Cardiovascular Management of Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: From Pretransplantation to Survivorship: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation can cure various disorders but poses cardiovascular risks, especially for elderly patients and those with cardiovascular diseases. Cardiovascular evaluations are crucial in pretransplantation assessments, but guidelines are lacking. This American Heart Association scientific statement summarizes the data on transplantation-related complications and provides guidance for the cardiovascular management throughout transplantation. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation consists of 4 phases: pretransplantation workup, conditioning therapy and infusion, immediate posttransplantation period, and long-term survivorship. Complications can occur during each phase, with long-term survivors facing increased risks for late effects such as cardiovascular disease, secondary malignancies, and endocrinopathies. In adults, arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation and flutter are the most frequent acute cardiovascular complication. Acute heart failure has an incidence ranging from 0.4% to 2.2%. In pediatric patients, left ventricular systolic dysfunction and pericardial effusion are the most common cardiovascular complications. Factors influencing the incidence and risk of complications include pretransplantation therapies, transplantation type (autologous versus allogeneic), conditioning regimen, comorbid conditions, and patient age. The pretransplantation cardiovascular evaluation consists of 4 steps: (1) initial risk stratification, (2) exclusion of high-risk cardiovascular disease, (3) assessment of cardiac reserve, and (4) optimization of cardiovascular reserve. Clinical risk scores could be useful tools for the risk stratification of adult patients. Long-term cardiovascular management of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation survivors includes optimizing risk factors, monitoring, and maintaining a low threshold for evaluating cardiovascular causes of symptoms. Future research should prioritize refining risk stratification and creating evidence-based guidelines and strategies to optimize outcomes in this growing patient population.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

An ERK5-NRF2 Axis Mediates Senescence-Associated Stemness and Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: ERK5 (extracellular signal-regulated kinase 5) is a dual kinase transcription factor containing an N-terminal kinase domain and a C-terminal transcriptional activation domain. Many ERK5 kinase inhibitors have been developed and tested to treat cancer and inflammatory diseases. However, recent data have raised questions about the role of the catalytic activity of ERK5 in proliferation and inflammation. We aimed to investigate how ERK5 reprograms myeloid cells to the proinflammatory senescent phenotype, subsequently leading to atherosclerosis. METHODS: A ERK5 S496A (dephosphorylation mimic) knock in (KI) mouse model was generated using CRISPR/Cas9 (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat-associated 9), and atherosclerosis was characterized by hypercholesterolemia induction. The plaque phenotyping in homozygous ERK5 S496A KI and wild type (WT) mice was studied using imaging mass cytometry. Bone marrow-derived macrophages were isolated from hypercholesterolemic mice and characterized using RNA sequencing and functional in vitro approaches, including senescence, mitochondria reactive oxygen species, and inflammation assays, as well as by metabolic extracellular flux analysis. RESULTS: We show that atherosclerosis was inhibited in ERK5 S496A KI mice. Furthermore, ERK5 S496 phosphorylation mediates both senescence-associated secretory phenotype and senescence-associated stemness by upregulating AHR (aryl hydrocarbon receptor) in plaque and bone marrow-derived macrophages isolated from hypercholesterolemic mice. We also discovered that ERK5 S496 phosphorylation could induce NRF2 (NFE2-related factor 2) SUMOylation at a novel K518 site to inhibit NRF2 transcriptional activity without altering ERK5 catalytic activity and mediates oxidized LDL (low-density lipoprotein)-induced senescence-associated secretory phenotype. Specific ERK5 kinase inhibitors (AX15836 and XMD8-92) also inhibited ERK5 S496 phosphorylation, suggesting the involvement of ERK5 S496 phosphorylation in the anti-inflammatory effects of these ERK5 kinase inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: We discovered a novel mechanism by which the macrophage ERK5-NRF2 axis develops a unique senescence-associated secretory phenotype/stemness phenotype by upregulating AHR to engender atherogenesis. The finding of senescence-associated stemness phenotype provides a molecular explanation to resolve the paradox of senescence in proliferative plaque by permitting myeloid cells to escape the senescence-induced cell cycle arrest during atherosclerosis formation.

In adults with overweight or obesity and CVD, but without diabetes, semaglutide reduced MACE at a mean 40 mo.

SOURCE CITATION: Lincoff AM, Brown-Frandsen K, Colhoun HM, et al; SELECT Trial Investigators. Semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in obesity without diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:2221-2232. 37952131.

