User login
Bringing you the latest news, research and reviews, exclusive interviews, podcasts, quizzes, and more.
div[contains(@class, 'header__large-screen')]
div[contains(@class, 'read-next-article')]
div[contains(@class, 'main-prefix')]
div[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
footer[@id='footer']
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
div[contains(@class, 'ce-card-content')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-ce-stack')]
div[contains(@class, 'view-medstat-quiz-listing-panes')]
div[contains(@class, 'pane-article-sidebar-latest-news')]
Coming to a pill near you: The exercise molecule
Exercise in a pill? Sign us up
You just got home from a long shift and you know you should go to the gym, but the bed is calling and you just answered. We know sometimes we have to make sacrifices in the name of fitness, but there just aren’t enough hours in the day. Unless our prayers have been answered. There could be a pill that has the benefits of working out without having to work out.
In a study published in Nature, investigators reported that they have identified a molecule made during exercise and used it on mice, which took in less food after being given the pill, which may open doors to understanding how exercise affects hunger.
In the first part of the study, the researchers found the molecule, known as Lac-Phe – which is synthesized from lactate and phenylalanine – in the blood plasma of mice after they had run on a treadmill.
The investigators then gave a Lac-Phe supplement to mice on high-fat diets and found that their food intake was about 50% of what other mice were eating. The supplement also improved their glucose tolerance.
Because the research also found Lac-Phe in humans who exercised, they hope that this pill will be in our future. “Our next steps include finding more details about how Lac-Phe mediates its effects in the body, including the brain,” Yong Xu, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, said in a written statement. “Our goal is to learn to modulate this exercise pathway for therapeutic interventions.”
As always, we are rooting for you, science!
Gonorrhea and grandparents: A match made in prehistoric heaven
*Editorial note: LOTME takes no responsibility for any unfortunate imagery the reader may have experienced from the above headline.
Old people are the greatest. Back pains, cognitive decline, aches in all the diodes down your left side, there’s nothing quite like your golden years. Notably, however, humans are one of the few animals who experience true old age, as most creatures are adapted to maximize reproductive potential. As such, living past menopause is rare in the animal kingdom.
This is where the “grandmother hypothesis” comes in: Back in Ye Olde Stone Age, women who lived into old age could provide child care for younger women, because human babies require a lot more time and attention than other animal offspring. But how did humans end up living so long? Enter a group of Californian researchers, who believe they have an answer. It was gonorrhea.
When compared with the chimpanzee genome (as well as with Neanderthals and Denisovans, our closest ancestors), humans have a unique mutated version of the CD33 gene that lacks a sugar-binding site; the standard version uses the sugar-binding site to protect against autoimmune response in the body, but that same site actually suppresses the brain’s ability to clear away damaged brain cells and amyloid, which eventually leads to diseases like dementia. The mutated version allows microglia (brain immune cells) to attack and clear out this unwanted material. People with higher levels of this mutated CD33 variant actually have higher protection against Alzheimer’s.
Interestingly, gonorrhea bacteria are coated in the same sugar that standard CD33 receptors bind to, thus allowing them to bypass the body’s immune system. According to the researchers, the mutated CD33 version likely emerged as a protection against gonorrhea, depriving the bacteria of their “molecular mimicry” abilities. In one of life’s happy accidents, it turned out this mutation also protects against age-related diseases, thus allowing humans with the mutation to live longer. Obviously, this was a good thing, and we ran with it until the modern day. Now we have senior citizens climbing Everest, and all our politicians keep on politicking into their 70s and 80s ... well, everything has its drawbacks.
Parents raise a glass to children’s food addiction
There can be something pretty addicting about processed foods. Have you ever eaten just one french fry? Or taken just one cookie? If so, your willpower is incredible. For many of us, it can be a struggle to stop.
A recent study from the University of Michigan, which considered the existence of an eating phenotype, suggests our parents’ habits could be to blame.
By administering a series of questionnaires that inquired about food addiction, alcohol use disorders, cannabis use disorder, nicotine/e-cigarette dependence, and their family tree, investigators found that participants with a “paternal history of problematic alcohol use” had higher risk of food addiction but not obesity.
Apparently about one in five people display a clinically significant addiction to highly processed foods. It was noted that foods like ice cream, pizza, and french fries have high amounts of refined carbs and fats, which could trigger an addictive response.
Lindzey Hoover, a graduate student at the university who was the study’s lead author, noted that living in an environment where these foods are cheap and accessible can be really challenging for those with a family history of addiction. The investigators suggested that public health approaches, like restriction of other substances and marketing to kids, should be put in place for highly processed foods.
Maybe french fries should come with a warning label.
A prescription for America’s traffic problems
Nostalgia is a funny thing. Do you ever feel nostalgic about things that really weren’t very pleasant in the first place? Take, for instance, the morning commute. Here in the Washington area, more than 2 years into the COVID era, the traffic is still not what it used to be … and we kind of miss it.
Nah, not really. That was just a way to get everyone thinking about driving, because AAA has something of an explanation for the situation out there on the highways and byways of America. It’s drugs. No, not those kinds of drugs. This time it’s prescription drugs that are the problem. Well, part of the problem, anyway.
AAA did a survey last summer and found that nearly 50% of drivers “used one or more potentially impairing medications in the past 30 days. … The proportion of those choosing to drive is higher among those taking multiple medications.” How much higher? More than 63% of those with two or more prescriptions were driving within 2 hours of taking at least one of those meds, as were 71% of those taking three or more.
The 2,657 respondents also were asked about the types of potentially impairing drugs they were taking: 61% of those using antidepressants had been on the road within 2 hours of use at least once in the past 30 days, as had 73% of those taking an amphetamine, AAA said.
So there you have it. That guy in the BMW who’s been tailgating you for the last 3 miles? He may be a jerk, but there’s a good chance he’s a jerk with a prescription … or two … or three.
Exercise in a pill? Sign us up
You just got home from a long shift and you know you should go to the gym, but the bed is calling and you just answered. We know sometimes we have to make sacrifices in the name of fitness, but there just aren’t enough hours in the day. Unless our prayers have been answered. There could be a pill that has the benefits of working out without having to work out.
In a study published in Nature, investigators reported that they have identified a molecule made during exercise and used it on mice, which took in less food after being given the pill, which may open doors to understanding how exercise affects hunger.
In the first part of the study, the researchers found the molecule, known as Lac-Phe – which is synthesized from lactate and phenylalanine – in the blood plasma of mice after they had run on a treadmill.
The investigators then gave a Lac-Phe supplement to mice on high-fat diets and found that their food intake was about 50% of what other mice were eating. The supplement also improved their glucose tolerance.
Because the research also found Lac-Phe in humans who exercised, they hope that this pill will be in our future. “Our next steps include finding more details about how Lac-Phe mediates its effects in the body, including the brain,” Yong Xu, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, said in a written statement. “Our goal is to learn to modulate this exercise pathway for therapeutic interventions.”
As always, we are rooting for you, science!
Gonorrhea and grandparents: A match made in prehistoric heaven
*Editorial note: LOTME takes no responsibility for any unfortunate imagery the reader may have experienced from the above headline.
Old people are the greatest. Back pains, cognitive decline, aches in all the diodes down your left side, there’s nothing quite like your golden years. Notably, however, humans are one of the few animals who experience true old age, as most creatures are adapted to maximize reproductive potential. As such, living past menopause is rare in the animal kingdom.
This is where the “grandmother hypothesis” comes in: Back in Ye Olde Stone Age, women who lived into old age could provide child care for younger women, because human babies require a lot more time and attention than other animal offspring. But how did humans end up living so long? Enter a group of Californian researchers, who believe they have an answer. It was gonorrhea.
When compared with the chimpanzee genome (as well as with Neanderthals and Denisovans, our closest ancestors), humans have a unique mutated version of the CD33 gene that lacks a sugar-binding site; the standard version uses the sugar-binding site to protect against autoimmune response in the body, but that same site actually suppresses the brain’s ability to clear away damaged brain cells and amyloid, which eventually leads to diseases like dementia. The mutated version allows microglia (brain immune cells) to attack and clear out this unwanted material. People with higher levels of this mutated CD33 variant actually have higher protection against Alzheimer’s.
Interestingly, gonorrhea bacteria are coated in the same sugar that standard CD33 receptors bind to, thus allowing them to bypass the body’s immune system. According to the researchers, the mutated CD33 version likely emerged as a protection against gonorrhea, depriving the bacteria of their “molecular mimicry” abilities. In one of life’s happy accidents, it turned out this mutation also protects against age-related diseases, thus allowing humans with the mutation to live longer. Obviously, this was a good thing, and we ran with it until the modern day. Now we have senior citizens climbing Everest, and all our politicians keep on politicking into their 70s and 80s ... well, everything has its drawbacks.
Parents raise a glass to children’s food addiction
There can be something pretty addicting about processed foods. Have you ever eaten just one french fry? Or taken just one cookie? If so, your willpower is incredible. For many of us, it can be a struggle to stop.
A recent study from the University of Michigan, which considered the existence of an eating phenotype, suggests our parents’ habits could be to blame.
By administering a series of questionnaires that inquired about food addiction, alcohol use disorders, cannabis use disorder, nicotine/e-cigarette dependence, and their family tree, investigators found that participants with a “paternal history of problematic alcohol use” had higher risk of food addiction but not obesity.
Apparently about one in five people display a clinically significant addiction to highly processed foods. It was noted that foods like ice cream, pizza, and french fries have high amounts of refined carbs and fats, which could trigger an addictive response.
Lindzey Hoover, a graduate student at the university who was the study’s lead author, noted that living in an environment where these foods are cheap and accessible can be really challenging for those with a family history of addiction. The investigators suggested that public health approaches, like restriction of other substances and marketing to kids, should be put in place for highly processed foods.
Maybe french fries should come with a warning label.
A prescription for America’s traffic problems
Nostalgia is a funny thing. Do you ever feel nostalgic about things that really weren’t very pleasant in the first place? Take, for instance, the morning commute. Here in the Washington area, more than 2 years into the COVID era, the traffic is still not what it used to be … and we kind of miss it.
Nah, not really. That was just a way to get everyone thinking about driving, because AAA has something of an explanation for the situation out there on the highways and byways of America. It’s drugs. No, not those kinds of drugs. This time it’s prescription drugs that are the problem. Well, part of the problem, anyway.
AAA did a survey last summer and found that nearly 50% of drivers “used one or more potentially impairing medications in the past 30 days. … The proportion of those choosing to drive is higher among those taking multiple medications.” How much higher? More than 63% of those with two or more prescriptions were driving within 2 hours of taking at least one of those meds, as were 71% of those taking three or more.
The 2,657 respondents also were asked about the types of potentially impairing drugs they were taking: 61% of those using antidepressants had been on the road within 2 hours of use at least once in the past 30 days, as had 73% of those taking an amphetamine, AAA said.
So there you have it. That guy in the BMW who’s been tailgating you for the last 3 miles? He may be a jerk, but there’s a good chance he’s a jerk with a prescription … or two … or three.
Exercise in a pill? Sign us up
You just got home from a long shift and you know you should go to the gym, but the bed is calling and you just answered. We know sometimes we have to make sacrifices in the name of fitness, but there just aren’t enough hours in the day. Unless our prayers have been answered. There could be a pill that has the benefits of working out without having to work out.
In a study published in Nature, investigators reported that they have identified a molecule made during exercise and used it on mice, which took in less food after being given the pill, which may open doors to understanding how exercise affects hunger.
In the first part of the study, the researchers found the molecule, known as Lac-Phe – which is synthesized from lactate and phenylalanine – in the blood plasma of mice after they had run on a treadmill.
The investigators then gave a Lac-Phe supplement to mice on high-fat diets and found that their food intake was about 50% of what other mice were eating. The supplement also improved their glucose tolerance.
Because the research also found Lac-Phe in humans who exercised, they hope that this pill will be in our future. “Our next steps include finding more details about how Lac-Phe mediates its effects in the body, including the brain,” Yong Xu, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, said in a written statement. “Our goal is to learn to modulate this exercise pathway for therapeutic interventions.”
As always, we are rooting for you, science!
Gonorrhea and grandparents: A match made in prehistoric heaven
*Editorial note: LOTME takes no responsibility for any unfortunate imagery the reader may have experienced from the above headline.
Old people are the greatest. Back pains, cognitive decline, aches in all the diodes down your left side, there’s nothing quite like your golden years. Notably, however, humans are one of the few animals who experience true old age, as most creatures are adapted to maximize reproductive potential. As such, living past menopause is rare in the animal kingdom.
This is where the “grandmother hypothesis” comes in: Back in Ye Olde Stone Age, women who lived into old age could provide child care for younger women, because human babies require a lot more time and attention than other animal offspring. But how did humans end up living so long? Enter a group of Californian researchers, who believe they have an answer. It was gonorrhea.
When compared with the chimpanzee genome (as well as with Neanderthals and Denisovans, our closest ancestors), humans have a unique mutated version of the CD33 gene that lacks a sugar-binding site; the standard version uses the sugar-binding site to protect against autoimmune response in the body, but that same site actually suppresses the brain’s ability to clear away damaged brain cells and amyloid, which eventually leads to diseases like dementia. The mutated version allows microglia (brain immune cells) to attack and clear out this unwanted material. People with higher levels of this mutated CD33 variant actually have higher protection against Alzheimer’s.
Interestingly, gonorrhea bacteria are coated in the same sugar that standard CD33 receptors bind to, thus allowing them to bypass the body’s immune system. According to the researchers, the mutated CD33 version likely emerged as a protection against gonorrhea, depriving the bacteria of their “molecular mimicry” abilities. In one of life’s happy accidents, it turned out this mutation also protects against age-related diseases, thus allowing humans with the mutation to live longer. Obviously, this was a good thing, and we ran with it until the modern day. Now we have senior citizens climbing Everest, and all our politicians keep on politicking into their 70s and 80s ... well, everything has its drawbacks.
Parents raise a glass to children’s food addiction
There can be something pretty addicting about processed foods. Have you ever eaten just one french fry? Or taken just one cookie? If so, your willpower is incredible. For many of us, it can be a struggle to stop.
A recent study from the University of Michigan, which considered the existence of an eating phenotype, suggests our parents’ habits could be to blame.
By administering a series of questionnaires that inquired about food addiction, alcohol use disorders, cannabis use disorder, nicotine/e-cigarette dependence, and their family tree, investigators found that participants with a “paternal history of problematic alcohol use” had higher risk of food addiction but not obesity.
Apparently about one in five people display a clinically significant addiction to highly processed foods. It was noted that foods like ice cream, pizza, and french fries have high amounts of refined carbs and fats, which could trigger an addictive response.
Lindzey Hoover, a graduate student at the university who was the study’s lead author, noted that living in an environment where these foods are cheap and accessible can be really challenging for those with a family history of addiction. The investigators suggested that public health approaches, like restriction of other substances and marketing to kids, should be put in place for highly processed foods.
Maybe french fries should come with a warning label.
