Prevalence and management of familial hypercholesterolaemia in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

AIMS We aimed to assess the prevalence and management of clinical familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS AND RESULTS We studied 4778 patients with ACS from a multi-centre cohort study in Switzerland. Based on personal and familial history of premature cardiovascular disease and LDL-cholesterol levels, two validated algorithms for diagnosis of clinical FH were used: the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network algorithm to assess possible (score 3-5 points) or probable/definite FH (>5 points), and the Simon Broome Register algorithm to assess possible FH. At the time of hospitalization for ACS, 1.6% had probable/definite FH [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-2.0%, n = 78] and 17.8% possible FH (95% CI 16.8-18.9%, n = 852), respectively, according to the Dutch Lipid Clinic algorithm. The Simon Broome algorithm identified 5.4% (95% CI 4.8-6.1%, n = 259) patients with possible FH. Among 1451 young patients with premature ACS, the Dutch Lipid Clinic algorithm identified 70 (4.8%, 95% CI 3.8-6.1%) patients with probable/definite FH, and 684 (47.1%, 95% CI 44.6-49.7%) patients had possible FH. Excluding patients with secondary causes of dyslipidaemia such as alcohol consumption, acute renal failure, or hyperglycaemia did not change prevalence. One year after ACS, among 69 survivors with probable/definite FH and available follow-up information, 64.7% were using high-dose statins, 69.0% had decreased LDL-cholesterol from at least 50, and 4.6% had LDL-cholesterol ≤1.8 mmol/L. CONCLUSION A phenotypic diagnosis of possible FH is common in patients hospitalized with ACS, particularly among those with premature ACS. Optimizing long-term lipid treatment of patients with FH after ACS is required.

Sharing evidence of sustainable land management impacts

Ensuring sustainable use of natural resources is crucial for maintaining the basis for our livelihoods. With threats from climate change, disputes over water, biodiversity loss, competing claims on land, and migration increasing worldwide, the demands for sustainable land management (SLM) practices will only increase in the future. For years already, various national and international organizations (GOs, NGOs, donors, research institutes, etc.) have been working on alternative forms of land management. And numerous land users worldwide – especially small farmers – have been testing, adapting, and refining new and better ways of managing land. All too often, however, the resulting SLM knowledge has not been sufficiently evaluated, documented and shared. Among other things, this has often prevented valuable SLM knowledge from being channelled into evidence-based decision-making processes. Indeed, proper knowledge management is crucial for SLM to reach its full potential. Since more than 20 years, the international WOCAT network documents and promotes SLM through its global platform. As a whole, the WOCAT methodology comprises tools for documenting, evaluating, and assessing the impact of SLM practices, as well as for knowledge sharing, analysis and use for decision support in the field, at the planning level, and in scaling up identified good practices. In early 2014, WOCAT’s growth and ongoing improvement culminated in its being officially recognized by the UNCCD as the primary recommended database for SLM best practices. Over the years, the WOCAT network confirmed that SLM helps to prevent desertification, to increase biodiversity, enhance food security and to make people less vulnerable to the effects of climate variability and change. In addi- tion, it plays an important role in mitigating climate change through improving soil organic matter and increasing vegetation cover. In-depth assessments of SLM practices from desertification sites enabled an evaluation of how SLM addresses prevalent dryland threats. The impacts mentioned most were diversified and enhanced production and better management of water and soil degradation, whether through water harvesting, improving soil moisture, or reducing runoff. Among others, favourable local-scale cost-benefit relationships of SLM practices play a crucial role in their adoption. An economic analysis from the WOCAT database showed that land users perceive a large majority of the technologies as having benefits that outweigh costs in the long term. The high investment costs associated with some practices may constitute a barrier to adoption, however, where appropriate, short-term support for land users can help to promote these practices. The increased global concerns on climate change, disaster risks and food security redirect attention to, and trigger more funds for SLM. To provide the necessary evidence-based rationale for investing in SLM and to reinforce expert and land users assessments of SLM impacts, more field research using inter- and transdisciplinary approaches is needed. This includes developing methods to quantify and value ecosystem services, both on-site and off-site, and assess the resilience of SLM practices, as currently aimed at within the EU FP7 projects CASCADE and RECARE.

