Citations

Background Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common comorbidity in patients with heart failure, although current evidence is equivocal regarding the potential benefits of treating OSA with positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy in patients with heart failure. This study assessed the impact of adherence to PAP therapy on health care resource utilization in patients with OSA and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results Administrative insurance claims data linked with objective PAP therapy use data from patients with OSA and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were used to determine associations between PAP adherence and a composite outcome of hospitalizations and emergency room visits. One‐year PAP adherence was based on an adapted US Medicare definition. Propensity score methods were used to create groups with similar characteristics across PAP adherence levels. The study cohort included 3182 patients (69.9% male, mean age 59.7 years); 39% were considered adherent to PAP therapy (29% intermediate adherent, 31% nonadherent). One year after PAP initiation, adherent patients had fewer composite visits than matched nonadherent patients, driven by a 24% reduction in emergency room visits for adherent patients. Composite visit costs were lower in adherent versus nonadherent patients ($3500 versus $5879, P =0.031), although total health care costs were not statistically different ($13 028 versus $14 729, P =0.889). Conclusions PAP therapy adherence in patients with OSA with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction was associated with a reduction in health care resource utilization. This suggests that greater emphasis should be placed on diagnosing and effectively treating OSA with PAP in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Abstract Objectives Disease flares in the post–coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). Methods The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022, respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history and vaccination details. Flares of IIMs were defined as (a) patient self-reported, (b) immunosuppression (IS) denoted, (c) clinical sign directed and (d) with >7.9-point minimal clinically significant improvement difference worsening of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analysed using regression models. Results Of 15 165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians) and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7% and 19.6% patients by definitions (a) to (d), respectively, with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7–235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.03, 1.6, P = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving rituximab (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1, 0.7, P = 0.010) and AZA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1, 0.8, P = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in IS. Asthma (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.05, 2.50, P = 0.028) and higher pain visual analogue score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27, P < 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. Conclusion A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post–COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient- and physician-reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration.

Clonidine, an alpha-2 adrenergic agonist, has been proposed as an antimanic agent that acts by reducing noradrenergic transmission. We conducted a systematic review to examine the efficacy and safety of clonidine for acute mania/hypomania. A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) and non-randomized studies investigating the efficacy and safety of monotherapy/adjuvant treatment with clonidine for acute mania/hypomania in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). Nine studies (n = 222) met our inclusion criteria, including five RCTs (n = 159) and four non-randomized studies (n = 63). Non-randomized studies showed clonidine to help reduce symptoms of mania. However, data from placebo controlled RCTs were inconsistent. One RCT showed adjuvant clonidine as superior to placebo, whereas another RCT reported that clonidine was not better than placebo. In individual RCTs, lithium and valproate offered better antimanic effects compared to clonidine. Studies reported hypotension, depression, and somnolence as common adverse effects. Significant differences in study design and sample size contributed to high heterogeneity. This systematic review suggests low-grade evidence for clonidine as an adjuvant treatment for acute mania with mood stabilizers and inconclusive efficacy as monotherapy, warranting further well-designed RCTs.

Abstract Objective Flares of autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are a particular concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs, using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. Methods The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details for patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported (a), increased immunosuppression (b), clinical exacerbations (c) and worsening of PROMIS scores (d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. Results Of 15 165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5% and 26.7% by definitions a–d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, P = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (P = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHDs) (P < 0.001) and autoimmune disease multimorbidity (AIDm) (P < 0.001). In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.7; P = 0.003), or a MHD (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6; P = 0.007), or being a Moderna vaccine recipient (OR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.2; P = 0.014) were predictors of flares. Use of MMF (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.8; P = 0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = 0.003) were protective. A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared with before vaccination (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5; P < 0.001). Conclusion Flares occur in nearly 1 in 10 individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination; people with comorbidities (especially AIDm), MHDs and those receiving the Moderna vaccine are particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group.

