or hypertension and OSA severity, controlling for demographics and body mass index. Additional analyses utilized multiple linear regression to determine the relationship between natural log AHI and systolic and diastolic BP, controlling for the same covariates.

For all definitions of elevated BP, increasing OSA severity was associated with greater likelihood of an elevated or hypertensive status in fully adjusted models. Specifically, the odds ratios among those with elevated BP was 1.30 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.54), 1.41 (95% CI, 1.15-1.72), and 1.69 (95% CI, 1.32-2.17) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea, respectively. The ORs among those with stage 1 BP was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.09-1.49), 1.36 (95% CI, 1.13-1.63), 1.58 (95% CI, 1.27-1.97) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea, while the OR among those with stage 2 BP was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.26), 1.22 (95% CI, 1.02-1.45), 1.38 (95% CI, 1.12-1.69) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea. Linear regression found that AHI was associated with both systolic and diastolic BP in fully adjusted models.

“Using the AASM and CMS AHI definitions, increasing severity of AHI is associated with greater likelihood of having an elevated blood pressure or hypertension,” Dr. Quan concluded. “However, the prevalence of OSA was substantially lower using the CMS definition of OSA. In fact, 218 of these individuals had moderate to severe OSA when the AASM definition was applied.”

He characterized the study as “a practical analysis, a way to help identify patients who might benefit from treatment. This is not the issue of whether the science of 3% AHI is better than 4%.”

The Sleep Heart Health Study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Quan reported that he helped draft the AASM AHI recommendations but had no other relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Quan SF et al. SLEEP 2019, Abstract 0501.

SAN DIEGO – The prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is substantially lower using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services apnea-hypopnea index definition of OSA than using the one recommended by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

Doug Brunk/MDedge News

In addition, among individuals who did not have OSA using the CMS definition but met criteria using the AASM definition of OSA, an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of five events or greater per hour was associated with a greater likelihood of having hypertension.

The findings come from an analysis which set out to assess the relationship between OSA and hypertension using the AASM-recommended definition and the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology blood pressure guidelines, and to determine if there is an association between hypertension and OSA among individuals who did not meet the CMS definition of OSA.

“Given the substantial morbidity associated with hypertension, these results suggest that universal adoption of the AASM AHI definition would be a reasonable step in ensuring appropriate diagnosis and treatment of OSA,” lead study author Stuart F. Quan, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies.

Dr. Quan, of the division of sleep and circadian disorders at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, noted that a number of studies have demonstrated that OSA is a risk factor for hypertension and a variety of other medical conditions. “Rightly or wrongly, the most important metric for determining whether OSA is present and determining its severity, is the apnea-hypopnea index,” he said. “It’s the most common metric used for determining OSA severity, and mostly importantly, Medicare and some other insurers use this metric to determine whether a person is eligible for treatment. If a person falls above the line, they can get continuous positive airway pressure, for example. If they’re below the line, that’s too bad; they don’t have OSA insofar as the insurance company is concerned.”

There is no controversy as to what constitutes apnea, he continued, but some disagreement exists on the definition of hypopnea. The AASM recommends using a 3% oxygen desaturation or an arousal, while Medicare uses a definition of hypopnea requiring only a 4% oxygen desaturation. Hypertension definitions have changed recently as well. Before 2018, the definition of hypertension was greater than 140/90 mm Hg for people younger than age 65 years and 150/80 mm Hg for people age 65 years and older. In 2018, the AHA and ACC changed the hypertension guidelines, defining normal as less than 120/80 mm Hg.

“Previous studies linking OSA and hypertension used older definitions, but to my knowledge there are no current studies examining the association between OSA and hypertension using new definitions,” Dr. Quan said.

He reported on results from an analysis of 6,307 participants in the Sleep Heart Health Study who underwent home polysomnography. Their AHI defined by a 3% oxygen desaturation or an arousal was classified into four categories of OSA severity: fewer than 5 events per hour (normal sleep), 5-14 events per hour (mild sleep apnea), 15-29 events per hour (moderate sleep apnea), and 30 or more events per hour (severe sleep apnea).

The researchers used three definitions of dichotomous BP elevation: elevated (greater than 120/80 mm Hg or use of hypertension medications [meds]), stage 1 (greater than 130/80 mm Hg or meds), or stage 2 (greater than 140/90 mm Hg or meds). They used logistic regression to assess the association between elevated BP and/or hypertension and OSA severity, controlling for demographics and body mass index. Additional analyses utilized multiple linear regression to determine the relationship between natural log AHI and systolic and diastolic BP, controlling for the same covariates.

For all definitions of elevated BP, increasing OSA severity was associated with greater likelihood of an elevated or hypertensive status in fully adjusted models. Specifically, the odds ratios among those with elevated BP was 1.30 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.54), 1.41 (95% CI, 1.15-1.72), and 1.69 (95% CI, 1.32-2.17) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea, respectively. The ORs among those with stage 1 BP was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.09-1.49), 1.36 (95% CI, 1.13-1.63), 1.58 (95% CI, 1.27-1.97) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea, while the OR among those with stage 2 BP was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92-1.26), 1.22 (95% CI, 1.02-1.45), 1.38 (95% CI, 1.12-1.69) for mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea. Linear regression found that AHI was associated with both systolic and diastolic BP in fully adjusted models.

“Using the AASM and CMS AHI definitions, increasing severity of AHI is associated with greater likelihood of having an elevated blood pressure or hypertension,” Dr. Quan concluded. “However, the prevalence of OSA was substantially lower using the CMS definition of OSA. In fact, 218 of these individuals had moderate to severe OSA when the AASM definition was applied.”

He characterized the study as “a practical analysis, a way to help identify patients who might benefit from treatment. This is not the issue of whether the science of 3% AHI is better than 4%.”

The Sleep Heart Health Study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Quan reported that he helped draft the AASM AHI recommendations but had no other relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Quan SF et al. SLEEP 2019, Abstract 0501.

Patients with mild or moderate Alzheimer’s disease who took nilvadipine experienced increases in cerebral blood flow in the hippocampus, according to a new study.

copyright Radboud University Medical Center

Cerebral blood flow in other regions of the brain did not significantly change in patients who took the antihypertensive drug nilvadipine, according to a report on the trial published in Hypertension. Reduced cerebral blood flow is an early marker of Alzheimer’s disease, and the SPRINT MIND study suggests that intensive blood pressure control may reduce the risk of cognitive impairment.

“These findings [of the new study] not only indicate preserved cerebral autoregulation in Alzheimer’s disease but also point toward beneficial cerebrovascular effects of antihypertensive treatment,” said Jurgen A.H.R. Claassen, MD, PhD of Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and coauthors. “An important question is whether this observed increase in [cerebral blood flow] translates to clinical benefits. Unfortunately, sample sizes were too small and follow-up time too short to reliably study the effects ... on structural brain measures and cognitive measures.”

Nilvadipine is a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist used to treat hypertension. In the NILVAD trial, investigators assessed the effects of nilvadipine versus placebo in approximately 500 patients with Alzheimer’s disease. The 18-month trial found no beneficial effects of nilvadipine on cognitive function, but subgroup analyses suggested a potential benefit among patients in the early stages of the disease (PLoS Med. 2018 Sep 24;15[9]:e1002660.).

The cerebral blood flow analysis was a preplanned substudy of NILVAD designed to assess how 6 months of treatment with the drug affects cerebral blood flow as measured using MRI arterial spin labeling. The researchers looked at cerebral blood flow in whole-brain gray matter and in specific regions such as the hippocampus.


The substudy analysis included 22 patients who received nilvadipine and 22 who received placebo during the randomized, double-blind study. Participants had a mean age of 72.8 years and a mean Mini-Mental State Examination score of 20.4.

At 6 months, nilvadipine lowered systolic BP by 11.5 mm Hg, and whole-brain gray matter cerebral blood flow remained stable. Blood flow to the hippocampus increased by approximately 20% among patients treated with nilvadipine – by 24.4 mL/100 g per minute to the left hippocampus and by 20.1 mL/100 g per minute to the right hippocampus.

