User login
Cancer centers announce new faculty
Jorge E. Cortes, MD, is set to become director of the Georgia Cancer Center in Augusta on Sept. 1. In this new position, Dr. Cortes will further the center’s missions of obtaining National Cancer Institute designation and reducing the burden of cancer in Georgia.
Dr. Cortes was previously deputy chair and professor of medicine in the department of leukemia at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. He received his medical degree in 1986 and began working at MD Anderson in 1991. His clinical interests include acute and chronic leukemias, myelodysplastic syndromes, and myeloproliferative neoplasms.
Fern M. Anari, MD, joined Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia in August. Dr. Anari is now an assistant professor in the division of genitourinary medical oncology within the department of hematology/oncology.
Dr. Anari earned her medical degree from Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J., and completed an internship and residency at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. She joined Fox Chase/Temple University for a 3-year fellowship in 2016.
Another new hire in the department of hematology/oncology at Fox Chase is Iberia Romina Sosa, MD, PhD. Dr. Sosa became an assistant professor in the clinical investigator track in August.
Dr. Sosa, who is a member of the Hematology News editorial advisory board, was previously an assistant professor in the department of hematology/oncology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She received her MD and PhD from the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and completed a residency and fellowship at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.
Finally, John Migliano, MD, has joined The Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation, which has locations in Southern California, Arizona, and Nevada. Dr. Migliano serves patients at the Arizona locations in Tucson, Oro Valley, and Marana.
Dr. Migliano received his medical degree from the University of Medicine and Health Sciences in Saint Kitts and completed his residency in internal medicine at the University of Arizona in Tucson. He was a hematology/oncology fellow at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Movers in Medicine highlights career moves and personal achievements by hematologists and oncologists. Did you switch jobs, take on a new role, climb a mountain? Tell us all about it at [email protected], and you could be featured in Movers in Medicine.
Jorge E. Cortes, MD, is set to become director of the Georgia Cancer Center in Augusta on Sept. 1. In this new position, Dr. Cortes will further the center’s missions of obtaining National Cancer Institute designation and reducing the burden of cancer in Georgia.
Dr. Cortes was previously deputy chair and professor of medicine in the department of leukemia at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. He received his medical degree in 1986 and began working at MD Anderson in 1991. His clinical interests include acute and chronic leukemias, myelodysplastic syndromes, and myeloproliferative neoplasms.
Fern M. Anari, MD, joined Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia in August. Dr. Anari is now an assistant professor in the division of genitourinary medical oncology within the department of hematology/oncology.
Dr. Anari earned her medical degree from Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J., and completed an internship and residency at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. She joined Fox Chase/Temple University for a 3-year fellowship in 2016.
Another new hire in the department of hematology/oncology at Fox Chase is Iberia Romina Sosa, MD, PhD. Dr. Sosa became an assistant professor in the clinical investigator track in August.
Dr. Sosa, who is a member of the Hematology News editorial advisory board, was previously an assistant professor in the department of hematology/oncology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She received her MD and PhD from the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and completed a residency and fellowship at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.
Finally, John Migliano, MD, has joined The Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation, which has locations in Southern California, Arizona, and Nevada. Dr. Migliano serves patients at the Arizona locations in Tucson, Oro Valley, and Marana.
Dr. Migliano received his medical degree from the University of Medicine and Health Sciences in Saint Kitts and completed his residency in internal medicine at the University of Arizona in Tucson. He was a hematology/oncology fellow at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Movers in Medicine highlights career moves and personal achievements by hematologists and oncologists. Did you switch jobs, take on a new role, climb a mountain? Tell us all about it at [email protected], and you could be featured in Movers in Medicine.
Jorge E. Cortes, MD, is set to become director of the Georgia Cancer Center in Augusta on Sept. 1. In this new position, Dr. Cortes will further the center’s missions of obtaining National Cancer Institute designation and reducing the burden of cancer in Georgia.
Dr. Cortes was previously deputy chair and professor of medicine in the department of leukemia at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. He received his medical degree in 1986 and began working at MD Anderson in 1991. His clinical interests include acute and chronic leukemias, myelodysplastic syndromes, and myeloproliferative neoplasms.
Fern M. Anari, MD, joined Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia in August. Dr. Anari is now an assistant professor in the division of genitourinary medical oncology within the department of hematology/oncology.
Dr. Anari earned her medical degree from Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J., and completed an internship and residency at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia. She joined Fox Chase/Temple University for a 3-year fellowship in 2016.
Another new hire in the department of hematology/oncology at Fox Chase is Iberia Romina Sosa, MD, PhD. Dr. Sosa became an assistant professor in the clinical investigator track in August.
Dr. Sosa, who is a member of the Hematology News editorial advisory board, was previously an assistant professor in the department of hematology/oncology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. She received her MD and PhD from the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and completed a residency and fellowship at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.
Finally, John Migliano, MD, has joined The Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation, which has locations in Southern California, Arizona, and Nevada. Dr. Migliano serves patients at the Arizona locations in Tucson, Oro Valley, and Marana.
Dr. Migliano received his medical degree from the University of Medicine and Health Sciences in Saint Kitts and completed his residency in internal medicine at the University of Arizona in Tucson. He was a hematology/oncology fellow at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Movers in Medicine highlights career moves and personal achievements by hematologists and oncologists. Did you switch jobs, take on a new role, climb a mountain? Tell us all about it at [email protected], and you could be featured in Movers in Medicine.
AHA highlights limitations of perfusion testing for critical limb ischemia
A new assessment statement from the American Heart Association reviewed the strengths and limitations of current imaging techniques for critical limb ischemia (CLI), the severest form of peripheral arterial disease (PAD).
The main techniques discussed were the ankle-brachial index (ABI), toe-brachial index (TBI), toe systolic pressure, transcutaneous oximetry (TcPO2) and skin perfusion pressure (SPP). The literature review also identified what the authors saw as opportunities for technology improvement.
“No single vascular test has been identified as the most important predictor of wound healing or major amputation for the threatened limb,” wrote Sanjay Misra, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and colleagues, on behalf of the American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, the Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing.
Of particular concern were limitations seen in the use of ABI, the most widely used assessment method. “Although ABI was first described to diagnose PAD, it has not been shown to be an accurate predictor of wound healing or major adverse limb events. Clearly, the ABI provides important prognostic information, including the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke ... and should be performed in all patients suspected of having PAD,” but in about 30% of patients with angiographically documented CLI, the ABI is normal or noncompressible, the authors wrote.
And, although recent data indicate that toe pressure may be a better predictor of major adverse limb events and tibial disease in patients with CLI, especially among those with isolated below-knee disease, there was no solid evidence that ABI or TBI have the sensitivity or specificity to be used as perfusion tools to assess wound healing or limb salvage, the authors stated.
However, there may be some technological improvements on the horizon for assessing limb perfusion that might provide eventual benefits, according to the reviewers. These include the use of indigo carmine angiography to evaluate microcirculation and angiosomal revascularization, the use of CT perfusion or MRI to quantify perfusion and monitor treatment response, the use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to assess calf muscle perfusion, and hyperspectral imaging.
Among the other issues of concern raised in the AHA statement were the significant demographic disparities that occur in detection and treatment of CLI. The authors noted differences in how CLI is diagnosed, the coexisting conditions that were present, and the disparities in treatment given based on sex and racial differences. For example, women were more likely to experience emergency hospitalization, have differences in blood flow, and have higher disability and death rates.
As for racial disparities, the reviewers found that black and Hispanic patients with CLI were more likely to have diabetes and chronic kidney disease, and were more likely to develop gangrene, compared with white patients, who were more likely to have ulcers and pain in their legs while at rest.
In terms of treatment, black patients were 78% more likely to receive lower extremity amputation for CLI, compared with their white peers, even after adjustment for socioeconomic status, access to facilities with revascularization services, and other factors, according to the report, which was published online in Circulation.
