| 11. |
- Lønborg, C., et al.
(författare)
-
A global database of dissolved organic matter (DOM) concentration measurements in coastal waters (CoastDOM v1)
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Earth System Science Data. - : Copernicus Publications. - 1866-3508 .- 1866-3516. ; 16:2, s. 1107-1119
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Measurements of dissolved organic carbon (DOC), nitrogen (DON), and phosphorus (DOP) concentrations are used to characterize the dissolved organic matter (DOM) pool and are important components ofbiogeochemical cycling in the coastal ocean. Here, we present the first edition of a global database (CoastDOMv1; available at https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.964012, Lønborg et al., 2023) compiling previously published and unpublished measurements of DOC, DON, and DOP in coastal waters. These data are complementedby hydrographic data such as temperature and salinity and, to the extent possible, other biogeochemical variables(e.g. chlorophyll a, inorganic nutrients) and the inorganic carbon system (e.g. dissolved inorganic carbon andtotal alkalinity). Overall, CoastDOM v1 includes observations of concentrations from all continents. However,most data were collected in the Northern Hemisphere, with a clear gap in DOM measurements from the SouthernHemisphere. The data included were collected from 1978 to 2022 and consist of 62 338 data points for DOC,20 356 for DON, and 13 533 for DOP. The number of measurements decreases progressively in the sequenceDOC > DON > DOP, reflecting both differences in the maturity of the analytical methods and the greater focuson carbon cycling by the aquatic science community. The global database shows that the average DOC concentration in coastal waters (average ± standard deviation (SD): 182±314 µmolC L−1; median: 103 µmolC L−1) is13-fold higher than the average coastal DON concentration (13.6 ± 30.4 µmol N L−1; median: 8.0 µmol N L−1),which is itself 39-fold higher than the average coastal DOP concentration (0.34 ± 1.11 µmol P L−1; median:0.18 µmol P L−1). This dataset will be useful for identifying global spatial and temporal patterns in DOM and willhelp facilitate the reuse of DOC, DON, and DOP data in studies aimed at better characterizing local biogeochemical processes; closing nutrient budgets; estimating carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous pools; and establishing abaseline for modelling future changes in coastal waters.
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
- Zannad, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical outcome endpoints in heart failure trials: a European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association consensus document
- 2013
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 15:10, s. 1082-1094
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Endpoint selection is a critically important step in clinical trial design. It poses major challenges for investigators, regulators, and study sponsors, and it also has important clinical and practical implications for physicians and patients. Clinical outcomes of interest in heart failure trials include all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, relevant non-fatal morbidity (e.g. all-cause and cause-specific hospitalization), composites capturing both morbidity and mortality, safety, symptoms, functional capacity, and patient-reported outcomes. Each of these endpoints has strengths and weaknesses that create controversies regarding which is most appropriate in terms of clinical importance, sensitivity, reliability, and consistency. Not surprisingly, a lack of consensus exists within the scientific community regarding the optimal endpoint(s) for both acute and chronic heart failure trials. In an effort to address these issues, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) convened a group of expert heart failure clinical investigators, biostatisticians, regulators, and pharmaceutical industry scientists (Nice, France, 12-13 February 2012) to evaluate the challenges of defining heart failure endpoints in clinical trials and to develop a consensus framework. This report summarizes the group's recommendations for achieving common views on heart failure endpoints in clinical trials.
