Mazimba, Sula

Background: Inequities in Preeclampsia/Eclampsia (PrE/E) persist. It is unknown if the receipt of cardiology care relates to future risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in Black and White patients with PrE/E. We sought to determine the cumulative incidence of MACE by race and whether predelivery cardiology care was associated with the hazard of MACE up to 1-year post-delivery for Black and White patients with PrE/E. Methods: Using Optum’s Clinformatics® Data Mart Database (CDM), we identified Black and White patients with PrE/E who had a delivery between 2008 to 2019. MACE was defined as the composite of heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. Cumulative incidence functions were used to compare the incidence of MACE by race. Cox regression models were used to assess the hazard of MACE by cardiology care for Black and White patients. Results: Among 29,336 patients (83.4% White, 16.6% Black, mean age of 30.9 years) with PrE/E, 11.2% received cardiology care (10.9% White, 13.0% Black). Black patients had a higher incidence of MACE than White patients at 1-yr post-delivery (2.7% vs 1.4%). After adjusting for age and clinical comorbidities, receipt of cardiology care was associated with lower hazard of MACE for White patients (HR= 0.68, 95%CI: 0.50-0.92 p=0.013) but not Black patients (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.82-1.81; p= 0.328). The interaction effect between race and cardiology care was statistically significant (p=0.013) Conclusions: Among a well-insured population of patients with PrE/E, Black patients had a higher cumulative incidence of MACE up to a year post-delivery. However, cardiology care significantly lowered the hazard of MACE for only White women. This observation does not suggest that cardiology care is detrimental to Black individuals but underscores the necessity to investigate why outcomes are disparate among these racial groups.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether predelivery cardiology care is associated with future risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in preeclampsia/eclampsia (PrE/E). We sought to determine the cumulative incidence of MACE by race and whether predelivery cardiology care was associated with the hazard of MACE up to 1 year post-delivery for Black and White patients with PrE/E. METHODS: Using Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database, we identified Black and White patients with PrE/E who had a delivery between 2008 and 2019. MACE was defined as the composite of heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and death. Cumulative incidence functions were used to compare the incidence of MACE by race. Regression models were used to assess the hazard of MACE by cardiology care for each race. Separate hazards were calculated for the first 14 days and the remainder of the year. RESULTS: Among 29 336 patients (83.4% White patients, 16.6% Black patients, 99.5% commercially insured, mean age: 30.9 years) with PrE/E, 11.2% received cardiology care (10.9% White patients, 13.0% Black patients). Black patients had higher incidence of MACE than White patients at 1 year post-delivery (2.7% versus 1.4%) with the majority within 14 days of delivery (Black patients: 58.7%; White patients: 67.8%). After adjusting for age and comorbidities, receipt of cardiology care was associated with a lower hazard of MACE for White patients within 14 days after delivery (hazard ratio, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.21–0.46]; P <0.001) but not Black patients (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.60–1.67]; P =0.999). The effect of the interaction between race and cardiology care was significant in the first 14 days ( P <0.001) but not the remainder of the year ( P =0.56). CONCLUSIONS: Among a well-insured population of patients with PrE/E, Black patients had a higher cumulative incidence of MACE up to a year post-delivery. Cardiology care was associated with a lower hazard of MACE only for White patients during the first 14 days after delivery.

Abstract Contemporary anticancer therapies frequently have different efficacy and side effects in men and women. Yet, whether women are well‐represented in pivotal trials supporting contemporary anticancer drugs is unknown. Leveraging the Drugs@FDA database, clinicaltrials.gov , MEDLINE, and publicly available FDA‐drug‐reviews, we identified all pivotal (phase II and III) non‐sex specific trials supporting FDA‐approval of anticancer drugs (1998–2018). Observed‐enrollment‐rates were compared to expected‐population‐rates derived from concurrent US‐National‐Cancer‐Institute's Surveillance‐Epidemiology‐and‐End‐Results (SEER) reported rates and US‐Census databases. Primary outcome was the proportional representation of women across trials, evaluated by a participation‐to‐prevalence ratio (PPR), according to cancer type. Secondary outcome was the report of any sex‐specific analysis of efficacy and/or safety, irrespective of treatment‐arm. Overall, there were 148 trials, enrolling 60,216 participants (60.5 ± 4.0 years, 40.7% female, 79.1% biologic, targeted, or immune‐based therapies) evaluating 99 drugs. Sex was reported in 146 (98.6%) trials, wherein 40.7% (24,538) were women, compared to 59.3% (35,678) men ( p < .01). Altogether, women were under‐represented in 66.9% trials compared to the proportional incidence of cancers by respective disease type; weight‐average PPR of 0.91 (relative difference: ‐9.1%, p < .01). Women were most under‐represented in gastric (PPR = 0.63), liver (PPR = 0.71), and lung (PPR = .81) cancer trials. Sex‐based safety data was reported in 4.0% trials. There was no association between adequate female enrollment and drug efficacy (HR: 0.616 vs. 0.613, p = .96). Over time, there was no difference in the percentage of women recruited into clinical trials. Among pivotal clinical trials supporting contemporary FDA‐approved cancer drugs, women were frequently under‐represented and sex‐specific‐efficacy and safety‐outcomes were commonly not reported.

