Current and emerging perspectives on pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common genetically inherited cardiomyopathy with an autosomal dominant inheritance pattern. A disease-causing gene is found between 34% and >60% of the times and the two most frequently mutated genes, which encode sarcomeric proteins, are MYBPC3 and MYH7. HCM is a diagnosis of exclusion since secondary causes of left ventricular hypertrophy should first be ruled out. These include hypertension, aortic stenosis, infiltrative disease, metabolic and endocrine disorders, mitochondrial cardiomyopathies, neuromuscular disorders, malformation syndromes and some chronic drug use. The disease is characterized by great heterogeneity of its clinical manifestations, however diastolic dysfunction and increased ventricular arrhythmogenesis are commonly seen. Current HCM therapies focus on symptom management and prevention of sudden cardiac death. Symptom management includes the use of pharmacological agents, elimination of medication promoting outflow track obstruction, control of comorbid conditions and invasive procedures, whereas in the prevention of sudden cardiac death, implantable cardiac defibrillators and antiarrhythmic drugs are used. A targeted therapy for LVOTO represented by allosteric cardiac myosin inhibitors has been developed. In terms of sport participation, a more liberal approach is recently recommended, after careful evaluation and common-shared decision. The application of the current therapies has lowered HCM mortality rates to <1.0%/year, however it appears to have shifted focus to heart failure and atrial fibrillation, as the predominant causes of disease-related morbidity and mortality and, therefore, unmet treatment need. With improved understanding of the genetic and molecular basis of HCM, the present decade will witness novel treatments for disease prevention and modification.

Eight-year survival study of first-line tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: real-world data from a university centre registry.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety and survival of TNF-α inhibitors in patients with RA. METHODS: A total of 178 patients >18 years of age were treated with TNF-α inhibitors. A total of 74 patients were treated with infliximab, 75 with adalimumab and 29 with etanercept. Each patient was followed-up for a period of 8 years. RESULTS: Anti-TNF-α therapy resulted in rapid clinical improvement. The rate of good/moderate response according to EULAR response criteria for the index 28-joint DAS with CRP in the first 6 months was 82% for infliximab, 89.6% for adalimumab and 95.6% for etanercept. The rate of withdrawal in 8 years was 80% for patients on infliximab, 61.4% for patients on adalimumab and 47.6% for patients on etanercept. The main reasons for discontinuation were allergic reactions for infliximab (rate of discontinuation 25.7%) and inefficacy for adalimumab and etanercept (17.5% and 23.8%, respectively). Systemic allergic reactions and infections were significantly more frequent in the infliximab group (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). However, there was no significant difference among the three drugs concerning serious infections. According to Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, a significantly faster withdrawal for infliximab patients was depicted compared with adalimumab (P = 0.003) and etanercept (P = 0.019), while adalimumab and etanercept were not statistically different (P = 0.089). CONCLUSIONS: TNF-α inhibitors establish an effective therapeutic option in RA showing an acceptable safety profile. Infections and allergic reactions appear more often with infliximab, while serious infections did not differ among them. RA patients treated with infliximab are more likely to discontinue treatment earlier compared with the other alternatives.