Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 34
Filter
1.
EClinicalMedicine ; 65: 102259, 2023 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38106563

ABSTRACT

Background: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of death worldwide, driven primarily by coronary artery disease (CAD). ASCVD risk estimators such as the pooled cohort equations (PCE) facilitate risk stratification and primary prevention of ASCVD but their accuracy is still suboptimal. Methods: Using deep electronic health record data from 7,116,209 patients seen at 70+ hospitals and clinics across 5 states in the USA, we developed an artificial intelligence-based electrocardiogram analysis tool (ECG-AI) to detect CAD and assessed the additive value of ECG-AI-based ASCVD risk stratification to the PCE. We created independent ECG-AI models using separate neural networks including subjects without known history of ASCVD, to identify coronary artery calcium (CAC) score ≥300 Agatston units by computed tomography, obstructive CAD by angiography or procedural intervention, and regional left ventricular akinesis in ≥1 segment by echocardiogram, as a reflection of possible prior myocardial infarction (MI). These were used to assess the utility of ECG-AI-based ASCVD risk stratification in a retrospective observational study consisting of patients with PCE scores and no prior ASCVD. The study period covered all available digitized EHR data, with the first available ECG in 1987 and the last in February 2023. Findings: ECG-AI for identifying CAC ≥300, obstructive CAD, and regional akinesis achieved area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) values of 0.88, 0.85, and 0.94, respectively. An ensembled ECG-AI identified 3, 5, and 10-year risk for acute coronary events and mortality independently and additively to PCE. Hazard ratios for acute coronary events over 3-years in patients without ASCVD that tested positive on 1, 2, or 3 versus 0 disease-specific ECG-AI models at cohort entry were 2.41 (2.14-2.71), 4.23 (3.74-4.78), and 11.75 (10.2-13.52), respectively. Similar stratification was observed in cohorts stratified by PCE or age. Interpretation: ECG-AI has potential to address unmet need for accessible risk stratification in patients in whom PCE under, over, or insufficiently estimates ASCVD risk, and in whom risk assessment over time periods shorter than 10 years is desired. Funding: Anumana.

3.
Circulation ; 145(23): e1059-e1071, 2022 06 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35531777

ABSTRACT

Addressing the pervasive gaps in knowledge and care delivery to reduce sex-based disparities and achieve equity is fundamental to the American Heart Association's commitment to advancing cardiovascular health for all by 2024. This presidential advisory serves as a call to action for the American Heart Association and other stakeholders around the globe to identify and remove barriers to health care access and quality for women. A concise and current summary of existing data across the areas of risk and prevention, access and delivery of equitable care, and awareness and education provides a framework to consider knowledge gaps and research needs critical toward achieving significant progress for the health and well-being of all women.


Subject(s)
American Heart Association , Cardiovascular Diseases , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , United States/epidemiology
4.
Stroke Vasc Neurol ; 2022 Apr 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35474180

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: This study compares the global disability status of patients who had a mild ischaemic stroke at 30 and 90 days poststroke, as measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and identifies predictors of change in disability status between 30 and 90 days. METHODS: The study population included 1339 patients who had a ischaemic stroke enrolled in the Mild and Rapidly Improving Stroke Study with National Institutes of Health (NIH) stroke score 0-5 and mRS measurements at 30 and 90 days. Outcomes were (1) Improvement defined as having mRS >1 at 30 days and mRS 0-1 at 90 days OR mRS >2 at 30 days and mRS 0-2 at 90 days and (2) Worsening defined as an increase of ≥2 points or a worsening from mRS of 1 at 30 days to 2 at 90 days. Demographic and clinical characteristics at hospital arrival were abstracted from medical records, and regression models were used to identify predictors of functional improvement and decline from 30 to 90 days post-stroke. Significant predictors were mutually adjusted in multivariable models that also included age and stroke severity. RESULTS: Fifty-seven per cent of study participants had no change in mRS value from 30 to 90 days. Overall, there was moderate agreement in mRS between the two time points (weighted kappa=0.59 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.62)). However, worsening on the mRS was observed in 7.54% of the study population from 30 to 90 days, and 17.33% improved. Participants of older age (per year OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03), greater stroke severity (per NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) point at admission OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.34), and those with no alteplase treatment (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.69) were more likely to show functional decline after mutual adjustment. DISCUSSION: A quarter of all mild ischaemic stroke participants exhibited functional changes between 30 and 90 days, suggesting that the 30-day outcome may insufficiently represent long-term recovery in mild stroke and longer follow-up may be clinically necessary. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02072681.

