Meaningful Change Thresholds and Fatigue Severity Points on Patient-Reported Outcomes by the Fatigue Symptoms and Impacts Questionnaire in Patients With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis.

OBJECTIVES: The Fatigue Symptoms and Impacts Questionnaire-Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (FSIQ-RMS) is a new content-valid, concise, and reliable 20-item patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate the symptoms and impacts of fatigue in patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis. Analyses were performed to derive meaningful change thresholds (MCTs) on patient-reported outcomes as measured by FSIQ-RMS and generate receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to determine fatigue severity cut points at baseline and change in severity at post-baseline and supplement the anchor-based MCT results. METHODS: Analyses were based on data from the OPTIMUM trial (NCT02425644). An anchor-based approach using uncollapsed changes on the Patient Global Impression of Severity at week 108 were used to determine the MCT for only the FSIQ-RMS Symptoms domain; distribution-based MCT estimations were conducted using baseline FSIQ-RMS Impacts scores. ROC curves with calculation of area under the curve were used to identify the best cut point. RESULTS: Based on the evidence provided by the anchor-based analyses using the Patient Global Impression of Severity as an anchor for the FSIQ-RMS Symptoms domain, meaningful score changes for improvement and deterioration were -6.3 and 6.3, respectively. Meaningful score changes for the FSIQ-RMS Physical, Cognitive/Emotional, and Coping Impacts domains using distribution-based methods were 10.8, 8.4, and 9.8, respectively. These results are supported by the ROC analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Thresholds to support interpretation of the FSIQ-RMS, such as MCTs, can be used to determine and categorize patients who have experienced a meaningful change in their MS-related fatigue (eg, responder analyses) in future clinical research studies.

A Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis of the Psychiatrist Decision-Making Process Used in Determining When to Discharge Adults With Major Depressive Disorder Hospitalized for Active Suicidal Ideation With Intent.

ABSTRACT: To ascertain the relative importance of attributes considered when deciding to discharge patients hospitalized with major depressive disorder (MDD) and active suicidal ideation with intent, a choice-based conjoint analysis was conducted via online survey among US-based psychiatrists actively managing such patients. Potential attributes and attribute levels were identified. Attribute importance in decision to discharge and the discharge time frame were assessed. One hundred psychiatrists completed the survey. The relative importance of attributes were current MDD severity (relative importance weight [out of 100] 24.8 [95% confidence interval, 23.3-26.3]), clinician assessment of current suicidal ideation (20.8 [18.5-23.0]), previous history of suicide attempts (16.7 [15.9-17.6]), psychosocial support at discharge (13.0 [11.7-14.4]), postdischarge outpatient follow-up (9.8 [8.8-10.8]), current length of hospital stay (9.2 [8.1-10.3]), and suicidal ideation at admission (5.7 [4.8-6.6]). Thus, current clinical symptoms were considered the most important attributes by psychiatrists when discharging patients initially hospitalized with MDD and active suicidal ideation with intent.

Microbiome-Gut-Brain Axis: Probiotics and Their Association With Depression.

To assess the association of probiotics with depression, a large population-based cross-sectional study was conducted. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey adult participants from 2005 through 2012 were included. Exposure was defined as having consumed any probiotic food or supplement on any of the interview days. Subjects were classified as depressed if Patient Health Questionnaire scores were ≥10. Of the 18,019 subjects included, 14.11% consumed probiotics. Unadjusted analysis suggested that subjects who consumed probiotics had lower odds of depression (OR=0.58, 95% CI=0.45-0.75). After adjustment for characteristics associated with depression and probiotic exposure, the effect was attenuated (OR=0.82, 95% CI=0.61-1.1) and no longer significant. Use of probiotics is not associated with lower rates of depression in this national sample.

