Citations

Abstract Clinical question In adults with low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels >1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug? Current practice Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event. However, to achieve these goals in very high risk patients with statins alone is almost impossible, so physicians are increasingly considering other lipid-lowering drugs solely for achieving LDL cholesterol treatment goals rather than for achieving important absolute cardiovascular risk reduction. Most guidelines do not systematically assess the cardiovascular benefits of adding PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe for all risk groups across primary and secondary prevention, nor do they report, in accordance with explicit judgments of assumed patients’ values and preferences, absolute benefits and harms and potential treatment burdens. Recommendations The guideline panel provided mostly weak recommendations, which means we rely on shared decision making when applying these recommendations. For adults already using statins, the panel suggests adding a second lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but recommends against adding it in people at low cardiovascular risk. For adults who are intolerant to statins, the panel recommends using a lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but against adding it in those at low cardiovascular risk. When choosing to add another lipid-lowering drug, the panel suggests ezetimibe in preference to PCSK9 inhibitors. The panel suggests further adding a PCSK9 inhibitor to ezetimibe for adults already taking statins at very high risk and those at very high and high risk who are intolerant to statins. How this guideline was created An international panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations following standards for trustworthy guidelines and using the GRADE approach. The panel identified four risk groups of patients (low, moderate, high, and very high cardiovascular risk) and primarily applied an individual patient perspective in moving from evidence to recommendations, though societal issues were a secondary consideration. The panel considered the balance of benefits and harms and burdens of starting a PCSK9 inhibitor and/or ezetimibe, making assumptions of adults’ average values and preferences. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids accompany multi-layered recommendations, developed in an online authoring and publication platform ( www.magicapp.org ) that also allows re-use and adaptation. The evidence A linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (14 trials including 83 660 participants) of benefits found that PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe probably reduce myocardial infarctions and stroke in patients with very high and high cardiovascular risk, with no impact on mortality (moderate to high certainty evidence), but not in those with moderate and low cardiovascular risk. PCSK9 inhibitors may have similar effects to ezetimibe on reducing non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke (low certainty evidence). These relative benefits were consistent, but their absolute magnitude varied based on cardiovascular risk in individual patients (for example, for 1000 people treated with PCSK9 inhibitors in addition to statins over five years, benefits ranged from 2 fewer strokes in the lowest risk to 21 fewer in the highest risk). Two systematic reviews on harms found no important adverse events for these drugs (moderate to high certainty evidence). PCSK9 inhibitors require injections that sometimes result in injection site reactions (best estimate 15 more per 1000 in a 5 year timeframe), representing a burden and harm that may matter to patients. The MATCH-IT decision support tool allows you to interact with the evidence and your patients across the alternative options: https://magicevidence.org/match-it/220504dist-lipid-lowering-drugs/ . Understanding the recommendations The stratification into four cardiovascular risk groups means that, to use the recommendations, physicians need to identify their patient’s risk first. We therefore suggest, specific to various geographical regions, using some reliable risk calculators that estimate patients’ cardiovascular risk based on a mix of known risk factors. The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms. Because of the anticipated large variability of patients’ values and preferences, well informed choices warrant shared decision making. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids linked to the recommendations can facilitate such shared decisions. The strong recommendations against adding another drug in people at low cardiovascular risk reflect what the panel considered to be a burden without important benefits. The strong recommendation for adding either ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in people at high and very high cardiovascular risk reflect a clear benefit. The panel recognised the key uncertainty in the evidence concerning patient values and preferences, namely that what most people consider important reductions in cardiovascular risks, weighed against burdens and harms, remains unclear. Finally, availability and costs will influence decisions when healthcare systems, clinicians, or people consider adding ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors.

