Sex differences in clinical profile, left ventricular remodeling and cardiovascular outcomes among diabetic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a cardiac-MRI-based study.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with a high rate of mortality and morbidity. Evidence has shown that sex differences may be an important contributor to phenotypic heterogeneity in patients with HFrEF. Although diabetes mellitus (DM) frequently coexists with HFrEF and results in a worse prognosis, there remains a need to identify sex-related differences in the characteristics and outcomes of this population. In this study, we aimed to investigate the between-sex differences in clinical profile, left ventricular (LV) remodeling, and cardiovascular risk factors and outcomes in patients with HFrEF concomitant with DM. A total of 273 patients with HFrEF concomitant with DM who underwent cardiac MRI were included in this study. Clinical characteristics, LV remodeling as assessed by cardiac MRI, and cardiovascular risk factors and outcomes were compared between sexes. Women were older, leaner and prone to have anemia and hypoproteinemia but less likely to have ischemic etiology. Cardiac MRI revealed that despite similar LVEFs between the sexes, there was more LV concentric remodeling, less impaired global systolic peak strain in longitudinal and circumferential components and a decreased likelihood of late gadolinium enhancement presence in women than in men. During a median follow-up time of 34.6 months, women exhibited better overall survival than men did (log-rank P = 0.042). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis indicated different risk factors for predicting outcomes between sexes, with hypertension [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 4.85, P = 0.041] and hypoproteinemia (HR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.06 to 4.37, P = 0.039) serving as independent determinants of outcomes in women, whereas ischemic etiology (HR = 1.96, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.48, P = 0.021) and atrial fibrillation (HR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.02 to 3.41, P = 0.044) served as independent determinants of outcomes in men. Among patients with HFrEF concomitant with DM, women displayed different LV remodeling and risk factors and had better survival than men did. Sex-based phenotypic heterogeneity in patients with HFrEF in the context of DM should be addressed in clinical practice.

Shi K ，Zhang G ，Fu H ，Li XM ，Jiang L ，Gao Y ，Qian WL ，Shen LT ，Xu HY ，Li Y ，Guo YK ，Yang ZG ... -  《Cardiovascular Diabetology》

Glycemic control and clinical outcomes in diabetic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: insight from ventricular remodeling using cardiac MRI.

Glycemic control, as measured by glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), is an important biomarker to evaluate diabetes severity and is believed to be associated with heart failure development. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) commonly coexist, and the combination of these two diseases indicates a considerably poorer outcome than either disease alone. Therefore, glycemic control should be carefully managed. The present study aimed to explore the association between glycemic control and clinical outcomes, and to determine the optimal glycemic target in this specific population. A total of 262 patients who underwent cardiac MRI were included and were split by HbA1c levels [HbA1c < 6.5% (intensive control), HbA1c 6.5-7.5% (modest control), and HbA1c > 7.5% (poor control)]. The biventricular volume and function, as well as left ventricular (LV) systolic strains in patients in different HbA1c categories, were measured and compared. The primary and secondary outcomes were recorded. The association of different HbA1c levels with adverse outcomes was assessed. Despite similar biventricular ejection fractions, both patients with intensive and poor glycemic control exhibited prominent deterioration of LV systolic strain in the longitudinal component (P = 0.004). After a median follow-up of 35.0 months, 55 patients (21.0%) experienced at least one confirmed endpoint event. Cox multivariable analysis indicated that both patients in the lowest and highest HbA1c categories exhibited a more than 2-fold increase in the risk for primary outcomes [HbA1c < 6.5%: hazard ratio (HR) = 2.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-5.45; P = 0.033; HbA1c > 7.5%: HR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.01-4.99; P = 0.038] and secondary outcomes (HbA1c < 6.5%: HR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.16-6.96; P = 0.022; HbA1c > 7.5%: HR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.08-6.50; P = 0.038) compared with those in the middle HbA1c category. We showed a U-shaped association of glycemic control with clinical outcomes in patients with T2DM and HFrEF, with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes among patients with modest glycemic control. HbA1c between 6.5% and 7.5% may be served as the optimal hypoglycemic target in this specific population.

Shi K ，Zhang G ，Fu H ，Li XM ，Gao Y ，Shi R ，Xu HY ，Li Y ，Guo YK ，Yang ZG ... -  《Cardiovascular Diabetology》

Active left atrial ejection fraction as a non-invasive marker in pulmonary hypertension secondary to heart failure.

Patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH) secondary to left heart failure (HF) exhibit a complex pathophysiological profile and poor prognosis. Left atrial (LA) function is pivotal in the progression of this disease, yet its predictive significance remains exclusive. This study aimed to explore the predictive capability of LA metrics in this population and compare them with other common predictors. In this retrospective study, consecutive patients with PH secondary to HF who underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging between December 2010 and December 2021 were enrolled. The composite endpoint was defined as all-cause death, heart-lung transplantation, or left ventricular assist device implantation. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses. A total of 174 patients with PH secondary to HF, with a mean age of 53.2 ± 14.9 years, including 90 men, were included in the final analysis. During a median follow-up of 31.9 months, 33.3% (58/174) of the patients with PH reached the endpoints. There was a fair correlation between active left atrial ejection fraction (LAEF) and pulmonary artery wedge pressure (r = -0.397, p = 0.044). Active LAEF had a strong correlation with oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold (r = 0.769, p < 0.001) and peak oxygen consumption (r = 0.754, p < 0.001). Active LAEF demonstrated comparable prognostic performance to other variables measured by echocardiography or CMR. After adjusting for clinical variables and left ventricular ejection fraction, active LAEF was still an independent predictor for adverse events (C-statistic: 0.784). Subgroup analysis among HF patients with preserved ejection fraction demonstrated that those with active LAEF ≤8.6% had a 7.05-fold higher risk of experiencing the composite endpoint compared to those with active LAEF >8.6%. Although active LAEF does not demonstrate statistical improvement in outcome discrimination compared to established metrics, it may still merit consideration for assessing disease severity and prognosis in patients with PH secondary to HF. The integration of active LAEF and HF subtypes may stratify individuals at different levels of risk.

Zhou D ，Li X ，Xu J ，Wang Y ，Wu W ，Sirajuddin A ，Zhao S ，Liu Z ，Lu M ... -  《-》

Diabetes as a risk factor for tuberculosis disease.

Franco JV ，Bongaerts B ，Metzendorf MI ，Risso A ，Guo Y ，Peña Silva L ，Boeckmann M ，Schlesinger S ，Damen JA ，Richter B ，Baddeley A ，Bastard M ，Carlqvist A ，Garcia-Casal MN ，Hemmingsen B ，Mavhunga F ，Manne-Goehler J ，Viney K ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

Impact of residual disease as a prognostic factor for survival in women with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer after primary surgery.

