Search

Abstract Introduction Several blood markers of inflammation are elevated in prostate cancer (PCa) and have prognostic value. Little is known about the relationship between these markers, PCa, and other factors associated with chronic inflammation, such as smoking and obesity. We analyzed the interaction between neutrophil and platelet counts indexed to lymphocyte count (NLR and PLR, resp.) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa), accounting for the potential confounding factors of systemic inflammation. Methods NLR and PLR were evaluated in a multicenter prospective study in 443 patients. CsPCa was defined as a Gleason ≥ 4 + 3. Differences between patients with csPCa and non-csPCA were evaluated using the chi-square test, analysis of variance or the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for smoking, hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease, and in separate models, either body mass index or waist-to-hip ratio was used to characterize the relationship between inflammation and csPCa. Results None of the factors such as plateletcrit, NLR, and PLR were significantly different between patients with csPCa or non-significant PCa. After adjustment, there was no association between PLR, NLR, plateletcrit or platelet count and csPCa. In an exploratory analysis, there was no association between markers of inflammation and PSA levels > 10 ng/mL. When testing different NLR cutoffs to predict csPCa in ROC analysis, none reached a clinically meaningful value. Conclusion In contrast to previous studies, we found no significant association between easily available blood markers of inflammation and indices of PCa aggressiveness. Further research is required to determine whether inflammation promotes PCa. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03127631. Date of registration: April 25, 2017.

Background: Visit-to-visit variability in single biological measurements has been associated with cognitive decline and an elevated risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). However, the effect of visit-to-visit variability in multiple biological measures is underexplored. We investigated the effect of visit-to-visit variability in blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), weight, fasting plasma glucose, cholesterol, and triglycerides on cognitive performance and CVD. Methods: Data on BP, HR, weight, glucose, cholesterol, and triglycerides from study visits in the Outcome Reduction with Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) trial were used to estimate the association between visit-to-visit variability, cognitive performance (Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score) and CVD (non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death). Visit-to-visit variation for each measurement was estimated by calculating each individuals visit-to-visit standard deviation for that measurement. Participants whose standard deviation was in the highest quarter were classified as having high variation. Participants were grouped into those having 0, 1, 2, 3, or ≥ 4 high variation measurements. Regression and survival models were used to estimate the association between biological measures with MMSE and CVD with adjustment for confounders and mean measurement value. Results: After adjustment for covariates, higher visit-to-visit variability in BP, HR, weight, and FPG were associated with poorer MMSE and a higher risk of CVD. Effect sizes did not vary greatly by measurement. The effects of high visit-to-visit variability were additive; compared to participants who had no measurements with high visit-to-visit variability, those who had high visit-to-visit variability in ≥4 measurements had poorer MMSE scores (-0.63 (95 % CI -0.96 to -0·31). Participants with ≥4 measurements with high visit-to-visit variability compared to participants with none had higher risk of CVD (hazard ratio 2.46 (95 % CI 1.63 to 3.70). Conclusion: Visit-to-visit variability in several measurements were associated with cumulatively poorer cognitive performance and a greater risk of CVD.

Objectives Handgrip strength and physical activity are commonly used to evaluate physical frailty; however, their distribution varies worldwide. The thresholds that identify frail individuals have been established in high-income countries but not in low-income and middle-income countries. We created two adaptations of physical frailty to study how global versus regional thresholds for handgrip strength and physical activity affect frailty prevalence and its association with mortality in a multinational population.Design, setting and participants Our sample included 137 499 adults aged 35–70 years (median age: 61 years, 60% women) from Population Urban Rural Epidemiology Studies community-dwelling prospective cohort across 25 countries, covering the following geographical regions: China, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Africa, Russia and Central Asia, North America/Europe, Middle East and South America.Primary and secondary outcome measures We measured and compared frailty prevalence and time to all-cause mortality for two adaptations of frailty.Results Overall frailty prevalence was 5.6% using global frailty and 5.8% using regional frailty. Global frailty prevalence ranged from 2.4% (North America/Europe) to 20.1% (Africa), while regional frailty ranged from 4.1% (Russia/Central Asia) to 8.8% (Middle East). The HRs for all-cause mortality (median follow-up of 9 years) were 2.42 (95% CI: 2.25 to 2.60) and 1.91 (95% CI: 1.77 to 2.06) using global frailty and regional frailty, respectively, (adjusted for age, sex, education, smoking status, alcohol consumption and morbidity count). Receiver operating characteristic curves for all-cause mortality were generated for both frailty adaptations. Global frailty yielded an area under the curve of 0.600 (95% CI: 0.594 to 0.606), compared with 0.5933 (95% CI: 0.587 to 5.99) for regional frailty (p=0.0007).Conclusions Global frailty leads to higher regional variations in estimated frailty prevalence and stronger associations with mortality, as compared with regional frailty. However, both frailty adaptations in isolation are limited in their ability to discriminate between those who will die during 9 years’ follow-up from those who do not.