5.
Eur J Heart Fail ; 24(6): 1117-1128, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35289038

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To assess heart failure (HF) in-hospital quality of care and outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients hospitalized for HF with ejection fraction (EF) <40% in the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines©-HF (GWTG-HF) registry during the COVID-19 pandemic (3/1/2020-4/1/2021) and pre-pandemic (2/1/2019-2/29/2020) periods were included. Adherence to HF process of care measures, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay (LOS) were compared in pre-pandemic vs. pandemic periods and in patients with vs. without COVID-19. Overall, 42 004 pre-pandemic and 37 027 pandemic period patients (median age 68, 33% women, 58% White) were included without observed differences across clinical characteristics, comorbidities, vital signs, or EF. Utilization of guideline-directed medical therapy at discharge was comparable across both periods, with rates of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) placement or prescription lower during the pandemic (vs. pre-pandemic period). In-hospital mortality (3.0% vs. 2.5%, p <0.0001) and LOS (mean 5.7 vs. 5.4 days, p <0.0004) were higher during the pandemic vs. pre-pandemic. The highest in-hospital mortality during the pandemic was observed among patients hospitalized in the Northeast region (3.4%). Among patients concurrently diagnosed with COVID-19 (n = 549; 1.5%), adherence to ICD placement or prescription, prescription of aldosterone antagonist or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor at discharge were lower, and in-hospital mortality (8.2% vs. 3.0%, p <0.0001) and LOS (mean 7.7 vs. 5.7 days, p <0.0001) were higher than those without COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Among GWTG-HF participating hospitals, patients hospitalized for HF with reduced EF during the pandemic received similar care quality but experienced higher in-hospital mortality than the pre-pandemic period.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Failure , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Heart Failure/therapy , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Quality of Health Care , Registries , United States/epidemiology
6.
Circ Res ; 130(3): 343-351, 2022 02 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35113661

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in women. To address its determinants including persisting cardiovascular risk factors amplified by sex and race inequities, novel personalized approaches are needed grounded in the engagement of participants in research and prevention. OBJECTIVE: To report on a participant-centric and personalized dynamic registry designed to address persistent gaps in understanding and managing cardiovascular disease in women. METHODS AND RESULTS: The American Heart Association and Verily launched the Research Goes Red registry (RGR) in 2019, as an online research platform available to consenting individuals over the age of 18 years in the United States. RGR aims to bring participants and researchers together to expand knowledge by collecting data and providing an open-source longitudinal dynamic registry for conducting research studies. As of July 2021, 15 350 individuals have engaged with RGR. Mean age of participants was 48.0 48.0±0.2 years with a majority identifying as female and either non-Hispanic White (75.7%) or Black (10.5%). In addition to 6 targeted health surveys, RGR has deployed 2 American Heart Association-sponsored prospective clinical studies based on participants' areas of interest. The first study focuses on perimenopausal weight gain, developed in response to a health concerns survey. The second study is designed to test the use of social media campaigns to increase awareness and participation in cardiovascular disease research among underrepresented millennial women. CONCLUSIONS: RGR is a novel online participant-centric platform that has successfully engaged women and provided critical data on women's heart health to guide research. Priorities for the growth of RGR are centered on increasing reach and diversity of participants, and engaging researchers to work within their communities to leverage the platform to address knowledge gaps and improve women's health.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Patient Participation/methods , Registries , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Social Media
7.
Stroke ; 53(2): 482-487, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34645285

