Screening for heart failure in patients with diabetes mellitus in tertiary care - A SwissDiab study.

AIMS: To evaluate the prevalence of heart failure (HF) in patients with diabetes in tertiary care, and the implementation of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i). METHODS: Between 28.09.2020 and 31.03.2022, patients enrolled in the Swiss Diabetes Registry at one study centre were screened for HF based on the recommendations by the European Society of Cardiology. Indicated patients were referred for echocardiography and a clinical evaluation of HF, further stratified by preserved (HFpEF), mildly reduced (HFmrEF), and reduced (HFrEF) left ventricular ejection fraction. RESULTS: In total, 534 patients were screened (31.5%, type 1 diabetes (T1D); 59.7%, type 2 diabetes (T2D); 8.8%, other forms). Overall, HF was present in 11.2% (HFpEF, 56.7%; HFmrEF, 11.7%; HFrEF, 31.7%). Prevalence by diabetes type was 2.4%, T1D; 16.0%, T2D; and 10.6%, other forms. Of the identified cases, 40.0% were previously diagnosed and 60.0% were diagnosed as a result of the screening. Of the 24 patients with previously known HF, 50.0% were prescribed SGLT2i (including 2 out of 3 patients with HFrEF). CONCLUSIONS: The fact that most cases of HF were previously undiagnosed and treatment with SGLT2i could be improved highlights the need to increase awareness of HF among healthcare professionals treating patients with diabetes.

Pulmonary and Systemic Hemodynamics in Patients with Hyperthyroidism.

BACKGROUND: There is an association between hyperthyroidism and pulmonary hypertension. However, the prevalence of pulmonary hypertension in hyperthyroidism and the underlying mechanisms are incompletely defined. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe hyperthyroidism, mostly due to Graves disease, were included in this single-center study. Echocardiographic assessment of pulmonary hemodynamics was performed at the time of hyperthyroidism diagnosis (baseline) and after normalization of thyroid hormones (follow-up; median 11 months). In a subset of patients, right heart catheterization and noninvasive assessment of central hemodynamics was performed. RESULTS: Among all 99 patients, 31% had pulmonary hypertension at baseline. The estimated systolic pulmonary artery pressure correlated significantly with the estimated left ventricular filling pressure (E/e'). The invasively measured systolic pulmonary artery pressure correlated well with the estimated systolic pulmonary artery pressure. Cardiac output, E/e', left and right ventricular dimensions were significantly reduced from baseline to follow-up, whereas the estimated pulmonary vascular resistance did not differ. Diastolic blood pressure was significantly higher at follow-up, with no change in systolic blood pressure. The central systolic blood pressure, however, exhibited a trend for a reduction at follow-up, while the pulse wave velocity was significantly lower at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of patients with hyperthyroidism have evidence of pulmonary hypertension. Our data suggest that an increased cardiac output and left ventricular filling pressure are the main mechanisms underlying the elevated systolic pulmonary artery pressure in hyperthyroidism, whereas there is no evidence of significant pulmonary vascular disease.

Effect of Single High Dose Vitamin D Substitution in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients with Vitamin D Deficiency on Length of Hospital Stay.

Vitamin D and its role in the coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been controversially discussed, with inconclusive evidence about vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) supplementation in COVID-19 patients. Vitamin D metabolites play an important role in the initiation of the immune response and can be an easily modifiable risk factor in 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3)-deficient patients. This is a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trial to compare the effect of a single high dose of vitamin D3 followed by treatment as usual (TAU) of daily vitamin D3 daily until discharge versus placebo plus TAU in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and 25(OH)D3-deficiency on length hospital stay. We included 40 patients per group and did not observe a significant difference in the median length of hospital stay (6 days in both groups, p = 0.920). We adjusted the length of stay for COVID-19 risk factors (ß = 0.44; 95% CI: -2.17-2.22), and center (ß = 0.74; 95% CI: -1.25-2.73). The subgroup analysis in patients with severe 25(OH)D3-deficiency (<25 nmol/L) showed a non-significant reduction in the median length of hospital stay in the intervention group (5.5 vs. 9 days, p = 0.299). The competing risk model with death did not reveal significant differences between the group in the length of stay (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.62-1.48, p = 0.850). Serum 25(OH)D3 level increased significantly in the intervention group (mean change in nmol/L; intervention: +26.35 vs. control: -2.73, p < 0.001). The intervention with 140,000 IU vitamin D3 + TAU did not significantly shorten the length of hospital stay but was effective and safe for the elevation of serum 25(OH)D3 levels.