Development of patient- and observer-reported outcome measures to assess COVID-19 signs and symptoms in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC) is a 30-item patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate the presence and severity of COVID-19 signs/symptoms in adults. This study expanded the context of use of the adult SIC among adolescents aged 12-17 years and supported a pediatric adaptation (the Pediatric SIC [PedSIC]) for caregiver assessment of signs/symptoms in children aged < 12 years. METHODS: Draft versions of the PedSIC and reference materials containing sign/symptom definitions for adolescents, based on an assessment of the reading level of SIC items by a professional linguist, were developed to facilitate accurate completion of the SIC by adolescents and observer-report (PedSIC) by caregivers. For adolescents, reference materials were intended to provide definitions for selected signs/symptoms identified to have a higher reading level. Iterative rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted from November 2020 to January 2021 to evaluate adolescent understanding of the SIC reference materials and inform refinement of the PedSIC for caregivers of children too young to reliably self-report. Participants were identified via databases of individuals who previously expressed interest in participating in qualitative research and were then screened for eligibility. Recruitment quotas were established to improve sample diversity. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used to assess qualitative and demographic data, respectively. RESULTS: Nine healthy adolescents (mean [SD, range] age, 14 [1.76, 12-17] years, 56% female, 22% non-White; round 1, n = 6; round 2, n = 3) and 17 caregivers (mean [SD, range] age, 34 [6.28, 26-41] years, 59% female, 35% non-White; round 1, n = 9; round 2, n = 8) were interviewed. Adolescents understood the majority of signs/symptoms (22 of the 30 SIC items) without assistance or use of the reference materials during the cognitive debriefing interview. Definitions were added to the reference materials for 5 additional items, and clarifications provided to existing definitions for 3 items. Seven observer-report (PedSIC) items were modified following feedback from caregivers of healthy young children. Reference materials (similar to those for adolescent use) were developed to support caregiver understanding of the intent of the PedSIC items collecting input from children ages ≥ 5- < 12 years. CONCLUSIONS: Results support using the SIC, PedSIC, and their associated reference materials to evaluate the presence and severity of COVID-19 signs/symptoms in adolescents and children aged < 12 years via caregiver-supported report, respectively.

How can patient preferences be used and communicated in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products? Findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER and call to action.

Objective: Patients have unique insights and are (in-)directly affected by each decision taken throughout the life cycle of medicinal products. Patient preference studies (PPS) assess what matters most to patients, how much, and what trade-offs patients are willing to make. IMI PREFER was a six-year European public-private partnership under the Innovative Medicines Initiative that developed recommendations on how to assess and use PPS in medical product decision-making, including in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products. This paper aims to summarize findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER regarding i) PPS applications in regulatory evaluation, ii) when and how to consult with regulators on PPS, iii) how to reflect PPS in regulatory communication and iv) barriers and open questions for PPS in regulatory decision-making. Methods: PREFER performed six literature reviews, 143 interviews and eight focus group discussions with regulators, patient representatives, industry representatives, Health Technology Assessment bodies, payers, academics, and clincians between October 2016 and May 2022. Results: i) With respect to PPS applications, prior to the conduct of clinical trials of medicinal products, PPS could inform regulators' understanding of patients' unmet needs and relevant endpoints during horizon scanning activities and scientific advice. During the evaluation of a marketing authorization application, PPS could inform: a) the assessment of whether a product meets an unmet need, b) whether patient-relevant clinical trial endpoints and outcomes were studied, c) the understanding of patient-relevant effect sizes and acceptable trade-offs, and d) the identification of key (un-)favorable effects and uncertainties. ii) With respect to consulting with regulators on PPS, PPS researchers should ideally have early discussions with regulators (e.g., during scientific advice) on the PPS design and research questions. iii) Regarding external PPS communication, PPS could be reflected in the assessment report and product information (e.g., the European Public Assessment Report and the Summary of Product Characteristics). iv) Barriers relevant to the use of PPS in regulatory evaluation include a lack of PPS use cases and demonstrated impact on regulatory decision-making, and need for (financial) incentives, guidance and quality criteria for implementing PPS results in regulatory decision-making. Open questions concerning regulatory PPS use include: a) should a product independent broad approach to the design of PPS be taken and/or a product-specific one, b) who should optimally be financing, designing, conducting, and coordinating PPS, c) when (within and/or outside clinical trials) to perform PPS, and d) how can PPS use best be operationalized in regulatory decisions. Conclusion: PPS have high potential to inform regulators on key unmet needs, endpoints, benefits, and risks that matter most to patients and their acceptable trade-offs. Regulatory guidelines, templates and checklists, together with incentives are needed to foster structural and transparent PPS submission and evaluation in regulatory decision-making. More PPS case studies should be conducted and submitted for regulatory assessment to enable regulatory discussion and increase regulators' experience with PPS implementation and communication in regulatory evaluations.

