<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_460"
                     title="Black Mothers at Increased Risk for Cardiomyopathy (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Prevention/tb/18389?impressionId=1265758782424"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;African-American women have an increased risk of peripartum cardiomyopathy, researchers have found in a small, single-center Georgia study.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Compared with healthy controls of other races, black women had a 15.7-fold increased risk of the dangerous heart condition (95% CI 3.5 to 70.6, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001), Mindy B. Gentry, MD, of the Medical College of Georgia Cardiovascular Center in Augusta, and colleagues reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American College of Cardiology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers said that the findings &quot;could not be explained by several other factors,&quot; including hypertension and smoking.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We are unable to determine in this study whether genetic factors of race, or other complex environmental, social, economic, or other factors that are linked to race, account for the increased risk,&quot; the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Peripartum cardiomyopathy is a major cause of heart failure and cardiovascular mortality among women of child-bearing age, and can occur in women without preexisting heart disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, its risk factors have not yet been established, the researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So they conducted a single-center, case-control study involving 28 women diagnosed with peripartum cardiomyopathy. Each case was matched with three healthy controls: all delivered babies within the same month.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers found that case incidence was 24 in 100,000 deliveries for non-blacks and 340 in 100,000 for African Americans.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That relationship remained significant in multivariate analyses, controlling for other factors (OR 31.5, 95% CI 3.6 to 277.6).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Other significant risk factors included hypertension (OR 10.8, 95% CI 2.6 to 44.4), being unmarried (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.4 to 12.3), and having had more than two previous pregnancies (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 7.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It wasn&apos;t significant in the univariate analysis, but smoking during pregnancy was a significant risk factor in the multivariate analysis, the researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Yet in a stratified analysis, &quot;none of these risk factors could explain solely the increased risk for this disorder among African-American women,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They noted that the frequency of cardiomyopathy was higher at their center than in previous reports, although it was comparable to the frequency in countries with more women of African descent (100 to 980 in 100,000 deliveries).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These data and an analysis of previous reports provide strong, consistent evidence that the risk of peripartum cardiomyopathy is increased among women of African descent,&quot; they concluded. &quot;It is important to consider whether the increased risk is due to genetic factors, environmental factors, or both.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors noted that the study was limited by a relatively small sample size.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_452"
                     title="Study Backs Late Cardiotoxicity of Childhood Cancer Treatment (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18384?impressionId=1265758782424"
                     
      A childhood cancer survivor&apos;s risk of dying from cardiovascular causes rises with the dose of radiation his heart received during treatment, researchers in France and the U.K. affirmed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Those whose hearts were exposed had a 60% higher risk of cardiovascular death than the general population, even at a dose of 1 Gy (95% CI 20% to 250%), according to Florent de Vathaire, PhD, of L&apos;Institut National de la Sant&amp;#233; et de la Recherche M&amp;#233;dicale in Paris, and colleagues.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The risk jumped to 12.5-fold for a cumulative radiation dose to the heart of 5 to 14.9 Gy, and to 14.9-fold for a dose of more than 15 Gy (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01 for trend), the researchers reported online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of Clinical Oncology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The notion that exposing the heart to radiation increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and death is not surprising, according to an accompanying editorial.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this study examined cardiovascular mortality effects of both the dose of radiation and the dose of anthracyclines given to childhood cancer victims in the same cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That&apos;s something previous studies haven&apos;t done, according to editorialists Steven E. Lipshultz, MD, of the University of Miami and Holtz Children&apos;s Hospital in Miami, and M. Jacob Adams, MD, MPH, of the University of Rochester, N.Y.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These are pretty profound findings,&quot; Lipshultz told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;. &quot;These are the exact concerns we&apos;ve had based on careful subclinical assessments of how the heart in these survivors has been working.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;His group was one of the first to report that survivors of childhood cancer faced not only acute cardiotoxicity from treatment, but also late cardiac effects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As more effective treatment for childhood cancers came into play, the dramatic jump in survival rates  --  from less than 50% in the mid-1970s to 80% today  --  yielded a large enough population of survivors to make chronic issues from treatment apparent, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It appears that for some of these survivors we have substituted one fatal disease of childhood  --  cancer  --  for another fatal disease of early adult life,&quot; he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;de Vathaire&apos;s group studied a cohort of 4,122 French and British children diagnosed with childhood solid cancer between 1942 and 1986 and who survived at least five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Over an average of 27 years of follow-up, they were at 8.3-fold higher risk of dying from any cause compared with the general populations in France and the U.K. (95% CI 7.6 to 9.0).