Effect of Mavacamten in Women Compared With Men With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Insights From EXPLORER-HCM.

BACKGROUND: Compared with men, women with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) have a higher incidence of heart failure and worse outcomes. We investigated baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and response to mavacamten among women compared with men in the EXPLORER-HCM study (Clinical Study to Evaluate Mavacamten [MYK-461] in Adults With Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy). METHODS: A prespecified post hoc analysis of sex from the blinded, randomized EXPLORER-HCM trial of mavacamten versus placebo in symptomatic patients with obstructive HCM was performed. Baseline characteristics were compared with t tests for continuous variables (expressed as mean values) and χ2 tests for categorical variables. Prespecified primary, secondary, and exploratory end points and echocardiographic measurements from baseline to end of treatment (week 30) were analyzed with ANCOVA for continuous end points and a generalized linear model with binomial distribution for binary end points, with adjustment for each outcome's baseline value, New York Heart Association class, ß-blocker use, and ergometer type. RESULTS: At baseline, women (n=102) were older (62 years versus 56 years; P<0.0001), had lower peak oxygen consumption (16.7 mL·kg-1·min-1 versus 21.3 mL·kg-1·min-1; P<0.0001), were more likely to be assigned New York Heart Association class III (42% versus 17%; P<0.0001), had worse health status (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score 64 versus 75; P<0.0001), and had higher baseline plasma NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) levels (1704 ng/L versus 990 ng/L; P=0.004) than men (n=149). After 30 weeks of mavacamten treatment, similar improvements were observed in women and men in the primary composite end point (percentage difference on mavacamten versus placebo, 22% versus 19%, respectively; P=0.759) and in the secondary end points of change in postexercise left ventricular outflow tract gradient (-42.4 mm Hg versus -33.6 mm Hg; P=0.348), change in peak oxygen consumption (1.2 mL·kg-1·min-1 versus 1.6 mL·kg-1·min-1; P=0.633), and percentage achieving ≥1 New York Heart Association class improvement (41% versus 28%; P=0.254). However, women had greater improvement in health status (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score 14.8 versus 6.1; P=0.026) and in the exploratory end point of NT-proBNP levels (-1322 ng/L versus -649 ng/L; P=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Although at baseline women with symptomatic obstructive HCM enrolled in EXPLORER-HCM were older and had worse heart failure and health status than men, treatment with mavacamten resulted in similar improvements in the primary and most secondary EXPLORER-HCM end points and greater improvements in health status and NT-proBNP. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03470545.

Mavacamten for Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy With or Without Hypertension: Post-Hoc Analysis of the EXPLORER-HCM Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension (HTN) is common in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), but its effect on the treatment of left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction is undefined. Although elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP) may impact dynamic LVOT gradients, its response to cardiac myosin inhibition is unknown. OBJECTIVES: In a post hoc exploratory analysis of the EXPLORER-HCM trial (Clinical Study to Evaluate Mavacamten [MYK-461] in Adults With Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy), the authors examined the characteristics of patients with obstructive HCM and HTN and the associations between HTN, SBP, and the response to mavacamten treatment of LVOT obstruction. METHODS: Patients were stratified by baseline history of HTN and mean SBP during 30-week treatment with mavacamten or placebo. The study estimated treatment differences and evaluated HTN and SBP groups by treatment interaction. Analysis of covariance was used to model changes in continuous endpoints, and a generalized linear model was used for binary endpoints. RESULTS: HTN was present in 119 of 251 patients (47.4%), including 60 receiving mavacamten and 59 receiving placebo. Patients with HTN vs no HTN were older (63.4 vs 54.0 years; P < 0.001), had higher SBP (134 ± 15.1 mm Hg vs 123 ± 13.8 mm Hg; P < 0.001), more comorbidities, and lower peak oxygen consumption (19 ± 3 vs 20 ± 4 mL/kg/min; P = 0.021). Patients with HTN had similar NYHA functional class (NYHA functional class II, 72% vs 73%), Valsalva LVOT gradients (72 ± 34 mm Hg vs 74 ± 30 mm Hg), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Scores (70.6 ± 18.8 vs 68.9 ± 23.1), and NT pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (geometric mean 632 ± 129 pg/mL vs 745 ± 130 pg/mL). Mavacamten-treated patients had improvement in all primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints regardless of HTN status or mean SBP. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefits of mavacamten in symptomatic, obstructive HCM were similar in patients with and without HTN, despite differences in baseline characteristics. (Clinical Study to Evaluate Mavacamten [MYK-461] in Adults With Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy [EXPLORER-HCM]; NCT03470545).

