Low Health Literacy Is Associated With Frailty and Reduced Likelihood of Liver Transplant Listing: A Prospective Cohort Study.

The effect of low health literacy (HL) on outcomes in end-stage liver disease (ESLD) is largely unknown. The association of low HL on clinical outcomes was investigated in a prospective cohort of outpatients with ESLD undergoing liver transplantation (LT) evaluation. From 2014 to 2017, 276 patients underwent LT evaluation with assessments of liver disease severity, medical and psychosocial comorbidities, physical frailty, and malnutrition. Literacy was measured with the Newest Vital Sign, a brief validated assessment. Multivariate models assessed relationships between HL and clinical outcomes adjusting for clinical and psychosocial variables. The median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-sodium score of the study sample was 15 (interquartile range, 11-19), 71 (25.7%) of candidates were frail, 117 (42.4%) had malnutrition, 151 (54.7%) had hepatic encephalopathy, 104 (37.7%) had low HL, and 85 (39.2%) had marginal or poor social support. Adjusting for education level, socioeconomic factors, and severity of illness, low HL was independently associated with physical frailty (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.50-8.59; P = 0.004) and not being wait-listed (aOR 1.96; 95% CI, 1.03-3.75; P = 0.04). Strong social support attenuated the relationship between low HL and not being wait-listed (aOR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.74-3.36; P = 0.24). Low HL is common and a largely unrecognized risk factor for poor health outcomes among patients with ESLD. Patient-oriented infrastructure and support are needed at the health system level to ensure all patients can successfully navigate the complex process of LT evaluation and wait-listing.

A randomized, controlled, behavioral intervention to promote walking after abdominal organ transplantation: results from the LIFT study.

Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and liver transplant recipients (LTRs) have significant post-transplant weight gain and low physical activity. We conducted a home-based, remotely monitored intervention using wearable accelerometer devices to promote post-transplant physical activity. We randomized 61 KTRs and 66 LTRs within 24 months of transplant to: (i) control, (ii) accelerometer or (iii) intervention: accelerometer paired with financial incentives and health engagement questions to increase steps by 15% from baseline every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was weight change. A co-primary outcome for the two accelerometer arms was steps. Participants were recruited at a median of 9.5 [3-17] months post-transplant. At 3 months, there were no significant differences in weight change across the three arms. The intervention arm was more likely to achieve ≥7000 steps compared to control with device (OR 1.99, 95% CI: 1.03-3.87); effect remained significant after adjusting for demographics, allograft, time from transplant and baseline weight. Adherence to target step goals was 74% in the intervention arm, 84% of health engagement questions were answered correctly. A pilot study with financial incentives and health engagement questions was feasible and led KTRs and LTRs to walk more, but did not affect weight. A definitive trial is warranted.

The Habit Formation trial of behavioral economic interventions to improve statin use and reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease: Rationale, design and methodologies.

