Clinical Relevance of Cherry Angiomas

Cherry angiomas are the most common vascular tumors of the skin. They are particularly prevalent in the general population and become more common with age. Although an association with cancer was suggested at the end of the 19th century, when these tumors were first described, it could not be demonstrated. For many decades, therefore, cherry angiomas were considered to have no clinical relevance other than their association with age. A number of studies in recent years, however, have shown a link between cherry angiomas and exposure to various toxic substances and medications, benign and malignant diseases, and immunosuppression, rekindling interest in these lesions and providing clues for a better understanding of their etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical relevance.

[Translated article] Clinical Relevance of Cherry Angiomas

Cherry angiomas are the most common vascular tumors of the skin. They are particularly prevalent in the general population and become more common with age. Although an association with cancer was suggested at the end of the 19th century, when these tumors were first described, it could not be demonstrated. For many decades, therefore, cherry angiomas were considered to have no clinical relevance other than their association with age. A number of studies in recent years, however, have shown a link between cherry angiomas and exposure to various toxic substances and medications, benign and malignant diseases, and immunosuppression, rekindling interest in these lesions and providing clues for a better understanding of their etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical relevance.

Gender differences in drug titration among heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction in the ETIFIC trial

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Optimal medical therapy decreases mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in HF patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Women have been underrepresented in clinical trials and not specifically evaluated. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of drug titration in women vs men.

METHODS

This post hoc gender study of the ETIFIC multicenter randomized trial included hospitalized patients with new-onset HF with reduced ejection fraction and New York Heart Association II-III and no contraindications to beta-blockers. A structured 4-month titration process was implemented in HF clinics. The primary endpoint was the mean relative dose (% of target dose) of beta-blockers achieved by women vs men. Secondary endpoints included the mean relative doses of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, adverse events, and other clinical outcomes at 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 320 patients were included, 83 (25.93%) women and 237 (74.06%) men (76 vs 213 analyzed). The mean±standard deviation of the relative doses achieved by women vs men were as follows: beta-blockers 62.08%±30.72% vs 64.4%±32.77%, with a difference of-2.32% (95%CI,-10.58-5.94), P = .580; and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists 79.85%±27.72% vs 67.29%±31.43%, P =.003. No other differences in drug dosage were found. Multivariate analysis showed nonsignificant differences. CV mortality was 1 (1.20%) vs 3 (1.26%), P=1, and HF hospitalizations 0 (0.00%) vs 10 (4.22%), P=.125.

CONCLUSIONS

In a post hoc analysis from the HF-titration ETIFIC trial, we found nonsignificant gender differences in drug dosage, cardiovascular mortality, and HF hospitalizations. Trial registry number: NCT02546856.