Dataset Information

[Cardiovascular risk in Spanish smokers compared to non-smokers: RETRATOS study].

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To evaluate the level of cardiovascular risk in smokers seenin Primary Care clinics.

Design

Epidemiologic, cross-sectional and multicentre study.

Setting

Primary Care.

Patients

Every investigator included 4 consecutive patients (3 smokers, 1 non-smoker) aged 35-50 years, who came to the clinic for any reason. A total of 2,184 patients were included; 2,124 (1,597 smokers; 527 non-smokers) were evaluated and 60 patients were excluded because they did not meet with selection criteria.

Measurements

The 10-year risk of suffering from a fatal cardiovascular disease (CVDR) was calculated according to the SCORE (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) model. The 10-year lethal CVR according SCORE model, was classified as: very high (> 15%), high (10-14%), slightly high (5-9%), average (3-4%), low (2%), very low (1%) and negligible (< 1%). A logistical regression model was used to estimate the relationship between smoking and prior cardiovascular events.

Results

10-year fatal CVDR according to the SCORE model was significantly higher in smokers (40±5.3) vs. non-smokers (1.9±2.5) (P<.0001).

Risk stratification

low (< 3%) [78.0% non-smokers vs. 60.7% smokers (P<.0001)]; intermediate (3-5%) [11.1% non-smokers vs. 12.6% smokers (P<.001)]; high (> 5%) [10.9% non-smokers vs. 26.7% smokers (P<.001)]. The logistical regression model showed that non-smokers vs. smokers had less probability of suffering myocardial infarction (OR 0.3; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.1-0.8; P<.0001), peripheral vascular disease (OR 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4-1.0; P=.0180) and chronic obstructive lung disease (OR 0.18; 95% CI: 0.1-0.2; P=.0507).

Conclusions

Smoking is related to a high risk of fatal cardiovascular disease. Active promotion in Primary Care clinics of measures aimed at reducing the prevalence of the smoking habit would lead to a lowering of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

SUBMITTER: Fernandez de Bobadilla J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7025142 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

[Cardiovascular risk in Spanish smokers compared to non-smokers: RETRATOS study].

Fernández de Bobadilla Jaime J Sanz de Burgoa Verónica V Garrido Morales Patricio P López de Sá Esteban E

Atencion primaria 20110321 11

<h4>Aim</h4>To evaluate the level of cardiovascular risk in smokers seenin Primary Care clinics.<h4>Design</h4>Epidemiologic, cross-sectional and multicentre study.<h4>Setting</h4>Primary Care.<h4>Patients</h4>Every investigator included 4 consecutive patients (3 smokers, 1 non-smoker) aged 35-50 years, who came to the clinic for any reason. A total of 2,184 patients were included; 2,124 (1,597 smokers; 527 non-smokers) were evaluated and 60 patients were excluded because they did not meet with ...[more]

PMID: 21420200

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDepression is strongly associated with daily smoking. Yet, little is known about the association between depression and non-daily smoking. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of past-year depression and changes in past-year depression over time among non-daily smokers, compared to daily smokers and never-smokers, overall and stratified by age, gender, income, nicotine dependence, and cigarettes per day.MethodsData were drawn from the National Household Survey on Drug Use (NSDUH), an annual cross-sectional study of persons aged 12 and over (total study population N = 496 805). The prevalence of past-year depression was examined annually among non-daily smokers, daily smokers, and never-smokers from 2005 to 2013 using linear trend analyses.ResultsPast-year depression was common among 10.10% of non-daily smokers, common among 10.78% of daily smokers, and 5.51% of never-smokers in 2013. The prevalence of depression increased from 2005 to 2013 among non-daily smokers (9.06% vs. 10.10%; p = .034) while there was no significant change in depression over time among daily smokers. Increases in depression among non-daily smokers occurred for both men and women and appear most pronounced youth, those smoking fewer cigarettes, and those without nicotine dependence.ConclusionsThe prevalence of depression among non-daily smokers was equivalent to daily smokers and nearly twice that among nonsmokers. Depression appears to be increasing over time in non-daily smokers especially among youth, those who smoke less, and those without nicotine dependence. More work on the mental health of non-daily smokers is needed as this is an increasing and understudied group.ImplicationsThis is the first study to investigate changes in the prevalence of depression among non-daily smokers compared to daily smokers and never-smokers over the past decade in a nationally representative sample of the United States. The results suggest an increase in depression among non-daily smokers over time that did not similarly occur for daily smokers. Further, there were several subgroups of non-daily smokers among whom depression has increased more rapidly. This study suggests the need for more information about the relationship between depression and non-daily smoking including the impact of depression on quit attempts and outcomes.