“CLI is a complex disease process with great morbidity. This statement highlights the importance of incorporating perfusion assessment into the care of CLI patients. Despite the high prevalence of CLI, strategies for perfusion assessment remain limited. New technologies offer potential opportunities to improve the precision and quality of CLI management,” the researchers concluded.
Dr. Misra and the majority of the authors reported having no relevant disclosures. Several authors reported receiving funding from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries.
SOURCE: Chandra S. et al. Circulation. 2019;140:00-00. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000708.
A new assessment statement from the American Heart Association reviewed the strengths and limitations of current imaging techniques for critical limb ischemia (CLI), the severest form of peripheral arterial disease (PAD).
The main techniques discussed were the ankle-brachial index (ABI), toe-brachial index (TBI), toe systolic pressure, transcutaneous oximetry (TcPO2) and skin perfusion pressure (SPP). The literature review also identified what the authors saw as opportunities for technology improvement.
“No single vascular test has been identified as the most important predictor of wound healing or major amputation for the threatened limb,” wrote Sanjay Misra, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and colleagues, on behalf of the American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, the Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing.
Of particular concern were limitations seen in the use of ABI, the most widely used assessment method. “Although ABI was first described to diagnose PAD, it has not been shown to be an accurate predictor of wound healing or major adverse limb events. Clearly, the ABI provides important prognostic information, including the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke ... and should be performed in all patients suspected of having PAD,” but in about 30% of patients with angiographically documented CLI, the ABI is normal or noncompressible, the authors wrote.
And, although recent data indicate that toe pressure may be a better predictor of major adverse limb events and tibial disease in patients with CLI, especially among those with isolated below-knee disease, there was no solid evidence that ABI or TBI have the sensitivity or specificity to be used as perfusion tools to assess wound healing or limb salvage, the authors stated.
However, there may be some technological improvements on the horizon for assessing limb perfusion that might provide eventual benefits, according to the reviewers. These include the use of indigo carmine angiography to evaluate microcirculation and angiosomal revascularization, the use of CT perfusion or MRI to quantify perfusion and monitor treatment response, the use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to assess calf muscle perfusion, and hyperspectral imaging.
Among the other issues of concern raised in the AHA statement were the significant demographic disparities that occur in detection and treatment of CLI. The authors noted differences in how CLI is diagnosed, the coexisting conditions that were present, and the disparities in treatment given based on sex and racial differences. For example, women were more likely to experience emergency hospitalization, have differences in blood flow, and have higher disability and death rates.
As for racial disparities, the reviewers found that black and Hispanic patients with CLI were more likely to have diabetes and chronic kidney disease, and were more likely to develop gangrene, compared with white patients, who were more likely to have ulcers and pain in their legs while at rest.
In terms of treatment, black patients were 78% more likely to receive lower extremity amputation for CLI, compared with their white peers, even after adjustment for socioeconomic status, access to facilities with revascularization services, and other factors, according to the report, which was published online in Circulation.
“CLI is a complex disease process with great morbidity. This statement highlights the importance of incorporating perfusion assessment into the care of CLI patients. Despite the high prevalence of CLI, strategies for perfusion assessment remain limited. New technologies offer potential opportunities to improve the precision and quality of CLI management,” the researchers concluded.
Dr. Misra and the majority of the authors reported having no relevant disclosures. Several authors reported receiving funding from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries.
SOURCE: Chandra S. et al. Circulation. 2019;140:00-00. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000708.
A new assessment statement from the American Heart Association reviewed the strengths and limitations of current imaging techniques for critical limb ischemia (CLI), the severest form of peripheral arterial disease (PAD).
The main techniques discussed were the ankle-brachial index (ABI), toe-brachial index (TBI), toe systolic pressure, transcutaneous oximetry (TcPO2) and skin perfusion pressure (SPP). The literature review also identified what the authors saw as opportunities for technology improvement.
“No single vascular test has been identified as the most important predictor of wound healing or major amputation for the threatened limb,” wrote Sanjay Misra, MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and colleagues, on behalf of the American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, the Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing.
Of particular concern were limitations seen in the use of ABI, the most widely used assessment method. “Although ABI was first described to diagnose PAD, it has not been shown to be an accurate predictor of wound healing or major adverse limb events. Clearly, the ABI provides important prognostic information, including the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke ... and should be performed in all patients suspected of having PAD,” but in about 30% of patients with angiographically documented CLI, the ABI is normal or noncompressible, the authors wrote.
And, although recent data indicate that toe pressure may be a better predictor of major adverse limb events and tibial disease in patients with CLI, especially among those with isolated below-knee disease, there was no solid evidence that ABI or TBI have the sensitivity or specificity to be used as perfusion tools to assess wound healing or limb salvage, the authors stated.
However, there may be some technological improvements on the horizon for assessing limb perfusion that might provide eventual benefits, according to the reviewers. These include the use of indigo carmine angiography to evaluate microcirculation and angiosomal revascularization, the use of CT perfusion or MRI to quantify perfusion and monitor treatment response, the use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to assess calf muscle perfusion, and hyperspectral imaging.
Among the other issues of concern raised in the AHA statement were the significant demographic disparities that occur in detection and treatment of CLI. The authors noted differences in how CLI is diagnosed, the coexisting conditions that were present, and the disparities in treatment given based on sex and racial differences. For example, women were more likely to experience emergency hospitalization, have differences in blood flow, and have higher disability and death rates.
As for racial disparities, the reviewers found that black and Hispanic patients with CLI were more likely to have diabetes and chronic kidney disease, and were more likely to develop gangrene, compared with white patients, who were more likely to have ulcers and pain in their legs while at rest.
In terms of treatment, black patients were 78% more likely to receive lower extremity amputation for CLI, compared with their white peers, even after adjustment for socioeconomic status, access to facilities with revascularization services, and other factors, according to the report, which was published online in Circulation.
“CLI is a complex disease process with great morbidity. This statement highlights the importance of incorporating perfusion assessment into the care of CLI patients. Despite the high prevalence of CLI, strategies for perfusion assessment remain limited. New technologies offer potential opportunities to improve the precision and quality of CLI management,” the researchers concluded.
Dr. Misra and the majority of the authors reported having no relevant disclosures. Several authors reported receiving funding from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries.
SOURCE: Chandra S. et al. Circulation. 2019;140:00-00. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000708.
FROM CIRCULATION
Advances in Hematology and Oncology (August 2019)
Click here to access August 2019 Advances in Hematology and Oncology
Table of Contents
- Partners in Oncology Care: Coordinated Follicular Lymphoma Management
- Accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Staging of Early Rectal Cancer
- Treatment Facility: An Important Prognostic Factor for Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma Survival
- Review of Radiologic Considerations in an Immunocompetent Patient With Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma
- Use of Mobile Messaging System for Self-Management of Chemotherapy Symptoms
- Timely Diagnosis of Lung Cancer in a Dedicated VA Referral Unit With Endobronchial Ultrasound
- Research News: Darolutamide Approved for Nonmetastatic CRPC
- Roundtable: Genomic Medicine and Genetic Counseling in the VA and DoD
Click here to access August 2019 Advances in Hematology and Oncology
Table of Contents
- Partners in Oncology Care: Coordinated Follicular Lymphoma Management
- Accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Staging of Early Rectal Cancer
- Treatment Facility: An Important Prognostic Factor for Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma Survival
- Review of Radiologic Considerations in an Immunocompetent Patient With Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma
- Use of Mobile Messaging System for Self-Management of Chemotherapy Symptoms
- Timely Diagnosis of Lung Cancer in a Dedicated VA Referral Unit With Endobronchial Ultrasound
- Research News: Darolutamide Approved for Nonmetastatic CRPC
- Roundtable: Genomic Medicine and Genetic Counseling in the VA and DoD
Click here to access August 2019 Advances in Hematology and Oncology
Table of Contents
- Partners in Oncology Care: Coordinated Follicular Lymphoma Management
- Accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Staging of Early Rectal Cancer
- Treatment Facility: An Important Prognostic Factor for Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma Survival
- Review of Radiologic Considerations in an Immunocompetent Patient With Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma
- Use of Mobile Messaging System for Self-Management of Chemotherapy Symptoms
- Timely Diagnosis of Lung Cancer in a Dedicated VA Referral Unit With Endobronchial Ultrasound
- Research News: Darolutamide Approved for Nonmetastatic CRPC
- Roundtable: Genomic Medicine and Genetic Counseling in the VA and DoD
Aspirin interacts with epigenetics to influence breast cancer mortality
The impact of prediagnosis aspirin use on mortality in women with breast cancer is significantly tied to epigenetic changes in certain breast cancer-related genes, investigators reported.
