Major disparities in patient-reported adherence compared to objective assessment of adherence using mass spectrometry: A prospective study in a tertiary-referral hypertension clinic.

AIM: Many challenges exist in determining true rates of adherence to antihypertensive medications among individuals in a clinic setting. For the first time, we aimed to compare patient-reported antihypertensive adherence with objective evidence using mass spectrometry spot urinalysis in a tertiary referral clinic setting. METHODS: A prospective observational single-centre cohort study was performed in a tertiary referral hypertension clinic, encompassing antihypertensive initiation and persistence. Patients were referred with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension or for suspected secondary causes. Participants completed a self-reported assessment of antihypertensive adherence and provided a spot urine sample. The presence of antihypertensive medications and/or their respective metabolites was evaluated using high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Patients were determined to be adherent if they demonstrated both self-reported adherence and objective mass spectrometry evidence. RESULTS: Of all 105 eligible participants initially recruited, 73 (69.5%) met the eligibility criteria. Only 27.4% (95% confidence interval 0.2-0.4) of participants demonstrated true adherence to their self-reported antihypertensives, despite 75.3% (0.6-0.8) reporting adherence. Greatest medication adherence was achieved with angiotensin II receptor blockers (61%), with calcium-channel blockers and mineralocorticoid antagonists demonstrating least adherence (38%). CONCLUSION: In patients attending a tertiary hypertension clinic, the combined use of spot urine mass spectrometry and self-reporting identifies higher rates of nonadherence when compared to either modality alone. Both techniques should be combined for more accurate detection of medication adherence.

High-Dose Methotrexate in Patients With Lymphoma: Predictors of a Complicated Course.

PURPOSE: High-dose methotrexate (HDMTX; > 500 mg/m2) is an important component of lymphoma therapy. Serum MTX monitoring at 48 hours is the standard approach to identify those at increased risk of developing MTX toxicity. Our aim was to characterize the incidence of complications and their association with MTX levels. METHODS: A retrospective review of our institutional electronic medical record was conducted to identify patients with lymphoma who received HDMTX between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2018. We characterized the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality across 48-hour MTX levels. To establish an association between 48-hour MTX levels and the complications listed, we performed chi-square analysis for dichotomous variables and Kruskal-Wallis for nonparametric data. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was performed to identify the MTX level where AKI grade ≥ 2 was more likely. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for this MTX level. RESULTS: We identified 642 patients with 2,804 cycles of HDMTX. The incidence of AKI was 19.1% with AKI grade ≥ 2 making up 21% of cases. Rates of AKI, ICU admission, and 30-day mortality are associated with elevated 48-hour MTX levels. There was a significant increase in median LOS with elevated MTX levels (P < .001). Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis for AKI grade ≥ 2 demonstrated a 48-hour MTX level threshold of 1.28 µmol/L. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed age, male sex, elevated body surface area, higher MTX dose, monotherapy, and first cycle as independent factors. CONCLUSION: Elevated MTX levels are associated with a significant increased rate of AKI, ICU admission, prolonged LOS, and 30-day mortality. Elevated 48-hour MTX levels, particularly > 1.28 µmol/L, should alert clinicians for complications and to initiate measures to reduce MTX levels.