BackgroundAlthough several epidemiological studies have linked social isolation to increased risk of mortality, the magnitude of any effect is unclear, in part because of the use of different measures of social isolation.ObjectiveTo examine the association between social isolation and all-cause mortality and investigate whether it differs in various subgroups or populations.Data sourcesWe searched for relevant studies in electronic databases: MEDLINE (1946 to December 31, 2021), EMBASE (1974 to December 31, 2021), and PsycINFO (1806 to December 31, 2021).Selection criteriaWe included both prospective and retrospective cohort studies that examined the association between social isolation and all-cause mortality among adults.Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers screened and extracted data independently. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information whenever possible. Data were pooled using a random effect model to calculate estimates of the effects of social isolation on all-cause mortality.ResultsData from studies involving 1.30 million individuals were included. The pooled hazard ratio of social isolation for all-cause mortality was 1.33 (95% confidence interval; 1.26-1.41, heterogeneity: Chi² = 112.51, P < 0.00001, I² = 76%).ConclusionSocial isolation is associated with increased risk for all-cause mortality.RegistrationPROSPERO (CRD42020152351).

The aim of this review is to discuss the current health disparities in rural communities and to explore the potential role of telehealth and artificial intelligence in providing cardio-oncology care to underserviced communities. With advancements in early detection and cancer treatment, survivorship has increased. The interplay between cancer and cardiovascular disease, which are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in this population, has been increasingly recognized. Worldwide, cardio-oncology clinics (COCs) have emerged to deliver a multidisciplinary approach to the care of patients with cancer to mitigate cardiovascular risks while minimizing interruptions in cancer treatment. Despite the value of COCs, the accessibility gap between urban and rural communities in both oncology and cardio-oncology contributes to health care disparities and may be an underrecognized determinant of health globally. Telehealth and artificial intelligence offer opportunities to provide timely care irrespective of rurality. We therefore explore current developments within this sphere and propose a novel model of care to address the disparity in urban vs. rural cardio-oncology using the experience in Canada, a geographically large country with many rural communities.

Metastatic lesions of the heart are rare but have the potential to cause significant morbidity. We describe the case of a patient with renal cell carcinoma who presented with shortness of breath and palpitations and was found to have a metastatic myocardial lesion causing arrythmia. He received stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to alleviate symptoms and provide local control. SBRT planning was executed using a four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scan to account for respiratory and cardiac motion. Images from a planning magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan and a gated diagnostic MRI scan of the heart were fused with the 4DCT to assist with delineating the tumour. A dose of 30 Gy in five fractions was delivered without incident. The patient’s cardiac MRI at two months post-treatment showed stability of his cardiac lesion. He subsequently died of distant disease progression, without any recurrence of his cardiac symptoms. SBRT may be considered for patients who present with a symptomatic metastatic cardiac lesion.

Summary: Background: The associations between the extent of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) impairment and mortality, incident cardiovascular disease, and respiratory hospitalisations are unclear, and how these associations might vary across populations is unknown. Methods: In this international, community-based cohort study, we prospectively enrolled adults aged 35–70 years who had no intention of moving residences for 4 years from rural and urban communities across 17 countries. A portable spirometer was used to assess FEV1. FEV1 values were standardised within countries for height, age, and sex, and expressed as a percentage of the country-specific predicted FEV1 value (FEV1%). FEV1% was categorised as no impairment (FEV1% ≥0 SD from country-specific mean), mild impairment (FEV1%

Russia has one of the highest rates of cardiovascular disease in the world. The International Project on Cardiovascular Disease in Russia (IPCDR) was set up to understand the reasons for this. A substantial component of this study was the Know Your Heart Study devoted to characterising the nature and causes of cardiovascular disease in Russia by conducting large cross-sectional surveys in two Russian cities Novosibirsk and Arkhangelsk. The study population was 4542 men and women aged 35-69 years recruited from the general population. Fieldwork took place between 2015-18. There were two study components: 1) a baseline interview to collect information on socio-demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors, usually conducted at home, and 2) a comprehensive health check at a primary care clinic which included detailed examination of the cardiovascular system. In this paper we describe in detail the rationale for, design and conduct of these studies.

Russia has one of the highest rates of cardiovascular disease in the world. The International Project on Cardiovascular Disease in Russia (IPCDR) was set up to understand the reasons for this. A substantial component of this study was the Know Your Heart Study devoted to characterising the nature and causes of cardiovascular disease in Russia by conducting large cross-sectional surveys in two Russian cities Novosibirsk and Arkhangelsk. The study population was 4542 men and women aged 35-69 years recruited from the general population. Fieldwork took place between 2015-18. There were two study components: 1) a baseline interview to collect information on socio-demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors, usually conducted at home, and 2) a comprehensive health check at a primary care clinic which included detailed examination of the cardiovascular system. In this paper we describe in detail the rationale for, design and conduct of these studies.