While studies have shown aspirin reduces the risk of breast cancer development, there is limited and inconsistent data on the effect of aspirin on prognosis and mortality after a diagnosis of breast cancer, Tengteng Wang, PhD, from the department of epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and coauthors wrote in Cancer.
To address this, they analyzed data from 1,508 women who had a first diagnosis of primary breast cancer and were involved in the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project; they then looked at the women’s methylation status, which is a mechanism of epigenetic change.
Around one in five participants reported ever using aspirin, and the analysis showed that ever use of aspirin was associated with an overall 13% decrease in breast cancer–specific mortality.
However researchers saw significant interactions between aspirin use and LINE-1 methylation status – which is a marker of methylation of genetic elements that play key roles in maintaining genomic stability – and breast cancer–specific genes.
They found that aspirin use in women with LINE-1 hypomethylation was associated with a risk of breast cancer–specific mortality that was 45% higher than that of nonusers (P = .05).
Compared with nonusers, aspirin users with methylated tumor BRCA1 promoter had significant 16% higher breast cancer mortality (P = .04) and 67% higher all-cause mortality (P = .02). However the study showed aspirin did not affect mortality in women with unmethylated BRCA1 promoter.
Among women with the PR breast cancer gene, aspirin use by those with methylation of the PR promoter was associated with a 63% higher breast cancer–specific mortality, but methylation showed no statistically significant effect on all-cause mortality, compared with nonusers.
The study found no significant change when they restricted the analysis to receptor-positive or invasive breast cancer, and the associations remained consistent even after adjusting for global methylation.
“Our findings suggest that the association between aspirin use and mortality after breast cancer may depend on methylation profiles and warrant further investigation,” the authors wrote. “These findings, if confirmed, may provide new biological insights into the association between aspirin use and breast cancer prognosis, may affect clinical decision making by identifying a subgroup of patients with breast cancer using epigenetic markers for whom prediagnosis aspirin use affects subsequent mortality, and may help refine risk-reduction strategies to improve survival among women with breast cancer.”
The study was partly supported by the National Institutes of Health. One author declared personal fees from the private sector outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Wang T et al. Cancer. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32364.
This study offers new insights into the intersection of epigenetics, prediagnosis aspirin use, and breast cancer survival at a time when there is an urgent need to understand why some women respond differently to treatment and to find cost-effective therapies for the disease.
Epigenetics is a promising avenue of investigation because epigenetic shifts, such as DNA methylation, that impact the genes responsible for cell behavior and DNA damage and repair are known to contribute to and exacerbate cancer. These epigenetic signatures could act as biomarkers for risk in cancer and also aid with more effective treatment approaches. For example, aspirin is known to affect DNA methylation at certain sites in colon cancer, hence this study’s hypothesis that pre–cancer diagnosis aspirin use would interact with epigenetic signatures and influence breast cancer outcomes.
Kristen M. C. Malecki, PhD, is from the department of population health sciences in the School of Medicine and Public Health at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. The comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial (Cancer. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32365). Dr. Malecki declared support from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences Breast Cancer, and the Environment Research Program.
This study offers new insights into the intersection of epigenetics, prediagnosis aspirin use, and breast cancer survival at a time when there is an urgent need to understand why some women respond differently to treatment and to find cost-effective therapies for the disease.
Epigenetics is a promising avenue of investigation because epigenetic shifts, such as DNA methylation, that impact the genes responsible for cell behavior and DNA damage and repair are known to contribute to and exacerbate cancer. These epigenetic signatures could act as biomarkers for risk in cancer and also aid with more effective treatment approaches. For example, aspirin is known to affect DNA methylation at certain sites in colon cancer, hence this study’s hypothesis that pre–cancer diagnosis aspirin use would interact with epigenetic signatures and influence breast cancer outcomes.
Kristen M. C. Malecki, PhD, is from the department of population health sciences in the School of Medicine and Public Health at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. The comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial (Cancer. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32365). Dr. Malecki declared support from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences Breast Cancer, and the Environment Research Program.
This study offers new insights into the intersection of epigenetics, prediagnosis aspirin use, and breast cancer survival at a time when there is an urgent need to understand why some women respond differently to treatment and to find cost-effective therapies for the disease.
Epigenetics is a promising avenue of investigation because epigenetic shifts, such as DNA methylation, that impact the genes responsible for cell behavior and DNA damage and repair are known to contribute to and exacerbate cancer. These epigenetic signatures could act as biomarkers for risk in cancer and also aid with more effective treatment approaches. For example, aspirin is known to affect DNA methylation at certain sites in colon cancer, hence this study’s hypothesis that pre–cancer diagnosis aspirin use would interact with epigenetic signatures and influence breast cancer outcomes.
Kristen M. C. Malecki, PhD, is from the department of population health sciences in the School of Medicine and Public Health at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. The comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial (Cancer. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32365). Dr. Malecki declared support from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences Breast Cancer, and the Environment Research Program.
The impact of prediagnosis aspirin use on mortality in women with breast cancer is significantly tied to epigenetic changes in certain breast cancer-related genes, investigators reported.
While studies have shown aspirin reduces the risk of breast cancer development, there is limited and inconsistent data on the effect of aspirin on prognosis and mortality after a diagnosis of breast cancer, Tengteng Wang, PhD, from the department of epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and coauthors wrote in Cancer.
To address this, they analyzed data from 1,508 women who had a first diagnosis of primary breast cancer and were involved in the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project; they then looked at the women’s methylation status, which is a mechanism of epigenetic change.
Around one in five participants reported ever using aspirin, and the analysis showed that ever use of aspirin was associated with an overall 13% decrease in breast cancer–specific mortality.
However researchers saw significant interactions between aspirin use and LINE-1 methylation status – which is a marker of methylation of genetic elements that play key roles in maintaining genomic stability – and breast cancer–specific genes.
They found that aspirin use in women with LINE-1 hypomethylation was associated with a risk of breast cancer–specific mortality that was 45% higher than that of nonusers (P = .05).
Compared with nonusers, aspirin users with methylated tumor BRCA1 promoter had significant 16% higher breast cancer mortality (P = .04) and 67% higher all-cause mortality (P = .02). However the study showed aspirin did not affect mortality in women with unmethylated BRCA1 promoter.
Among women with the PR breast cancer gene, aspirin use by those with methylation of the PR promoter was associated with a 63% higher breast cancer–specific mortality, but methylation showed no statistically significant effect on all-cause mortality, compared with nonusers.
The study found no significant change when they restricted the analysis to receptor-positive or invasive breast cancer, and the associations remained consistent even after adjusting for global methylation.
“Our findings suggest that the association between aspirin use and mortality after breast cancer may depend on methylation profiles and warrant further investigation,” the authors wrote. “These findings, if confirmed, may provide new biological insights into the association between aspirin use and breast cancer prognosis, may affect clinical decision making by identifying a subgroup of patients with breast cancer using epigenetic markers for whom prediagnosis aspirin use affects subsequent mortality, and may help refine risk-reduction strategies to improve survival among women with breast cancer.”