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The majority of these excess deaths occurred early after diagnosis, five to nine years afterward in this analysis  --  in which all patients survived to five years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Based on just 32 deaths from cardiovascular diseases in the cohort, the childhood cancer survivors experienced five times the cardiovascular mortality (95% CI 3.3 to 6.7) expected from the general population (1.7% cumulative at 35 years versus 0.3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This elevation in risk was similar to that seen in large studies from the U.S. and Nordic countries, suggesting generalizability of the results, Lipshultz said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Radiation therapy also conferred a 5.0-fold elevation in risk of cardiovascular disease-related death (95% CI 1.2 to 21.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Like radiation, a higher cumulative dose of anthracycline chemotherapy also increased risk of dying from cardiac diseases, compared with the general population (RR 4.4 for a dose over 360 mg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, 95% CI 1.3 to 15.3).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, radiotherapy and chemotherapy did not appear to interact for cardiovascular mortality (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.4).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Notably, the vinca alkaloids were also significantly linked to cardiovascular disease-related death risk among childhood cancer survivors, even after adjustment for sex, treatment period, age at diagnosis, follow-up, and all other treatment modalities (RR 3.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 12.9).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Currently, guidelines support regular long-term cardiovascular screening for childhood cancer survivors who received anthracycline-based chemotherapy but provide little to no direction for those treated with nonanthracycline chemotherapy or radiation, Lipshultz noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These results suggested all three groups should be getting cardiac follow-up, he told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, because other research has suggested that these individual treatments affect the heart in different ways, such as diastolic rather than systolic dysfunction with radiotherapy, screening modalities may need to account for this as well, he said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that cardiovascular disease was probably under-reported as a cause of death in the cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Indeed, 15 of the deaths classified as results of cancer as the principal cause had cardiovascular diseases as the immediate cause,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer; the Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique; the Agence Fran&amp;#231;aise de S&amp;#233;curit&amp;#233; Sanitaire et Produit de Sant&amp;#233;; Electricit&amp;#233; de France; the Wyeth Foundation for childhood and adolescent health; and a grant from the Foundation of France.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The editorialists reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_449"
                     title="FDA Okays Statin for Primary Prevention"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/PublicHealth/tb/18380?impressionId=1265758782424"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON  --  The FDA has approved rosuvastatin (Crestor) for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, making it the first statin to receive this indication.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The new labeling, recommended by an FDA advisory panel late last year, also marks the first time that a drug label will include an indication based on the biomarker highly-sensitive C-reactive protein, an inflammatory marker.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The new indication would be for men 50 or older and women 60 or older who have fasting LDL of less than 130 mg/dL, a highly-sensitive CRP of 2.0 mg/L or greater, triglycerides of less than 500 mg/dL, and no prior history of heart attack or stroke, or coronary heart disease risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The basis for the new labeling was the JUPITER trial, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 17,802 men and women with a mean age of 66 and no history of atherosclerosis. All participants had LDL of less than 130 mg/dL and a highly-sensitive C-reactive protein concentration of 2 mg/L or higher.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were randomized to 20 mg of rosuvastatin for 1.9 years, which reduced median LDL cholesterol to 55 mg/dL, down from a median of 108 mg/dL at baseline. The corresponding relative reduction in the rate of MI, stroke, arterial revascularization, or cardiovascular death was 44% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.00001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The number needed to treat to avoid one cardiovascular event was 25.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those results, according to Melvyn Rubenfire, MD, of the University of Michigan, were a &quot;home run for JUPITER,&quot; but it is not clear whether the results would be the same with another statin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And there were some risks associated with rosuvastatin, including 13 deaths due to gastrointestinal disorders in the rosuvastatin arm, and 18 patients reported experiencing a &quot;confused state&quot; while taking the drug.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The most troubling adverse event, however, was an uptick in investigator-reported, new onset diabetes mellitus in the treatment arm, 2.8% versus 2.5%, for a hazard ratio of 1.27 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.53, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.015).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Rosuvastatin in marketed by AstraZeneca, which also sponsored the JUPITER trial.&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_448"