An estimation of the consequences of reinforcing the 2016 and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society guidelines on current lipid-lowering treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes in tertiary care-a SwissDiab study.

AIMS: In 2019, the European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society updated the 2016 guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias recommending more stringent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets in diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2). Based on a real-world patient population, this study aimed to determine the feasibility and cost of attaining guideline-recommended LDL-C targets, and assess cardiovascular benefit. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Swiss Diabetes Registry is a multicentre longitudinal observational study of outpatients in tertiary diabetes care. Patients with DM2 and a visit between 1 January 2018 and 31 August 2019 that failed the 2016 LDL-C target were identified. The theoretical intensification of current lipid-lowering medication needed to reach the 2016 and 2019 LDL-C target was determined and the cost thereof extrapolated. The expected number of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) prevented by treatment intensification was estimated. Two hundred and ninety-four patients (74.8%) failed the 2016 LDL-C target. The percentage of patients that theoretically achieved the 2016 and 2019 target with the indicated treatment modifications were high-intensity statin, 21.4% and 13.3%; ezetimibe, 46.6% and 27.9%; proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor (PCSK9i), 30.6% and 53.7%; ezetimibe and PCSK9i, 1.0% and 3.1%; whereas one (0.3%) and five patients (1.7%) failed to reach target, respectively. Achieving the 2016 vs. 2019 target would reduce the estimated 4-year MACE from 24.9 to 18.6 vs. 17.4 events, at an additional annual cost of medication of 2140 Swiss francs (CHF) vs. 3681 CHF per patient, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For 68% of the patients, intensifying statin treatment and/or adding ezetimibe would be sufficient to reach the 2016 target, whereas 57% would require cost-intensive PCSK9i therapy to reach the 2019 target, with limited additional medium-term cardiovascular benefit.

Based on 294 patients with type 2 diabetes and elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, this study looked at how much patients' lipid-lowering medication would need to be intensified for them to be able to reach the old and the new, lower treatment target for LDL-cholesterol that was introduced in 2019, along with the cost and feasibility, and estimated cardiovascular benefits of doing so. The majority of patients would reach the old LDL-cholesterol target by optimizing therapy with statin and ezetimibe, with a clear expected cardiovascular benefit. It would however be difficult for the majority of patients to reach the new, lower LDL-cholesterol target, as this would require treatment with a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor. This expensive treatment would not be reimbursed for the majority of patients that would need them. The additional expected cardiovascular benefit was also less clear. Tools that help physicians to weigh the additional reduction in cardiovascular risk that the patient might benefit from by reaching the new rather than the old LDL-cholesterol target against known benefits of targeting other important risk factors (e.g. smoking, physical inactivity, overweight, and obesity) would help guide efficient cardiovascular risk management, and identify patients that would most benefit from PCSK9 inhibitor therapy.

Incidence and costs of hypoglycemia in insulin-treated diabetes in Switzerland: A health-economic analysis.

AIMS: We assess the incidence and economic burden of severe and non-severe hypoglycemia in insulin-treated diabetes type 1 and 2 patients in Switzerland. METHODS: We developed a health economic model to assess the incidence of hypoglycemia, the subsequent medical costs, and the production losses in insulin-treated diabetes patients. The model distinguishes between severity of hypoglycemia, type of diabetes, and type of medical care. We used survey data, health statistics, and health care utilization data extracted from primary studies. RESULTS: The number of hypoglycemic events in 2017 was estimated at 1.3 million in type 1 diabetes patients and at 0.7 million in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes patients. The subsequent medical costs amount to 38 million Swiss Francs (CHF), 61 % of which occur in type 2 diabetes. Outpatient visits dominate costs in both types of diabetes. Total production losses due to hypoglycemia amount to CHF 11 million. Almost 80 % of medical costs and 39 % of production losses are due to non-severe hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: Hypoglycemia leads to substantial socio-economic burden in Switzerland. Greater attention to non-severe hypoglycemic events and to severe hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes could have a major impact on reducing this burden.

Swiss recommendations of the Society for Endocrinology and Diabetes (SGED/SSED) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (2023).