ImportanceBarriers to heart transplant must be overcome prior to listing. It is unclear why Black men and women remain less likely to receive a heart transplant after listing than White men and women.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether race or gender of a heart transplant candidate (ie, patient on the transplant waiting list) is associated with the probability of a donor heart being accepted by the transplant center team with each offer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study used the United Network for Organ Sharing datasets to identify organ acceptance with each offer for US non-Hispanic Black (hereafter, Black) and non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White) adults listed for heart transplant from October 18, 2018, through March 31, 2023.ExposuresBlack or White race and gender (men, women) of a heart transplant candidate.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcome was heart offer acceptance by the transplant center team. The number of offers to acceptance was assessed using discrete time-to-event analyses, nonparametrically (stratified by race and gender) and parametrically. The hazard probability of offer acceptance for each offer was modeled using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for candidate-, donor-, and offer-level variables.ResultsAmong 159 177 heart offers with 13 760 donors, there were 14 890 candidates listed for heart transplant; 30.9% were Black, 69.1% were White, 73.6% were men, and 26.4% were women. The cumulative incidence of offer acceptance was highest for White women followed by Black women, White men, and Black men (P &amp;lt; .001). Odds of acceptance were less for Black candidates than for White candidates for the first offer (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69-0.84) through the 16th offer. Odds of acceptance were higher for women than for men for the first offer (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.39-1.68) through the sixth offer and were lower for the 10th through 31st offers.Conclusions and RelevanceThe cumulative incidence of heart offer acceptance by a transplant center team was consistently lower for Black candidates than for White candidates of the same gender and higher for women than for men. These disparities persisted after adjusting for candidate-, donor-, and offer-level variables, possibly suggesting racial and gender bias in the decision-making process. Further investigation of site-level decision-making may reveal strategies for equitable donor heart acceptance.

Introduction: Intravenous heparin is strongly associated with pocket hematoma (PH) formation in patients undergoing cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. However, there is no data on subcutaneous prophylactic heparin in this population Hypothesis: We hypothesized that the subcutaneous heparin may increase the odds of PH in patients undergoing CIED implantation using data from a large, nationally representative sample of the US population. Methods: The Premier Healthcare Database was analyzed from 2016-2019 to identify patients >18 years old undergoing CIED implantation. Patients with PH were then identified by using ICD-10 CM codes. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to adjust for confounders Results: A total of 267,650 patients underwent CIED implantation between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, of which 4,496 (1.68%) \developed PH. Single chamber pacemaker in 7.22%, dual-chamber pacemaker was implanted in 58.3% of patients, and CRT-P in 4.59%, ICD in 18.58%, CRT-D in 11.31%. Of the total cohort, 559 Patients received subcutaneous heparin within 3 days of the CIED implant procedure. Of these 559 patients, 91 (16%) patients were on subcutaneous heparin (pre-procedural: 19; post-procedural: 57) and developed PH. Subcutaneous heparin is associated with increased odds (OR :13.8,p<0.01) of PH formation. Conclusions: This study suggests that subcutaneous heparin is a strong risk factor for the development of PH. This may independently drive up the rates of PH in the inpatient population. Further studies on the timing of subcutaneous heparin need to be conducted.