Psychometric evaluation of the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC): results from a cross-sectional study and a phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC) is a 30-item patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure scored by body system composites to assess signs/symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In addition to cross-sectional and longitudinal psychometric evaluations, qualitative exit interviews were conducted to support the content validity of the SIC. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, adults diagnosed with COVID-19 in the United States completed the web-based SIC and additional PRO measures. A subset was invited to participate in phone-based exit interviews. Longitudinal psychometric properties were assessed in ENSEMBLE2, a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of the Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine. Psychometric properties evaluated included structure, scoring, reliability, construct validity, discriminating ability, responsiveness, and meaningful change thresholds of SIC items and composite scores. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional study, 152 participants completed the SIC (mean age, 51.0 ± 18.6 years) and 20 completed follow-up interviews. Fatigue (77.6%), feeling unwell (65.8%), and cough (60.5%) were symptoms most frequently reported. SIC inter-item correlations were all positive and mostly moderate (r ≥ 0.3) and statistically significant. SIC items and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) scores correlated as hypothesized (all r ≥ 0.32). Internal consistency reliabilities of all SIC composite scores were satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha, 0.69-0.91). SIC composite scores correlated moderately (r = 0.30-0.49) to strongly (r ≥ 0.50) with PROMIS-29 scores and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) ratings (all P < 0.01). A variety of signs/symptoms were cited in exit interviews, and participants considered the SIC straightforward, comprehensive, and easy to use. From ENSEMBLE2, 183 participants with laboratory-confirmed moderate to severe/critical COVID-19 were included (51.5 ± 14.8 years). Strong test-retest reliabilities were observed for most SIC composite scores (intraclass correlations ≥ 0.60). Statistically significant differences across PGIS severity levels were found for all but 1 composite score, supporting known-groups validity. All SIC composite scores demonstrated responsiveness based on changes in PGIS. CONCLUSIONS: The psychometric evaluations provided strong evidence for the reliability and validity of the SIC for measuring COVID-19 symptoms, supporting its use in vaccine and treatment trials. In exit interviews, participants described a broad range of signs/symptoms consistent with previous research, further supporting the content validity and format of the SIC.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a serious disease that continues to evolve globally. Researchers developed the Symptoms of Infection with Coronavirus-19 (SIC), a 30-item questionnaire designed for patients to report signs and symptoms of COVID-19. In this study, the researchers formally analyzed how well the SIC measures the patient experience with COVID-19, using survey and clinical trial data as well as telephone interviews. Adults with COVID-19 and at least 2 bothersome symptoms completed the web-based survey, and some of these individuals also participated in in-depth interviews. Participants in a clinical trial for a COVID-19 vaccine also completed the SIC measure. The SIC was compared with other commonly used questionnaires that evaluate patient experience. The most commonly reported symptoms of COVID-19 were fatigue, feeling unwell, cough, weakness, and headache. The items for individual symptoms (e.g., "cough") and combined scores for body systems (e.g., "respiratory system") performed well in statistical analyses. Participants found the SIC to be straightforward, comprehensive, and easy to use. The SIC may prove useful in the future for vaccine and treatment trials for COVID-19.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Patient-Focused Drug Development Initiative: Experience with Integration of Patient-Experience Data in a New Drug Application for Esketamine Nasal Spray Plus a Newly Initiated Oral Antidepressant for Treatment-Resistant Depression.

The Patient-Focused Drug Development initiative of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) aims to ensure that the patient experience of disease and treatment is an integral component of the drug development process. The 21st Century Cures Act and Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) VI require the FDA to publicly report the type of patient-experience data reviewed in a new drug application (NDA) to inform regulatory decision-making. This report describes a recent approach adopted at Janssen of integrating patient-experience data into the NDA for esketamine (SPRAVATO®) nasal spray with a newly initiated oral antidepressant (esketamine + AD) for treatment-resistant depression. During the development of esketamine + AD, patient-experience data were collected using several patient-reported outcomes, including the Sheehan Disability Scale and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Additionally, a patient-preference study assessed the relative importance of benefits and harms that patients allocated to different attributes of treatment. Preferences were collected from patients enrolled in phase 3 esketamine trials and from an online panel of primarily ketamine-naive patients. Patient-experience data were integrated into the esketamine NDA, the FDA advisory committee meeting briefing document, and the Sponsor's presentation. The FDA acknowledged reviewing the patient-experience data and determined that they supported esketamine + AD for treatment-resistant depression. This report highlights the importance of integrating patient-experience methods early in drug development, their impact on assessing patient-relevant benefits and risks, and how they can help improve clinical program design.

