Allopurinol and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease: the ALL-HEART RCT and economic evaluation.

Background: Allopurinol is a xanthine oxidase inhibitor that lowers serum uric acid and is used to prevent acute gout flares in patients with gout. Observational and small interventional studies have suggested beneficial cardiovascular effects of allopurinol. Objective: To determine whether allopurinol improves major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease. Design: Prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint multicentre clinical trial. Setting: Four hundred and twenty-four UK primary care practices. Participants: Aged 60 years and over with ischaemic heart disease but no gout. Interventions: Participants were randomised (1 : 1) using a central web-based randomisation system to receive allopurinol up to 600 mg daily that was added to usual care or to continue usual care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or cardiovascular death. Secondary outcomes were non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, hospitalisation for heart failure, hospitalisation for acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularisation, hospitalisation for acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularisation, all cardiovascular hospitalisations, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The hazard ratio (allopurinol vs. usual care) in a Cox proportional hazards model was assessed for superiority in a modified intention-to-treat analysis. Results: From 7 February 2014 to 2 October 2017, 5937 participants were enrolled and randomised to the allopurinol arm (n = 2979) or the usual care arm (n = 2958). A total of 5721 randomised participants (2853 allopurinol; 2868 usual care) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis population (mean age 72.0 years; 75.5% male). There was no difference between the allopurinol and usual care arms in the primary endpoint, 314 (11.0%) participants in the allopurinol arm (2.47 events per 100 patient-years) and 325 (11.3%) in the usual care arm (2.37 events per 100 patient-years), hazard ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.21); p = 0.65. Two hundred and eighty-eight (10.1%) participants in the allopurinol arm and 303 (10.6%) participants in the usual care arm died, hazard ratio 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.20); p = 0.77. The pre-specified health economic analysis plan was to perform a 'within trial' cost-utility analysis if there was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint, so NHS costs and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated over a 5-year period. The difference in costs between treatment arms was +£115 higher for allopurinol (95% confidence interval £17 to £210) with no difference in quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval -0.061 to +0.060). We conclude that there is no evidence that allopurinol used in line with the study protocol is cost-effective. Limitations: The results may not be generalisable to younger populations, other ethnic groups or patients with more acute ischaemic heart disease. One thousand six hundred and thirty-seven participants (57.4%) in the allopurinol arm withdrew from randomised treatment, but an on-treatment analysis gave similar results to the main analysis. Conclusions: The ALL-HEART study showed that treatment with allopurinol 600 mg daily did not improve cardiovascular outcomes compared to usual care in patients with ischaemic heart disease. We conclude that allopurinol should not be recommended for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with ischaemic heart disease but no gout. Future work: The effects of allopurinol on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease and co-existing hyperuricaemia or clinical gout could be explored in future studies. Trial registration: This trial is registered as EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2013-003559-39) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN 32017426). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 11/36/41) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 18. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The purpose of the ALL-HEART study was to determine whether giving allopurinol to people with ischaemic heart disease (also commonly known as coronary heart disease) would reduce their risk of having a heart attack, stroke or of dying from cardiovascular disease. Allopurinol is a medication usually given to patients with gout to prevent acute gout flares. It is not currently used to treat ischaemic heart disease. We randomly allocated people aged over 60 years with ischaemic heart disease to take up to 600 mg of allopurinol daily (in addition to their usual care) or to continue with their usual care. We then monitored participants for several years and recorded any major health events such as heart attacks, strokes and deaths. We obtained most of the follow-up data from centrally held electronic hospital admissions and death records, making the study easier for participants and more cost-efficient. We asked participants in both groups to complete questionnaires to assess their quality of life during the study. We also collected data to determine whether there was any economic benefit to the NHS of using allopurinol in patients with ischaemic heart disease. There was no difference in the risk of heart attacks, strokes or death from cardiovascular disease between the participants given allopurinol and those in the group continuing their usual care. We also found no difference in the risks of other cardiovascular events, deaths from any cause or quality-of-life measurements between the allopurinol and usual care groups. The results of the ALL-HEART study suggest that we should not recommend that allopurinol be given to people with ischaemic heart disease to prevent further cardiovascular events or deaths.