A prescription for America’s traffic problems
Nostalgia is a funny thing. Do you ever feel nostalgic about things that really weren’t very pleasant in the first place? Take, for instance, the morning commute. Here in the Washington area, more than 2 years into the COVID era, the traffic is still not what it used to be … and we kind of miss it.
Nah, not really. That was just a way to get everyone thinking about driving, because AAA has something of an explanation for the situation out there on the highways and byways of America. It’s drugs. No, not those kinds of drugs. This time it’s prescription drugs that are the problem. Well, part of the problem, anyway.
AAA did a survey last summer and found that nearly 50% of drivers “used one or more potentially impairing medications in the past 30 days. … The proportion of those choosing to drive is higher among those taking multiple medications.” How much higher? More than 63% of those with two or more prescriptions were driving within 2 hours of taking at least one of those meds, as were 71% of those taking three or more.
The 2,657 respondents also were asked about the types of potentially impairing drugs they were taking: 61% of those using antidepressants had been on the road within 2 hours of use at least once in the past 30 days, as had 73% of those taking an amphetamine, AAA said.
So there you have it. That guy in the BMW who’s been tailgating you for the last 3 miles? He may be a jerk, but there’s a good chance he’s a jerk with a prescription … or two … or three.
Scientists aim to combat COVID with a shot in the nose
Scientists seeking to stay ahead of an evolving SARS-Cov-2 virus are looking at new strategies, including developing intranasal vaccines, according to speakers at a conference on July 26.
Scientists and federal officials are looking to build on the successes seen in developing the original crop of COVID vaccines, which were authorized for use in the United States less than a year after the pandemic took hold.
But emerging variants are eroding these gains. For months now, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration have been keeping an eye on how the level of effectiveness of COVID vaccines has waned during the rise of the Omicron strain. And there’s continual concern about how SARS-CoV-2 might evolve over time.
“Our vaccines are terrific,” Ashish K. Jha, MD, the White House’s COVID-19 response coordinator, said at the summit. “[But] we have to do better.”
Among the approaches being considered are vaccines that would be applied intranasally, with the idea that this might be able to boost the immune response to SARS-CoV-2.
At the summit, Akiko Iwasaki, PhD, of Yale University, New Haven, Conn., said the intranasal approach might be helpful in preventing transmission as well as reducing the burden of illness for those who are infected with SARS-CoV-2.
“We’re stopping the virus from spreading right at the border,” Dr. Iwasaki said at the summit. “This is akin to putting a guard outside of the house in order to patrol for invaders compared to putting the guards in the hallway of the building in the hope that they capture the invader.”
Dr. Iwasaki is one of the founders of Xanadu Bio, a private company created last year to focus on ways to kill SARS-CoV-2 in the nasosinus before it spreads deeper into the respiratory tract. In an editorial in Science Immunology, Dr. Iwasaki and Eric J. Topol, MD, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, urged greater federal investment in this approach to fighting SARS-CoV-2. (Dr. Topol is editor-in-chief of Medscape.)
Titled “Operation Nasal Vaccine – Lightning speed to counter COVID-19,” their editorial noted the “unprecedented success” seen in the rapid development of the first two mRNA shots. Dr. Iwasaki and Dr. Topol noted that these victories had been “fueled by the $10 billion governmental investment in Operation Warp Speed.
“During the first year of the pandemic, meaningful evolution of the virus was slow-paced, without any functional consequences, but since that time we have seen a succession of important variants of concern, with increasing transmissibility and immune evasion, culminating in the Omicron lineages,” wrote Dr. Iwasaki and Dr. Topol.
Recent developments have “spotlighted the possibility of nasal vaccines, with their allure for achieving mucosal immunity, complementing, and likely bolstering the circulating immunity achieved via intramuscular shots,” they added.
An early setback
Scientists at the National Institutes of Health and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) have for some time been looking to vet an array of next-generation vaccine concepts, including ones that trigger mucosal immunity, the Washington Post reported in April.
At the summit on July 26, several participants, including Dr. Jha, stressed the role that public-private partnerships were key to the rapid development of the initial COVID vaccines. They said continued U.S. government support will be needed to make advances in this field.
One of the presenters, Biao He, PhD, founder and president of CyanVac and Blue Lake Biotechnology, spoke of the federal support that his efforts have received over the years to develop intranasal vaccines. His Georgia-based firm already has an experimental intranasal vaccine candidate, CVXGA1-001, in phase 1 testing (NCT04954287).
The CVXGA-001 builds on technology already used in a veterinary product, an intranasal vaccine long used to prevent kennel cough in dogs, he said at the summit.
The emerging field of experimental intranasal COVID vaccines already has had at least one setback.
The biotech firm Altimmune in June 2021 announced that it would discontinue development of its experimental intranasal AdCOVID vaccine following disappointing phase 1 results. The vaccine appeared to be well tolerated in the test, but the immunogenicity data demonstrated lower than expected results in healthy volunteers, especially in light of the responses seen to already cleared vaccines, Altimmune said in a release.
In the statement, Scot Roberts, PhD, chief scientific officer at Altimmune, noted that the study participants lacked immunity from prior infection or vaccination. “We believe that prior immunity in humans may be important for a robust immune response to intranasal dosing with AdCOVID,” he said.
At the summit, Marty Moore, PhD, cofounder and chief scientific officer for Redwood City, Calif.–based Meissa Vaccines, noted the challenges that remain ahead for intranasal COVID vaccines, while also highlighting what he sees as the potential of this approach.
Meissa also has advanced an experimental intranasal COVID vaccine as far as phase 1 testing (NCT04798001).
“No one here today can tell you that mucosal COVID vaccines work. We’re not there yet. We need clinical efficacy data to answer that question,” Dr. Moore said.
But there’s a potential for a “knockout blow to COVID, a transmission-blocking vaccine” from the intranasal approach, he said.
“The virus is mutating faster than our ability to manage vaccines and not enough people are getting boosters. These injectable vaccines do a great job of preventing severe disease, but they do little to prevent infection” from spreading, Dr. Moore said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Scientists seeking to stay ahead of an evolving SARS-Cov-2 virus are looking at new strategies, including developing intranasal vaccines, according to speakers at a conference on July 26.
Scientists and federal officials are looking to build on the successes seen in developing the original crop of COVID vaccines, which were authorized for use in the United States less than a year after the pandemic took hold.
But emerging variants are eroding these gains. For months now, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration have been keeping an eye on how the level of effectiveness of COVID vaccines has waned during the rise of the Omicron strain. And there’s continual concern about how SARS-CoV-2 might evolve over time.
“Our vaccines are terrific,” Ashish K. Jha, MD, the White House’s COVID-19 response coordinator, said at the summit. “[But] we have to do better.”
Among the approaches being considered are vaccines that would be applied intranasally, with the idea that this might be able to boost the immune response to SARS-CoV-2.
At the summit, Akiko Iwasaki, PhD, of Yale University, New Haven, Conn., said the intranasal approach might be helpful in preventing transmission as well as reducing the burden of illness for those who are infected with SARS-CoV-2.
“We’re stopping the virus from spreading right at the border,” Dr. Iwasaki said at the summit. “This is akin to putting a guard outside of the house in order to patrol for invaders compared to putting the guards in the hallway of the building in the hope that they capture the invader.”
Dr. Iwasaki is one of the founders of Xanadu Bio, a private company created last year to focus on ways to kill SARS-CoV-2 in the nasosinus before it spreads deeper into the respiratory tract. In an editorial in Science Immunology, Dr. Iwasaki and Eric J. Topol, MD, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, urged greater federal investment in this approach to fighting SARS-CoV-2. (Dr. Topol is editor-in-chief of Medscape.)
Titled “Operation Nasal Vaccine – Lightning speed to counter COVID-19,” their editorial noted the “unprecedented success” seen in the rapid development of the first two mRNA shots. Dr. Iwasaki and Dr. Topol noted that these victories had been “fueled by the $10 billion governmental investment in Operation Warp Speed.
“During the first year of the pandemic, meaningful evolution of the virus was slow-paced, without any functional consequences, but since that time we have seen a succession of important variants of concern, with increasing transmissibility and immune evasion, culminating in the Omicron lineages,” wrote Dr. Iwasaki and Dr. Topol.
Recent developments have “spotlighted the possibility of nasal vaccines, with their allure for achieving mucosal immunity, complementing, and likely bolstering the circulating immunity achieved via intramuscular shots,” they added.
An early setback
Scientists at the National Institutes of Health and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) have for some time been looking to vet an array of next-generation vaccine concepts, including ones that trigger mucosal immunity, the Washington Post reported in April.
At the summit on July 26, several participants, including Dr. Jha, stressed the role that public-private partnerships were key to the rapid development of the initial COVID vaccines. They said continued U.S. government support will be needed to make advances in this field.
One of the presenters, Biao He, PhD, founder and president of CyanVac and Blue Lake Biotechnology, spoke of the federal support that his efforts have received over the years to develop intranasal vaccines. His Georgia-based firm already has an experimental intranasal vaccine candidate, CVXGA1-001, in phase 1 testing (NCT04954287).
The CVXGA-001 builds on technology already used in a veterinary product, an intranasal vaccine long used to prevent kennel cough in dogs, he said at the summit.
The emerging field of experimental intranasal COVID vaccines already has had at least one setback.
The biotech firm Altimmune in June 2021 announced that it would discontinue development of its experimental intranasal AdCOVID vaccine following disappointing phase 1 results. The vaccine appeared to be well tolerated in the test, but the immunogenicity data demonstrated lower than expected results in healthy volunteers, especially in light of the responses seen to already cleared vaccines, Altimmune said in a release.
In the statement, Scot Roberts, PhD, chief scientific officer at Altimmune, noted that the study participants lacked immunity from prior infection or vaccination. “We believe that prior immunity in humans may be important for a robust immune response to intranasal dosing with AdCOVID,” he said.
At the summit, Marty Moore, PhD, cofounder and chief scientific officer for Redwood City, Calif.–based Meissa Vaccines, noted the challenges that remain ahead for intranasal COVID vaccines, while also highlighting what he sees as the potential of this approach.
Meissa also has advanced an experimental intranasal COVID vaccine as far as phase 1 testing (NCT04798001).
“No one here today can tell you that mucosal COVID vaccines work. We’re not there yet. We need clinical efficacy data to answer that question,” Dr. Moore said.
But there’s a potential for a “knockout blow to COVID, a transmission-blocking vaccine” from the intranasal approach, he said.
“The virus is mutating faster than our ability to manage vaccines and not enough people are getting boosters. These injectable vaccines do a great job of preventing severe disease, but they do little to prevent infection” from spreading, Dr. Moore said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Scientists seeking to stay ahead of an evolving SARS-Cov-2 virus are looking at new strategies, including developing intranasal vaccines, according to speakers at a conference on July 26.
Scientists and federal officials are looking to build on the successes seen in developing the original crop of COVID vaccines, which were authorized for use in the United States less than a year after the pandemic took hold.
But emerging variants are eroding these gains. For months now, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Food and Drug Administration have been keeping an eye on how the level of effectiveness of COVID vaccines has waned during the rise of the Omicron strain. And there’s continual concern about how SARS-CoV-2 might evolve over time.
“Our vaccines are terrific,” Ashish K. Jha, MD, the White House’s COVID-19 response coordinator, said at the summit. “[But] we have to do better.”
Among the approaches being considered are vaccines that would be applied intranasally, with the idea that this might be able to boost the immune response to SARS-CoV-2.
At the summit, Akiko Iwasaki, PhD, of Yale University, New Haven, Conn., said the intranasal approach might be helpful in preventing transmission as well as reducing the burden of illness for those who are infected with SARS-CoV-2.
“We’re stopping the virus from spreading right at the border,” Dr. Iwasaki said at the summit. “This is akin to putting a guard outside of the house in order to patrol for invaders compared to putting the guards in the hallway of the building in the hope that they capture the invader.”
Dr. Iwasaki is one of the founders of Xanadu Bio, a private company created last year to focus on ways to kill SARS-CoV-2 in the nasosinus before it spreads deeper into the respiratory tract. In an editorial in Science Immunology, Dr. Iwasaki and Eric J. Topol, MD, director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, urged greater federal investment in this approach to fighting SARS-CoV-2. (Dr. Topol is editor-in-chief of Medscape.)
Titled “Operation Nasal Vaccine – Lightning speed to counter COVID-19,” their editorial noted the “unprecedented success” seen in the rapid development of the first two mRNA shots. Dr. Iwasaki and Dr. Topol noted that these victories had been “fueled by the $10 billion governmental investment in Operation Warp Speed.
“During the first year of the pandemic, meaningful evolution of the virus was slow-paced, without any functional consequences, but since that time we have seen a succession of important variants of concern, with increasing transmissibility and immune evasion, culminating in the Omicron lineages,” wrote Dr. Iwasaki and Dr. Topol.
Recent developments have “spotlighted the possibility of nasal vaccines, with their allure for achieving mucosal immunity, complementing, and likely bolstering the circulating immunity achieved via intramuscular shots,” they added.
An early setback
Scientists at the National Institutes of Health and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) have for some time been looking to vet an array of next-generation vaccine concepts, including ones that trigger mucosal immunity, the Washington Post reported in April.
At the summit on July 26, several participants, including Dr. Jha, stressed the role that public-private partnerships were key to the rapid development of the initial COVID vaccines. They said continued U.S. government support will be needed to make advances in this field.
One of the presenters, Biao He, PhD, founder and president of CyanVac and Blue Lake Biotechnology, spoke of the federal support that his efforts have received over the years to develop intranasal vaccines. His Georgia-based firm already has an experimental intranasal vaccine candidate, CVXGA1-001, in phase 1 testing (NCT04954287).
The CVXGA-001 builds on technology already used in a veterinary product, an intranasal vaccine long used to prevent kennel cough in dogs, he said at the summit.
The emerging field of experimental intranasal COVID vaccines already has had at least one setback.
The biotech firm Altimmune in June 2021 announced that it would discontinue development of its experimental intranasal AdCOVID vaccine following disappointing phase 1 results. The vaccine appeared to be well tolerated in the test, but the immunogenicity data demonstrated lower than expected results in healthy volunteers, especially in light of the responses seen to already cleared vaccines, Altimmune said in a release.
In the statement, Scot Roberts, PhD, chief scientific officer at Altimmune, noted that the study participants lacked immunity from prior infection or vaccination. “We believe that prior immunity in humans may be important for a robust immune response to intranasal dosing with AdCOVID,” he said.
At the summit, Marty Moore, PhD, cofounder and chief scientific officer for Redwood City, Calif.–based Meissa Vaccines, noted the challenges that remain ahead for intranasal COVID vaccines, while also highlighting what he sees as the potential of this approach.
Meissa also has advanced an experimental intranasal COVID vaccine as far as phase 1 testing (NCT04798001).
“No one here today can tell you that mucosal COVID vaccines work. We’re not there yet. We need clinical efficacy data to answer that question,” Dr. Moore said.