Optimizing data integration in trials that use EHR data: lessons learned from a multi-center randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite great promise, trials that ascertain patient clinical data from electronic health records (EHR), referred to here as "EHR-sourced" trials, are limited by uncertainty about how existing trial sites and infrastructure can be best used to operationalize study goals. Evidence is needed to support the practical use of EHRs in contemporary clinical trial settings. MAIN TEXT: We describe a demonstration project that used EHR data to complement data collected for a contemporary multi-center pharmaceutical industry outcomes trial, and how a central coordinating center supported participating sites through the technical, governance, and operational aspects of this type of activity. We discuss operational considerations related to site selection, data extraction, site performance, and data transfer and quality review, and we outline challenges and lessons learned. We surveyed potential sites and used their responses to assess feasibility, determine the potential capabilities of sites and choose an appropriate data extraction strategy. We designed a flexible, multimodal approach for data extraction, enabling each site to either leverage an existing data source, create a new research datamart, or send all data to the central coordinating center to produce the requisite data elements. We evaluated site performance, as reflected by the speed of contracting and IRB approval, total patients enrolled, enrollment yield, data quality, and compared performance by data collection strategy. CONCLUSION: While broadening the type of sites able to participate in EHR-sourced trials may lead to greater generalizability and improved enrollment, sites with fewer technical resources may require additional support to participate. Central coordinating center support is essential to facilitate the execution of operational processes. Future work should focus on sharing lessons learned and creating reusable tools to facilitate participation of heterogeneous trial sites.

Examining COVID-19 testing and vaccination behaviors by heritage and linguistic preferences among Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish RADx-UP participants.

The Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish (hereafter, "Hispanic") populations in the U.S. bear a disproportionate burden of COVID-19-related outcomes, including disease incidence and mortality. Developing culturally appropriate national public health services for Hispanic persons remains a challenge. This study examined the association of heritage and language preference with COVID-19 testing (tested vs. not tested) and vaccination (vaccinated vs. not vaccinated) outcomes among Hispanic participants from 18 Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics-Underserved Populations (RADx-UP) projects (n = 3308; mean age = 44.1 years [SD = 14.9], 60% women; 83% spoke other than English at home). Generalized estimating equation models adjusted for age, gender, education level, income, insurance coverage, geographic region, comorbidities, and prior infection. Relative to Mexican heritage, individuals identifying as Puerto Rican or Dominican were more likely to test for COVID-19, and South American heritage was associated with higher testing and vaccination rates. Speaking Spanish or another language at home was associated with increased testing compared with speaking English at home for individuals who preferred not to report their heritage, and increased vaccination for those with Mexican, Cuban, or Central American heritage. This study highlights heterogeneity in testing and vaccination behaviors among Hispanic populations based on heritage and language preference, underscoring the diversity within the U.S. Hispanic community. In contrast to other studies on linguistic acculturation and health care utilization, our study found that a language other than English spoken at home was associated with greater vaccine uptake. That is, enculturation - the retention of Spanish language and presumably of Hispanic cultural norms - was linked with being vaccinated.

Disruption in Blood Pressure Control With the COVID-19 Pandemic: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory.

