cardiovascular disease

hidden

Why Advocacy is Critical for the Future of Cardiovascular Research & Medicine

Christa Trexler, PhD

As researchers and physicians, many of us got in to our professions to push the scientific enterprise further to ultimately help others. We’ve all trained for an insane amount of years and collectively we work as a unit to uncover the intricacies of the cardiovascular system, develop therapeutics and treat patients. We traditionally think of ourselves as researchers or physicians first, but obviously we are all so much more than our jobs. We are also citizens within a really complex system that has been continually struggling to serve all of its citizens equally. It’s no secret that access to affordable health care is currently not equitable within our society. Similarly, there are also large diversity & inclusivity issues within our training institutions for both researchers and physicians.

However, something we don’t think about enough is that our intensive training and experience within these systems has also prepared us to be effective advocates for these issues. We have the opportunity to promote tangible change and some might argue it’s even our responsibility.

One of the things I really appreciate about being apart of the American Heart Association (AHA) is that this is something the organization doesn’t shy away from. During his presidential address at AHA Scientific Sessions 2018, Dr. Ivor Benjamin gave a heartfelt and determined talk about what the future of the AHA’s advocacy mission looks like. He discussed how supporting local and federal advocacy, early careers and mentoring is key to supporting the future of the AHA – but only 3% of cardiac professionals are African American men and this is something the AHA wants to help change. To help solve the diversity and inclusivity issues within the cardiac field, the AHA is expanding major undergraduate initiatives to fix the leaky pipeline. My favorite part of Dr. Benjamin’s talk was when he urged everyone at AHA18 to get involved in advocacy, not just for our field, but also for our communities. Because this is the key point: in order for our work to have meaning and to be effective, we need to ensure our communities are healthy. We also need to put value to advocacy efforts in our field – this is an essential part of our profession.

Well, this is all great, but how can you get involved? We are all insanely busy; I know adding advocacy efforts can seem daunting. Luckily for all of us, one of the focuses of the AHA for January is Advocacy. Since over 7 million Americans with cardiovascular disease are currently uninsured, advocating for the protection of the Affordable Care Act is something we can all do from our computers right now.

How can you help? (Provided by the AHA newsroom)

https://www.heart.org/en/get-involved/advocate/state-issues

 

Looking for more ways to help on other issues?

  • The AHA has a great advocacy resource page for to get involved with efforts at the federal, state and community levels with issues regarding health care, tobacco prevention, and healthy lifestyles for kids.
  • Sign up here to become part of the AHA’s grassroots network, You’re the Cure, which is focused on advocating for heart-healthy and stroke-smart communities.
  • There are many great non-profits around the country focused on promoting science funding, literacy, inclusion, diversity & advocacy – finding the right one for you is key and many of them have already done the legwork by developing toolkits for you to get started in your community.
  • Interested in STEM outreach as a way to get involved in your community? The great Marian Wright Edelman said, “You can’t be what you can’t see.” Participating in local educational initiatives is one of the best ways to expose kids to what scientists and physicians actually look like (in addition to getting them excited about science). The STEM Ecosystem is a great way to get started; there are local chapters all over the country.

I recently watched the brilliant documentary (I highly recommend it!) about Mr. Rogers, “Won’t You Be My Neighbor”, where I was reminded of his advice many of us take comfort in during intense times.

“When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, “Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.” – Mr. Rogers

We are the helpers. Its time we use our power to advocate for equity within our field and communities.

 

 
hidden

The Unexpected Benefits of Extending Your Training

Nosheen Reza, MD

During my general cardiology fellowship, I developed a special interest in the care of patients with inherited cardiovascular disease. By virtue of the robust clinical activity of my division’s advanced heart failure and electrophysiology programs, I was exposed to clinical dilemmas like risk stratification in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in lamin A/C cardiomyopathy, and timing of heart transplantation for Danon disease early in my training. Refreshing my knowledge of clinical genetics alone was overwhelming, and I realized that while the rapid growth in genomic technologies was transforming our understanding of inherited cardiovascular disease, frontline clinicians were lagging behind in applying this knowledge to disease prevention and clinical care. To cultivate my interests further and learn to bridge this gap, I joined my institution’s new National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)-supported postdoctoral training program in genomic medicine, a program created to prepare the next generation of physicians and scientists to implement genomic approaches to improve healthcare.

For M.D./D.O. trainees who have spent six consecutive years entrenched in clinical residency and fellowship programs, the idea of extending training by two years, re-entering the world of formal coursework and letter grades, and learning new skills to perform complex and unfamiliar research is more than enough to deter one from pursuing this career development track. However, participating in this program has afforded me many unexpected benefits outside the bounds of my clinical and research training:

  • Caring for patients with a new type of multidisciplinary team:
    • During my clinical training, my idea of a multidisciplinary care team was mostly grounded in my inpatient experience. While cooperating toward the same goal, physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers, therapists, nutritionists, pharmacists, social and case management workers often performed their roles asynchronously with little collaboration outside of the prescribed morning rounds. In contrast, my experience in our inherited cardiovascular disease clinic introduced me to a new paradigm essential to caring for patients and families with genetic disorders. I have been fortunate to learn about variant adjudication, pre-test and post-test counseling, cascade screening, and much more from our tremendous genetic counselors who are integral in the outpatient evaluations of our probands.
    • Though the initial years of my practice have been focused in adult medicine, I have learned about the importance of tracking variant segregation in families and of comprehensive transitions of care through our joint familial cardiomyopathy and arrhythmia programs, partnerships with our neighboring pediatric hospital.
    • Finally, I have witnessed the potential of real time bedside-to-bench-to-bedside research collaborations as shown by my mentors in their recent report of a clinical incorporation of rapid functional annotation of cardiomyopathy gene variants.1
  • Developing and sharing expertise:
    • In leading my fellowship’s didactic education curriculum as Chief Fellow, I took advantage of opportunities to share my new knowledge and skills with other fellows and residents. For our “fresh case” presentations, I often chose to present perplexing cases of cardiomyopathy to reinforce teaching points regarding the workup of genetic cardiomyopathies and the importance of taking a minimum three-generation family history.
    • After completing the Examination of Special Competence in Adult Echocardiography, I led a fellow teaching conference on echocardiography in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. I also joined our internal medicine residents for a clinicopathologic conference as an expert discussant, a position usually reserved for faculty but generously offered to me given my interest in cardiovascular genetics and enthusiasm for teaching.
    • Pursuing these opportunities to develop and share my expertise has helped me solidify my own knowledge in the field, develop my oral and written communication skills, and grow as a peer mentor.
  • Meeting physicians and scientists outside of cardiovascular medicine:
    • The world often feels quite small while training within a medical specialty, but through my postdoctoral program, I have been exposed to physicians, scientists, and trainees in many disciplines outside of cardiovascular medicine. I heard diverse perspectives in my bioinformatics, biostatistics, and bioethics courses that have encouraged me develop my own independent opinions about my fields of interest. Multidisciplinary forums like genetics journal clubs, genetic rounds, and campus retreats have helped me contextualize the practice of genomic medicine.

 

 

My time in the postdoctoral program has shown me that these unexpected benefits of training are highly valuable to a trainee’s success. Through the genomic medicine postdoctoral program, the NHGRI “hopes to bring cross-training opportunities to individuals at different career levels and to support the training of investigators working in both basic genome science and genomic medicine” as it recognizes that this “is essential to realizing the full potential of genomics.”2

 

References:

  1. Lv W, Qiao L, Petrenko N, Li W, Owens AT, McDermott-Roe C, Musunuru K. Functional Annotation of TNNT2 Variants of Uncertain Significance With Genome-Edited Cardiomyocytes. Circulation. 2018;138(24):2852-2854.
  2. Green, Eric D. “NHGRI’s Research Training and Career Development: Genome Science to Genomic Medicine.” National Human Genome Research Institute. 3 Sept. 2014. https://www.genome.gov/27557674/may-5-nhgris-research-training-and-career-development-genome-science-to-genomic-medicine/

 
hidden

Diabetes Makes Heart Disease Worse

Keerat Kaur, PhD

Global awareness has made us cognizant that people with diabetes are susceptible to various disorders involving eye, kidney or nervous system and blood circulation affecting the limbs in the long run. Along these lines, type 2 diabetic patients are more likely to develop heart disease and have a greater incidence of heart attack. According to American Heart Association (AHA), diabetes is one of the major contributing factors for cardiovascular disease and accounts for at least 68 percent of diabetic population of age 65 or older to die from some form of heart disease.

Diabetic heart disease (DHD) is a broader term used to explain heart problems in patients who have diabetes. DHD may include conditions like coronary heart disease, where plaque accumulating in your arteries reduces the blood flow to the heart eventually leading to heart failure, a condition where your heart cannot pump enough blood to meet your body’s requirements. Another consequence of diabetes can be diabetic cardiomyopathy where the damage is extended to the structure and function of the heart. Patients with diabetic cardiomyopathy are more predisposed to develop irregular heartbeat disorders called arrhythmias.

Arrhythmias are conditions in which there is a problem with the rate or rhythm of your heartbeat. It is observed when the electrical signals to the heart that coordinate heartbeats do not function properly. This leads to increase in heart rate (basal rate of more than 100bpm), a condition called trachycardia or decrease in heart rate (basal rate less than 60bpm), called bradycardia. The detailed illustration of these conditions can be found at AHA website. While these conditions can have serious complications in patients, the condition becomes far worse in patients with DHD.

Under normal conditions, mitochondrias which are the energy sources of the cell, give rise to dangerous chemicals known as reactive oxygen species (ROS), byproducts of aerobic metabolism. Oxidative stress occurs when there is excessive production of ROS and if these chemicals are not removed, they possess damage to proteins, tissues and genetic material of the heart cells. However, mitochondria have antioxidant defense systems which decrease ROS production. Under pathological conditions such as diabetes, glucose fluctuations far exceed the ROS production than the oxidative defense systems are capable of cleaning and thus the problem becomes far more intense.

