Cardiac risk underestimation in urban,black women

BACKGROUND: Black women have a disproportionately higher incidence of cardiovascular disease mortality than other groups and the reason for this health disparity is incompletely understood. Underestimation of personal cardiac risk may play a role. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the personal characteristics associated with underestimating cardiovascular disease in black women. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Trained surveyors interviewed 128 black women during the baseline evaluation for a randomized controlled trial in an urban, academic continuity clinic affiliated with a public hospital system. They provided information on the presence of cardiac risk factors and demographic and psychosocial characteristics. These self-report data were supplemented with medical record abstraction for weight. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The main outcome measure was the accurate perception of cardiac risk. Objective risk was determined by a simple count of major cardiac risk factors and perceived risk by respondent's answer to a survey question about personal cardiac risk. The burden of cardiac risk factors was high in this population: 77% were obese; 72% had hypertension; 48% had high cholesterol; 49% had a family history of heart disease; 31% had diabetes, and 22% currently used tobacco. Seventy-nine percent had 3 or more cardiac risk factors. Among those with 3 or more risk factors ("high risk"), 63% did not perceive themselves to be at risk for heart disease. Among all patients, objective and perceived cardiac risk was poorly correlated (kappa=0.026). In a multivariable model, increased perceived personal stress and lower income were significant correlates of underestimating cardiac risk. CONCLUSIONS: Urban, disadvantaged black women in this study had many cardiac risk factors, yet routinely underestimated their risk of heart disease. We found that the strongest correlates of underestimation were perceived stress and lower personal income.     

PTSD in Latino Patients: Illness Beliefs, Treatment Preferences, and Implications for Care

Background  Little is known about how Latinos with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) understand their illness and their preferences for mental health treatment. Objective  To understand the illness beliefs and treatment preferences of Latino immigrants with PTSD. Design  Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews. Participants  Sixty foreign-born, Latino adults recruited from five primary care centers in New York and New Jersey and screened for PTSD. Approach  Content analytic methods identified common themes, their range, and most frequent or typical responses. Results  Participants identified their primary feelings as sadness, anxiety, nervousness, and fear. The most common feeling was “sad” (triste). Other words frequently volunteered were “angry” (enojada), “nervous” (nerviosa), and “scared” (miedo). Participants viewed their PTSD as impairing health and functioning. They ascribed their somatic symptoms and their general medical problems to the “stress” from the trauma and its consequences on their lives. The most common reason participants volunteered for their work and school functioning being impaired was their poor concentration, often due to intrusive thoughts. Most expressed their desire to receive mental health treatment, to receive it within their primary care center, and preferred psychotherapy over psychotropic medications. Among participants who did not report wanting treatment, most said it was because the trauma was “in the past.” Conclusions  Clinicians may consider enquiring about PTSD in Latino patients who report feeling sad, anxious, nervous, or fearful. Our study suggests topics clinicians may include in the psychoeducation of patients with PTSD.     

HLA-DRB1 genotype associations in 793 white patients from a rheumatoid arthritis inception cohort: frequency,severity, and treatment bias

OBJECTIVE: The HLA-DRB1 "shared epitope" (SE) genotypes are associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but it remains controversial whether the association is with incidence, severity, or both, whether there are associations in seronegative patients, and whether different DRB1 alleles that contain the SE have similar effects on RA susceptibility and/or severity. The present study was undertaken to study these issues in a large cohort of patients with RA. METHODS: White patients with RA of <6 months' duration (n = 793) were enrolled in an inception cohort. HLA-DRB1 typing was performed, and patients were categorized into 21 DRB1 genotype groups. The disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire was the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: DRB1 associations in seronegative RA patients closely resembled those in controls. Of seropositive patients, 21% had 2 copies of the epitope, 52% had 1 copy, and 27% had none. However, not all genotypes with 1 copy were associated with increased susceptibility; for example, frequencies of DRB1*0404/X and *01/X did not differ from those in controls. Absolute differences between seropositive RA patients and controls were greatest for DRB1*0401 homozygosity (3.8% versus 0.8%, respectively) and *0401/0404 heterozygosity (4.7% versus 1.0%). DRB1*0404 was increased in frequency in seropositive RA but, unlike *0401, an increased frequency was seen only with 2 epitope copies. The relatively rare DRB1*10 had an unexpected association with seropositive RA, being present in 1.7% of seropositive RA patients and 0.7% of controls, and also showed a trend toward association with greater disease severity. The presence of 2 epitope copies was associated with increased frequency of seropositivity and younger age at disease onset, not with disease severity. Treatment indication bias was substantial and may have accounted for some of these effects. HLA-DRB1*0401/0404 was found much more frequently in men and in patients with a lower age at disease onset, and there was a trend toward a higher frequency of *0404/0401 in women. CONCLUSION: This large inception cohort study confirms previously identified major associations and provides additional insights. Only one dominant association was found: *0401, which differs from other SE alleles in a single Lys-for-Arg substitution. The association of the rare DRB1*10 allele has not previously been postulated. Sex associations were confirmed. Associations with seronegative RA were not seen. Not all genotypes containing an SE copy showed increased susceptibility to RA. The association of SE genotypes found in this study related to disease susceptibility rather than severity.     

Diagnosis of intra-abdominal and mediastinal sarcoidosis with EUS-guided FNA

BACKGROUND: In the presence of a compatible clinical picture, the diagnosis of sarcoidosis requires pathologic confirmation of noncaseating epithelioid granuloma in affected tissues. The standard procedure of choice for most patients is a bronchoscopy with transbronchial biopsy (TBB), which has a diagnostic yield of 40% to 90%. The lowest yield with TBB is in cases that present with predominant mediastinal or intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy (LN) and minimal parenchymal lung involvement. OBJECTIVE: To study the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA in diagnosing sarcoidosis with predominant LN or masses. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Teaching university hospital. PATIENTS: Analysis of 21 consecutive patients with sarcoidosis and predominant mediastinal and/or intra-abdominal LN or masses who underwent EUS-guided FNA. RESULTS: EUS-guided FNA diagnosed sarcoidosis in 18 of 21 patients (86%). In 3 patients, EUS-guided FNA was either not diagnostic or inconclusive, and patients underwent mediastinoscopy with lymphadenectomy, which established the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Seven of the 21 patients (33%) had intra-abdominal LN and/or masses, and EUS-guided FNA of the intra-abdominal pathology was diagnostic of sarcoidosis in 4 of the 7 patients (57%). Four of the 21 patients (19%) had a history of malignancy, and use of EUS-guided FNA helped in ruling out the recurrence of malignancy in 3 of the 4 patients (75%). LIMITATIONS: Mycobacterial and fungal culture was not obtained in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided FNA offers a practical, minimally invasive technique for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis in patients who present with predominant mediastinal and/or intra-abdominal LN or masses.     

Simultaneous quantification of ten key Kratom alkaloids in Mitragyna speciosa leaf extracts and commercial products by ultra‐performance liquid chromatography−tandem mass spectrometry

Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a psychoactive plant popular in the United States for the self‐treatment of pain and opioid addiction. For standardization and quality control of raw and commercial kratom products, an ultra‐performance liquid chromatography?tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC?MS/MS) method was developed and validated for the quantification of ten key alkaloids, namely: corynantheidine, corynoxine, corynoxine B, 7‐hydroxymitragynine, isocorynantheidine, mitragynine, mitraphylline, paynantheine, speciociliatine, and speciogynine. Chromatographic separation of diastereomers, or alkaloids sharing same ion transitions, was achieved on an Acquity BEH C18 column with a gradient elution using a mobile phase containing acetonitrile and aqueous ammonium acetate buffer (10mM, pH 3.5). The developed method was linear over a concentration range of 1–200 ng/mL for each alkaloid. The total analysis time per sample was 22.5 minutes. The analytical method was validated for accuracy, precision, robustness, and stability. After successful validation, the method was applied for the quantification of kratom alkaloids in alkaloid‐rich fractions, ethanolic extracts, lyophilized teas, and commercial products. Mitragynine (0.7%–38.7% w/w), paynantheine (0.3%–12.8% w/w), speciociliatine (0.4%–12.3% w/w), and speciogynine (0.1%–5.3% w/w) were the major alkaloids in the analyzed kratom products/extracts. Minor kratom alkaloids (corynantheidine, corynoxine, corynoxine B, 7‐hydroxymitragynine, isocorynantheidine) were also quantified (0.01%–2.8% w/w) in the analyzed products; however mitraphylline was below the lower limit of quantification in all analyses.