As a first step, the authors emphasise lifestyle changes (increased physical activity, stopping smoking), blood pressure control, and lowering cholesterol). The initial medical treatment should always be a combination treatment with metformin and a sodium-glucose transporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor or a glucagon-like 1 peptide (GLP-1) receptor agonist. Metformin is given first and up-titrated, followed by SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists. In persons with type 2 diabetes, if the initial double combination is not sufficient, a triple combination (SGLT-2 inhibitor, GLP-1 receptor agonist, and metformin) is recommended. This triple combination has not been officially tested in cardiovascular outcome trials, but there is more and more real-world experience in Europe and in the USA that proves that the triple combination with metformin, SGLT-2 inhibitor, and GLP-1 receptor agonist is the best treatment to reduce 3-point MACE, total mortality, and heart failure as compared to other combinations. The treatment with sulfonylurea is no longer recommended because of its side effects and higher mortality compared to the modern treatment with SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists. If the triple combination is not sufficient to reduce the HbA1c to the desired target, insulin treatment is necessary. A quarter of all patients with type 2 diabetes (sometimes misdiagnosed) require insulin treatment. If insulin deficiency is the predominant factor at the outset of type 2 diabetes, the order of medications has to be reversed: insulin first and then cardio-renal protective medications (SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists).

Glucocorticoid withdrawal and glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency: Study protocol of the randomized controlled «TOASST" (Taper Or Abrupt Steroid STop) multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of glucocorticoids in inflammatory and autoimmune disorders, there is uncertainty about the safe cessation of long-term systemic treatment, as data from prospective trials are largely missing. Due to potential disease relapse or glucocorticoid-induced hypocortisolism, the drug is often tapered to sub-physiological doses rather than stopped when the underlying disease is clinically stable, increasing the cumulative drug exposure. Conversely, the duration of exposure to glucocorticoids should be minimized to lower the risk of side effects. METHODS: We designed a multicenter, randomized, triple-blinded, placebo-controlled trial to test the clinical noninferiority of abrupt glucocorticoid stop compared to tapering after ≥28 treatment days with ≥420 mg cumulative and ≥7.5 mg mean daily prednisone-equivalent dose. 573 adult patients treated systemically for various disorders will be included after their underlying disease has been stabilized. Prednisone in tapering doses or matching placebo is administered over 4 weeks. A 250 mg ACTH-test, the result of which will be revealed a posteriori, is performed at study inclusion; all patients are instructed on glucocorticoid stress cover dosing. Follow-up is for 6 months. The composite primary outcome measure is time to hospitalization, death, initiation of unplanned systemic glucocorticoid therapy, or adrenal crisis. Secondary outcomes include the individual components of the primary outcome, cumulative glucocorticoid doses, signs and symptoms of hypocortisolism, and the performance of the ACTH test in predicting the clinical outcome. Cox proportional hazard, linear, and logistic regression models will be used for statistical analysis. CONCLUSION: This trial aims to demonstrate the clinical noninferiority and safety of abrupt treatment cessation after ≥28 days of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in patients with stabilized underlying disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03153527; EUDRA-CT: 2020-005601-48 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03153527?term=NCT03153527&draw=2&rank=1.

Association of CT-based diagnosis of sarcopenia with prognosis and treatment response in patients at risk of malnutrition - A secondary analysis of the Effect of early nutritional support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of malnourished medical inpatients Trial (EFFORT) trial.

BACKGROUND & AIM: CT-derived measures of muscle mass may help to identify patients with sarcopenia. We investigated the prognostic significance of CT-derived sarcopenia and muscle attenuation with nutritional markers, clinical outcomes and response to nutritional support in medical in-patients at nutritional risk. METHOD: Within this secondary analysis of the randomized-controlled Effect of early nutritional support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of malnourished medical inpatients Trial (EFFORT) comparing individualized nutritional support with usual care nutrition in medical inpatients, we investigated associations of CT-based sarcopenia and muscle attenuation at the level L3 with different nutritional and clinical outcomes, and the response to the nutritional intervention. The primary composite endpoint was adverse clinical outcome within 30 days of hospital admission. RESULTS: We included 573 of 2028 EFFORT patients with available CT scans, of which 68.4% met the CT-based definition of sarcopenia and 72.9% had low muscle attenuation. In multivariate analysis, low skeletal muscle index was associated with higher nutritional risk (coefficient per NRS class -0.94 (95%CI -1.87 to -0.01) p = 0.049) and higher risk for adverse clinical outcomes (adjusted odds ratio 1.59 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.38), p = 0.024). Low muscle attenuation was also associated with adverse clinical outcome (adjusted odds ratio 1.67 (95%CI 1.08 to 2.58), p = 0.02). Nutritional support tended to be more effective in reducing mortality in non-sarcopenic patients compared to patients with CT-based sarcopenia (p for interaction 0.058). CONCLUSIONS: Within a population of medical patients at nutritional risk, CT-based sarcopenia and muscle attenuation were associated with several nutritional parameters and predicted adverse clinical outcomes. Information from CT scans, thus may help to better characterize these patients, and may be helpful in guiding therapeutic interventions.