Evaluation of Midodrine Utilization in Patients with Cancer and Heart Failure.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate safety and cardiovascular outcomes as well as overall survival of cancer patients with concomitant heart failure (HF) treated with midodrine for hypotension. METHODS: Adult patients diagnosed with cancer and HF who were treated with midodrine at a tertiary cancer center from 03/2013 to 08/2021 were identified. Demographic and clinical parameters were collected retrospectively. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients were included with a median age of 68 years (IQR: 60, 74; 33% female and 85% White). Of those, 31% had HFpEF (EF ≥ 50%), 42% HF with mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF; EF 41-49%), and 27% HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%). The most common indication for midodrine use was orthostatic hypotension (49%). Midodrine was continued for at least one month in 57% of the patients. Supine hypertension was the only side effect reported in 6% of patients. No statistically significant changes in NYHA class, guideline-directed medical therapy, cardiac biomarkers (NT-proBNP or troponin T), echocardiographic findings or cardiovascular hospitalizations were observed between patients who continued treatment with midodrine compared to those who stopped using midodrine over a median follow-up of 38 months. In the multivariable cox regression analysis, continuation of midodrine, compared to discontinuation, and use of midodrine for orthostatic hypotension, as opposed to other causes of hypotension, were not associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24-0.69, p < .0001; HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18-0.64, p < .001, respectively). In contrast, elevated creatinine (> 1.3 for males and > 1.1 for females) was associated with an increased risk of mortality (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.07-3.14). LVEF was not significantly associated with lower or higher risk of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, midodrine use in patients with cancer and HF was not associated with significant adverse effects, worse cardiovascular outcomes, or increased risk of mortality. Larger, prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

In thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome, DOACs vs. VKAs increase arterial thrombotic events but not major bleeding.

SOURCE CITATION: Khairani CD, Bejjani A, Piazza G, et al. Direct oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonists in patients with antiphospholipid syndromes: meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2023;81:16-30. 36328154.

In patients with HFpEF and obesity, semaglutide increased weight loss and reduced symptoms and physical limitations at 52 wk.

SOURCE CITATION: Kosiborod MN, Abildstrøm SZ, Borlaug BA, et al; STEP-HFpEF Trial Committees and Investigators. Semaglutide in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and obesity. N Engl J Med. 2023;389:1069-1084. 37622681.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary.

BACKGROUND: The 2022 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America (AHA/ACC/HFSA) Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure replaces the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure and the 2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose and manage patients with heart failure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews and other evidence conducted in human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies published through September 2021 were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments that have high-quality published economic analyses.

Cardiovascular events in patients treated with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for aggressive B-cell lymphoma.

Standard of care (SOC) chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies such as axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are associated with multisystem toxicities. There is limited information available about cardiovascular (CV) events associated with SOC axi-cel or tisa-cel. Patients with CV comorbidities, organ dysfunction, or lower performance status were often excluded in the clinical trials leading to their Food and Drug Adminsitration approval. An improved understanding of CV toxicities in the real-world setting will better inform therapy selection and management of patients receiving these cellular therapies. Here, we retrospectively reviewed the characteristics and outcomes of adult patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma treated with SOC axi-cel or tisa-cel. Among the 165 patients evaluated, 27 (16%) developed at least one 30-day (30-d) major adverse CV event (MACE). Cumulatively, these patients experienced 21 arrhythmias, four exacerbations of heart failure/cardiomyopathy, four cerebrovascular accidents, three myocardial infarctions, and one patient died due to myocardial infaction. Factors significantly associated with an increased risk of 30-d MACE included age ≥60 years, an earlier start of cytokine release syndrome (CRS), CRS ≥ grade 3, long duration of CRS, and use of tocilizumab. After a median follow-up time of 16.2 months (range, 14.3-19.1), the occurrence of 30-d MACE was not significantly associated with progression-free survival or with overall survival. Our results suggest that the occurrence of 30-d MACE is more frequent among patients who are elderly, with early, severe, and prolonged CRS. However, with limited follow-up, larger prospective studies are needed, and multidisciplinary management of these patients is recommended.

Can We Mitigate Coronary Heart Disease Risk in Patients with Cancer?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The review focuses on the shared risk factors observed between coronary heart disease and cancer, cancer therapeutics causing coronary heart disease, and potential strategies to mitigate atherosclerosis in patients with cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: The pathophysiology behind how traditional cardiovascular risk factors also contribute to cancer development and mortality is increasingly recognized. In addition, newer cancer therapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, cause increased inflammation leading to increased cardiovascular events. Traditional coronary heart disease risk factors such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia also contribute to cancer development and worse cancer outcomes. Cancer therapeutics can also lead to atherosclerotic events in addition to the shared risk factors present at the time of cancer diagnosis. Understanding the pathophysiology, using multidisciplinary care teams, and developing machine learning algorithms for individualized patient care will help to mitigate the risk of coronary heart disease in patients with cancer.

