COVID-19-associated AKI in hospitalized US patients: incidence, temporal trends, geographical distribution, risk factors and mortality.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, however, its incidence, geographic distribution, and temporal trends since the start of the pandemic are understudied. Methods: Electronic health record data were obtained from 53 health systems in the United States (US) in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). We selected hospitalized adults diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 6th, 2020, and January 6th, 2022. AKI was determined with serum creatinine (SCr) and diagnosis codes. Time were divided into 16-weeks (P1-6) periods and geographical regions into Northeast, Midwest, South, and West. Multivariable models were used to analyze the risk factors for AKI or mortality. Results: Out of a total cohort of 306,061, 126,478 (41.0 %) patients had AKI. Among these, 17.9% lacked a diagnosis code but had AKI based on the change in SCr. Similar to patients coded for AKI, these patients had higher mortality compared to those without AKI. The incidence of AKI was highest in P1 (49.3%), reduced in P2 (40.6%), and relatively stable thereafter. Compared to the Midwest, the Northeast, South, and West had higher adjusted AKI incidence in P1, subsequently, the South and West regions continued to have the highest relative incidence. In multivariable models, AKI defined by either SCr or diagnostic code, and the severity of AKI was associated with mortality. Conclusions: Uncoded cases of COVID-19-associated AKI are common and associated with mortality. The incidence and distribution of COVID-19-associated AKI have changed since the first wave of the pandemic in the US.

Ontology-Based Classification and Analysis of Adverse Events Associated With the Usage of Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine.

Multiple methodologies have been developed to identify and predict adverse events (AEs); however, many of these methods do not consider how patient population characteristics, such as diseases, age, and gender, affect AEs seen. In this study, we evaluated the utility of collecting and analyzing AE data related to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ) from US Prescribing Information (USPIs, also called drug product labels or package inserts), the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), and peer-reviewed literature from PubMed/EMBASE, followed by AE classification and modeling using the Ontology of Adverse Events (OAE). Our USPI analysis showed that CQ and HCQ AE profiles were similar, although HCQ was reported to be associated with fewer types of cardiovascular, nervous system, and musculoskeletal AEs. According to EMBASE literature mining, CQ and HCQ were associated with QT prolongation (primarily when treating COVID-19), heart arrhythmias, development of Torsade des Pointes, and retinopathy (primarily when treating lupus). The FAERS data was analyzed by proportional ratio reporting, Chi-square test, and minimal case number filtering, followed by OAE classification. HCQ was associated with 63 significant AEs (including 21 cardiovascular AEs) for COVID-19 patients and 120 significant AEs (including 12 cardiovascular AEs) for lupus patients, supporting the hypothesis that the disease being treated affects the type and number of certain CQ/HCQ AEs that are manifested. Using an HCQ AE patient example reported in the literature, we also ontologically modeled how an AE occurs and what factors (e.g., age, biological sex, and medical history) are involved in the AE formation. The methodology developed in this study can be used for other drugs and indications to better identify patient populations that are particularly vulnerable to AEs.

24-Hour Profiles of 11-Oxygenated C19 Steroids and Δ5-Steroid Sulfates during Oral and Continuous Subcutaneous Glucocorticoids in 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency.