The increased hippocampal cerebral blood flow could be related to nilvadipine’s antihypertensive effects or its effects on amyloid-beta, the authors noted.

“These findings indicate that the known decrease in [cerebral blood flow] in patients with [Alzheimer’s disease] can in some regions be reversed,” they wrote.

“Even though no medical treatment is without risk, getting treatment for high blood pressure could be important to maintain brain health in patients with Alzheimer’s disease,” Dr. Claassen said in a statement. “In the future, we need to find out whether the improvement in blood flow, especially in the hippocampus, can be used as a supportive treatment to slow down progression of Alzheimer’s disease, especially in earlier states of disease.”

The researchers wrote they lacked biomarkers to confirm Alzheimer’s disease pathology. Most of the study participants were white Europeans, which “limits extrapolation [of the findings] to other populations,” they added.

The Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation and the Dutch Alzheimer Society funded the NILVAD cerebral blood flow substudy. NILVAD was funded by the European Commission Framework 7 Program Health Theme. Dr. Claassen had no disclosures; one coauthor disclosed a pending patent for nilvadipine.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Claassen JAHR et al. Hypertension. 2019 Jun 17. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.12892.

Patients with mild or moderate Alzheimer’s disease who took nilvadipine experienced increases in cerebral blood flow in the hippocampus, according to a new study.

copyright Radboud University Medical Center

Cerebral blood flow in other regions of the brain did not significantly change in patients who took the antihypertensive drug nilvadipine, according to a report on the trial published in Hypertension. Reduced cerebral blood flow is an early marker of Alzheimer’s disease, and the SPRINT MIND study suggests that intensive blood pressure control may reduce the risk of cognitive impairment.

“These findings [of the new study] not only indicate preserved cerebral autoregulation in Alzheimer’s disease but also point toward beneficial cerebrovascular effects of antihypertensive treatment,” said Jurgen A.H.R. Claassen, MD, PhD of Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and coauthors. “An important question is whether this observed increase in [cerebral blood flow] translates to clinical benefits. Unfortunately, sample sizes were too small and follow-up time too short to reliably study the effects ... on structural brain measures and cognitive measures.”

Nilvadipine is a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist used to treat hypertension. In the NILVAD trial, investigators assessed the effects of nilvadipine versus placebo in approximately 500 patients with Alzheimer’s disease. The 18-month trial found no beneficial effects of nilvadipine on cognitive function, but subgroup analyses suggested a potential benefit among patients in the early stages of the disease (PLoS Med. 2018 Sep 24;15[9]:e1002660.).

The cerebral blood flow analysis was a preplanned substudy of NILVAD designed to assess how 6 months of treatment with the drug affects cerebral blood flow as measured using MRI arterial spin labeling. The researchers looked at cerebral blood flow in whole-brain gray matter and in specific regions such as the hippocampus.


The substudy analysis included 22 patients who received nilvadipine and 22 who received placebo during the randomized, double-blind study. Participants had a mean age of 72.8 years and a mean Mini-Mental State Examination score of 20.4.

At 6 months, nilvadipine lowered systolic BP by 11.5 mm Hg, and whole-brain gray matter cerebral blood flow remained stable. Blood flow to the hippocampus increased by approximately 20% among patients treated with nilvadipine – by 24.4 mL/100 g per minute to the left hippocampus and by 20.1 mL/100 g per minute to the right hippocampus.

The increased hippocampal cerebral blood flow could be related to nilvadipine’s antihypertensive effects or its effects on amyloid-beta, the authors noted.

“These findings indicate that the known decrease in [cerebral blood flow] in patients with [Alzheimer’s disease] can in some regions be reversed,” they wrote.

“Even though no medical treatment is without risk, getting treatment for high blood pressure could be important to maintain brain health in patients with Alzheimer’s disease,” Dr. Claassen said in a statement. “In the future, we need to find out whether the improvement in blood flow, especially in the hippocampus, can be used as a supportive treatment to slow down progression of Alzheimer’s disease, especially in earlier states of disease.”

The researchers wrote they lacked biomarkers to confirm Alzheimer’s disease pathology. Most of the study participants were white Europeans, which “limits extrapolation [of the findings] to other populations,” they added.

The Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation and the Dutch Alzheimer Society funded the NILVAD cerebral blood flow substudy. NILVAD was funded by the European Commission Framework 7 Program Health Theme. Dr. Claassen had no disclosures; one coauthor disclosed a pending patent for nilvadipine.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Claassen JAHR et al. Hypertension. 2019 Jun 17. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.12892.

Patients with mild or moderate Alzheimer’s disease who took nilvadipine experienced increases in cerebral blood flow in the hippocampus, according to a new study.

copyright Radboud University Medical Center

Cerebral blood flow in other regions of the brain did not significantly change in patients who took the antihypertensive drug nilvadipine, according to a report on the trial published in Hypertension. Reduced cerebral blood flow is an early marker of Alzheimer’s disease, and the SPRINT MIND study suggests that intensive blood pressure control may reduce the risk of cognitive impairment.

“These findings [of the new study] not only indicate preserved cerebral autoregulation in Alzheimer’s disease but also point toward beneficial cerebrovascular effects of antihypertensive treatment,” said Jurgen A.H.R. Claassen, MD, PhD of Radboud University Medical Center in Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and coauthors. “An important question is whether this observed increase in [cerebral blood flow] translates to clinical benefits. Unfortunately, sample sizes were too small and follow-up time too short to reliably study the effects ... on structural brain measures and cognitive measures.”

Nilvadipine is a dihydropyridine calcium antagonist used to treat hypertension. In the NILVAD trial, investigators assessed the effects of nilvadipine versus placebo in approximately 500 patients with Alzheimer’s disease. The 18-month trial found no beneficial effects of nilvadipine on cognitive function, but subgroup analyses suggested a potential benefit among patients in the early stages of the disease (PLoS Med. 2018 Sep 24;15[9]:e1002660.).

The cerebral blood flow analysis was a preplanned substudy of NILVAD designed to assess how 6 months of treatment with the drug affects cerebral blood flow as measured using MRI arterial spin labeling. The researchers looked at cerebral blood flow in whole-brain gray matter and in specific regions such as the hippocampus.


The substudy analysis included 22 patients who received nilvadipine and 22 who received placebo during the randomized, double-blind study. Participants had a mean age of 72.8 years and a mean Mini-Mental State Examination score of 20.4.

At 6 months, nilvadipine lowered systolic BP by 11.5 mm Hg, and whole-brain gray matter cerebral blood flow remained stable. Blood flow to the hippocampus increased by approximately 20% among patients treated with nilvadipine – by 24.4 mL/100 g per minute to the left hippocampus and by 20.1 mL/100 g per minute to the right hippocampus.

The increased hippocampal cerebral blood flow could be related to nilvadipine’s antihypertensive effects or its effects on amyloid-beta, the authors noted.

“These findings indicate that the known decrease in [cerebral blood flow] in patients with [Alzheimer’s disease] can in some regions be reversed,” they wrote.

“Even though no medical treatment is without risk, getting treatment for high blood pressure could be important to maintain brain health in patients with Alzheimer’s disease,” Dr. Claassen said in a statement. “In the future, we need to find out whether the improvement in blood flow, especially in the hippocampus, can be used as a supportive treatment to slow down progression of Alzheimer’s disease, especially in earlier states of disease.”

The researchers wrote they lacked biomarkers to confirm Alzheimer’s disease pathology. Most of the study participants were white Europeans, which “limits extrapolation [of the findings] to other populations,” they added.

The Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation and the Dutch Alzheimer Society funded the NILVAD cerebral blood flow substudy. NILVAD was funded by the European Commission Framework 7 Program Health Theme. Dr. Claassen had no disclosures; one coauthor disclosed a pending patent for nilvadipine.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Claassen JAHR et al. Hypertension. 2019 Jun 17. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.12892.

MADRID – Using allopurinol to reduce hyperuricemia in young adults with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension failed to significantly lower blood pressure but succeeded in significantly improving endothelial function as measured by increased flow-mediated arterial dilation in a single-center crossover study with 82 participants.