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Esketamine Nasal Spray vs. Placebo in Treatment-Resistant Depression.

This post hoc analysis assessed the benefit-risk profile of esketamine nasal spray + oral antidepressant (AD) induction and maintenance treatment in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The Benefit-Risk Action Team framework was utilized to assess the benefit-risk profile using data from three induction studies and one maintenance study. Benefits were proportion of remitters or responders in induction studies and proportion of stable remitters or stable responders who remained relapse-free in the maintenance study. Risks were death, suicidal ideation, most common adverse events (AEs), and potential long-term risks. Per 100 patients on esketamine + AD vs. AD + placebo in induction therapy, 5-21 additional patients would remit and 14-17 additional patients would respond. In maintenance therapy, 19-32 fewer relapses would occur with esketamine. In both cases, there was little difference in serious or severe common AEs (primarily dissociation, vertigo, and dizziness). These findings support a positive benefit-risk balance for esketamine + AD as induction and maintenance treatment in patients with TRD.

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment: A Qualitative Study Protocol Among Advanced Lung Cancer Patients.

Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing qualitative studies to understand which treatment aspects are most valued by patients in drug development, regulation, and reimbursement.

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatments: A Study Protocol for a Preference Survey Using Discrete Choice Experiment and Swing Weighting.

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit-risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perform against each other in eliciting patient preferences. Overall, this protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing quantitative patient preferences into decision-making along the medical product life cycle.

Evaluating the Effect of Standard of Care Treatment on Burden of Chronic Hepatitis B: A Retrospective Analysis of the United States Veterans Population.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to characterize chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-infected patients and estimate the association between nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) persistence and economic outcomes using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database. METHODS: Patients (at least 18 years of age) with two or more claims for CHB and at least one pharmacy claim for NA were identified using VHA data from 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2018. The index date was the first NA prescription fill date during 1 October 2014 to 31 March 2017. Persistence and non-persistence to NA treatment were assessed during the first 2 years post index date. Non-persistence was defined as at least one failure to refill medication within 30 days from the run-out date. Generalized linear models were used to compare health care utilization and costs between persistent and non-persistent patients. RESULTS: Among patients treated with NAs (N = 2368), 1428 (60%) were CHB mono-infected and 748 (32%) were HIV co-infected. Total costs per patient per year (PPPY) were $39,240, $29,957, and $55,220 PPPY for NA-treated, mono-infected, and HIV co-infected patients, respectively. An inception cohort of 564 patients (24%), without a NA prescription in the 6 months pre-index period and at least 2 years of follow-up, was created. Persistence among the inception cohort was 29% for first year and 14% for first 2 years. After adjustment for baseline differences, persistent patients had lower cumulative overall health care costs compared to non-persistent patients, with a net cost saving of $851 (p > 0.05) in the first 2 years. CONCLUSION: CHB is associated with considerable economic burden. We observed suboptimal persistence to NAs which decreased over time. Short-term savings could be generated for CHB-infected patients when they remain persistent to NAs.

The atopic dermatitis itch scale: development of a new measure to assess pruritus in patients with atopic dermatitis.

Introduction: Pruritus is the primary symptom of atopic dermatitis (AD). The objective of this study was to develop a patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument for daily administration in clinical trials to measure AD-related itch in adolescents and adults that would meet the standards described in the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) PRO Guidance.Materials and methods: Six focus groups were conducted with 49 patients with AD (32 adults; 17 adolescents). Three iterative rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted in 26 patients with AD (17 adults; 9 adolescents) to pretest and refine the instrument.Results: AD-related itching was considered the most bothersome AD symptom by nearly two-thirds of the focus group participants. The items in the initial version of the instrument, named the Atopic Dermatitis Itch Scale (ADIS), were developed to reflect concepts most relevant to the assessment of itching as described during the focus groups. Based on results of the cognitive debriefing interviews, an 8-item final version of the ADIS was created.Conclusion: The ADIS is a content valid PRO instrument addressing the concepts critical to the measurement of AD-related itching. To our knowledge, it is the first instrument developed to assess AD-related itch in patients as young as 12 years following the recommendations of the PRO Guidance.

Impact of body mass index on incident hypertension and diabetes in Chinese Asians, American Whites, and American Blacks: the People's Republic of China Study and the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study.

Researchers have hypothesized that the impact of body mass index on chronic disease may be greater in Asians than in Whites; however, most studies are cross-sectional and have no White comparison group. The authors compared the associations with body mass index in Chinese Asians (n = 5,980), American Whites (n = 10,776), and American Blacks (n = 3,582) using prospective data from the People's Republic of China Study (1983-1994) and the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study (1987-1998). Slopes of risk differences over body mass index levels were compared among the three ethnic groups in adjusted analyses. The authors found larger associations with body mass index in Chinese Asians compared with American Whites and Blacks for hypertension (p < 0.05). The increase in the incidence of hypertension associated with a one-unit increase in body mass index over approximately 8 years of follow-up was 2.5, 1.7, and 1.8 percentage points for Chinese Asians, American Whites, and American Blacks, respectively. For diabetes, the estimates were 1.7, 1.1, and 1.6 percentage points for the same groups- higher in Chinese Asians than in American Whites (p < 0.05) but similar between Chinese Asians and American Blacks. Given the ethnic differences in associations, the results support advocacy of public health and medical actions toward obesity prevention and treatment in China.

Physician and patient benefit-risk preferences from two randomized long-acting injectable antipsychotic trials.

PURPOSE: To quantify clinical trial participants' and investigators' judgments with respect to the relative importance of efficacy and safety attributes of antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia, and to assess the impact of formulation and adherence. METHODS: Discrete-choice experiment surveys were completed by patients with schizophrenia and physician investigators participating in two phase-3 clinical trials of paliperidone palmitate 3-month long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic. Respondents were asked to choose between hypothetical antipsychotic profiles defined by efficacy, safety, and mode of administration. Data were analyzed using random-parameters logit and probit models. RESULTS: Patients (N=214) and physicians (N=438) preferred complete improvement in positive symptoms (severe to none) as the most important attribute, compared with improvement in any other attribute studied. Both respondents preferred 3-month and 1-month injectables to oral formulation (P<0.05), irrespective of prior adherence to oral antipsychotic treatment, with physicians showing greater preference for a 3-month over a 1-month LAI for nonadherent patients. Physicians were willing to accept treatments with reduced efficacy for patients with prior poor adherence. The maximum decrease in efficacy (95% confidence interval [CI]) that physicians would accept for switching a patient from daily oral to 3-month injectable was as follows: adherent: 9.8% (95% CI: 7.2-12.4), 20% nonadherent: 25.4% (95% CI: 21.0-29.9), and 50% nonadherent: >30%. For patients, adherent: 10.1% (95% CI: 6.1-14.1), nonadherent: the change in efficacy studied was regarded as unimportant. CONCLUSION: Improvement in positive symptoms was the most important attribute. Patients and physicians preferred LAIs over oral antipsychotics, with physicians showing a greater preference for 3-month over 1-month LAI. Physicians and patients were willing to accept reduced efficacy in exchange for switching a patient from an oral formulation to a LAI.

Long-term Anticoagulation With Rivaroxaban for Preventing Recurrent VTE: A Benefit-Risk Analysis of EINSTEIN-Extension.

BACKGROUND: Short-term anticoagulant treatment for acute DVT or pulmonary embolism (PE) effectively reduces the risk of recurrent disease during the first 6 to 12 months of therapy. Continued anticoagulation often is not instituted because of the perception among physicians that the risk of major bleeding will outweigh the risk of new venous thrombotic episodes. METHODS: The authors performed a benefit-risk analysis by using the randomized EINSTEIN-Extension trial, which compared continued rivaroxaban with placebo in 1,197 patients with symptomatic DVT or PE who had completed 6 to 12 months of anticoagulation and in whom physicians had equipoise with respect to the need for continued anticoagulation. One-year Kaplan-Meier rates and rate differences of recurrent VTE and major bleeding were calculated. Benefits and risks were assessed using rate differences scaled to a population size of 10,000 patients treated for 1 year. RESULTS: Recurrent VTE occurred in eight recipients of rivaroxaban and 42 patients receiving placebo. In a population of 10,000 patients treated for 1 year, rivaroxaban treatment would have resulted in 665 (95% CI, 246-1,084) fewer recurrent VTEs than would placebo (number needed to treat = 15). Major bleeding occurred in four (0.7%) and zero patients, respectively. Rivaroxaban treatment would have resulted in 68 (95% CI, 2-134) more major bleeding events than would placebo (number needed to harm = 147). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed early recurrent VTE reduction with rivaroxaban that continued to improve throughout treatment; major bleeding increased gradually, plateauing at approximately 100 days. CONCLUSIONS: A clinically important benefit and a favorable benefit-risk profile of continued rivaroxaban anticoagulation was observed. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00439725; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Associations of body mass index with incident hypertension in American white, American black and Chinese Asian adults in early and middle adulthood: the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and the People's Republic of China (PRC) study.