Inhaled aviptadil for the possible treatment of COVID-19 in patients at high risk for ARDS: study protocol for a randomized, placebo-controlled, and multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the fast establishment of new therapeutic agents in the management of COVID-19 and large-scale vaccination campaigns since the beginning of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in early 2020, severe disease courses still represent a threat, especially to patients with risk factors. This indicates the need for alternative strategies to prevent respiratory complications like acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) associated with COVID-19. Aviptadil, a synthetic form of human vasoactive intestinal peptide, might be beneficial for COVID-19 patients at high risk of developing ARDS because of its ability to influence the regulation of exaggerated pro-inflammatory proteins and orchestrate the lung homeostasis. Aviptadil has recently been shown to considerably improve the prognosis of ARDS in COVID-19 when applied intravenously. An inhaled application of aviptadil has the advantages of achieving a higher concentration in the lung tissue, fast onset of activity, avoiding the hepatic first-pass metabolism, and the reduction of adverse effects. The overall objective of this project is to assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled aviptadil in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at high risk of developing ARDS. METHODS: This multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, randomized trial with 132 adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and at high risk for ARDS (adapted early acute lung injury score ≥ 2 points) is conducted in five public hospitals in Europe. Key exclusion criteria are mechanical ventilation at baseline, need for intensive care at baseline, and severe hemodynamic instability. Patients are randomly allocated to either inhale 67 µg aviptadil or normal saline (three times a day for 10 days), in addition to standard care, stratified by center. The primary endpoint is time from hospitalization to clinical improvement, defined as either hospital discharge, or improvement of at least two levels on the nine-level scale for clinical status suggested by the World Health Organization. DISCUSSION: Treatment strategies for COVID-19 are still limited. In the context of upcoming new variants of SARS-CoV-2 and possible inefficacy of the available vaccines and antibody therapies, the investigation of alternative therapy options plays a crucial role in decreasing associated mortality and improving prognosis. Due to its unique immunomodulating properties also targeting the SARS-CoV-2 pathways, inhaled aviptadil may have the potential to prevent ARDS in COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04536350 . Registered 02 September 2020.

[Hypercalcemia - Diagnosis and Management]. / Hyperkalzämie ­ Diagnose, Abklärung und Therapie.

Hypercalcemia - Diagnosis and Management Abstract. The diagnostic workup of hypercalcemia requires a thorough patient history, a focused clinical examination as well as a step-by-step laboratory diagnostic approach. In order to detect the exact aetiology of hypercalcemia an accurate measurement of serum calcium in correlation with the parathyroid hormone level is therefore essential. Primary hyperparathyroidism and malignancy-related hypercalcemia are responsible for about 90% of all hypercalcemia cases. Therefore, these two pathologies should always be considered in the diagnostic approach. The therapeutic procedure is based on the aetiology and severity of the hypercalcemia.

Evaluation of type 2 diabetes care management in nine primary care practices before and after implementation of the Criteria of Good Disease Management of Diabetes established by the Swiss Society of Endocrinology and Diabetology.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Little is known about the quality of diabetes management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Swiss primary care. Based on the recommendations of the National Council Quality Assurance Programme, an interprofessional working group of the Swiss Society of Endocrinology and Diabetology (SSED) established population-based national criteria for good disease management of T2DM in primary health care (the diabetes score). The objective of this study was to assess whether the implementation of these criteria improve diabetes management in primary care. METHODS: The diabetes score comprises eight criteria including three biometric measurements, two lifestyle-specific items and screening of three diabetes-associated complications. Practices can evaluate adherence to the criteria based on a point system, with the recommended aim to achieve ≥70/100 points. Group practices and single practices were included in this study and started implementing the SSED criteria in January 2018. The resulting score was compared with data retrospectively obtained for 2017. The primary endpoint was the overall change in Diabetes Score between 2017 and 2018 at each practice, further stratified by practice type. The absolute effect on individual diabetes score criteria was assessed by pooling all patient-level data. RESULTS: Nine practices (six single and three group) participated in the study. In 2017 and 2018, the primary care practices treated 727 and 704 patients with T2DM, respectively, of whom 676 were treated both years. Around half of the patients were cared for in group practices and half in single practices. Between 2017 and 2018 the median (interquartile range) diabetes score improved from 40 (35, 65) to 55 (45, 70; p = 0.078). One practice (single) obtained a score ≥70 in 2017, three practices (all single) achieved this target in 2018. Pooling patient-level data, we observed a significant absolute improvement in the following criteria: number of regular diabetes check ups, body mass index, glycated haemoglobin, blood pressure, low density lipoprotein cholesterol and screenings for diabetes-associated complications (all p <0.05). However, the extent of the improvements were often insufficient to reach the prefixed targets of the diabetes score criteria on the practice level. CONCLUSION: Overall, the implementation of the SSED criteria in the current setting led to a modest, nonsignificant improvement of the diabetes score. Only three (all single practices) out of the nine practices reached the recommended 70-point target, indicating that further strategies are needed to improve diabetes care in primary care practice. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID NCT04216875).