The finding of improved endothelial function suggests that reducing hyperuricemia may be a new way to manage hypertension or prevent progression to stage 1 hypertension, improve cardiovascular health, and ultimately cut cardiovascular events, Angelo L. Gaffo, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology. The results indicated that the BP-lowering effect of allopurinol treatment was strongest in people who entered the study with the highest serum urate levels, greater than 6.5 mg/dL, an indication that the next step in developing this approach should be targeting it to people with serum urate levels in this range, said Dr. Gaffo, a rheumatologist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

“It’s just a matter of finding the right population to see the blood pressure reduction effect,” Dr. Gaffo said in an interview.

He and his associates designed the SURPHER (Serum Urate Reduction to Prevent Hypertension) study to assess the impact of allopurinol treatment in people aged 18-40 years with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension as defined by U.S. BP standards at the time they launched the study in 2016 (Contemp Clin Trials. 2016 Sep;50:238-44). Enrolled participants had to be nonsmokers; have an estimated glomerular filtration rate of greater than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m²; have a serum urate level of at least 5.0 mg/dL in men and at least 4.0 mg/dL in women; and be without diabetes, antihypertensive medications, prior urate-lowering treatment, or a history of gout. The 99 people who started the study averaged 28 years old, nearly two-thirds were men, 40% were African Americans, and 52% were white. The participants’ average body mass index was nearly 31 kg/m², and their average BP was 127/81 mm Hg. Average serum urate levels were 6.4 mg/dL in men and 4.9 mg/dL in women. Participants received 300 mg/day allopurinol or placebo, and after 4 weeks crossed to the alternate regimen, with 82 people completing the full protocol. While on allopurinol, serum urate levels fell by an average of 1.3 mg/dL, a statistically significant drop; on placebo, the levels showed no significant change from baseline.

The primary endpoint was the change in BP on allopurinol treatment, which overall showed no statistically significant difference, compared with when participants received placebo. The results also showed no significant impact of allopurinol treatment, compared with placebo, in serum levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, a measure of inflammation. However, for the secondary endpoint of change in endothelial function as measured by a change in flow-mediated dilation (FMD), the results showed a statistically significant effect of allopurinol treatment. While on allopurinol, average FMD increased from 10.3% at baseline to 14.5% on the drug, a 41% relative increase, while on placebo the average FMD rate showed a slight reduction. Allopurinol treatment was safe and well tolerated during the study.

The results also showed that among people with a baseline serum urate level of greater than 6.5 mg/dL (15 of the 82 study completers) systolic BP fell by an average of about 5 mm Hg.

The results suggested that the concept of reducing hyperuricemia in people with early-stage hypertension or prehypertension might be viable for people with higher serum urate levels than most of those enrolled in SURPHER, Dr. Gaffo said. He noted that prior study results in obese adolescents showed that treating hyperuricemia was able to produce a meaningful BP reduction (Hypertension. 2012 Nov;60[5]:1148-56).

SURPHER received no commercial funding. Dr. Gaffo has received research funding from Amgen and AstraZeneca.

[email protected]

MADRID – Using allopurinol to reduce hyperuricemia in young adults with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension failed to significantly lower blood pressure but succeeded in significantly improving endothelial function as measured by increased flow-mediated arterial dilation in a single-center crossover study with 82 participants.

The finding of improved endothelial function suggests that reducing hyperuricemia may be a new way to manage hypertension or prevent progression to stage 1 hypertension, improve cardiovascular health, and ultimately cut cardiovascular events, Angelo L. Gaffo, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology. The results indicated that the BP-lowering effect of allopurinol treatment was strongest in people who entered the study with the highest serum urate levels, greater than 6.5 mg/dL, an indication that the next step in developing this approach should be targeting it to people with serum urate levels in this range, said Dr. Gaffo, a rheumatologist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

“It’s just a matter of finding the right population to see the blood pressure reduction effect,” Dr. Gaffo said in an interview.

He and his associates designed the SURPHER (Serum Urate Reduction to Prevent Hypertension) study to assess the impact of allopurinol treatment in people aged 18-40 years with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension as defined by U.S. BP standards at the time they launched the study in 2016 (Contemp Clin Trials. 2016 Sep;50:238-44). Enrolled participants had to be nonsmokers; have an estimated glomerular filtration rate of greater than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m²; have a serum urate level of at least 5.0 mg/dL in men and at least 4.0 mg/dL in women; and be without diabetes, antihypertensive medications, prior urate-lowering treatment, or a history of gout. The 99 people who started the study averaged 28 years old, nearly two-thirds were men, 40% were African Americans, and 52% were white. The participants’ average body mass index was nearly 31 kg/m², and their average BP was 127/81 mm Hg. Average serum urate levels were 6.4 mg/dL in men and 4.9 mg/dL in women. Participants received 300 mg/day allopurinol or placebo, and after 4 weeks crossed to the alternate regimen, with 82 people completing the full protocol. While on allopurinol, serum urate levels fell by an average of 1.3 mg/dL, a statistically significant drop; on placebo, the levels showed no significant change from baseline.

The primary endpoint was the change in BP on allopurinol treatment, which overall showed no statistically significant difference, compared with when participants received placebo. The results also showed no significant impact of allopurinol treatment, compared with placebo, in serum levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, a measure of inflammation. However, for the secondary endpoint of change in endothelial function as measured by a change in flow-mediated dilation (FMD), the results showed a statistically significant effect of allopurinol treatment. While on allopurinol, average FMD increased from 10.3% at baseline to 14.5% on the drug, a 41% relative increase, while on placebo the average FMD rate showed a slight reduction. Allopurinol treatment was safe and well tolerated during the study.

The results also showed that among people with a baseline serum urate level of greater than 6.5 mg/dL (15 of the 82 study completers) systolic BP fell by an average of about 5 mm Hg.

The results suggested that the concept of reducing hyperuricemia in people with early-stage hypertension or prehypertension might be viable for people with higher serum urate levels than most of those enrolled in SURPHER, Dr. Gaffo said. He noted that prior study results in obese adolescents showed that treating hyperuricemia was able to produce a meaningful BP reduction (Hypertension. 2012 Nov;60[5]:1148-56).

SURPHER received no commercial funding. Dr. Gaffo has received research funding from Amgen and AstraZeneca.

[email protected]

MADRID – Using allopurinol to reduce hyperuricemia in young adults with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension failed to significantly lower blood pressure but succeeded in significantly improving endothelial function as measured by increased flow-mediated arterial dilation in a single-center crossover study with 82 participants.

The finding of improved endothelial function suggests that reducing hyperuricemia may be a new way to manage hypertension or prevent progression to stage 1 hypertension, improve cardiovascular health, and ultimately cut cardiovascular events, Angelo L. Gaffo, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology. The results indicated that the BP-lowering effect of allopurinol treatment was strongest in people who entered the study with the highest serum urate levels, greater than 6.5 mg/dL, an indication that the next step in developing this approach should be targeting it to people with serum urate levels in this range, said Dr. Gaffo, a rheumatologist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

“It’s just a matter of finding the right population to see the blood pressure reduction effect,” Dr. Gaffo said in an interview.

He and his associates designed the SURPHER (Serum Urate Reduction to Prevent Hypertension) study to assess the impact of allopurinol treatment in people aged 18-40 years with prehypertension or stage 1 hypertension as defined by U.S. BP standards at the time they launched the study in 2016 (Contemp Clin Trials. 2016 Sep;50:238-44). Enrolled participants had to be nonsmokers; have an estimated glomerular filtration rate of greater than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m²; have a serum urate level of at least 5.0 mg/dL in men and at least 4.0 mg/dL in women; and be without diabetes, antihypertensive medications, prior urate-lowering treatment, or a history of gout. The 99 people who started the study averaged 28 years old, nearly two-thirds were men, 40% were African Americans, and 52% were white. The participants’ average body mass index was nearly 31 kg/m², and their average BP was 127/81 mm Hg. Average serum urate levels were 6.4 mg/dL in men and 4.9 mg/dL in women. Participants received 300 mg/day allopurinol or placebo, and after 4 weeks crossed to the alternate regimen, with 82 people completing the full protocol. While on allopurinol, serum urate levels fell by an average of 1.3 mg/dL, a statistically significant drop; on placebo, the levels showed no significant change from baseline.

