Enriching the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry Through Linkage With External Data Sources: Rationale and Design.

Background The AHA Registry (American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry) captures detailed information on hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The registry, however, does not capture information on social determinants of health or long-term outcomes. Here we describe the linkage of the AHA Registry with external data sources, including fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare claims, to fill these gaps and assess the representativeness of linked registry patients to the broader Medicare FFS population hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods and Results We linked AHA Registry records of adults ≥65 years from March 2020 to September 2021 with Medicare FFS claims using a deterministic linkage algorithm and with the American Hospital Association Annual Survey, Rural Urban Commuting Area codes, and the Social Vulnerability Index using hospital and geographic identifiers. We compared linked individuals with unlinked FFS beneficiaries hospitalized with COVID-19 to assess the representativeness of the AHA Registry. A total of 10 010 (47.0%) records in the AHA Registry were successfully linked to FFS Medicare claims. Linked and unlinked FFS beneficiaries were similar with respect to mean age (78.1 versus 77.9, absolute standardized difference [ASD] 0.03); female sex (48.3% versus 50.2%, ASD 0.04); Black race (15.1% versus 12.0%, ASD 0.09); dual-eligibility status (26.1% versus 23.2%, ASD 0.07); and comorbidity burden. Linked patients were more likely to live in the northeastern United States (35.7% versus 18.2%, ASD 0.40) and urban/metropolitan areas (83.9% versus 76.8%, ASD 0.18). There were also differences in hospital-level characteristics between cohorts. However, in-hospital outcomes were similar (mortality, 23.3% versus 20.1%, ASD 0.08; home discharge, 45.5% versus 50.7%, ASD 0.10; skilled nursing facility discharge, 24.4% versus 22.2%, ASD 0.05). Conclusions Linkage of the AHA Registry with external data sources such as Medicare FFS claims creates a unique and generalizable resource to evaluate long-term health outcomes after COVID-19 hospitalization.

Clinical Strategy for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Associated Myocarditis: A Narrative Review.

Importance: In the last decade, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved for the treatment of many cancer types. Immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis has emerged as a significant and potentially fatal adverse effect. Recognizing, diagnosing, and treating ICI-associated myocarditis poses new challenges for the practicing clinician. Here, the current literature on ICI-associated myocarditis is reviewed. Observations: Clinical presentation and cardiac pathological findings are highly variable in patients with ICI-associated myocarditis. Although endomyocardial biopsy is the criterion standard diagnostic test, a combination of clinical suspicion, cardiac biomarkers (specifically troponin), and cardiac imaging, in addition to biopsy, is often needed to support the diagnosis. Importantly, the combination of a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 inhibitor with a programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor increases the risk of developing ICI-associated myocarditis. Conclusion and Relevance: This review aims to provide a standardized diagnostic and therapeutic approach for patients with suspected ICI-associated myocarditis. A complete history of recent cancer treatments and physical examination in combination with cardiac biomarkers, cardiac imaging, and endomyocardial biopsy represent a pragmatic diagnostic approach for most cases of ICI-associated myocarditis. The addition of novel biomarkers or imaging modalities is an area of active research and should be evaluated in larger cohorts.