COVID-19 and Heart Transplant: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in many challenges in patient care, especially among high-risk populations such as heart transplant recipients. Patients with heart transplant experience a significantly higher mortality rate with COVID-19 infection, and management is based on extrapolation from clinical trials done on nontransplant patients and from clinical experience. Here we report 4 cases of patients with heart transplant who presented with COVID-19 infection in late 2020. Patients presented with symptoms similar to those seen in the general population. All 4 patients were admitted to the hospital, and they were all treated with dexamethasone. In addition, 2 patients received remdesivir. Immunosuppressive medications were adjusted to maintain adequate levels of immunosuppression but at the same time allow for an adequate immune response against the infection. All patients were discharged alive from the hospital. We then performed a literature review on studies that included heart transplant patients who developed the infection and developed suggestions for a standardized management approach, which we share in this article.     

Relation between active mediation,exposure to Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood,and US preschoolers’ social and emotional development

This study explored the relationship between active mediation, exposure to Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood, and key indicators of preschoolers’ social and emotional development. One hundred and twenty-seven children aged 2–6 either watched or did not watch 10 episodes of Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood over a two-week period. Results revealed that preschoolers who watched the program exhibited higher levels of empathy, self-efficacy, and emotion recognition when their regular TV-watching experiences are frequently accompanied by active mediation. This was especially true for younger preschoolers and preschoolers from low-income families. Implications for policy-makers, parents, producers of prosocial programming, and educators are discussed.     

Pioglitazone has a dubious bladder cancer risk but an undoubted cardiovascular benefit

On 8 April 2014, a US jury ordered Takeda and Eli Lilly to pay $9 bn in punitive damages after finding that they had concealed the cancer risks associated with pioglitazone. By contrast, on 28 August 2014, the long‐awaited outcome of the 10‐year Kaiser Permanente Northern California study was announced. That study was specifically designed to investigate whether patients exposed to pioglitazone were at an increased risk of bladder cancer and found no association; thus, at last, the controversial issue has been resolved. A review, in retrospect, of the story of the proposed link between pioglitazone and bladder cancer reveals flaws at every stage. In 2012, a BMJ editorial, in keeping with some other contemporary reports, stated ‘it can confidently be assumed that pioglitazone increases the risk of bladder cancer’. Examination of the information which led to such a statement shows that: 1) the pre‐clinical findings of bladder cancer in male rats is not indicative of human risk; 2) there is no association between bladder cancer and pioglitazone in randomized controlled trials, once cases that could not plausibly be related to treatment are removed; and 3) the observational studies that have suggested a link have over‐extrapolated from the data: pioglitazone‐treated patients had more risk factors for bladder cancer than those not treated with pioglitazone. Meanwhile careful study of randomized controlled trials shows evidence of cardiovascular benefit from pioglitazone in Type 2 diabetes, a condition which results, more than anything, in premature cardiovascular death and morbidity.