Background: Optimal management of androgen excess in 21-hydroxylase deficiency (21OHD) remains challenging. 11-oxygenated-C19 steroids (11-oxyandrogens) have emerged as promising biomarkers of disease control, but data regarding their response to treatment are lacking. Objective: To compare the dynamic response of a broad set of steroids to both conventional oral glucocorticoids (OG) and circadian cortisol replacement via continuous subcutaneous hydrocortisone infusion (CSHI) in patients with 21OHD based on 24-hour serial sampling. Participants and Methods: We studied 8 adults (5 women), ages 19-43 years, with poorly controlled classic 21OHD who participated in a single-center open-label phase I-II study comparing OG with CSHI. We used mass spectrometry to measure 15 steroids (including 11-oxyandrogens and Δ5 steroid sulfates) in serum samples obtained every 2 h for 24 h after 3 months of stable OG, and 6 months into ongoing CSHI. Results: In response to OG therapy, androstenedione, testosterone (T), and their four 11-oxyandrogen metabolites:11ß-hydroxyandrostenedione, 11-ketoandrostenedione, 11ß-hydroxytestosterone and 11-ketotestosterone (11KT) demonstrated a delayed decline in serum concentrations, and they achieved a nadir between 0100-0300. Unlike DHEAS, which had little diurnal variation, pregnenolone sulfate (PregS) and 17-hydoxypregnenolone sulfate peaked in early morning and declined progressively throughout the day. CSHI dampened the early ACTH and androgen rise, allowing the ACTH-driven adrenal steroids to return closer to baseline before mid-day. 11KT concentrations displayed the most consistent difference between OG and CSHI across all time segments. While T was lowered by CSHI as compared with OG in women, T increased in men, suggesting an improvement of the testicular function in parallel with 21OHD control in men. Conclusion: 11-oxyandrogens and PregS could serve as biomarkers of disease control in 21OHD. The development of normative data for these promising novel biomarkers must consider their diurnal variability.

Characterizing Long COVID: Deep Phenotype of a Complex Condition.

BACKGROUND: Numerous publications describe the clinical manifestations of post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC or "long COVID"), but they are difficult to integrate because of heterogeneous methods and the lack of a standard for denoting the many phenotypic manifestations. Patient-led studies are of particular importance for understanding the natural history of COVID-19, but integration is hampered because they often use different terms to describe the same symptom or condition. This significant disparity in patient versus clinical characterization motivated the proposed ontological approach to specifying manifestations, which will improve capture and integration of future long COVID studies. METHODS: The Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO) is a widely used standard for exchange and analysis of phenotypic abnormalities in human disease but has not yet been applied to the analysis of COVID-19. FUNDING: We identified 303 articles published before April 29, 2021, curated 59 relevant manuscripts that described clinical manifestations in 81 cohorts three weeks or more following acute COVID-19, and mapped 287 unique clinical findings to HPO terms. We present layperson synonyms and definitions that can be used to link patient self-report questionnaires to standard medical terminology. Long COVID clinical manifestations are not assessed consistently across studies, and most manifestations have been reported with a wide range of synonyms by different authors. Across at least 10 cohorts, authors reported 31 unique clinical features corresponding to HPO terms; the most commonly reported feature was Fatigue (median 45.1%) and the least commonly reported was Nausea (median 3.9%), but the reported percentages varied widely between studies. INTERPRETATION: Translating long COVID manifestations into computable HPO terms will improve analysis, data capture, and classification of long COVID patients. If researchers, clinicians, and patients share a common language, then studies can be compared/pooled more effectively. Furthermore, mapping lay terminology to HPO will help patients assist clinicians and researchers in creating phenotypic characterizations that are computationally accessible, thereby improving the stratification, diagnosis, and treatment of long COVID. FUNDING: U24TR002306; UL1TR001439; P30AG024832; GBMF4552; R01HG010067; UL1TR002535; K23HL128909; UL1TR002389; K99GM145411.

Identification and Development of Therapeutics for COVID-19.

After emerging in China in late 2019, the novel coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spread worldwide, and as of mid-2021, it remains a significant threat globally. Only a few coronaviruses are known to infect humans, and only two cause infections similar in severity to SARS-CoV-2: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, a species closely related to SARS-CoV-2 that emerged in 2002, and Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, which emerged in 2012. Unlike the current pandemic, previous epidemics were controlled rapidly through public health measures, but the body of research investigating severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome has proven valuable for identifying approaches to treating and preventing novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Building on this research, the medical and scientific communities have responded rapidly to the COVID-19 crisis and identified many candidate therapeutics. The approaches used to identify candidates fall into four main categories: adaptation of clinical approaches to diseases with related pathologies, adaptation based on virological properties, adaptation based on host response, and data-driven identification (ID) of candidates based on physical properties or on pharmacological compendia. To date, a small number of therapeutics have already been authorized by regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), while most remain under investigation. The scale of the COVID-19 crisis offers a rare opportunity to collect data on the effects of candidate therapeutics. This information provides insight not only into the management of coronavirus diseases but also into the relative success of different approaches to identifying candidate therapeutics against an emerging disease. IMPORTANCE The COVID-19 pandemic is a rapidly evolving crisis. With the worldwide scientific community shifting focus onto the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19, a large number of possible pharmaceutical approaches for treatment and prevention have been proposed. What was known about each of these potential interventions evolved rapidly throughout 2020 and 2021. This fast-paced area of research provides important insight into how the ongoing pandemic can be managed and also demonstrates the power of interdisciplinary collaboration to rapidly understand a virus and match its characteristics with existing or novel pharmaceuticals. As illustrated by the continued threat of viral epidemics during the current millennium, a rapid and strategic response to emerging viral threats can save lives. In this review, we explore how different modes of identifying candidate therapeutics have borne out during COVID-19.