Diagnosis and management of primary hyperaldosteronism in patients with hypertension: a practical approach endorsed by the British and Irish Hypertension Society.

Alongside the lack of homogeneity among international guidelines and consensus documents on primary hyperaldosteronism, the National UK guidelines on hypertension do not provide extensive recommendations regarding the diagnosis and management of this condition. Local guidelines vary from area to area, and this is reflected in the current clinical practice in the UK. In an attempt to provide support to the clinicians involved in the screening of subjects with hypertension and clinical management of suspected cases of primary hyperaldosteronism the following document has been prepared on the behalf of the BIHS Guidelines and Information Service Standing Committee. Through remote video conferences, the authors of this document reviewed an initial draft which was then circulated among the BIHS Executive members for feedback. A survey among members of the BIHS was carried out in 2022 to assess screening strategies and clinical management of primary hyperaldosteronism in the different regions of the UK. Feedback and results of the survey were then discussed and incorporated in the final document which was approved by the panel after consensus was achieved considering critical review of existing literature and expert opinions. Grading of recommendations was not performed in light of the limited available data from properly designed randomized controlled trials.

Serum antinuclear autoantibodies are associated with measures of oxidative stress and lifestyle factors: analysis of LIPIDOGRAM2015 and LIPIDOGEN2015 studies.

Introduction: Oxidative stress is one of many factors suspected to promote antinuclear autoantibody (ANA) formation. Reactive oxygen species can induce changes in the antigenic structure of macromolecules, causing the immune system to treat them as "neo-antigens" and start production of autoantibodies. This study was designed to evaluate the relationship between oxidative stress markers, lifestyle factors and the detection of ANA. Material and methods: We examined measures of oxidative stress indices of free-radical damage to lipids and proteins, such as total oxidant status (TOS), concentration of protein thiol groups (PSH), and malondialdehyde (MDA), activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD) in 1731 serum samples. The parameters of the non-enzymatic antioxidant system, such as total antioxidant status (TAS) and uric acid (UA) concentration, were also measured and the oxidative stress index (OSI-index) was calculated. All samples were tested for the presence of ANA using an indirect immunofluorescence assay (IIFA). Results: The presence of ANA in women was associated with lower physical activity (p = 0.036), less frequent smoking (p = 0.007) and drinking of alcohol (p = 0.024) accompanied by significant changes in SOD isoenzymes activity (p < 0.001) and a higher uric acid (UA) concentration (p < 0.001). In ANA positive males we observed lower concentrations of PSH (p = 0.046) and increased concentrations of MDA (p = 0.047). Conclusions: The results indicate that local oxidative stress may be associated with increased probability of ANA formation in a sex-specific manner.

Impact of beta-blockers on mortality and cardiovascular disease outcomes in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: a population-based cohort study in target trial emulation framework.

Background: There is no real-world evidence regarding the association between beta-blocker use and mortality or cardiovascular outcomes in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). We aimed to investigate the impact of beta-blocker use on all-cause mortality and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) in patients with OSA. Methods: We conducted a target trial emulation study of 37,581 patients with newly diagnosed OSA from 1st January 2000 to 30th November 2021 using the IMRD-UK database (formerly known as the THIN database). We compared the treatment strategies of initiating beta-blocker treatment within one year versus non-beta-blocker treatment through the method of clone-censor-weight. Covariates, including patients' demographics, lifestyle, comorbidities, and recent medications, were measured and controlled. Patients were followed up for all-cause mortality or composite CVD outcomes (angina, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, heart failure, or atrial fibrillation). We estimated the five-year absolute risks, risk differences and risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with standardised, weighted pooled logistic regression, which is a discrete-time hazard model for survival analysis. Several sensitivity analyses were performed, including multiple imputation addressing the missing data. Findings: The median follow-up time was 4.1 (interquartile range, 1.9-7.8) years. The five-year absolute risk of all-cause mortality and CVD outcomes were 4.9% (95% CI, 3.8-6.0) and 13.0% (95% CI, 11.4-15.0) among beta-blocker users, and 4.0% (95% CI, 3.8-4.2) and 9.4% (95% CI, 9.1-9.7) among non-beta-blocker users, respectively. The five-year absolute risk difference and risk ratio between the two groups for all-cause mortality and CVD outcomes were 0.9% (95% CI, -0.2 to 2.1) and 1.22 (95% CI, 0.96-1.54), and 3.5% (95% CI, 2.1-5.5) and 1.37 (95% CI, 1.22-1.62), respectively. Findings were consistent across the sensitivity analyses. Interpretation: Beta-blocker treatment was associated with an increased risk of CVD and a trend for an increased risk of mortality among patients with OSA. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings. Funding: Innovation and Technology Commission of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region Government.