Prospective validation of five malnutrition screening and assessment instruments among medical inpatients: Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Screening for malnutrition upon hospital admission is the first crucial step for proper nutritional assessment and treatment. While several nutritional screening and assessment instruments exist, there is a lack of head-to-head validation of these instruments. We studied the ability of five different nutrition screening and assessment instruments to predict 1-year mortality and response to nutritional treatment in participants of the EFFORT randomized trial. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a Swiss-wide multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing individualized nutritional support with usual care nutrition in medical inpatients, we prospectively classified patients as low, intermediate, and high nutritional risk based on five nutritional screening and assessment instruments (NRS 2002, SGA, SNAQ, MNA and MUST). RESULTS: Overall mortality at 1-year in the 1866 included patients was 30.4%. There were significant correlations and a significant concordance between all instruments with r-values ranging from 0.23 to 0.55 and kappa values ranging from 0.10 to 0.36. While high nutritional risk was associated with higher mortality in all instruments, SGA and MNA showed the strongest association with adjusted odds ratios of 3.17 (95%CI, 2.18 to 4.61, p < 0.001) and 3.45 (95%CI, 2.28 to 5.22, p < 0.001). When comparing mortality in intervention group patients to control group patients stratified by severity of malnutrition, there was overall no clear trend towards more benefit in patients with more severe malnutrition, with NRS 2002 and SGA showing the most pronounced relationship between the severity of malnutrition and reduction in mortality as a response to nutritional support. CONCLUSION: Among all five screening and assessment instruments, higher nutritional risk was associated with higher risk for mortality and adverse clinical outcome, but not with more or less treatment response from nutritional support with differences among scores. Adding more specific parameters to these instruments is important when using them to decide for or against nutritional support interventions in an individual patient. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02517476.

Validation of modified GLIM criteria to predict adverse clinical outcome and response to nutritional treatment: A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) recently suggested specific criteria to standardize the diagnosis of malnutrition. There is need for validation of these criteria regarding response to nutrition treatment. Our aim was to validate modified GLIM (mGLIM) criteria among medical inpatients at risk of disease related malnutrition for prediction of outcome and response to nutritional therapy. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of the Effect of Early Nutritional Support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes, and Recovery of Malnourished Medical Inpatients Trial (EFFORT), a multicenter randomized controlled trial conducted between April 2014 and February 2018. Adult medical inpatients at nutritional risk (Nutrition Risk Score 2002 ≥ 3 points) were randomly assigned to receive nutritional therapy according to an algorithm based on individualized nutritional requirements (intervention group) or standard hospital food (control group). We included all participants with available information regarding mGLIM criteria. The primary outcome was adverse clinical outcome, which was a composite of 30-day all-cause mortality, ICU-admission, rehospitalization rate, major complications and decline in functional status. RESULTS: Of 1917 eligible participants at nutritional risk, 1181 (61.6%) met the diagnosis of malnutrition based on mGLIM criteria. The incidence of adverse clinical outcome was significantly higher in mGLIM-positive participants compared with mGLIM-negative participants [330/1181 (27.9%) versus 140/736 (19.0%); multivariable adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.53; 95% CI 1.22-1.93; p < 0.001]. Regarding the effect of nutritional therapy, the reduction in adverse clinical outcomes was higher in mGLIM-positive participants [180/581 (31.0%) vs. 150/600 (25.0%), OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.53-0.9, p = 0.007], compared with mGLIM-negative participants [75/379 (19.8%) versus 65/357 (18.2%), OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.65-1.40, p = 0.797], a finding that was, however, not significant in interaction analysis (p for interaction = 0.217). CONCLUSION: Data from this secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial involving medical inpatients at nutritional risk validate the strong prognostic value of mGLIM criteria regarding adverse clinical outcomes and other long-term outcomes. However, further research is needed to improve the ability of GLIM criteria to predict therapeutic response to nutritional interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02517476.