But there’s a potential for a “knockout blow to COVID, a transmission-blocking vaccine” from the intranasal approach, he said.
“The virus is mutating faster than our ability to manage vaccines and not enough people are getting boosters. These injectable vaccines do a great job of preventing severe disease, but they do little to prevent infection” from spreading, Dr. Moore said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Exceeding exercise guidelines boosts survival, to a point
A new study suggests that going beyond current guidance on moderate and vigorous physical activity levels may add years to one’s life.
Americans are advised to do a minimum of 150-300 minutes a week of moderate exercise or 75-150 minutes a week of vigorous exercise, or an equivalent combination of both, according to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines.
Results from more than 100,000 U.S. adults followed for 30 years showed that .
Adults who reported completing four times the minimum recommended activity levels saw no clear incremental mortality benefit but also no harm, according to the study, published in the journal Circulation.
“I think we’re worried more about the lower end and people that are not even doing the minimum, but this should be reassuring to people who like to do a lot of exercise,” senior author Edward Giovannucci, MD, ScD, with the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, told this news organization.
Some studies have suggested that long-term, high-intensity exercise (e.g., marathons, triathlons, and long-distance cycling) may be associated with increased risks of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery calcification, and sudden cardiac death.
A recent analysis from the Copenhagen City Heart Study showed a U-shaped association between long-term all-cause mortality and 0 to 2.5 hours and more than 10 hours of weekly, leisure-time sports activities.
Most studies suggesting harm, however, have used only one measurement of physical activity capturing a mix of people who chronically exercise at high levels and those who do it sporadically, which possibly can be harmful, Dr. Giovannucci said. “We were better able to look at consistent long-term activity and saw there was no harm.”
The study included 116,221 participants in the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study between 1988 and 2018, who completed up to 15 (median, 11) questionnaires on their health and leisure-time physical activity that were updated every 2 years.
Most were White (96%), 63% were female, and the average age and body mass index over follow-up was 66 years and 26 kg/m2. During 30 years of follow-up, there were 47,596 deaths.
‘Any effort is worthwhile’
The analysis found that individuals who met the guideline for long-term vigorous physical activity (75-150 min/week) cut their adjusted risk of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD) by a whopping 31%, from non-CVD causes by 15%, and all-causes by 19%, compared with those with no long-term vigorous activity.
Those completing two to four times the recommended minimum (150-299 min/week) had a 27%-33% lower risk of CVD mortality, 19% lower risk of non-CVD mortality, and 21%-23% lower risk of all-cause mortality.
Higher levels did not appear to further lower mortality risk. For example, 300-374 min/week of vigorous physical activity was associated with a 32% lower risk of CVD death, 18% lower risk of non-CVD death, and 22% lower risk of dying from any cause.
The analysis also found that individuals who met the guidelines for moderate physical activity had lower CVD, non-CVD, and all-cause mortality risks whether they were active 150-244 min/week (22%, 19%, and 20%, respectively) or 225-299 min/week (21%, 25%, and 20%, respectively), compared with those with almost no long-term moderate activity.
Those fitting in two to four times the recommended minimum (300-599 min/week) had a 28%-38% lower risk of CVD mortality, 25%-27% lower risk of non-CVD mortality, and 26%-31% lower risk of all-cause mortality.
The mortality benefit appeared to plateau, with 600 min/week of moderate physical activity showing associations similar to 300-599 min/week.
“The sweet spot seems to be two to four times the recommended levels but for people who are sedentary, I think one of the key messages that I give my patients is that any effort is worthwhile; that any physical activity, even less than the recommended, has some mortality reduction,” Erin Michos, MD, MHS, associate director of preventive cardiology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, said in an interview.
Indeed, individuals who reported doing just 20-74 minutes of moderate exercise per week had a 19% lower risk of dying from any cause and a 13% lower risk of dying from CVD compared with those doing less.
Current American Heart Association (AHA) recommendations are for at least 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise or 75 minutes per week of vigorous aerobic exercise, or a combination of both.
“This suggests that even more is probably better, in the range of two to four times that, so maybe we should move our targets a little bit higher, which is kind of what the Department of Health and Human Services has already done,” said Dr. Michos, who was not involved in the study.
Former AHA president Donna K. Arnett, PhD, who was not involved in the study, said in a statement that “we’ve known for a long time that moderate or intense levels of physical exercise can reduce a person’s risk of both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and mortality.
“We have also seen that getting more than 300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity or more than 150 minutes of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical exercise each week may reduce a person’s risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease even further, so it makes sense that getting those extra minutes of exercise may also decrease mortality,” she added.
Mix and match
Dr. Giovannucci noted that the joint effects of the two types of exercise on mortality have not been studied and “there are some questions, for example, about whether doing a lot of moderate activity is sufficient or can you get more benefits by doing vigorous activity also.”
Joint analyses of both exercise intensities found that additional vigorous physical activity was associated with lower mortality among participants with insufficient (less than 300 min/week) levels of moderate exercise but not among those with at least 300 min/week of moderate exercise.
“The main message is that you can get essentially all of the benefit by just doing moderate exercise,” Dr. Giovannucci said. “There’s no magic benefit of doing vigorous [exercise]. But if someone wants to do vigorous, they can get the benefit in about half the time. So if you only have 2-3 hours a week to exercise and can do, say 2 or 3 hours of running, you can get pretty much the maximum benefit.”
Sensitivity analyses showed a consistent association between long-term leisure physical activity and mortality without adjustment for body mass index/calorie intake.
“Some people think the effect of exercise is to lower your body weight or keep it down, which could be one of the benefits, but even independent of that, you get benefits even if it has no effect on your weight,” he said. “So, definitely, that’s important.”
Dr. Michos pointed out that vigorous physical activity may seem daunting for many individuals but that moderate exercise can include activities such as brisk walking, ballroom dancing, active yoga, and recreational swimming.
“The nice thing is that you can really combine or substitute both and get just as similar mortality reductions with moderate physical activity, because a lot of patients may not want to do vigorous activity,” she said. “They don’t want to get on the treadmill; that’s too intimidating or stressful.”
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. The authors and Dr. Michos report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A new study suggests that going beyond current guidance on moderate and vigorous physical activity levels may add years to one’s life.
Americans are advised to do a minimum of 150-300 minutes a week of moderate exercise or 75-150 minutes a week of vigorous exercise, or an equivalent combination of both, according to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines.
Results from more than 100,000 U.S. adults followed for 30 years showed that .
Adults who reported completing four times the minimum recommended activity levels saw no clear incremental mortality benefit but also no harm, according to the study, published in the journal Circulation.
“I think we’re worried more about the lower end and people that are not even doing the minimum, but this should be reassuring to people who like to do a lot of exercise,” senior author Edward Giovannucci, MD, ScD, with the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, told this news organization.
Some studies have suggested that long-term, high-intensity exercise (e.g., marathons, triathlons, and long-distance cycling) may be associated with increased risks of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery calcification, and sudden cardiac death.
A recent analysis from the Copenhagen City Heart Study showed a U-shaped association between long-term all-cause mortality and 0 to 2.5 hours and more than 10 hours of weekly, leisure-time sports activities.
Most studies suggesting harm, however, have used only one measurement of physical activity capturing a mix of people who chronically exercise at high levels and those who do it sporadically, which possibly can be harmful, Dr. Giovannucci said. “We were better able to look at consistent long-term activity and saw there was no harm.”
The study included 116,221 participants in the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study between 1988 and 2018, who completed up to 15 (median, 11) questionnaires on their health and leisure-time physical activity that were updated every 2 years.
Most were White (96%), 63% were female, and the average age and body mass index over follow-up was 66 years and 26 kg/m2. During 30 years of follow-up, there were 47,596 deaths.
‘Any effort is worthwhile’
The analysis found that individuals who met the guideline for long-term vigorous physical activity (75-150 min/week) cut their adjusted risk of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD) by a whopping 31%, from non-CVD causes by 15%, and all-causes by 19%, compared with those with no long-term vigorous activity.
Those completing two to four times the recommended minimum (150-299 min/week) had a 27%-33% lower risk of CVD mortality, 19% lower risk of non-CVD mortality, and 21%-23% lower risk of all-cause mortality.
Higher levels did not appear to further lower mortality risk. For example, 300-374 min/week of vigorous physical activity was associated with a 32% lower risk of CVD death, 18% lower risk of non-CVD death, and 22% lower risk of dying from any cause.
The analysis also found that individuals who met the guidelines for moderate physical activity had lower CVD, non-CVD, and all-cause mortality risks whether they were active 150-244 min/week (22%, 19%, and 20%, respectively) or 225-299 min/week (21%, 25%, and 20%, respectively), compared with those with almost no long-term moderate activity.
Those fitting in two to four times the recommended minimum (300-599 min/week) had a 28%-38% lower risk of CVD mortality, 25%-27% lower risk of non-CVD mortality, and 26%-31% lower risk of all-cause mortality.
The mortality benefit appeared to plateau, with 600 min/week of moderate physical activity showing associations similar to 300-599 min/week.
“The sweet spot seems to be two to four times the recommended levels but for people who are sedentary, I think one of the key messages that I give my patients is that any effort is worthwhile; that any physical activity, even less than the recommended, has some mortality reduction,” Erin Michos, MD, MHS, associate director of preventive cardiology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, said in an interview.
Indeed, individuals who reported doing just 20-74 minutes of moderate exercise per week had a 19% lower risk of dying from any cause and a 13% lower risk of dying from CVD compared with those doing less.
Current American Heart Association (AHA) recommendations are for at least 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise or 75 minutes per week of vigorous aerobic exercise, or a combination of both.
“This suggests that even more is probably better, in the range of two to four times that, so maybe we should move our targets a little bit higher, which is kind of what the Department of Health and Human Services has already done,” said Dr. Michos, who was not involved in the study.
Former AHA president Donna K. Arnett, PhD, who was not involved in the study, said in a statement that “we’ve known for a long time that moderate or intense levels of physical exercise can reduce a person’s risk of both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and mortality.
“We have also seen that getting more than 300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity or more than 150 minutes of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical exercise each week may reduce a person’s risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease even further, so it makes sense that getting those extra minutes of exercise may also decrease mortality,” she added.
Mix and match
Dr. Giovannucci noted that the joint effects of the two types of exercise on mortality have not been studied and “there are some questions, for example, about whether doing a lot of moderate activity is sufficient or can you get more benefits by doing vigorous activity also.”
Joint analyses of both exercise intensities found that additional vigorous physical activity was associated with lower mortality among participants with insufficient (less than 300 min/week) levels of moderate exercise but not among those with at least 300 min/week of moderate exercise.
“The main message is that you can get essentially all of the benefit by just doing moderate exercise,” Dr. Giovannucci said. “There’s no magic benefit of doing vigorous [exercise]. But if someone wants to do vigorous, they can get the benefit in about half the time. So if you only have 2-3 hours a week to exercise and can do, say 2 or 3 hours of running, you can get pretty much the maximum benefit.”
Sensitivity analyses showed a consistent association between long-term leisure physical activity and mortality without adjustment for body mass index/calorie intake.
“Some people think the effect of exercise is to lower your body weight or keep it down, which could be one of the benefits, but even independent of that, you get benefits even if it has no effect on your weight,” he said. “So, definitely, that’s important.”
Dr. Michos pointed out that vigorous physical activity may seem daunting for many individuals but that moderate exercise can include activities such as brisk walking, ballroom dancing, active yoga, and recreational swimming.
“The nice thing is that you can really combine or substitute both and get just as similar mortality reductions with moderate physical activity, because a lot of patients may not want to do vigorous activity,” she said. “They don’t want to get on the treadmill; that’s too intimidating or stressful.”
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. The authors and Dr. Michos report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A new study suggests that going beyond current guidance on moderate and vigorous physical activity levels may add years to one’s life.
Americans are advised to do a minimum of 150-300 minutes a week of moderate exercise or 75-150 minutes a week of vigorous exercise, or an equivalent combination of both, according to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Physical Activity Guidelines.
Results from more than 100,000 U.S. adults followed for 30 years showed that .
Adults who reported completing four times the minimum recommended activity levels saw no clear incremental mortality benefit but also no harm, according to the study, published in the journal Circulation.
“I think we’re worried more about the lower end and people that are not even doing the minimum, but this should be reassuring to people who like to do a lot of exercise,” senior author Edward Giovannucci, MD, ScD, with the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, told this news organization.
Some studies have suggested that long-term, high-intensity exercise (e.g., marathons, triathlons, and long-distance cycling) may be associated with increased risks of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery calcification, and sudden cardiac death.
A recent analysis from the Copenhagen City Heart Study showed a U-shaped association between long-term all-cause mortality and 0 to 2.5 hours and more than 10 hours of weekly, leisure-time sports activities.
Most studies suggesting harm, however, have used only one measurement of physical activity capturing a mix of people who chronically exercise at high levels and those who do it sporadically, which possibly can be harmful, Dr. Giovannucci said. “We were better able to look at consistent long-term activity and saw there was no harm.”
The study included 116,221 participants in the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study between 1988 and 2018, who completed up to 15 (median, 11) questionnaires on their health and leisure-time physical activity that were updated every 2 years.
Most were White (96%), 63% were female, and the average age and body mass index over follow-up was 66 years and 26 kg/m2. During 30 years of follow-up, there were 47,596 deaths.
‘Any effort is worthwhile’
The analysis found that individuals who met the guideline for long-term vigorous physical activity (75-150 min/week) cut their adjusted risk of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD) by a whopping 31%, from non-CVD causes by 15%, and all-causes by 19%, compared with those with no long-term vigorous activity.
Those completing two to four times the recommended minimum (150-299 min/week) had a 27%-33% lower risk of CVD mortality, 19% lower risk of non-CVD mortality, and 21%-23% lower risk of all-cause mortality.
Higher levels did not appear to further lower mortality risk. For example, 300-374 min/week of vigorous physical activity was associated with a 32% lower risk of CVD death, 18% lower risk of non-CVD death, and 22% lower risk of dying from any cause.
The analysis also found that individuals who met the guidelines for moderate physical activity had lower CVD, non-CVD, and all-cause mortality risks whether they were active 150-244 min/week (22%, 19%, and 20%, respectively) or 225-299 min/week (21%, 25%, and 20%, respectively), compared with those with almost no long-term moderate activity.
Those fitting in two to four times the recommended minimum (300-599 min/week) had a 28%-38% lower risk of CVD mortality, 25%-27% lower risk of non-CVD mortality, and 26%-31% lower risk of all-cause mortality.
The mortality benefit appeared to plateau, with 600 min/week of moderate physical activity showing associations similar to 300-599 min/week.
“The sweet spot seems to be two to four times the recommended levels but for people who are sedentary, I think one of the key messages that I give my patients is that any effort is worthwhile; that any physical activity, even less than the recommended, has some mortality reduction,” Erin Michos, MD, MHS, associate director of preventive cardiology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, said in an interview.