Metabolic syndrome is associated with similar long-term prognosis in those living with and without obesity: an analysis of 45 615 patients from the nationwide LIPIDOGRAM 2004-2015 studies.

AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and long-term all-cause mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: The LIPIDOGRAM studies were carried out in the primary care in Poland in 2004, 2006, and 2015. MetS was diagnosed based on the National Cholesterol Education Program, Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP/ATP III), and Joint Interim Statement (JIS) criteria. The cohort was divided into four groups: non-obese patients without MetS, obese patients without MetS, non-obese patients with MetS, and obese patients with MetS. Differences in all-cause mortality were analysed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. A total of 45 615 participants were enrolled (mean age 56.3, standard deviation: 11.8 years; 61.7% female). MetS was diagnosed in 14 202 (31%) by NCEP/ATP III criteria and 17 216 (37.7%) by JIS criteria. Follow-up was available for 44 620 (97.8%, median duration 15.3 years) patients. MetS was associated with increased mortality risk among the obese {hazard ratio, HR: 1.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-1.99] and HR: 1.93 [95% CI 1.82-2.04], according to NCEP/ATP III and JIS criteria, respectively} and non-obese individuals [HR: 2.11 (95% CI 1.85-2.40) and 1.7 (95% CI 1.56-1.85) according to NCEP/ATP III and JIS criteria, respectively]. Obese patients without MetS had a higher mortality risk than non-obese patients without MetS [HR: 1.16 (95% CI 1.10-1.23) and HR: 1.22 (95% CI 1.15-1.30), respectively in subgroups with NCEP/ATP III and JIS criteria applied]. CONCLUSIONS: MetS is associated with increased all-cause mortality risk in non-obese and obese patients. In patients without MetS, obesity remains significantly associated with mortality. The concept of metabolically healthy obesity should be revised.

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is used to describe a constellation of metabolic disturbances such as elevated blood glucose, increased levels of triglycerides and decreased level of high density lipoprotein cholesterol. They are often accompanied by elevated blood pressure and central obesity, defined as increased waist circumference. Usually, those metabolic disturbances occur in obese individuals, but sometimes, they can also occur in lean subjects. This relatively recent concept is often referred to as lean MetS. A key conclusion from our paper is that MetS, when it occurs in lean patients, is associated with similarly unfavourable long-term prognosis as in obese patients. Additionally, our analysis shows that lean patients with MetS are less often treated with lipid-lowering drugs despite having higher low density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (LDL-C). An additional finding, which is important from a public health perspective, is that obese patients who do not fulfil MetS criteria have higher long-term all-cause mortality than their lean counterparts without MetS. This finding should be an argument to encourage maintenance of normal body weight.

Cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension with evening versus morning dosing of usual antihypertensives in the UK (TIME study): a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that evening dosing with antihypertensive therapy might have better outcomes than morning dosing. The Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) study aimed to investigate whether evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication improves major cardiovascular outcomes compared with morning dosing in patients with hypertension. METHODS: The TIME study is a prospective, pragmatic, decentralised, parallel-group study in the UK, that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with hypertension and taking at least one antihypertensive medication. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), without restriction, stratification, or minimisation, to take all of their usual antihypertensive medications in either the morning (0600-1000 h) or in the evening (2000-0000 h). Participants were followed up for the composite primary endpoint of vascular death or hospitalisation for non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke. Endpoints were identified by participant report or record linkage to National Health Service datasets and were adjudicated by a committee masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was assessed as the time to first occurrence of an event in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group). Safety was assessed in all participants who submitted at least one follow-up questionnaire. The study is registered with EudraCT (2011-001968-21) and ISRCTN (18157641), and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2011, and June 5, 2018, 24 610 individuals were screened and 21 104 were randomly assigned to evening (n=10 503) or morning (n=10 601) dosing groups. Mean age at study entry was 65·1 years (SD 9·3); 12 136 (57·5%) participants were men; 8968 (42·5%) were women; 19 101 (90·5%) were White; 98 (0·5%) were Black, African, Caribbean, or Black British (ethnicity was not reported by 1637 [7·8%] participants); and 2725 (13·0%) had a previous cardiovascular disease. By the end of study follow-up (March 31, 2021), median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 4·9-5·7), and 529 (5·0%) of 10 503 participants assigned to evening treatment and 318 (3·0%) of 10 601 assigned to morning treatment had withdrawn from all follow-up. A primary endpoint event occurred in 362 (3·4%) participants assigned to evening treatment (0·69 events [95% CI 0·62-0·76] per 100 patient-years) and 390 (3·7%) assigned to morning treatment (0·72 events [95% CI 0·65-0·79] per 100 patient-years; unadjusted hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·83-1·10]; p=0·53). No safety concerns were identified. INTERPRETATION: Evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication was not different from morning dosing in terms of major cardiovascular outcomes. Patients can be advised that they can take their regular antihypertensive medications at a convenient time that minimises any undesirable effects. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation.

Allopurinol versus usual care in UK patients with ischaemic heart disease (ALL-HEART): a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial.

BACKGROUND: Allopurinol is a urate-lowering therapy used to treat patients with gout. Previous studies have shown that allopurinol has positive effects on several cardiovascular parameters. The ALL-HEART study aimed to determine whether allopurinol therapy improves major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease. METHODS: ALL-HEART was a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial done in 18 regional centres in England and Scotland, with patients recruited from 424 primary care practices. Eligible patients were aged 60 years or older, with ischaemic heart disease but no history of gout. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a central web-based randomisation system accessed via a web-based application or an interactive voice response system, to receive oral allopurinol up-titrated to a dose of 600 mg daily (300 mg daily in participants with moderate renal impairment at baseline) or to continue usual care. The primary outcome was the composite cardiovascular endpoint of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. The hazard ratio (allopurinol vs usual care) in a Cox proportional hazards model was assessed for superiority in a modified intention-to-treat analysis (excluding randomly assigned patients later found to have met one of the exclusion criteria). The safety analysis population included all patients in the modified intention-to-treat usual care group and those who took at least one dose of randomised medication in the allopurinol group. This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT 2013-003559-39, and ISRCTN, ISRCTN32017426. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2014, and Oct 2, 2017, 5937 participants were enrolled and then randomly assigned to receive allopurinol or usual care. After exclusion of 216 patients after randomisation, 5721 participants (mean age 72·0 years [SD 6·8], 4321 [75·5%] males, and 5676 [99·2%] white) were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, with 2853 in the allopurinol group and 2868 in the usual care group. Mean follow-up time in the study was 4·8 years (1·5). There was no evidence of a difference between the randomised treatment groups in the rates of the primary endpoint. 314 (11·0%) participants in the allopurinol group (2·47 events per 100 patient-years) and 325 (11·3%) in the usual care group (2·37 events per 100 patient-years) had a primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04 [95% CI 0·89-1·21], p=0·65). 288 (10·1%) participants in the allopurinol group and 303 (10·6%) participants in the usual care group died from any cause (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·87-1·20], p=0·77). INTERPRETATION: In this large, randomised clinical trial in patients aged 60 years or older with ischaemic heart disease but no history of gout, there was no difference in the primary outcome of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death between participants randomised to allopurinol therapy and those randomised to usual care. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

The Prognostic Value of Derivatives-Reactive Oxygen Metabolites (d-ROMs) for Cardiovascular Disease Events and Mortality: A Review.