The primary endpoint was the change in BP on allopurinol treatment, which overall showed no statistically significant difference, compared with when participants received placebo. The results also showed no significant impact of allopurinol treatment, compared with placebo, in serum levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, a measure of inflammation. However, for the secondary endpoint of change in endothelial function as measured by a change in flow-mediated dilation (FMD), the results showed a statistically significant effect of allopurinol treatment. While on allopurinol, average FMD increased from 10.3% at baseline to 14.5% on the drug, a 41% relative increase, while on placebo the average FMD rate showed a slight reduction. Allopurinol treatment was safe and well tolerated during the study.

The results also showed that among people with a baseline serum urate level of greater than 6.5 mg/dL (15 of the 82 study completers) systolic BP fell by an average of about 5 mm Hg.

The results suggested that the concept of reducing hyperuricemia in people with early-stage hypertension or prehypertension might be viable for people with higher serum urate levels than most of those enrolled in SURPHER, Dr. Gaffo said. He noted that prior study results in obese adolescents showed that treating hyperuricemia was able to produce a meaningful BP reduction (Hypertension. 2012 Nov;60[5]:1148-56).

SURPHER received no commercial funding. Dr. Gaffo has received research funding from Amgen and AstraZeneca.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has announced that Teva is expanding its recall to certain lots of losartan potassium distributed by Golden State Medical Supply, according to a release.

The recall for this and other angiotensin II receptor blockers was initiated by Teva on April 25, 2019, because of detection of unacceptable levels of the possibly cancer-causing impurity N-Nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA). Teva expanded this recall on June 10, with another update issued on June 12.


Losartan is not the only ARB found to contain NMBA; a full list of all ARBs affected can be found on the FDA website and currently includes more than 1,100 lots being recalled. The list can be searched and sorted by such considerations as medicine in question, company involved, and lot number.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has announced that Teva is expanding its recall to certain lots of losartan potassium distributed by Golden State Medical Supply, according to a release.

The recall for this and other angiotensin II receptor blockers was initiated by Teva on April 25, 2019, because of detection of unacceptable levels of the possibly cancer-causing impurity N-Nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA). Teva expanded this recall on June 10, with another update issued on June 12.


Losartan is not the only ARB found to contain NMBA; a full list of all ARBs affected can be found on the FDA website and currently includes more than 1,100 lots being recalled. The list can be searched and sorted by such considerations as medicine in question, company involved, and lot number.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has announced that Teva is expanding its recall to certain lots of losartan potassium distributed by Golden State Medical Supply, according to a release.

The recall for this and other angiotensin II receptor blockers was initiated by Teva on April 25, 2019, because of detection of unacceptable levels of the possibly cancer-causing impurity N-Nitroso-N-methyl-4-aminobutyric acid (NMBA). Teva expanded this recall on June 10, with another update issued on June 12.


Losartan is not the only ARB found to contain NMBA; a full list of all ARBs affected can be found on the FDA website and currently includes more than 1,100 lots being recalled. The list can be searched and sorted by such considerations as medicine in question, company involved, and lot number.

[email protected]

Counties in states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act have experienced a significantly smaller increase in cardiovascular mortality rates among middle-aged adults, compared with counties in states that did not expand coverage, according to findings from a new study.

In expansion-state counties, the change in cardiovascular mortality was stable between the pre-expansion (2010-2013) and postexpansion (2014-2016) periods, at 146.5-146.4 deaths per 100,000 residents per year, compared with mortality rates in nonexpansion counties during the same periods (176.3-180.9 deaths per 100,000), Sameed Ahmed M. Khatana, MD, and colleagues wrote in JAMA Cardiology.

“After accounting for demographic, clinical, and economic differences, counties in expansion states had 4.3 fewer deaths per 100,000 residents per year from cardiovascular causes after Medicaid expansion than if they had followed the same trends as counties in nonexpansion states,” Dr. Khatana, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and colleagues wrote..

That translated into 2,039 fewer total deaths per year in residents aged between 45 and 64 years from cardiovascular causes after Medicaid expansion, the authors noted.

In all, 29 states, plus Washington, D.C., were included in the expansion group, and 19 states were in the nonexpansion (control) group. During the study period, from 2010 to 2016, the number of expansion counties ranged between 912 and 931, and for the nonexpansion counties, between 985 and 1,029. About half of the residents in each group were women. The percentage of black residents was lower in expansion states, but the percentage of Hispanic residents did not differ. Compared with nonexpansion counties, expansion counties also had a lower prevalence of diabetes (8.5% vs. 9.7% in the nonexpansion counties), obesity (26.2% vs. 29.1%), and smoking (17.1 vs. 18.9%); a lower mean percentage of poor residents (14.4% vs 16.6%; all with P less than .001); and a higher median household income.

Expansion counties also fared better when it came to health insurance coverage. In 2010, 14.6% of their residents had no coverage, compared with 19.5% of residents in nonexpansion counties. During the study period, the decrease in the percentage of middle-aged residents without health coverage was larger in expansion than in nonexpansion counties (7.3% vs. 5.6%, respectively), as was the decrease in low-income residents without coverage (19.8% vs. 13.5%).

However, the authors cautioned that, given the observational nature of the study, they were “not able to make a causal association between expansion of Medicaid eligibility and differences in the cardiovascular mortality rates between the two groups of counties. It is possible that there were other unmeasured time varying factors that can explain the observed association.”

Despite that limitation of the study, which observed adults in all income categories and was not limited to low-income residents, the researchers noted that, given the association between Medicaid expansion and cardiovascular mortality rates, as well as the “high burden of cardiovascular risk factors among individuals without insurance and those with lower socioeconomic status,” policy makers might consider the results in future discussions about changes to eligibility for and expansion of Medicaid.

Dr. Khatana is supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. Two authors reported relationships with drug companies outside of the reported study; the rest of the authors had no disclosures to report.

SOURCE: Khatana SAM et al. JAMA Cardiol. 2019 Jun 5. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1651.

Counties in states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act have experienced a significantly smaller increase in cardiovascular mortality rates among middle-aged adults, compared with counties in states that did not expand coverage, according to findings from a new study.

In expansion-state counties, the change in cardiovascular mortality was stable between the pre-expansion (2010-2013) and postexpansion (2014-2016) periods, at 146.5-146.4 deaths per 100,000 residents per year, compared with mortality rates in nonexpansion counties during the same periods (176.3-180.9 deaths per 100,000), Sameed Ahmed M. Khatana, MD, and colleagues wrote in JAMA Cardiology.

“After accounting for demographic, clinical, and economic differences, counties in expansion states had 4.3 fewer deaths per 100,000 residents per year from cardiovascular causes after Medicaid expansion than if they had followed the same trends as counties in nonexpansion states,” Dr. Khatana, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and colleagues wrote..

That translated into 2,039 fewer total deaths per year in residents aged between 45 and 64 years from cardiovascular causes after Medicaid expansion, the authors noted.

In all, 29 states, plus Washington, D.C., were included in the expansion group, and 19 states were in the nonexpansion (control) group. During the study period, from 2010 to 2016, the number of expansion counties ranged between 912 and 931, and for the nonexpansion counties, between 985 and 1,029. About half of the residents in each group were women. The percentage of black residents was lower in expansion states, but the percentage of Hispanic residents did not differ. Compared with nonexpansion counties, expansion counties also had a lower prevalence of diabetes (8.5% vs. 9.7% in the nonexpansion counties), obesity (26.2% vs. 29.1%), and smoking (17.1 vs. 18.9%); a lower mean percentage of poor residents (14.4% vs 16.6%; all with P less than .001); and a higher median household income.

Expansion counties also fared better when it came to health insurance coverage. In 2010, 14.6% of their residents had no coverage, compared with 19.5% of residents in nonexpansion counties. During the study period, the decrease in the percentage of middle-aged residents without health coverage was larger in expansion than in nonexpansion counties (7.3% vs. 5.6%, respectively), as was the decrease in low-income residents without coverage (19.8% vs. 13.5%).

