Discussion
This retrospective study combined multiple health registers covering the entire population of Sweden. Sweden is well known for high-quality health registers that are well designed for population studies. A total of 994 patients diagnosed with ATTR-CM were identified between 2008 and 2018. The mean age at diagnosis was 73 years and 30% were female. The prevalence of diagnosed ATTR-CM cases in 2018 was 5.0 per 100 000 and the median survival was 37.6 months, with lower median survival in women (27.9 months) compared with men (43.5 months). Several red flags could be identified as early signs of ATTR-CM.
While the mean age is in line with previous studies,7 19–21 the proportion of female patients with ATTR-CM is higher than often suggested in the literature. A recent meta-analysis22 identified 13% of patients diagnosed with ATTR-CM as women. Results from a review of previous studies23 demonstrated an average of 9% women among patients with ATTRwt-CM and 29% among patients with ATTRv-CM. The 30% share of female patients with ATTR-CM found in this study likely reflects the relatively higher proportion of patients with ATTRv-CM in Sweden.
The prevalence of diagnosed ATTR-CM increased steadily over the study period to 5.0 per 100 000 in 2018. The lower numbers and the increase in prevalence in the earlier years are partly due to study design, with inclusion of patients starting in 2008. However, this default increase in prevalence likely affects only the first few years as many patients diagnosed before 2008 either died soon after or were identified and included in the population at a later specialist visit. The lower number of patients included during 2018 compared with prior years is also due to study design, as patients with an HF/CM diagnosis in 2018 and an AM diagnosis in 2019 or 2020 would have been assigned to 2018 but were not included in the study population due to end of data availability.
The observed rise in prevalent diagnosed cases over time likely reflects increased awareness of the disease as well as the use of non-invasive technologies for diagnosis of ATTR- CM, with higher numbers of patients diagnosed in the years following pivotal publications for such technologies.24 Still, underdiagnosis remains an important factor. Lindmark et al25 estimated the true prevalence of ATTRwt-CM in 2018 by specifically screening for undiagnosed ATTRwt-CM and estimated the prevalence of diagnosed and undiagnosed ATTRwt-CM at 16.6 per 100 000.
The median overall survival after ATTR-CM diagnosis in this study is similar to the survival after diagnosis reported in other studies,5 7 20 26 and also survival in the HF cohort is aligned with previous results for Swedish patients with HF.27 The higher mortality of patients with ATTR-CM compared with the matched HF cohort may indicate that ATTR-CM is a more severe and aggressive disease than ‘garden variety’ HF which, combined with lower disease awareness and delayed diagnosis, leads to poor survival outcomes.
The significantly shorter median survival estimated for women compared with men (p=0.001) cannot be fully explained by observed patient characteristics. Instead, it may be a sign that women are diagnosed at a later stage of the disease compared with men. Kroi et al22 found that in studies which included autopsy for ATTR-CM identification, the share of female patients was generally higher than in studies which relied on diagnosis during lifetime, indicating that ATTR-CM in women is more often overlooked. This could be due to specific diagnostic challenges in women. Bruno et al23 argue that women, due to their smaller cardiac anatomy, show generally lower wall thickness than men and thus reach the generally suggested threshold for ATTR-CM diagnosis (>12 mm) later than men. Moreover, HF with preserved ejection fraction is more common in elderly women than elderly men, resulting in a lower degree of suspicion of ATTR-CM in this patient population.28
Comparing the occurrence of red flags in patients with ATTR-CM and in patients with HF is relevant from a clinical standpoint where patients with ATTR-CM need to be identified among patients who present with heart-related symptoms. We were able to confirm common red flags,6–12 but when compared with patients with HF, only carpal tunnel syndrome remained a significant red flag for ATTR-CM. Carpal tunnel syndrome and spinal stenosis occurred in substantial proportions of patients at a median of 6 years before diagnosis, potentially reflecting earlier manifestations of the disease process, while conduction blocks and atrial arrhythmias occurred closer to the time of diagnosis. However, about one-third of patients did not have a history of red flag diagnoses, and while red flags can help physicians in identifying ATTR-CM the lack of such early signals should not be used to exclude patients from further investigation.
This study has some limitations. First and most importantly, only diagnosed ATTR-CM cases could be identified in this study and underdiagnosis is frequent. Patients diagnosed with ATTR-CM were identified based on a combination of several ICD-10 codes since there is no final consensus on how to code the diagnoses of ATTRv-CM and ATTRwt-CM in Sweden. Some patients diagnosed with ATTR-CM may have been missed by the identification algorithm and some patients may have been falsely included. In addition, this study could not differentiate patients with and without biopsy-proven or otherwise clinically validated ATTR-CM diagnoses and it was not possible to differentiate ATTRv-CM and ATTRwt-CM cases. This is an important limitation as clinical presentations and prognoses differ between ATTRwt-CM and types of ATTRv-CM.29 30 Finally, the exact date of the first ATTR-CM diagnosis was not known but was set to the first HF or CM diagnosis which fulfilled the inclusion criteria.
Despite these limitations, the carefully designed algorithm used to identify probable patients with ATTR-CM, and exclude patients with AL, was demonstrated by study results to work well. Prevalence rates, patient characteristics and mortality were in line with the existing literature. The higher prevalence rates found in Northern Sweden reflect the larger numbers of hereditary cases as well as the increased disease awareness of physicians in these regions, further increasing confidence in the method of patient identification used in this study. Moreover, the high-quality national health registers provide a reliant data source to study epidemiology and facilitated estimation of prevalence for the whole country without the need to extrapolate. Finally, the long follow-up period of up to 11 years leads to mature survival data and the long look-back period of a minimum of 10 years made it possible to study red flags that occurred several years before ATTR-CM diagnosis.
In conclusion, this study provides the first nationwide estimates of ATTR-CM prevalence and risk factors. The prevalence of diagnosed ATTR-CM cases increased over time and the median survival from ATTR-CM diagnosis was just over 3 years. This study revealed worse survival outcomes for women compared with men. The results reinforce the severity of the disease, high mortality and the importance of earlier diagnosis in order to effectively treat patients and prevent disease progression. This study provided supporting evidence about the importance of red flags and their potential in facilitating early diagnosis.