Indeed, individuals who reported doing just 20-74 minutes of moderate exercise per week had a 19% lower risk of dying from any cause and a 13% lower risk of dying from CVD compared with those doing less.
Current American Heart Association (AHA) recommendations are for at least 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise or 75 minutes per week of vigorous aerobic exercise, or a combination of both.
“This suggests that even more is probably better, in the range of two to four times that, so maybe we should move our targets a little bit higher, which is kind of what the Department of Health and Human Services has already done,” said Dr. Michos, who was not involved in the study.
Former AHA president Donna K. Arnett, PhD, who was not involved in the study, said in a statement that “we’ve known for a long time that moderate or intense levels of physical exercise can reduce a person’s risk of both atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and mortality.
“We have also seen that getting more than 300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity or more than 150 minutes of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical exercise each week may reduce a person’s risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease even further, so it makes sense that getting those extra minutes of exercise may also decrease mortality,” she added.
Mix and match
Dr. Giovannucci noted that the joint effects of the two types of exercise on mortality have not been studied and “there are some questions, for example, about whether doing a lot of moderate activity is sufficient or can you get more benefits by doing vigorous activity also.”
Joint analyses of both exercise intensities found that additional vigorous physical activity was associated with lower mortality among participants with insufficient (less than 300 min/week) levels of moderate exercise but not among those with at least 300 min/week of moderate exercise.
“The main message is that you can get essentially all of the benefit by just doing moderate exercise,” Dr. Giovannucci said. “There’s no magic benefit of doing vigorous [exercise]. But if someone wants to do vigorous, they can get the benefit in about half the time. So if you only have 2-3 hours a week to exercise and can do, say 2 or 3 hours of running, you can get pretty much the maximum benefit.”
Sensitivity analyses showed a consistent association between long-term leisure physical activity and mortality without adjustment for body mass index/calorie intake.
“Some people think the effect of exercise is to lower your body weight or keep it down, which could be one of the benefits, but even independent of that, you get benefits even if it has no effect on your weight,” he said. “So, definitely, that’s important.”
Dr. Michos pointed out that vigorous physical activity may seem daunting for many individuals but that moderate exercise can include activities such as brisk walking, ballroom dancing, active yoga, and recreational swimming.
“The nice thing is that you can really combine or substitute both and get just as similar mortality reductions with moderate physical activity, because a lot of patients may not want to do vigorous activity,” she said. “They don’t want to get on the treadmill; that’s too intimidating or stressful.”
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. The authors and Dr. Michos report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM CIRCULATION
Moms using frozen embryos carry higher hypertensive risk
Women who become pregnant during in vitro fertilization (IVF) from previously frozen embryos have a significantly higher chance of developing hypertensive disorders such as preeclampsia than do women who become pregnant through natural conception, researchers have found.
The new findings come from a study presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. In the study, which will soon be published in Hypertension, researchers analyzed more than 4.5 million pregnancies from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
“Our findings are significant because frozen embryo transfers are increasingly common all over the world, partly due to the elective freezing of all embryos,” said Sindre Hoff Petersen, PhD, a fellow in the department of public health and nursing at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, who led the study.
More than 320,000 IVF procedures were performed in the United States in 2020, according to preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Of those, more than 123,000 eggs or embryos were frozen for future use.
The use of assisted reproductive technology, which includes IVF, has more than doubled during the past decade, the CDC reports. Roughly 2% of all babies born in the United States each year are conceived through assisted reproductive technology.
Dr. Petersen and his colleagues compared maternal complications in sibling pregnancies. Women who became pregnant following the transfer of a frozen embryo were 74% more likely to develop a hypertensive disorder than women who became pregnant following natural conception (7.4% vs. 4.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, P < .001). The difference was even higher with respect to sibling births: Women who became pregnant using frozen embryos were 102% more likely than women who became pregnant using natural conception to develop a hypertensive disorder (adjusted odds ratio 2.02; 95% CI, 1.72-2.39, P < .001).
The researchers found no difference in the risk of hypertensive disorders between women who used fresh embryos during IVF and women who used natural conception (5.9% vs. 4.3%, 95% CI, P = .382).
“When we find that the association between frozen embryo transfer and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy persists in sibling comparisons, we believe we have strong indications that treatment factors might in fact contribute to the higher risk,” Dr. Petersen told this news organization.
Women in the study who became pregnant after natural conception had a 4.3% chance of developing hypertensive disorders. That effect persisted after controlling for maternal body mass index, smoking, and time between deliveries, he said.
The findings can add to discussions between patients and doctors on the potential benefits and harms of freezing embryos on an elective basis if there is no clinical indication, Dr. Petersen said. The frozen method is most often used to transfer a single embryo in order to reduce the incidence of multiple pregnancies, such as twins and triplets, which in turn reduces pregnancy complications.
“The vast majority of IVF pregnancies, including frozen embryo transfer, are healthy and uncomplicated, and both short- and long-term outcomes for both the mother and the children are very reassuring,” Dr. Petersen said.
Women who become pregnant through use of frozen embryos should be more closely monitored for potential hypertensive disorders, although more work is needed to determine the reasons for the association, said Elizabeth S. Ginsburg, MD, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.
“This is something general ob.gyns. need to be aware of, but it’s not clear which subpopulations of patients are going to be affected,” Dr. Ginsburg said. “More investigation is needed to determine if this is caused by the way the uterus is readied for the embryo transfer or if it’s patient population etiology.”
Some studies have suggested that the absence of a hormone-producing cyst, which forms on the ovary during each menstrual cycle, could explain the link between frozen embryo transfer and heightened preeclampsia risk.
Dr. Petersen and Dr. Ginsburg reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Women who become pregnant during in vitro fertilization (IVF) from previously frozen embryos have a significantly higher chance of developing hypertensive disorders such as preeclampsia than do women who become pregnant through natural conception, researchers have found.
The new findings come from a study presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. In the study, which will soon be published in Hypertension, researchers analyzed more than 4.5 million pregnancies from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
“Our findings are significant because frozen embryo transfers are increasingly common all over the world, partly due to the elective freezing of all embryos,” said Sindre Hoff Petersen, PhD, a fellow in the department of public health and nursing at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, who led the study.
More than 320,000 IVF procedures were performed in the United States in 2020, according to preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Of those, more than 123,000 eggs or embryos were frozen for future use.
The use of assisted reproductive technology, which includes IVF, has more than doubled during the past decade, the CDC reports. Roughly 2% of all babies born in the United States each year are conceived through assisted reproductive technology.
Dr. Petersen and his colleagues compared maternal complications in sibling pregnancies. Women who became pregnant following the transfer of a frozen embryo were 74% more likely to develop a hypertensive disorder than women who became pregnant following natural conception (7.4% vs. 4.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, P < .001). The difference was even higher with respect to sibling births: Women who became pregnant using frozen embryos were 102% more likely than women who became pregnant using natural conception to develop a hypertensive disorder (adjusted odds ratio 2.02; 95% CI, 1.72-2.39, P < .001).
The researchers found no difference in the risk of hypertensive disorders between women who used fresh embryos during IVF and women who used natural conception (5.9% vs. 4.3%, 95% CI, P = .382).
“When we find that the association between frozen embryo transfer and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy persists in sibling comparisons, we believe we have strong indications that treatment factors might in fact contribute to the higher risk,” Dr. Petersen told this news organization.
Women in the study who became pregnant after natural conception had a 4.3% chance of developing hypertensive disorders. That effect persisted after controlling for maternal body mass index, smoking, and time between deliveries, he said.
The findings can add to discussions between patients and doctors on the potential benefits and harms of freezing embryos on an elective basis if there is no clinical indication, Dr. Petersen said. The frozen method is most often used to transfer a single embryo in order to reduce the incidence of multiple pregnancies, such as twins and triplets, which in turn reduces pregnancy complications.
“The vast majority of IVF pregnancies, including frozen embryo transfer, are healthy and uncomplicated, and both short- and long-term outcomes for both the mother and the children are very reassuring,” Dr. Petersen said.
Women who become pregnant through use of frozen embryos should be more closely monitored for potential hypertensive disorders, although more work is needed to determine the reasons for the association, said Elizabeth S. Ginsburg, MD, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.
“This is something general ob.gyns. need to be aware of, but it’s not clear which subpopulations of patients are going to be affected,” Dr. Ginsburg said. “More investigation is needed to determine if this is caused by the way the uterus is readied for the embryo transfer or if it’s patient population etiology.”
Some studies have suggested that the absence of a hormone-producing cyst, which forms on the ovary during each menstrual cycle, could explain the link between frozen embryo transfer and heightened preeclampsia risk.
Dr. Petersen and Dr. Ginsburg reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Women who become pregnant during in vitro fertilization (IVF) from previously frozen embryos have a significantly higher chance of developing hypertensive disorders such as preeclampsia than do women who become pregnant through natural conception, researchers have found.
The new findings come from a study presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. In the study, which will soon be published in Hypertension, researchers analyzed more than 4.5 million pregnancies from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.
“Our findings are significant because frozen embryo transfers are increasingly common all over the world, partly due to the elective freezing of all embryos,” said Sindre Hoff Petersen, PhD, a fellow in the department of public health and nursing at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, who led the study.
More than 320,000 IVF procedures were performed in the United States in 2020, according to preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Of those, more than 123,000 eggs or embryos were frozen for future use.
The use of assisted reproductive technology, which includes IVF, has more than doubled during the past decade, the CDC reports. Roughly 2% of all babies born in the United States each year are conceived through assisted reproductive technology.
Dr. Petersen and his colleagues compared maternal complications in sibling pregnancies. Women who became pregnant following the transfer of a frozen embryo were 74% more likely to develop a hypertensive disorder than women who became pregnant following natural conception (7.4% vs. 4.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, P < .001). The difference was even higher with respect to sibling births: Women who became pregnant using frozen embryos were 102% more likely than women who became pregnant using natural conception to develop a hypertensive disorder (adjusted odds ratio 2.02; 95% CI, 1.72-2.39, P < .001).
The researchers found no difference in the risk of hypertensive disorders between women who used fresh embryos during IVF and women who used natural conception (5.9% vs. 4.3%, 95% CI, P = .382).
“When we find that the association between frozen embryo transfer and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy persists in sibling comparisons, we believe we have strong indications that treatment factors might in fact contribute to the higher risk,” Dr. Petersen told this news organization.
Women in the study who became pregnant after natural conception had a 4.3% chance of developing hypertensive disorders. That effect persisted after controlling for maternal body mass index, smoking, and time between deliveries, he said.
The findings can add to discussions between patients and doctors on the potential benefits and harms of freezing embryos on an elective basis if there is no clinical indication, Dr. Petersen said. The frozen method is most often used to transfer a single embryo in order to reduce the incidence of multiple pregnancies, such as twins and triplets, which in turn reduces pregnancy complications.
“The vast majority of IVF pregnancies, including frozen embryo transfer, are healthy and uncomplicated, and both short- and long-term outcomes for both the mother and the children are very reassuring,” Dr. Petersen said.
Women who become pregnant through use of frozen embryos should be more closely monitored for potential hypertensive disorders, although more work is needed to determine the reasons for the association, said Elizabeth S. Ginsburg, MD, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.
“This is something general ob.gyns. need to be aware of, but it’s not clear which subpopulations of patients are going to be affected,” Dr. Ginsburg said. “More investigation is needed to determine if this is caused by the way the uterus is readied for the embryo transfer or if it’s patient population etiology.”
Some studies have suggested that the absence of a hormone-producing cyst, which forms on the ovary during each menstrual cycle, could explain the link between frozen embryo transfer and heightened preeclampsia risk.
Dr. Petersen and Dr. Ginsburg reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Metabolic syndrome raises dementia risk in under-60s
The more components of metabolic syndrome a person has in midlife seems to raise their risk of dementia, although that relationship seems to go away after age 70, a post hoc analysis of data from a major European cohort study has found.
A team of European researchers reported online in the journal Diabetes Care that the follow-up of the Whitehall II cohort study, a study of more than 10,000 civil servants in London that was established in the late 1980s, also found that cardiovascular disease (CVD) may only partially contribute to the risk of dementia in study participants.
They found that each additional metabolic syndrome component before age 60 years was linked to a 13% rise in the risk of dementia (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.23) and, from age 60 to 70, the risk rose 8% (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.16). However, in people aged 70 years and older, the relationship wasn’t statistically significant (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13]).
The study used “the latest harmonized definition” of metabolic syndrome; that is, participants were classified as having metabolic syndrome if they had three or more of the five components. As lead author Marcos D. Machado-Fragua, PhD, noted in an email interview, those components are abdominal obesity, high triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, and high fasting glucose.
“Our research question was on the association between metabolic syndrome and late-life dementia. We found that the presence of one metabolic syndrome component and the presence of metabolic risk before age 60, but not after, is associated with higher risk of dementia,” said Dr. Machado-Fragua, a post-doctoral researcher at the French Institute for Health and Medical Research in Paris.
The study cohort consisted of 10,308 London-based civil servants aged 35-55 years. Every 4-5 years after enrollment, from 1991 through 2016, they completed a questionnaire and had a clinical examination. The U.K. National Health Service electronic health record system tracked outcomes for all but 10 participants through March 2019.
The study identified the individual metabolic syndrome components that posed the highest risk for dementia in these three age groups:
- Age < 60 years: elevated waist circumference (HR 1.39 [95% CI 1.07, 1.81]), low HDL-C, (HR 1.30 [95% CI 1.02, 1.66]), and elevated blood pressure (HR 1.34 [95% CI 1.09, 1.63]).
- Age 60-70 years: low HDL-C (HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.02, 1.57]) and elevated fasting glucose (HR 1.40 [95% CI 1.12, 1.74]).
- Age >70 years: elevated fasting glucose (HR 1.38 [95% CI 1.07, 1.79]).
The study found that the dementia risk was significantly high in study participants under age 60 who had at least one (HR 1.99 [95% CI 1.08, 3.66]) or two (HR 1.69 [95% CI 1.12, 2.56]) metabolic syndrome components even when they didn’t have CVD.
“The present study adds to the understanding of the association between metabolic syndrome and dementia due to three novel features,” Dr. Machado-Fragua said. “First, we tested alternative thresholds to define ‘high metabolic risk,’ and findings show increased risk of dementia to start with the presence of one metabolic syndrome component. Second, assessment of metabolic syndrome components in midlife and later life allowed the examination of the role of age at prevalence of metabolic risk for incident dementia at older ages. Third, our findings showed high dementia risk in those free of cardiovascular disease during follow-up, suggesting that the association between high metabolic risk and incident dementia is not fully explained by cardiovascular disease.”
Dr. Machado-Fragua added, “For now, a cure for dementia remains elusive, making it important to think of prevention strategies. Our findings support targeting the components of the metabolic syndrome in midlife, even in those who have fewer than three of the metabolic syndrome components.”
