Objective

To characterise the relationship between simvastatin and risk of acute pancreatitis (AP).

Design

We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2006-2012) on data from an integrated healthcare system in southern California. Exposure to simvastatin was calculated from time of initial dispensation until 60 days following prescription termination. AP cases were defined by ICD-9 CM 577.0 and serum lipase≥3 times normal. Patients were censored at death, last follow-up, and onset of AP or end-of-study. Incidence rate of pancreatitis among simvastatin users was compared with the adult reference population. Robust Poisson regression was used to generate risk ratio (RR) estimates for simvastatin use adjusted for age, gender, race/ethnicity, gallstone-related disorders, hypertriglyceridaemia, smoking and alcohol dependence. Analysis was repeated for atorvastatin.

Results

Among 3,967,859 adult patients (median duration of follow-up of 3.4 years), 6399 developed an initial episode of AP. A total of 707,236 patients received simvastatin during the study period. Patients that received simvastatin were more likely to have gallstone-related disorders, alcohol dependence or hypertriglyceridaemia compared with the reference population. Nevertheless, risk of AP was significantly reduced with simvastatin use, crude incidence rate ratio 0.626 (95% CL 0.588, 0.668), p<0.0001. In multivariate analysis, simvastatin was independently associated with reduced risk of pancreatitis, adjusted RR 0.29 (95% CL 0.27, 0.31) after adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, gallstone disorders, alcohol dependence, smoking and hypertriglyceridaemia. Similar results were noted with atorvastatin, adjusted RR 0.33(0.29, 0.38).

Conclusions

Use of simvastatin was independently associated with reduced risk of AP in this integrated healthcare setting. Similar findings for atorvastatin suggest a possible class effect.

Purpose

Whether higher serum phosphorus levels increase risk for kidney disease onset and progression to end-stage renal disease in those with normal renal function is largely unknown. We sought to determine whether higher serum phosphorus levels increase risk for end-stage renal disease within a large ethnically diverse population with normal kidney function.

Methods

A retrospective longitudinal cohort study was performed in the period January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2008 of adults within a vertically integrated health plan (3.4 million members). The primary objective was to determine risk of incident end-stage renal disease. Baseline and time-averaged phosphorus were used for Cox regressions analyses to calculate hazard ratios (HR) adjusting for age, sex, race, pre-existing hypertension, and diabetes.

Results

A total of 94,989 subjects were identified in the 11-year observation period. Mean age of the cohort was 50 years, with 61% female, 38% white, 14% black, and 25% Hispanic. Population-based phosphorus quartile ranges were 1.9-3.0 mg/dL, 3.1-3.4 mg/dL, 3.5-3.8 mg/dL, and 3.9-5.7 mg/dL. End-stage renal disease occurred in 130 (0.1%) subjects. Every 0.5-mg/dL phosphorus increase demonstrated an adjusted HR of 1.40 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.84) and HR for mortality of 1.09 (95% CI, 1.06-1.13). Adjusted HRs were 0.64 (95% CI, 0.37-1.11), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.50-1.39), and 1.48 (95% CI, 0.96-2.28) in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quartile, respectively, compared with the first phosphorus quartile. Time-averaged serum phosphorus demonstrated a similar relationship across quartiles and as a continuous variable.

Conclusion

In our large, ethnically diverse cohort of non kidney disease subjects, higher serum phosphorus levels were associated with greater risk for end-stage renal disease and mortality.

Objective

Approximately, 50-60% of patients with sleep apnea have hypertension. To explore a mechanism of this relationship, we compared its prevalence in a hypertensive population with and without hyperaldosteronism.

Methods

Using the Kaiser Permanente Southern California database, hypertensive individuals who had plasma aldosterone and plasma renin activity measured between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2007 were evaluated. Hyperaldosteronism was defined as an aldosterone : renin ratio more than 30 and plasma aldosterone more than 20 ng/dl or an aldosterone : renin ratio more than 50 (ng/dl : ng/ml per h). Hypertension was identified by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) coding and sleep apnea was defined by ICD-9 coding or procedural coding for dispensation of positive airway devices.

Results

Of 3428 hypertensive patients, 575 (17%) had hyperaldosteronism. Sleep apnea was present in 18% (105) with hyperaldosteronism vs. 9% (251) without hyperaldosteronism (P < 0.001). Odds ratio for sleep apnea in patients with hyperaldosteronism was 1.8 (95% confidence interval 1.3-2.6) after controlling for other sleep apnea risk factors. No ethnic group was at greater risk for sleep apnea.

Conclusion

The prevalence of sleep apnea in a diverse hypertensive population is increased in patients with hyperaldosteronism, even when controlling for other sleep apnea risk factors.

Objective

To evaluate the prevalence of and characterize resistant hypertension in a large representative population with successful hypertension management and reliable health information.

Patient and methods

We performed a cross-sectional study using clinical encounter, laboratory, and administrative information from the Kaiser Permanente Southern California health system between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2007. From individuals older than 17 years with hypertension, resistant hypertension was identified and prevalence was determined. Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs), with adjustments for demographic characteristics, clinical variables, and medication use.

Results

Of 470,386 hypertensive individuals, 60,327 (12.8%) were identified as having resistant disease, representing 15.3% of those taking medications. Overall, 37,061 patients (7.9%) had uncontrolled hypertension while taking 3 or more medicines. The ORs (95% CIs) for resistant hypertension were greater for black race (1.68 [1.62-1.75]), older age (1.11 [1.10-1.11] for every 5-year increase), male sex (1.06 [1.03-1.10]), and obesity (1.46 [1.42-1.51]). Medication adherence rates were higher in those with resistant hypertension (93% vs 89.8%; P<.001). Chronic kidney disease (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.78-1.90), diabetes mellitus (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.53-1.63), and cardiovascular disease (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.30-1.39) were also associated with higher risk of resistant hypertension.