The study was partly supported by the National Institutes of Health. One author declared personal fees from the private sector outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Wang T et al. Cancer. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32364.
The impact of prediagnosis aspirin use on mortality in women with breast cancer is significantly tied to epigenetic changes in certain breast cancer-related genes, investigators reported.
While studies have shown aspirin reduces the risk of breast cancer development, there is limited and inconsistent data on the effect of aspirin on prognosis and mortality after a diagnosis of breast cancer, Tengteng Wang, PhD, from the department of epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and coauthors wrote in Cancer.
To address this, they analyzed data from 1,508 women who had a first diagnosis of primary breast cancer and were involved in the Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project; they then looked at the women’s methylation status, which is a mechanism of epigenetic change.
Around one in five participants reported ever using aspirin, and the analysis showed that ever use of aspirin was associated with an overall 13% decrease in breast cancer–specific mortality.
However researchers saw significant interactions between aspirin use and LINE-1 methylation status – which is a marker of methylation of genetic elements that play key roles in maintaining genomic stability – and breast cancer–specific genes.
They found that aspirin use in women with LINE-1 hypomethylation was associated with a risk of breast cancer–specific mortality that was 45% higher than that of nonusers (P = .05).
Compared with nonusers, aspirin users with methylated tumor BRCA1 promoter had significant 16% higher breast cancer mortality (P = .04) and 67% higher all-cause mortality (P = .02). However the study showed aspirin did not affect mortality in women with unmethylated BRCA1 promoter.
Among women with the PR breast cancer gene, aspirin use by those with methylation of the PR promoter was associated with a 63% higher breast cancer–specific mortality, but methylation showed no statistically significant effect on all-cause mortality, compared with nonusers.
The study found no significant change when they restricted the analysis to receptor-positive or invasive breast cancer, and the associations remained consistent even after adjusting for global methylation.
“Our findings suggest that the association between aspirin use and mortality after breast cancer may depend on methylation profiles and warrant further investigation,” the authors wrote. “These findings, if confirmed, may provide new biological insights into the association between aspirin use and breast cancer prognosis, may affect clinical decision making by identifying a subgroup of patients with breast cancer using epigenetic markers for whom prediagnosis aspirin use affects subsequent mortality, and may help refine risk-reduction strategies to improve survival among women with breast cancer.”
The study was partly supported by the National Institutes of Health. One author declared personal fees from the private sector outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Wang T et al. Cancer. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32364.
FROM CANCER
Register for the 2019 Coding and Reimbursement Course
The vascular specialty has had many coding changes over the past five to six years. It is sometimes difficult to keep up with the changes from year to year, but attending the SVS Coding & Reimbursement workshop, to be held on Sept. 20-21 in Rosemont, Ill., is sure to help. Coding is critical in every practice model – whether it be private, academic or employed. If it is not done accurately, money will be lost. This intensive course will give attendees the knowledge they need to make a positive impact on their coding procedures. All those who wish to improve and expand their knowledge of accurate coding and reimbursement for vascular surgery should attend. Learn more and register here.
The vascular specialty has had many coding changes over the past five to six years. It is sometimes difficult to keep up with the changes from year to year, but attending the SVS Coding & Reimbursement workshop, to be held on Sept. 20-21 in Rosemont, Ill., is sure to help. Coding is critical in every practice model – whether it be private, academic or employed. If it is not done accurately, money will be lost. This intensive course will give attendees the knowledge they need to make a positive impact on their coding procedures. All those who wish to improve and expand their knowledge of accurate coding and reimbursement for vascular surgery should attend. Learn more and register here.
The vascular specialty has had many coding changes over the past five to six years. It is sometimes difficult to keep up with the changes from year to year, but attending the SVS Coding & Reimbursement workshop, to be held on Sept. 20-21 in Rosemont, Ill., is sure to help. Coding is critical in every practice model – whether it be private, academic or employed. If it is not done accurately, money will be lost. This intensive course will give attendees the knowledge they need to make a positive impact on their coding procedures. All those who wish to improve and expand their knowledge of accurate coding and reimbursement for vascular surgery should attend. Learn more and register here.
Psoriasis Treatments Could Have Bonus Benefits
Psoriasis is associated with systemic inflammation, which heightens the risk of blood vessel disease and diabetes. Therefore, the finding, while notable, may not have been entirely unexpected. Biologic therapy (BT) for psoriasis was already found to be favorably associated with luminal coronary plaque, the researchers say, but it was not clear whether those associations were attributable to direct anti-inflammatory effects on the coronary arteries. They wanted to find out whether the perivascular fat attenuation index (FAI) would offer clues. FAI is a new method of analyzing CT scans by assessing whether the fat tissue surrounding arteries becomes attenuated, or less fatty.
The researchers investigated their premise in 134 participants from an ongoing NIH study, the Psoriasis Atherosclerosis Cardiometabolic Initiative cohort. Of the participants, 82 had been receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor α, anti-interleukin (IL) 12/23, or anti-IL-17 for 1 year. The remaining 52 had not received any BT, and given topical or light therapy. The patients underwent CT scans at the start of the study and 1 year later. All of the patients had low cardiovascular risk. At baseline, 27 in the treated group and 19 in the untreated group had a focal coronary atherosclerotic plaque.
The study found that an abnormal perivascular FAI was linked to a 6- to 9-fold increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, study coauthor Charalambos Antoniades, MD, says. Patients on BT had a significant decrease in FAI at 1 year, as well as improved psoriasis symptoms. Even patients with preexisting coronary artery plaque had a reduction in coronary inflammation after BT. No change was seen in the untreated patients. The associations with FAI were independent of the presence of coronary plaque and were consistent among patients receiving different biologic agents.
The researchers say their findings have implications for other chronic inflammatory diseases, such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, which are known to raise the risk for heart attacks and stroke.
Psoriasis is associated with systemic inflammation, which heightens the risk of blood vessel disease and diabetes. Therefore, the finding, while notable, may not have been entirely unexpected. Biologic therapy (BT) for psoriasis was already found to be favorably associated with luminal coronary plaque, the researchers say, but it was not clear whether those associations were attributable to direct anti-inflammatory effects on the coronary arteries. They wanted to find out whether the perivascular fat attenuation index (FAI) would offer clues. FAI is a new method of analyzing CT scans by assessing whether the fat tissue surrounding arteries becomes attenuated, or less fatty.
The researchers investigated their premise in 134 participants from an ongoing NIH study, the Psoriasis Atherosclerosis Cardiometabolic Initiative cohort. Of the participants, 82 had been receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor α, anti-interleukin (IL) 12/23, or anti-IL-17 for 1 year. The remaining 52 had not received any BT, and given topical or light therapy. The patients underwent CT scans at the start of the study and 1 year later. All of the patients had low cardiovascular risk. At baseline, 27 in the treated group and 19 in the untreated group had a focal coronary atherosclerotic plaque.
The study found that an abnormal perivascular FAI was linked to a 6- to 9-fold increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, study coauthor Charalambos Antoniades, MD, says. Patients on BT had a significant decrease in FAI at 1 year, as well as improved psoriasis symptoms. Even patients with preexisting coronary artery plaque had a reduction in coronary inflammation after BT. No change was seen in the untreated patients. The associations with FAI were independent of the presence of coronary plaque and were consistent among patients receiving different biologic agents.
The researchers say their findings have implications for other chronic inflammatory diseases, such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, which are known to raise the risk for heart attacks and stroke.
Psoriasis is associated with systemic inflammation, which heightens the risk of blood vessel disease and diabetes. Therefore, the finding, while notable, may not have been entirely unexpected. Biologic therapy (BT) for psoriasis was already found to be favorably associated with luminal coronary plaque, the researchers say, but it was not clear whether those associations were attributable to direct anti-inflammatory effects on the coronary arteries. They wanted to find out whether the perivascular fat attenuation index (FAI) would offer clues. FAI is a new method of analyzing CT scans by assessing whether the fat tissue surrounding arteries becomes attenuated, or less fatty.