                     title="Inflammatory Bowel Disease Linked to Dangerous VT (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Gastroenterology/InflammatoryBowelDisease/tb/18362?impressionId=1265758782424"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Patients with active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) could be at far greater risk for potentially deadly blood clots than doctors previously thought, a new British study found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonhospitalized patients with active IBD are 16 times more likely to suffer venous thromboembolism than the general population, with an occurrence rate of 6.4 per 1,000 person-years (HR 15.8, 95% CI 9.8 to 25.5, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001), according to an online report in the Feb. 9 issue of &lt;em&gt;The Lancet&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors concluded that such patients could benefit from preventative treatment to prevent blood clotting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Despite the low absolute risks during nonhospitalised periods, these results suggest that active inflammatory bowel disease in ambulatory patients might be a far greater risk factor for venous thromboembolism than previously recognised,&quot; Matthew J. Grainge, MD, of the University of Nottingham, and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients with venous thromboembolism in the leg have a short term-mortality rate of about 6%, increasing as high as 20% when the clot has circulated to the lung.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Researchers believe that infection and inflammation, such as occur in IBD, predispose patients to this life-threatening condition, and those with inflammatory bowel disease seem to be at particular risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Grainge and colleagues used records from the U.K. General Practice Research Database from November 1987 through July 2001, to match 13,756 patients with IBD against 71,672 controls without the disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Of the subjects, 139 patients and 165 controls developed a blood clot during the study period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their results agreed with previous studies indicating that patients hospitalized for IBD are at high risk for venous thromboembolism. However, the new study also found the danger extends to nonhospitalized IBD patients, particularly during a flare-up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the researchers reported, patients with IBD had three times as much risk of an embolism as controls (HR 3.4, 95% CI 2.7 to 4.3; &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001) with an occurrence rate of 2.6 per 1,000 per person-years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During a flare-up, IBD patients were at dramatically greater risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that the study excluded patients likely to have received corticosteroids for chronic respiratory disease and rheumatoid arthritis, so the results may not reflect blood clotting rates in these populations.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that they relied on anonymous patient records and were dependent on family doctors&apos; diagnoses of inflammatory bowel disease, flare-ups and venous thromboembolism.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite the limitations of the study, they argued that research into ways to prevent embolism in IBD outpatients is warranted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We believe that the medical profession needs to recognise the increased risk in people with inflammatory bowel disease when assessing the likelihood of venous thromboembolism and to address the difficulty of reducing this risk in patients with a flare who are not admitted to hospital,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They suggested that strategies used to prevent blood clots in hospitalized patients  --  courses of low molecular weight heparin or other newly available anticoagulants  --  might be also be used to prevent clots in nonhospitalized IBD patients experiencing a flare-up.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an accompanying editorial, Geoffrey C. Nguyen, MD, and Erik L. Yeo, MD, of the University of Toronto, noted that &quot;the use of steroid prescriptions as a surrogate indicator of acute disease flare restricts the applicability of Grainge and colleagues&apos; findings to flares that are moderate to severe. Whether patients with mild flares are also at increased risk is not clear.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Recognition of venous thromboembolism might be increased during periods of frequent contact with doctors, such as during flares compared with during remission of inflammatory bowel disease, thus potentially introducing a bias in ascertainment of venous thromboembolism,&quot; they added.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nguyen and Yeo also argued that the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacological prevention in patients with inflammatory bowel disease should be proven before it is routinely recommended during acute flares.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, they acknowledged that such evidence could be difficult to acquire, given the low numbers of nonhospitalized IBD patients who suffer venous thromboembolism.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;A pragmatic initial approach to reduction of the rates of morbidity and mortality resulting from venous thromboembolism in ambulatory patients with inflammatory bowel disease would be nonpharmacological thromboprophylaxis, including patients&apos; education and awareness of risk and signs and symptoms of venous thromboembolism, and use of support stockings,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Physicians should clinically assess for signs and symptoms of this embolism during visits for acute flare of inflammatory bowel disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded by the National Association for Colitis and Crohn&apos;s Disease.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Nguyen reported serving on advisory boards for Schering-Plough, Canada, and Abbott Pharmaceuticals.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Yeo reported receiving an honorarium from sanofi-aventis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_222"