The European Network for Translational Research in Atrial Fibrillation (EUTRAF): objectives and initial results

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained arrhythmia in the general population. As an age-related arrhythmia AF is becoming a huge socio-economic burden for European healthcare systems. Despite significant progress in our understanding of the pathophysiology of AF, therapeutic strategies for AF have not changed substantially and the major challenges in the management of AF are still unmet. This lack of progress may be related to the multifactorial pathogenesis of atrial remodelling and AF that hampers the identification of causative pathophysiological alterations in individual patients. Also, again new mechanisms have been identified and the relative contribution of these mechanisms still has to be established. In November 2010, the European Union launched the large collaborative project EUTRAF (European Network of Translational Research in Atrial Fibrillation) to address these challenges. The main aims of EUTRAF are to study the main mechanisms of initiation and perpetuation of AF, to identify the molecular alterations underlying atrial remodelling, to develop markers allowing to monitor this processes, and suggest strategies to treat AF based on insights in newly defined disease mechanisms. This article reports on the objectives, the structure, and initial results of this network.

Effectiveness of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of pain in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the backbone of osteoarthritis pain management. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of different preparations and doses of NSAIDs on osteoarthritis pain in a network meta-analysis. METHODS For this network meta-analysis, we considered randomised trials comparing any of the following interventions: NSAIDs, paracetamol, or placebo, for the treatment of osteoarthritis pain. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the reference lists of relevant articles for trials published between Jan 1, 1980, and Feb 24, 2015, with at least 100 patients per group. The prespecified primary and secondary outcomes were pain and physical function, and were extracted in duplicate for up to seven timepoints after the start of treatment. We used an extension of multivariable Bayesian random effects models for mixed multiple treatment comparisons with a random effect at the level of trials. For the primary analysis, a random walk of first order was used to account for multiple follow-up outcome data within a trial. Preparations that used different total daily dose were considered separately in the analysis. To assess a potential dose-response relation, we used preparation-specific covariates assuming linearity on log relative dose. FINDINGS We identified 8973 manuscripts from our search, of which 74 randomised trials with a total of 58 556 patients were included in this analysis. 23 nodes concerning seven different NSAIDs or paracetamol with specific daily dose of administration or placebo were considered. All preparations, irrespective of dose, improved point estimates of pain symptoms when compared with placebo. For six interventions (diclofenac 150 mg/day, etoricoxib 30 mg/day, 60 mg/day, and 90 mg/day, and rofecoxib 25 mg/day and 50 mg/day), the probability that the difference to placebo is at or below a prespecified minimum clinically important effect for pain reduction (effect size [ES] -0·37) was at least 95%. Among maximally approved daily doses, diclofenac 150 mg/day (ES -0·57, 95% credibility interval [CrI] -0·69 to -0·46) and etoricoxib 60 mg/day (ES -0·58, -0·73 to -0·43) had the highest probability to be the best intervention, both with 100% probability to reach the minimum clinically important difference. Treatment effects increased as drug dose increased, but corresponding tests for a linear dose effect were significant only for celecoxib (p=0·030), diclofenac (p=0·031), and naproxen (p=0·026). We found no evidence that treatment effects varied over the duration of treatment. Model fit was good, and between-trial heterogeneity and inconsistency were low in all analyses. All trials were deemed to have a low risk of bias for blinding of patients. Effect estimates did not change in sensitivity analyses with two additional statistical models and accounting for methodological quality criteria in meta-regression analysis. INTERPRETATION On the basis of the available data, we see no role for single-agent paracetamol for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis irrespective of dose. We provide sound evidence that diclofenac 150 mg/day is the most effective NSAID available at present, in terms of improving both pain and function. Nevertheless, in view of the safety profile of these drugs, physicians need to consider our results together with all known safety information when selecting the preparation and dose for individual patients. FUNDING Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 405340-104762) and Arco Foundation, Switzerland.