OBJECTIVE: To explore trends in blood pressure (BP) control before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Health systems participating in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System responded to data queries, producing 9 BP control metrics. Averages of the BP control metrics (weighted by numbers of observations in each health system) were calculated and compared between two 1-year measurement periods (January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, and January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020). RESULTS: Among 1,770,547 hypertensive persons in 2019, BP control to <140/<90 mm Hg varied across 24 health systems (range, 46%-74%). Reduced BP control occurred in most health systems with onset of the COVID-19 pandemic; the weighted average BP control was 60.5% in 2019 and 53.3% in 2020. Reductions were also evident for BP control to <130/<80 mm Hg (29.9% in 2019 and 25.4% in 2020) and improvement in BP (reduction of 10 mm Hg in systolic BP or achievement of systolic BP <140 mm Hg; 29.7% in 2019 and 23.8% in 2020). Two BP control process metrics exhibited pandemic-associated disruption: repeat visit in 4 weeks after a visit with uncontrolled hypertension (36.7% in 2019 and 31.7% in 2020) and prescription of fixed-dose combination medications among those with 2 or more drug classes (24.6% in 2019 and 21.5% in 2020). CONCLUSION: BP control decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a corresponding reduction in follow-up health care visits among persons with uncontrolled hypertension. It is unclear whether the observed decline in BP control during the pandemic will contribute to future cardiovascular events.

Seasonal variation in blood pressure control across US health systems.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize seasonal variation in US population-based blood pressure (BP) control and BP-related metrics and evaluate the association between outdoor temperature and BP control variation. METHODS: We queried electronic health records (EHRs) from 26 health systems, representing 21 states, to summarize BP metrics by quarters of 12-month periods from January 2017 to March 2020. Patients with at least one ambulatory visit during the measurement period and a hypertension diagnosis during the first 6 months or prior to the measurement period were included. Changes in BP control, BP improvement, medication intensification, average SBP reduction after medication intensification across quarters and association with outdoor temperature were analyzed using weighted generalized linear models with repeated measures. RESULTS: Among 1 818 041 people with hypertension, the majority were more than 65 years of age (52.2%), female (52.1%), white non-Hispanic (69.8%) and had stage 1/2 hypertension (64.8%). Overall, BP control and process metrics were highest in quarters 2 and 3, and lowest in quarters 1 and 4. Quarter 2 had the highest percentage of improved BP (31.95 ±â€Š0.90%) and average SBP reduction after medication intensification (16 ±â€Š0.23 mmHg). Quarter 3 had the highest percentage of BP controlled (62.25 ±â€Š2.55%) and lowest with medication intensification (9.73 ±â€Š0.60%). Results were largely consistent in adjusted models. Average temperature was associated with BP control metrics in unadjusted models, but associations were attenuated following adjustment. CONCLUSION: In this large, national, EHR-based study, BP control and BP-related process metrics improved during spring/summer months, but outdoor temperature was not associated with performance following adjustment for potential confounders.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and COVID-19-related outcomes: A patient-level analysis of the PCORnet blood pressure control lab.

SARS-CoV-2 accesses host cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme-2, which is also affected by commonly used angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), raising concerns that ACEI or ARB exposure may portend differential COVID-19 outcomes. In parallel cohort studies of outpatient and inpatient COVID-19-diagnosed adults with hypertension, we assessed associations between antihypertensive exposure (ACEI/ARB vs. non-ACEI/ARB antihypertensives, as well as between ACEI- vs. ARB) at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, using electronic health record data from PCORnet health systems. The primary outcomes were all-cause hospitalization or death (outpatient cohort) or all-cause death (inpatient), analyzed via Cox regression weighted by inverse probability of treatment weights. From February 2020 through December 9, 2020, 11,246 patients (3477 person-years) and 2200 patients (777 person-years) were included from 17 health systems in outpatient and inpatient cohorts, respectively. There were 1015 all-cause hospitalization or deaths in the outpatient cohort (incidence, 29.2 events per 100 person-years), with no significant difference by ACEI/ARB use (adjusted HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.88, 1.15). In the inpatient cohort, there were 218 all-cause deaths (incidence, 28.1 per 100 person-years) and ACEI/ARB exposure was associated with reduced death (adjusted HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.99). ACEI, versus ARB exposure, was associated with higher risk of hospitalization in the outpatient cohort, but no difference in all-cause death in either cohort. There was no evidence of effect modification across pre-specified baseline characteristics. Our results suggest ACEI and ARB exposure have no detrimental effect on hospitalizations and may reduce death among hypertensive patients diagnosed with COVID-19.