BackgroundAtrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factors for all‐cause mortality may guide interventions.Methods and ResultsIn the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose‐adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identified factors at randomization that were independently associated with all‐cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intention‐to‐treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS 2 score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow‐up, 1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan–Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all‐cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.33–1.70, P<0.0001) and age ≥75 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.51–1.90, P<0.0001) were associated with higher all‐cause mortality. Multiple additional characteristics were independently associated with higher mortality, with decreasing creatinine clearance, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, male sex, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes being among the most strongly associated (model C‐index 0.677).ConclusionsIn a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, ≈7 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereas <1 in 10 deaths were caused by nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. Optimal prevention and treatment of heart failure, renal impairment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes may improve survival.Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.

ObjectiveIrritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disorder that is difficult to diagnose and treat due to its inherent heterogeneity and unclear aetiology. Although there is evidence suggesting the importance of the microbiome in IBS, this association remains poorly defined. In the current study, we aimed to characterise a large cross-sectional cohort of patients with self-reported IBS in terms of microbiome composition, demographics, and risk factors.DesignIndividuals who had previously submitted a stool sample for 16S microbiome sequencing were sent a comprehensive survey regarding IBS diagnosis, demographics, health history, comorbidities, family history, and symptoms. Log ratio-transformed abundances of microbial taxa were compared between individuals reporting a diagnosis of IBS without any comorbidities and individuals reporting no health conditions. Univariable testing was followed by a multivariable logistic regression model controlling for relevant confounders.ResultsOut of 6386 respondents, 1692 reported a diagnosis of IBS without comorbidities and 1124 reported no health conditions. We identified 3 phyla, 15 genera, and 19 species as significantly associated with IBS after adjustment for confounding factors. Demographic risk factors include a family history of gut disorders and reported use of antibiotics in the last year.ConclusionThe results of this study confirm important IBS risk factors in a large cohort and support a connection for microbiome compositional changes in IBS pathogenesis. The results also suggest clinical relevance in monitoring and investigating the microbiome in patients with IBS. Further, the exploratory models described here provide a foundation for future studies.

No abstract

No abstract

Background The Inner Santiago Health Study (ISHS) aimed to (i) estimate the prevalence of common mental disorders (CMD; i.e. depressive and anxiety disorders) among immigrants of Peruvian origin in Chile; (ii) determine whether such immigrants are at higher risk of CMD when compared with the native-born geographically matched population (i.e. non-immigrants); and (iii) identify factors associated with higher risk of any CMD among this immigrant group. A secondary aim was to describe access to mental health services by Peruvian immigrants meeting criteria for any CMD. Methods Findings are based on a population-based cross-sectional household mental health survey of 608 immigrant and 656 non-immigrant adults (18-64 years) residing in Santiago de Chile. Diagnoses of ICD-10 depressive and anxiety disorders and of any CMD were obtained using the Revised Clinical Interview Schedule. The relationships between demographic, economic, psychosocial, and migration-specific predictor variables, and risk of any CMD were analyzed with a series of stepwise multivariate logistic regression models. Results The one-week prevalence of any CMD was 29.1% (95% CI: 25.2-33.1) among immigrants and 34.7% (95% CI: 30.7-38.7) among non-immigrants. Depending on the statistical model used in the pooled sample, we found the prevalence of any CMD among non-immigrants to be higher (OR=1.53; 95% CI: 1.05-2.25) or similar (OR=1.34; 95% CI: 0.94-19.2) when compared with immigrants. In the multivariate stepwise regression of any CMD in immigrants only, the prevalence was higher for females, those with primary compared to higher education, in debt and exposed to discrimination. Conversely, higher levels of functional social support, sense of comprehensibility, and manageability were associated with a lower risk of any CMD in immigrants. In addition, no differences were observed between immigrants and non-immigrants reporting any CMD in mental health service utilization. Conclusion Our results evidence high levels of current CMD in this immigrant group, particularly amongst women. However, lower adjusted prevalence of any CMD in immigrants compared to non-immigrants was limited to preliminary statistical models, thus failing to provide clear support for a “healthy immigrant effect”. The study sheds new light on differences in CMD prevalence by immigrant status in Latin America by examining differential exposure to risk factors in immigrant versus non-immigrant groups.