However, the authors cautioned that, given the observational nature of the study, they were “not able to make a causal association between expansion of Medicaid eligibility and differences in the cardiovascular mortality rates between the two groups of counties. It is possible that there were other unmeasured time varying factors that can explain the observed association.”

Despite that limitation of the study, which observed adults in all income categories and was not limited to low-income residents, the researchers noted that, given the association between Medicaid expansion and cardiovascular mortality rates, as well as the “high burden of cardiovascular risk factors among individuals without insurance and those with lower socioeconomic status,” policy makers might consider the results in future discussions about changes to eligibility for and expansion of Medicaid.

Dr. Khatana is supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. Two authors reported relationships with drug companies outside of the reported study; the rest of the authors had no disclosures to report.

SOURCE: Khatana SAM et al. JAMA Cardiol. 2019 Jun 5. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1651.

Counties in states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act have experienced a significantly smaller increase in cardiovascular mortality rates among middle-aged adults, compared with counties in states that did not expand coverage, according to findings from a new study.

In expansion-state counties, the change in cardiovascular mortality was stable between the pre-expansion (2010-2013) and postexpansion (2014-2016) periods, at 146.5-146.4 deaths per 100,000 residents per year, compared with mortality rates in nonexpansion counties during the same periods (176.3-180.9 deaths per 100,000), Sameed Ahmed M. Khatana, MD, and colleagues wrote in JAMA Cardiology.

“After accounting for demographic, clinical, and economic differences, counties in expansion states had 4.3 fewer deaths per 100,000 residents per year from cardiovascular causes after Medicaid expansion than if they had followed the same trends as counties in nonexpansion states,” Dr. Khatana, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and colleagues wrote..

That translated into 2,039 fewer total deaths per year in residents aged between 45 and 64 years from cardiovascular causes after Medicaid expansion, the authors noted.

In all, 29 states, plus Washington, D.C., were included in the expansion group, and 19 states were in the nonexpansion (control) group. During the study period, from 2010 to 2016, the number of expansion counties ranged between 912 and 931, and for the nonexpansion counties, between 985 and 1,029. About half of the residents in each group were women. The percentage of black residents was lower in expansion states, but the percentage of Hispanic residents did not differ. Compared with nonexpansion counties, expansion counties also had a lower prevalence of diabetes (8.5% vs. 9.7% in the nonexpansion counties), obesity (26.2% vs. 29.1%), and smoking (17.1 vs. 18.9%); a lower mean percentage of poor residents (14.4% vs 16.6%; all with P less than .001); and a higher median household income.

Expansion counties also fared better when it came to health insurance coverage. In 2010, 14.6% of their residents had no coverage, compared with 19.5% of residents in nonexpansion counties. During the study period, the decrease in the percentage of middle-aged residents without health coverage was larger in expansion than in nonexpansion counties (7.3% vs. 5.6%, respectively), as was the decrease in low-income residents without coverage (19.8% vs. 13.5%).

However, the authors cautioned that, given the observational nature of the study, they were “not able to make a causal association between expansion of Medicaid eligibility and differences in the cardiovascular mortality rates between the two groups of counties. It is possible that there were other unmeasured time varying factors that can explain the observed association.”

Despite that limitation of the study, which observed adults in all income categories and was not limited to low-income residents, the researchers noted that, given the association between Medicaid expansion and cardiovascular mortality rates, as well as the “high burden of cardiovascular risk factors among individuals without insurance and those with lower socioeconomic status,” policy makers might consider the results in future discussions about changes to eligibility for and expansion of Medicaid.

Dr. Khatana is supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. Two authors reported relationships with drug companies outside of the reported study; the rest of the authors had no disclosures to report.

SOURCE: Khatana SAM et al. JAMA Cardiol. 2019 Jun 5. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1651.

Consuming caffeinated energy drinks leads to a prolonged QT interval and an increase in blood pressure, according to a study of young volunteers who had their hearts tested after drinking either energy drinks or placebo.

mipan/thinkstockphotos.

“Further investigation is warranted on whether an individual ingredient or a unique combination leads to the observed electrophysiological and hemodynamic changes,” wrote Sachin A. Shah of the University of the Pacific, Stockton, Calif., and coinvestigators. The study was published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.

To analyze electrocardiographic changes in the heart after consumption of 300 mg of caffeine plus other energy drink ingredients, the researchers assigned 34 healthy volunteers with an average age of 22 years to consume two 16-ounce bottles of either Drink A, a commercially available energy drink, Drink B, a different brand of energy drink, or a placebo drink for 3 days, followed by a 6-day washout period. Before and for 4 hours after consuming the beverages, volunteers had their hearts measured via ECG to test for differences in QT interval. Their blood pressures also were recorded.

Compared with placebo, the Drink A group had a 6.1 ms increase in QT interval and the Drink B group had a 7.7 ms rise. The maximum changes from baseline in corrected QT interval for Drink A, Drink B, and placebo were 17.9 ms, 19.6 ms, and 11.9 ms, respectively; both differences were statistically significant. Volunteers in Drink A and Drink B groups also had statistically significant increases of 5 mm Hg in systolic and 4 mm Hg in diastolic blood pressure after energy drink consumption, compared with placebo.

Both energy drinks used in the study contained caffeine (about 300 mg), taurine, glucuronolactone, and B vitamins. The investigators said that caffeine at doses under 400 mg is not expected to induce any electrocardiographic changes.

The coauthors noted their study’s limitations, including not investigating the effects of different doses and the possibility that consuming two 16-ounce bottles is an unrealistic real-world volume. That said, they noted that 16% of respondents to a 2,040-person survey admitted to consuming more than two energy drinks a day. In addition, though not every brand was tested, the researchers stated that, “the class of energy drinks, rather than one particular product, warrants use with caution.”

Dr. Shah reported serving as an expert witness in legal cases related to caffeinated energy drinks. The other authors reported no conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Shah SA et al. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 May 29.

Consuming caffeinated energy drinks leads to a prolonged QT interval and an increase in blood pressure, according to a study of young volunteers who had their hearts tested after drinking either energy drinks or placebo.

mipan/thinkstockphotos.

“Further investigation is warranted on whether an individual ingredient or a unique combination leads to the observed electrophysiological and hemodynamic changes,” wrote Sachin A. Shah of the University of the Pacific, Stockton, Calif., and coinvestigators. The study was published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.

To analyze electrocardiographic changes in the heart after consumption of 300 mg of caffeine plus other energy drink ingredients, the researchers assigned 34 healthy volunteers with an average age of 22 years to consume two 16-ounce bottles of either Drink A, a commercially available energy drink, Drink B, a different brand of energy drink, or a placebo drink for 3 days, followed by a 6-day washout period. Before and for 4 hours after consuming the beverages, volunteers had their hearts measured via ECG to test for differences in QT interval. Their blood pressures also were recorded.

Compared with placebo, the Drink A group had a 6.1 ms increase in QT interval and the Drink B group had a 7.7 ms rise. The maximum changes from baseline in corrected QT interval for Drink A, Drink B, and placebo were 17.9 ms, 19.6 ms, and 11.9 ms, respectively; both differences were statistically significant. Volunteers in Drink A and Drink B groups also had statistically significant increases of 5 mm Hg in systolic and 4 mm Hg in diastolic blood pressure after energy drink consumption, compared with placebo.

Both energy drinks used in the study contained caffeine (about 300 mg), taurine, glucuronolactone, and B vitamins. The investigators said that caffeine at doses under 400 mg is not expected to induce any electrocardiographic changes.

The coauthors noted their study’s limitations, including not investigating the effects of different doses and the possibility that consuming two 16-ounce bottles is an unrealistic real-world volume. That said, they noted that 16% of respondents to a 2,040-person survey admitted to consuming more than two energy drinks a day. In addition, though not every brand was tested, the researchers stated that, “the class of energy drinks, rather than one particular product, warrants use with caution.”

Dr. Shah reported serving as an expert witness in legal cases related to caffeinated energy drinks. The other authors reported no conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Shah SA et al. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 May 29.