Applicability ‘confusing’
In an interview, Yehuda Handelsman, MD, questioned the applicability of the study findings in the clinic. “Metabolic syndrome is a clinical manifestation of insulin resistance,” he said. “The more metabolic syndrome criteria a person has, the more insulin resistant that person will be. There is literature that is [suggesting] that insulin resistance is an important cause of dementia.”
The finding of a higher dementia risk before age 70, compared to afterward, makes the applicability “even more confusing,” he said. The results are even more muddled for U.S. physicians, who have moved away from the term metabolic syndrome in favor of cardiometabolic syndrome, said Dr. Handelsman, medical director and principal investigator at the Metabolic Institute of America and president of the Diabetes CardioRenal & Metabolism Institute, both in Tarzana, Calif.
Confusion also surrounds one of the components of metabolic syndrome: Waist circumference, per the harmonized definition the study used, and body mass index, which the more traditional definition uses.
Nonetheless, metabolic syndrome can be used as “kind of a risk calculator” for CVD, diabetes, and dementia, he said. One strength of the study, Dr. Handelsman said, is its size and scope, following 28 years of data. But a weakness was its observational design. “It doesn’t evaluate any true intervention to modify risk,” he said.
Dr. Machado-Fragua and coauthors have no disclosures.
The more components of metabolic syndrome a person has in midlife seems to raise their risk of dementia, although that relationship seems to go away after age 70, a post hoc analysis of data from a major European cohort study has found.
A team of European researchers reported online in the journal Diabetes Care that the follow-up of the Whitehall II cohort study, a study of more than 10,000 civil servants in London that was established in the late 1980s, also found that cardiovascular disease (CVD) may only partially contribute to the risk of dementia in study participants.
They found that each additional metabolic syndrome component before age 60 years was linked to a 13% rise in the risk of dementia (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.23) and, from age 60 to 70, the risk rose 8% (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.16). However, in people aged 70 years and older, the relationship wasn’t statistically significant (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13]).
The study used “the latest harmonized definition” of metabolic syndrome; that is, participants were classified as having metabolic syndrome if they had three or more of the five components. As lead author Marcos D. Machado-Fragua, PhD, noted in an email interview, those components are abdominal obesity, high triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, and high fasting glucose.
“Our research question was on the association between metabolic syndrome and late-life dementia. We found that the presence of one metabolic syndrome component and the presence of metabolic risk before age 60, but not after, is associated with higher risk of dementia,” said Dr. Machado-Fragua, a post-doctoral researcher at the French Institute for Health and Medical Research in Paris.
The study cohort consisted of 10,308 London-based civil servants aged 35-55 years. Every 4-5 years after enrollment, from 1991 through 2016, they completed a questionnaire and had a clinical examination. The U.K. National Health Service electronic health record system tracked outcomes for all but 10 participants through March 2019.
The study identified the individual metabolic syndrome components that posed the highest risk for dementia in these three age groups:
- Age < 60 years: elevated waist circumference (HR 1.39 [95% CI 1.07, 1.81]), low HDL-C, (HR 1.30 [95% CI 1.02, 1.66]), and elevated blood pressure (HR 1.34 [95% CI 1.09, 1.63]).
- Age 60-70 years: low HDL-C (HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.02, 1.57]) and elevated fasting glucose (HR 1.40 [95% CI 1.12, 1.74]).
- Age >70 years: elevated fasting glucose (HR 1.38 [95% CI 1.07, 1.79]).
The study found that the dementia risk was significantly high in study participants under age 60 who had at least one (HR 1.99 [95% CI 1.08, 3.66]) or two (HR 1.69 [95% CI 1.12, 2.56]) metabolic syndrome components even when they didn’t have CVD.
“The present study adds to the understanding of the association between metabolic syndrome and dementia due to three novel features,” Dr. Machado-Fragua said. “First, we tested alternative thresholds to define ‘high metabolic risk,’ and findings show increased risk of dementia to start with the presence of one metabolic syndrome component. Second, assessment of metabolic syndrome components in midlife and later life allowed the examination of the role of age at prevalence of metabolic risk for incident dementia at older ages. Third, our findings showed high dementia risk in those free of cardiovascular disease during follow-up, suggesting that the association between high metabolic risk and incident dementia is not fully explained by cardiovascular disease.”
Dr. Machado-Fragua added, “For now, a cure for dementia remains elusive, making it important to think of prevention strategies. Our findings support targeting the components of the metabolic syndrome in midlife, even in those who have fewer than three of the metabolic syndrome components.”
Applicability ‘confusing’
In an interview, Yehuda Handelsman, MD, questioned the applicability of the study findings in the clinic. “Metabolic syndrome is a clinical manifestation of insulin resistance,” he said. “The more metabolic syndrome criteria a person has, the more insulin resistant that person will be. There is literature that is [suggesting] that insulin resistance is an important cause of dementia.”
The finding of a higher dementia risk before age 70, compared to afterward, makes the applicability “even more confusing,” he said. The results are even more muddled for U.S. physicians, who have moved away from the term metabolic syndrome in favor of cardiometabolic syndrome, said Dr. Handelsman, medical director and principal investigator at the Metabolic Institute of America and president of the Diabetes CardioRenal & Metabolism Institute, both in Tarzana, Calif.
Confusion also surrounds one of the components of metabolic syndrome: Waist circumference, per the harmonized definition the study used, and body mass index, which the more traditional definition uses.
Nonetheless, metabolic syndrome can be used as “kind of a risk calculator” for CVD, diabetes, and dementia, he said. One strength of the study, Dr. Handelsman said, is its size and scope, following 28 years of data. But a weakness was its observational design. “It doesn’t evaluate any true intervention to modify risk,” he said.
Dr. Machado-Fragua and coauthors have no disclosures.
The more components of metabolic syndrome a person has in midlife seems to raise their risk of dementia, although that relationship seems to go away after age 70, a post hoc analysis of data from a major European cohort study has found.
A team of European researchers reported online in the journal Diabetes Care that the follow-up of the Whitehall II cohort study, a study of more than 10,000 civil servants in London that was established in the late 1980s, also found that cardiovascular disease (CVD) may only partially contribute to the risk of dementia in study participants.
They found that each additional metabolic syndrome component before age 60 years was linked to a 13% rise in the risk of dementia (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.23) and, from age 60 to 70, the risk rose 8% (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.00-1.16). However, in people aged 70 years and older, the relationship wasn’t statistically significant (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.13]).
The study used “the latest harmonized definition” of metabolic syndrome; that is, participants were classified as having metabolic syndrome if they had three or more of the five components. As lead author Marcos D. Machado-Fragua, PhD, noted in an email interview, those components are abdominal obesity, high triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol levels, high blood pressure, and high fasting glucose.
“Our research question was on the association between metabolic syndrome and late-life dementia. We found that the presence of one metabolic syndrome component and the presence of metabolic risk before age 60, but not after, is associated with higher risk of dementia,” said Dr. Machado-Fragua, a post-doctoral researcher at the French Institute for Health and Medical Research in Paris.
The study cohort consisted of 10,308 London-based civil servants aged 35-55 years. Every 4-5 years after enrollment, from 1991 through 2016, they completed a questionnaire and had a clinical examination. The U.K. National Health Service electronic health record system tracked outcomes for all but 10 participants through March 2019.
The study identified the individual metabolic syndrome components that posed the highest risk for dementia in these three age groups:
- Age < 60 years: elevated waist circumference (HR 1.39 [95% CI 1.07, 1.81]), low HDL-C, (HR 1.30 [95% CI 1.02, 1.66]), and elevated blood pressure (HR 1.34 [95% CI 1.09, 1.63]).
- Age 60-70 years: low HDL-C (HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.02, 1.57]) and elevated fasting glucose (HR 1.40 [95% CI 1.12, 1.74]).
- Age >70 years: elevated fasting glucose (HR 1.38 [95% CI 1.07, 1.79]).
The study found that the dementia risk was significantly high in study participants under age 60 who had at least one (HR 1.99 [95% CI 1.08, 3.66]) or two (HR 1.69 [95% CI 1.12, 2.56]) metabolic syndrome components even when they didn’t have CVD.
“The present study adds to the understanding of the association between metabolic syndrome and dementia due to three novel features,” Dr. Machado-Fragua said. “First, we tested alternative thresholds to define ‘high metabolic risk,’ and findings show increased risk of dementia to start with the presence of one metabolic syndrome component. Second, assessment of metabolic syndrome components in midlife and later life allowed the examination of the role of age at prevalence of metabolic risk for incident dementia at older ages. Third, our findings showed high dementia risk in those free of cardiovascular disease during follow-up, suggesting that the association between high metabolic risk and incident dementia is not fully explained by cardiovascular disease.”
Dr. Machado-Fragua added, “For now, a cure for dementia remains elusive, making it important to think of prevention strategies. Our findings support targeting the components of the metabolic syndrome in midlife, even in those who have fewer than three of the metabolic syndrome components.”
Applicability ‘confusing’
In an interview, Yehuda Handelsman, MD, questioned the applicability of the study findings in the clinic. “Metabolic syndrome is a clinical manifestation of insulin resistance,” he said. “The more metabolic syndrome criteria a person has, the more insulin resistant that person will be. There is literature that is [suggesting] that insulin resistance is an important cause of dementia.”
The finding of a higher dementia risk before age 70, compared to afterward, makes the applicability “even more confusing,” he said. The results are even more muddled for U.S. physicians, who have moved away from the term metabolic syndrome in favor of cardiometabolic syndrome, said Dr. Handelsman, medical director and principal investigator at the Metabolic Institute of America and president of the Diabetes CardioRenal & Metabolism Institute, both in Tarzana, Calif.
Confusion also surrounds one of the components of metabolic syndrome: Waist circumference, per the harmonized definition the study used, and body mass index, which the more traditional definition uses.
Nonetheless, metabolic syndrome can be used as “kind of a risk calculator” for CVD, diabetes, and dementia, he said. One strength of the study, Dr. Handelsman said, is its size and scope, following 28 years of data. But a weakness was its observational design. “It doesn’t evaluate any true intervention to modify risk,” he said.
Dr. Machado-Fragua and coauthors have no disclosures.
FROM DIABETES CARE
New update focuses on NAFLD in lean people
Ongoing follow-up and lifestyle interventions are needed in lean patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), suggests a panel of experts in a recent review.
They also urge screening for NAFLD in individuals who are older than 40 years with type 2 diabetes, even if they are not overweight.
NAFLD is a leading cause of chronic liver disease that affects more than 25% of the United States and worldwide populations, note lead author Michelle T. Long, MD, Boston Medical Center, Boston University, and colleagues.
They add that around one-quarter of those affected have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to complications of liver cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma.
Although NAFLD occurs primarily in individuals with obesity or type 2 diabetes, between 7%-20% have a lean body habitus, they write.
There are differences in rates of disease progression, associated conditions, and diagnostic and management approaches between lean and non-lean patients, the authors note, but there is limited guidance on the appropriate clinical evaluation of the former group.
The American Gastroenterological Association therefore commissioned an expert review to provide best practice advice on key clinical issues relating to the diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment of NAFLD in lean individuals.
Their review was published online in Gastroenterology.
Evidence-based approaches
The 15 best practice advice statements covered a wide range of clinical areas, first defining lean as a body mass index (BMI) less than 25 in non-Asian persons and less than 23 in Asian persons.
The authors go on to stipulate, for example, that lean individuals in the general population should not be screened for NAFLD but that screening should be considered for individuals older than 40 years with type 2 diabetes.
More broadly, they write that the condition should be considered in lean individuals with metabolic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, as well as elevated values on liver biochemical tests or incidentally noted hepatic steatosis.
After other causes of liver diseases are ruled out, the authors note that clinicians should consider liver biopsy as the reference test if uncertainties remain about liver injury causes and/or liver fibrosis staging.
They also write that the NAFLD fibrosis score and Fibrosis-4 score, along with imaging techniques, may be used as alternatives to biopsy for staging and during follow-up.
The authors, who provide a diagnosis and management algorithm to aid clinicians, suggest that lean patients with NAFLD follow lifestyle interventions, such as exercise, diet modification, and avoidance of fructose- and sugar-sweetened drinks, to achieve weight loss of 3%-5%.
Vitamin E may be considered, they continue, in patients with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis but without type 2 diabetes or cirrhosis. Additionally, oral pioglitazone may be considered in lean persons with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis without cirrhosis.
In contrast, they write that the role of glucagonlike peptide 1 agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors requires further investigation.
The advice also says that lean patients with NAFLD should be routinely evaluated for comorbid conditions, such as type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, and risk-stratified for hepatic fibrosis to identify those with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis.
For lean patients with NAFLD and clinical markers compatible with liver cirrhosis, twice-yearly surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma is also advised.
Fatty liver disease in lean people with metabolic conditions
Approached for comment, Liyun Yuan, MD, PhD, assistant professor of clinical medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, said it is very important to have uniform guidelines for general practitioners and other specialties on NAFLD in lean individuals.
Dr. Yuan, who was not involved in the review, told this news organization that it is crucial to raise awareness of NAFLD, just like awareness of breast cancer screening among women of a certain age was increased, so that individuals are screened for metabolic conditions regardless of whether they have obesity or overweight.
Zobair Younossi, MD, MPH, professor of medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Inova Campus, Falls Church, Va., added that there is a lack of awareness that NAFLD occurs in lean individuals, especially in those who have diabetes.
He said in an interview that although it is accurate to define individuals as being lean in terms of their BMI, the best way is to look not only at BMI but also at waist circumference.
Dr. Younossi said that he and his colleagues have shown that when BMI is combined with waist circumference, the prediction of mortality risk in NAFLD is affected, such that lean individuals with an obese waist circumference have a higher risk for all-cause mortality.
Dr. Long is supported in part by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, Gilead Sciences Research Scholars Award, Boston University School of Medicine Department of Medicine Career Investment Award, and Boston University Clinical Translational Science Institute. Dr. Long declares relationships with Novo Nordisk, Echosens Corporation, and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Yuan declares relationships with Genfit, Intercept, and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Younossi declares no relevant relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
*This article was updated on July 27, 2022.
Ongoing follow-up and lifestyle interventions are needed in lean patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), suggests a panel of experts in a recent review.
They also urge screening for NAFLD in individuals who are older than 40 years with type 2 diabetes, even if they are not overweight.
NAFLD is a leading cause of chronic liver disease that affects more than 25% of the United States and worldwide populations, note lead author Michelle T. Long, MD, Boston Medical Center, Boston University, and colleagues.
They add that around one-quarter of those affected have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to complications of liver cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma.
Although NAFLD occurs primarily in individuals with obesity or type 2 diabetes, between 7%-20% have a lean body habitus, they write.
There are differences in rates of disease progression, associated conditions, and diagnostic and management approaches between lean and non-lean patients, the authors note, but there is limited guidance on the appropriate clinical evaluation of the former group.
The American Gastroenterological Association therefore commissioned an expert review to provide best practice advice on key clinical issues relating to the diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment of NAFLD in lean individuals.
Their review was published online in Gastroenterology.
