Use of Dietary Supplements Among People With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in the United States: A Population-Based Analysis From NHANES.

BACKGROUND: Dietary supplement use is prevalent in the general US population, but little is known regarding the driving reasons for their use among those with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2017 to March 2020 were used to identify adults with ASCVD. Supplement use was assessed by interviewers using label review, and surveys captured self-reported reasons for use. Demographic, clinical, medication, and laboratory characteristics were compared between supplement users and nonusers. Among individuals with ASCVD in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (n=965; mean age, 65 years; 56.1% men; 73.7% White individuals), 73.1% reported taking ≥1 dietary supplements, most commonly multivitamins (35.4%), vitamin D (30.8%), and fish oil (19.8%). Of those taking supplements, 47.3% report taking them under the advisement of a health professional. Nearly one fifth (17.9%) reported taking at least 1 supplement for "heart health," most commonly fish oil (11.1%), followed by CoQ10 (4.2%) and resveratrol (1.5%). Supplement users were older (68 versus 62 years; P=0.003), included more women (45.8% versus 37.7%; P=0.17), were less likely to smoke (11.0% versus 36.4%; P<0.001), had higher levels of education (P=0.005) and income (P<0.001), and higher use of statins (69.4% versus 55.8%; P=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Supplement use is common in people with ASCVD. Among the top 3 supplements, a substantial minority were being taken under the direction of health professionals. Supplement users often report taking supplements "for heart health," despite a lack of randomized trial evidence for benefit in ASCVD, indicating a need for more patient and clinician education regarding health benefits of dietary supplements in ASCVD.

The impact of race and ethnicity on outcomes in 19,584 adults hospitalized with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: At the population level, Black and Hispanic adults in the United States have increased risk of dying from COVID-19, yet whether race and ethnicity impact on risk of mortality among those hospitalized for COVID-19 is unclear. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using data on adults hospitalized with COVID-19 from the electronic health record from 52 health systems across the United States contributing data to Cerner Real World DataTM. In-hospital mortality was evaluated by race first in unadjusted analysis then sequentially adjusting for demographics and clinical characteristics using logistic regression. RESULTS: Through August 2020, 19,584 patients with median age 52 years were hospitalized with COVID-19, including n = 4,215 (21.5%) Black and n = 5,761 (29.4%) Hispanic patients. Relative to white patients, crude mortality was slightly higher in Black adults [22.7% vs 20.8%, unadjusted OR 1.12 (95% CI 1.02-1.22)]. Mortality remained higher among Black adults after adjusting for demographic factors including age, sex, date, region, and insurance status (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.27), but not after including comorbidities and body mass index (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.93-1.23). Compared with non-Hispanic patients, Hispanic patients had lower mortality both in unadjusted and adjusted models [mortality 12.7 vs 25.0%, unadjusted OR 0.44(95% CI 0.40-0.48), fully adjusted OR 0.71 (95% CI 0.59-0.86)]. DISCUSSION: In this large, multicenter, EHR-based analysis, Black adults hospitalized with COVID-19 had higher observed mortality than white patients due to a higher burden of comorbidities in Black adults. In contrast, Hispanic ethnicity was associated with lower mortality, even in fully adjusted models.

Effects of Influenza Vaccine on Mortality and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background Influenza infection causes considerable morbidity and mortality in patients with cardiovascular disease. We assessed the effects of the influenza vaccine on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. Methods and Results We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through January 2020 for randomized controlled trials and observational studies assessing the effects of influenza vaccine on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. Estimates were reported as random effects risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. Analyses were stratified by study design into randomized controlled trials and observational studies. A total of 16 studies (n=237 058), including 4 randomized controlled trials (n=1667) and 12 observational studies (n=235 391), were identified. Participants' mean age was 69.2±7.01 years, 36.6% were women, 65.1% had hypertension, 31.1% had diabetes mellitus, and 23.4% were smokers. At a median follow-up duration of 19.5 months, influenza vaccine was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93 [P=0.01]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.80-0.84 [P<0.001]), and major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.94 [P<0.001]) compared with control. The use of the influenza vaccine was not associated with a statistically significant reduction of myocardial infarction (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.49-1.09 [P=0.12]) compared with control. Conclusions Data from both randomized controlled trials and observational studies support the use of the influenza vaccine in adults with cardiovascular disease to reduce mortality and cardiovascular events, as currently supported by clinical guidelines. Clinicians and health systems should continue to promote the influenza vaccine as part of comprehensive secondary prevention.

Population Effect of Differences in Cholesterol Guidelines in Eastern Europe and the United States.

IMPORTANCE: The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for the management of blood cholesterol and the current European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines differ in how they identify adults in need of statin therapy; furthermore, it is unclear how this difference translates into numbers and characteristics of patients recommended for treatment. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of the ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS cholesterol guidelines when applied to a population-based sample. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used nationally representative data for 3055 adults aged 40 to 65 years from the 2007-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) for the United States and for 1060 adults aged 40 to 65 years from the 2011 Nadcisnienie Tetnicze w Polsce survey for Poland. Data analysis was conducted from May 1, 2014, to December 31, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number and characteristics of adults recommended for statin therapy according to the ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS guidelines were evaluated, and characteristics were compared between adults with discordant recommendations. RESULTS: The 3136 US adults in NHANES (2007-2012) aged 40 to 65 years represented 100.1 million adults; after excluding the 81 patients with missing data, these population estimates translate to 97.9 million adults. Similarly, the 1060 Polish adults in NATPOL (2011) aged 40 to 65 years represent 13.5 million adults. Using weighted data, in the United States, 43.8% (95% CI, 40.9%-46.7%) of adults would be recommended for statin therapy according to ACC/AHA guidelines and 39.1% (95% CI, 36.4%-41.8%) according to ESC/EAS guidelines. In Poland, 49.9% (95% CI, 46.9%-52.9%) of adults would be recommended for statin therapy under ACC/AHA guidelines compared with 47.6% (95% CI, 44.6%-50.7%) under ESC/EAS guidelines. Among individuals without cardiovascular disease and not currently taking statins, 11.0% of US and 10.5% of Polish adults had discordant guideline recommendations. Compared with individuals recommended for statin therapy by the ESC/EAS guidelines but not the ACC/AHA guidelines, those recommended for statin therapy under the ACC/AHA guidelines only had less chronic kidney disease; however, these individuals were also more likely to smoke, have lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and have higher predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite differences in the ACC/AHA and EAS/ESC guidelines, the numbers of adults aged 40 to 65 years recommended for cholesterol-lowering therapy under each guideline were similar when applied to nationwide representative samples from both the United States and Poland. Discordant recommendations were driven by differences in the risk equations used in the 2 guidelines and different recommendations for adults with chronic kidney disease.