Abstract BackgroundFormalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues have many advantages for identification of risk biomarkers, including wide availability and potential for extended follow-up endpoints. However, RNA derived from archival FFPE samples has limited quality. Here we identified parameters that determine which FFPE samples have the potential for successful RNA extraction, library preparation, and generation of usable RNAseq data.MethodsWe optimized library preparation protocols designed for use with FFPE samples using seven FFPE and Fresh Frozen replicate pairs, and tested optimized protocols using a study set of 130 FFPE biopsies from women with benign breast disease. Metrics from RNA extraction and preparation procedures were collected and compared with bioinformatics sequencing summary statistics. Finally, a decision tree model was built to learn the relationship between pre-sequencing lab metrics and qc pass/fail status as determined by bioinformatics metrics.ResultsSamples that failed bioinformatics qc tended to have low median sample-wise correlation within the cohort (Spearman correlation < 0.75), low number of reads mapped to gene regions (< 25 million), or low number of detectable genes (11,400 # of detected genes with CPM > 2). The median RNA concentration and pre-capture library Qubit values for qc failed samples were 18.7 ng/ul and 1.68 ng/ul respectively, which were significantly lower than those of qc pass samples (40.8 ng/ul and 5.58 ng/ul). We built a decision tree model based on input RNA concentration, input library qubit values, and achieved an F score of 0.803 in predicting QC status (pass/fail) of FFPE samples. ConclusionsWe provide a bioinformatics quality control recommendation for FFPE samples from breast tissue by evaluating bioinformatic and sample metrics. Our results suggest a minimum concentration of 25 ng/ul FFPE-extracted RNA for library preparation and 1.8 ng/ul pre-capture library output to achieve adequate RNA-seq data for downstream bioinformatics analysis.

The epidemiology of macrolide resistance in Mycoplasma ( Mycoplasmoides ) pneumoniae in the United States is incompletely described. Using a PCR assay targeting common mutations associated with macrolide resistance in M. pneumoniae (23S rRNA gene, A2063G/A2064G), the frequency of macrolide resistance was estimated to be 10% based on analysis of 114 samples tested from January 2014 to September 2021 at Mayo Clinic Laboratories.

Ureaplasma -induced hyperammonemia is a deadly complication affecting around 4% of lung transplant recipients and, to a lesser extent, other solid organ transplant patients. Understanding the underlying mechanisms will inform patient management, potentially decreasing mortality and morbidity. Here, it is shown that uremia is a plausible contributing factor to the pathophysiology of the condition.

Abstract Purpose: Cardiac toxicity is a serious potential complication of HER2-directed therapies and anthracyclines. HER2 codon 655 and SLC28A3 gene polymorphisms have been reported to be associated with cardiac toxicity from anti-HER2 and anthracycline therapy, respectively. Association of the polymorphism at HER2 codon 655 with prognosis has also been reported. Experimental Design: Whole blood samples from patients treated on a randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial (BCIRG-006) that compared chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab plus either anthracycline or nonanthracycline chemotherapy were tested for genetic polymorphisms in HER2 codon 655 and SLC28A3. Genotypes were correlated with cardiac function and disease-free survival (DFS) outcomes. Results: Of 3,222 patients enrolled in BCIRG-006, 662 patient samples were successfully genotyped for the rs1136201 allele in HER2 (codon 655): 424 (64%) were AA, 30 (4.5%) were GG, and 208 (31%) were AG genotype. In addition, 665 patient samples were successfully genotyped for the rs7853758 allele in the SLC28A3 gene: 19 (3%) were AA, 475 (71%) were GG, and 171 (26%) were AG genotype. Follow-up time was 10 years. No correlation between DFS, cardiac event rate, or mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and rs1136201 genotype was seen in the trastuzumab-treated or non–trastuzumab-treated patients. Moreover, mean LVEF and cardiac event rates were similar in all rs7853758 genotype groups treated with anthracycline-based therapy. Conclusions: In the largest study to date to evaluate whether two polymorphisms are associated with DFS and/or cardiac toxicity in HER2-positive breast cancer treated with trastuzumab and/or anthracyclines, we observed no correlation.

Increasing antimicrobial resistance and medical device-related infections have led to a renewed interest in phage therapy as an alternative or adjunct to conventional antimicrobials. Expanded access and compassionate use cases have risen exponentially but have varied widely in approach, methodology, clinical situations in which phage therapy might be considered, dosing, route of administration, and outcomes.

Omadacycline, vancomycin, and rifampin, as well as rifampin combination therapies, were evaluated in an experimental rat model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) osteomyelitis. All treatment groups had less MRSA recovered than saline-treated animals.