Evidence-based approaches
The 15 best practice advice statements covered a wide range of clinical areas, first defining lean as a body mass index (BMI) less than 25 in non-Asian persons and less than 23 in Asian persons.
The authors go on to stipulate, for example, that lean individuals in the general population should not be screened for NAFLD but that screening should be considered for individuals older than 40 years with type 2 diabetes.
More broadly, they write that the condition should be considered in lean individuals with metabolic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, as well as elevated values on liver biochemical tests or incidentally noted hepatic steatosis.
After other causes of liver diseases are ruled out, the authors note that clinicians should consider liver biopsy as the reference test if uncertainties remain about liver injury causes and/or liver fibrosis staging.
They also write that the NAFLD fibrosis score and Fibrosis-4 score, along with imaging techniques, may be used as alternatives to biopsy for staging and during follow-up.
The authors, who provide a diagnosis and management algorithm to aid clinicians, suggest that lean patients with NAFLD follow lifestyle interventions, such as exercise, diet modification, and avoidance of fructose- and sugar-sweetened drinks, to achieve weight loss of 3%-5%.
Vitamin E may be considered, they continue, in patients with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis but without type 2 diabetes or cirrhosis. Additionally, oral pioglitazone may be considered in lean persons with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis without cirrhosis.
In contrast, they write that the role of glucagonlike peptide 1 agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors requires further investigation.
The advice also says that lean patients with NAFLD should be routinely evaluated for comorbid conditions, such as type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, and risk-stratified for hepatic fibrosis to identify those with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis.
For lean patients with NAFLD and clinical markers compatible with liver cirrhosis, twice-yearly surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma is also advised.
Fatty liver disease in lean people with metabolic conditions
Approached for comment, Liyun Yuan, MD, PhD, assistant professor of clinical medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, said it is very important to have uniform guidelines for general practitioners and other specialties on NAFLD in lean individuals.
Dr. Yuan, who was not involved in the review, told this news organization that it is crucial to raise awareness of NAFLD, just like awareness of breast cancer screening among women of a certain age was increased, so that individuals are screened for metabolic conditions regardless of whether they have obesity or overweight.
Zobair Younossi, MD, MPH, professor of medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Inova Campus, Falls Church, Va., added that there is a lack of awareness that NAFLD occurs in lean individuals, especially in those who have diabetes.
He said in an interview that although it is accurate to define individuals as being lean in terms of their BMI, the best way is to look not only at BMI but also at waist circumference.
Dr. Younossi said that he and his colleagues have shown that when BMI is combined with waist circumference, the prediction of mortality risk in NAFLD is affected, such that lean individuals with an obese waist circumference have a higher risk for all-cause mortality.
Dr. Long is supported in part by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, Gilead Sciences Research Scholars Award, Boston University School of Medicine Department of Medicine Career Investment Award, and Boston University Clinical Translational Science Institute. Dr. Long declares relationships with Novo Nordisk, Echosens Corporation, and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Yuan declares relationships with Genfit, Intercept, and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Younossi declares no relevant relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
*This article was updated on July 27, 2022.
Ongoing follow-up and lifestyle interventions are needed in lean patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), suggests a panel of experts in a recent review.
They also urge screening for NAFLD in individuals who are older than 40 years with type 2 diabetes, even if they are not overweight.
NAFLD is a leading cause of chronic liver disease that affects more than 25% of the United States and worldwide populations, note lead author Michelle T. Long, MD, Boston Medical Center, Boston University, and colleagues.
They add that around one-quarter of those affected have nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to complications of liver cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma.
Although NAFLD occurs primarily in individuals with obesity or type 2 diabetes, between 7%-20% have a lean body habitus, they write.
There are differences in rates of disease progression, associated conditions, and diagnostic and management approaches between lean and non-lean patients, the authors note, but there is limited guidance on the appropriate clinical evaluation of the former group.
The American Gastroenterological Association therefore commissioned an expert review to provide best practice advice on key clinical issues relating to the diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment of NAFLD in lean individuals.
Their review was published online in Gastroenterology.
Evidence-based approaches
The 15 best practice advice statements covered a wide range of clinical areas, first defining lean as a body mass index (BMI) less than 25 in non-Asian persons and less than 23 in Asian persons.
The authors go on to stipulate, for example, that lean individuals in the general population should not be screened for NAFLD but that screening should be considered for individuals older than 40 years with type 2 diabetes.
More broadly, they write that the condition should be considered in lean individuals with metabolic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, as well as elevated values on liver biochemical tests or incidentally noted hepatic steatosis.
After other causes of liver diseases are ruled out, the authors note that clinicians should consider liver biopsy as the reference test if uncertainties remain about liver injury causes and/or liver fibrosis staging.
They also write that the NAFLD fibrosis score and Fibrosis-4 score, along with imaging techniques, may be used as alternatives to biopsy for staging and during follow-up.
The authors, who provide a diagnosis and management algorithm to aid clinicians, suggest that lean patients with NAFLD follow lifestyle interventions, such as exercise, diet modification, and avoidance of fructose- and sugar-sweetened drinks, to achieve weight loss of 3%-5%.
Vitamin E may be considered, they continue, in patients with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis but without type 2 diabetes or cirrhosis. Additionally, oral pioglitazone may be considered in lean persons with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis without cirrhosis.
In contrast, they write that the role of glucagonlike peptide 1 agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors requires further investigation.
The advice also says that lean patients with NAFLD should be routinely evaluated for comorbid conditions, such as type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, and risk-stratified for hepatic fibrosis to identify those with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis.
For lean patients with NAFLD and clinical markers compatible with liver cirrhosis, twice-yearly surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma is also advised.
Fatty liver disease in lean people with metabolic conditions
Approached for comment, Liyun Yuan, MD, PhD, assistant professor of clinical medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, said it is very important to have uniform guidelines for general practitioners and other specialties on NAFLD in lean individuals.
Dr. Yuan, who was not involved in the review, told this news organization that it is crucial to raise awareness of NAFLD, just like awareness of breast cancer screening among women of a certain age was increased, so that individuals are screened for metabolic conditions regardless of whether they have obesity or overweight.
Zobair Younossi, MD, MPH, professor of medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Inova Campus, Falls Church, Va., added that there is a lack of awareness that NAFLD occurs in lean individuals, especially in those who have diabetes.
He said in an interview that although it is accurate to define individuals as being lean in terms of their BMI, the best way is to look not only at BMI but also at waist circumference.
Dr. Younossi said that he and his colleagues have shown that when BMI is combined with waist circumference, the prediction of mortality risk in NAFLD is affected, such that lean individuals with an obese waist circumference have a higher risk for all-cause mortality.
Dr. Long is supported in part by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, Gilead Sciences Research Scholars Award, Boston University School of Medicine Department of Medicine Career Investment Award, and Boston University Clinical Translational Science Institute. Dr. Long declares relationships with Novo Nordisk, Echosens Corporation, and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Yuan declares relationships with Genfit, Intercept, and Gilead Sciences. Dr. Younossi declares no relevant relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
*This article was updated on July 27, 2022.
FROM GASTROENTEROLOGY
‘Alarming’ global rise in NAFLD
The global prevalence of fatty liver disease not caused by alcohol is considerably higher than previously estimated and is continuing to increase at an alarming rate, report researchers from Canada.
Their analysis suggests nearly one-third of the global general adult population has nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), with men much more likely to have the disease than women.
“Greater awareness of NAFLD and the development of cost-effective risk stratification strategies are needed to address the growing burden NAFLD,” wrote Abdel-Aziz Shaheen, MBBCh, MSc, and colleagues with the University of Calgary (Alta.).
The study was published online in Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology.
NAFLD is the most common liver disease worldwide and a leading cause of liver-related illness and death. Yet, high-quality reports on the epidemiology of NAFLD at a global level are scarce and temporal trends of the NAFLD burden, including by gender, have not been described, until now.
Using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science, the Calgary team identified reports on NAFLD incidence and prevalence in study populations representative of the general adult population published between the date of database inception to May 25, 2021.
In total, 72 publications, with a sample population of more than 1 million adults from 17 countries, were included in the prevalence analysis, and 16 publications, with a sample population of nearly 382,000 individuals from five countries, were included in the incidence analysis.
By their estimates, the overall global prevalence of NAFLD is 32.4%, with prevalence increasing steadily and significantly over time, from 25.5% in or before 2005 to 37.8% in 2016 or later. The overall prevalence is significantly higher in men than in women (39.7% vs. 25.6%).
These figures contrast with recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews that put the global prevalence of NAFLD at between 25.2% and 29.8%. However, these studies had “considerable” limitations with “potentially biased inferences,” Dr. Shaheen and colleagues noted.
By region, their data put the prevalence of NAFLD at 31.6% in Asia, 32.6% in Europe, 47.8% in North America, and 56.8% in Africa.
Dr. Shaheen and colleagues estimate the overall incidence of NAFLD to be 46.9 cases per 1,000 person-years, with a higher incidence in men than women (70.8 vs. 29.6 cases per 1000 person-years), in line with the gender differences in prevalence.
They caution that there was “considerable” heterogeneity between studies in both NAFLD prevalence and incidence (I2 = 99.9%) and few “high-quality” studies.
Despite these limitations, Dr. Shaheen and colleagues said the rise in NAFLD prevalence “should drive enhanced awareness of NAFLD at the level of primary care physicians, public health specialists, and health policy makers to encourage the development of more effective preventive policies.”
Funding for the study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health. Dr. Shaheen has received research grants from Gilead and Intercept, and honoraria from SCOPE Canada.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The global prevalence of fatty liver disease not caused by alcohol is considerably higher than previously estimated and is continuing to increase at an alarming rate, report researchers from Canada.
Their analysis suggests nearly one-third of the global general adult population has nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), with men much more likely to have the disease than women.
“Greater awareness of NAFLD and the development of cost-effective risk stratification strategies are needed to address the growing burden NAFLD,” wrote Abdel-Aziz Shaheen, MBBCh, MSc, and colleagues with the University of Calgary (Alta.).
The study was published online in Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology.
NAFLD is the most common liver disease worldwide and a leading cause of liver-related illness and death. Yet, high-quality reports on the epidemiology of NAFLD at a global level are scarce and temporal trends of the NAFLD burden, including by gender, have not been described, until now.
Using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science, the Calgary team identified reports on NAFLD incidence and prevalence in study populations representative of the general adult population published between the date of database inception to May 25, 2021.
In total, 72 publications, with a sample population of more than 1 million adults from 17 countries, were included in the prevalence analysis, and 16 publications, with a sample population of nearly 382,000 individuals from five countries, were included in the incidence analysis.
By their estimates, the overall global prevalence of NAFLD is 32.4%, with prevalence increasing steadily and significantly over time, from 25.5% in or before 2005 to 37.8% in 2016 or later. The overall prevalence is significantly higher in men than in women (39.7% vs. 25.6%).
These figures contrast with recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews that put the global prevalence of NAFLD at between 25.2% and 29.8%. However, these studies had “considerable” limitations with “potentially biased inferences,” Dr. Shaheen and colleagues noted.
By region, their data put the prevalence of NAFLD at 31.6% in Asia, 32.6% in Europe, 47.8% in North America, and 56.8% in Africa.
Dr. Shaheen and colleagues estimate the overall incidence of NAFLD to be 46.9 cases per 1,000 person-years, with a higher incidence in men than women (70.8 vs. 29.6 cases per 1000 person-years), in line with the gender differences in prevalence.
They caution that there was “considerable” heterogeneity between studies in both NAFLD prevalence and incidence (I2 = 99.9%) and few “high-quality” studies.
Despite these limitations, Dr. Shaheen and colleagues said the rise in NAFLD prevalence “should drive enhanced awareness of NAFLD at the level of primary care physicians, public health specialists, and health policy makers to encourage the development of more effective preventive policies.”
Funding for the study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health. Dr. Shaheen has received research grants from Gilead and Intercept, and honoraria from SCOPE Canada.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The global prevalence of fatty liver disease not caused by alcohol is considerably higher than previously estimated and is continuing to increase at an alarming rate, report researchers from Canada.
Their analysis suggests nearly one-third of the global general adult population has nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), with men much more likely to have the disease than women.
“Greater awareness of NAFLD and the development of cost-effective risk stratification strategies are needed to address the growing burden NAFLD,” wrote Abdel-Aziz Shaheen, MBBCh, MSc, and colleagues with the University of Calgary (Alta.).
The study was published online in Lancet Gastroenterology and Hepatology.
NAFLD is the most common liver disease worldwide and a leading cause of liver-related illness and death. Yet, high-quality reports on the epidemiology of NAFLD at a global level are scarce and temporal trends of the NAFLD burden, including by gender, have not been described, until now.
Using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science, the Calgary team identified reports on NAFLD incidence and prevalence in study populations representative of the general adult population published between the date of database inception to May 25, 2021.
In total, 72 publications, with a sample population of more than 1 million adults from 17 countries, were included in the prevalence analysis, and 16 publications, with a sample population of nearly 382,000 individuals from five countries, were included in the incidence analysis.
By their estimates, the overall global prevalence of NAFLD is 32.4%, with prevalence increasing steadily and significantly over time, from 25.5% in or before 2005 to 37.8% in 2016 or later. The overall prevalence is significantly higher in men than in women (39.7% vs. 25.6%).
These figures contrast with recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews that put the global prevalence of NAFLD at between 25.2% and 29.8%. However, these studies had “considerable” limitations with “potentially biased inferences,” Dr. Shaheen and colleagues noted.
By region, their data put the prevalence of NAFLD at 31.6% in Asia, 32.6% in Europe, 47.8% in North America, and 56.8% in Africa.
Dr. Shaheen and colleagues estimate the overall incidence of NAFLD to be 46.9 cases per 1,000 person-years, with a higher incidence in men than women (70.8 vs. 29.6 cases per 1000 person-years), in line with the gender differences in prevalence.
They caution that there was “considerable” heterogeneity between studies in both NAFLD prevalence and incidence (I2 = 99.9%) and few “high-quality” studies.
Despite these limitations, Dr. Shaheen and colleagues said the rise in NAFLD prevalence “should drive enhanced awareness of NAFLD at the level of primary care physicians, public health specialists, and health policy makers to encourage the development of more effective preventive policies.”
Funding for the study was provided by the Canadian Institutes of Health. Dr. Shaheen has received research grants from Gilead and Intercept, and honoraria from SCOPE Canada.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM LANCET GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
Boosting hypertension screening, treatment would cut global mortality 7%
If 80% of individuals with hypertension were screened, 80% received treatment, and 80% then reached guideline-specified targets, up to 200 million cases of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and 130 million deaths could be averted by 2050, a modeling study suggests.
Achievement of the 80-80-80 target “could be one of the single most important global public health accomplishments of the coming decades,” according to the authors.