Pathogenesis, Symptomatology, and Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through Analysis of Viral Genomics and Structure.

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which emerged in late 2019, has since spread around the world and infected hundreds of millions of people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While this viral species was unknown prior to January 2020, its similarity to other coronaviruses that infect humans has allowed for rapid insight into the mechanisms that it uses to infect human hosts, as well as the ways in which the human immune system can respond. Here, we contextualize SARS-CoV-2 among other coronaviruses and identify what is known and what can be inferred about its behavior once inside a human host. Because the genomic content of coronaviruses, which specifies the virus's structure, is highly conserved, early genomic analysis provided a significant head start in predicting viral pathogenesis and in understanding potential differences among variants. The pathogenesis of the virus offers insights into symptomatology, transmission, and individual susceptibility. Additionally, prior research into interactions between the human immune system and coronaviruses has identified how these viruses can evade the immune system's protective mechanisms. We also explore systems-level research into the regulatory and proteomic effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the immune response. Understanding the structure and behavior of the virus serves to contextualize the many facets of the COVID-19 pandemic and can influence efforts to control the virus and treat the disease. IMPORTANCE COVID-19 involves a number of organ systems and can present with a wide range of symptoms. From how the virus infects cells to how it spreads between people, the available research suggests that these patterns are very similar to those seen in the closely related viruses SARS-CoV-1 and possibly Middle East respiratory syndrome-related CoV (MERS-CoV). Understanding the pathogenesis of the SARS-CoV-2 virus also contextualizes how the different biological systems affected by COVID-19 connect. Exploring the structure, phylogeny, and pathogenesis of the virus therefore helps to guide interpretation of the broader impacts of the virus on the human body and on human populations. For this reason, an in-depth exploration of viral mechanisms is critical to a robust understanding of SARS-CoV-2 and, potentially, future emergent human CoVs (HCoVs).

Ten Rules for Conducting Retrospective Pharmacoepidemiological Analyses: Example COVID-19 Study.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, pharmaceutical treatment hypotheses have abounded, each requiring careful evaluation. A randomized controlled trial generally provides the most credible evaluation of a treatment, but the efficiency and effectiveness of the trial depend on the existing evidence supporting the treatment. The researcher must therefore compile a body of evidence justifying the use of time and resources to further investigate a treatment hypothesis in a trial. An observational study can provide this evidence, but the lack of randomized exposure and the researcher's inability to control treatment administration and data collection introduce significant challenges. A proper analysis of observational health care data thus requires contributions from experts in a diverse set of topics ranging from epidemiology and causal analysis to relevant medical specialties and data sources. Here we summarize these contributions as 10 rules that serve as an end-to-end introduction to retrospective pharmacoepidemiological analyses of observational health care data using a running example of a hypothetical COVID-19 study. A detailed supplement presents a practical how-to guide for following each rule. When carefully designed and properly executed, a retrospective pharmacoepidemiological analysis framed around these rules will inform the decisions of whether and how to investigate a treatment hypothesis in a randomized controlled trial. This work has important implications for any future pandemic by prescribing what we can and should do while the world waits for global vaccine distribution.

Clinical Characterization and Prediction of Clinical Severity of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among US Adults Using Data From the US National COVID Cohort Collaborative.