BACKGROUND: Low adherence to statin (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) medication is common. Here, we report on the design and implementation of the Habit Formation trial. This clinical trial assessed whether the interventions, based on principles from behavioral economics, might improve statin adherence and lipid control in at-risk populations. We describe the rationale and methods for the trial, recruitment, conduct and follow-up. We also report on several barriers we encountered with recruitment and conduct of the trial, solutions we devised and efforts we will make to assess their impact on our study. METHODS: Habit Formation is a four-arm randomized controlled trial. Recruitment of 805 participants at elevated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with evidence of sub-optimal statin adherence and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) control is complete. Initially, we recruited from large employers (Employers) and a national health insurance company (Insurers) using mailed letters; individuals with a statin Medication Possession Ratio less than 80% were invited to participate. Respondents were enrolled if a laboratory measurement of low-density lipoprotein was >130 mg/dL. Subsequently, we recruited participants from the Penn Medicine Health System; individuals with usual-care low-density lipoprotein of >100 mg/dL in the electronic medical record were recruited using phone, text, email, and regular mail. Eligible participants self-reported incomplete medication adherence. During a 6-month intervention period, all participants received a wireless-enabled pill bottle for their statins and daily reminder messages to take their medication. Principles of behavioral economics were used to design three financial incentives, specifically a Simple Daily Sweepstakes rewarding daily medication adherence, a Deadline Sweepstakes where participants received either a full or reduced incentive depending on whether they took their medication before or after a daily reminder or Sweepstakes Plus Deposit Contract with incentives divided between daily sweepstakes and a monthly deposit. Six months post-incentives, we compared the primary outcome, mean change from baseline low-density lipoprotein, across arms. RESULTS AND LESSONS LEARNED: Health system recruitment yielded substantially better enrollment and was cost-efficient. Despite unexpected systematic failure and/or poor availability of two wireless pill bottles, we achieved enrollment targets and implemented the interventions. For new trials, we will routinely monitor device function and have contingency plans in the event of systemic failure. CONCLUSION: Interventions used in the Habit Formation trial could be translated into clinical practice. Within a large health system, successful recruitment depended on identification of eligible individuals through their electronic medical record, along with flexible ways of contacting these individuals. Challenges with device failure were manageable. The study will add to our understanding of optimally structuring and implementing incentives to motivate durable behavior change.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation for Treatment of Gastric Varices: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To quantify the pooled clinical outcomes of stent-graft transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for the management of gastric varices (GVs) through systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PubMed and Embase search was performed from 2003 to 2020. Search terms included: (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt OR TIPS) AND (gastric varices OR fundal varices OR gastroesophageal varices OR gastroesophageal varices) AND (hemorrhage OR rebleeding OR rebleeding OR survival). Inclusion criteria spanned: English language studies, publication in peer reviewed journals, sample size ≥ 10, reported clinical outcome data, exclusive treatment of GVs (no esophageal varices), exclusive use of stent-grafts for TIPS, no chemical obliteration of GVs. Outcomes included GV rebleeding rate, overall rebleeding rate, GV occlusion rate, hepatic encephalopathy (HE) incidence, and adverse event (AE) rate. RESULTS: Literature search yielded 936 articles. Of these, 5 (0.5%) retrospective observational cohort studies met inclusion criteria, spanning 209 patients (quinquagenarian men with viral or alcoholic liver disease) with GVs treated using TIPS with adjunctive coil embolization (47%). Clinical follow-up time ranged from 4.3 to 30.6 months. Outcomes included a pooled GV rebleeding rate of 15% (95% CI: 11%, 20%), total rebleeding rate of 21% (95% CI: 15%, 27%), GV occlusion rate of 33% (95% CI: 22%, 45%), HE incidence of 30% (95% CI: 24%, 36%), and AE incidence of 3% (95% CI: 1%, 8%). CONCLUSION: The incidence of GV rebleeding after stent-graft TIPS is high. The results suggest the need for additional measures to reduce recurrent hemorrhage incidence from GVs.

Qualitative Exploration of Barriers to Statin Adherence and Lipid Control: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Financial incentives may improve health by rewarding patients for focusing on present actions-such as medication regimen adherence-that provide longer-term health benefits. Objective: To identify barriers to improving statin therapy adherence and control of cholesterol levels with financial incentives and insights for the design of future interventions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study involved retrospective interviews with participants in a preplanned secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial of financial incentives for statin therapy adherence. A total of 636 trial participants from several US insurer or employer populations and an academic health system were rank ordered by change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLC) levels. Participants with the most LDLC level improvement (high-improvement group) and those with LDLC levels that did not improve (nonimprovement group) were purposively targeted, stratified across all trial groups, for semistructured telephone interviews that were performed from April 1 to June 30, 2018. Interviews were coded using a team-based, iterative approach. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2018, to October 31, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was mean change in LDLC level from baseline to 12 months; the secondary outcome, statin therapy adherence during the first 6 months. Results: A total of 54 patients were interviewed, divided equally between high-improvement and nonimprovement groups, with a mean (SD) age of 43.5 (10.3) years; 36 (66.7%) were women, 28 (51.9%) had diabetes, and 18 (33.3%) had cardiovascular disease. Compared with the high-improvement group, the nonimprovement group had fewer interviewees with an annual income of greater than $50 000 (11 [40.7%] vs 22 [81.5%]), worse self-reported health (fair to poor, 13 [48.1%] vs 3 [11.1%]), more Black interviewees (16 [59.3%] vs 4 [14.8%]), and lower baseline LDLC levels (>160 mg/dL, 2 [7.4%] vs 25 [92.6%]). Participants in the nonimprovement group had a greater burden of chronic illness (≥2 chronic conditions, 13 [48.1%] vs 6 [22.2%]) and were less frequently employed (full-time, 6 [22.2%] vs 12 [44.4%]). In interviews, the nonimprovement group was less focused on risks of high LDLC levels, described less engagement in LDLC level management, articulated fewer specific nutritional choices for optimizing health, and recounted greater difficulty obtaining healthy food. Participants in both groups had difficulty describing the structure of the financial incentives but did recall features of the electronic pill containers used to track adherence and how those containers affected medication routines. Conclusions and Relevance: Participants in a statin adherence trial whose LDLC levels did not improve found it more difficult to create medication routines and respond to financial incentives in the context of complex living conditions and a high burden of chronic illness. These findings suggest that future studies should be more attentive to socioeconomic circumstances of trial participants. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01798784.