The association of body mass index (BMI) with blood pressure may be stronger in Asian than non-Asian populations, however, longitudinal studies with direct comparisons between ethnicities are lacking. We compared the relationship of BMI with incident hypertension over approximately 9.5 years of follow-up in young (24-39 years) and middle-aged (45-64 years) Chinese Asians (n=5354), American Blacks (n=6076) and American Whites (n=13451). We estimated risk differences using logistic regression models and calculated adjusted incidences and incidence differences. To facilitate comparisons across ethnicities, standardized estimates were calculated using mean covariate values for age, sex, smoking, education and field center, and included the quadratic terms for BMI and age. Weighted least-squares regression models with were constructed to summarize ethnic-specific incidence differences across BMI. Wald statistics and p-values were calculated based on chi-square distributions. The association of BMI with the incidence difference for hypertension was steeper in Chinese (p<0.05) than in American populations during young and middle-adulthood. For example, at a BMI of 25 vs 21 kg/m2 the adjusted incidence differences per 1000 persons (95% CI) in young adults with a BMI of 25 vs those with a BMI of 21 was 83 (36- 130) for Chinese, 50 (26-74) for Blacks and 30 (12-48) for Whites; among middle-aged adults it was 137 (77-198) for Chinese, 49 (9-88) for Blacks and 54 (38-69) for Whites. Whether hypertension carries the same level of risk of stroke or cardiovascular disease across national or ethnic groups remains uncertain.

Interactions between obesity, parental history of hypertension, and age on prevalent hypertension: the People's Republic of China Study.

Age, family history, and body mass index (BMI) influence the prevalence of hypertension, but very little is known about the interplay of these factors in Chinese populations. The authors examined this issue in Chinese adults (n = 4104) in the People's Republic of China Study. In young adults (24-39 years), the prevalence of hypertension/1000 persons (95% confidence interval [CI]) at the referent BMI was greater among subjects with a parental history of hypertension (35; 15-54) compared with those without (7; 3-11). Among middle-aged (40-71 years) adults, the prevalence of hypertension was similar regardless of parental history; however, the effect of BMI was modified by parental history status. For example, at BMI = 25 kg/m(2), the prevalence difference/1000 persons was 375 (95% CI = 245-506) and 97 (95% CI = 51-144) among subjects with and without a parental history, respectively. These large differences call for further investigation of the genetic and environmental factors that could be driving this interaction.

Hip circumference and incident metabolic risk factors in Chinese men and women: the People's Republic of China study.

BACKGROUND: The associations between adiposity and metabolic risk factors have been suggested to vary across ethnicities. Studies in Caucasians have shown that after adjusting for waist circumference and body mass index (BMI), a larger hip circumference may be protective for metabolic risk factors. To our knowledge, these associations have never been examined in a Chinese population. METHODS: Baseline (1987-1988) and follow-up (1993-1994) data were from the People's Republic of China Study (n = 1,144 men, n = 1,776 women). Logistic models were stratified by sex and adjusted for age, smoking, center, and education. Incidence differences (ID) comparing the sex specific 85(th) percentile to the 15(th) percentile of hip circumference were computed for elevated blood pressure, blood glucose and triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and multiple metabolic abnormalities (three or more of the aforementioned). RESULTS: In models adjusted for waist circumference and BMI, the ID [95% confidence interval (CI)] per 1,000 persons associated with a 12-cm larger hip were -132 (-237, -26) for low HDL-C; -85 (-138, -31) for elevated triglycerides; and -49 (-83, -4) for multiple metabolic abnormalities. In males, a larger hip circumference was not associated with a reduction of incident risk factors, although the ID tended to be negative. CONCLUSIONS: In Chinese women, greater mass in the lower trunk region was inversely associated with incident high triglycerides, low HDL-C, and multiple metabolic abnormalities when adjusted for general and central adiposity. This association was not detected in men. Additional research is needed to better understand the mechanisms by which fat at different depots results in differential risk.