Red blood cell transfusion use in patients with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data available on the use of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in younger chronic kidney disease patients not on dialysis (CKD-ND), for whom the consequences of developing antibodies to foreign antigens (allosensitization) may be particularly relevant. METHODS: We used the Ingenix medical claims database, comprising data on ∼40 million commercially insured US individuals, to identify annual (2002-08) cohorts of patients 18-64 years of age with newly diagnosed CKD. We followed each cohort for 1 year to estimate RBC transfusion rates and used Cox proportional hazards regression to identify patient characteristics associated with time to first transfusion. RESULTS: We identified 120 790 newly diagnosed CKD patients for the years 2002-08; 54% were 50-64 years of age. Overall, the transfusion rate was 2.64/100 person-years (PYs) (95% CI: 2.52-2.77). Rates were higher among those with diagnosed anemia [9.80/100 PYs (95% CI: 9.31-10.3)] and among those who progressed to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) [28.0/100 PYs (95% CI: 23.7-33.0)]. For those progressing to ESRD, transfusion rates more than doubled between 2002 and 2008. Of the factors evaluated, transfusion history and the presence of heart failure and diabetes were most strongly associated with a receipt of a transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: RBC transfusions are relatively common and on the rise among younger CKD-ND patients who are anemic and progress to ESRD. Efforts to decrease the use of transfusions may be important for potential transplant candidates who progress to ESRD.

Inpatient Constipation Among Migraine Patients Prescribed Anti-calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies and Standard of Care Antiepileptic Drugs: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a United States Electronic Health Record Database.

INTRODUCTION: Erenumab, an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor monoclonal antibody (mAb), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in May 2018. Constipation with serious complications was added to the Warning and Precautions section in the erenumab Prescribing Information in October 2019 after events were observed during post-marketing surveillance. We aimed to assess and compare the risk of inpatient constipation, and, separately, inpatient constipation with serious complications, among patients with migraine treated with CGRP mAbs and standard of care antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). METHODS: Within Optum's Electronic Health Record Research Database, patients with migraine who initiated erenumab, other CGRP mAbs, and AEDs were identified from May 2018 through March 2020. Erenumab initiators were propensity score-matched separately to initiators of other CGRP mAbs and AEDs. Incident inpatient constipation events, and serious complications, were identified using multiple risk windows for outcome assessment (30-, 60-, 90-day risk windows, and all available follow-up). Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated comparing inpatient constipation risk among matched erenumab initiators relative to comparators. RESULTS: We identified 17,902 erenumab, 13,404 other CGRP mAb, and 49,497 AED initiators who met study criteria. Among matched initiators, the risk of inpatient constipation was 0.46% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.60) for erenumab and 0.44% (95% CI 0.33-0.58) for other CGRP mAbs within the 90-day risk window, with a corresponding OR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.72-1.55). Among matched erenumab and AED initiators, inpatient constipation risk was 0.53% (95% CI 0.42-0.66) and 0.76% (95% CI 0.62-0.92), respectively, and the OR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.51-0.94). Few serious complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Patients initiating erenumab had similar risk of inpatient constipation within 90 days of treatment initiation versus patients initiating other CGRP mAbs, and lower risk versus patients initiating AEDs. These findings provide context to events observed during post-marketing surveillance.

High-intensity environmental light in dementia: effect on sleep and activity.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether high-intensity ambient light in public areas of long-term care facilities will improve sleeping patterns and circadian rhythms of persons with dementia. DESIGN: A cluster-unit crossover intervention trial involving four conditions: morning bright light, evening bright light, all-day bright light, and minimum standard light. SETTING: The common areas of two geriatric units in a psychiatric hospital and a dementia-specific residential care facility. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-six older adults with dementia. INTERVENTION: Ambient bright light of approximately 2,500 lux, delivered through a low-glare lighting system installed in the dining and activity areas. Participant exposure averaged 2.5 to 3.0 hours for the morning and evening interventions and 8.4 hours for the all-day intervention. MEASUREMENTS: Nighttime sleep using wrist actigraphy and daytime activity using nonobtrusive daytime observations. RESULTS: Night-time sleep increased significantly in participants exposed to morning and all-day light, with the increase most prominent in participants with severe or very severe dementia (mean increase 16 minutes (P=.008) for morning, and 14 minutes (P=.01) for all-day). Morning light produced a mean phase advance of 29 minutes (P=.02) and evening light a mean phase delay of 15 minutes (P=.06). Effects on daytime sleepiness were inconsistent, and the number of sleep bouts, mesor, amplitude, intradaily variability, and interdaily stability were not significantly different, indicating that the overall strength of day and night activity rhythms did not change significantly under any treatment condition. CONCLUSION: Bright light appears to have a modest but measurable effect on sleep in this population, and ambient light may be preferable to stationary devices such as light boxes.