Project description:A few studies have assessed the short-term effects of low-dose nicotine e-cigarettes, while data about nicotine-free e-cigarettes (NF e-cigarettes) are scanty. Concerns have been expressed about the use of NF e-cigarettes, because of the high concentrations of propylene glycol and other compounds in the e-cigarette vapor.This laboratory-based study was aimed to compare the effects of ad libitum use of a NF e-cigarette or and a traditional cigarette for 5 min in healthy adult smokers (n = 10) and non-smokers (n = 10). The main outcome measures were pulmonary function tests, fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) and fractional concentration of carbon monoxide (FeCO) in exhaled breath.The traditional cigarette induced statistically significant increases in FeCO in both smokers and non-smokers, while no significant changes were observed in FeNO. In non-smokers, the traditional cigarette induced a significant decrease from baseline in FEF75 (81 % ± 35 % vs 70.2 % ± 28.2 %, P = 0.013), while in smokers significant decreases were observed in FEF25 (101.3 % ± 16.4 % vs 93.5 % ± 31.7 %, P = 0.037), FEV1 (102.2 % ± 9.5 % vs 98.3 % ± 10 %, P = 0.037) and PEF (109.5 % ± 14.6 % vs 99.2 % ± 17.5 %, P = 0.009). In contrast, the only statistically significant effects induced by the NF e-cigarette in smokers were reductions in FEV1 (102.2 % ± 9.5 % vs 99.5 ± 7.6 %, P = 0.041) and FEF25 (103.4 % ± 16.4 % vs 94.2 % ± 16.2 %, P =? .014).The present study demonstrated that the specific brand of NF e-cigarette utilized did not induce any majoracute effects. In contrast, several studies have shown that both traditional cigarettes and nicotine-containing e-cigarettes have acute effects on lung function. Our study expands on previous observations on the effects of NF e-cigarettes, but also for the first time describes the changes induced by smoking one traditional cigarette in a group of never smokers.The short-term use of the specific brand of NF e-cigarette assessed in this study had no immediate adverse effects on non-smokers and only small effects on FEV1 and FEF25 in smokers. The long-term health effects of NF e-cigarette use are unknown but worthy of further investigations.Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02102191.

