Search

Background: Both total ankle replacement (TAR) and ankle arthrodesis do show some problems in long-term studies. To choose either of these surgical options is a delicate task. There are no randomized studies reported in the literature and no previous studies in which patients constitute the own controls.Methods: Patients with a TAR and a contralateral ankle arthrodesis were identified in the Swedish Ankle Register. A self-reported foot and ankle specific questionnaire (SEFAS) was sent to these patients who also were asked to report their grade of satisfaction from 1 to 5.Results: The median SEFAS score was 32 (16-44) for the prostheses and 27 (14-47) for the arthrodeses. The median satisfaction score was 2 (1-4) for the prostheses and 2 (1-5) for the arthrodeses. There were no statistically significant difference between the prosthetic side and the fused side regarding these scores.Conclusion: Patients who had undergone ankle arthrodesis on one side and had the contralateral ankle replaced, were equally satisfied with both procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article engages with the resistance against the global erosion of seed diversity following the modernization and industrialization of agriculture over the 20th century. This resistance spans from local farming communities that preserve and safeguard traditional landraces to international movements which oppose proprietary seed regulations and promote free sharing of seeds. The article focuses on the latter and presents a study of the open source seed movement: an initiative to apply strategies from the open source software movement to ensure the free circulation of seeds. The erosion of seed diversity can be seen not only as a loss of genetic diversity but also a memory loss where traditional, collective knowledge about how to grow certain landraces is forgotten. Consequently, the open source seed movement is not only about saving seeds but also about preserving and revitalizing local and traditional ecological knowledge against privatization and enclosure through intellectual property rights. The aim of this article is, thus, to analyze the open source seed movement as an act of revitalization in relation to intellectual property rights and in the context of information politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at heightened risk of cardiovascular complications. The sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin reduces the risk for hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and kidney events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. An increased risk of amputation has been observed with canagliflozin in 1 previous trial. We examined cardiovascular and kidney efficacy and the risk of limb-related events in patients with and without PAD in an exploratory analysis.Methods: A total of 17 160 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, including 1025 (6%) with PAD, were randomized. Key efficacy outcomes were MACE (cardiovascular [CV] death, myocardial infarction, stroke), CV death/HHF, and progression of kidney disease. Amputations, peripheral revascularization, and limb ischemic adverse events were site-reported and categorized by a blinded reviewer.Results: Patients in the placebo arm with PAD versus those without tended to have higher adjusted risk of CV death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.23 [95% CI, 0.97-1.56], P=0.094) and significantly higher adjusted risk of CV death/HHF (adjusted HR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.21-2.12], P=0.0010) and progression of kidney disease (adjusted HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.13 - 2.03], P=0.0058), and limb adverse events (adjusted HR, 8.37, P<0.001). The relative risk reductions with dapagliflozin for CV death/HHF (HR, 0.86, PAD; HR, 0.82, no-PAD; P-interaction=0.79) and progression of kidney disease (HR, 0.78, PAD; HR, 0.76, no-PAD; P-interaction=0.84) were consistent regardless of PAD. There were 560 patients who had at least 1 limb ischemic event, 454 patients with at least 1 peripheral revascularization, and 236 patients with at least 1 amputation, with a total of 407 amputations reported. Overall, there were no significant differences in any limb outcome with dapagliflozin versus placebo including limb ischemic adverse events (HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.90-1.26]) and amputation (HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.84-1.40]), with no significant interactions by a history of PAD versus not (P-interactions=0.30 and 0.093, respectively).Conclusions: Patients with versus without PAD are at a higher risk of CV death of CV death, HHF, and kidney outcomes, and have a consistent benefits for CV death/HHF and progression of kidney disease with dapagliflozin. Patients with PAD had a higher risk of limb events, with no consistent pattern of incremental risk observed with dapagliflozin. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01730534. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sodium glucose transporter-2 inhibitors reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Because of their baseline risk, patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI) may derive even greater benefit from sodium glucose transporter-2 inhibitor therapy.Methods: DECLARE-TIMI 58 (Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 58) randomized 17 160 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and either established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (n=6974) or multiple risk factors (n=10 186) to dapagliflozin versus placebo. The 2 primary end points were composite of MACE (cardiovascular death, MI, or ischemic stroke) and the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure. Those with previous MI (n=3584) made up a prespecified subgroup of interest.Results: In patients with previous MI (n=3584), dapagliflozin reduced the relative risk of MACE by 16% and the absolute risk by 2.6% (15.2% versus 17.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; P=0.039), whereas there was no effect in patients without previous MI (7.1% versus 7.1%; HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.88-1.13; P=0.97; P for interaction for relative difference=0.11; P for interaction for absolute risk difference=0.048), including in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease but no history of MI (12.6% versus 12.8%; HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81-1.19). There seemed to be a greater benefit for MACE within 2 years after the last acute event ( P for interaction trend=0.007). The relative risk reductions in cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure were more similar, but the absolute risk reductions tended to be greater: 1.9% (8.6% versus 10.5%; HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65-1.00; P=0.046) and 0.6% (3.9% versus 4.5%; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.00; P=0.055) in patients with and without previous MI, respectively ( P interaction for relative difference=0.69; P interaction for absolute risk difference=0.010).Conclusions: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and previous MI are at high risk of MACE and cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure. Dapagliflozin appears to robustly reduce the risk of both composite outcomes in these patients. Future studies should aim to confirm the large clinical benefits with sodium glucose transporter-2 inhibitors we observed in patients with previous MI.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01730534. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular and cardiopulmonary events. In the Phase III, 52-week ETHOS trial (NCT02465567), triple therapy with budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGF) reduced rates of moderate/severe exacerbations and all-cause mortality versus dual therapy with glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (GFF) or budesonide/formoterol fumarate (BFF). However, the effect of BGF on cardiovascular events versus GFF remains unevaluated. Further, the effect of BGF on time to first severe exacerbation has not been reported. Objective: Assess the effects of BGF 320/18/9.6 μg (BGF 320) and other ICS-containing arms on cardiovascular and severe cardiopulmonary endpoints versus GFF in patients with COPD from ETHOS. Methods: Patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of exacerbations were randomized to twice-daily BGF 320, BGF 160/18/9.6 μg, BFF 320/9.6 μg, or GFF 18/9.6 µg (GFF). Time to first severe COPD exacerbation was a pre-specified endpoint; post-hoc cardiovascular and severe cardiopulmonary endpoints included time to first major adverse cardiac event (MACE), time to first cardiovascular adverse event (AE) of special interest (CVAESI), time to first cardiac AE, and time to the composite endpoint of first severe cardiopulmonary event. Measurements and Main Results: BGF 320 reduced the rate of first occurrence (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) of cardiovascular and severe cardiopulmonary events versus GFF, including for CVAESI (0.63 [0.48, 0.82]), cardiac AE (0.60 [0.48, 0.76]), and severe cardiopulmonary event (0.80 [0.67, 0.95]). Conclusions: BGF had a benefit on cardiovascular endpoints and severe cardiopulmonary events versus GFF in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD.

Importance: Dapagliflozin reduces the risk of hospitalizations for heart failure and the progression of chronic kidney disease in patients with and without type 2 diabetes (T2D), whereas the effects on reducing atherosclerotic events appear less clear., Objective: To explore whether N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hsTnT) levels can identify a subset of patients with T2D at higher risk and who might benefit more from dapagliflozin with regard to atherosclerotic events., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial, a randomized clinical trial of dapagliflozin in patients with T2D and either multiple risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD; approximately 60%) or established ASCVD (approximately 40%). All patients with available blood samples at randomization were included in these analyses. Data were collected from May 2013 to September 2018, and data were analyzed from May 2019 to June 2022., Interventions: Dapagliflozin vs placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), the composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiovascular death, which was one of dual primary outcomes of the main trial., Results: Of 14 565 included patients, 9143 (62.8%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 63.9 (6.8) years. When tested individually in a multivariable model for MACE risk, NT-proBNP and hsTnT were each significantly associated with the risk of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] per 1 SD in log-transformed biomarker: NT-proBNP, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.49-1.76; hsTnT: 1.59; 95% CI, 1.46-1.74). The magnitude of the association was similar in patients with ASCVD (NT-proBNP: aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.45-1.77; hsTnT: aHR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.45-1.81) and multiple risk factors for ASCVD (NT-proBNP: aHR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.40-1.88; hsTnT: aHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.29-1.77). Moreover, both biomarkers remained independently associated with MACE when both were included in the multivariable model (NT-proBNP: aHR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.34-1.60; hsTnT: aHR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.26-1.53). Modeled as a continuous variable, baseline biomarker levels did not modify the relative treatment effect of dapagliflozin vs placebo with MACE. However, the relative risk reduction numerically grew with higher biomarker levels, as did the baseline risk. Thus, MACE event rates were nominally lower in dapagliflozin-treated vs placebo-treated patients with biomarker concentrations in the top quartile (NT-proBNP: HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.97; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 2.4%; hsTnT: HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; ARR, 2.7%), whereas there was no significant treatment effect in patients with biomarkers levels in quartiles 1 to 3 (NT-proBNP: HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.88-1.18; ARR, 0%; hsTnT: HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.84-1.13; ARR, 0.2%)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, NT-proBNP and hsTnT levels were associated with the risk for future cardiovascular events in both primary and secondary prevention patients with T2D. Both cardiac biomarkers were helpful to identify patients at very high risk for atherosclerotic events that may derive reduction in risk of MACE with dapagliflozin., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01730534.