At this year’s Scientific Sessions, one of my colleagues presented his work establishing an interesting link between oxidative stress and arrhythmias. His project focused on protein which is a key enabler of ROS- mediated cardiac arrhythmias, known as mitochondrial translator protein (TSPO). TSPO is an outer mitochondrial membrane protein, previously described as peripheral benzodiazepine receptor, a secondary binding site for diazepam. It’s primarily associated with cholesterol transport to inside the cell, while the group explains its potential role in mitochondrial instability during arrhythmias by mechanism, where excess ROS generated in diabetic patient positively up-regulates its own levels – a process called ROS induced ROS-release (RIRR). Thus, TSPO can be a potential therapeutic target against arrhythmias in diabetic patients. Preliminary data by the group confirmed the increased levels of TPSO in hearts of diabetic rats, which might be responsible for increased propensity of diabetic hearts to arrhythmic events. While TPSO is probably upregulated as compensatory mechanism during type 2 diabetes, its global gene silencing may interfere with essential homeostatic function including cholesterol import and mitochondrial biogenesis. In relation to that, the group is further looking into avenues for targeted and specific TSPO inhibition in the areas affected after heart attack.

Personally, I am not only proud of his work but also hopeful that research studies like his help us to identify potential targets for curing serious conditions like DHD.

 

References:

Ilkan Z, Akar FG. The Mitochondrial Translocator Protein and the Emerging Link Between Oxidative Stress and Arrhythmias in the Diabetic Heart.Front Physiol. 2018;26;9:1518

Ilkan Z, Strauss B, Akar FG. Reversal of TSPO Upregulation in the Diabetic Heart by Chronic TSPO Gene Silencing Causes Metabolic Sink via an Increase in ROMK Expression. Circulation. 2018;138:A16826.

 

 
hidden

What Can Cardiology Learn from Impressionism?

Akl Fahed, MD, MPH

A Sunday on La Grande Jatte — 1886 Georges Seurat

At the end of three inspiring days at the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions (AHA18) in Chicago, I took advantage of my late night return flight to spend the afternoon at the Art Institute of Chicago. The museum has one of the finest collections of impressionist paintings, and I’m a big fan.

Impressionist artists in the mid-1870s in France challenged the artistic traditions of their predecessors. They depicted spontaneity in their paintings by capturing moments of daily life of regular people, focusing on nature, and using bright colors and rapid brush strokes.

The mid-1880s marked the end of Impressionism. Fathers of the movement started challenging the very basic conventions they helped establish. Claude Monet, for example, traveled outside Paris and instead of painting spontaneous moments, his paintings started reflecting thoughtful and deliberate approach with series of paintings of the same subject to reflect all the level of detail. In the last impressionist exhibition in Paris in 1886, Georges Seurat exhibited A Sunday a La Grande Jatte which used pointillism, a scientific technique of painting deliberately distinct from the more intuitive approach of impressionists. It was a challenge to the impressionist movement and marked its end and the start of a post-impressionist era.

The American Heart Association brings breakthrough science in cardiovascular disease to the art of cardiology practice. At the Scientific Sessions every year, you get to see practice-changing clinical trials, which are often the result of at decade or more of pre-clinical and clinical development. Despite that excitement, adoption of new evidence-based therapies remains slow.  While economic, drug-specific, and prescriber-specific characteristics play a role, we are sometimes shackled by our habits.

Impressionists revolted on the habits of the past and brought a whole new approach to painting. When they no longer needed it a decade later, they evolved quickly into new techniques. One painting, A Sunday a La Grande Jatte, marked the end of an era.

We can learn from that.

If new anti-diabetic drugs such as GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors are showing cardiovascular benefits, maybe we should take more ownership of diabetes management.   If the new cholesterol guidelines recommended lower LDL cut-offs for statin initiation, we should be more proactive about re-evaluating all our clinic patients. And if angiotensin receptor-neprolyhsin inhibitor reduces death in heart failure compared to ACE inhibitor, then we should probably we using it more.   There is often a delay in diffusion of scientific sessions research to clinical practice. We should be always conscious that any delay of implementing new scientific findings to patient care is a  missed opportunity to save lives.

When AHA was founded in 1925, Dr. Paul Dudley White, one of the co-founders, commented, “We were living in a time of almost unbelievable ignorance about heart disease.”  Thankfully nowadays, we have gone so far from that, as we even discuss cutting edge cardiovascular science such as systems-based approaches to drug development, nanotech monitoring in the ICU, and development of an anti-atherosclerosis vaccine.

Like the impressionists, we should continue to challenge the past and present every day, but also free ourselves of habit when necessary,  as we strive “to be a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives.”

 
hidden

Practice Change & CME

Mirvat Alasnag, MD

There are many scientific sessions happening around the globe that issue continuous medical education (CME) credits. Although the AHA Scientific Sessions 2018 covered a wide breadth of topics, I took particular interest in how the new Lipid Management Guidelines apply to women. My previous blog ended by citing a clinic encounter with a female patient. When I see how, as a woman cardiologist, I gained a newer perspective on hyperlipidemia, I realize these CME hours don’t capture the actual impact and changes in practice effected by presented data. Most busy clinicians don’t read every page of published guidelines. The lipid guidelines were summarized into ten key take home messages.

These points didn’t include women as a special population. I avail this opportunity to highlight two very different clinic visits: one before AHA Scientific Sessions 2018 & the second soon after it.

 

October 2018:

This is a 42-year-old female whose cardiovascular risk factors include poorly controlled Type II Diabetes, obesity and hypertension. She suffered an acute inferior myocardial infarction 3 months ago for which primary Percutaneous Intervention was performed with a second-generation drug eluting stent. She was on dual antiplatelet therapy, Lisinopril, Bisoprolol and Atorvastatin 40mg daily. She had not repeated any blood works since discharge (HbA1C 11.1 g/dL & LDL 162 mg/L). Her physical examination was unremarkable aside from weight gain (82 Kg to 85 Kg).

Me: Any chest pain or dyspnea?

She: No

Me: Why did your weight increase?

She: Shrug

Me: Ok I’ll get a dietician and educator to discuss this with you. You need to see your diabetologist. Continue DAPT. We need to drop your LDL, so I’d like to increase the dose of statin.

 

November 2018:

This is a 45-year-old female whose cardiovascular risk factors include Type II Diabetes, obesity and hypertension. She had a positive myocardial perfusion scan performed for angina. A coronary angiogram revealed non-obstructive coronary artery disease in January 2018. She was on aspirin, oral hypoglycemic agents, Bisoprolol and Atorvastatin 40mg daily. Her HbA1C 8 g/dL & LDL 118 mg/L. Her physical examination was unremarkable (weight 71 Kg).

Me: Any chest pain or dyspnea?

She: No, I’m feeling well.

Me: You’re only 45 years old. How many children do you have? Do you plan on having anymore?

She: Why? Will I have a heart attack if I do?

Me: I’m asking because of the statin. We need to discuss contraception if you aren’t planning anymore or alternatives if you do.

She: How about aspirin? Can I stop it now?

Me: …

 

As my mentor always told me, “If you don’t know what to look for, you won’t see what you should.” If I wasn’t directed through the AHA Scientific Sessions to search for the topic of women and statin therapy, I would have failed my second patient as I did my first.

But the second encounter sparked a different discussion related to cardiovascular disease prevention in women: What is the role of Aspirin in prevention? This too was discussed at Scientific Sessions 2018.

The Physicians Health Study published in 1989 demonstrated a 44% reduction in myocardial infarctions with aspirin therapy. The evidence for stroke reduction and cardiovascular deaths was inconclusive.1 The Women’s Health Study published in 2005 demonstrated a 17% reduction in stroke.2 This was primarily ischemic with an insignificant increase in hemorrhagic stroke. There was no net effect on fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarctions or overall cardiovascular deaths. The US Preventive Services’ latest statement (see link) recommends low dose aspirin for individuals between 50-59 years with a > 10% 10- year ASCVD risk and a life expectancy of at least 10 years for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and colorectal cancer.

Neither of my patients fit the age group; nevertheless, it is worth the pause. Would my second patient qualify in 5 years?

This year three trials on the role of aspirin in prevention were published and all conflict with these recommendations: ASPREE, ASCEND, ARRIVE. ASCEND in particular is relevant to my second patient who is diabetic rendering her ACVD risk > 20%. There was a small reduction in major adverse cardiac events and a significant increase in bleeding.3 How do we reconcile these differences. Subjects in the earlier trials had an important additional risk factor: smoking. The use of statin therapy was also significantly lower in the earlier studies. Perhaps the impact of the two accounts for the conflicting results in the more recent trials.

Is there any role for aspirin in primary prevention? Preliminary data from MESA suggests that high coronary artery calcium score and high plasma lipoprotein (a) may warrant aspirin therapy.4

Scientific Sessions offers CME. However, what we take back to our patients is far more…Aspirin or not, Statin or not, CACs or not. All these were thought provoking discussions this year.

 

I thank both my patients for consenting to using their information in this blog.

 

REFERENCES:

  1. Steering Committee of the Physicians’ Health Study Research Group. N Engl J Med 1989; 321: 129-35
  2. Ridker P, et al. A Randomized Trial of Low-Dose Aspirin in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1293-1304.
  3. The ASCEND Study Collaborative Group N Engl J Med 2018; 379: 1529-39.
  4. Chasman D, et al. Polymorphism in the apolipoprotein (a) gene, plasma lipoprotein(a), cardiovascular Disease and Low-dose Aspirin Therapy. Atherosclersosis: 2009 Apr; 203 (2):371-6.

 

 
hidden

Is There An Intervention For Reducing All Cardiovascular-Related Diseases?

Saurav Chatterjee, MD

What ‘intervention’ reduces risk for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, cardiac and cerebrovascular events, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, lipid disorders, and cancer of the bladder, breast, colon, endometrium, esophagus, kidney, stomach, and lung? As an interventional cardiologist and outcomes researcher, I would have been happy to attribute this to the latest device/procedure or a cure-all pill. But the answer is ‘none of the above’. The the answer is probably one of the biggest take aways from AHA Scientific Sessions 2018 for me.

As the AHA18 meeting drew to a close, amidst all the ‘buzz’ of the late-breaking clinical trials and other remarkable research, a largely less publicized session celebrated physical activity and their favorable impact on health outcomes.The ‘Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee’ under the auspices of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) came out with a systematic review and proposed recommendations for physical activity for the American public:

  • A significant change since the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans is that previously, aerobic physical activity for adults had to be accumulated in bouts, or sessions, that lasted at least 10 minutes to count toward meeting the key guidelines. Current evidence shows that the total volume of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity is related to many health benefits; bouts of a prescribed duration are not essential. Sufficient physical activity is defined as at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity and 2 days per week of muscle-strengthening activity for adults and at least 60 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity and 3 days per week of muscle-strengthening activity for youth.
  • Preschool-aged children (ages 3-5 years) should be physically active throughout the day to enhance growth and development. Increased physical activity is associated with improvements in bone health and weight status. Children and adolescents ages 6-17 years should do 60 minutes or more of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity daily. Increased physical activity is associated with improvements in bone health, weight status, cardiorespiratory fitness, and cardiometabolic health. Additional benefits include improved cognitive function and reduced risk of depression.
  • Adults should do at least 150-300 minutes a week of moderate-intensity, or 75-150 minutes a week of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic activity. Adults should perform muscle-strengthening activities on 2 or more days a week. Older adults should do multicomponent physical activity that includes balance training as well as aerobic and muscle-strengthening activities. Benefits of increased physical activity include lower risk of mortality including cardiovascular mortality, lower risk of cardiovascular events and associated risk factors (hypertension and diabetes), and lower risk of many cancers (including bladder, breast, colon, endometrium, esophagus, kidney, lung, and stomach). Additional improvements have been seen in cognition, risk of dementia, anxiety and depression, improved bone health, lower risk of falls, and associated injuries.
  • Adults with chronic conditions or disabilities, who are able, should follow the key guidelines for adults and do both aerobic and muscle-strengthening activities. Pregnant and postpartum women should do at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity a week.
  • Recommendations emphasize that moving more and sitting less will benefit nearly everyone. Individuals performing the least physical activity benefit most by even modest increases in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Both aerobic and muscle-strengthening physical activity are beneficial. Some health benefits begin immediately after exercising, and even short episodes or small amounts of physical activity are beneficial.
  • Technology, such as step counters or other wearable devices or fitness apps, can provide physical activity feedback directly to the user. Technology can be used alone or combined with other strategies, such as goal setting and coaching, to encourage and maintain increased physical activity. (Adapted from https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/ten-points-to-remember/2018/11/14/14/37/the-physical-activity-guidelines-for-americans)

As an interventional cardiologist, I feel that these interventions or recommendations, if observed, could have significant positive impact on the health and well-being of the US population, and I will try my best to incorporate these in my practice and encourage peers to do the same.

 

 
hidden

Heart Health and HIV: An Opportunity for Global Health Partnership

Allison Webel, PhD

Slightly over five years ago, I immersed myself in a growing literature that documented the increase in heart disease in people living with HIV (PLHIV). While almost of all of these studies were in well-developed “high income” countries, the conclusion was always the same. The HIV medications worked, and those who had access to them were aging and developing conditions associated with aging including, prominently, cardiovascular disease (CVD). People living with HIV seemed to be developing these conditions more frequently than those who were not living with HIV, and no one was able to tease apart the myriad reasons why this was happening.

 

Global Burden of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in People Living With HIV                                          
DOI: (10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.033369

Others had the same realization and earlier this year. Anoop Shah, MD, from the University of Edinburgh, conducted the first meta-analysis examining the global burden of CVD in PLHIV. Pooling data from almost 800,000 PLHIV with 3.5 million person years of follow up, they found that the global burden of HIV-Associated CVD has tripled in the past 20 years, especially in low and middle-income nations.

Specifically, Dr. Shah and his team measured the population attributable fraction of CVD in PLHIV. This metric combines the risk associated with CVD with the prevalence of HIV- an approach that can quantify the actual impact of risk on a population. This is important because in low and middle-income countries where the HIV prevalence is high and resources are scarce, interventions to reduce the risk of CVD will likely have a bigger impact. Dr. Shah’s work revealed that those in sub-Saharan Africa experience a “double hit” of both HIV and CVD, with higher rates of traditional risk factors such as high blood pressure, and context-specific risk factors including air pollution.

To address these risk factors, Dr. Shah suggests that while there are studies leveraging cutting edge science to help us identify those living with or at risk for CVD (e.g. biomarkers), we need more research testing evidence-based strategies to improve cardiovascular outcomes in PLHIV in low and middle-income countries. This includes testing traditional pharmacological (e.g., antihypertensive and dyslipidemia) and non-pharmacological (e.g., diet, exercise and smoking cessation) strategies tailored to the setting and the population. Critically, this research must also account for the pivotal role health systems have in delivering these interventions.

This year the theme of World AIDS Day is “Building Partnerships through Leadership” and Dr. Shah captured this promise when discussing how to improve health systems to reduce CVD.  “Based on my experience, in Sub-Saharan Africa HIV clinics are incredibly well run and effective, but they only do one thing- treat HIV; but what if we could partner with this HIV clinics across Africa [and other low and middle income settings] to start to provide better CVD prevention and treatment? By building on the existing systems, and expanding to other populations, we could deliver the change that is needed to improve cardiovascular health to PLHIV and beyond”.

