Fatima Jichi

AIMS: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a leading cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in young adults. Current risk algorithms provide only a crude estimate of risk and fail to account for the different effect size of individual risk factors. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a new SCD risk prediction model that provides individualized risk estimates. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prognostic model was derived from a retrospective, multi-centre longitudinal cohort study. The model was developed from the entire data set using the Cox proportional hazards model and internally validated using bootstrapping. The cohort consisted of 3675 consecutive patients from six centres. During a follow-up period of 24 313 patient-years (median 5.7 years), 198 patients (5%) died suddenly or had an appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock. Of eight pre-specified predictors, age, maximal left ventricular wall thickness, left atrial diameter, left ventricular outflow tract gradient, family history of SCD, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia, and unexplained syncope were associated with SCD/appropriate ICD shock at the 15% significance level. These predictors were included in the final model to estimate individual probabilities of SCD at 5 years. The calibration slope was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.08), C-index was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.72), and D-statistic was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.81, 1.32). For every 16 ICDs implanted in patients with ≥4% 5-year SCD risk, potentially 1 patient will be saved from SCD at 5 years. A second model with the data set split into independent development and validation cohorts had very similar estimates of coefficients and performance when externally validated. CONCLUSION: This is the first validated SCD risk prediction model for patients with HCM and provides accurate individualized estimates for the probability of SCD using readily collected clinical parameters.

BACKGROUND: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is the most common muscular dystrophy of childhood. Untreated, this incurable disease, which has an X-linked recessive inheritance, is characterised by muscle wasting and loss of walking ability, leading to complete wheelchair dependence by 13 years of age. Prolongation of walking is a major aim of treatment. Evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicates that corticosteroids significantly improve muscle strength and function in boys with DMD in the short term (six months), and strength at two years (two-year data on function are very limited). Corticosteroids, now part of care recommendations for DMD, are largely in routine use, although questions remain over their ability to prolong walking, when to start treatment, longer-term balance of benefits versus harms, and choice of corticosteroid or regimen.We have extended the scope of this updated review to include comparisons of different corticosteroids and dosing regimens. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of corticosteroids on prolongation of walking ability, muscle strength, functional ability, and quality of life in DMD; to address the question of whether benefit is maintained over the longer term (more than two years); to assess adverse events; and to compare efficacy and adverse effects of different corticosteroid preparations and regimens. SEARCH METHODS: On 16 February 2016 we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, and LILACS. We wrote to authors of published studies and other experts. We checked references in identified trials, handsearched journal abstracts, and searched trials registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered RCTs or quasi-RCTs of corticosteroids (e.g. prednisone, prednisolone, and deflazacort) given for a minimum of three months to patients with a definite DMD diagnosis. We considered comparisons of different corticosteroids, regimens, and corticosteroids versus placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The review authors followed standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 12 studies (667 participants) and two new ongoing studies for inclusion. Six RCTs were newly included at this update and important non-randomised cohort studies have also been published. Some important studies remain unpublished and not all published studies provide complete outcome data. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: one two-year deflazacort RCT (n = 28) used prolongation of ambulation as an outcome measure but data were not adequate for drawing conclusions. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: meta-analyses showed that corticosteroids (0.75 mg/kg/day prednisone or prednisolone) improved muscle strength and function versus placebo over six months (moderate quality evidence from up to four RCTs). Evidence from single trials showed 0.75 mg/kg/day superior to 0.3 mg/kg/day on most strength and function measures, with little evidence of further benefit at 1.5 mg/kg/day. Improvements were seen in time taken to rise from the floor (Gowers' time), timed walk, four-stair climbing time, ability to lift weights, leg function grade, and forced vital capacity. One new RCT (n = 66), reported better strength, function and quality of life with daily 0.75 mg/kg/day prednisone at 12 months. One RCT (n = 28) showed that deflazacort stabilised muscle strength versus placebo at two years, but timed function test results were too imprecise for conclusions to be drawn.One double-blind RCT (n = 64), largely at low risk of bias, compared daily prednisone (0.75 mg/kg/day) with weekend-only prednisone (5 mg/kg/weekend day), finding no overall difference in muscle strength and function over 12 months (moderate to low quality evidence). Two small RCTs (n = 52) compared daily prednisone 0.75 mg/kg/day with daily deflazacort 0.9 mg/kg/day, but study methods limited our ability to compare muscle strength or function. ADVERSE EFFECTS: excessive weight gain, behavioural abnormalities, cushingoid appearance, and excessive hair growth were all previously shown to be more common with corticosteroids than placebo; we assessed the quality of evidence (for behavioural changes and weight gain) as moderate. Hair growth and cushingoid features were more frequent at 0.75 mg/kg/day than 0.3 mg/kg/day prednisone. Comparing daily versus weekend-only prednisone, both groups gained weight with no clear difference in body mass index (BMI) or in behavioural changes (low quality evidence for both outcomes, one study); the weekend-only group had a greater linear increase in height. Very low quality evidence suggested less weight gain with deflazacort than with prednisone at 12 months, and no difference in behavioural abnormalities. Data are insufficient to assess the risk of fractures or cataracts for any comparison.Non-randomised studies support RCT evidence in showing improved functional benefit from corticosteroids. These studies suggest sustained benefit for up to 66 months. Adverse effects were common, although generally manageable. According to a large comparative longitudinal study of daily or intermittent (10 days on, 10 days off) corticosteroid for a mean period of four years, a daily regimen prolongs ambulation and improves functional scores over the age of seven, but with a greater frequency of side effects than an intermittent regimen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate quality evidence from RCTs indicates that corticosteroid therapy in DMD improves muscle strength and function in the short term (twelve months), and strength up to two years. On the basis of the evidence available for strength and function outcomes, our confidence in the effect estimate for the efficacy of a 0.75 mg/kg/day dose of prednisone or above is fairly secure. There is no evidence other than from non-randomised trials to establish the effect of corticosteroids on prolongation of walking. In the short term, adverse effects were significantly more common with corticosteroids than placebo, but not clinically severe. A weekend-only prednisone regimen is as effective as daily prednisone in the short term (12 months), according to low to moderate quality evidence from a single trial, with no clear difference in BMI (low quality evidence). Very low quality evidence indicates that deflazacort causes less weight gain than prednisone after a year's treatment. We cannot evaluate long-term benefits and hazards of corticosteroid treatment or intermittent regimens from published RCTs. Non-randomised studies support the conclusions of functional benefits, but also identify clinically significant adverse effects of long-term treatment, and a possible divergence of efficacy in daily and weekend-only regimens in the longer term. These benefits and adverse effects have implications for future research and clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Identification of people with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) who are at risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and require a prophylactic implantable cardioverter defibrillator is challenging. In 2014, the European Society of Cardiology proposed a new risk stratification method based on a risk prediction model (HCM Risk-SCD) that estimates the 5-year risk of SCD. The aim was to externally validate the 2014 European Society of Cardiology recommendations in a geographically diverse cohort of patients recruited from the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. METHODS: This was an observational, retrospective, longitudinal cohort study. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 3703 patients. Seventy three (2%) patients reached the SCD end point within 5 years of follow-up (5-year incidence, 2.4% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.9-3.0]). The validation study revealed a calibration slope of 1.02 (95% CI, 0.93-1.12), C-index of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.72), and D-statistic of 1.17 (95% CI, 1.05-1.29). In a complete case analysis (n= 2147; 44 SCD end points at 5 years), patients with a predicted 5-year risk of <4% (n=1524; 71%) had an observed 5-year SCD incidence of 1.4% (95% CI, 0.8-2.2); patients with a predicted risk of ≥6% (n=297; 14%) had an observed SCD incidence of 8.9% (95% CI, 5.96-13.1) at 5 years. For every 13 (297/23) implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantations in patients with an estimated 5-year SCD risk ≥6%, 1 patient can potentially be saved from SCD. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the HCM Risk-SCD model provides accurate prognostic information that can be used to target implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy in patients at the highest risk of SCD.