Conclusion

In a more standardized hypertension treatment environment, we observed a rate of resistant hypertension comparable with that of previous studies using more fragmented data sources. Past observations have been limited due to nonrepresentative populations, reliability of the data, heterogeneity of the treatment environments, and less than ideal control rates. This cohort, which was established using an electronic medical record-based approach, has the potential to provide a better understanding of resistant hypertension and outcomes.

Background

Whether the benefits of phosphorus binders extend to those without end stage renal disease is uncertain. Among a large diverse non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD) population with hyperphosphatemia, we sought to evaluate phosphorus binder use and compare mortality risk between patients prescribed and not prescribed binders.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study within an integrated health system (January 1, 1998 - December 31, 2012) among CKD patients (age ≥18) was performed. Non-dialysis CKD patients with 2 separate estimated glomerular filtrate rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 and serum phosphorus ≥5.0 mg/dL within 180 days of eGFR were included. Multivariable cox proportional hazards and inverse probability of treatment-weighted models were used to estimate mortality hazard ratios (HRs) for patients who received phosphorus binders compared to no binders.

Results

Among 10,165 study patients, 2,733 subjects (27%) received phosphorus binders. Compared to the no-phosphorus-binder group, the binder group had mortality HRs (95% CI) of 0.86 (0.79-0.94) and 0.86 (0.80-0.93) using traditional multivariable and inverse probability of treatment-weighted models respectively. Sensitivity analyses removing patients who were prescribed binders >180 days after index date revealed no difference in mortality between those with binders and with no binders.

Conclusion

Our findings from a real-world clinical environment revealed that 27% of hyperphosphatemic non-dialysis CKD patients were prescribed binders. They also had lower risk of mortality compared to those not prescribed phosphorus binders. However, the lower mortality risk was not observed when we accounted for immortal time bias. Whether phosphorus binder use in CKD improves survival remains to be determined.

Science is humanity's best insurance against threats from nature, but it is a fragile enterprise that must be nourished and protected. The preponderance of scientific evidence indicates a natural origin for SARS-CoV-2. Yet, the theory that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in and escaped from a lab dominates media attention, even in the absence of strong evidence. We discuss how the resulting anti-science movement puts the research community, scientific research, and pandemic preparedness at risk.

In October 2020, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Serological Sciences Network (SeroNet) was established to study the immune response to COVID-19, and "to develop, validate, improve, and implement serological testing and associated technologies" (https://www.cancer.gov/research/key-initiatives/covid-19/coronavirus-research-initiatives/serological-sciences-network). SeroNet is comprised of 25 participating research institutions partnering with the Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research (FNLCR) and the SeroNet Coordinating Center. Since its inception, SeroNet has supported collaborative development and sharing of COVID-19 serological assay procedures and has set forth plans for assay harmonization. To facilitate collaboration and procedure sharing, a detailed survey was sent to collate comprehensive assay details and performance metrics on COVID-19 serological assays within SeroNet. In addition, FNLCR established a protocol to calibrate SeroNet serological assays to reference standards, such as the U.S. severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serology standard reference material and first WHO international standard (IS) for anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin (20/136), to facilitate harmonization of assay reporting units and cross-comparison of study data. SeroNet institutions reported development of a total of 27 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) methods, 13 multiplex assays, and 9 neutralization assays and use of 12 different commercial serological methods. FNLCR developed a standardized protocol for SeroNet institutions to calibrate these diverse serological assays to reference standards. In conclusion, SeroNet institutions have established a diverse array of COVID-19 serological assays to study the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and vaccines. Calibration of SeroNet serological assays to harmonize results reporting will facilitate future pooled data analyses and study cross-comparisons. IMPORTANCE SeroNet institutions have developed or implemented 61 diverse COVID-19 serological assays and are collaboratively working to harmonize these assays using reference materials to establish standardized reporting units. This will facilitate clinical interpretation of serology results and cross-comparison of research data.

In the United States (US), biosafety and biosecurity oversight of research on viruses is being reappraised. Safety in virology research is paramount and oversight frameworks should be reviewed periodically. Changes should be made with care, however, to avoid impeding science that is essential for rapidly reducing and responding to pandemic threats as well as addressing more common challenges caused by infectious diseases. Decades of research uniquely positioned the US to be able to respond to the COVID-19 crisis with astounding speed, delivering life-saving vaccines within a year of identifying the virus. We should embolden and empower this strength, which is a vital part of protecting the health, economy, and security of US citizens. Herein, we offer our perspectives on priorities for revised rules governing virology research in the US.

Viruses have brought humanity many challenges: respiratory infection, cancer, neurological impairment and immunosuppression to name a few. Virology research over the last 60+ years has responded to reduce this disease burden with vaccines and antivirals. Despite this long history, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented attention to the field of virology. Some of this attention is focused on concern about the safe conduct of research with human pathogens. A small but vocal group of individuals has seized upon these concerns - conflating legitimate questions about safely conducting virus-related research with uncertainties over the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The result has fueled public confusion and, in many instances, ill-informed condemnation of virology. With this article, we seek to promote a return to rational discourse. We explain the use of gain-of-function approaches in science, discuss the possible origins of SARS-CoV-2 and outline current regulatory structures that provide oversight for virological research in the United States. By offering our expertise, we - a broad group of working virologists - seek to aid policy makers in navigating these controversial issues. Balanced, evidence-based discourse is essential to addressing public concern while maintaining and expanding much-needed research in virology.