Publications

BACKGROUND: Cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are independently associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with both cancer and comorbid CVD are unknown.

METHODS: This retrospective study included 2,476 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at 4 Massachusetts hospitals between March 11 and May 21, 2020. Patients were stratified by a history of either cancer (n=195) or CVD (n=414) and subsequently by the presence of both cancer and CVD (n=82). We compared outcomes between patients with and without cancer and patients with both cancer and CVD compared with patients with either condition alone. The primary endpoint was COVID-19-associated severe disease, defined as a composite of the need for mechanical ventilation, shock, or death. Secondary endpoints included death, shock, need for mechanical ventilation, need for supplemental oxygen, arrhythmia, venous thromboembolism, encephalopathy, abnormal troponin level, and length of stay.

RESULTS: Multivariable analysis identified cancer as an independent predictor of COVID-19-associated severe disease among all infected patients. Patients with cancer were more likely to develop COVID-19-associated severe disease than were those without cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.53-2.68; P<.001). Furthermore, patients with both cancer and CVD had a higher likelihood of COVID-19-associated severe disease compared with those with either cancer (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.11-3.10; P=.02) or CVD (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.21-2.66; P=.004) alone. Patients died more frequently if they had both cancer and CVD compared with either cancer (35% vs 17%; P=.004) or CVD (35% vs 21%; P=.009) alone. Arrhythmias and encephalopathy were also more frequent in patients with both cancer and CVD compared with those with cancer alone.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of both cancer and CVD are at significantly higher risk of experiencing COVID-19-associated adverse outcomes. Aggressive public health measures are needed to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 infection in this vulnerable patient population.

INTRODUCTION: The use of controlled substances like cocaine increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and myocardial infarction (MI). However, outside of alcohol and tobacco, substance use is not included in CVD risk assessment tools. We identified the effects of using multiple substances (nicotine/cotinine, cannabis, alcohol, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin and other opioids) on cardiac injury measured by high-sensitivity troponin (hsTnI) in homeless and unstably housed women.

METHODS: We recruited 245 homeless and unstably housed women from shelters, free meal programs and street encampments. Participants completed six monthly study visits. Adjusting for traditional CVD risk factors, we examined longitudinal associations between substance use and hsTnI.

RESULTS: Median participant age was 53 years and 74 % were ethnic minority women. At baseline, 76 % of participants had hypertension, 31 % were HIV-positive, 8% had a history of a prior MI and 12 % of prior stroke. The most commonly used substances were cotinine/nicotine (80 %), cannabis (68 %) and cocaine (66 %). HsTnI exceeding the 99th percentile (14.7 ng/L) - a level high enough to signal possible MI - was observed in 14 participants during >1 study visit (6%). In adjusted analysis, cocaethylene and fentanyl were significantly associated with higher hsTnI levels.

CONCLUSIONS: Fentanyl use and the co-use of cocaine and alcohol are associated with myocardial injury, suggesting that the use of these substances may act as long-term cardiac insults. Whether risk counseling on these specific substances and/or including their use in CVD risk stratification would improve CVD outcomes in populations where substance use is high merits further investigation.

This study examines cost sharing for novel second-line diabetes treatment agents under Medicare Part D.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on the differential ability of variables on transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) to predict heart failure (HF) readmission across the spectrum of left ventricular (LV) systolic function.

METHODS: We linked 15 years of TTE report data (1/6/2003-5/3/2018) at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center to complete Medicare claims. In those with recent HF, we evaluated the relationship between variables on baseline TTE and HF readmission, stratified by LVEF.

RESULTS: After excluding TTEs with uninterpretable diastology, 5,900 individuals (mean age: 76.9 years; 49.1% female) were included, of which 2545 individuals (41.6%) were admitted for HF. Diastolic variables augmented prediction compared to demographics, comorbidities, and echocardiographic structural variables (p < 0.001), though discrimination was modest (c-statistic = 0.63). LV dimensions and eccentric hypertrophy predicted HF in HF with reduced (HFrEF) but not preserved (HFpEF) systolic function, whereas LV wall thickness, NT-proBNP, pulmonary vein D- and Ar-wave velocities, and atrial dimensions predicted HF in HFpEF but not HFrEF (all interaction p < 0.10). Prediction of HF readmission was not different in HFpEF and HFrEF (p = 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center echocardiographic study linked to Medicare claims, left ventricular dimensions and eccentric hypertrophy predicted HF readmission in HFrEF but not HFpEF and left ventricular wall thickness predicted HF readmission in HFpEF but not HFrEF. Regardless of LVEF, diastolic variables augmented prediction of HF readmission compared to echocardiographic structural variables, demographics, and comorbidities alone. The additional role of medication adherence, readmission history, and functional status in differential prediction of HF readmission by LVEF category should be considered for future study.