Consuming caffeinated energy drinks leads to a prolonged QT interval and an increase in blood pressure, according to a study of young volunteers who had their hearts tested after drinking either energy drinks or placebo.

mipan/thinkstockphotos.

“Further investigation is warranted on whether an individual ingredient or a unique combination leads to the observed electrophysiological and hemodynamic changes,” wrote Sachin A. Shah of the University of the Pacific, Stockton, Calif., and coinvestigators. The study was published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.

To analyze electrocardiographic changes in the heart after consumption of 300 mg of caffeine plus other energy drink ingredients, the researchers assigned 34 healthy volunteers with an average age of 22 years to consume two 16-ounce bottles of either Drink A, a commercially available energy drink, Drink B, a different brand of energy drink, or a placebo drink for 3 days, followed by a 6-day washout period. Before and for 4 hours after consuming the beverages, volunteers had their hearts measured via ECG to test for differences in QT interval. Their blood pressures also were recorded.

Compared with placebo, the Drink A group had a 6.1 ms increase in QT interval and the Drink B group had a 7.7 ms rise. The maximum changes from baseline in corrected QT interval for Drink A, Drink B, and placebo were 17.9 ms, 19.6 ms, and 11.9 ms, respectively; both differences were statistically significant. Volunteers in Drink A and Drink B groups also had statistically significant increases of 5 mm Hg in systolic and 4 mm Hg in diastolic blood pressure after energy drink consumption, compared with placebo.

Both energy drinks used in the study contained caffeine (about 300 mg), taurine, glucuronolactone, and B vitamins. The investigators said that caffeine at doses under 400 mg is not expected to induce any electrocardiographic changes.

The coauthors noted their study’s limitations, including not investigating the effects of different doses and the possibility that consuming two 16-ounce bottles is an unrealistic real-world volume. That said, they noted that 16% of respondents to a 2,040-person survey admitted to consuming more than two energy drinks a day. In addition, though not every brand was tested, the researchers stated that, “the class of energy drinks, rather than one particular product, warrants use with caution.”

Dr. Shah reported serving as an expert witness in legal cases related to caffeinated energy drinks. The other authors reported no conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Shah SA et al. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 May 29.

Young Native Americans had increased left ventricular thickness and left ventricular hypertrophy after being exposed to arsenic, and had a greater risk if they showed signs of prehypertension or hypertension, according to recent research.

“The stronger association in subjects with elevated blood pressure suggests that individuals with preclinical heart disease might be more prone to the toxic effects of arsenic on the heart,” Gernot Pichler, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at Hospital Hietzing/Heart Center Clinic Floridsdorf in Vienna, stated in a press release.

Dr. Pichler and colleagues evaluated 1,337 individuals (mean age, 31 years; 61% female) in the Strong Heart Family Study, an extension of the Strong Heart Study that was designed to study cardiovascular disease in Native Americans. The researchers noted that, while the studies were not originally intended to evaluate arsenic exposure in these populations, “the importance of studying arsenic was recognized overtime as increasing evidence supported the role of arsenic in cardiovascular disease and the relatively high arsenic exposure in tribal communities, compared to other general populations in the United States.”

Arsenic exposure was determined through the sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine, and researchers used transthoracic ECG at baseline and follow-up to compare left ventricular geometry and function. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years and baseline median sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine was 4.24 (interquartile range, 2.82-6.90) mcg/g creatinine.

Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 4.6% overall, and the odds ratio of left ventricular hypertrophy per 100% increase in arsenic in the urine was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.08) overall and 1.58 for individuals with prehypertension or hypertension (95% CI, 1.04-2.41).

“People drinking water from private wells, which are not regulated, need to be aware that arsenic may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Pichler. “Testing those wells is a critical first step to take action and prevent exposure.”

Prospective and cross-sectional analyses both showed changes in left ventricular geometry – such as in the left atrial systolic diameter, interventricular septum, and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and mass index – were associated with exposure to arsenic. In addition, left ventricular function factors such as isovolumic relaxation time and stroke volume were also affected by arsenic exposure. However, the researchers noted that their study was limited by a single method of arsenic exposure and having no long-term follow-up for participants.

“The study raises the question of whether the changes in heart structure are reversible if exposure is reduced. Some changes have occurred in water sources in the study communities, and it will be important to check the potential health impact of reducing arsenic exposure,” said Dr. Pichler.

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health Sciences and grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Pichler G et al. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.119.009018.

Young Native Americans had increased left ventricular thickness and left ventricular hypertrophy after being exposed to arsenic, and had a greater risk if they showed signs of prehypertension or hypertension, according to recent research.

“The stronger association in subjects with elevated blood pressure suggests that individuals with preclinical heart disease might be more prone to the toxic effects of arsenic on the heart,” Gernot Pichler, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at Hospital Hietzing/Heart Center Clinic Floridsdorf in Vienna, stated in a press release.

Dr. Pichler and colleagues evaluated 1,337 individuals (mean age, 31 years; 61% female) in the Strong Heart Family Study, an extension of the Strong Heart Study that was designed to study cardiovascular disease in Native Americans. The researchers noted that, while the studies were not originally intended to evaluate arsenic exposure in these populations, “the importance of studying arsenic was recognized overtime as increasing evidence supported the role of arsenic in cardiovascular disease and the relatively high arsenic exposure in tribal communities, compared to other general populations in the United States.”

Arsenic exposure was determined through the sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine, and researchers used transthoracic ECG at baseline and follow-up to compare left ventricular geometry and function. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years and baseline median sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine was 4.24 (interquartile range, 2.82-6.90) mcg/g creatinine.

Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 4.6% overall, and the odds ratio of left ventricular hypertrophy per 100% increase in arsenic in the urine was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.08) overall and 1.58 for individuals with prehypertension or hypertension (95% CI, 1.04-2.41).

“People drinking water from private wells, which are not regulated, need to be aware that arsenic may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Pichler. “Testing those wells is a critical first step to take action and prevent exposure.”

Prospective and cross-sectional analyses both showed changes in left ventricular geometry – such as in the left atrial systolic diameter, interventricular septum, and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and mass index – were associated with exposure to arsenic. In addition, left ventricular function factors such as isovolumic relaxation time and stroke volume were also affected by arsenic exposure. However, the researchers noted that their study was limited by a single method of arsenic exposure and having no long-term follow-up for participants.

“The study raises the question of whether the changes in heart structure are reversible if exposure is reduced. Some changes have occurred in water sources in the study communities, and it will be important to check the potential health impact of reducing arsenic exposure,” said Dr. Pichler.

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health Sciences and grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Pichler G et al. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.119.009018.

Young Native Americans had increased left ventricular thickness and left ventricular hypertrophy after being exposed to arsenic, and had a greater risk if they showed signs of prehypertension or hypertension, according to recent research.

“The stronger association in subjects with elevated blood pressure suggests that individuals with preclinical heart disease might be more prone to the toxic effects of arsenic on the heart,” Gernot Pichler, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at Hospital Hietzing/Heart Center Clinic Floridsdorf in Vienna, stated in a press release.

Dr. Pichler and colleagues evaluated 1,337 individuals (mean age, 31 years; 61% female) in the Strong Heart Family Study, an extension of the Strong Heart Study that was designed to study cardiovascular disease in Native Americans. The researchers noted that, while the studies were not originally intended to evaluate arsenic exposure in these populations, “the importance of studying arsenic was recognized overtime as increasing evidence supported the role of arsenic in cardiovascular disease and the relatively high arsenic exposure in tribal communities, compared to other general populations in the United States.”

Arsenic exposure was determined through the sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine, and researchers used transthoracic ECG at baseline and follow-up to compare left ventricular geometry and function. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years and baseline median sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine was 4.24 (interquartile range, 2.82-6.90) mcg/g creatinine.

Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 4.6% overall, and the odds ratio of left ventricular hypertrophy per 100% increase in arsenic in the urine was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.08) overall and 1.58 for individuals with prehypertension or hypertension (95% CI, 1.04-2.41).

“People drinking water from private wells, which are not regulated, need to be aware that arsenic may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Pichler. “Testing those wells is a critical first step to take action and prevent exposure.”