Oxidative stress participates in the development and exacerbation of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). The ability to promptly quantify an imbalance in an individual reductive-oxidative (RedOx) state could improve cardiovascular risk assessment and management. Derivatives-reactive oxygen metabolites (d-ROMs) are an emerging biomarker of oxidative stress quantifiable in minutes through standard biochemical analysers or by a bedside point-of-care test. The current review evaluates available data on the prognostic value of d-ROMs for CVD events and mortality in individuals with known and unknown CVD. Outcome studies involving small and large cohorts were analysed and hazard ratio, risk ratio, odds ratio, and mean differences were used as measures of effect. High d-ROM plasma levels were found to be an independent predictor of CVD events and mortality. Risk begins increasing at d-ROM levels higher than 340 UCARR and rises considerably above 400 UCARR. Conversely, low d-ROM plasma levels are a good negative predictor for CVD events in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure. Moreover, combining d-ROMs with other relevant biomarkers routinely used in clinical practice might support a more precise cardiovascular risk assessment. We conclude that d-ROMs represent an emerging oxidative-stress-related biomarker with the potential for better risk stratification both in primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention.

A secondary qualitative analysis of stakeholder views about participant recruitment, retention, and adherence in decentralised clinical trials (DCTs).

BACKGROUND: Decentralised clinical trials (DCTs) are clinical trials where all or most trial activities occur in or near participants' homes instead of hospitals or research sites. While more convenient for participants, DCTs may offer limited opportunities to build trust with investigators and trial teams. This qualitative analysis explored DCT stakeholder views to inform strategies for maximising participant recruitment, retention, and adherence. METHODS: A secondary analysis of original interview transcripts focused on participant engagement: recruitment, retention, and adherence. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including trial managers and administrators, investigators, nurses, vendors, and patient representatives. Interview data were coded using a thematic approach to generate descriptive themes. RESULTS: Forty-eight stakeholders were interviewed. Three components of participant engagement in DCTs were identified: identifying and attracting potential participants, retaining participants and encouraging adherence, and involvement of patients and the public. Interviewees believed that a potential participant's beliefs about research value and their trust in the research team strongly influenced the likelihood of taking part in a DCT. Early involvement of patients was identified as one way to gauge participant priorities. However, perceived burden was seen as a barrier to recruitment. Factors influencing retention and adherence were related to the same underlying motivators that drove recruitment: personal values, circumstances, and burden. Being part of a DCT should not conflict with the original motivations to participate. CONCLUSION: Recruitment, retention, and adherence in DCTs are driven by factors that have previously been found to affect conventional clinical trials. Increasing patient and public involvement can address many of these factors. In contrast to conventional trials, DCTs are perceived as requiring greater emphasis on communication, and contact, to engender trust between participants and researchers despite a relative lack of in-person interaction.

Adverse events and overall health and well-being after COVID-19 vaccination: interim results from the VAC4COVID cohort safety study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the incidence of adverse events (AEs), reactogenicity symptoms, menstrual changes and overall self-rated improvement in health and well-being after COVID-19 vaccination. DESIGN: VAC4COVID is an ongoing prospective, active observational, post-authorisation cohort safety study (PASS) of UK-approved vaccines for COVID-19 disease. SETTING: The study is conducted through a secure website (www.vac4covid.com) by MEMO Research, University of Dundee, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 16 265 adult (18 years or older) UK residents with a valid email address and internet access. INTERVENTIONS: Any UK-authorised COVID-19 vaccination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcomes reported in this interim analysis include AEs, reactogenicity-type AEs (headache, fatigue, muscle or joint pain, fever, nausea, dizziness or local vaccine reaction), menstrual changes and reported improvement in overall health and well-being. RESULTS: 11 475 consented participants (mean age 54.8 years) provided follow-up data between 2 February and 5 October 2021 (mean follow-up duration 184 days), by which date 89.2% of participants had received two vaccine doses. 89.8% of 5222 participants who completed a follow-up questionnaire in the 7 days after any COVID-19 vaccination reported no AEs. The risk of experiencing any event (not necessarily vaccine-related) requiring hospitalisation was less than 0.2%. 43.7% of post-vaccination follow-up records reported improvement in health and well-being. Reactogenicity-type reactions were more common in the week after the first dose of ChAdOx1 than BNT162b2 (7.8% vs 1.6%), but this relationship was reversed after the second dose (1.3% vs 3.1%). 0.3% of women reported menstrual symptoms after vaccination; no differences between vaccine type or dose order were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides reassuring data on low rates of AEs after COVID-19 vaccination. Differences in reactogenicity-type AE profiles between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 and between first and second doses of these vaccines were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN95881792; Pre-results.