Admission serum albumin concentrations and response to nutritional therapy in hospitalised patients at malnutrition risk: Secondary analysis of a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Historically, admission serum albumin concentrations have been considered useful biochemical markers for nutrition assessment. However, there is a lack of randomised trial data investigating whether low albumin concentrations are helpful for identifying patients benefitting from nutritional support. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the EFFORT trial, a Swiss-wide multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing individualised nutritional support with usual care nutrition in medical inpatients from April 1, 2014, to February 1, 2018. 1389 of 2028 patients at nutritional risk with available albumin concentrations on admission were included. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 and 180 days. Patients were stratified into groups of low or normal albumin based on the albumin cut-off of 30 g/L. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02517476. FINDINGS: 1389 patients (mean age, 73.1 (SD 3.5) years; 747 (53.8%) men) were included and 676 (48.7%) had low serum albumin concentrations at admission (<30 g/L). Mortality at 180 days was significantly increased in the low albumin group compared with patients with normal albumin concentrations (219/676 (32.4%) vs. 162/713 (22.7%), fully adjusted HR 1.4, 95%CI 1.11 to 1.77, p = 0.005]. Effects of nutritional support on 30-day mortality were similar for patients with low compared to patients with normal albumin concentrations (HR 0.68, 95%CI 0.44 to 1.05 vs. HR 0.70, 95%CI 0.41 to 1.20), with no evidence for a subgroup effect (p for interaction=0.97). INTERPRETATION: Based on this secondary analysis of a randomised trial, low admission serum albumin concentrations in hospitalised, non-critically ill, medical patients at nutritional risk had prognostic implications and indicated higher mortality risk but were not helpful in selecting patients for nutritional interventions. FUNDING: The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) (PP00P3_150531) and the Research Council of the Kantonsspital Aarau (1410.000.058 and 1410.000.044) provided funding for the EFFORT trial.

High-dose vitamin D substitution in patients with COVID-19: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center study-VitCov Trial.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused millions of deaths, and new treatments are urgently needed. Factors associated with a worse COVID-19 prognosis include old age (> 65 years), ethnicity, male sex, obesity, and people with comorbidities. Furthermore, vitamin D deficiency was reported as a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. According to a recent clinical case series, vitamin D deficiency is a modifiable risk factor, which has the prospect of reducing hospital stay, intensive care, and fatal outcomes. Vitamin D has potent immunomodulatory properties, and its supplementation might improve important outcomes in critically ill and vitamin D-deficient COVID-19 patients. Despite the evidence that supports an association between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 severity, there is uncertainty about the direct link. Therefore, the aim of the trial is to assess if high-dose vitamin D supplementation has a therapeutic effect in vitamin D-deficient patients with COVID-19. METHODS: As the trial design, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multi-center approach was chosen to compare a high single dose of vitamin D (140,000 IU) followed by treatment as usual (TAU) (VitD + TAU) with treatment as usual only (placebo + TAU) in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency. DISCUSSION: Vitamin D substitution in patients with COVID-19 and vitamin D deficiency should be investigated for efficacy and safety. The study aim is to test the hypothesis that patients with vitamin D deficiency suffering from COVID-19 treated under standardized conditions in hospital will recover faster when additionally treated with high-dose vitamin D supplementation. Latest studies suggest that vitamin D supplementation in patients with COVID-19 is highly recommended to positively influence the course of the disease. With this randomized controlled trial, a contribution to new treatment guidelines shall be made. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04525820 and SNCTP 2020-01401.