The researchers investigated their premise in 134 participants from an ongoing NIH study, the Psoriasis Atherosclerosis Cardiometabolic Initiative cohort. Of the participants, 82 had been receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor α, anti-interleukin (IL) 12/23, or anti-IL-17 for 1 year. The remaining 52 had not received any BT, and given topical or light therapy. The patients underwent CT scans at the start of the study and 1 year later. All of the patients had low cardiovascular risk. At baseline, 27 in the treated group and 19 in the untreated group had a focal coronary atherosclerotic plaque.
The study found that an abnormal perivascular FAI was linked to a 6- to 9-fold increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, study coauthor Charalambos Antoniades, MD, says. Patients on BT had a significant decrease in FAI at 1 year, as well as improved psoriasis symptoms. Even patients with preexisting coronary artery plaque had a reduction in coronary inflammation after BT. No change was seen in the untreated patients. The associations with FAI were independent of the presence of coronary plaque and were consistent among patients receiving different biologic agents.
The researchers say their findings have implications for other chronic inflammatory diseases, such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, which are known to raise the risk for heart attacks and stroke.
Quarterly intravenous eptinezumab prevents migraine
PHILADELPHIA – An intravenous formulation of a calcitonin gene–related peptide inhibitor monoclonal antibody showed efficacy for preventing chronic migraine headaches for 3 months in a dose-ranging, phase 3 trial with 1,072 patients.
In a separate study with 669 patients, a single IV dose of the antibody, eptinezumab, also significantly reduced the incidence of episodic migraine headaches during 3 months of follow-up, compared with placebo. And in both the chronic and episodic migraine studies a similar 3-month effect resulted from a second IV dose of the humanized antibody that binds the calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) ligand, thereby blocking the pathway, Laszlo L. Mechtler, MD, and his associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.
Eptinezumab follows the therapeutic approach already used by three Food and Drug Administration–approved monoclonal antibody drugs that cut migraine headache recurrences by blocking the CGRP pathway by binding either the peptide ligand or its receptor: erenumab-aooe (Aimovig), fremanezumab-vfrm (Ajovy), and galcanezumab-gnlm (Emgality). Eptinezumab differs from the three approved CGRP antibodies by using an IV route of administration – the other three are delivered by subcutaneous injection – and by a 3-month dosing interval. Both erenumab-aooe and galcanezumab-gnlm are labeled for monthly administration only, while fremanezumab-vfrm is labeled for both monthly and once every 3 months dosing schedules.
The PROMISE-1 (A Multicenter Assessment of ALD403 in Frequent Episodic Migraine) trial randomized 669 patients with episodic migraine (defined as 4-14 headache days/month with at least 4 classifiable as migraine headache days) at 87 centers mostly in the United States and with some in Georgia. The PROMISE-2 (Evaluation of ALD403 (Eptinezumab) in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine) trial randomized 1,072 patients with chronic migraine (defined as a history of 15-26 headache days/month and with at least 8 of the days involving a migraine headache) at any of 145 study sites, many in the United States, in several countries.
In PROMISE-1, patients could receive as many as four serial infusions every 3 months, and up to two serial infusions in PROMISE-2, but the primary endpoint in both studies was the change in monthly migraine count from baseline during the 3 months following the first dosage.
Among patients with chronic migraine in PROMISE-2, the average monthly migraine number fell by 8.2 migraine days/month, compared with an average 5.6 monthly migraine days drop from baseline among placebo patients, which was a statistically significant difference for the higher dosage of eptinezumab tested, 300 mg. A 100-mg dose linked with an average 7.7 migraine days/month reduction, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo patients, reported Dr. Mechtler, professor of neurology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and medical director of the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, and his associates.
Among patients with episodic migraine in PROMISE-1, the 300-mg dosage cut monthly migraines by an average 4.3 migraine headache days/month, compared with 3.2 in the placebo group, a statistically significant difference. Among patients who received the 100-mg dosage, the average cut was 3.9 migraine headache days/month, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo controls.
The researchers included no safety findings in their report, but in an interview Dr. Mechtler said that eptinezumab showed an excellent safety profile that was consistent with what’s been previously reported for the approved agents from this class. He cited the safety of the drugs in the class as a major feature of their clinical utility.
PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were sponsored by Alder BioPharmaceuticals, the company developing eptinezumab. Dr. Mechtler has been a speaker on behalf of Allergan, Amgen/Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Promius, Avanir, and Teva, and he has received research funding from Allergan, Autonomic Technologies, Boston Biomedical, and Teva.
SOURCE: Mechtler LL et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:34, Abstract P12
PHILADELPHIA – An intravenous formulation of a calcitonin gene–related peptide inhibitor monoclonal antibody showed efficacy for preventing chronic migraine headaches for 3 months in a dose-ranging, phase 3 trial with 1,072 patients.
In a separate study with 669 patients, a single IV dose of the antibody, eptinezumab, also significantly reduced the incidence of episodic migraine headaches during 3 months of follow-up, compared with placebo. And in both the chronic and episodic migraine studies a similar 3-month effect resulted from a second IV dose of the humanized antibody that binds the calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) ligand, thereby blocking the pathway, Laszlo L. Mechtler, MD, and his associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.
Eptinezumab follows the therapeutic approach already used by three Food and Drug Administration–approved monoclonal antibody drugs that cut migraine headache recurrences by blocking the CGRP pathway by binding either the peptide ligand or its receptor: erenumab-aooe (Aimovig), fremanezumab-vfrm (Ajovy), and galcanezumab-gnlm (Emgality). Eptinezumab differs from the three approved CGRP antibodies by using an IV route of administration – the other three are delivered by subcutaneous injection – and by a 3-month dosing interval. Both erenumab-aooe and galcanezumab-gnlm are labeled for monthly administration only, while fremanezumab-vfrm is labeled for both monthly and once every 3 months dosing schedules.
The PROMISE-1 (A Multicenter Assessment of ALD403 in Frequent Episodic Migraine) trial randomized 669 patients with episodic migraine (defined as 4-14 headache days/month with at least 4 classifiable as migraine headache days) at 87 centers mostly in the United States and with some in Georgia. The PROMISE-2 (Evaluation of ALD403 (Eptinezumab) in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine) trial randomized 1,072 patients with chronic migraine (defined as a history of 15-26 headache days/month and with at least 8 of the days involving a migraine headache) at any of 145 study sites, many in the United States, in several countries.
In PROMISE-1, patients could receive as many as four serial infusions every 3 months, and up to two serial infusions in PROMISE-2, but the primary endpoint in both studies was the change in monthly migraine count from baseline during the 3 months following the first dosage.
Among patients with chronic migraine in PROMISE-2, the average monthly migraine number fell by 8.2 migraine days/month, compared with an average 5.6 monthly migraine days drop from baseline among placebo patients, which was a statistically significant difference for the higher dosage of eptinezumab tested, 300 mg. A 100-mg dose linked with an average 7.7 migraine days/month reduction, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo patients, reported Dr. Mechtler, professor of neurology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and medical director of the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, and his associates.
Among patients with episodic migraine in PROMISE-1, the 300-mg dosage cut monthly migraines by an average 4.3 migraine headache days/month, compared with 3.2 in the placebo group, a statistically significant difference. Among patients who received the 100-mg dosage, the average cut was 3.9 migraine headache days/month, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo controls.
The researchers included no safety findings in their report, but in an interview Dr. Mechtler said that eptinezumab showed an excellent safety profile that was consistent with what’s been previously reported for the approved agents from this class. He cited the safety of the drugs in the class as a major feature of their clinical utility.
PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were sponsored by Alder BioPharmaceuticals, the company developing eptinezumab. Dr. Mechtler has been a speaker on behalf of Allergan, Amgen/Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Promius, Avanir, and Teva, and he has received research funding from Allergan, Autonomic Technologies, Boston Biomedical, and Teva.
