Perhaps the most important and most actionable trial #ACC22 is Chronic Hypertension and Pregnancy (CHAP) Trial. Blood pressure control matters in pregnancy. This needs to be put into action. Next in line of great recent BP trials. nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.105…@ACCinTouch@NEJM
@ACCinTouch@NEJM In this study @atitapatterns and colleagues randomized 2408 women w/chronic htn to target <140/90 or usual care (unless BP ≥160/105). Outcomes improved substantially with strategy of targeting <140/90. 18% reduction in risk for primary outcome. @nih_nhlbi@NICHD_NIH
@ACCinTouch@NEJM@atitapatterns@nih_nhlbi@NICHD_NIH Here is the blood pressure in the trial…at baseline SBP was ~134 mm Hg. About 56% diagnosed and receiving medication. SBP randomization to delivery lower in active-Rx group (129.5 vs 132.6 and 81.5 vs 81.5). That’s not much, but yet, yielded benefit.
@ACCinTouch@NEJM@atitapatterns@nih_nhlbi@NICHD_NIH Here are the blood pressure differences… and this seemed to translate into the 18% relative benefit… and 7 point difference in primary outcome (30.2% vs 37.0%).
@ACCinTouch@NEJM@atitapatterns@nih_nhlbi@NICHD_NIH Primary outcome was a composite of preeclampsia with severe
features, medically indicated preterm birth at less than 35 weeks’ gestation, placental abruption, or fetal or neonatal death. And I was shocked to see the rates so high, even in the intervention group… 30.2%.
@ACCinTouch@NEJM@atitapatterns@nih_nhlbi@NICHD_NIH And then this...'The incidence of serious maternal complications 2.1% & 2.8%, respectively (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.26) & incidence of severe neonatal complications 2.0% and 2.6% (RR, 0.77;95% CI, 0.45 to 1.30).’ So high. And BP control probably beneficial for these too.
@medrxivpreprint@yaleHFdoc@EricTopol@CMichaelGibson For all #ACC22 presenters, preprinting is easy; we accept scientific studies, screen rapidly, post quickly. Non-profit. It is of the community-available throughout the world, understood as pre-peer reviewed, and citable. Almost all reputable journals are fine with it, incl @NEJM.
@FrancesSSellers@washingtonpost@limitlessliza@dianaberrent@VirusesImmunity@YaleMed@PCORI People participating in research as partners, and w/agency over their data, & w/an approach of 'nothing about me, without me’ has great promise, yet threatens a status quo… but about time. Will enable better, faster, more efficient, more relevant, and less burdensome research.
Should we put patients w/chronic heart failure on low sodium diets. This international trial indicates it doesn’t decrease risk of CV events or all-cause death. Little reason to promote the approach.
Nice study @JustinEzekowitz and colleagues. #ACC22thelancet.com/journals/lance…
@JustinEzekowitz The #SODIUMHF study had an interesting finding…secondary endpoints of health status modestly improved w/low salt diet. People can try it if they want & see if they feel better. If not, they can stop w/o fear they're increasing their risk. We docs should not push it on them.
@JustinEzekowitz Another interesting feature of the study is that while people reported modest improvement in health status w/low salt diet, they did not walk farther in 6 minute walk test. So a split in what you might expect.
Our new piece: #Racism as a Leading Cause of Death in the US. "To address racism, understand its impact on health, & identify remedies, a national set of metrics is needed to galvanise action & promote accountability." bmj.com/content/376/bm…@bmj_latest#HealthEquity@YaleMed
@bmj_latest@YaleMed "Black people in the US are more likely to die young—not because there is some intrinsic biological risk, but because of racism… For many racial & ethnic minority groups, particularly for descendants of enslaved Africans, equality in health and longevity remain beyond reach."
@bmj_latest@YaleMed "The excess deaths associated with race can be understood as a toll that is in large part a result of racism in the United States. There is no biological reason, independent of social context, that Black people should die younger than White people."
Your data, packaged and sold by @IBM. 'Business analysts said the data dump instantly makes Francisco Partners a significant player in the multibillion-dollar business of buying and selling sensitive information about the care of patients.’ @statnews@caseymross
@IBM@statnews@caseymross How did IBM get all your sensitive health data to sell? They bought other companies that acquired your sensitive health data. And how did they get it? Mostly from 3rd parties who obtained it from health systems, insurers, & others you trust with your data. #privacy#digitalhealth
@IBM@statnews@caseymross And what is being done w/your sensitive data as billion dollar companies buy and sell it? [well, something that makes it valuable to people who want to buy it] And can you reclaim it or get access to it? [no] And is there consequences to orgs that share your sensitive data [no]
Was watching #Dopesick, and I started reflecting on when I first learned IMS (now IQVIA) tracked every prescription by every doc &sold it to pharma so the doctors could be targeted for drug sales… and how inappropriate that seemed to me. And yet I didn’t do anything.
I was on a plane and a drug representative was sitting beside me going through the prescriptions written by doctors he covered - and there was so much detail. Data-drive marketing…& we docs had no idea the companies were tracking us in this way… & IMS was making billions on it.
It felt like an invasion of privacy… & I was puzzled that it could be legal…we were saying at the time that pharma should not be giving gifts…but we didn’t talk about tracking of individual MD's prescribing patterns by the sales teams - and how they acted on that information.