                     title="Benefits of Cutting Down on Salt Quantified (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Prevention/tb/18075?impressionId=1265758782424"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Cutting daily salt intake by 3 grams a day  --  about 30% of the current average  --  could prevent 32,000 strokes and 54,000 myocardial infarctions a year, if a computer model developed by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco accurately depicts the clinical impact of salt reduction.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results of the analysis, which used a computer simulation of heart disease in U.S. adults ages 35 to 84, also suggest that even a 1 gram per day reduction in salt over the next decade would be a more cost-effective strategy for treating hypertension than use of even the cheapest antihypertensive, wrote Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, MD, PhD, and colleagues in a paper published online by the &lt;em&gt;New England Journal of Medicine.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lee Goldman, MD, MPH, of Columbia University, who co-authored the paper, told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; that their study builds on what has long been known about the adverse health effects of salt on a society that believes it to be the spice of life.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, Goldman said that most people seeking a healthy choice will check food labels and restaurant menus for calorie counts and trans fats, but will not pay attention to salt.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not the first time a call for salt reduction has been issued. As recently as last November, a meta-analysis published in &lt;em&gt;BMJ &lt;/em&gt;suggested that cutting salt intake in half  --  a reduction of about 5 grams a day or roughly a teaspoonful  --  would lower the stroke rate by 23% and reduce overall cardiovascular disease by as much as 17%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Americans, like those in many Western countries, take in an average of about 10 g of salt a day; whereas the World Health Organization recommends only 5 g per day, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture recommends daily intake be limited to 5.8 g.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bibbins-Domingo and colleagues reported that a 3 gram per day reduction in dietary salt would &quot;save 194,00 to 392,00 quality-adjusted life-years and $10 billion to $24 billion in healthcare costs annually.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an editorial that accompanied the study, Lawrence J. Appel, MD, MPH, and Cheryl A.M. Anderson, PhD, MPH, of Johns Hopkins University, wrote that &quot;the evidence supporting the call to reduce salt intake as a means of preventing cardiovascular disease is compelling.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They concluded with this admonition: &quot;As we deliberate healthcare reform, let us not neglect this inexpensive, yet highly effective public health intervention for the prevention of disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that Appel was also first author on a position paper from the American Society of Hypertension that also called for salt reduction as public policy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Franz H. Messerli, MD, director of the hypertension program at St. Luke&apos;s-Roosevelt Hospital and a colleague of Goldman&apos;s, said the computer model used in the study was impressive but probably underestimates the benefit of reducing dietary salt &quot;because salt reduction has been shown to have a direct (blood pressure independent) effect on the heart, the brain, the kidneys, and also reduces stomach cancer and osteoporosis  --  factors that were not considered in this analysis.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But Messerli found it difficult to lead the victory parade, noting &quot;this is a modeling study and statements such as &apos;A modest reduction of 1 gm per day would be more cost-effective than using medication to lower blood pressure in all persons with hypertension&apos; are to be taken with a good grain of salt.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Messerli&apos;s measured response was not echoed by his colleagues in the hypertension world.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, Henry Black, MD, president of the American Society of Hypertension, and director of hypertension research at the New York University School of Medicine said that, although the paper extended the findings of many other studies, it is &quot;more comprehensive and is especially useful by comparing the benefits of [sodium] and [salt] reduction to those of other widely accepted public health approaches that the public and governmental bodies have embraced, including drug treatment.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Clyde Yancy, MD, president of the American Heart Association, said that while the study was a computer modeling analysis that may be as good as it gets because &quot;it would be impossible to do a randomized trial in large numbers of high versus low sodium consumption, and the use of modeling with reasonable assumptions represents a solid if not ideal alternative.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, Yancy argued that &quot;the costs and effort involved in setting and/or changing policy&quot; require strong imperatives, and he thought the data reported today &quot;provide that imperative.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Three grams of salt comes to about a teaspoonful, but Goldman said it was foolish to think of sodium reduction in terms of such measurements because so much sodium comes from processed foods and from restaurant food. Achieving the needed reduction requires a concerted national effort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bibbins-Domingo noted that their study was limited &quot;by any uncertainty concerning the data entered into the model.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also they noted that they did not &quot;account fully for the possible effects of salt reduction that are unrelated to control of blood pressure  --  for example, potential improvements in outcomes for the increasing numbers of patients with heart failure or prevention of other serious conditions, such as end-stage renal disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported in part by a grant from the American Heart Association Western States Affiliate and a grant from the University of California, San Francisco Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors said they had &quot;no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This article was developed in collaboration with ABC News. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; mce_src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>