Importance: The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) is a centralized, harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record repository that is the largest, most representative COVID-19 cohort to date. This multicenter data set can support robust evidence-based development of predictive and diagnostic tools and inform clinical care and policy. Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 severity and risk factors over time and assess the use of machine learning to predict clinical severity. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a retrospective cohort study of 1 926 526 US adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection (polymerase chain reaction >99% or antigen <1%) and adult patients without SARS-CoV-2 infection who served as controls from 34 medical centers nationwide between January 1, 2020, and December 7, 2020, patients were stratified using a World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and demographic characteristics. Differences between groups over time were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Random forest and XGBoost models were used to predict severe clinical course (death, discharge to hospice, invasive ventilatory support, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient demographic characteristics and COVID-19 severity using the World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and differences between groups over time using multivariable logistic regression. Results: The cohort included 174 568 adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 44.4 [18.6] years; 53.2% female) and 1 133 848 adult controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (mean [SD] age, 49.5 [19.2] years; 57.1% female). Of the 174 568 adults with SARS-CoV-2, 32 472 (18.6%) were hospitalized, and 6565 (20.2%) of those had a severe clinical course (invasive ventilatory support, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, death, or discharge to hospice). Of the hospitalized patients, mortality was 11.6% overall and decreased from 16.4% in March to April 2020 to 8.6% in September to October 2020 (P = .002 for monthly trend). Using 64 inputs available on the first hospital day, this study predicted a severe clinical course using random forest and XGBoost models (area under the receiver operating curve = 0.87 for both) that were stable over time. The factor most strongly associated with clinical severity was pH; this result was consistent across machine learning methods. In a separate multivariable logistic regression model built for inference, age (odds ratio [OR], 1.03 per year; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04), male sex (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.51-1.69), liver disease (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34), dementia (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.13-1.41), African American (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.20) and Asian (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.57) race, and obesity (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.27-1.46) were independently associated with higher clinical severity. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that COVID-19 mortality decreased over time during 2020 and that patient demographic characteristics and comorbidities were associated with higher clinical severity. The machine learning models accurately predicted ultimate clinical severity using commonly collected clinical data from the first 24 hours of a hospital admission.

Separation, characterization, and standardization of extracellular vesicles for drug delivery applications.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are membranous nanovesicles secreted from living cells, shuttling macromolecules in intercellular communication and potentially possessing intrinsic therapeutic activity. Due to their stability, low immunogenicity, and inherent interaction with recipient cells, EVs also hold great promise as drug delivery vehicles. Indeed, they have been used to deliver nucleic acids, proteins, and small molecules in preclinical investigations. Furthermore, EV-based drugs have entered early clinical trials for cancer or neurodegenerative diseases. Despite their appeal as delivery vectors, however, EV-based drug delivery progress has been hampered by heterogeneity of sample types and methods as well as a persistent lack of standardization, validation, and comprehensive reporting. This review highlights specific requirements for EVs in drug delivery and describes the most pertinent approaches for separation and characterization. Despite residual uncertainties related to pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and potential off-target effects, clinical-grade, high-potency EV drugs might be achievable through GMP-compliant workflows in a highly standardized environment.

Urinary extracellular vesicles: A position paper by the Urine Task Force of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles.

Urine is commonly used for clinical diagnosis and biomedical research. The discovery of extracellular vesicles (EV) in urine opened a new fast-growing scientific field. In the last decade urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) were shown to mirror molecular processes as well as physiological and pathological conditions in kidney, urothelial and prostate tissue. Therefore, several methods to isolate and characterize uEVs have been developed. However, methodological aspects of EV separation and analysis, including normalization of results, need further optimization and standardization to foster scientific advances in uEV research and a subsequent successful translation into clinical practice. This position paper is written by the Urine Task Force of the Rigor and Standardization Subcommittee of ISEV consisting of nephrologists, urologists, cardiologists and biologists with active experience in uEV research. Our aim is to present the state of the art and identify challenges and gaps in current uEV-based analyses for clinical applications. Finally, recommendations for improved rigor, reproducibility and interoperability in uEV research are provided in order to facilitate advances in the field.

Challenges in defining Long COVID: Striking differences across literature, Electronic Health Records, and patient-reported information.