SOURCE: Mechtler LL et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:34, Abstract P12
PHILADELPHIA – An intravenous formulation of a calcitonin gene–related peptide inhibitor monoclonal antibody showed efficacy for preventing chronic migraine headaches for 3 months in a dose-ranging, phase 3 trial with 1,072 patients.
In a separate study with 669 patients, a single IV dose of the antibody, eptinezumab, also significantly reduced the incidence of episodic migraine headaches during 3 months of follow-up, compared with placebo. And in both the chronic and episodic migraine studies a similar 3-month effect resulted from a second IV dose of the humanized antibody that binds the calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) ligand, thereby blocking the pathway, Laszlo L. Mechtler, MD, and his associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.
Eptinezumab follows the therapeutic approach already used by three Food and Drug Administration–approved monoclonal antibody drugs that cut migraine headache recurrences by blocking the CGRP pathway by binding either the peptide ligand or its receptor: erenumab-aooe (Aimovig), fremanezumab-vfrm (Ajovy), and galcanezumab-gnlm (Emgality). Eptinezumab differs from the three approved CGRP antibodies by using an IV route of administration – the other three are delivered by subcutaneous injection – and by a 3-month dosing interval. Both erenumab-aooe and galcanezumab-gnlm are labeled for monthly administration only, while fremanezumab-vfrm is labeled for both monthly and once every 3 months dosing schedules.
The PROMISE-1 (A Multicenter Assessment of ALD403 in Frequent Episodic Migraine) trial randomized 669 patients with episodic migraine (defined as 4-14 headache days/month with at least 4 classifiable as migraine headache days) at 87 centers mostly in the United States and with some in Georgia. The PROMISE-2 (Evaluation of ALD403 (Eptinezumab) in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine) trial randomized 1,072 patients with chronic migraine (defined as a history of 15-26 headache days/month and with at least 8 of the days involving a migraine headache) at any of 145 study sites, many in the United States, in several countries.
In PROMISE-1, patients could receive as many as four serial infusions every 3 months, and up to two serial infusions in PROMISE-2, but the primary endpoint in both studies was the change in monthly migraine count from baseline during the 3 months following the first dosage.
Among patients with chronic migraine in PROMISE-2, the average monthly migraine number fell by 8.2 migraine days/month, compared with an average 5.6 monthly migraine days drop from baseline among placebo patients, which was a statistically significant difference for the higher dosage of eptinezumab tested, 300 mg. A 100-mg dose linked with an average 7.7 migraine days/month reduction, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo patients, reported Dr. Mechtler, professor of neurology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and medical director of the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, and his associates.
Among patients with episodic migraine in PROMISE-1, the 300-mg dosage cut monthly migraines by an average 4.3 migraine headache days/month, compared with 3.2 in the placebo group, a statistically significant difference. Among patients who received the 100-mg dosage, the average cut was 3.9 migraine headache days/month, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo controls.
The researchers included no safety findings in their report, but in an interview Dr. Mechtler said that eptinezumab showed an excellent safety profile that was consistent with what’s been previously reported for the approved agents from this class. He cited the safety of the drugs in the class as a major feature of their clinical utility.
PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were sponsored by Alder BioPharmaceuticals, the company developing eptinezumab. Dr. Mechtler has been a speaker on behalf of Allergan, Amgen/Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Promius, Avanir, and Teva, and he has received research funding from Allergan, Autonomic Technologies, Boston Biomedical, and Teva.
SOURCE: Mechtler LL et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:34, Abstract P12
REPORTING FROM AHS 2019
Crossword: 2019 AAD Summer Meeting
Mediterranean diet tied to improved cognition in type 2 diabetes
People with type 2 diabetes whose diet followed a “Mediterranean” pattern – high in vegetables, legumes, fish, and unsaturated fats – saw global cognitive improvements over a 2-year period, compared with individuals with different eating patterns, even if the latter incorporated healthy dietary features. In addition, effective glycemic control seemed to have a role in sustaining the benefits associated with the Mediterranean-type diet.
Adults without type 2 diabetes, meanwhile, did not see the cognitive improvements associated with a Mediterranean diet, suggesting that the pathways linking diet to cognition may be different for individuals with and without diabetes, according to Josiemer Mattei, PhD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues.
The investigators used data from the Boston Puerto Rican Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of about 1,499 adults aged 45-75 years who lived in Boston and identified as Puerto Rican, for their research, which was published in Diabetes Care.
At baseline, participants were administered a questionnaire to capture their eating patterns. Four diet-quality scores – Mediterranean Diet Score, Healthy Eating Index, Alternate Healthy Eating Index, and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) were analyzed. The participants were also screened for diabetes, and nearly 40% of them were found to have type 2 diabetes at baseline (74% uncontrolled). They underwent a battery of cognitive tests, including the Mini-Mental State Exam and tests for verbal fluency, executive function, word recognition, and figure copying. The study endpoints included 2-year change in global cognitive function as well as executive and memory function. At 2 years, data was available for 913 participants.
Among participants with type 2 diabetes, greater adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet was significantly associated with a higher positive change at the 2-year follow-up in global cognitive function score (0.027 [SD, 0.011]; P = .016), the Mini-Mental State Exam, and other individual tests. The association was significant for those who were under glycemic control at baseline and who remained stable or improved over 2 years, but not for those with poor or worsening glycemic control.
“The Mediterranean diet explained as much or more of the variability in predicting changes in cognitive function in our study as did age, especially for participants with type 2 diabetes under glycemic control. ... This dietary pattern may provide more cognitive benefits [in this patient group] than other modifiable and nonmodifiable factors,” the authors wrote in their analysis. They stressed that a Mediterranean dietary pattern can be realized through foods and dishes that are already standard in many Puerto Rican households.
In participants who did not have diabetes, improvement in memory function measures was seen in association with a Mediterranean diet, but also with adherence to other eating patterns that are deemed healthy. That suggests that for this subgroup, any evidence-based healthy diet – not just the Mediterranean diet – may have some benefits for memory function.
“Dietary recommendations for cognitive health may need to be tailored for individuals with versus without type 2 diabetes,” the authors concluded.
Dr. Mattei and colleagues acknowledged as a limitation of their study its observational design.
The study received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institute on Aging; and Harvard University. The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Mattei et al. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1372-9.
People with type 2 diabetes whose diet followed a “Mediterranean” pattern – high in vegetables, legumes, fish, and unsaturated fats – saw global cognitive improvements over a 2-year period, compared with individuals with different eating patterns, even if the latter incorporated healthy dietary features. In addition, effective glycemic control seemed to have a role in sustaining the benefits associated with the Mediterranean-type diet.
Adults without type 2 diabetes, meanwhile, did not see the cognitive improvements associated with a Mediterranean diet, suggesting that the pathways linking diet to cognition may be different for individuals with and without diabetes, according to Josiemer Mattei, PhD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues.
The investigators used data from the Boston Puerto Rican Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of about 1,499 adults aged 45-75 years who lived in Boston and identified as Puerto Rican, for their research, which was published in Diabetes Care.
At baseline, participants were administered a questionnaire to capture their eating patterns. Four diet-quality scores – Mediterranean Diet Score, Healthy Eating Index, Alternate Healthy Eating Index, and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) were analyzed. The participants were also screened for diabetes, and nearly 40% of them were found to have type 2 diabetes at baseline (74% uncontrolled). They underwent a battery of cognitive tests, including the Mini-Mental State Exam and tests for verbal fluency, executive function, word recognition, and figure copying. The study endpoints included 2-year change in global cognitive function as well as executive and memory function. At 2 years, data was available for 913 participants.
Among participants with type 2 diabetes, greater adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet was significantly associated with a higher positive change at the 2-year follow-up in global cognitive function score (0.027 [SD, 0.011]; P = .016), the Mini-Mental State Exam, and other individual tests. The association was significant for those who were under glycemic control at baseline and who remained stable or improved over 2 years, but not for those with poor or worsening glycemic control.