Today is World AIDS Day and I am part of the first generation where AIDS has always existed.  I was born a week after the MMRW report  documented the first case of what would become known as AIDS. Since then we have made so much progress, and continue to make strides in preventing, treating, and eventually curing HIV. I look forward to the day when HIV will no longer be a part of anyone’s life. But until that happens, my work, and the work of many scientists, clinicians, advocates and allies will continue to build a better understanding of how to help all PLHIV enjoy the healthiest life possible, with less risk for cardiovascular diseases and stroke.  By working with HIV organizations there are incredible opportunities for innovative and exciting partnerships to improve cardiovascular health in PLHIV, and millions of others around the globe. The American Heart Association can and should have an important role in this quest for longer, healthier lives.

Over the next year, I will explore what is known about the various causes of cardiovascular disease in this population in this series on Heart Health and HIV. I will work to incorporate high quality science with the perspectives of the both clinicians caring for PLHIV and the voices of the patients themselves. I look forward to engaging with all of you and, together, trying to solve these important issues.

 

 
hidden

Highlights of AHA18 – Bridging Lifestyle Medicine with Contemporary Medicine through Science

Renee Bullock-Palmer, MD

This year’s annual scientific meeting of the American Heart Association (AHA) held in Chicago, Illinois November 10-12, 2018 was excellent. The abbreviated 3-day meeting received positive feedback as this allowed practicing physicians to attend the meeting over the weekend and be able to return to their practice early in the work week rather than having to spend an extended time away from the office. It was great being a part of the AHA Early Career Blogger group as this allowed access to many of the embargoed sessions. At these sessions I was able to listen to the AHA 2018 updated Lipid Management Guidelines1 as well as The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, Second Edition2 prior to their release at the meeting. This gave me a chance to ask the guideline committee several questions related to patient management.

 

Opening Session:

The opening session by Dr. Ivor Benjamin, the President of the American Heart Association, delivered very powerful messages throughout his speech. He highlighted the track of his career and the important role of strong mentors throughout his career and the impact it had on his advancement throughout the field of cardiology. He also discussed both the importance of mentoring and diversity in the cardiology profession highlighting the fact that African American men account for only 3% of Cardiologists in the United States and the need to bridge this gap. I found this session very inspiring and encouraging especially with regards to mentoring and supporting junior colleagues and being grateful for the mentors I have had thus far in my career. I also welcomed the message of the importance of diversity and inclusion as this leads to a healthier work and training environment.

 

Bridging Lifestyle Medicine with Contemporary Medicine through Science:

This year’s meeting highlighted the value of integrating lifestyle medicine with contemporary medicine to achieve the best outcomes for patients with regards to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. This was supported by the release of the updated 2018 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines on Lipid Management on the first day of this meeting1. This updated guideline emphasized the importance of the cholesterol management at all stages of adulthood along with the importance of therapeutic lifestyle changes1. The utility of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring with cardiac CT was also emphasized as a useful tool to further refine patients’ risk to determine the best management for patients who are at intermediate risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)1. This guideline also had included ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors as having a complementary role when used with statin therapy in selected patients at high risk for ASCVD1. The release of this updated guidelines will be a useful in my management of patients with regards to primary and secondary prevention of ASCVD. I appreciated the role of CAC scoring which will be very helpful for the management of the intermediate risk patients.

The release of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ second edition of the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans on the last day of the meeting was also well received2. This second edition emphasized the importance of increasing physical activity for all age ranges throughout the population including women in pregnancy and the postpartum period, as well as adults with chronic diseases or disabilities2. This guideline update will assist me with counseling patients with regards to increasing their physical activity to improve their overall cardiovascular health.

 

Networking Opportunities:

There were many networking opportunities during the meeting. These included the Council on Clinical Cardiology dinner on the first night of the meeting which honored Dr. Judith Hochman the recipient of the James B. Herrick Award for Outstanding Achievement in Clinical Cardiology. Dr. Stacy Rosen was also the recipient of the Women in Cardiology Mentoring Award. This dinner was attended by many leaders in the field of Cardiology and was a great opportunity for me to meet these leaders. The Women in Cardiology Committee also hosted a networking luncheon on the first day of the meeting during which Dr. Sharonne Hayes from the Mayo Clinic was the keynote speaker. Dr. Hayes gave a very riveting interactive talk on leadership for women in cardiology, she was also the recipient of last year’s Women in Cardiology Mentoring Award. Her talk was useful with very powerful messages on navigating your professional and personal life to achieve overall job satisfaction, career success and personal happiness. I learned several tips that I will apply to my own career as well. Dr. Annabelle Volgman and the faculty at Rush University was gracious to host a wonderful networking dinner for Women in Cardiology (WIC) on the second night of the meeting. This dinner provided a great opportunity for me to meet fellow WIC colleagues and to discuss several relevant issues related to our practice in the Cardiology field.