Design and rationale of a nationwide screening analysis from the LIPIDOGRAM2015 and LIPIDOGEN2015 studies.

Introduction: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. The LIPIDOGRAM2015 study was performed to estimate the prevalence of risk factors for atherosclerotic diseases as well as cardiovascular and related disorders in the primary care setting in Poland. The LIPIDOGEN2015 sub-study was designed to include a random cohort of patients in order to analyse parameters related to lipid metabolism, oxidative stress, inflammatory responses, autoimmune disorders, and gene variants that confer susceptibility to cardiometabolic and atherosclerotic diseases. Material and methods: The recruitment was carried out by 438 primary care physicians in Poland. The expected number of patients recruited for the LIPIDOGRAM2015 study was 13,000-14,000 with 13-15% (1700-2000) also participating in the LIPIDOGEN2015 sub-study. Each patient had to complete a questionnaire concerning medical and family history, concomitant diseases, and pharmacotherapy. Anthropometric measurements were performed at the doctor's office. For the LIPIDOGEN2015 sub-study, saliva samples for DNA isolation and blood samples for measurement of glycated haemoglobin, oxidative stress parameters, autoantibody levels, and inflammatory cytokine profile and apolipoprotein profile were collected. Follow-up data will be obtained from the National Health Fund in Poland. Results: The LIPIDOGRAM2015 and LIPIDOGEN2015 study cohort reflects the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and concomitant diseases, markers of oxidative stress, the presence of autoantibodies, inflammatory cytokine profile, and apolipoprotein profile, as well as genetic variants potentially conferring susceptibility to cardiometabolic and atherosclerotic diseases. Conclusions: This study presents the prevalence of different CV risk factors, with special emphasis on lipid disorders, and it assesses the relationship between inflammation, oxidative stress, and mutations in genes encoding proteins regulating lipid metabolism, as well as genes conferring susceptibility to cardiovascular, cardiometabolic, and related diseases.

Evaluating Diuretics in Normal Care (EVIDENCE): a feasibility report of a pilot cluster randomised trial of prescribing policy in primary care to compare the effectiveness of thiazide-type diuretics in hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Obtaining evidence on comparative effectiveness and safety of widely prescribed drugs in a timely and cost-effective way is a major challenge for healthcare systems. Here, we describe the feasibility of the Evaluating Diuretics in Normal Care (EVIDENCE) study that compares a thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics for hypertension as an exemplar of a more general framework for efficient generation of such evidence. In 2011, the UK NICE hypertension guideline included a recommendation that thiazide-like diuretics (such as indapamide) be used in preference to thiazide diuretics (such as bendroflumethiazide) for hypertension. There is sparse evidence backing this recommendation, and bendroflumethiazide remains widely used in the UK. METHODS: Patients prescribed indapamide or bendroflumethiazide regularly for hypertension were identified in participating general practices. Allocation of a prescribing policy favouring one of these drugs was then randomly applied to the practice and, where required to comply with the policy, repeat prescriptions switched by pharmacy staff. Patients were informed of the potential switch by letter and given the opportunity to opt out. Practice adherence to the randomised policy was assessed by measuring the amount of policy drug prescribed as a proportion of total combined indapamide and bendroflumethiazide. Routinely collected hospitalisation and death data in the NHS will be used to compare cardiovascular event rates between the two policies. RESULTS: This pilot recruited 30 primary care practices in five Scottish National Health Service (NHS) Boards. Fifteen practices were randomised to indapamide (2682 patients) and 15 to bendroflumethiazide (3437 patients), a study population of 6119 patients. Prior to randomisation, bendroflumethiazide was prescribed to 78% of patients prescribed either of these drugs. Only 1.6% of patients opted out of the proposed medication switch. CONCLUSION: The pilot and subsequent recruitment confirms the methodology is scalable within NHS Scotland for a fully powered larger study; currently, 102 GP practices (> 12,700 patients) are participating in this study. It has the potential to efficiently produce externally valid comparative effectiveness data with minimal disruption to practice staff or patients. Streamlining this pragmatic trial approach has demonstrated the feasibility of a random prescribing policy design framework that can be adapted to other therapeutic areas. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN46635087 . Registered on 11 August 2017.