“The Mediterranean diet explained as much or more of the variability in predicting changes in cognitive function in our study as did age, especially for participants with type 2 diabetes under glycemic control. ... This dietary pattern may provide more cognitive benefits [in this patient group] than other modifiable and nonmodifiable factors,” the authors wrote in their analysis. They stressed that a Mediterranean dietary pattern can be realized through foods and dishes that are already standard in many Puerto Rican households.
In participants who did not have diabetes, improvement in memory function measures was seen in association with a Mediterranean diet, but also with adherence to other eating patterns that are deemed healthy. That suggests that for this subgroup, any evidence-based healthy diet – not just the Mediterranean diet – may have some benefits for memory function.
“Dietary recommendations for cognitive health may need to be tailored for individuals with versus without type 2 diabetes,” the authors concluded.
Dr. Mattei and colleagues acknowledged as a limitation of their study its observational design.
The study received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institute on Aging; and Harvard University. The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Mattei et al. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1372-9.
People with type 2 diabetes whose diet followed a “Mediterranean” pattern – high in vegetables, legumes, fish, and unsaturated fats – saw global cognitive improvements over a 2-year period, compared with individuals with different eating patterns, even if the latter incorporated healthy dietary features. In addition, effective glycemic control seemed to have a role in sustaining the benefits associated with the Mediterranean-type diet.
Adults without type 2 diabetes, meanwhile, did not see the cognitive improvements associated with a Mediterranean diet, suggesting that the pathways linking diet to cognition may be different for individuals with and without diabetes, according to Josiemer Mattei, PhD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues.
The investigators used data from the Boston Puerto Rican Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of about 1,499 adults aged 45-75 years who lived in Boston and identified as Puerto Rican, for their research, which was published in Diabetes Care.
At baseline, participants were administered a questionnaire to capture their eating patterns. Four diet-quality scores – Mediterranean Diet Score, Healthy Eating Index, Alternate Healthy Eating Index, and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) were analyzed. The participants were also screened for diabetes, and nearly 40% of them were found to have type 2 diabetes at baseline (74% uncontrolled). They underwent a battery of cognitive tests, including the Mini-Mental State Exam and tests for verbal fluency, executive function, word recognition, and figure copying. The study endpoints included 2-year change in global cognitive function as well as executive and memory function. At 2 years, data was available for 913 participants.
Among participants with type 2 diabetes, greater adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet was significantly associated with a higher positive change at the 2-year follow-up in global cognitive function score (0.027 [SD, 0.011]; P = .016), the Mini-Mental State Exam, and other individual tests. The association was significant for those who were under glycemic control at baseline and who remained stable or improved over 2 years, but not for those with poor or worsening glycemic control.
“The Mediterranean diet explained as much or more of the variability in predicting changes in cognitive function in our study as did age, especially for participants with type 2 diabetes under glycemic control. ... This dietary pattern may provide more cognitive benefits [in this patient group] than other modifiable and nonmodifiable factors,” the authors wrote in their analysis. They stressed that a Mediterranean dietary pattern can be realized through foods and dishes that are already standard in many Puerto Rican households.
In participants who did not have diabetes, improvement in memory function measures was seen in association with a Mediterranean diet, but also with adherence to other eating patterns that are deemed healthy. That suggests that for this subgroup, any evidence-based healthy diet – not just the Mediterranean diet – may have some benefits for memory function.
“Dietary recommendations for cognitive health may need to be tailored for individuals with versus without type 2 diabetes,” the authors concluded.
Dr. Mattei and colleagues acknowledged as a limitation of their study its observational design.
The study received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institute on Aging; and Harvard University. The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Mattei et al. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1372-9.
FROM DIABETES CARE
Ambulatory BP monitoring slightly better than in-office measures for predicting cardiovascular outcomes
Continuous blood pressure monitoring is significantly better than in-office measurements at predicting the risk of cardiovascular events and death, although the additional prognostic benefit is quite small, wrote Wen-Yi Yang, MD, and colleagues. Their report is in JAMA.
In light of this finding, 24-hour monitoring is probably best reserved for select patients – especially those with white coat hypertension, and those who self-report hypertension but test within normal parameters in the office, said Philip Greenland, MD, Harry W. Dingman Professor of Cardiology at Northwestern University, Chicago, who wrote a perspective piece published along with the study.
“The good news is that, for the average patient, the office measurement is highly predictive and performs extremely well,” Dr. Greenland said in an interview. “Ambulatory monitoring will get you very little additional information. But if you are getting a 24-hour reading, the measures you probably want to focus on are the nighttime pressures and the overall 24-hour average.”
Dr. Yang of the University of Leuven, Belgium, and his team were “trying to make sense of this huge amount of data that’s available now that ambulatory blood pressure monitoring systems are much more common,” Dr. Greenland said. “The real clinical question is, ‘If I’m getting all this information, how do I interpret it?’ ”
To investigate this, the authors evaluated blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes among more than 11,000 subjects enrolled in the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDACO).
The median individual follow-up was about 14 years, although some patients were followed up to 22 years. All told, the study posted 153,140 person-years of follow-up. These patients were a mean of 55 years old at enrollment; almost 12% had a history of cardiovascular disease. Most (83%) had three automated in-office blood pressure measurements; 5% had two, and 2% had a single measurement. There were 55 24-hour ambulatory readings, 28 for daytime only, and 11 for nighttime.
The mean in-office automated BP was 135/82. The mean 24-hour BP was 123/74; the mean daytime pressure, 130/79; and the mean nighttime pressure, 113/65.
The authors recorded blood pressure–dipping status: 50% were normal, 18% had extreme dipping, 25% had no dipping, and 6% had reverse dipping. The mean dipping ratio was 0.87.
A regression analysis adjusted for sex, age, body mass index, smoking, and alcohol use, serum cholesterol, antihypertensive drugs, cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Over the entire study period, there were 2,836 deaths and 2,049 cardiovascular events – a rate of 13.4 per 1,000 person-years. Both cardiovascular events and mortality were significantly associated with all ambulatory BP measurements, compared with in-office measurements. For nighttime systolic BP, the hazard ratio for mortality was 1.23 and 1.36 for cardiovascular events. For the 24-hour measure, the HR for mortality was 1.22, and for cardiovascular events, 1.45. Hazard ratios represented the risk associated with a 20–mm Hg higher systolic blood pressure or a 0.10 difference in dipping ratio.
However, the area under the curve for a single, in-office systolic BP was quite good, at 0.83 for mortality and 0.84 for cardiovascular events. Adding 24-hour measurements or nighttime systolic BP to the model resulted only in very, very small “incremental” improvements in AUC of 0.0013 and 0.0027, respectively
“The current population-based study confirmed previous research indicating that ambulatory BP monitoring over and beyond measures taken in clinicians’ offices improved risk stratification among patients with or suspected of having hypertension,” The authors wrote. “It strengthened the notion that nighttime BP measures carry valuable prognostic information.”
However, they admitted that the addition these measures offer to the AUC for BP measurements was “incremental.”
“This metric is not very sensitive in model comparisons if the basic model performs well, as was the case in the current study. … The prevailing perception among experts is that BP is the strongest modifiable risk factor. The small increments in change in the AUC challenge this concept. Thus an important issue in the evaluation of an additional risk prediction marker is how to interpret a small AUC increase, which many researchers believe is an imprecise metric because it increases only slightly with the introduction of an additional marker in multivariable-adjusted models, even if the marker under study carries great risk, as reflected by the odds ratio (or HR).”
One investigator, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, MD, reported receiving lecture fees from numerous pharmaceutical and device companies. No other disclosures were reported.
SOURCE: Yang W et al. JAMA. 2019;322(5):409-20.