Social Media Coverage:

There was also a broad social media coverage of the meeting on Twitter and this was assisted by the AHA Early Bloggers writing group. I was able to share live tweets during several sessions and this generated a lot of discussion amongst members on Twitter. This also allowed many colleagues who were unable to attend the meeting to be able to follow and comment on several meeting highlights.

 

Looking Forward to AHA 2019:

This year’s AHA Scientific Sessions embrace of lifestyle medicine and the value of preventive cardiology was refreshing and empowering. This meeting highlighted the importance of not only treating ASCVD but also the importance of preventing disease and empowering our patients to take responsibility for their health as well. In the words of Goethe as mentioned in Dr. Ivor Benjamin’s opening session “Choose well….your choice is brief, and yet endless.” We look forward to next year’s AHA 2019 meeting in the beautiful city of Philadelphia.

 

References:

1. Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, Beam LT, Birtcher KK, et al. 2018AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol. JACC Nov 2018, 25709; DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.003

2. The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans: THe HHS Roadmap for an Active Healthy Nation. Second Edition. ADM Brett P. Giroir, MD.

 
hidden

AHA18 Reminded Me We Need to Do More for Women

Christa Trexler, PhD

On the surface, it doesn’t really seem that surprising men and women develop heart disease differently or experience different symptoms for the same types of cardiac episodes. However, even though heart disease is the number one killer of both men and women, women have traditionally been omitted from clinical trials and female animals have either not been included in preclinical research studies or the two sexes have been combined1. We just simply weren’t taking half of the population into account at every level of cardiovascular disease (CVD) research for quite some time. I spent my graduate career focused on understanding the baseline differences in the heart between the sexes, and was extremely passionate about this work. Since I spent most of my scientific career working in this field, I wanted to switch it up as a postdoctoral fellow and am currently not researching sex differences. However, when I went to AHA sessions this year, I made it a point to go to any events focused on sex differences and women to get updated on what I’ve been missing this past year. Luckily the “State of the Heart For Women: Top Ten Advances in Gender-Specific Medicine” session provided the perfect summary. After ten great talks focused on a variety of gender specific concerns ranging from heart failure to pregnancy, the take home message was clear: women are still very much at risk, more likely to be misdiagnosed, and are still under-represented in clinical trials. These issues are also worse for women of color.

 

While this is a widespread issue across disciplines, the cardiovascular field has been particularly biased with regard to including women in clinical trials for drug development, leading to drugs being either not as effective in women or causing different side effects2. The good news is, things are changing. In the early 1990’s, reports from the Food and Drug Agency (FDA) demonstrated that less than 20% of participants in clinical trials were women and recent studies reveal that this number is steadily increasing – even in the cardiovascular field3. Fixing this imbalance is the result of the tireless work from many dedicated researchers over the past several decades. One of the main advocates this field has is Dr. Nanette Wenger, who was the first speaker of this session and actually let me ask her a some questions later during the conference while we were both in the Women in Science and Medicine Lounge. When I asked Dr. Wenger about her strategy for making this issue a priority in our field she explained the key steps to creating change:

  1. Investigate — people can’t ignore what the data is clearly telling them
  2. Educate — teach your peers & patients
  3. Advocate for the change
  4. Legislate — it took a long time, but we’re slowly transforming the strategic plan of the NIH

Dr. Wenger also stressed that since the emphasis in our field now is personalized care, many researchers and physicians are more supportive of including sex in their experiments and/or trials, but we need to move forward by not assuming that women are a homogeneous group. Other factors such as race are also important and must also be considered.

While progress has been made we still have a long way to go on many accounts. While there are more women in clinical trials than in the past, women still only make-up about 34% of the total participants in cardiac clinical trials3. Hopefully, with the passing of the 21st Centuries Cures act and the NIH policy mandating sex be included as an biological variable in basic research studies in 2016, these numbers will progressively increase. At the session before the talks even began, I immediately noticed that all but one of the ten panelists were women (which is awesome, but strange for the cardiac field) and the majority of people in the audience were also women. We will need to continue to advocate for this issue and we need men to join us and take it seriously for real change to be made. Additionally, while I really enjoyed this unique session, the speakers were only given ~10 minutes each to summarize their extraordinarily complex topics, which just wasn’t enough time. It would be great if gender-specific cardiovascular issues were given more time at AHA Scientific Sessions as well as other conferences in the future. This session reminded me just how pressing making CVD treatment equitable for all truly is and thankful for the researchers making it happen.