Relationship Between Anti-DFS70 Autoantibodies and Oxidative Stress.

BACKGROUND: The anti-DFS70 autoantibodies are one of the most commonly and widely described agent of unknown clinical significance, frequently detected in healthy individuals. It is not known whether the DFS70 autoantibodies are protective or pathogenic. One of the factors suspected of inducing the formation of anti-DFS70 antibodies is increased oxidative stress. We evaluated the coexistence of anti-DFS70 antibodies with selected markers of oxidative stress and investigated whether these antibodies could be considered as indirect markers of oxidative stress. METHODS: The intensity of oxidative stress was measured in all samples via indices of free-radical damage to lipids and proteins such as total oxidant status (TOS), concentrations of lipid hydroperoxides (LPH), lipofuscin (LPS), and malondialdehyde (MDA). The parameters of the non-enzymatic antioxidant system, such as total antioxidant status (TAS) and uric acid concentration (UA), were also measured, as well as the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD). Based on TOS and TAS values, the oxidative stress index (OSI) was calculated. All samples were also tested with indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and 357 samples were selected for direct monospecific anti DFS70 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing. RESULTS: The anti-DFS70 antibodies were confirmed by ELISA test in 21.29% of samples. Compared with anti-DFS70 negative samples we observed 23% lower concentration of LPH (P = .038) and 11% lower concentration of UA (P = .005). TOS was 20% lower (P = .014). The activity of SOD was up to 5% higher (P = .037). The Pearson correlation showed weak negative correlation for LPH, UA, and TOS and a weak positive correlation for SOD activity. CONCLUSION: In samples positive for the anti-DFS70 antibody a decreased level of oxidative stress was observed, especially in the case of samples with a high antibody titer. Anti-DFS70 antibodies can be considered as an indirect marker of reduced oxidative stress or a marker indicating the recent intensification of antioxidant processes.

Factors influencing home blood pressure monitor ownership in a large clinical trial.

Home blood pressure monitor (HBPM) ownership prevalence and the factors that influence it are unclear. This study aimed to investigate factors associated with HBPM ownership among participants in the Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) hypertension study. This study is a sub-analysis of the TIME study, a randomised trial investigating the effect of day-time versus night-time dosing of antihypertensive medication on cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension. As part of the TIME study online registration process, participants were asked to indicate whether they owned an HBPM. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to determine factors associated with HBPM ownership. Of 21,104 randomised participants, 11,434 (54.2%) reported owning an HBPM. The mean age of all participants at enrolment was 67.7 ± 9.3 years, 12,134 (57.5%) were male, and 8892 (42.1%) reported a current or previous history of smoking. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of reporting HBPM owned include being male (OR:1.47; 95% CI 1.39-1.56) or residing in a less deprived socioeconomic region (IMD Decile 6-10) (OR:1.31; 95% CI 1.23-1.40). Participants with a history of diabetes mellitus (OR:0.74; 95% CI:0.64-0.86) or current smokers, compared to non-smokers, (OR:0.71; 95% CI:0.62-0.82) were less likely to report owning an HBPM. This study has identified important patient factors influencing HBPM ownership. Further qualitative research would be valuable to identify and explore potential patient-level barriers to engagement with self-monitoring of blood pressure.

Factors influencing participation and long-term commitment to self-monitoring of blood pressure in a large remote clinical trial: The treatment in morning versus evening (TIME) study.