Association of clonal hematopoiesis mutations with clinical outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Clonal hematopoiesis (CH) mutations are common among individuals without known hematologic disease. CH mutations have been associated with numerous adverse clinical outcomes across many different studies. We systematically reviewed the available literature for clinical outcomes associated with CH mutations in patients without hematologic disease. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus for eligible studies. Three investigators independently extracted the data, and each study was verified by a second author. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We identified 32 studies with 56 cohorts that examine the association between CH mutations and clinical outcomes. We conducted meta-analyses comparing outcomes among individuals with and without detectable CH mutations. We conducted meta-analyses for cardiovascular diseases (nine studies; HR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.26-2.07, p = .0002), hematologic malignancies (seven studies; HR = 5.59, 95% CI = 3.31-9.45, p < .0001), therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (four studies; HR = 7.55, 95% CI = 4.3-13.57, p < .001), and death (nine studies; HR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.2-1.5, p < .0001). The cardiovascular disease analysis was further stratified by variant allele fraction (VAF) and gene, which showed a statistically significant association only with a VAF of ≥ 10% (HR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.24-1.62, p < .0001), as well as statistically significant associations for each gene examined with the largest magnitude of effect found for CH mutations in JAK2 (HR = 3.5, 95% CI = 1.84-6.68, p < .0001). Analysis of the association of CH mutations with hematologic malignancy demonstrated a numeric stepwise increase in risk with increasing VAF thresholds. This analysis strongly supports the association of CH mutations with a clinically meaningful increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes among individuals without hematologic disease, particularly with increasing VAF thresholds.

Radiation-Induced Cardiovascular Disease: Mechanisms, Prevention, and Treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite the advancements of modern radiotherapy, radiation-induced cardiovascular disease (RICVD) remains a common cause of morbidity and mortality among cancer survivors. RECENT FINDINGS: Proposed pathogenetic mechanisms of RICVD include endothelial cell damage with accelerated atherosclerosis, pro-thrombotic alterations in the coagulation pathway as well as inflammation and fibrosis of the myocardial, pericardial, valvular, and conduction tissues. Prevention of RICVD can be achieved by minimizing the exposure of the cardiovascular system to radiation, by treatment of underlying cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular disease, and possibly by prophylactic pharmacotherapy post exposure. Herein we summarize current knowledge on the mechanisms underlying the pathogenesis of RICVD and propose prevention and treatment strategies.

In older patients with permanent AF and HF, digoxin and bisoprolol did not differ for QoL at 6 mo.

SOURCE CITATION: Kotecha D, Bunting KV, Gill SK, et al. Effect of digoxin vs bisoprolol for heart rate control in atrial fibrillation on patient-reported quality of life: the RATE-AF randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324:2497-508. 33351042.

Myocardial Dysfunction in Patients with Cancer.

Myocardial dysfunction in patients with cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Cancer therapy-related cardiotoxicities are an important contributor to the development of cardiomyopathy in this patient population. Furthermore, cardiac AL amyloidosis, cardiac malignancies/metastases, accelerated atherosclerosis, stress cardiomyopathy, systemic and pulmonary hypertension are also linked to the development of myocardial dysfunction. Herein, we summarize current knowledge on the mechanisms of myocardial dysfunction in the setting of cancer and cancer-related therapies. Additionally, we briefly outline key recommendations on the surveillance and management of cancer therapy-related myocardial dysfunction based on the consensus of experts in the field of cardio-oncology.

2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Aim This executive summary of the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy clinical practice guideline provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to diagnose and manage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in adult and pediatric patients as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to April 30, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Structure Many recommendations from the earlier hypertrophic cardiomyopathy guidelines have been updated with new evidence or a better understanding of earlier evidence. This summary operationalizes the recommendations from the full guideline and presents a combination of diagnostic work-up, genetic and family screening, risk stratification approaches, lifestyle modifications, surgical and catheter interventions, and medications that constitute components of guideline directed medical therapy. For both guideline-directed medical therapy and other recommended drug treatment regimens, the reader is advised to follow dosing, contraindications and drug-drug interactions based on product insert materials.