Effect of Patient Financial Incentives on Statin Adherence and Lipid Control: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Financial incentives can improve medication adherence and cardiovascular disease risk, but the optimal design to promote sustained adherence after incentives are discontinued is unknown. Objective: To determine whether 6-month interventions involving different financial incentives to encourage statin adherence reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels from baseline to 12 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 4-group, randomized clinical trial was conducted from August 2013 to July 2018 among several large US insurer or employer populations and the University of Pennsylvania Health System. The study population included adults with elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, suboptimal LDL-C control, and evidence of imperfect adherence to statin medication. Data analysis was performed from July 2017 to June 2019. Interventions: The interventions lasted 6 months during which all participants received daily medication reminders and an electronic pill bottle. Statin adherence was measured by opening the bottle. For participants randomized to the 3 intervention groups, adherence was rewarded with financial incentives. The sweepstakes group involved incentives for daily adherence. In the deadline sweepstakes group, incentives were reduced if participants were adherent only after a reminder. The sweepstakes plus deposit contract group split incentives between daily adherence and a monthly deposit reduced for each day of nonadherence. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in LDL-C level from baseline to 12 months. Results: Among 805 participants randomized (199 in the simple daily sweepstakes group, 204 in the deadline sweepstakes group, 201 in the sweepstakes plus deposit contract group, and 201 in the control group), the mean (SD) age was 58.5 (10.3) years; 519 participants (64.5%) were women, 514 (63.9%) had diabetes, and 273 (33.9%) had cardiovascular disease. The mean (SD) baseline LDL-C level was 143.2 (42.5) mg/dL. Measured adherence at 6 months (defined as the proportion of 180 days with electronic pill bottle opening) in the control group (0.69; 95% CI, 0.66-0.72) was lower than that in the simple sweepstakes group (0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.87), the deadline sweepstakes group (0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.89), and the sweepstakes plus deposit contract group (0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90) (P < .001 for each incentive group vs control). LDL-C levels were measured for 636 participants at 12 months. Mean LDL-C level reductions from baseline to 12 months were 33.6 mg/dL (95% CI, 28.4-38.8 mg/dL) in the control group, 32.4 mg/dL (95% CI, 27.3-37.6 mg/dL) in the sweepstakes group, 33.2 mg/dL (95% CI, 28.1-38.3 mg/dL) in the deadline sweepstakes group, and 36.5 mg/dL (95% CI, 31.3-41.7 mg/dL) in the sweepstakes plus deposit contract group (adjusted P > .99 for each incentive group vs control). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with the control group, different financial incentives improved measured statin adherence but not LDL-C levels. This result points to the importance of directly measuring health outcomes, rather than simply adherence, in trials aimed at improving health behaviors. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01798784.

Sirtuin-1 in immunotherapy: A Janus-headed target.

Sirtuin-1 (Sirt1), a member of the NAD-dependent sirtuin family of histone/protein deacetylases (HDAC), is an important target for immunotherapy due to its role in deacetylating the transcription factors Foxp3 and thymic retinoid acid receptor related orphan receptor gamma (RORγt). Sirt1 inhibition can increase Foxp3 acetylation and promote the production and functions of Foxp3+ T-regulatory (Treg) cells, whereas the acetylation of RORγt decreases its transcriptional activity DNA binding and decreases the differentiation of proinflammatory Th17 cells. Pharmacologic inhibitors of Sirt1 increase allograft survival and decrease autoimmune colitis and experimental allergic encephalomyelitis. However, in contrast to its role in T cells, Sirt1 has anti-inflammatory effects in myeloid cells, and, context dependent, in Th17 cells. Here, inhibition of Sirt1 can have proinflammatory effects. In addition to effects arising from the central role of Sirt1 in cellular metabolism and NAD-dependent reactions, such proinflammatory effects further complicate the potential of Sirt1 for therapeutic immunosuppression. This review aims to reconcile the opposing literature on pro- and anti-inflammatory effects of Sirt1, provides an overview of the role of Sir1 in the immune system, and discusses the pros and cons associated with inhibiting Sirt1 for control of inflammation and immune responses.