Background: In people with type 2 diabetes at high risk of cardiovascular or kidney disease, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors consistently reduce the risk of hospitalisations for heart failure. Less is known about their effects on hospitalisation from any cause, especially in people with type 2 diabetes without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, which includes most of the global population of people with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to assess the effect of the SGLT2 inhibitor, dapagliflozin, on the risks of hospitalisations for any cause and for specific causes in people with type 2 diabetes with and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease., Methods: The DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial was a double-blind, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study. People with type 2 diabetes and either risk factors for or established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral dapagliflozin 10 mg or placebo once daily. In these post-hoc analyses, the effects of dapagliflozin on risks of first non-elective any-cause and cause-specific hospitalisation were assessed with Cox proportional hazards regression models overall and in the subset of participants without prevalent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The risk of total (first plus subsequent) non-elective hospitalisations was assessed with Lin-Wei-Ying-Yang model. Investigator-reported System Organ Class terms were used to classify cause-specific hospitalisations. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01730534., Findings: Between April 25, 2013, and Sept 18, 2018, 17 160 people (6422 [37·4%] women, 10 738 [62·6%] men; mean age 63·9 years [SD 6·8]) were enrolled in the original trial, of whom 10186 (59·4%) had multiple risk factors for but did not have established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and 6835 (39·8%) had both no evidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and low KDIGO risk. Over a median follow-up of 4·2 years (IQR 3·9-4·4), dapagliflozin was associated with a lower risk of first non-elective hospitalisation for any cause (2779 [32·4%] of 8582 people in the dapagliflozin group vs 3036 [35·4%] of 8578 people in the placebo group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·89 [95% CI 0·85-0·94]) and total (first plus subsequent) non-elective hospitalisations for any cause (risk ratio 0·92 [95% CI 0·86-0·97]). The association between dapagliflozin use and the risk of first non-elective hospitalisation for any cause was consistent in subgroups of participants with (HR 0·92 [95% CI 0·85-0·99] and without (0·87 [0·81-0·94]) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease at baseline (p interaction=0·31). Compared with the placebo group, the dapagliflozin group had lower risk of first hospitalisations due to cardiac disorders (HR 0·91 [95% CI 0·84-1·00]), metabolism and nutrition disorders (0·73 [0·60-0·89]), renal and urinary disorders (0·61 [0·49-0·77]), and due to any other cause excluding these three causes (0·90 [0·85-0·96]). Treatment with dapagliflozin was also associated with a lower risk of hospitalisations due to musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders (HR 0·81 [0·67-0·99]) and infections and infastations (HR 0·86 [0·78-0·96])., Interpretation: Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of first and total non-elective hospitalisations for any cause in people with type 2 diabetes, regardless of the presence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, including hospitalisations not directly attributed to cardiac, kidney, or metabolic causes. These findings might have implications on health-related quality of life for people with type 2 diabetes and on health-care costs attributable this condition., Funding: AstraZeneca., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MS reports travel support from AstraZeneca and Novo Nordisk paid to Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. SDW reports grants from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi, and Amgen; grants and personal fees from Arena, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, and Janssen; grants and consulting fees from Merck; and personal fees from Aegerion, Allergan, AngelMed, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Clinical Research Institute, Icon Clinical, Lexicon, St Jude Medical, Xoma, Servier, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. SDW's spouse is employed by Merck. IR reports being a member of an advisory board for AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk. Consultancy fees AstraZeneca, Insuline Medical, Concenter BioPharma, and Pluristem; and Speaker's Bureau from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. ELG and SAM are members of the TIMI Study Group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women's Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Research and Development, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Softcell Medical, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. AR and IY report hourly payments from AstraZeneca paid to Hadassah Medical Center and hourly payments from Novo Nordisk. TAZ reports research grants from the Austrian Science Funds and the German Research Foundation, honoraria for serving on advisory boards from Boehringer Ingelheim; personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries; and educational grants from Eli Lilly. MF, PAJ, IAMG-N, and AML are employees at BioPharmaceuticals Research & Development, AstraZeneca, Gothenburg, Sweden. LAL reports research funding from Astra Zeneca and Lexicon; has provided continuing medical education on behalf of AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Servier; and has acted as an advisor to AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi. DLB reports being a member of an advisory board for from AngioWave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; is a member of the Board of Directors for AngioWave (with stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol-Myers Squibb (holds stock), DRS.LINQ (with stock options), High Enroll (holds stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; is the Inaugural Chair of the American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; consultantcy fees from Broadview Ventures; is a member of Data Monitoring Committees for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific, Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Novartis, Population Health Research Institute; Rutgers University; Honoraria from the American College of Cardiology, Arnold and Porter law firm, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute), Belvoir Publications, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute, HMP Global, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, K2P, Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD, MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME, Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute, Slack Publications, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, WebMD, Wiley; is the Deputy Editor of Clinical Cardiology; is the Chair of the NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee; is the Chair of the VA CART Research and Publications Committee; is named on the patent for sotagliflozin, which is assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon (neither DLB nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; royalties from Elsevier; is a site coinvestigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, Vascular Solutions; is a trustee of the American College of Cardiology; and has done unfunded research for FlowCo and Takeda. DKM reports research support for Clinical Trials Leadership from Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi, Merck, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Esperion, Lilly USA, Lexicon, and CSL Behring; and honoraria for consultancy from Lilly USA, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Applied Therapeutics, Metavant, Sanofi, Altimmune and Intercept Pharma, CSL Behring, Bayer, and GlaxoSmithKline. JPHW reports consultancy and speaking engagements contracted via the University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK (no personal payment) from Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Napp, Novo Nordisk, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Rhythm Pharmaceuticals, Saniona, and Ysopia; grants paid to the University of Liverpool from AstraZeneca and Novo Nordisk; and honoraria and lecture fees (personal) from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Napp, Novo Nordisk, Mundipharma, Sanofi, and Takeda. AC reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Novo Nordisk and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Pfizer, and Medial Early-Sign. MSS reports grants and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Intarcia, Janssen Research & Development, Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, and Novartis; consulting fees from Anthos Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CVS Caremark, DalCor, Dyrnamix, Esperion, IFM Therapeutics, and Ionis; and grants from Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; MSS is a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has also received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women's Hospital from Abbott, Aralez, Roche, and Zora Biosciences. OM reports being a member of an advisory board for Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, AstraZeneca; research grant support paid to Hadassah Hebrew University Hospital from Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca; and Speaker's Bureau from AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Boehringer Ingelheim., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This article analyzes India's Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) as a potential intervention in the administration of patent law. The TKDL is a database including a vast body of traditional medical knowledge from India, aiming to prevent the patenting and misappropriation of that knowledge. This article contextualizes the TKDL in relation to documentation theory as well as to existing research on the uses of databases to protect traditional knowledge. It explores the TKDL's potential consequences for India's traditional medical knowledge and the wider implications that traditional knowledge databases can have for the safeguarding of traditional knowledge in general. The article concludes that on the one hand the TKDL bridges the gap between the main branches of Indian traditional medicine and the formal knowledge system of International Patent Classifications. Furthermore, it has also inspired revisions of the International Patent Classification system, which makes it better adapted to incorporate traditional medical knowledge. On the other hand, critical research on traditional knowledge documentation argues that traditional knowledge databases, like the TKDL, can decontextualize the knowledge they catalogue and dispossess its original owners. The TKDL, however, also fits into a national, Indian agenda of documenting and modernizing traditional medicine that predates the formation of the TKDL by several decades and challenges the dichotomy between traditional and scientific knowledge systems that originally motivated the formation of the TKDL., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Big data is central to new developments in global clinical science aiming to improve the lives of patients. Technological advances have led to the routine use of structured electronic healthcare records with the potential to address key gaps in clinical evidence. The covid-19 pandemic has demonstrated the potential of big data and related analytics, but also important pitfalls. Verification, validation, and data privacy, as well as the social mandate to undertake research are key challenges. The European Society of Cardiology and the BigData@Heart consortium have brought together a range of international stakeholders, including patient representatives, clinicians, scientists, regulators, journal editors and industry. We propose the CODE-EHR Minimum Standards Framework as a means to improve the design of studies, enhance transparency and develop a roadmap towards more robust and effective utilisation of healthcare data for research purposes., (This article has been co-published with permission in The BMJ, the Lancet Digital Health, and the European Heart Journal © the Authors 2022.)