Prospective and cross-sectional analyses both showed changes in left ventricular geometry – such as in the left atrial systolic diameter, interventricular septum, and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and mass index – were associated with exposure to arsenic. In addition, left ventricular function factors such as isovolumic relaxation time and stroke volume were also affected by arsenic exposure. However, the researchers noted that their study was limited by a single method of arsenic exposure and having no long-term follow-up for participants.

“The study raises the question of whether the changes in heart structure are reversible if exposure is reduced. Some changes have occurred in water sources in the study communities, and it will be important to check the potential health impact of reducing arsenic exposure,” said Dr. Pichler.

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health Sciences and grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Pichler G et al. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.119.009018.

NEW ORLEANS – Cell-free (cf) DNA looked like an informative biomarker for both the severity of pulmonary artery hypertension and the survival prognosis for patients with this disease, based on results from two preliminary studies involving a total of 173 people.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

“Plasma levels of cell-free DNA are elevated in patients with pulmonary artery hypertension, compared with healthy controls, and may predict disease severity and mortality,” Samuel B. Brusca, MD, said at the at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

A growing biomedical literature has documented a role for cfDNA in tracking the course of cancer, septic shock, and transplanted organs (Transplantation. 2019 Feb;103[2]:273-83) (Cell-Free DNA: Applications in Different Diseases, in “Cell-free DNA as Diagnostic Markers.” [New York: Humana Press, 2018, pp. 3-12]). Based on this background Dr. Brusca and his associates decided to examine whether plasma levels of cfDNA linked with pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) severity and survival.

Their first study included seven patients with mild PAH (defined as patients with a tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion [TAPSE] of more than 18 mm and a maximum oxygen uptake [VO₂] of at least 75% of predicted), eight with severe PAH (a TAPSE of 18 mm or less and a VO₂ of less than 75%), and seven healthy adult controls. Measurement of plasma cfDNA showed an average level of 19.4 ng/mL among the healthy controls (prior reports had indicated that 10-20 ng/mL were normal levels), 22.0 ng/mL among patients with mild PAH, and 36.2 ng/mL in those with severe PAH. The level among the severe PAH patients was significantly higher than the level in controls by two different statistical tests, said Dr. Brusca, a critical care medicine physician at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, Md.

The second analysis by Dr. Brusca and his associates included 151 PAH patients followed by physicians at the Clinical Center for an average of 40 months. Their analysis tracked survival of these patients relative to their baseline levels of cfDNA and divided into tertiles. Patients in the lowest tertile had a starting cfDNA level of up to 39 ng/mL, those in the middle tertile had levels of 39.1-64.0 ng/mL, and those in the top tertile had levels of at least 64.1 ng/mL. A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed statistically significant differences in survival rates between each of the tertiles. Patients in the lowest tertile had a 5-year actuarial survival rate of about 65%, those in the middle tertile had a survival rate of about 48%, and those in the tertile with the highest level of cfDNA had a survival rate of about 28%.

Additional studies of cfDNA are needed in larger numbers of PAH patients, and cfDNA levels should be compared with levels of other, more established biomarkers, such as inflammatory cytokines, Dr. Brusca said in an interview.

Dr. Brusca had no disclosures. The study received no commercial funding.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Brusca SB et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 March 12;73(9 Suppl 1):1897.

NEW ORLEANS – Cell-free (cf) DNA looked like an informative biomarker for both the severity of pulmonary artery hypertension and the survival prognosis for patients with this disease, based on results from two preliminary studies involving a total of 173 people.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

“Plasma levels of cell-free DNA are elevated in patients with pulmonary artery hypertension, compared with healthy controls, and may predict disease severity and mortality,” Samuel B. Brusca, MD, said at the at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

A growing biomedical literature has documented a role for cfDNA in tracking the course of cancer, septic shock, and transplanted organs (Transplantation. 2019 Feb;103[2]:273-83) (Cell-Free DNA: Applications in Different Diseases, in “Cell-free DNA as Diagnostic Markers.” [New York: Humana Press, 2018, pp. 3-12]). Based on this background Dr. Brusca and his associates decided to examine whether plasma levels of cfDNA linked with pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) severity and survival.

Their first study included seven patients with mild PAH (defined as patients with a tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion [TAPSE] of more than 18 mm and a maximum oxygen uptake [VO₂] of at least 75% of predicted), eight with severe PAH (a TAPSE of 18 mm or less and a VO₂ of less than 75%), and seven healthy adult controls. Measurement of plasma cfDNA showed an average level of 19.4 ng/mL among the healthy controls (prior reports had indicated that 10-20 ng/mL were normal levels), 22.0 ng/mL among patients with mild PAH, and 36.2 ng/mL in those with severe PAH. The level among the severe PAH patients was significantly higher than the level in controls by two different statistical tests, said Dr. Brusca, a critical care medicine physician at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, Md.

The second analysis by Dr. Brusca and his associates included 151 PAH patients followed by physicians at the Clinical Center for an average of 40 months. Their analysis tracked survival of these patients relative to their baseline levels of cfDNA and divided into tertiles. Patients in the lowest tertile had a starting cfDNA level of up to 39 ng/mL, those in the middle tertile had levels of 39.1-64.0 ng/mL, and those in the top tertile had levels of at least 64.1 ng/mL. A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed statistically significant differences in survival rates between each of the tertiles. Patients in the lowest tertile had a 5-year actuarial survival rate of about 65%, those in the middle tertile had a survival rate of about 48%, and those in the tertile with the highest level of cfDNA had a survival rate of about 28%.

Additional studies of cfDNA are needed in larger numbers of PAH patients, and cfDNA levels should be compared with levels of other, more established biomarkers, such as inflammatory cytokines, Dr. Brusca said in an interview.

Dr. Brusca had no disclosures. The study received no commercial funding.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Brusca SB et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 March 12;73(9 Suppl 1):1897.

NEW ORLEANS – Cell-free (cf) DNA looked like an informative biomarker for both the severity of pulmonary artery hypertension and the survival prognosis for patients with this disease, based on results from two preliminary studies involving a total of 173 people.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

“Plasma levels of cell-free DNA are elevated in patients with pulmonary artery hypertension, compared with healthy controls, and may predict disease severity and mortality,” Samuel B. Brusca, MD, said at the at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

A growing biomedical literature has documented a role for cfDNA in tracking the course of cancer, septic shock, and transplanted organs (Transplantation. 2019 Feb;103[2]:273-83) (Cell-Free DNA: Applications in Different Diseases, in “Cell-free DNA as Diagnostic Markers.” [New York: Humana Press, 2018, pp. 3-12]). Based on this background Dr. Brusca and his associates decided to examine whether plasma levels of cfDNA linked with pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) severity and survival.

Their first study included seven patients with mild PAH (defined as patients with a tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion [TAPSE] of more than 18 mm and a maximum oxygen uptake [VO₂] of at least 75% of predicted), eight with severe PAH (a TAPSE of 18 mm or less and a VO₂ of less than 75%), and seven healthy adult controls. Measurement of plasma cfDNA showed an average level of 19.4 ng/mL among the healthy controls (prior reports had indicated that 10-20 ng/mL were normal levels), 22.0 ng/mL among patients with mild PAH, and 36.2 ng/mL in those with severe PAH. The level among the severe PAH patients was significantly higher than the level in controls by two different statistical tests, said Dr. Brusca, a critical care medicine physician at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, Md.

The second analysis by Dr. Brusca and his associates included 151 PAH patients followed by physicians at the Clinical Center for an average of 40 months. Their analysis tracked survival of these patients relative to their baseline levels of cfDNA and divided into tertiles. Patients in the lowest tertile had a starting cfDNA level of up to 39 ng/mL, those in the middle tertile had levels of 39.1-64.0 ng/mL, and those in the top tertile had levels of at least 64.1 ng/mL. A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed statistically significant differences in survival rates between each of the tertiles. Patients in the lowest tertile had a 5-year actuarial survival rate of about 65%, those in the middle tertile had a survival rate of about 48%, and those in the tertile with the highest level of cfDNA had a survival rate of about 28%.

