Pharmacogenomics aims to correlate inter-individual differences of drug efficacy and/or toxicity with the underlying genetic composition, particularly in genes encoding for protein factors and enzymes involved in drug metabolism and transport. In several European populations, particularly in countries with lower income, information related to the prevalence of pharmacogenomic biomarkers is incomplete or lacking. Here, we have implemented the microattribution approach to assess the pharmacogenomic biomarkers allelic spectrum in 18 European populations, mostly from developing European countries, by analyzing 1,931 pharmacogenomics biomarkers in 231 genes. Our data show significant inter-population pharmacogenomic biomarker allele frequency differences, particularly in 7 clinically actionable pharmacogenomic biomarkers in 7 European populations, affecting drug efficacy and/or toxicity of 51 medication treatment modalities. These data also reflect on the differences observed in the prevalence of high-risk genotypes in these populations, as far as common markers in the CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP3A5, VKORC1, SLCO1B1 and TPMT pharmacogenes are concerned. Also, our data demonstrate notable differences in predicted genotype-based warfarin dosing among these populations. Our findings can be exploited not only to develop guidelines for medical prioritization, but most importantly to facilitate integration of pharmacogenomics and to support pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing. This may subsequently contribute towards significant cost-savings in the overall healthcare expenditure in the participating countries, where pharmacogenomics implementation proves to be cost-effective.

No abstract

Background and objective: According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 100 million people have already recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Therefore, it is imperative to understand the possible outcomes of COVID-19. The aim of our study was to evaluate pulmonary function, exercise capacity, residual radiological changes, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at follow-up in a cohort of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia survivors. Materials and Methods: Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and radiologically confirmed lung injury, with no chronic lung disease prior to this infection, were included in the study. Patients’ evaluation 2 months after their discharge from hospital included spirometry (FVC, FEV1, FEV1/FVC), determination of lung volume (TLC, VC, RV) and diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO, adjusted for hemoglobin), 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), chest CT scan, and 36-Item Short Form General Health Survey (SF-36). Results: Fifty-one patients (25 men, 26 women) were included. The mean age was 56 years (SD-11,72). Eighteen patients (35.3%) had experienced moderate COVID-19, 21 (41.2%) severe COVID-19, and 12 (23.5%) were critically ill. The mean follow-up visit time after the discharge from hospital was 60 days (SD-17). Pulmonary function at follow-up was impaired in 24 (47.2%) patients. Reduced lung volume was observed in 15 (29.4%) patients, DLCO reduction in 15 (29.4%) patients, and only one patient displayed obstruction. Twelve patients out of 51 (12/51, 27.3%) showed reduced physical capacity in the 6 MWT, and 3/51 (9.1%) showed desaturation, with SO2 < 90%. Different levels of abnormality were found in 49/51 (96,1%) patients on follow-up chest CT; the median radiological score was 10.9 (SD ± 8.87, possible maximal score, 25). Ground-glass opacity was the most common radiological feature, found in 45 (88.2%) patients. The SF-36 scores demonstrated a reduction in health status across all domains, with the lowest scores for limitations in social activities because of physical problems, vitality, and general health. Conclusion: In the group of COVID-19 pneumonia survivors 2 months after hospital discharge, residual changes in the lungs on chest CT and in lung function and reduced physical and HRQoL status were found in a significant number of patients. To evaluate COVID-19 long-term consequences, a longer follow-up period is needed.

BackgroundThe aim of our study was to determine the association of anxiety and depression symptoms, as well as the main socio-demographic factors, with patients’ satisfaction with primary healthcare services.MethodsThe respondents were asked to fill out an anonymous questionnaire that included information on the patients’ gender, age, place of residence, education, ethnicity, the type of clinic they visited and the presence of chronic diseases. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by using a short version of the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire. We also used the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.ResultsPoor evaluations of primary healthcare services were more characteristic of males, older patients, those living in district centres and villages, individuals with lower (secondary or lower) education levels, respondents of Russian ethnicity (compared to Lithuanian), patients with chronic diseases and higher anxiety and depression symptom scores. In the final regression analysis, better satisfaction with primary healthcare services was observed in respondents who were less depressed, of Polish ethnicity and who were living in a city rather than a village.ConclusionsBeing more depressed or anxious, living in the district centre or countryside related to patients’ worse satisfaction with primary healthcare services. The results of nationality of patients and their satisfaction are ambiguous. The is strong correlation between the symptoms of depression and anxiety.

The development of PC systems in Baltic countries has been rather similar, but some aspects also differ between the countries. Use of a standardized instrument allows for international comparison, but assumes standardised data collection procedures in comparable countries.

SummaryObjectives: According to the latest WHO data, coronary heart disease deaths in Lithuania reached 38.3% of total deaths. Based on the unfavourable situation with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in Lithuania the Lithuanian High Cardiovascular Risk (LitHiR) programme aimed at estimation and aggressive managing of cardiovascular risk factors. This paper describes the Lithuanian High Cardiovascular Risk programme protocol.Design and methods: In 2006 the Lithuanian High Cardiovascular Risk programme was started. LitHiR programme recruited men -at the age of 40-54 years and women -50-64 years without overt cardiovascular disease. The two-level approach -primary health care institutions (PHCI) and specialized cardiovascular prevention units (CVPU) -was applied. The subjects selected were tested for cardiovascular risk and those with high cardiovascular risk were sent to secondary (CVPU) level, for other the plan of preventive measures of risk factor reduction was created. In years 2006-2010 overall 266,391 persons (36.9% from all target population) were examined. Among them 164,657 subjects (61.8%) were tested for the first time, 68,832 (25.8%) were tested repeatedly one time, 32,848 subjects (12.3%) were tested repeatedly for two and more times. Conclusions:The programme aimed at estimation and managing of cardiovascular risk factors striving to reduce acute cardiovascular event related morbidity and mortality, to slow down the progression of sub-clinical atherosclerosis into overt cardiovascular disease, to increase the number of newly identified cases of diabetes, metabolic syndrome and latent course of atherosclerosis related diseases, to decrease hospitalizations for treatment of arterial hypertension and coronary heart disease. Seminars in Cardiovascular Medicine 2012; 18: 3

Background The role of primary care physician in COPD management varies in different health care systems. According to the researches in various countries, extent of spirometry use in diagnosing and grading COPD frequently remains insufficient. Inaccurate diagnosis results in mistreatment and disease progression. The aims of our study were to investigate the accuracy of COPD diagnosis, grading, and treatment according to guidelines in daily practice of primary care. Methods A retrospective analysis of ambulatory records in a large primary care center was conducted. Digital medical records of current patients were screened for ICD-10-AM codes J44.0, J44.1, J44.8 and J44.9. All medical records starting from the first visit in this primary care center were reviewed. Results Two hundred twenty-eight patients diagnosed with COPD were included in the study, 118 male, mean age 67 yrs. (SD 14). A spirometry report was available to 58% of the patients, 75% of them met the guidelines for COPD diagnosis. The grade was correct for 56.8% of the patients. 54% were consulted by the pulmonologist at least once. After re-analyzing spirometry, correcting the diagnosis, and grading, it was determined that only 70% of the patients were receiving appropriate treatments. Sixteen per cent of patients were undertreated and 14% were overtreated. Conclusions COPD care in primary practice remains suboptimal. Incorrect approach often leads to incorrect grading and mistreatment. Points for improvement should be identified in further studies.

No abstract