COVID-19 myocarditis and long-term heart failure sequelae.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The clinical syndrome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a global pandemic leading to significant morbidity and mortality. Cardiac dysfunction is commonly seen in these patients, often presenting as clinical heart failure. Accordingly, we aim to provide a comprehensive review on COVID-19 myocarditis and its long-term heart failure sequelae. RECENT FINDINGS: Several suspected cases of COVID-19 myocarditis have been reported. It is often not clear if the acute myocardial dysfunction is caused by myocarditis or secondary to generalized inflammatory state of cytokine release or microvascular thrombotic angiopathy. Ischemia may also need to be ruled out. Regardless, myocardial dysfunction in these patients is associated with poor overall prognosis. Laboratory testing, echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and even endomyocardial biopsy may be needed for timely diagnosis. Several treatment strategies have been described, including both supportive and targeted therapies. SUMMARY: COVID-19 can cause a spectrum of ventricular dysfunction ranging from mild disease to fulminant myocarditis with hemodynamic instability. Future research is needed to understand the true prevalence of COVID-19 myocarditis, as well as to better define various diagnostic protocols and treatment strategies.

Anemia in Cardiovascular Disease: Marker of Disease Severity or Disease-modifying Therapeutic Target?

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW: In this review paper, we examine the latest evidence regarding the use of iron supplementation, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), and blood transfusions as therapeutic targets for anemia to mitigate morbidity and mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FC) injections in heart failure (HF) have resulted in improved self-reported patient symptoms; higher exercise capacity, as measured by 6-min walk test distance in anemic patients; and lower re-hospitalization rates in iron deficient patients. Darbepoetin alfa has shown evidence of improved Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores. No mortality benefits have been noted thus far with FC injections or darbepoetin in HF, with an increase in adverse events with darbepoetin. Aggressive transfusions (Hg < 10 g/dL) are not associated with improved outcomes in cardiovascular disease. Quality of life metrics, rather than mortality, appear to improve with IV FC and ESA use in HF. More studies are required to see if these treatments have a role in coronary artery disease. Current evidence suggests that anemia is a marker of underlying disease severity, with a limited role in disease modification. Further studies are required to solidify our understanding of this topic.

Geographical Differences in Cardiovascular Comorbidities and Outcomes of COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular comorbidities may predispose to adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, across the USA, the burden of cardiovascular comorbidities varies significantly. Whether clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 differ between regions has not yet been studied systematically. Here, we report differences in underlying cardiovascular comorbidities and clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Texas and in New York state. METHODS: We established a multicenter retrospective registry including patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 15 and July 12, 2020. Demographic and clinical data were manually retrieved from electronic medical records. We focused on the following outcomes: mortality, need for pharmacologic circulatory support, need for mechanical ventilation, and need for hemodialysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Patients in the Texas cohort (n = 296) were younger (57 vs. 63 years, p value <0.001), they had a higher BMI (30.3 kg/m2 vs. 28.5 kg/m2, p = 0.015), and they had higher rates of diabetes mellitus (41 vs. 30%; p = 0.014). In contrast, patients in the New York state cohort (n = 218) had higher rates of coronary artery disease (19 vs. 10%, p = 0.005) and atrial fibrillation (11 vs. 5%, p = 0.012). Pharmacologic circulatory support, mechanical ventilation, and hemodialysis were more frequent in the Texas cohort (21 vs. 13%, p = 0.020; 30 vs. 12%, p < 0.001; and 11 vs. 5%, p = 0.009, respectively). In-hospital mortality was similar between the 2 cohorts (16 vs. 18%, p = 0.469). After adjusting for differences in underlying comorbidities, only the use of mechanical ventilation remained significantly higher in the participating Texas hospitals (odds ratios [95% CI]: 3.88 [1.23, 12.24]). Median time to pharmacologic circulatory support was 8 days (interquartile range: 2, 13.8) in the Texas cohort compared to 1 day (0, 3) in the New York state cohort, while median time to in-hospital mortality was 16 days (10, 25.5) and 7 days (4, 14), respectively (both p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was higher in the late versus the early study phase in the New York state cohort (24 vs. 14%, p = 0.050), while it was similar between the 2 phases in the Texas cohort (16 vs. 15%, p = 0.741). CONCLUSIONS: Geographical differences, including practice pattern variations and the impact of disease burden on provision of health care, are important for the evaluation of COVID-19 outcomes. Unadjusted data may cause bias affecting future regulatory policies and proper allocation of resources.