Evaluating the quality of life of long-term care residents with dementia.

PURPOSE: This study's purpose was to better understand existing measures of quality of life in dementia residents of long-term care facilities. DESIGN AND METHODS: We gathered data from 421 residents in 45 facilities. Analyses determined the psychometric properties of each measure, estimated the relationship between measures, and identified the extent to which resident characteristics predicted scores. RESULTS: Most instruments had good to excellent dispersion and interrater reliability, and most scales had good to excellent internal consistency. Proxy measures tended to correlate best with each other, less well with observational measures, and least well with resident measures. Resident cognition and activities of daily living (ADLs) function were associated with most quality-of-life measures but predicted no more than a quarter of the observed variance in any measure. IMPLICATIONS: Various measures and sources of data provide different perspectives on quality of life. No "gold standard" exists; so a combination of methods and sources is likely to provide the most complete picture of quality of life.

Diagnostic mammography performance and race: outcomes in Black and White women.

BACKGROUND: A previous study compared the performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and cancer detection rate) of screening mammography in Black and White women. No study, to the authors' knowledge, has evaluated the difference in the performance of diagnostic mammography between Black and White women. METHODS: Univariate analysis was used to evaluate differences in characteristics and cancers between Black and White women. Stratified and adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to test the association of Black and White race with performance measures of diagnostic mammography. RESULTS: The sensitivity of diagnostic mammography was higher (91% vs. 84%) and specificity was lower (86% vs. 90%) among Black women compared with White women. After controlling for age, density, self-reported breast problems, and previous mammography, sensitivity was significantly higher (odds ratio [OR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22-2.80) and specificity was significantly lower (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.70-0.81) among Black women. The crude cancer detection rate of mammography was higher for Black women (42.6/1000) than for White women (31.0/1000) and Black women had a higher proportion of cancers that were > 2.0 cm (57.4% vs. 46.2%) that were more often poorly differentiated (61.7% vs. 49.3%) and were more often estrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor negative. CONCLUSIONS: Black women have lower specificity of diagnostic mammography and, consequently, more unnecessary workups than White women. Black women have higher sensitivity of diagnostic mammography, with cancers that are larger and more advanced than White women. Delay in responding to signs and symptoms would explain the size and later stage. However, more research is needed to understand the biologic differences of breast cancer characteristics between Black and White women.

Screening mammography performance and cancer detection among black women and white women in community practice.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvement in mammography screening attendance, black women continue to have poorer prognosis at diagnosis than white woman. Data from the Carolina Mammography Registry were used to evaluate whether there may be differences in mammography performance or detected cancers when comparing black women with white women who are screened by mammography. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from community-based mammography facilities on 468,484 screening mammograms (79,397 in black women and 389,087 in white women) were included for study. Mammograms were linked to a pathology data base for identification of cancers. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and cancer detection rates were compared between black women and white women. Logistic regression methods were used to control for covariates associated with performance characteristics. Differences in cancer characteristics were compared between black women and white women using chi-square statistics. RESULTS: Screening mammography performance results for black women compared with white women were as follows: sensitivity, odds ratio (OR) = 1.07 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.83-1.39); specificity, OR = 1.02 (95% CI, 0.98-1.06); and positive predictive value, OR = 1.07 (95% CI, 0.94-1.23). Among women with no previous screening, black women had a larger proportion of invasive tumors that measured > or = 2 cm (38% vs. 26%; P = 0.04). The cancer detection rate was highest among black women who reported symptoms at screening (13.9 per 1000 black women vs. 7.9 per 1000 white women). Invasive cancers in black women were poorer grade (P = 0.001), and more often had negative estrogen receptor status and progesterone receptor status (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, screening mammography performed equally well in black women and white women controlling for age, breast density, and time since previous mammogram. Black women who reported symptoms had larger and higher grade tumors compared with white women. Educational efforts need to be strengthened to encourage black women to react sooner to symptoms, so that the tumors detected will be smaller and black women will have a better prognosis when they appear for mammography.