Abstract Aims Obesity is causally related to the development of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) but complicates the diagnosis and treatment of this disorder. We aimed to determine the relationship between severity of obesity and clinical, echocardiographic and haemodynamic parameters in a large cohort of patients with documented HFpEF. Methods and results The REDUCE LAP-HF II trial randomized 626 patients with ejection fraction ≥40% and exercise pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) ≥25 mmHg to atrial shunt or sham procedure. We tested for associations between body mass index (BMI), clinical characteristics, cardiac structural and functional abnormalities, physical limitations, quality of life and outcomes with atrial shunt therapy. Overall, 60.9% of patients had BMI ≥30 kg/m2. As the severity of obesity increased, symptoms (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score) and 6-min walk distance worsened. More severe obesity was associated with lower natriuretic peptide levels despite more cardiac remodelling, higher cardiac filling pressures, and higher cardiac output. Lower cut points for E/e′ were needed to identify elevated PCWP in more obese patients. Strain measurements in all four chambers were maintained as BMI increased. Pulmonary vascular resistance at rest and exercise decreased with higher BMI. Obesity was associated with more first and recurrent heart failure events. However, there was no significant interaction between obesity and treatment effects of the atrial shunt. Conclusions Increasing severity of obesity was associated with greater cardiac remodelling, higher right and left ventricular filling pressures, higher cardiac output and increased subsequent heart failure events. Despite significant obesity, many HFpEF patients have preserved right heart and pulmonary vascular function and thus, may be appropriate candidates for atrial shunt therapy.

Background: Outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are influenced by access and adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy. Our objective was to study the association between annual household income and: (1) the odds of having a claim for sacubitril/valsartan among insured patients with HFrEF and (2) medication adherence (measured as the proportion of days covered). We hypothesized that lower annual household income is associated with decreased odds of having a claim for and adhering to sacubitril/valsartan. Methods: Using the Optum de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart, patients with HFrEF and ≥6 months of enrollment for follow-up (2016–2020) were included. Covariates included age, sex, race, ethnicity, educational attainment, US region, number of prescribed medications, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. Prescription for sacubitril/valsartan was defined by the presence of a claim within 6 months of HFrEF diagnosis. Adherence was defined as proportion of days covered ≥80%. We fit multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models and hierarchical logistic regression accounting for covariates. Results: Among 322 007 individuals with incident HFrEF, 135 282 had complete data for analysis. Of the patients eligible for sacubitril/valsartan, 4.7% (6372) had a claim within 6 months of HFrEF diagnosis. Following multivariable adjustment, individuals in the lowest annual income category (<$40 000) were significantly less likely (odds ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.76–0.90]) to have a sacubitril/valsartan claim within 6 months of HFrEF diagnosis than those in the highest annual income category (≥$100 000). Annual income <$40 000 was associated with lower odds of proportion of days covered ≥80% compared with income ≥$100 000 (odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.59–0.83]). Conclusions: Lower household income is associated with decreased likelihood of a sacubitril/valsartan claim and medication adherence within 6 months of HFrEF diagnosis, even after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors. Future analyses are needed to identify additional social factors associated with delays in sacubitril/valsartan initiation and long-term adherence.

Background: Outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), are influenced by access and adherence to guideline directed medical therapy. Objective: To study the association between median annual household income and: (1) odds of receiving sacubitril/valsartan, a novel angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy among insured patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and (2) medication adherence (measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC)). Hypothesis: lower income is associated with lower odds of receiving and adhering to ARNI among patients with HFrEF. Methods: Using Optum’s deidentified Clinformatics® Data Mart, patients with ≥ 2 diagnoses of HFrEF and ≥ 6 months of enrollment for follow up (2016-2020) were included. Covariates included age, race, ethnicity, sex, educational attainment, household net worth, geographical region and Elixhauser comorbidity index. Prescription for ARNI was defined by presence of a claim within 180 days. Adherence was defined as PDC ≥80%. We fit multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models and hierarchical logistic regression accounting for covariates. We also assessed for race-income interaction. Results: Among 322007 individuals with HFrEF diagnosis, 136,613 had ≥6 months of complete data. Of the patients eligible for ARNI, only 5.4% (7409/136613) received a claim within 180 days of HFrEF diagnosis. After adjusting for social and clinical factors, the odds were elevated for ARNI claim within 180 days of HFrEF diagnosis (OR=1.38, 95% CI: 1.27, 1.49) for the highest income category (>$100K) compared with the lowest (<$40K). After adjustment, income <$40k) was associated with a 47% higher odds of PDC<80% compared with income >$100K. Conclusions: Higher patient income is associated with increased likelihood of an ARNI claim within 180 days of HFrEF diagnosis, even after adjusting for socioeconomic and clinical factors. Future analyses are needed to determine other social factors associated with delay in ARNI initiation and long-term adherence.