Ovarian cancer is the seventh most common cancer among women and a leading cause of death from gynaecological malignancies. Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most common type, accounting for around 90% of all ovarian cancers. This specific type of ovarian cancer starts in the surface layer covering the ovary or lining of the fallopian tube. Surgery is performed either before chemotherapy (upfront or primary debulking surgery (PDS)) or in the middle of a course of treatment with chemotherapy (neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and interval debulking surgery (IDS)), with the aim of removing all visible tumour and achieving no macroscopic residual disease (NMRD). The aim of this review is to investigate the prognostic impact of size of residual disease nodules (RD) in women who received upfront or interval cytoreductive surgery for advanced (stage III and IV) epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). To assess the prognostic impact of residual disease after primary surgery on survival outcomes for advanced (stage III and IV) epithelial ovarian cancer. In separate analyses, primary surgery included both upfront primary debulking surgery (PDS) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery (IDS). Each residual disease threshold is considered as a separate prognostic factor. We searched CENTRAL (2021, Issue 8), MEDLINE via Ovid (to 30 August 2021) and Embase via Ovid (to 30 August 2021). We included survival data from studies of at least 100 women with advanced EOC after primary surgery. Residual disease was assessed as a prognostic factor in multivariate prognostic models. We excluded studies that reported fewer than 100 women, women with concurrent malignancies or studies that only reported unadjusted results. Women were included into two distinct groups: those who received PDS followed by platinum-based chemotherapy and those who received IDS, analysed separately. We included studies that reported all RD thresholds after surgery, but the main thresholds of interest were microscopic RD (labelled NMRD), RD 0.1 cm to 1 cm (small-volume residual disease (SVRD)) and RD > 1 cm (large-volume residual disease (LVRD)). Two review authors independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the data in meta-analysis. To assess the adequacy of adjustment factors used in multivariate Cox models, we used the 'adjustment for other prognostic factors' and 'statistical analysis and reporting' domains of the quality in prognosis studies (QUIPS) tool. We also made judgements about the certainty of the evidence for each outcome in the main comparisons, using GRADE. We examined differences between FIGO stages III and IV for different thresholds of RD after primary surgery. We considered factors such as age, grade, length of follow-up, type and experience of surgeon, and type of surgery in the interpretation of any heterogeneity. We also performed sensitivity analyses that distinguished between studies that included NMRD in RD categories of < 1 cm and those that did not. This was applicable to comparisons involving RD < 1 cm with the exception of RD < 1 cm versus NMRD. We evaluated women undergoing PDS and IDS in separate analyses. We found 46 studies reporting multivariate prognostic analyses, including RD as a prognostic factor, which met our inclusion criteria: 22,376 women who underwent PDS and 3697 who underwent IDS, all with varying levels of RD. While we identified a range of different RD thresholds, we mainly report on comparisons that are the focus of a key area of clinical uncertainty (involving NMRD, SVRD and LVRD). The comparison involving any visible disease (RD > 0 cm) and NMRD was also important. SVRD versus NMRD in a PDS setting In PDS studies, most showed an increased risk of death in all RD groups when those with macroscopic RD (MRD) were compared to NMRD. Women who had SVRD after PDS had more than twice the risk of death compared to women with NMRD (hazard ratio (HR) 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80 to 2.29; I2 = 50%; 17 studies; 9404 participants; moderate-certainty). The analysis of progression-free survival found that women who had SVRD after PDS had nearly twice the risk of death compared to women with NMRD (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.16; I2 = 63%; 10 studies; 6596 participants; moderate-certainty). LVRD versus SVRD in a PDS setting When we compared LVRD versus SVRD following surgery, the estimates were attenuated compared to NMRD comparisons. All analyses showed an overall survival benefit in women who had RD < 1 cm after surgery (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.32; I2 = 0%; 5 studies; 6000 participants; moderate-certainty). The results were robust to analyses of progression-free survival. SVRD and LVRD versus NMRD in an IDS setting The one study that defined the categories as NMRD, SVRD and LVRD showed that women who had SVRD and LVRD after IDS had more than twice the risk of death compared to women who had NMRD (HR 2.09, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.66; 310 participants; I2 = 56%, and HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.49 to 3.34; 343 participants; I2 = 35%; very low-certainty, for SVRD versus NMRD and LVRD versus NMRD, respectively). LVRD versus SVRD + NMRD in an IDS setting Meta-analysis found that women who had LVRD had a greater risk of death and disease progression compared to women who had either SVRD or NMRD (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.11; 6 studies; 1572 participants; I2 = 58% for overall survival and HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.52; 1145 participants; I2 = 60% for progression-free survival; very low-certainty). However, this result is biased as in all but one study it was not possible to distinguish NMRD within the < 1 cm thresholds. Only one study separated NMRD from SVRD; all others included NMRD in the SVRD group, which may create bias when comparing with LVRD, making interpretation challenging. MRD versus NMRD in an IDS setting Women who had any amount of MRD after IDS had more than twice the risk of death compared to women with NMRD (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.35 to 3.29, I2 = 81%; 906 participants; very low-certainty). In a PDS setting, there is moderate-certainty evidence that the amount of RD after primary surgery is a prognostic factor for overall and progression-free survival in women with advanced ovarian cancer. We separated our analysis into three distinct categories for the survival outcome including NMRD, SVRD and LVRD. After IDS, there may be only two categories required, although this is based on very low-certainty evidence, as all but one study included NMRD in the SVRD category. The one study that separated NMRD from SVRD showed no improved survival outcome in the SVRD category, compared to LVRD. Further low-certainty evidence also supported restricting to two categories, where women who had any amount of MRD after IDS had a significantly greater risk of death compared to women with NMRD. Therefore, the evidence presented in this review cannot conclude that using three categories applies in an IDS setting (very low-certainty evidence), as was supported for PDS (which has convincing moderate-certainty evidence).

Bryant A ，Hiu S ，Kunonga PT ，Gajjar K ，Craig D ，Vale L ，Winter-Roach BA ，Elattar A ，Naik R ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》