“We need to reprioritize hypertension care in our practices,” principal investigator David A. Watkins, MD, MPH, University of Washington, Seattle, told this news organization. “Only about one in five persons with hypertension around the world has their blood pressure well controlled. Oftentimes, clinicians are focused on addressing patients’ other health needs, many of which can be pressing in the short term, and we forget to talk about blood pressure, which has more than earned its reputation as ‘the silent killer.’ ”
The modeling study was published online in Nature Medicine, with lead author Sarah J. Pickersgill, MPH, also from the University of Washington.
Two interventions, three scenarios
Dr. Watkins and colleagues based their analysis on two approaches to blood pressure (BP) control shown to be beneficial: drug treatment to a systolic BP of either 130 mm Hg or 140 mm Hg or less, depending on local guidelines, and dietary sodium reduction, as recommended by the World Health Organization.
The team modeled the impacts of these interventions in 182 countries according to three scenarios:
- Business as usual (control): allowing hypertension to increase at historic rates of change and mean sodium intake to remain at current levels
- Progress: matching historically high-performing countries (for example, accelerating hypertension control by about 3% per year at intermediate levels of intervention coverage) while lowering mean sodium intake by 15% by 2030
- Aspirational: hypertension control achieved faster than historically high-performing countries (about 4% per year) and mean sodium intake decreased by 30% by 2027
The analysis suggests that in the progressive scenario, all countries could achieve 80-80-80 targets by 2050 and most countries by 2040; the aspirational scenario would have all countries meeting them by 2040. That would result in reductions in all-cause mortality of 4%-7% (76 million to 130 million deaths averted) with progressive and aspirational interventions, respectively, compared with the control scenario.
There would also be a slower rise in expected CVD from population growth and aging (110 million to 200 million cases averted). That is, the probability of dying from any CVD cause between the ages of 30 and 80 years would be reduced by 16% in the progressive scenario and 26% in the aspirational scenario.
Of note, about 83%-85% of the potential mortality reductions would result from scaling up hypertension treatment in the progressive and aspirational scenarios, respectively, with the remaining 15%-17% coming from sodium reduction, the researchers state.
Further, they propose, scaling up BP interventions could reduce CVD inequalities across countries, with low-income and lower-middle-income countries likely experiencing the largest reductions in disease rates and mortality.
Implementation barriers
“Health systems in many low- and middle-income countries have not traditionally been set up to succeed in chronic disease management in primary care,” Dr. Watkins noted. For interventions to be successful, he said, “several barriers need to be addressed, including: low population awareness of chronic diseases like hypertension and diabetes, which leads to low rates of screening and treatment; high out-of-pocket cost and low availability of medicines for chronic diseases; and need for adherence support and provider incentives for improving quality of chronic disease care in primary care settings.”
“Based on the analysis, achieving the 80-80-80 seems feasible, though actually getting there may be much more complicated. I wonder whether countries have the resources to implement the needed policies,” Rodrigo M. Carrillo-Larco, MD, researcher, department of epidemiology and biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, told this news organization.
“It may be challenging, particularly after COVID-19, which revealed deficiencies in many health care systems, and care for hypertension may have been disturbed,” said Dr. Carrillo-Larco, who is not connected with the analysis.
That said, simplified BP screening approaches could help maximize the number of people screened overall, potentially identifying those with hypertension and raising awareness, he proposed. His team’s recent study showed that such approaches vary from country to country but are generally reliable and can be used effectively for population screening.
In addition, Dr. Carrillo-Larco said, any efforts by clinicians to improve adherence and help patients achieve BP control “would also have positive effects at the population level.”
The study was supported by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with additional funding by a grant to Dr. Watkins from Resolve to Save Lives. No conflicts of interest were declared.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
If 80% of individuals with hypertension were screened, 80% received treatment, and 80% then reached guideline-specified targets, up to 200 million cases of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and 130 million deaths could be averted by 2050, a modeling study suggests.
Achievement of the 80-80-80 target “could be one of the single most important global public health accomplishments of the coming decades,” according to the authors.
“We need to reprioritize hypertension care in our practices,” principal investigator David A. Watkins, MD, MPH, University of Washington, Seattle, told this news organization. “Only about one in five persons with hypertension around the world has their blood pressure well controlled. Oftentimes, clinicians are focused on addressing patients’ other health needs, many of which can be pressing in the short term, and we forget to talk about blood pressure, which has more than earned its reputation as ‘the silent killer.’ ”
The modeling study was published online in Nature Medicine, with lead author Sarah J. Pickersgill, MPH, also from the University of Washington.
Two interventions, three scenarios
Dr. Watkins and colleagues based their analysis on two approaches to blood pressure (BP) control shown to be beneficial: drug treatment to a systolic BP of either 130 mm Hg or 140 mm Hg or less, depending on local guidelines, and dietary sodium reduction, as recommended by the World Health Organization.
The team modeled the impacts of these interventions in 182 countries according to three scenarios:
- Business as usual (control): allowing hypertension to increase at historic rates of change and mean sodium intake to remain at current levels
- Progress: matching historically high-performing countries (for example, accelerating hypertension control by about 3% per year at intermediate levels of intervention coverage) while lowering mean sodium intake by 15% by 2030
- Aspirational: hypertension control achieved faster than historically high-performing countries (about 4% per year) and mean sodium intake decreased by 30% by 2027
The analysis suggests that in the progressive scenario, all countries could achieve 80-80-80 targets by 2050 and most countries by 2040; the aspirational scenario would have all countries meeting them by 2040. That would result in reductions in all-cause mortality of 4%-7% (76 million to 130 million deaths averted) with progressive and aspirational interventions, respectively, compared with the control scenario.
There would also be a slower rise in expected CVD from population growth and aging (110 million to 200 million cases averted). That is, the probability of dying from any CVD cause between the ages of 30 and 80 years would be reduced by 16% in the progressive scenario and 26% in the aspirational scenario.
Of note, about 83%-85% of the potential mortality reductions would result from scaling up hypertension treatment in the progressive and aspirational scenarios, respectively, with the remaining 15%-17% coming from sodium reduction, the researchers state.
Further, they propose, scaling up BP interventions could reduce CVD inequalities across countries, with low-income and lower-middle-income countries likely experiencing the largest reductions in disease rates and mortality.
Implementation barriers
“Health systems in many low- and middle-income countries have not traditionally been set up to succeed in chronic disease management in primary care,” Dr. Watkins noted. For interventions to be successful, he said, “several barriers need to be addressed, including: low population awareness of chronic diseases like hypertension and diabetes, which leads to low rates of screening and treatment; high out-of-pocket cost and low availability of medicines for chronic diseases; and need for adherence support and provider incentives for improving quality of chronic disease care in primary care settings.”
“Based on the analysis, achieving the 80-80-80 seems feasible, though actually getting there may be much more complicated. I wonder whether countries have the resources to implement the needed policies,” Rodrigo M. Carrillo-Larco, MD, researcher, department of epidemiology and biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, told this news organization.
“It may be challenging, particularly after COVID-19, which revealed deficiencies in many health care systems, and care for hypertension may have been disturbed,” said Dr. Carrillo-Larco, who is not connected with the analysis.
That said, simplified BP screening approaches could help maximize the number of people screened overall, potentially identifying those with hypertension and raising awareness, he proposed. His team’s recent study showed that such approaches vary from country to country but are generally reliable and can be used effectively for population screening.
In addition, Dr. Carrillo-Larco said, any efforts by clinicians to improve adherence and help patients achieve BP control “would also have positive effects at the population level.”
The study was supported by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with additional funding by a grant to Dr. Watkins from Resolve to Save Lives. No conflicts of interest were declared.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
If 80% of individuals with hypertension were screened, 80% received treatment, and 80% then reached guideline-specified targets, up to 200 million cases of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and 130 million deaths could be averted by 2050, a modeling study suggests.
Achievement of the 80-80-80 target “could be one of the single most important global public health accomplishments of the coming decades,” according to the authors.
“We need to reprioritize hypertension care in our practices,” principal investigator David A. Watkins, MD, MPH, University of Washington, Seattle, told this news organization. “Only about one in five persons with hypertension around the world has their blood pressure well controlled. Oftentimes, clinicians are focused on addressing patients’ other health needs, many of which can be pressing in the short term, and we forget to talk about blood pressure, which has more than earned its reputation as ‘the silent killer.’ ”
The modeling study was published online in Nature Medicine, with lead author Sarah J. Pickersgill, MPH, also from the University of Washington.
Two interventions, three scenarios
Dr. Watkins and colleagues based their analysis on two approaches to blood pressure (BP) control shown to be beneficial: drug treatment to a systolic BP of either 130 mm Hg or 140 mm Hg or less, depending on local guidelines, and dietary sodium reduction, as recommended by the World Health Organization.
The team modeled the impacts of these interventions in 182 countries according to three scenarios:
- Business as usual (control): allowing hypertension to increase at historic rates of change and mean sodium intake to remain at current levels
- Progress: matching historically high-performing countries (for example, accelerating hypertension control by about 3% per year at intermediate levels of intervention coverage) while lowering mean sodium intake by 15% by 2030
- Aspirational: hypertension control achieved faster than historically high-performing countries (about 4% per year) and mean sodium intake decreased by 30% by 2027
The analysis suggests that in the progressive scenario, all countries could achieve 80-80-80 targets by 2050 and most countries by 2040; the aspirational scenario would have all countries meeting them by 2040. That would result in reductions in all-cause mortality of 4%-7% (76 million to 130 million deaths averted) with progressive and aspirational interventions, respectively, compared with the control scenario.
There would also be a slower rise in expected CVD from population growth and aging (110 million to 200 million cases averted). That is, the probability of dying from any CVD cause between the ages of 30 and 80 years would be reduced by 16% in the progressive scenario and 26% in the aspirational scenario.
Of note, about 83%-85% of the potential mortality reductions would result from scaling up hypertension treatment in the progressive and aspirational scenarios, respectively, with the remaining 15%-17% coming from sodium reduction, the researchers state.
Further, they propose, scaling up BP interventions could reduce CVD inequalities across countries, with low-income and lower-middle-income countries likely experiencing the largest reductions in disease rates and mortality.
Implementation barriers
“Health systems in many low- and middle-income countries have not traditionally been set up to succeed in chronic disease management in primary care,” Dr. Watkins noted. For interventions to be successful, he said, “several barriers need to be addressed, including: low population awareness of chronic diseases like hypertension and diabetes, which leads to low rates of screening and treatment; high out-of-pocket cost and low availability of medicines for chronic diseases; and need for adherence support and provider incentives for improving quality of chronic disease care in primary care settings.”
“Based on the analysis, achieving the 80-80-80 seems feasible, though actually getting there may be much more complicated. I wonder whether countries have the resources to implement the needed policies,” Rodrigo M. Carrillo-Larco, MD, researcher, department of epidemiology and biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, told this news organization.
“It may be challenging, particularly after COVID-19, which revealed deficiencies in many health care systems, and care for hypertension may have been disturbed,” said Dr. Carrillo-Larco, who is not connected with the analysis.
That said, simplified BP screening approaches could help maximize the number of people screened overall, potentially identifying those with hypertension and raising awareness, he proposed. His team’s recent study showed that such approaches vary from country to country but are generally reliable and can be used effectively for population screening.
In addition, Dr. Carrillo-Larco said, any efforts by clinicians to improve adherence and help patients achieve BP control “would also have positive effects at the population level.”
The study was supported by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with additional funding by a grant to Dr. Watkins from Resolve to Save Lives. No conflicts of interest were declared.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
U.S. News issues top hospitals list, now with expanded health equity measures
For the seventh consecutive year, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., took the top spot in the annual honor roll of best hospitals, published July 26 by U.S. News & World Report.
The 2022 rankings, which marks the 33rd edition, showcase several methodology changes, including new ratings for ovarian, prostate, and uterine cancer surgeries that “provide patients ... with previously unavailable information to assist them in making a critical health care decision,” a news release from the publication explains.
said the release. Finally, a new metric called “home time” determines how successfully each hospital helps patients return home.
Mayo Clinic remains No. 1
For the 2022-2023 rankings and ratings, U.S. News compared more than 4,500 medical centers across the country in 15 specialties and 20 procedures and conditions. Of these, 493 were recognized as Best Regional Hospitals as a result of their overall strong performance.
The list was then narrowed to the top 20 hospitals, outlined in the honor roll below, that deliver “exceptional treatment across multiple areas of care.”
Following Mayo Clinic in the annual ranking’s top spot, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles rises from No. 6 to No. 2, and New York University Langone Hospitals finish third, up from eighth in 2021.
Cleveland Clinic in Ohio holds the No. 4 spot, down two from 2021, while Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles tie for fifth place. Rounding out the top 10, in order, are: New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago; Stanford (Calif.) Health Care–Stanford Hospital.
The following hospitals complete the top 20 in the United States:
- 11. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis
- 12. UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco
- 13. Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania–Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia
- 14. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston
- 15. Houston Methodist Hospital
- 16. Mount Sinai Hospital, New York
- 17. University of Michigan Health–Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor
- 18. Mayo Clinic–Phoenix
- 19. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
- 20. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago
For the specialty rankings, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, remains No. 1 in cancer care, the Cleveland Clinic is No. 1 in cardiology and heart surgery, and the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York is No. 1 in orthopedics.
Top five for cancer
- 1. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
- 2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York
- 3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 4. Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, Boston
- 5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles
Top five for cardiology and heart surgery
- 1. Cleveland Clinic
- 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
- 4. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York
- 5. New York University Langone Hospitals
Top five for orthopedics
- 1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York
- 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
- 4. New York University Langone Hospitals
- 5. (tie) Rush University Medical Center, Chicago
- 5. (tie) UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles
According to the news release, the procedures and conditions ratings are based entirely on objective patient care measures like survival rates, patient experience, home time, and level of nursing care. The Best Hospitals rankings consider a variety of data provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, American Hospital Association, professional organizations, and medical specialists.
The full report is available online.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
For the seventh consecutive year, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., took the top spot in the annual honor roll of best hospitals, published July 26 by U.S. News & World Report.
The 2022 rankings, which marks the 33rd edition, showcase several methodology changes, including new ratings for ovarian, prostate, and uterine cancer surgeries that “provide patients ... with previously unavailable information to assist them in making a critical health care decision,” a news release from the publication explains.
said the release. Finally, a new metric called “home time” determines how successfully each hospital helps patients return home.
Mayo Clinic remains No. 1
For the 2022-2023 rankings and ratings, U.S. News compared more than 4,500 medical centers across the country in 15 specialties and 20 procedures and conditions. Of these, 493 were recognized as Best Regional Hospitals as a result of their overall strong performance.
The list was then narrowed to the top 20 hospitals, outlined in the honor roll below, that deliver “exceptional treatment across multiple areas of care.”
Following Mayo Clinic in the annual ranking’s top spot, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles rises from No. 6 to No. 2, and New York University Langone Hospitals finish third, up from eighth in 2021.
Cleveland Clinic in Ohio holds the No. 4 spot, down two from 2021, while Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles tie for fifth place. Rounding out the top 10, in order, are: New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago; Stanford (Calif.) Health Care–Stanford Hospital.