This study investigates factors associated with active participation, and long-term commitment, to home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) in the TIME study, a remote clinical trial assessing the effectiveness of morning vs. evening dosing of antihypertensive medications on cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension. Participants reporting HBPM ownership were invited to submit blood pressure (BP) measurements three-monthly. Factors associated with active participation (submitting at least one set of BP measurements), and longer-term commitment (at least six sets of BP measurements), were analysed using multivariable logistic regression. 11,059 participants agreed to provide BP measurements, of whom 7646 submitted. Active participation was associated with age (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) per decade, 1.29; 95% CI 1.23-1.36), positive family history of hypertension (AOR 1.11; 95% CI 1.01-1.21), number of antihypertensive medications (AOR, 1.10; 95% CI 1.04-1.16), and lower deprivation (AOR per decile, 1.03; 95% CI 1.01-1.05). People with higher body mass index (BMI) and smokers were less likely to participate (AOR, 0.91 (per increase of 5.0 kg/m2) and 0.63 respectively; all p < 0.001). 3,655 participants (47.8%) submitted measurements beyond one year. Non-modifiable risk factors - age (AOR per decade, 1.29; 95% CI 1.21-1.37) and positive family history of hypertension (AOR, 1.15; 95% CI 1.03-1.27) - were positively associated with longer-term commitment. Higher BMI (AOR per 5.0 kg/m2, 0.89; 95% CI 0.85-0.93), smoking (AOR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.82) and higher baseline systolic blood pressure (AOR per mmHg, 0.99; 95% CI 0.98-0.99) were negatively associated. This study provides insight into factors that influence HBPM use.

When innovation outpaces regulations: The legal challenges for direct-to-patient supply of investigational medicinal products.

AIMS: We profile the lack of specific regulation for direct-to-patient postal supply (DTP) of clinical trial medications (investigational medicinal products, IMPs) calling for increased efficiency of patient-centred multi-country remote clinical trials. METHODS: Questionnaires emailed to 28 European Economic Area (EEA) Medical Product Licensing Authorities (MPLAs) and Swissmedic MPLA were analysed in 2019/2020. The questionnaire asked whether DTP of IMPs was legal, followed by comparative legal analysis profiling relevant national civil and criminal liability provisions in 30 European jurisdictions (including The Netherlands), finally summarising accessible COVID-19-related guidance in searches of 30 official MPLA websites in January 2021. RESULTS: Twenty MPLAs responded. Twelve consented to response publication in 2021. DTP was not widely authorised, though different phrases were used to explain this. Our legal review of national laws in 29 EEA jurisdictions and Switzerland did not identify any specific sanctions for DTP of IMPs; however, we identified potential national civil and criminal liability provisions. Switzerland provides legal clarity where DTP of IMPs is conditionally legal. MPLA webpage searches for COVID-19 guidance noted conditional acceptance by 19 MPLAs. CONCLUSIONS: Specific national legislation authorising DTP of IMPs, defining IMP categories, and conditions permitting the postage and delivery by courier in an EEA-wide clinical trial, would support innovative patient-centred research for multi-country remote clinical trials. Despite it appearing more acceptable to do this between EU Member States, provided each EU MPLA and ethics board authorises it, temporary Covid-19 restrictions in national Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidance discourages innovative research into the safety and effectiveness of clinical trial medications.

Learning from remote decentralised clinical trial experiences: A qualitative analysis of interviews with trial personnel, patient representatives and other stakeholders.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to identify actionable learning points from stakeholders in remote decentralised clinical trials (RDCTs) to inform their future design and conduct. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of stakeholders, including senior managers, trial managers, technology experts, principal investigators, clinical investigators, research scientists, research nurses, vendors, patient representatives and project assistants. The interview data were coded using a thematic approach, identifying similarities, differences and clustering to generate descriptive themes. Further refinement of themes was guided by empirical phenomenology, grounding explanation in the meanings that interviewees gave to their experiences. RESULTS: Forty-eight stakeholders were interviewed. Actionable learning points were generated from the thematic analysis. Patient involvement and participant engagement were seen as critical to the success of RDCTs where in-person contact is minimal or nonexistent. Involving patients in identifying the research question, creating recruitment materials, apps and websites, and providing ongoing feedback to trial participants were regarded as facilitating recruitment and engagement. Building strong relationships early with trial partners was thought to support RDCT conduct. Multiple modes of capturing information, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and routinely collected data, were felt to contribute to data completeness. However, RDCTs may transfer trial activity burden onto participants and remote-working research staff, therefore additional support may be needed. CONCLUSION: RDCTs will continue to face challenges in implementing novel technologies. However, maximising patient and partner involvement, reducing participant and staff burden, and simplifying how participants and staff interact with the RDCT may facilitate their implementation.