Representativeness of the Swiss Diabetes Registry - a single centre analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The Swiss Diabetes Registry (SwissDiab) is a multicentre, longitudinal, observational study of outpatients with diabetes receiving treatment at tertiary care centres. The aim of this study was to evaluate the representativeness of the participants at the study centre in the Division of Endocrinology and Diabetes at the Cantonal Hospital of St Gallen by comparing diabetes-related characteristics of participating and nonparticipating patients. METHODS: The study included 493 SwissDiab participants enrolled between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2016 and 640 nonparticipating patients treated at the centre during the same time period. For participants and nonparticipating patients, demographic characteristics, clinical findings, blood chemistry and medication were retrieved from the SwissDiab baseline visit and the medical record ±6 months from the first available outpatient visit to the clinic for diabetes-related care within the study period. Nonparticipating patients were further divided into three subgroups: (i) excluded from SwissDiab, or having received (ii) ≥6 months or (iii) <6 months of prior diabetes treatment at the centre. Differences in diabetes-related clinical characteristics were determined using simple bivariate (nonparametric) statistical analyses stratified by diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2. RESULTS: Compared with nonparticipants, participants smoked less (diabetes mellitus type 1: 24% vs 45%; diabetes mellitus type 2: 21% vs 29%), had higher educational attainment (diabetes mellitus type 1: 39% vs 21%; and diabetes mellitus type 2: 25% vs 18%) and lower glycated haemoglobin levels (diabetes mellitus type 1: 7.2% vs 7.8%; diabetes mellitus type 2: 7.2% vs 8.1%). In diabetes mellitus type 2, the proportion of females (30% vs 38%) and a migration background (36% vs 49%) were lower among participants. (All p-values <0.05.) In a stratified analysis SwissDiab participants had slightly better controlled diabetes than nonparticipating patients with ≥6 months of prior treatment, whereas the diabetes of patients recently referred to the clinic (with <6 months of prior treatment) and patients excluded from participation in SwissDiab were less well controlled. CONCLUSION: The observed differences in clinical characteristics between study participants and nonparticipating patients indicate that SwissDiab is likely to overestimate the state of diabetes care and management. The results highlight the need to improve recruitment of females and patients with a migration background in diabetes mellitus type 2.

Individualized Nutritional Support for Hospitalized Patients With Chronic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Deterioration of nutritional status during hospitalization in patients with chronic heart failure increases mortality. Whether nutritional support during hospitalization reduces these risks, or on the contrary, may be harmful due to an increase in salt and fluid intake, remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this trial was to study the effect of nutritional support on mortality in patients hospitalized with chronic heart failure who are at nutritional risk. METHODS: A total of 645 patients with chronic heart failure (36% [n = 234] with acute decompensation) participated in the investigator-initiated, open-label EFFORT (Effect of early nutritional support on Frailty, Functional Outcomes and Recovery of malnourished medical inpatients) trial. Patients were randomized to protocol-guided individualized nutritional support to reach energy, protein, and micronutrient goals (intervention group) or standard hospital food (control group). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: Mortality over 180 days increased with higher severity of malnutrition (odds ratio per 1-point increase in Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 score: 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21 to 2.24; p = 0.001). By 30 days, 27 of 321 intervention group patients (8.4%) died, compared with 48 of 324 (14.8%) control group patients (odds ratio: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.75; p = 0.002). Patients at high nutritional risk showed the most benefit from nutritional support. Mortality effects remained significant at 180-day follow-up. Intervention group patients also had a lower risk for major cardiovascular events at 30 days (17.4% vs. 26.9%; odds ratio: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.75; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized patients with chronic heart failure at high nutritional risk, individualized nutritional support reduced the risk for mortality and major cardiovascular events compared with standard hospital food. These data support malnutrition screening upon hospital admission followed by an individualized nutritional support strategy in this vulnerable patient population. (Effect of Early Nutritional Therapy on Frailty, Functional Outcomes and Recovery of Undernourished Medical Inpatients Trial [EFFORT]; NCT02517476).

Admission kidney function is a strong predictor for the response to nutritional support in patients at nutritional risk.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at substantial risk of malnutrition, which negatively affects clinical outcomes. We investigated the association of kidney function assessed at hospital admission and effectiveness of nutritional support in hospitalized medical patients at risk of malnutrition. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of an investigator-initiated, randomized-controlled, Swiss multicenter trial (EFFORT) that compared individualised nutritional support with usual hospital food on clinical outcomes. We compared effects of nutritional support on mortality in subgroups of patients stratified according to kidney function at the time of hospital admission (estimated glomerular filtration rates [eGFR] <15, 15-29, 30-59, 60-89 and ≥ 90 ml/min/1.73 m2). RESULTS: We included 1943 of 2028 patients (96%) from the original trial with known admission creatinine levels. Admission eGFR was a strong predictor for the beneficial effects of nutritional support in regard to lowering of 30-day mortality. Patients with an eGFR <15, 15-29 and 30-59 had the strongest mortality benefit (odds ratios [95%CI] of 0.24 [0.05 to 1.25], 0.37 [0.14 to 0.95] and 0.39 [0.21 to 0.75], respectively), while patients with less severe impairment in kidney function had a less pronounced mortality benefits (p for interaction 0.001). A similar stepwise association of kidney function and response to nutritional support was found also for other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: In medical inpatients at nutritional risk, admission kidney function was a strong predictor for the response to nutritional therapy. Initial kidney function may help to individualize nutritional support in the future by identification of patients with most clinical benefit. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered under ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier no. NCT02517476.