Since late 2019, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has introduced a wide array of health challenges globally. In addition to a complex acute presentation that can affect multiple organ systems, increasing evidence points to long-term sequelae being common and impactful. The worldwide scientific community is forging ahead to characterize a wide range of outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection; however the underlying assumptions in these studies have varied so widely that the resulting data are difficult to compareFormal definitions are needed in order to design robust and consistent studies of Long COVID that consistently capture variation in long-term outcomes. Even the condition itself goes by three terms, most widely "Long COVID", but also "COVID-19 syndrome (PACS)" or, "post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC)". In the present study, we investigate the definitions used in the literature published to date and compare them against data available from electronic health records and patient-reported information collected via surveys. Long COVID holds the potential to produce a second public health crisis on the heels of the pandemic itself. Proactive efforts to identify the characteristics of this heterogeneous condition are imperative for a rigorous scientific effort to investigate and mitigate this threat.

ST-segment elevation in patients presenting with COVID-19: case series.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the pathogen responsible for the now pandemic disease, coronavirus disease (COVID-19). A number of reports have emerged suggesting these patients may present with signs and symptoms consistent with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction without coronary artery occlusion. CASE SUMMARY: We report an international case series of patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection who presented with suspected ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Three patients with confirmed COVID-19 presented with electrocardiogram criteria for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. No patient had obstructive coronary disease at coronary angiography. Post-mortem histology in one case demonstrated myocardial ischaemia in the absence of coronary atherothrombosis or myocarditis. DISCUSSION: Patients with COVID-19 may present with features consistent with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and patent coronary arteries. The prevalence and clinical outcomes of this condition require systematic investigation in consecutive unselected patients.

Identification and Development of Therapeutics for COVID-19.

After emerging in China in late 2019, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 spread worldwide and as of mid-2021 remains a significant threat globally. Only a few coronaviruses are known to infect humans, and only two cause infections similar in severity to SARS-CoV-2: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, a closely related species of SARS-CoV-2 that emerged in 2002, and Middle East respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus, which emerged in 2012. Unlike the current pandemic, previous epidemics were controlled rapidly through public health measures, but the body of research investigating severe acute respiratory syndrome and Middle East respiratory syndrome has proven valuable for identifying approaches to treating and preventing novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Building on this research, the medical and scientific communities have responded rapidly to the COVID-19 crisis to identify many candidate therapeutics. The approaches used to identify candidates fall into four main categories: adaptation of clinical approaches to diseases with related pathologies, adaptation based on virological properties, adaptation based on host response, and data-driven identification of candidates based on physical properties or on pharmacological compendia. To date, a small number of therapeutics have already been authorized by regulatory agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), while most remain under investigation. The scale of the COVID-19 crisis offers a rare opportunity to collect data on the effects of candidate therapeutics. This information provides insight not only into the management of coronavirus diseases, but also into the relative success of different approaches to identifying candidate therapeutics against an emerging disease.

Pathogenesis, Symptomatology, and Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through Analysis of Viral Genomics and Structure.

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, which emerged in late 2019, has since spread around the world and infected hundreds of millions of people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). While this viral species was unknown prior to January 2020, its similarity to other coronaviruses that infect humans has allowed for rapid insight into the mechanisms that it uses to infect human hosts, as well as the ways in which the human immune system can respond. Here, we contextualize SARS-CoV-2 among other coronaviruses and identify what is known and what can be inferred about its behavior once inside a human host. Because the genomic content of coronaviruses, which specifies the virus's structure, is highly conserved, early genomic analysis provided a significant head start in predicting viral pathogenesis and in understanding potential differences among variants. The pathogenesis of the virus offers insights into symptomatology, transmission, and individual susceptibility. Additionally, prior research into interactions between the human immune system and coronaviruses has identified how these viruses can evade the immune system's protective mechanisms. We also explore systems-level research into the regulatory and proteomic effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the immune response. Understanding the structure and behavior of the virus serves to contextualize the many facets of the COVID-19 pandemic and can influence efforts to control the virus and treat the disease.

The National COVID Cohort Collaborative: Clinical Characterization and Early Severity Prediction.