The following hospitals complete the top 20 in the United States:
- 11. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis
- 12. UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco
- 13. Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania–Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia
- 14. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston
- 15. Houston Methodist Hospital
- 16. Mount Sinai Hospital, New York
- 17. University of Michigan Health–Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor
- 18. Mayo Clinic–Phoenix
- 19. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
- 20. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago
For the specialty rankings, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, remains No. 1 in cancer care, the Cleveland Clinic is No. 1 in cardiology and heart surgery, and the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York is No. 1 in orthopedics.
Top five for cancer
- 1. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
- 2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York
- 3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 4. Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, Boston
- 5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles
Top five for cardiology and heart surgery
- 1. Cleveland Clinic
- 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
- 4. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York
- 5. New York University Langone Hospitals
Top five for orthopedics
- 1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York
- 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
- 4. New York University Langone Hospitals
- 5. (tie) Rush University Medical Center, Chicago
- 5. (tie) UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles
According to the news release, the procedures and conditions ratings are based entirely on objective patient care measures like survival rates, patient experience, home time, and level of nursing care. The Best Hospitals rankings consider a variety of data provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, American Hospital Association, professional organizations, and medical specialists.
The full report is available online.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
For the seventh consecutive year, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., took the top spot in the annual honor roll of best hospitals, published July 26 by U.S. News & World Report.
The 2022 rankings, which marks the 33rd edition, showcase several methodology changes, including new ratings for ovarian, prostate, and uterine cancer surgeries that “provide patients ... with previously unavailable information to assist them in making a critical health care decision,” a news release from the publication explains.
said the release. Finally, a new metric called “home time” determines how successfully each hospital helps patients return home.
Mayo Clinic remains No. 1
For the 2022-2023 rankings and ratings, U.S. News compared more than 4,500 medical centers across the country in 15 specialties and 20 procedures and conditions. Of these, 493 were recognized as Best Regional Hospitals as a result of their overall strong performance.
The list was then narrowed to the top 20 hospitals, outlined in the honor roll below, that deliver “exceptional treatment across multiple areas of care.”
Following Mayo Clinic in the annual ranking’s top spot, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles rises from No. 6 to No. 2, and New York University Langone Hospitals finish third, up from eighth in 2021.
Cleveland Clinic in Ohio holds the No. 4 spot, down two from 2021, while Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore and UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles tie for fifth place. Rounding out the top 10, in order, are: New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston; Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago; Stanford (Calif.) Health Care–Stanford Hospital.
The following hospitals complete the top 20 in the United States:
- 11. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis
- 12. UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco
- 13. Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania–Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia
- 14. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston
- 15. Houston Methodist Hospital
- 16. Mount Sinai Hospital, New York
- 17. University of Michigan Health–Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor
- 18. Mayo Clinic–Phoenix
- 19. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.
- 20. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago
For the specialty rankings, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, remains No. 1 in cancer care, the Cleveland Clinic is No. 1 in cardiology and heart surgery, and the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York is No. 1 in orthopedics.
Top five for cancer
- 1. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston
- 2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York
- 3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 4. Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, Boston
- 5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles
Top five for cardiology and heart surgery
- 1. Cleveland Clinic
- 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
- 4. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York
- 5. New York University Langone Hospitals
Top five for orthopedics
- 1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York
- 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
- 3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles
- 4. New York University Langone Hospitals
- 5. (tie) Rush University Medical Center, Chicago
- 5. (tie) UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles
According to the news release, the procedures and conditions ratings are based entirely on objective patient care measures like survival rates, patient experience, home time, and level of nursing care. The Best Hospitals rankings consider a variety of data provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, American Hospital Association, professional organizations, and medical specialists.
The full report is available online.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The next blood pressure breakthrough: temporary tattoos
As scientists work on wearable technology that promises to revolutionize health care, researchers from the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University, College Station, are reporting a big win in the pursuit of one highly popular target: a noninvasive solution for continuous blood pressure monitoring at home.
Not only that, but this development comes in the surprising form of a temporary tattoo. That’s right: Just like the kind that children like to wear.
the researchers report in their new study.
“With this new technology, we are going to have an opportunity to understand how our blood pressure fluctuates during the day. We will be able to quantify how stress is impacting us,” says Roozbeh Jafari, PhD, a professor of biomedical engineering, electrical engineering, and computer science at Texas A&M, College Station, and a coauthor of the study.
Revealing the whole picture, not just dots
At-home blood pressure monitors have been around for many years now. They work just like the blood pressure machines doctors use at their office: You place your arm inside a cuff, press a button, feel a squeeze on your arm, and get a reading.
While results from this method are accurate, they are also just a moment in time. Our blood pressure can vary greatly throughout the day – especially among people who have labile hypertension, where blood pressure changes from one extreme to the other. So, looking at point-in-time readings is a bit like focusing on a few dots inside of a pointillism painting – one might miss the bigger picture.
Doctors may also find continuous monitoring useful for getting rid of false readings from “white coat syndrome.” Basically, this means a person’s blood pressure rises due to the anxiety of being in a doctor’s office but is not true hypertension.
Bottom line: The ability to monitor a person’s blood pressure continuously for hours or even days can provide clearer, and more accurate, insights into a person’s health.
How do health monitoring tattoos work?
Electronic tattoos for health monitoring are not completely new. John A. Rogers, PhD, of Northwestern University, Chicago, first put forth the idea of monitoring through temporary tattoos 12 years ago. Some concepts, such as UV monitoring tattoos, had already been adopted by scientists and put on the market. But the existing models weren’t suitable for monitoring blood pressure, according to Deji Akinwande, PhD, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Texas at Austin and another coauthor of the study.
“[UV monitoring tattoos] are very thick,” he says. “They create too much movement when used to measure blood pressure because they slide around.”
So, the Texas-based research team worked to develop an option that was slimmer and more stable.
“The key ingredient within e-tattoos is graphene,” says Dr. Akinwande.
Graphene is carbon that’s similar to what’s inside your graphite pencil. The material is conductive, meaning it can conduct small electrical currents through the skin. For blood pressure monitoring, graphene promotes bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), which is like the technology used in smart scales that measure body fat.
With e-tattoos, the thin layers of graphene stick to the skin and do not slide around, getting rid of “artifacts,” or bad data. The graphene e-tattoos can be worn on the skin for about a week – or roughly as long as the temporary tattoos kids love.
Once the graphene captures the raw data, a machine learning algorithm interprets the information and provides results in units used for measuring blood pressure: millimeters of mercury (mmHg), commonly referred to as blood pressure “points.”
How accurate are the results? The tests measured blood pressure within 0.2 ± 5.8 mmHg (systolic), 0.2 ± 4.5 mmHg (diastolic), and 0.1 ± 5.3 mmHg (mean arterial pressure). In other words: If this were a basketball player shooting baskets, the great majority of shots taken would be swishes and occasionally a few would hit the rim. That means good accuracy.
When will e-tattoos be available?
The teams of Dr. Jafari and Dr. Akinwande are working on a second generation of their e-tattoo that they expect to be available in the next 5 years.
The upgrade they envision will be smaller and compatible with smartwatches and phones that use Bluetooth technology and near-field communication (NFC) to transfer data and give it power. With these updates, e-tattoos for continuous blood pressure monitoring will be ready for clinical trials and mainstream use soon after.
“Everyone can benefit from knowing their blood pressure recordings,” Dr. Akinwande says. “It is not just for people at risk for hypertension but for others to proactively monitor their health, for stress and other factors.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
As scientists work on wearable technology that promises to revolutionize health care, researchers from the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University, College Station, are reporting a big win in the pursuit of one highly popular target: a noninvasive solution for continuous blood pressure monitoring at home.
Not only that, but this development comes in the surprising form of a temporary tattoo. That’s right: Just like the kind that children like to wear.
the researchers report in their new study.
“With this new technology, we are going to have an opportunity to understand how our blood pressure fluctuates during the day. We will be able to quantify how stress is impacting us,” says Roozbeh Jafari, PhD, a professor of biomedical engineering, electrical engineering, and computer science at Texas A&M, College Station, and a coauthor of the study.
Revealing the whole picture, not just dots
At-home blood pressure monitors have been around for many years now. They work just like the blood pressure machines doctors use at their office: You place your arm inside a cuff, press a button, feel a squeeze on your arm, and get a reading.
While results from this method are accurate, they are also just a moment in time. Our blood pressure can vary greatly throughout the day – especially among people who have labile hypertension, where blood pressure changes from one extreme to the other. So, looking at point-in-time readings is a bit like focusing on a few dots inside of a pointillism painting – one might miss the bigger picture.
Doctors may also find continuous monitoring useful for getting rid of false readings from “white coat syndrome.” Basically, this means a person’s blood pressure rises due to the anxiety of being in a doctor’s office but is not true hypertension.
Bottom line: The ability to monitor a person’s blood pressure continuously for hours or even days can provide clearer, and more accurate, insights into a person’s health.
How do health monitoring tattoos work?
Electronic tattoos for health monitoring are not completely new. John A. Rogers, PhD, of Northwestern University, Chicago, first put forth the idea of monitoring through temporary tattoos 12 years ago. Some concepts, such as UV monitoring tattoos, had already been adopted by scientists and put on the market. But the existing models weren’t suitable for monitoring blood pressure, according to Deji Akinwande, PhD, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Texas at Austin and another coauthor of the study.
“[UV monitoring tattoos] are very thick,” he says. “They create too much movement when used to measure blood pressure because they slide around.”
So, the Texas-based research team worked to develop an option that was slimmer and more stable.
“The key ingredient within e-tattoos is graphene,” says Dr. Akinwande.
Graphene is carbon that’s similar to what’s inside your graphite pencil. The material is conductive, meaning it can conduct small electrical currents through the skin. For blood pressure monitoring, graphene promotes bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), which is like the technology used in smart scales that measure body fat.
With e-tattoos, the thin layers of graphene stick to the skin and do not slide around, getting rid of “artifacts,” or bad data. The graphene e-tattoos can be worn on the skin for about a week – or roughly as long as the temporary tattoos kids love.
Once the graphene captures the raw data, a machine learning algorithm interprets the information and provides results in units used for measuring blood pressure: millimeters of mercury (mmHg), commonly referred to as blood pressure “points.”
How accurate are the results? The tests measured blood pressure within 0.2 ± 5.8 mmHg (systolic), 0.2 ± 4.5 mmHg (diastolic), and 0.1 ± 5.3 mmHg (mean arterial pressure). In other words: If this were a basketball player shooting baskets, the great majority of shots taken would be swishes and occasionally a few would hit the rim. That means good accuracy.
When will e-tattoos be available?
The teams of Dr. Jafari and Dr. Akinwande are working on a second generation of their e-tattoo that they expect to be available in the next 5 years.
The upgrade they envision will be smaller and compatible with smartwatches and phones that use Bluetooth technology and near-field communication (NFC) to transfer data and give it power. With these updates, e-tattoos for continuous blood pressure monitoring will be ready for clinical trials and mainstream use soon after.
“Everyone can benefit from knowing their blood pressure recordings,” Dr. Akinwande says. “It is not just for people at risk for hypertension but for others to proactively monitor their health, for stress and other factors.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
As scientists work on wearable technology that promises to revolutionize health care, researchers from the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University, College Station, are reporting a big win in the pursuit of one highly popular target: a noninvasive solution for continuous blood pressure monitoring at home.
Not only that, but this development comes in the surprising form of a temporary tattoo. That’s right: Just like the kind that children like to wear.
the researchers report in their new study.
“With this new technology, we are going to have an opportunity to understand how our blood pressure fluctuates during the day. We will be able to quantify how stress is impacting us,” says Roozbeh Jafari, PhD, a professor of biomedical engineering, electrical engineering, and computer science at Texas A&M, College Station, and a coauthor of the study.
Revealing the whole picture, not just dots
At-home blood pressure monitors have been around for many years now. They work just like the blood pressure machines doctors use at their office: You place your arm inside a cuff, press a button, feel a squeeze on your arm, and get a reading.
While results from this method are accurate, they are also just a moment in time. Our blood pressure can vary greatly throughout the day – especially among people who have labile hypertension, where blood pressure changes from one extreme to the other. So, looking at point-in-time readings is a bit like focusing on a few dots inside of a pointillism painting – one might miss the bigger picture.
Doctors may also find continuous monitoring useful for getting rid of false readings from “white coat syndrome.” Basically, this means a person’s blood pressure rises due to the anxiety of being in a doctor’s office but is not true hypertension.
Bottom line: The ability to monitor a person’s blood pressure continuously for hours or even days can provide clearer, and more accurate, insights into a person’s health.
How do health monitoring tattoos work?
Electronic tattoos for health monitoring are not completely new. John A. Rogers, PhD, of Northwestern University, Chicago, first put forth the idea of monitoring through temporary tattoos 12 years ago. Some concepts, such as UV monitoring tattoos, had already been adopted by scientists and put on the market. But the existing models weren’t suitable for monitoring blood pressure, according to Deji Akinwande, PhD, a professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Texas at Austin and another coauthor of the study.
“[UV monitoring tattoos] are very thick,” he says. “They create too much movement when used to measure blood pressure because they slide around.”
So, the Texas-based research team worked to develop an option that was slimmer and more stable.
“The key ingredient within e-tattoos is graphene,” says Dr. Akinwande.
Graphene is carbon that’s similar to what’s inside your graphite pencil. The material is conductive, meaning it can conduct small electrical currents through the skin. For blood pressure monitoring, graphene promotes bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), which is like the technology used in smart scales that measure body fat.
With e-tattoos, the thin layers of graphene stick to the skin and do not slide around, getting rid of “artifacts,” or bad data. The graphene e-tattoos can be worn on the skin for about a week – or roughly as long as the temporary tattoos kids love.
Once the graphene captures the raw data, a machine learning algorithm interprets the information and provides results in units used for measuring blood pressure: millimeters of mercury (mmHg), commonly referred to as blood pressure “points.”
How accurate are the results? The tests measured blood pressure within 0.2 ± 5.8 mmHg (systolic), 0.2 ± 4.5 mmHg (diastolic), and 0.1 ± 5.3 mmHg (mean arterial pressure). In other words: If this were a basketball player shooting baskets, the great majority of shots taken would be swishes and occasionally a few would hit the rim. That means good accuracy.
When will e-tattoos be available?
The teams of Dr. Jafari and Dr. Akinwande are working on a second generation of their e-tattoo that they expect to be available in the next 5 years.
The upgrade they envision will be smaller and compatible with smartwatches and phones that use Bluetooth technology and near-field communication (NFC) to transfer data and give it power. With these updates, e-tattoos for continuous blood pressure monitoring will be ready for clinical trials and mainstream use soon after.
“Everyone can benefit from knowing their blood pressure recordings,” Dr. Akinwande says. “It is not just for people at risk for hypertension but for others to proactively monitor their health, for stress and other factors.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.