Big data is important to new developments in global clinical science that aim to improve the lives of patients. Technological advances have led to the regular use of structured electronic health-care records with the potential to address key deficits in clinical evidence that could improve patient care. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown this potential in big data and related analytics but has also revealed important limitations. Data verification, data validation, data privacy, and a mandate from the public to conduct research are important challenges to effective use of routine health-care data. The European Society of Cardiology and the BigData@Heart consortium have brought together a range of international stakeholders, including representation from patients, clinicians, scientists, regulators, journal editors, and industry members. In this Review, we propose the CODE-EHR minimum standards framework to be used by researchers and clinicians to improve the design of studies and enhance transparency of study methods. The CODE-EHR framework aims to develop robust and effective utilisation of health-care data for research purposes., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The BigData@Heart project has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) 2 Joint Undertaking (grant 116074) which receives support from the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme of the European Union and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations. The funders had no role in considering the study design; in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the Review for publication. DK reports grants from the European Union and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations Innovative Medicines Initiative (116074), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR CDF-2015-08-074 RATE-AF; NIHR130280 DaRe2THINK; and NIHR132974 D2T-NeuroVascular), the British Heart Foundation (PG/17/55/33087, AA/18/2/34218 and FS/CDRF/21/21032), and the ESC. DK is supported by educational grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)-Pfizer Alliance, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Boston Scientific, the NIHR and University of Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, the British Heart Foundation and University of Birmingham Accelerator Award (STEEER-AF NCT04396418), Amomed Pharma, Istituto Di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico San Raffaele, and Menarini (NCT0083244). DK receives advisory board personal fees from Bayer, Amomed, Protherics Medicines Development, and Myokardia. FWA reports grants from IMI BigData@Heart. SDA reports grants and personal fees from Vifor Pharma, Abbott, and Abbott Vascular; and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Cardiac Dimensions, Actimed, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bioventrix, Janssen, Respicardia, V-Wave, Brahms, Cordio, and Occlutech. CB reports grants from Medical Research Council, Boehringer Ingelheim, and NIHR. AB reports grants from AstraZeneca. BB reports grants from the European Commission. GB reports grants from the European Commission (IMI project support) and Bayer. BC reports non-financial support from Roche Diagnostics and iRhythm. CC reports grants from the European Commission. MRC reports personal fees from AstraZeneca. FC reports personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Servier, and BMS; and advisory board fees from GlyCardial Diagnostics. MC reports personal fees from Vifor Pharma. AD reports salary from Bayer. MF reports salary from AstraZeneca. CPG reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Vifor Pharma, Menarini, Wondr Medical, Raisio Group, and Oxford University Press; and grants from BMS, Abbott, British Heart Foundation, NIHR, and ESC. MI reports grants from World Economic Forum, Swedish Innovation Agency, and the European Commission; and collaboration with Frisq. SL reports grants from the European Commission. TFL reports grants from Abbott, Amgen, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Vifor Pharma, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca; and personal fees from Daichi Sankyo, Pfizer, and Menarini. LR reports salary from Bayer. CS reports personal fees from Bayer. BT reports personal fees from Servier. GvT reports grants from IMI. KvB reports grants from IMI BigData@Heart. PEV reports personal fees from Hygeia Hospitals Group, Hellenic Healthcare Group, ESC, and Servier. TV is working as an editor at The BMJ and Acta Médica Portuguesa and is Vice President of the European Union of General Practitioners. MV reports grants from the European Commission. SW reports grants from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Bayer, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, InfraRedx, Johnson & Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, Sinomed, Terumo, and V-Wave. SW serves as an unpaid advisory board member or unpaid member of the steering or executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Sinomed, V-Wave, and Xeltis. He has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers. SW is a member of the steering or executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without effect on his personal remuneration. SW is an unpaid member of the Pfizer Research Award selection committee in Switzerland and of the Women as One Awards Committee. SW is a member of the Clinical Study Group of the Deutsches Zentrum für Herz Kreislauf-Forschung and of the Advisory Board of the Australian Victorian Heart Institute. He is Chairperson of the ESC Congress Program Committee, former Chairperson of the ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee, and Deputy Editor of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Interventions. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown beneficial effects on renal outcomes mainly in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Here we report analyses of renal outcomes with the SGLT2 inhibitor dapagliflozin in the DECLARE-TIMI 58 cardiovascular outcomes trial, which included patients with type 2 diabetes both with and without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and mostly with preserved renal function., Methods: In DECLARE-TIMI 58, patients with type 2 diabetes, HbA 1c 6·5-12·0% (47·5-113·1 mmol/mol), with either established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or multiple risk factors, and creatinine clearance of at least 60 mL/min were randomly assigned (1:1) to 10 mg dapagliflozin or placebo once daily. A prespecified secondary cardiorenal composite outcome was defined as a sustained decline of at least 40% in estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] to less than 60 mL/min per 1·73m 2 , end-stage renal disease (defined as dialysis for at least 90 days, kidney transplantation, or confirmed sustained eGFR <15mL/min per 1·73 m 2 ), or death from renal or cardiovascular causes; a prespecified renal-specific composite outcome was the same but excluding death from cardiovascular causes. In this renal analysis, we report findings for the components of these composite outcomes, subgroup analysis of these composite outcomes, and changes in eGFR at different timepoints. DECLARE-TIMI 58 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01730534., Findings: The trial took place between April 25, 2013, and Sept 18, 2018; median follow-up was 4·2 years (IQR 3·9-4·4). Of the 17 160 participants who were randomly assigned, 8162 (47·6%) had an eGFR of at least 90 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 , 7732 (45·1%) had an eGFR of 60 to less than 90 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 , and 1265 (7·4%) had an eGFR of less than 60 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 at baseline (one participant had missing data for eGFR); 6974 (40·6%) had established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and 10 186 (59·4%) had multiple risk factors. As previously reported, the cardiorenal secondary composite outcome was significantly reduced with dapagliflozin versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·67-0.87; p<0·0001); excluding death from cardiovascular causes, the HR for the renal-specific outcome was 0·53 (0·43-0·66; p<0·0001). We identified a 46% reduction in sustained decline in eGFR by at least 40% to less than 60 mL/min per 1·73 m 2 (120 [1·4% vs 221 [2·6%]; HR 0·54 [95% CI 0·43-0·67]; p<0·0001). The risk of end-stage renal disease or renal death was lower in the dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group (11 [0·1%] vs 27 [0·3%]; HR 0·41 [95% CI 0·20-0·82]; p=0·012). Both the cardiorenal and renal-specific composite outcomes were improved with dapagliflozin versus placebo across various prespecified subgroups, including those defined by baseline eGFR (cardiorenal outcome p interaction =0·97; renal-specific outcome p interaction =0·87) and the presence or absence of established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (cardiorenal outcome p interaction =0·67; renal-specific outcome p interaction =0·72). 6 months after randomisation, the mean decrease in eGFR was larger in the dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group. The mean change equalised by 2 years, and at 3 and 4 years the mean decrease in eGFR was less with dapagliflozin than with placebo., Interpretation: Dapagliflozin seemed to prevent and reduce progression of kidney disease compared with placebo in this large and diverse population of patients with type 2 diabetes with and without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, most of whom had preserved renal function., Funding: AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We describe a method, which uses already existent administrative data to identify individuals with a high risk of a large need of healthcare in the coming year. The model is based on the ACG (Adjusted Clinical Groups) system to identify the high-risk patients. We have set up a model where we combine the ACG system stratification analysis tool RUB (Resource Utilization Band) and Probability High Total Cost >0.5. We tested the method with historical data, using 2 endpoints, either >19 physical visits anywhere in the healthcare system in the coming 12 months or more than 2 hospital admissions in the coming 12 months. In the region of Västra Götaland with 1.6 million inhabitants, 5.6% of the population had >19 physical visits during a 12 month period and 1.2% more than 2 hospital admissions. Our model identified approximately 24,000 individuals of whom 25.7% had >19 physical visits and 11.6% had more than 2 hospital admissions in the coming 12 months. We now plan a small test in ten primary care centers to evaluate if the model should be introduced in the entire Västra Götaland region.