|
|
| 15. |
- Cosmi, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Treatment with insulin is associated with worse outcome in patients with chronic heart failure and diabetes
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842. ; 20:5, s. 888-895
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims Up to one-third of patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure (HF) are treated with insulin. As insulin causes sodium retention and hypoglycaemia, its use might be associated with worse outcomes. Methods and results We examined two datasets: 24 012 patients with HF from four large randomized trials and an administrative database of 4 million individuals, 103 857 of whom with HF. In the former, survival was examined using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline variables and separately for propensity scores. Fine-Gray competing risk regression models were used to assess the risk of hospitalization for HF. For the latter, a case-control nested within a population-based cohort study was conducted with propensity score. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus at study entry ranged from 25.5% to 29.5% across trials. Insulin alone or in combination with oral hypoglycaemic drugs was prescribed at randomization to 24.4% to 34.5% of the patients with diabetes. The rates of death from any cause and hospitalization for HF were higher in patients with vs. without diabetes, and highest of all in patients prescribed insulin [propensity score pooled hazard ratio for all-cause mortality 1.27 (1.16-1.38), for HF hospitalization 1.23 (1.13-1.33)]. In the administrative registry, insulin prescription was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.87-2.19] and rehospitalization for HF (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.32-1.53). Conclusions Whether insulin use is associated with poor outcomes in HF should be investigated further with controlled trials, as should the possibility that there may be safer alternative glucose-lowering treatments for patients with HF and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
- Kober, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Previously known and newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: a major risk indicator after a myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction
- 2006
-
Ingår i: European journal of heart failure. - 1388-9842. ; 8:6, s. 591-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIMS: To characterize the relationship between known and newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) and the risk of death and major cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by heart failure (HF) and/or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). METHODS: The VALIANT trial enrolled 14,703 individuals with acute MI complicated by HF and/or LVSD. AF was assessed at presentation and at randomization (median 4.9 days after symptom onset). Primary outcomes were risk of death and major CV events 3 years following acute MI. RESULTS: A total of 1812 with current AF (AF between presentation and randomization), 339 patients with prior AF (history of AF without current AF), and 12,509 without AF were enrolled. Patients with AF were older; had more prior HF, angina, and MI, and received beta-blockers and thrombolytics less often than those without AF. Three-year mortality estimates were 20% in those without AF, 37% with current AF, and 38% with prior AF. Compared with patients without AF, the multivariable adjusted HR of death was 1.25 (1.03-1.52; p=0.03) for prior AF and 1.32 (1.20-1.45; p<0.0001) for current AF. HR for major CV events was 1.15 (0.98-1.35; p=0.08) and 1.21 (1.12-1.31; p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: AF is associated with greater long-term mortality and adverse CV events with acute MI complicated by HF or LVSD.
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
|
|
| 20. |
- Shadman, R., et al.
(författare)
-
A novel method to predict the proportional risk of sudden cardiac death in heart failure: Derivation of the Seattle Proportional Risk Model
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Heart Rhythm. - : Elsevier BV. - 1547-5271. ; 12:10, s. 2069-2077
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND Patients with heart failure are at increased risk of both sudden death and pump failure death. Strategies to better identify those who have greatest net benefit from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation could reduce morbidity and maximize cost-effectiveness of ICDs. OBJECTIVE We aimed to identify baseline variables in patients with cardiomyopathy that are independently associated with a disproportionate fraction of mortality risk attributable to sudden death vs nonsudden death. METHODS We used data from 9885 patients with heart failure without ICDs, of whom 2552 died during an average follow-up of 2.3 years. Using commonly available baseline clinical and demographic variables, we developed a multivariate regression model to identify variables associated with a disproportionate risk of sudden death. RESULTS We confirmed that lower ejection fraction and better functional class were associated with a greater proportion of mortality due to sudden death. Younger age, male sex, and higher body mass index were independently associated with a greater proportional risk of sudden death, while diabetes mellitus, hyper/hypotension, higher creatinine level, and hyponatremia were associated with a disproportionately Lower risk of sudden death. The use of several heart failure medications, Left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, or NT-pro brain natriuretic peptide concentrations were not associated with a disproportionate risk of sudden death. CONCLUSION Several easily obtained baseline demographic and clinical variables, beyond ejection fraction and New York Heart Association functional class, are independently associated with a disproportionately increased risk of sudden death. Further investigation is needed to assess whether this novel predictive method can be used to target the use of lifesaving therapies to populations who will derive greatest mortality benefit
|
|