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Clinical fluctuations in ischemic stroke symptoms are common, but fluctuations before hospital arrival have not been previously characterized. METHODS: A standardized qualitative assessment of fluctuations before hospital arrival was obtained in an observational study that enrolled patients with mild ischemic stroke symptoms (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score of 0-5) present on arrival to hospital within 4.5 hours of onset, in a subset of 100 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke quality improvement program. The number of fluctuations, direction, and the overall improvement or worsening was recorded based on reports from the patient, family, or paramedics. Baseline NIHSS on arrival and at 72 hours (or discharge if before) and final diagnosis and stroke subtype were collected. Outcomes at 90 days included the modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, Stroke Impact Scale 16, and European Quality of Life. Prehospital fluctuations were examined in relation to hospital NIHSS change (admission to 72 hours or discharge) and 90-day outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1588 participants, prehospital fluctuations, consisting of improvement, worsening, or both were observed in 35.5%: 25.1% improved once, 5.3% worsened once, and 5.1% had more than 1 fluctuation. Those who improved were less likely and those who worsened were more likely to receive alteplase. Those who improved before hospital arrival had lower change in the hospital NIHSS than those who did not fluctuate. Better adjusted 90-day outcomes were noted in those with prehospital improvement compared to those without any fluctuations. CONCLUSIONS: Fluctuations in neurological symptoms and signs are common in the prehospital setting. Prehospital improvement was associated with better 90-day outcomes, controlling for admission NIHSS and alteplase treatment. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02072681.


Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services , Ischemic Stroke/physiopathology , Ischemic Stroke/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Follow-Up Studies , Guideline Adherence , Humans , Ischemic Stroke/psychology , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Quality Improvement , Quality of Life , Tissue Plasminogen Activator/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
10.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 10(12): e020910, 2021 06 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34107743

ABSTRACT

Background Emerging evidence links acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with COVID-19 with higher mortality and respiratory morbidity, but the relationship of AKI with cardiovascular disease outcomes has not been reported in this population. We sought to evaluate associations between chronic kidney disease (CKD), AKI, and mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods and Results In a large multicenter registry including 8574 patients with COVID-19 from 88 US hospitals, data were collected on baseline characteristics and serial laboratory data during index hospitalization. Primary exposure variables were CKD (categorized as no CKD, CKD, and end-stage kidney disease) and AKI (classified into no AKI or stages 1, 2, or 3 using a modification of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes guideline definition). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The key secondary outcome was major adverse cardiac events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, new-onset nonfatal heart failure, and nonfatal cardiogenic shock. CKD and end-stage kidney disease were not associated with mortality or major adverse cardiac events after multivariate adjustment. In contrast, AKI was significantly associated with mortality (stage 1 hazard ratio [HR], 1.72 [95% CI, 1.46-2.03]; stage 2 HR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.52-2.20]; stage 3 HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.44-1.98]; versus no AKI) and major adverse cardiac events (stage 1 HR, 2.17 [95% CI, 1.74-2.71]; stage 2 HR, 2.70 [95% CI, 2.07-3.51]; stage 3 HR, 3.06 [95% CI, 2.52-3.72]; versus no AKI). Conclusions This large study demonstrates a significant association between AKI and all-cause mortality and, for the first time, major adverse cardiovascular events in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/mortality , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Cause of Death , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Registries , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/diagnosis , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic/therapy , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , United States
11.
Stroke ; 52(6): 1995-2004, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33947209

ABSTRACT

Background and Purpose: Although most strokes present with mild symptoms, these have been poorly represented in clinical trials. The objective of this study is to describe multidimensional outcomes, identify predictors of worse outcomes, and explore the effect of thrombolysis in this population. Methods: This prospective observational study included patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, a baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score 0 to 5, presenting within 4.5 hours from symptom onset. The primary outcome was a 90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 0 to 1; secondary outcomes included good outcomes in the Barthel Index, Stroke Impact Scale-16, and European Quality of Life. Multivariable models were created to determine predictors of outcomes and the effect of alteplase. Results: A total of 1765 participants were included from 100 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke participating hospitals (age, 65±14; 42% women; final diagnosis of ischemic stroke, 90%; transient ischemic attack, 10%; 57% received alteplase). At 90 days, 37% were disabled and 25% not independent. Worse outcomes were noted for older individuals, women, non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics, Medicaid recipients, smokers, those with diabetes, atrial fibrillation, prior stroke, higher baseline NIHSS, visual field defects, and extremity weakness. Similar outcomes were noted for the alteplase-treated and untreated groups. Alteplase-treated patients were younger (64±13 versus 67±1.4) with higher NIHSS (2.9±1.4 versus 1.7±1.4). After adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and baseline NIHSS, we did not identify an effect of alteplase on the primary outcome but did find an association with Stroke Impact Scale-16 in the restricted sample of baseline NIHSS score 3­5. Few symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhages were recorded (<1%). Conclusions: A large proportion of stroke patients presenting with low NIHSS have a disabled outcome. Baseline predictors of worse outcomes are described. An effect of alteplase on outcomes was not identified in the overall cohort, but a suggestion of efficacy was noted in the NIHSS 3­5 subgroup. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02072681.