Background: The majority of U.S. reports of COVID-19 clinical characteristics, disease course, and treatments are from single health systems or focused on one domain. Here we report the creation of the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), a centralized, harmonized, high-granularity electronic health record repository that is the largest, most representative U.S. cohort of COVID-19 cases and controls to date. This multi-center dataset supports robust evidence-based development of predictive and diagnostic tools and informs critical care and policy. Methods and Findings: In a retrospective cohort study of 1,926,526 patients from 34 medical centers nationwide, we stratified patients using a World Health Organization COVID-19 severity scale and demographics; we then evaluated differences between groups over time using multivariable logistic regression. We established vital signs and laboratory values among COVID-19 patients with different severities, providing the foundation for predictive analytics. The cohort included 174,568 adults with severe acute respiratory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PCR >99% or antigen <1%) as well as 1,133,848 adult patients that served as lab-negative controls. Among 32,472 hospitalized patients, mortality was 11.6% overall and decreased from 16.4% in March/April 2020 to 8.6% in September/October 2020 (p = 0.002 monthly trend). In a multivariable logistic regression model, age, male sex, liver disease, dementia, African-American and Asian race, and obesity were independently associated with higher clinical severity. To demonstrate the utility of the N3C cohort for analytics, we used machine learning (ML) to predict clinical severity and risk factors over time. Using 64 inputs available on the first hospital day, we predicted a severe clinical course (death, discharge to hospice, invasive ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) using random forest and XGBoost models (AUROC 0.86 and 0.87 respectively) that were stable over time. The most powerful predictors in these models are patient age and widely available vital sign and laboratory values. The established expected trajectories for many vital signs and laboratory values among patients with different clinical severities validates observations from smaller studies, and provides comprehensive insight into COVID-19 characterization in U.S. patients. Conclusions: This is the first description of an ongoing longitudinal observational study of patients seen in diverse clinical settings and geographical regions and is the largest COVID-19 cohort in the United States. Such data are the foundation for ML models that can be the basis for generalizable clinical decision support tools. The N3C Data Enclave is unique in providing transparent, reproducible, easily shared, versioned, and fully auditable data and analytic provenance for national-scale patient-level EHR data. The N3C is built for intensive ML analyses by academic, industry, and citizen scientists internationally. Many observational correlations can inform trial designs and care guidelines for this new disease.

Testing for Primary Aldosteronism and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist Use Among U.S. Veterans : A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Primary aldosteronism is a common cause of treatment-resistant hypertension. However, evidence from local health systems suggests low rates of testing for primary aldosteronism. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate testing rates for primary aldosteronism and evidence-based hypertension management in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: U.S. Veterans Health Administration. PARTICIPANTS: Veterans with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (n = 269 010) from 2000 to 2017, defined as either 2 blood pressures (BPs) of at least 140 mm Hg (systolic) or 90 mm Hg (diastolic) at least 1 month apart during use of 3 antihypertensive agents (including a diuretic), or hypertension requiring 4 antihypertensive classes. MEASUREMENTS: Rates of primary aldosteronism testing (plasma aldosterone-renin) and the association of testing with evidence-based treatment using a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) and with longitudinal systolic BP. RESULTS: 4277 (1.6%) patients who were tested for primary aldosteronism were identified. An index visit with a nephrologist (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05 [95% CI, 1.66 to 2.52]) or an endocrinologist (HR, 2.48 [CI, 1.69 to 3.63]) was associated with a higher likelihood of testing compared with primary care. Testing was associated with a 4-fold higher likelihood of initiating MRA therapy (HR, 4.10 [CI, 3.68 to 4.55]) and with better BP control over time. LIMITATIONS: Predominantly male cohort, retrospective design, susceptibility of office BPs to misclassification, and lack of confirmatory testing for primary aldosteronism. CONCLUSION: In a nationally distributed cohort of veterans with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension, testing for primary aldosteronism was rare and was associated with higher rates of evidence-based treatment with MRAs and better longitudinal BP control. The findings reinforce prior observations of low adherence to guideline-recommended practices in smaller health systems and underscore the urgent need for improved management of patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.