Value of handgrip strength to predict clinical outcomes and therapeutic response in malnourished medical inpatients: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Disease-related malnutrition is associated with loss of muscle mass and impaired functional status. Handgrip strength (HGS) has been proposed as an easy-to-use tool to assess muscle strength in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the prognostic implications of HGS in patients at nutritional risk with regard to clinical outcomes and response to nutritional support. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the randomized controlled, multicenter, Effect of Early Nutritional Support on Frailty, Functional Outcome, and Recovery of Malnourished Medical Inpatients Trial, which compared the effects of individualized nutritional support with usual hospital food in medical inpatients at nutritional risk. Our primary endpoint was 30-d all-cause mortality. The association between sex-specific HGS and clinical outcomes was investigated using multivariable regression analyses, adjusted for randomization, age, weight, height, nutritional risk, admission diagnosis, comorbidities, interaction terms, and study center. We used interaction terms to investigate possible effect modification regarding the nutritional support intervention. RESULTS: Mean ± SD HGS in the 1809 patients with available handgrip measurement was 17.0 ± 7.1 kg for females and 28.9 ± 11.3 kg for males. Each decrease of 10 kg in HGS was associated with increased risk of 30-d mortality (female: adjusted OR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.23, 3.62, P = 0.007; male: adjusted OR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.93, P = 0.015) and 180-d mortality (female: adjusted OR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.0, 2.10, P = 0.048; male: adjusted OR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.28, 1.89, P < 0.001). Individualized nutritional support was most effective in reducing mortality in patients with low HGS (adjusted OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.10, 0.82 in patients in the ≤10th percentile compared with OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.48 in patients in the >10th percentile; P for interaction = 0.026). CONCLUSIONS: In medical inpatients at nutritional risk, HGS provided significant prognostic information about expected mortality and complication risks and helps to identify which patients benefit most from nutritional support. HGS may thus improve individualization of nutritional therapy.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02517476.

Natural ghrelin in advanced cancer patients with cachexia, a case series.

BACKGROUND: Natural ghrelin, a peptide growth hormone secretagogue, has a therapeutic potential in cachexia. We designed a dose-finding trial of subcutaneous natural ghrelin to improve nutritional intake (NI) in advanced cancer patients. METHODS: Advanced cancer patients with cachexia management (symptom management, physiotherapy, nutritional, and psychosocial support) started with ghrelin at 32 µg/kg body weight, followed by 50% dose increases. Patients self-injected ghrelin twice daily for 4 days followed by a wash-out period. After reaching the primary endpoint, maximal NI (minimal dose for maximal NI), a maintenance period followed during which patients injected 10 doses of ghrelin per week. Safety parameters, NI, and cachexia outcomes (symptoms, narratives, muscle mass, and strength) were measured over 6 weeks. RESULTS: Ten patients with metastatic solid tumours were included, and six (100% male, mean age 61.8 ± 8.5 SD) received ghrelin. Minimal dose for maximal NI was reached in four patients. Three patients reached the end-of study visit. Ghrelin was well tolerated with variable results on appetite and eating-related symptoms but a positive effect in the narratives. Mean Functional Assessment of Appetite & Cachexia Therapy score was 6.8 points lower at final measurement compared with baseline, t(5) = 5.98, P < .01. Muscle mass was stable in two patients and increased in one patient, and muscle strength was stable in three patients. Subjective tolerability was high. Patients showed a fluctuating trajectory, and median survival was 88 days (51-412 days). CONCLUSIONS: Ghrelin was safe in advanced patients with cancer cachexia without dose-limiting toxicity and well tolerated. The intervention was very complex, and the number of patients included was small. There was a positive effect on nutritional intake and patient narratives.