Subject(s)
Ischemic Attack, Transient , Ischemic Stroke , Quality of Life , Tissue Plasminogen Activator/administration & dosage , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Ischemic Attack, Transient/drug therapy , Ischemic Attack, Transient/epidemiology , Ischemic Stroke/drug therapy , Ischemic Stroke/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Sex Factors
12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(5): e218828, 2021 05 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33938933

ABSTRACT

Importance: In-hospital mortality rates from COVID-19 are high but appear to be decreasing for selected locations in the United States. It is not known whether this is because of changes in the characteristics of patients being admitted. Objective: To describe changing in-hospital mortality rates over time after accounting for individual patient characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of 20 736 adults with a diagnosis of COVID-19 who were included in the US American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry and admitted to 107 acute care hospitals in 31 states from March through November 2020. A multiple mixed-effects logistic regression was then used to estimate the odds of in-hospital death adjusted for patient age, sex, body mass index, and medical history as well as vital signs, use of supplemental oxygen, presence of pulmonary infiltrates at admission, and hospital site. Main Outcomes and Measures: In-hospital death adjusted for exposures for 4 periods in 2020. Results: The registry included 20 736 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from March through November 2020 (9524 women [45.9%]; mean [SD] age, 61.2 [17.9] years); 3271 patients (15.8%) died in the hospital. Mortality rates were 19.1% in March and April, 11.9% in May and June, 11.0% in July and August, and 10.8% in September through November. Compared with March and April, the adjusted odds ratios for in-hospital death were significantly lower in May and June (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.58-0.76; P < .001), July and August (odds ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.49-0.69; P < .001), and September through November (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47-0.73). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, high rates of in-hospital COVID-19 mortality among registry patients in March and April 2020 decreased by more than one-third by June and remained near that rate through November. This difference in mortality rates between the months of March and April and later months persisted even after adjusting for age, sex, medical history, and COVID-19 disease severity and did not appear to be associated with changes in the characteristics of patients being admitted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hospital Mortality/trends , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnostic imaging , Time Factors , Age Factors , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Outcome Assessment , Pneumonia, Viral/etiology , Registries , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Sex Factors , United States/epidemiology , Vital Signs
14.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes ; 13(8): e006967, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32546000

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to the public health emergency created by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, American Heart Association volunteers and staff aimed to rapidly develop and launch a resource for the medical and research community to expedite scientific advancement through shared learning, quality improvement, and research. In <4 weeks after it was first announced on April 3, 2020, AHA's COVID-19 CVD Registry powered by Get With The Guidelines received its first clinical records. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participating hospitals are enrolling consecutive hospitalized patients with active COVID-19 disease, regardless of CVD status. This hospital quality improvement program will allow participating hospitals and health systems to evaluate patient-level data including mortality rates, intensive care unit bed days, and ventilator days from individual review of electronic medical records of sequential adult patients with active COVID-19 infection. Participating sites can leverage these data for onsite, rapid quality improvement, and benchmarking versus other institutions. After 9 weeks, >130 sites have enrolled in the program and >4000 records have been abstracted in the national dataset. Additionally, the aggregate dataset will be a valuable data resource for the medical research community. CONCLUSIONS: The AHA COVID-19 CVD Registry will support greater understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular disease and will inform best practices for evaluation and management of patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Cardiovascular Diseases/therapy , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Emergency Service, Hospital/standards , Guideline Adherence , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Quality Improvement , Registries , American Heart Association , COVID-19 , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
16.
17.
Circulation ; 135(15): e867-e884, 2017 Apr 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28289069

ABSTRACT

Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed the effects of supplementation with eicosapentaenoic acid plus docosahexaenoic acid (omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, commonly called fish oils) on the occurrence of clinical cardiovascular diseases. Although the effects of supplementation for the primary prevention of clinical cardiovascular events in the general population have not been examined, RCTs have assessed the role of supplementation in secondary prevention among patients with diabetes mellitus and prediabetes, patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease, and those with prevalent coronary heart disease. In this scientific advisory, we take a clinical approach and focus on common indications for omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplements related to the prevention of clinical cardiovascular events. We limited the scope of our review to large RCTs of supplementation with major clinical cardiovascular disease end points; meta-analyses were considered secondarily. We discuss the features of available RCTs and provide the rationale for our recommendations. We then use existing American Heart Association criteria to assess the strength of the recommendation and the level of evidence. On the basis of our review of the cumulative evidence from RCTs designed to assess the effect of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation on clinical cardiovascular events, we update prior recommendations for patients with prevalent coronary heart disease, and we offer recommendations, when data are available, for patients with other clinical indications, including patients with diabetes mellitus and prediabetes and those with high risk of cardiovascular disease, stroke, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Dietary Supplements , Fatty Acids, Omega-3/administration & dosage , Fish Oils/administration & dosage , Atrial Fibrillation/etiology , Atrial Fibrillation/prevention & control , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Diabetes Complications , Diabetes Mellitus/prevention & control , Heart Failure/prevention & control , Humans , Primary Prevention , Risk , Secondary Prevention , Stroke/prevention & control
19.
JAMA Intern Med ; 173(22): 2032-6, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23925593

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance allows food manufacturers to determine whether additives to food are "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS). Manufacturers are not required to notify the FDA of a GRAS determination, although in some instances they notify the agency. The individuals that companies select to make these determinations may have financial conflicts of interest. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which individuals selected by manufacturers to make GRAS determinations have conflicts of interest between their obligations to ensure that the use of the additive is safe and their financial relationships to the company. DESIGN Using conflict of interest criteria developed by a committee of the Institute of Medicine, we analyzed 451 GRAS notifications that were voluntarily submitted to the FDA between 1997 and 2012. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Number of GRAS notices submitted to the FDA; frequency of various types of relationships between decision maker and additive manufacturer; frequency of participation on GRAS panels by individuals; and number of GRAS safety determinations identified by the FDA that were not submitted to the agency. RESULTS: For the 451 GRAS notifications, 22.4% of the safety assessments were made by an employee of an additive manufacturer, 13.3% by an employee of a consulting firm selected by the manufacturer, and 64.3% by an expert panel selected by either a consulting firm or the manufacturer. A standing expert panel selected by a third party made none of these safety assessments. The 290 panels that made GRAS determinations had an average of 3.5 members, with a maximum of 7. Ten individuals served on 27 or more panels; 1 individual served on 128 panels (44.1%). At least 1 of the 10 individuals with the most frequent service was a member of 225 panels (77.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Between 1997 and 2012, financial conflicts of interest were ubiquitous in determinations that an additive to food was GRAS. The lack of independent review in GRAS determinations raises concerns about the integrity of the process and whether it ensures the safety of the food supply, particularly in instances where the manufacturer does not notify the FDA of the determination. The FDA should address these concerns.


Subject(s)
Chemical Industry/ethics , Conflict of Interest , Food Additives/adverse effects , Food Industry/ethics , Legislation, Food , United States Food and Drug Administration , Food Additives/analysis , Humans , Interinstitutional Relations , United States
20.
Reprod Toxicol ; 42: 85-94, 2013 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23954440

ABSTRACT

In the United States, chemical additives cannot be used in food without an affirmative determination that their use is safe by FDA or additive manufacturer. Feeding toxicology studies designed to estimate the amount of a chemical additive that can be eaten safely provide the most relevant information. We analyze how many chemical additives allowed in human food have feeding toxicology studies in three toxicological information sources including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) database. Less than 38% of FDA-regulated additives have a published feeding study. For chemicals directly added to food, 21.6% have feeding studies necessary to estimate a safe level of exposure and 6.7% have reproductive or developmental toxicity data in FDA's database. A program is needed to fill these significant knowledge gaps by using in vitro and in silico methods complemented with targeted in vivo studies to ensure public health is protected.


Subject(s)
Food Additives/toxicity , Toxicity Tests , Animals , Databases, Factual , Humans , Research Design , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...