AbstractTo date, bipolar disorder (BD) genetic studies and polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for BD are based primarily on populations of European descent (EUR) and lack representation from other ancestries including Latin American (LAT). Here, we describe a new LAT cohort from the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank (MCBB), a multisite collaboration with recruitment sites in the United States (EUR; 1,443 cases and 777 controls) and Mexico and Chile (LAT; 211 cases and 161 controls) and use the sample to explore the performance of a BD‐PRS in a LAT population. Using results from the largest genome‐wide association study of BD in EUR individuals, PRSice2 and LDpred2 were used to compute BD‐PRSs in the LAT and EUR samples from the MCBB. PRSs explained up to 1.4% (PRSice) and 4% (LDpred2) of the phenotypic variance on the liability scale in the LAT sample compared to 3.8% (PRSice2) and 3.4% (LDpred2) in the EUR samples. Future larger studies should further explore the differential performance of different PRS approaches across ancestries. International multisite studies, such as this one, have the potential to address diversity‐related limitations of prior genomic studies and ultimately contribute to the reduction of health disparities.

Abstract Objective COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys. Methods The first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups. Results We analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs – OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs – OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7–10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8–0.97)]. Conclusion Vaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.

Sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) during sports events has a dramatic impact on stadium-goers and the public and is often associated with poor outcomes unless treated with an automated external defibrillator (AED). Despite this, stadiums vary in AED use. This review aims to identify the risks and incidences of SCA, and the use of AEDs in soccer and basketball stadiums. A narrative review of all relevant papers was conducted. Athletes across all sports face an SCA risk of 1:50,000 athlete-years, with the greatest risk of SCA in young male athletes (1:35,000 person-years) and black male athletes (1:18,000 person-years). Africa and South America have the poorest soccer SCA outcomes at 3% and 4% survival. AED use on-site improves survival greater than defibrillation by emergency services. Many stadiums do not have AEDs implemented into medical plans and the AEDs are often unrecognisable or are obstructed. Therefore, AEDs should be used on-site, use clear signalling, have certified trained personnel, and be incorporated into stadiums’ medical plans.

18 Background: Studies have shown that African Americans (AA) are at increased risk for Colorectal Cancer (CRC) compared to other groups. Despite advancements in CRC screening modalities, few studies have investigated disparities in CRC screening among this vulnerable population. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients of age 45 or older who were seen in Family Medicine (FM), Internal Medicine (IM), or Gastroenterology (GI) between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021 at the Mayo Clinic. Information was collected regarding patient characteristics (age, sex, Charlson comorbidity score, race), and outcomes (whether a Cologuard test was ordered on the same day as the initial appointment, and whether the patient underwent a colonoscopy within 1 year after the initial appointment). Categorical variables were summarized with number and percentage of patients. Outcomes were compared between race groups (Caucasian, AA, Asian, Other) using unadjusted and multivariable logistic regression models. Multivariable models were adjusted for age, sex, and Charlson comorbidity score. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. P-values <0.05 were considered as statistically significant, and all statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Overall, 558,078 were included for analysis and 14,607 (2.6%) were AA. Overall, AA patients for less likely to have Cologuard ordered compared to Caucasians (OR=0.62, p<0.001), notably driven by patient seen in the FM group (OR=0.54, p<0.001) and no statistically significant difference was observed in the IM and GI groups (p=0.055 and p=0.43, respectively). Notably, compared to Caucasian patients, Asian patients were overall more likely to have Cologuard ordered (OR=1.23, p=0.003). In multivariable analysis assessing the likelihood of having a colonoscopy performed within 1 year of the initial appointment, the likelihood of a colonoscopy within 1 year of initial clinic visit was significantly lower for AA compared to Caucasian patients (OR=0.50, p=0.028). This difference was strongest in FM patients (OR=0.26, p=0.022) and was not significant for IM (OR=0.67, p=0.37) or GI (OR=2.31, p=0.25). Conclusions: In this study, we found that AA ethnicity is associated with reduced likelihood of having Cologuard ordered compared to Caucasian patients. Furthermore, AA patients were less likely to have colonoscopy ordered within 1 year of initial visit clinic visit among the overall cohort, highlighting important disparities in CRC screening among this vulnerable patient population notably for those seen in the FM group. Future studies are needed to assess other barriers for CRC screening in this population.