BACKGROUND: Very limited evidence is available on how to treat adults with anorexia nervosa and treatment outcomes are poor. Novel treatment approaches are urgently needed. AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and acceptability of a novel psychological therapy for anorexia nervosa (Maudsley Model of Anorexia Nervosa Treatment for Adults, MANTRA) compared with specialist supportive clinical management (SSCM) in a randomised controlled trial. METHOD: Seventy-two adult out-patients with anorexia nervosa or eating disorder not otherwise specified were recruited from a specialist eating disorder service in the UK. Participants were randomly allocated to 20 once weekly sessions of MANTRA or SSCM and optional additional sessions depending on severity and clinical need (trial registration: ISRCTN62920529). The primary outcomes were body mass index, weight and global score on the Eating Disorders Examination at end of treatment (6 months) and follow-up (12 months). Secondary outcomes included: depression, anxiety and clinical impairment; neuropsychological outcomes; recovery rates; and additional service utilisation. RESULTS: At baseline, patients randomised to MANTRA were significantly less likely to be in a partner relationship than those receiving SSCM (3/34 v. 10/36; P<0.05). Patients in both treatments improved significantly in terms of eating disorder and other outcomes, with no differences between groups. Strictly defined recovery rates were low. However, MANTRA patients were significantly more likely to require additional in-patient or day-care treatment than those receiving SSCM (7/34 v. 0/37; P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Adults with anorexia nervosa are a difficult to treat group. The imbalance between groups in partner relationships may explain differences in service utilisation favouring SSCM. This study confirms SSCM as a useful treatment for out-patients with anorexia nervosa. The novel treatment, MANTRA, designed for this patient group may need adaptations to fully exploit its potential.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is increased in children with intellectual disability. Previous research has suggested stimulants are less effective than in typically developing children but no studies have titrated medication for individual optimal dosing or tested the effects for longer than 4 weeks. METHOD: One hundred and twenty two drug-free children aged 7-15 with hyperkinetic disorder and IQ 30-69 were recruited to a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized participants using minimization by probability, stratified by referral source and IQ level in a one to one ratio. Methylphenidate was compared with placebo. Dose titration comprised at least 1 week each of low (0.5 mg/kg/day), medium (1.0 mg/kg/day) and high dose (1.5 mg/kg/day). Parent and teacher Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) index of the Conners Rating Scale-Short Version at 16 weeks provided the primary outcome measures. Clinical response was determined with the Clinical Global Impressions scale (CGI-I). Adverse effects were evaluated by a parent-rated questionnaire, weight, pulse and blood pressure. Analyses were by intention to treat. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 68384912. RESULTS: Methylphenidate was superior to placebo with effect sizes of 0.39 [95% confidence intervals (CIs) 0.09, 0.70] and 0.52 (95% CIs 0.23, 0.82) for the parent and teacher Conners ADHD index. Four (7%) children on placebo versus 24 (40%) of those on methylphenidate were judged improved or much improved on the CGI. IQ and autistic symptoms did not affect treatment efficacy. Active medication was associated with sleep difficulty, loss of appetite and weight loss but there were no significant differences in pulse or blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal dosing of methylphenidate is practical and effective in some children with hyperkinetic disorder and intellectual disability. Adverse effects typical of methylphenidate were seen and medication use may require close monitoring in this vulnerable group.