Additional studies of cfDNA are needed in larger numbers of PAH patients, and cfDNA levels should be compared with levels of other, more established biomarkers, such as inflammatory cytokines, Dr. Brusca said in an interview.

Dr. Brusca had no disclosures. The study received no commercial funding.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Brusca SB et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 March 12;73(9 Suppl 1):1897.

The recent publication of the changes and current levels of evidence for the guidelines from the American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, and the European Society of Cardiology once again indicates that the level of high-quality scientific data supporting the decision making process is limited.

Of the thousands of recommendations among the guidelines provided, level A data – which is supported by at least two randomized, controlled trials (RCT), arguably the gold standard for the proof of benefit of a treatment program – was available in only 8.5% of ACC/AHA recommendations and in 14.2% of ESC recommendations. The recent review covering guidelines published from 2008 to 2018 has changed very little since the previous review carried out on data collected between 1999 and 2014 (JAMA. 2019 Mar 19;321[11]:1069-80). Admittedly, by the nature of their design, RCTs represent a very special subset of any disease process but they are the best we can do. The remainder of the guidelines is supported by nonrandomized data and consensus opinion of “experts.” The absence of randomized data in the rest of the guidelines creates an area of uncertainty between clinical practice and outcomes.

Guidelines have been with us for almost 30 years and have provided a near “cookbook recipe” for the treatment of almost the totality of cardiovascular care, both in the United States and Europe. There is little evidence that guideline dissemination results in a beneficial effect on cardiovascular care, instead reflecting the contemporary published research and informed opinion of our generation.

Despite the limitation of hard data based on RCTs, cardiovascular mortality has leveled off in the last few years. Although there are a number of areas that could be investigated with more focused and practical RCTs, there has been little enthusiasm by either the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute or the pharmaceutical or device industries to investigate existing cardiovascular drugs and/or devices to better elucidate nuanced therapy for subsets of heart disease that remain in the uncertain data areas. In fact, the current report shows that there has been little change in guidelines in the last 10 years. Most effort has been focused on new drug development and application.

Much of the advance in cardiovascular care and decrease in mortality is a result of the development of new drugs for the treatment of hypertension, management of hypercholesterolemia, and MI, together with coronary angiography and its interventional permutations of the previous 50 years. Those advances are now part of our knowledge base, our therapeutic DNA, and in the absence of some new scientific breakthrough, there is little to expect from future guideline development. Medical students and house officers are being taught as fact what we found as exciting new therapy just a few short years ago. Guidelines are now part of textbook knowledge and until new clinical outcome are reported, guidelines will probably serve a useful reference material but will not lead to much change in clinical care.

Even so, treating the patient in the clinic and in the hospital still requires the doctor to practice the “art” of medicine and to synthesize therapy based on the paucity of scientific data and quasi knowledge acquired over a generation.

The appreciation that much is unknown gives the doctor the humility required to be sensitive to patient needs and their symptoms and the aspiration for new, science-based data. This is still part of the excitement of being a doctor.

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.

The recent publication of the changes and current levels of evidence for the guidelines from the American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, and the European Society of Cardiology once again indicates that the level of high-quality scientific data supporting the decision making process is limited.

Of the thousands of recommendations among the guidelines provided, level A data – which is supported by at least two randomized, controlled trials (RCT), arguably the gold standard for the proof of benefit of a treatment program – was available in only 8.5% of ACC/AHA recommendations and in 14.2% of ESC recommendations. The recent review covering guidelines published from 2008 to 2018 has changed very little since the previous review carried out on data collected between 1999 and 2014 (JAMA. 2019 Mar 19;321[11]:1069-80). Admittedly, by the nature of their design, RCTs represent a very special subset of any disease process but they are the best we can do. The remainder of the guidelines is supported by nonrandomized data and consensus opinion of “experts.” The absence of randomized data in the rest of the guidelines creates an area of uncertainty between clinical practice and outcomes.

Guidelines have been with us for almost 30 years and have provided a near “cookbook recipe” for the treatment of almost the totality of cardiovascular care, both in the United States and Europe. There is little evidence that guideline dissemination results in a beneficial effect on cardiovascular care, instead reflecting the contemporary published research and informed opinion of our generation.

Despite the limitation of hard data based on RCTs, cardiovascular mortality has leveled off in the last few years. Although there are a number of areas that could be investigated with more focused and practical RCTs, there has been little enthusiasm by either the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute or the pharmaceutical or device industries to investigate existing cardiovascular drugs and/or devices to better elucidate nuanced therapy for subsets of heart disease that remain in the uncertain data areas. In fact, the current report shows that there has been little change in guidelines in the last 10 years. Most effort has been focused on new drug development and application.

Much of the advance in cardiovascular care and decrease in mortality is a result of the development of new drugs for the treatment of hypertension, management of hypercholesterolemia, and MI, together with coronary angiography and its interventional permutations of the previous 50 years. Those advances are now part of our knowledge base, our therapeutic DNA, and in the absence of some new scientific breakthrough, there is little to expect from future guideline development. Medical students and house officers are being taught as fact what we found as exciting new therapy just a few short years ago. Guidelines are now part of textbook knowledge and until new clinical outcome are reported, guidelines will probably serve a useful reference material but will not lead to much change in clinical care.

Even so, treating the patient in the clinic and in the hospital still requires the doctor to practice the “art” of medicine and to synthesize therapy based on the paucity of scientific data and quasi knowledge acquired over a generation.

The appreciation that much is unknown gives the doctor the humility required to be sensitive to patient needs and their symptoms and the aspiration for new, science-based data. This is still part of the excitement of being a doctor.

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.

The recent publication of the changes and current levels of evidence for the guidelines from the American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, and the European Society of Cardiology once again indicates that the level of high-quality scientific data supporting the decision making process is limited.

Of the thousands of recommendations among the guidelines provided, level A data – which is supported by at least two randomized, controlled trials (RCT), arguably the gold standard for the proof of benefit of a treatment program – was available in only 8.5% of ACC/AHA recommendations and in 14.2% of ESC recommendations. The recent review covering guidelines published from 2008 to 2018 has changed very little since the previous review carried out on data collected between 1999 and 2014 (JAMA. 2019 Mar 19;321[11]:1069-80). Admittedly, by the nature of their design, RCTs represent a very special subset of any disease process but they are the best we can do. The remainder of the guidelines is supported by nonrandomized data and consensus opinion of “experts.” The absence of randomized data in the rest of the guidelines creates an area of uncertainty between clinical practice and outcomes.

Guidelines have been with us for almost 30 years and have provided a near “cookbook recipe” for the treatment of almost the totality of cardiovascular care, both in the United States and Europe. There is little evidence that guideline dissemination results in a beneficial effect on cardiovascular care, instead reflecting the contemporary published research and informed opinion of our generation.

Despite the limitation of hard data based on RCTs, cardiovascular mortality has leveled off in the last few years. Although there are a number of areas that could be investigated with more focused and practical RCTs, there has been little enthusiasm by either the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute or the pharmaceutical or device industries to investigate existing cardiovascular drugs and/or devices to better elucidate nuanced therapy for subsets of heart disease that remain in the uncertain data areas. In fact, the current report shows that there has been little change in guidelines in the last 10 years. Most effort has been focused on new drug development and application.

Much of the advance in cardiovascular care and decrease in mortality is a result of the development of new drugs for the treatment of hypertension, management of hypercholesterolemia, and MI, together with coronary angiography and its interventional permutations of the previous 50 years. Those advances are now part of our knowledge base, our therapeutic DNA, and in the absence of some new scientific breakthrough, there is little to expect from future guideline development. Medical students and house officers are being taught as fact what we found as exciting new therapy just a few short years ago. Guidelines are now part of textbook knowledge and until new clinical outcome are reported, guidelines will probably serve a useful reference material but will not lead to much change in clinical care.

Even so, treating the patient in the clinic and in the hospital still requires the doctor to practice the “art” of medicine and to synthesize therapy based on the paucity of scientific data and quasi knowledge acquired over a generation.

The appreciation that much is unknown gives the doctor the humility required to be sensitive to patient needs and their symptoms and the aspiration for new, science-based data. This is still part of the excitement of being a doctor.

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.