 

References

  1. Blenck CL, Harvey PA, Reckelhoff JF, Leinwand LA. The Importance of Biological Sex and Estrogen in Rodent Models of Cardiovascular Health and Disease. Circ Res. 2016;118(8):1294-312.
  2. Regitz-Zagrosek V. Therapeutic implications of the gender-specific aspects of cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006;5(5):425-38.
  3. Pilote L, Raparelli V. Participation of Women in Clinical Trials: Not Yet Time to Rest on Our Laurels. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(18):1970-2.

 
hidden

Interview with Roxanne at AHA18

Anberitha Matthews, PhD

Imagine having an annoying pain that you thought was just a pulled muscle. No, I am not referencing that episode of The Resident, a medical drama prime time series aired by Fox, where a young immigrant was having pains in her side and it ended up being a rare cancer. However, I am referring to a real-life hero story about Roxanne (an organ recipient) and Michael (an organ donor). Roxanne had complaints of side pain for about a week, but she continued to work because she thought it was a pulled muscle. She tolerated the pain for about six weeks before she arrived at the emergency room (ER) where she was diagnosed with cardiovascular disease (CVD). She was immediately taken into cardiac care, underwent extensive diagnostic test, and her medical team concluded they could not give her the required treatment locally. Roxanne was transferred to the Cardiac Care unit in Bronx, New York where she was admitted to the hospital for nine days of extensive medical consultations. Upon receiving the diagnostic results, her primary physician approached her with both good news and bad. The bad news was that her heart had started to fail; the good news was she was in a state of stable instability. Roxanne was placed on list to receive a heart transplant as Stat 2.

By Christmas 2009 Roxanne’s health started to rapidly fail. She was losing weight at a rate of five pounds per day going from an average weigh of about 140 lbs to less than 90 lbs. By the spring she was upgraded on the transplant list from a Stat 2 to a Stat 1; that was when she was offered her first heart. She accepted, but she was second priority of the patients admitted to receive the heart. Thus, the wait continued. The second viable heart offer came, but the heart itself was damaged. Roxanne never gave up hope. Although her health was rapidly declining, and her family was feeling the stress of potentially losing her, she held on to her faith that her healing would come. The next heart offer was made but the donor was HIV positive. At that time AIDS was considered a deadly disease, so she rejected the heart. At this point she had been in the hospital for 100 days; her prognosis was becoming grim. Seventy-eight days later an unfortunate accident caused her to get an offer.

Meanwhile, Michael, an E3 Fireman with the Coast Guard, was brought into the Bronx hospital after a motor vehicle accident. July 2010, his dream to become an Aviation Maintenance Technician and a Flight Mechanic was brought to an end. Upon being guided by his family he registered to become an organ donor. Michael was a generous person with a spirit that prompted him to help others even postmortem. However, to his parent’s dismay they lost their son that night and was faced with the decision to donate his organs. In their grief, it took them a few days to reconcile whether to offer his body up for organ donation. From Sunday to Wednesday for his family wrestled with making the decision. Michael was their only male offspring! How would a father, a mother loses an only son and have his organs scattered from hither to thither? To strangers nonetheless? Ultimately, the family decided to allow the medical team to make their son a lifesaver for people they may never know. Michael has saved people from different cultural backgrounds. Scott, a Caucasian male received a double lung transplant allowing him to become a father. Elijah, an African American male, the kidney recipient, was afforded the opportunity to complete high school. Zhou, an Asian was able to return to work with his liver transplant. Finally, Michael’s heart, the most important organ of the body, went to Roxanne. Michael and his family gave freely; without cultural limitations, transcending socioeconomic barriers, and without regret. This heroic story of a man that was guided by his family to be an organ donor and unbeknownst to them lost their oldest only son, I could imagine was the hardest decision they could have made, but a necessary one.

Michael through his tragic accident saved the lives of four people changing them forever. Roxanne, determined to make the most out of this opportunity to live another day, became an advocate for organ donations; possibly signing up a record number of donors with over 11,000 people committed to organ donation. Michael had given her another chance at life; one she would not take for granted. Upon asking if anything in her life had changed, she indicated she developed a love for power tools. She had never had an interest in them before, but now she made daily trips to Home Depot just to look at the tools and dream of projects that she could take on. Along her life’s journey she expressed her interest in meeting the donor’s family. She dreamed about how she would respond to meeting the mother of the person that saved her life. Serendipitously, she was in Home Depot during her regular wish trips and was approached by the staff from The Oprah Winfrey Show. She was invited to go on the show to tell her story and encourage people to become organ donors as well as increasing minority organ donation, but during the airing, she met the donor family. Oprah introduced her to Michael with a photo, and subsequently his parents came out. Roxanne could not look upon Michael’s father without emotion. She thought she would have that feeling about his mother, but she found there was a close father-son bond between the two. It was then she found that Michael had a passion for mechanics and working with his hands. He and his father worked together on projects and build a bond that can only be between a father and his son.  Roxanne feels receiving the organ increased her desire for crafts. She has taken on some projects since but intends to continue with small do it yourself changes around her home. Roxanne remains in touch with the family and does various outreach and social projects together.

Roxanne has changed her activity of daily living to accommodate the dietary habits suggested by her nutritionist in addition to referencing a book she received outlining the things that she could and could not continue to remain healthy. She was adamant about following the instructions that were given because she did not want to risk damaging her new heart. She is now a self-proclaimed foodie although she had no interest in food or cooking to the extent she has developed. She has taken cooking classes and learned more details about mixing spices. Roxanne regularly attends conferences and deliver seminars to assist in her goal of encouraging people become organ donors. Roxanne has become an advocate for people that cannot advocate for themselves. This is an example that all can admire. Michael, real-life superhero, lives on though Roxanne as she goes on a mission to change people’s outlook on organ donations.