No abstract

IMPORTANCEThe COVID-19 pandemic saw one of the fastest developments of vaccines in an effort to combat an out-of-control pandemic. The 2 most common COVID-19 vaccine platforms currently in use, messenger RNA (mRNA) and adenovirus vector, were developed on the basis of previous research in use of this technology. Postauthorization surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines has identified safety signals, including unusual cases of thrombocytopenia with thrombosis reported in recipients of adenoviral vector vaccines. One of the devastating manifestations of this syndrome, termed vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), is cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST). This review summarizes the current evidence and indications regarding biology, clinical characteristics, and pharmacological management of VITT with CVST.OBSERVATIONS VITT appears to be similar to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), with both disorders associated with thrombocytopenia, thrombosis, and presence of autoantibodies to platelet factor 4 (PF4). Unlike VITT, HIT is triggered by recent exposure to heparin. Owing to similarities between these 2 conditions and lack of high-quality evidence, interim recommendations suggest avoiding heparin and heparin analogues in patients with VITT. Based on initial reports, female sex and age younger than 60 years were identified as possible risk factors for VITT. Treatment consists of therapeutic anticoagulation with nonheparin anticoagulants and prevention of formation of autoantibody-PF4 complexes, the latter being achieved by administration of high-dose intravenous immunoglobin (IVIG). Steroids, which can theoretically inhibit the production of new antibodies, have been used in combination with IVIG. In severe cases, plasma exchange should be used for clearing autoantibodies. Monoclonal antibodies, such as rituximab and eculizumab, can be considered when other therapies fail. Routine platelet transfusions, aspirin, and warfarin should be avoided because of the possibility of worsening thrombosis and magnifying bleeding risk.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Adverse events like VITT, while uncommon, have been described despite vaccination remaining the most essential component in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. While it seems logical to consider the use of types of vaccines (eg, mRNA-based administration) in individuals at high risk, treatment should consist of therapeutic anticoagulation mostly with nonheparin products and IVIG.

BackgroundCoronary artery disease (CAD) outcomes consistently improve when they are routinely measured and provided back to physicians and hospitals. However, few centers around the world systematically track outcomes, and no global standards exist. Furthermore, patient-centered outcomes and longitudinal outcomes are under-represented in current assessments.Methods and ResultsThe nonprofit International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international Working Group to define a consensus standard set of outcome measures and risk factors for tracking, comparing, and improving the outcomes of CAD care. Members were drawn from 4 continents and 6 countries. Using a modified Delphi method, the ICHOM Working Group defined who should be tracked, what should be measured, and when such measurements should be performed. The ICHOM CAD consensus measures were designed to be relevant for all patients diagnosed with CAD, including those with acute myocardial infarction, angina, and asymptomatic CAD. Thirteen specific outcomes were chosen, including acute complications occurring within 30 days of acute myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, or percutaneous coronary intervention; and longitudinal outcomes for up to 5 years for patient-reported health status (Seattle Angina Questionnaire [SAQ-7], elements of Rose Dyspnea Score, and Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-2]), cardiovascular hospital admissions, cardiovascular procedures, renal failure, and mortality. Baseline demographic, cardiovascular disease, and comorbidity information is included to improve the interpretability of comparisons.ConclusionsICHOM recommends that this set of outcomes and other patient information be measured for all patients with CAD.

Medication nonadherence, a major problem in cardiovascular disease (CVD), contributes yearly to approximately 125,000 preventable deaths, which is partly attributable to only about one-half of CVD patients consistently taking prescribed life-saving medications. Current interest has focused on how labeling and education influence adherence. This paper summarizes the scope of CVD nonadherence, describes key U.S. Food and Drug Administration initiatives, and identifies potential targets for improvement. We describe key adherence factors, methods, and technological applications for simplifying regimens and enhancing adherence, and 4 areas where additional collaborative research and implementation involving the regulatory system and clinical community could substantially reduce nonadherence: 1) identifying monitoring methods; 2) improving the evidence base to better understand adherence; 3) developing patient/health provider team-based engagement strategies; and 4) alleviating health disparities. Alignment of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approaches to dissemination of information about appropriate use with clinical practice could improve adherence, and thereby reduce CVD death and disability.

Blacks are two to three times as likely as whites to die of preventable heart disease and stroke. Declines in mortality from heart disease have not eliminated racial disparities. Control and effective treatment of hypertension, a leading cause of cardiovascular disease, among blacks is less than in whites and remains a challenge. One of the driving forces behind this racial/ethnic disparity is medication nonadherence whose cause is embedded in social determinants. Eight practical approaches to addressing medication adherence with the potential to attenuate disparities were identified and include: (1) patient engagement strategies, (2) consumer-directed health care, (3) patient portals, (4) smart apps and text messages, (5) digital pillboxes, (6) pharmacist-led engagement, (7) cardiac rehabilitation, and (8) cognitive-based behavior. However, while data suggest that these strategies may improve medication adherence, the effect on ameliorating racial/ethnic disparities is not certain. This review describes the relationship between disparities and medication adherence, which likely plays a role in persistent disparities in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Expanded Access (EA) Program, which allows for compassionate uses of unapproved therapeutics and diagnostics outside of clinical trials, has gained significant traction during the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. While development of vaccines has been the major focus, uncertainties around new vaccine safety and effectiveness have spawned interest in other pharmacological options. Experimental drugs can also be approved under the FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) program, designed to combat infectious disease and other threats. Here, we review the US experience in 2020 with pharmacological EA and EUA approvals during the pandemic. We also provide a description of, and clinical rationale for, each of the EA-or EUA-approved drugs (e.g. remdesivir, convalescent plasma, propofol 2%, hydroxychloroquine, ruxolitinib, bamlanivimab) during the pandemic and concluding reflections on the EA program and its potential future uses. Teaser: Several drugs have been authorized by the US FDA through the Expanded Access and/or the Emergency Use Authorization programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. How well did these programs function and what have we learned?Reviews POST SCREEN

No abstract

No abstract