Continuous blood pressure monitoring is significantly better than in-office measurements at predicting the risk of cardiovascular events and death, although the additional prognostic benefit is quite small, wrote Wen-Yi Yang, MD, and colleagues. Their report is in JAMA.
In light of this finding, 24-hour monitoring is probably best reserved for select patients – especially those with white coat hypertension, and those who self-report hypertension but test within normal parameters in the office, said Philip Greenland, MD, Harry W. Dingman Professor of Cardiology at Northwestern University, Chicago, who wrote a perspective piece published along with the study.
“The good news is that, for the average patient, the office measurement is highly predictive and performs extremely well,” Dr. Greenland said in an interview. “Ambulatory monitoring will get you very little additional information. But if you are getting a 24-hour reading, the measures you probably want to focus on are the nighttime pressures and the overall 24-hour average.”
Dr. Yang of the University of Leuven, Belgium, and his team were “trying to make sense of this huge amount of data that’s available now that ambulatory blood pressure monitoring systems are much more common,” Dr. Greenland said. “The real clinical question is, ‘If I’m getting all this information, how do I interpret it?’ ”
To investigate this, the authors evaluated blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes among more than 11,000 subjects enrolled in the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDACO).
The median individual follow-up was about 14 years, although some patients were followed up to 22 years. All told, the study posted 153,140 person-years of follow-up. These patients were a mean of 55 years old at enrollment; almost 12% had a history of cardiovascular disease. Most (83%) had three automated in-office blood pressure measurements; 5% had two, and 2% had a single measurement. There were 55 24-hour ambulatory readings, 28 for daytime only, and 11 for nighttime.
The mean in-office automated BP was 135/82. The mean 24-hour BP was 123/74; the mean daytime pressure, 130/79; and the mean nighttime pressure, 113/65.
The authors recorded blood pressure–dipping status: 50% were normal, 18% had extreme dipping, 25% had no dipping, and 6% had reverse dipping. The mean dipping ratio was 0.87.
A regression analysis adjusted for sex, age, body mass index, smoking, and alcohol use, serum cholesterol, antihypertensive drugs, cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Over the entire study period, there were 2,836 deaths and 2,049 cardiovascular events – a rate of 13.4 per 1,000 person-years. Both cardiovascular events and mortality were significantly associated with all ambulatory BP measurements, compared with in-office measurements. For nighttime systolic BP, the hazard ratio for mortality was 1.23 and 1.36 for cardiovascular events. For the 24-hour measure, the HR for mortality was 1.22, and for cardiovascular events, 1.45. Hazard ratios represented the risk associated with a 20–mm Hg higher systolic blood pressure or a 0.10 difference in dipping ratio.
However, the area under the curve for a single, in-office systolic BP was quite good, at 0.83 for mortality and 0.84 for cardiovascular events. Adding 24-hour measurements or nighttime systolic BP to the model resulted only in very, very small “incremental” improvements in AUC of 0.0013 and 0.0027, respectively
“The current population-based study confirmed previous research indicating that ambulatory BP monitoring over and beyond measures taken in clinicians’ offices improved risk stratification among patients with or suspected of having hypertension,” The authors wrote. “It strengthened the notion that nighttime BP measures carry valuable prognostic information.”
However, they admitted that the addition these measures offer to the AUC for BP measurements was “incremental.”
“This metric is not very sensitive in model comparisons if the basic model performs well, as was the case in the current study. … The prevailing perception among experts is that BP is the strongest modifiable risk factor. The small increments in change in the AUC challenge this concept. Thus an important issue in the evaluation of an additional risk prediction marker is how to interpret a small AUC increase, which many researchers believe is an imprecise metric because it increases only slightly with the introduction of an additional marker in multivariable-adjusted models, even if the marker under study carries great risk, as reflected by the odds ratio (or HR).”
One investigator, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, MD, reported receiving lecture fees from numerous pharmaceutical and device companies. No other disclosures were reported.
SOURCE: Yang W et al. JAMA. 2019;322(5):409-20.
Continuous blood pressure monitoring is significantly better than in-office measurements at predicting the risk of cardiovascular events and death, although the additional prognostic benefit is quite small, wrote Wen-Yi Yang, MD, and colleagues. Their report is in JAMA.
In light of this finding, 24-hour monitoring is probably best reserved for select patients – especially those with white coat hypertension, and those who self-report hypertension but test within normal parameters in the office, said Philip Greenland, MD, Harry W. Dingman Professor of Cardiology at Northwestern University, Chicago, who wrote a perspective piece published along with the study.
“The good news is that, for the average patient, the office measurement is highly predictive and performs extremely well,” Dr. Greenland said in an interview. “Ambulatory monitoring will get you very little additional information. But if you are getting a 24-hour reading, the measures you probably want to focus on are the nighttime pressures and the overall 24-hour average.”
Dr. Yang of the University of Leuven, Belgium, and his team were “trying to make sense of this huge amount of data that’s available now that ambulatory blood pressure monitoring systems are much more common,” Dr. Greenland said. “The real clinical question is, ‘If I’m getting all this information, how do I interpret it?’ ”
To investigate this, the authors evaluated blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes among more than 11,000 subjects enrolled in the International Database on Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDACO).
The median individual follow-up was about 14 years, although some patients were followed up to 22 years. All told, the study posted 153,140 person-years of follow-up. These patients were a mean of 55 years old at enrollment; almost 12% had a history of cardiovascular disease. Most (83%) had three automated in-office blood pressure measurements; 5% had two, and 2% had a single measurement. There were 55 24-hour ambulatory readings, 28 for daytime only, and 11 for nighttime.
The mean in-office automated BP was 135/82. The mean 24-hour BP was 123/74; the mean daytime pressure, 130/79; and the mean nighttime pressure, 113/65.
The authors recorded blood pressure–dipping status: 50% were normal, 18% had extreme dipping, 25% had no dipping, and 6% had reverse dipping. The mean dipping ratio was 0.87.
A regression analysis adjusted for sex, age, body mass index, smoking, and alcohol use, serum cholesterol, antihypertensive drugs, cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Over the entire study period, there were 2,836 deaths and 2,049 cardiovascular events – a rate of 13.4 per 1,000 person-years. Both cardiovascular events and mortality were significantly associated with all ambulatory BP measurements, compared with in-office measurements. For nighttime systolic BP, the hazard ratio for mortality was 1.23 and 1.36 for cardiovascular events. For the 24-hour measure, the HR for mortality was 1.22, and for cardiovascular events, 1.45. Hazard ratios represented the risk associated with a 20–mm Hg higher systolic blood pressure or a 0.10 difference in dipping ratio.
However, the area under the curve for a single, in-office systolic BP was quite good, at 0.83 for mortality and 0.84 for cardiovascular events. Adding 24-hour measurements or nighttime systolic BP to the model resulted only in very, very small “incremental” improvements in AUC of 0.0013 and 0.0027, respectively
“The current population-based study confirmed previous research indicating that ambulatory BP monitoring over and beyond measures taken in clinicians’ offices improved risk stratification among patients with or suspected of having hypertension,” The authors wrote. “It strengthened the notion that nighttime BP measures carry valuable prognostic information.”
However, they admitted that the addition these measures offer to the AUC for BP measurements was “incremental.”
“This metric is not very sensitive in model comparisons if the basic model performs well, as was the case in the current study. … The prevailing perception among experts is that BP is the strongest modifiable risk factor. The small increments in change in the AUC challenge this concept. Thus an important issue in the evaluation of an additional risk prediction marker is how to interpret a small AUC increase, which many researchers believe is an imprecise metric because it increases only slightly with the introduction of an additional marker in multivariable-adjusted models, even if the marker under study carries great risk, as reflected by the odds ratio (or HR).”
One investigator, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, MD, reported receiving lecture fees from numerous pharmaceutical and device companies. No other disclosures were reported.
SOURCE: Yang W et al. JAMA. 2019;322(5):409-20.
FROM JAMA