European Heart Journal - My Cardio Interview: Patrick Serruys & Ulf Landmesser on drug scaffolds

Background:N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a known marker of heart dysfunction, mainly described in patients with high activity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Further knowledge of the influence of the IL-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab (TCZ), on NT-proBNP levels and systolic heart function is yet to be obtained.Objectives:Access the effect of 12 months TCZ therapy on NT-proBNP levels, transthoracal ehocardiography results and analyze the association between congestive heart disease progression and RA activity.Methods:37 RA patients (pts) (31F/6M); median age 56,5 [48; 63,5] years; disease duration 48 [6; 348] months; DAS28 score 6,15 [5,44; 6,45]; rheumatoid factor (RF)+100%; anti–citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA) + 79,6% were treated in an open-label study with TCZ (8 mg/kg every 4 weeks). Identification of NT-pro-BNT in blood serum, transthoracal ultrasound evaluation of left ventriculum ejection fraction (LVEF), E/A ratio performed at baseline and 12 months.Results:11 (29,7%) pts had congestive heart disease (CHD) (II functional class of NYHA), 7 (18,9%) pts having signs of mild left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) as dyspnea, shortness of breath, cardiotropic treatment remained the same in the course of the study. After 12 month TCZ treatment as RA activity lowered (DAS28 2.32 [1,75; 3,15], р<0,05), NT-proBNP levels decreased (100,95 [57.9; 117.6] pg/ml to 90,46 [33.62; 106.6] pg/ml), along with elevation of LVEF (60,75 [60; 70]% to 67,68 [62.5; 73.5], p = 0,001). Increase of E/A (0,97 [0.8; 1.17] to 1,04 [0.7; 1.42] correlated with decrease of NT-proBNP level (r = -0,63, p=0,036). Raise of LVEF over 12 months correlated with decrease of RA activity according to SDAI scale (r= -0,670, p<0,05). No significant relationship between NT-proBNP levels, LVEF, E/A and other scales measuring RA activity was found. Clinically all patients had improvement in evaluation of their health and no signs of CHD or RVD progression were found.Conclusion:Use of TCZ in patients with active RA showed none to positive influence on heart condition, specifically, lowering NT-proBNP levels, improving LVEF and reducing clinical signs of LVD.References:[1]Pan Y, Li D, Ma J, Shan L, Wei M. NT-proBNP test with improved accuracy for the diagnosis of chronic heart failure. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Dec;96(51):e9181.[2]D Novikova, I Kirillova, E Markelova et al. The first report of significantly improvement of NT-proBNP level in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with tofacitinib during 12-month follow-up, European Heart Journal, Volume 40, Issue Supplement_1, October 2019, ehz745.0836.[3]Pappas DA, Nyberg F, Kremer JM et al. Clin Rheumatol. 2018 Sep;37(9):2331-2340.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Download Full-text

The year 2015–16 in the European Heart Journal—Cardiovascular Imaging. Part II

European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging ◽

10.1093/ehjci/jex237 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 18 (12) ◽

pp. 1322-1330 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Thor Edvardsen ◽

Bernhard Gerber ◽

Erwan Donal ◽

Pál Maurovich-Horvat ◽

Gerald Maurer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

European Heart Journal ◽

Cardiovascular Imaging

Download Full-text

P5707An evaluation of the use of propensity scores in cardiovascular literature: a systematic review and recommendations

European Heart Journal ◽

10.1093/eurheartj/ehz746.0648 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

M Samuel ◽

B Batomen ◽

J Rouette ◽

J Kim ◽

R W Platt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

New England ◽

Propensity Scores ◽

European Heart Journal ◽

Causal Effect ◽

High Impact ◽

Statistical Testing ◽

Clinical Literature ◽

Combination Of Methods ◽

Selection And Assessment

Abstract Background As randomized trials cannot always be conducted, propensity score (PS) methods are frequently used in cardiovascular observational studies. Previous evaluations found insufficient and inaccurate reporting of PS methods in the clinical literature, however; a comprehensive and current evaluation of their use and reporting is thus warranted. Purpose 1) To conduct a systematic review of cardiovascular articles published in high-impact medical and cardiovascular journals to evaluate the use and reporting of PS methods, as well as interpretation of results. 2) To identify key reporting and analysis elements when using PS methods. Methods Cardiovascular articles using PS published between 2010 to 2017 in high-impact medical (5) and cardiovascular (3) journals were reviewed. Included studies used a PS-based method, and focused on cardiovascular diseases, outcomes, interventions, or techniques. Information was extracted on: (1) PS assumptions, (2) variable selection and assessment of model success, (3) specifics of each PS method, and (4) consistency of written interpretation with the causal effect estimated. Each article was evaluated by 2 reviewers. Recommendations for key elements to be included in publications were based on findings and PS methodological literature. Results Of the 296 included articles, most were published in Journal of the American College of Cardiology (83 articles; 28%), followed by Circulation (79 articles; 27%), European Heart Journal (46 articles; 14%), Journal of the American Medical Association (35 articles; 12%), British Medical Journal (30 articles; 10%), New England Journal of Medicine (10 articles; 3%), Annals of Internal Medicine (10 articles; 3%), and Lancet (3 articles; <1%). The most commonly used PS method was matching (53% of studies), followed by a combination of methods (19%), direct adjustment (13%), inverse probability weighting (IPW, 12%), and stratification (3%). Variables in the PS model were predefined in 77% of articles, selected with statistical testing in 17% of articles, or both in 5% of articles (no details for 1% of articles). Balance was not assessed in 16% of papers and 38% of articles that evaluated balance did not report standardized differences, the recommended measure to assess balance. For matching, most studies (85%) conducted a 1:1 match; however, 17% of studies had >50% of unmatched treated (or untreated) patients (based on targeted parameter). Overall, heterogeneity of effects was assessed in 89% of all articles. In 48% of the reviewed articles, however, interpretations of the effect estimates did not correspond to the PS method conducted or described. Conclusions Detailed reporting of PS methods is important to maintain transparency and reproducibility, evaluate the appropriateness of the method, and correctly interpret the results and the population to which they apply. This systematic review describes areas for improvement.

Download Full-text