Project description:IntroductionSARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, gains entry into the host cell when its Spike protein is cleaved by host proteases TMPRSS2 and furin, thereby markedly increasing viral affinity for its receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme-2(ACE2). In rodent and diseased human lungs, tobacco cigarette(TCIG) smoke increases ACE2, but the effect of electronic cigarette vaping(ECIG) is unknown. It is unknown whether nicotine (in both TCIGs and ECIGs) or non-nicotine constituents unique to TCIG smoke increase expression of key proteins in COVID-19 pathogenesis.MethodsImmune (CD45+) cells collected before the pandemic in otherwise healthy young people, including TCIG-smokers(n=9), ECIG-vapers(n=12) or non-smokers(NS) (n=12) were studied. Using flow cytometry, expression of key proteins in COVID-19 pathogenesis were compared among these groups.ResultsTCIG-smokers and ECIG-vapers had similar smoking or vaping burdens as indicated by similar plasma cotinine levels. TCIG-smokers compared to NS had a significantly increased percentage of cells that were positive for ACE2 (10-fold, p<0.001), TMPRSS2 (5-fold, p<0.001) and ADAM17 (2.5-fold, p<0.001). Additionally, the mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) consistently showed greater mean ACE2 (2.2-fold, p<0.001), TMPRSS2 (1.5-fold, p<0.001), furin (1.1-fold, p<0.05) and ADAM17 (2-fold, p<0.001) in TCIG-smokers compared to NS. In ECIG-vapers, furin MFI was increased (1.15-fold, p<0.05) and TMPRSS2 MFI tended to be increased (1.1-fold, p=0.077) compared to NS.ConclusionsThe finding that key instigators of COVID-19 infection are lower in ECIG-vapers compared to TCIG-smokers is intriguing and warrants additional investigation to determine if switching to ECIGs is an effective harm reduction strategy. However, the trend towards increased proteases in ECIG-vapers remains concerning.ImplicationsThis is the first human study to report a marked increase in proteins critical for COVID-19 infection, including ACE2, TMPRSS2 and ADAM17, in immune cells from healthy tobacco cigarette smokers without lung disease compared to e-cigarette vapers and non-smokers. These findings warrant additional investigation to determine if switching to electronic cigarettes may be an effective harm reduction strategy in smokers addicted to nicotine who are unable or unwilling to quit, The increase in proteases in electronic cigarette vapers remains concerning.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:This study assessed the utility of the pooled cohort equation (PCE) and/or coronary artery calcium (CAC) for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment in smokers, especially those who were lung cancer screening eligible (LCSE). BACKGROUND:The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services currently pays for annual screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography scans in a specified group of cigarette smokers. CAC can be obtained from these low-dose scans. The incremental utility of CAC for ASCVD risk stratification remains unclear in this high-risk group. METHODS:Of 6,814 MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) participants, 3,356 (49.2% of total cohort) were smokers (2,476 former and 880 current), and 14.3% were LCSE. Kaplan-Meier, Cox proportional hazards, area under the curve, and net reclassification improvement (NRI) analyses were used to assess the association between PCE and/or CAC and incident ASCVD. Incident ASCVD was defined as coronary death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or fatal or nonfatal stroke. RESULTS:Smokers had a mean age of 62.1 years, 43.5% were female, and all had a mean of 23.0 pack-years of smoking. The LCSE sample had a mean age of 65.3 years, 39.1% were female, and all had a mean of 56.7 pack-years of smoking. After a mean of 11.1 years of follow-up 13.4% of all smokers and 20.8% of LCSE smokers had ASCVD events; 6.7% of all smokers and 14.2% of LCSE smokers with CAC = 0 had an ASCVD event during the follow-up. One SD increase in the PCE 10-year risk was associated with a 68% increase risk for ASCVD events in all smokers (hazard ratio: 1.68; 95% confidence interval: 1.57 to 1.80) and a 22% increase in risk for ASCVD events in the LCSE smokers (hazard ratio: 1.22; 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.47). CAC was associated with increased ASCVD risk in all smokers and in LCSE smokers in all the Cox models. The C-statistic of the PCE for ASCVD was higher in all smokers compared with LCSE smokers (0.693 vs. 0.545). CAC significantly improved the C-statistics of the PCE in all smokers but not in LCSE smokers. The event and nonevent net reclassification improvements for all smokers and LCSE smokers were 0.018 and -0.126 versus 0.16 and -0.196, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:In this well-characterized, multiethnic U.S. cohort, CAC was predictive of ASCVD in all smokers and in LCSE smokers but modestly improved discrimination over and beyond the PCE. However, 6.7% of all smokers and 14.2% of LCSE smokers with CAC = 0 had an ASCVD event during follow-up.

Dataset Information

[Cardiovascular risk in Spanish smokers compared to non-smokers: RETRATOS study].

Aim

Design

Setting

Patients

Measurements

Results

Risk stratification

Conclusions

Publications

[Cardiovascular risk in Spanish smokers compared to non-smokers: RETRATOS study].

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets