- Academic Editor
†These authors contributed equally.
Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF), which occurs four to six times
more frequently in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) patients than in the general
population, is the most common persistent arrhythmia and has a substantial
therapeutic consequence. In HCM patients, there are currently no discovered signs
that could be utilized to identify AF. Methods: From 2018 to 2022, 493
individuals with a continuous diagnosis of HCM were examined at Beijing Anzhen
Hospital. AF was proven using routine electrocardiography (ECG), 24-hour Holter
ECGs, or bedside ECGs. Echocardiography and blood tests were performed for all
patients. Analysis and comparison of the traits were performed in HCM patients
with AF (n = 77) and without AF (n = 416). Results: Age (p
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a prevalent hereditary cardiac disease that
impacts 0.2% of the population [1]. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is
undoubtedly the most prevalent persistent arrhythmia in HCM patients, with
between 20% and 25% of HCM patients experiencing symptomatic episodes and a
yearly rate of 2% to 4%, it represents a 4–6-fold greater prevalence than in
the global population, and it has a major clinical impact [2, 3, 4, 5]. AF correlates
with an increase in morbidity and death due to complications, including heart
failure (HF), systemic embolism, and stroke, thereby resulting in a substantial
public health burden. Once AF develops in HCM patients, the initiation of
anticoagulation should be considered, irrespective of the CHA
A larger load of atrial myopathy and fibrosis in HCM patients is believed to hinder sinus impulse propagation across the atrium, thereby providing a substrate for delayed conduction and intra-atrial re-entry [8, 9]. As the pathogenesis of AF involves inflammation, serum inflammatory markers, such as complement (C1q), albumin-to-globulin ratio (AGR), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) may be beneficial for the identification and risk stratification of AF [10, 11, 12, 13, 14]. However, whether a link exists between the AGR and AF occurrence in HCM patients remains unclear. Therefore, to identify possible risk factors for AF and their potential interactions with the occurrence of AF in HCM patients, we analyzed the features of a cohort of HCM patients.
Records of 1063 consecutive HCM patients at Anzhen Hospital (Beijing, China) between January 2018 and December 2022 were retrospectively evaluated for their probable inclusion in the study. Unexplained septal hypertrophy with a thickness of 15 mm was used to diagnose HCM, as indicated by the 2014 European Society of Cardiology guidelines and the 2020 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines [6, 15]. AF was proven by routine electrocardiography (ECG), 24-hour Holter ECG, or dynamic ECG monitoring. Excluded patients were those with a history of septal reduction therapy (septal myectomy or alcohol septal ablation, n = 220), incomplete echocardiogram data (n = 298), and other baseline data missing (n = 52), meaning 493 patients comprised the final study cohort (Fig. 1).
Flowchart of the study. HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; AF, atrial fibrillation.
The Ethics Committee of Beijing Anzhen Hospital (Grant No. KS2023004) authorized this prospective observational study and informed permission was provided by all patients prior to enrolling. All patient testing was conducted in conformity with the Helsinki Declaration’s ethical principles.
One competent physician performed each echocardiographic evaluation using GE
LOGIQ E9 (GE Healthcare, CA, USA) ultrasound equipment. From standardized
perspectives, two-dimensional and two-dimensionally directed M-mode pictures were
captured [16]. Left atrial diameter (LAD), interventricular septal thickness
(IVST), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD), left ventricular
end-systolic diameter (LVESD), left ventricular posterior wall thickness (LVPWT),
left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), peak E wave velocity, peak A wave
velocity, and E/A ratio (the ratio of early [E-wave] and late [A-wave] left ventricular
diastolic filling velocities) were measured. The heart chamber diameters were
determined as the highest value of the anteroposterior diameter during cardiac
cycles, while IVST and LVPWT were determined during diastole. The biplane Simpson
technique was used to calculate LVEF. The left ventricular mass (LVM) was
estimated according to the Devereux formula: LVM (g) = 0.8
A standardized medical history, including New York Heart Association (NYHA) cardiac function level; an accurate physical examination, which included body mass index (BMI) and body surface area (BSA); thorough clinical interventions, including oral medications and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation, were all obtained from each patient. Routine clinical blood examinations, including mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), red blood cell distribution width–standard deviation (RDW–SD), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP); serum biochemical tests, including alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT), and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), were each performed using standard assays after a 12 h fasting (no alcohol) for each patient.
For continuous variables in categorical categories, the baseline characteristics
were presented as mean, standard deviation, and proportions; for continuous
variables that did not follow normal distributions, the median (with 25% and
75% percentiles) was presented. The unpaired Student t-test,
Chi-square, or Fisher’s exact test were employed alongside the Mann–Whitney U
test to assess any differences in normally distributed continuous, categorical,
and non-normally distributed continuous data. The association between continuous
factors and the incidence of AF was estimated using point-biserial correlation
analysis. Chi-square tests and phi coefficient (phi) calculations were used to
explore the associations between a history of ventricular tachycardia (VT) or PAH
and AF occurrence. Collinearity and multicollinearity were analyzed utilizing
tolerance (cutoff value
Tables 1,2,3 describe the baseline features in each subgroup, in accordance with the comorbidity of AF. Patients with AF were older (59.32
HCM (n = 416) | HCM + AF (n = 77) | p value | |
Male, n (%) | 240 (57.7) | 45 (58.4) | 0.903 |
Age (y) | 54.11 |
59.32 |
|
BMI (kg/m |
25.82 |
25.93 |
0.791 |
BSA (m |
1.76 |
1.79 |
0.343 |
SBP (mmHg) | 127.3 |
125.64 |
0.471 |
DBP (mmHg) | 74.47 |
72.87 |
0.279 |
Hypertension, n (%) | 184 (44.2) | 38 (49.4) | 0.407 |
Hyperlipidemia, n (%) | 111 (26.7) | 20 (26.0) | 0.897 |
Diabetes, n (%) | 65 (15.6) | 13 (16.9) | 0.781 |
Renal dysfunction | 22 (5.3) | 5 (6.5) | 0.593 |
Liver disease | 24 (5.8) | 3 (3.9) | 0.784 |
Coronary heart disease, n (%) | 100 (24.0) | 22 (28.6) | 0.397 |
Stroke, n (%) | 23 (5.5) | 11 (14.3) | 0.005 |
NYHA class II–III, n (%) | 110 (26.4) | 21 (27.3) | 0.880 |
VT, n (%) | 16 (3.8) | 12 (15.6) | |
241 (57.9) | 33 (42.9) | 0.014 | |
CCBs, n (%) | 157 (37.7) | 15 (19.5) | 0.002 |
ACEIs/ARBs, n (%) | 51 (12.3) | 10 (13.0) | 0.859 |
Diuretics, n (%) | 166 (39.9) | 24 (31.2) | 0.148 |
Class III antiarrhythmic drugs, n (%) | 13 (3.1) | 19 (24.7) | |
Anticoagulants, n (%) | 95 (22.8) | 30 (39.0) | 0.003 |
Antiplatelets, n (%) | 124 (29.8) | 10 (13.0) | 0.002 |
Statins (%) | 122 (29.3) | 19 (24.7) | 0.407 |
ICD intervention, n (%) | 21 (5.0) | 9 (11.7) | 0.036 |
The values are presented as mean SD, median (interquartile range), or n (%).
HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; AF, atrial fibrillation; BMI, body mass index;
BSA, body surface area; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood
pressure; NYHA, New York Heart Association; VT, ventricular tachycardia; CCBs,
calcium channel blockers; ACEIs/ARBs, angiotensin-converting enzyme
inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers; ICD, implantable
cardioverter-defibrillator; SD, standard deviation.
Laboratory test | HCM (n = 416) | HCM + AF (n = 77) | p value |
Fasting plasma glucose (mmol/L) | 5.85 |
5.77 |
0.767 |
Glycosylated hemoglobin (%) | 6.19 |
6.11 |
0.621 |
Triglyceride (mmol/L) | 1.65 |
1.83 |
0.221 |
Total cholesterol (mmol/L) | 4.44 |
4.32 |
0.374 |
HDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.09 |
1.06 |
0.477 |
LDL-C (mmol/L) | 2.71 |
2.56 |
0.213 |
SdLDL (mmol/L) | 0.76 |
0.73 |
0.561 |
Non-HDL-C (mmol/L) | 3.37 |
3.24 |
0.468 |
FFA (mmol/L) | 0.41 |
0.44 |
0.354 |
Complement [C1q] (mg/L) | 174.04 |
166.57 |
0.231 |
Urea nitrogen (mmol/L) | 6.56 |
5.98 |
0.111 |
Uric acid (µmol/L) | 377.76 |
361.19 |
0.218 |
Creatinine (mmol/L) | 81.7 |
78.74 |
0.759 |
eGFR (mL/min per 1.73 m |
92.03 |
87.38 |
0.115 |
BNP (pg/mL) | 379.5 (174.25, 845.75) | 438 (207, 606) | 0.767 |
Hs-CRP (mg/L) | 0.90 (0.5, 2.04) | 1.03 (0.51, 1.73) | 0.945 |
Neutrophil (10 |
5.33 |
4.81 |
0.123 |
Lymphocyte (10 |
1.79 |
2.20 |
0.125 |
NLR | 2.25 (1.56, 3.23) | 1.99 (1.46, 3.97) | 0.476 |
Red blood cell (10 |
4.37 |
4.42 |
0.620 |
Hemoglobin (g/dL) | 132.92 |
136.45 |
0.295 |
MCV (fL) | 88.22 |
89.93 |
0.026 |
MCH (pg) | 30.39 |
31.07 |
0.040 |
MCHC (g/L) | 344.35 |
345.13 |
0.692 |
RDW–SD (fL) | 42.43 |
43.76 |
0.035 |
Platelet (10 |
188.46 |
188.6 |
0.988 |
ALT (U/L) | 18 (13, 26) | 23 (15, 30) | 0.034 |
AST (U/L) | 20 (17, 24) | 22 (18, 26) | 0.040 |
Albumin (g/L) | 42.47 |
42.49 |
0.968 |
AGR | 1.72 |
1.81 |
0.046 |
Total bilirubin (µmol/L) | 13.43 |
15.66 |
0.077 |
Direct bilirubin (µmol/L) | 4.10 |
5.17 |
0.078 |
Alkaline phosphatase (U/L) | 74.50 |
69.34 |
0.237 |
GGT (U/L) | 24 (17, 36) | 27 (21, 40) | 0.018 |
Total bile acid (µmol/L) | 3.2 (2.1, 5.58) | 3.5 (2.4, 7.1) | 0.140 |
Cholinesterase (kU/L) | 7.93 |
7.55 |
0.138 |
The values are presented as mean SD, median (interquartile range), or n (%).
HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; AF, atrial fibrillation; HDL-C, high-density
lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; SdLDL, small
dense LDL; Non-HDL-C, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, was calculated by subtracting HDL-C from total cholesterol;
FFA, free fatty acid; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; BNP, brain
natriuretic peptide; Hs-CRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; NLR,
neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; MCV, mean corpuscular volume; MCH, mean
corpuscular hemoglobin; MCHC, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration; RDW–SD,
red blood cell distribution width–standard deviation; SD, standard deviation; ALT, alanine
aminotransferase; AST, aspartate transaminase; AGR, albumin-to-globulin ratio;
GGT, gamma-glutamyl transferase.
Echocardiographic indices | HCM (n = 416) | HCM + AF (n = 77) | p value |
MR, n (%) | 357 (85.8) | 71 (92.2) | 0.128 |
PAH, n (%) | 44 (10.6) | 15 (19.5) | 0.027 |
LAD (mm) | 41.56 |
45.71 |
|
IVST (mm) | 19.84 |
18.74 |
0.060 |
LVEDD (mm) | 43.21 |
45 |
0.010 |
LVESD (mm) | 26.94 |
29.38 |
|
LVPWT (mm) | 12.44 |
11.79 |
0.068 |
LVM (g) | 298.45 |
285.87 |
0.201 |
LVM index (g/m |
170 |
160.87 |
0.092 |
LVEF (%) | 66.25 |
62.58 |
|
Peak E wave velocity (cm/s) | 80.48 |
78.35 |
0.583 |
Peak A wave velocity (cm/s) | 92 |
75.97 |
|
E/A ratio | 0.97 |
1.19 |
0.009 |
The values are presented as mean SD, median (interquartile range), or n (%).
HCM, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; AF, atrial fibrillation; MR, mitral
regurgitation; PAH, pulmonary artery hypertension; LAD, left atrial diameter;
IVST, interventricular septal thickness; LVEDD, left ventricular end-diastolic
diameter; LVESD, left ventricular end-systolic diameter; LVPWT, left ventricular
posterior wall thickness; LVM, left ventricular mass; LVEF, left ventricular
ejection fraction; SD, standard deviation.
Thereafter, we explored the relationship between the aforementioned clinical parameters and statistically significant intergroup differences in AF occurrence in HCM patients. The correlation coefficients were all less than 0.3, which is suggestive of a weak correlation (Table 4).
Point-biserial | p value | |
Age | 0.142 | 0.002 |
MCV | 0.105 | 0.026 |
MCH | 0.098 | 0.040 |
RDW–SD | 0.100 | 0.035 |
AGR | 0.096 | 0.046 |
ALT | –0.010 | 0.838 |
AST | –0.006 | 0.903 |
GGT | 0.110 | 0.022 |
LAD | 0.247 | |
LVEDD | 0.117 | 0.010 |
LVESD | 0.180 | |
LVEF | –0.182 | |
Peak A wave velocity | –0.186 | |
E/A ratio | 0.131 | 0.003 |
Phi | ||
VT | 0.184 | |
PAH | 0.100 | 0.027 |
AF, atrial fibrillation; MCV, mean corpuscular volume; MCH, mean corpuscular hemoglobin; RDW–SD, red blood cell distribution width–standard deviation; AGR, albumin-to-globulin ratio; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate transaminase; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transferase; LAD, left atrial diameter; LVEDD, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter; LVESD, left ventricular end-systolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; VT, ventricular tachycardia; PAH, pulmonary artery hypertension.
The univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis findings on HCM
patients with and without AF are shown in Table 5. The results of the univariate
logistic regression analysis indicated age (odds ratio [OR], 1.033; 95%
confidence interval [CI], 1.012–1.054; p = 0.002), LAD (OR, 1.113; 95%
CI, 1.069–1.158; p
p value | OR | 95% CI | |
Univariate | |||
Age | 0.002 | 1.033 | 1.012–1.054 |
LAD | 1.113 | 1.069–1.158 | |
LVEDD | 0.010 | 1.061 | 1.014–1.109 |
LVESD | 1.103 | 1.050–1.158 | |
LVEF | 0.937 | 0.908–0.968 | |
Peak A wave velocity | 0.981 | 0.973–0.990 | |
E/A ratio | 0.006 | 1.660 | 1.158–2.381 |
MCV | 0.025 | 1.068 | 1.008–1.131 |
MCH | 0.039 | 1.161 | 1.008–1.338 |
RDW–SD | 0.059 | 1.050 | 0.998–1.103 |
AGR | 0.048 | 2.223 | 1.006–4.909 |
GGT | 0.046 | 1.005 | 1.000–1.011 |
VT | 4.615 | 2.088–10.201 | |
PAH | 0.030 | 2.045 | 1.073–3.898 |
AF, atrial fibrillation; LAD, left atrial diameter; LVEDD, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter; LVESD, left ventricular end-systolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MCV, mean corpuscular volume; MCH, mean corpuscular hemoglobin; RDW–SD, red blood cell distribution width–standard deviation; AGR, albumin-to-globulin ratio; GGT, gamma-glutamyl transferase; VT, ventricular tachycardia; PAH, pulmonary artery hypertension; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Supplementary Table 1 displays the results of collinearity between
variables in the regression model. In the multivariate logistic regression model,
we found that age (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.026–1.095; p
p value | OR | 95% CI | |
Multivariate | |||
Model 1 | |||
VT | 0.009 | 4.156 | 1.431–12.066 |
AGR | 0.029 | 2.867 | 1.116–7.366 |
Age | 1.060 | 1.026–1.095 | |
PAH | 0.517 | 1.337 | 0.555–3.222 |
LAD | 1.122 | 1.058–1.189 | |
LVEDD | 0.031 | 0.840 | 0.717–0.984 |
LVESD | 0.028 | 1.261 | 1.026–1.551 |
LVEF | 0.947 | 0.998 | 0.930–1.070 |
Peak A wave velocity | 0.011 | 0.982 | 0.969–0.996 |
E/A ratio | 0.969 | 1.011 | 0.578–1.771 |
MCV | 0.883 | 0.991 | 0.875–1.121 |
MCH | 0.467 | 1.107 | 0.842–1.455 |
Model 2 | |||
VT | 0.048 | 2.702 | 1.007–7.255 |
AGR | 0.007 | 3.477 | 1.417–8.536 |
Age | 1.063 | 1.032–1.095 | |
LAD | 1.132 | 1.073–1.194 | |
LVEDD | 0.017 | 0.861 | 0.762–0.974 |
LVESD | 0.002 | 1.239 | 1.083–1.417 |
Peak A wave velocity | 0.002 | 0.983 | 0.972–0.994 |
AF, atrial fibrillation; VT, ventricular tachycardia; AGR, albumin-to-globulin ratio; PAH, pulmonary artery hypertension; LAD, left atrial diameter; LVEDD, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter; LVESD, left ventricular end-systolic diameter; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; MCV, mean corpuscular volume; MCH, mean corpuscular hemoglobin; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
ROC curve analysis was conducted to examine the capacity of the established multivariate logistic regression model (Model 2) to identify the presence of AF in HCM patients, and the results are displayed in Fig. 2. The area under the curve was 0.819 (95% confidence interval: 0.755–0.883, p = 0.033). A prediction probability of 0.158 was shown as the best cutoff point for predicting AF in HCM patients, with a sensitivity of 0.763 and a specificity of 0.816.
The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the multivariate logistic regression model for predicting AF. AF, atrial fibrillation; AUC, area under receiver operator characteristic curve.
This study conveys several new findings. First, the in-hospital incidence of AF in our research population was 15.6%, which is less than previously reported. For example, in a previous meta-analysis of 21,887 individuals from 36 cohorts with an average follow-up of 6.9 years, the presumed pooled frequency of AF among HCM patients was 22.3%, and the mean prevalence of AF was 2.5 cases per person/year [19]. One possible reason for this discrepancy is that dynamic electrocardiographic monitoring was not performed on all patients and only inpatients were enrolled in our study. Hence, the use of prolonged Holter electrocardiogram monitoring would have been more beneficial in detecting asymptomatic AF, while the simultaneous enrollment of outpatients would also avoid patient selection bias, to a certain extent. Since the risk of disability or fatal thromboembolic stroke is increased in HCM patients developing AF, along with functional decline from advancing HF, accurate risk stratification for AF is necessary to facilitate effective treatment [4, 20].
Second, we found that a history of VT and an increased level of
AGR were related to a higher occurrence of AF. Although several risk models, such
as the CHARGE-AF, CHA
In multivariate logistic analysis, age, history of VT, AGR, LAD, LVEDD, LVESD, and peak A wave velocity were independently linked to AF in HCM patients. Age, as is widely known, is a demographic risk indicator for AF. HCM is distinguished by myocyte hypertrophy, myocyte disorganization, and interstitial fibrosis, resulting in a thickened wall and narrowed lumen with diastolic dysfunction [27]. The majority of individuals had HCM before developing AF, thereby demonstrating that the structural and physiological alterations are linked to the onset of AF [28]. Aside from intrinsic atrial myopathy, HCM patients are hypothesized to be predisposed to AF through an increase in the left atrial dilatation caused by left ventricular diastolic failure and MR (frequently coupled with the systolic anterior motion of the valve) [8]. Collagen cross-linking was shown to be strongly expressed in AF patients and was also connected to left atrial remodeling [29]. While a preserved E/A ratio may be due to pseudo-normalization, there were other evident signs of diastolic dysfunction, with decreases in the peak velocity of the late filling wave (A wave), which is indicative of an impairment in the atrial systolic contraction. The AF group had a slightly inferior cardiac systolic performance than the non-AF group, as evidenced by its larger LVEDD and LVESD, thereby suggesting that ventricular remodeling and altered mechanics may also predispose patients with HCM to AF. A retrospective study has proven that the rising prevalence of AF was in accordance with LV geometric remodeling patterns involving a larger LA size and a lower LVEF [30].
Myocyte hypertrophy and disarray and fibrosis serving as electrophysiological substrates may occur simultaneously within both atria and ventricles; thus, it would be reasonable to hypothesize that a history of VT is a potential indicator for AF development. The maximal diastolic potential is lower than usual in the high-pressure dilated left atrium, and myocytes are more quickly depolarized, which enhances the heart’s vulnerability to AF [31]. Fibrosis disrupts myocyte electrical connection, resulting in delayed intra- and interatrial conduction times and uneven sinus impulse propagation [32]. Ventricular fibrosis was reported to be increased in canine models of chronic AF, caused by fast atrial pacing, while AF with a quick ventricular response further boosts atrial and ventricular fibrosis [33]. In a retrospective research study, AF was linked to a higher incidence of recurrent VTs in secondary-preventive ICD participants [34]. The underlying pathophysiological mechanism of the interaction between AF and VT involved an ion channel mutation, diffuse fibrosis, sympathoexcitation, and proarrhythmic short–long–short sequences [35].
A number of inflammatory biomarkers were found to be intimately linked to AF.
Plasma C1q concentrations in AF patients were considerably lower than in the
controls, and in persistent AF, were lower than in paroxysmal AF [10]. NLR may be
regarded as a supplemental risk evaluation tool, particularly for AF patients
with a CHA
There are several limitations to the current investigation. First, the study was cross-sectional and single-center, meaning we cannot confirm that the increase in AGR is a risk factor for AF in HCM. Second, not all patients underwent 24-hour Holter ECG or dynamic ECG monitoring, meaning the prevalence of asymptomatic AF might have been underestimated. Third, it was impossible to ensure that every single confounding factor was adequately controlled for in the multivariate analysis. Lastly, the selected group of inpatients is likely to have more severe symptoms, which may result in bias.
In HCM patients, both a history of VT and a higher AGR were independently related to an increased chance and incidence of AF. The current study is the first to reveal a link between AGR and the incidence of AF in HCM patients. However, the long-term clinical association and prognostic value of a history of VT and higher AGR in AF is unknown and warrants further investigations.
The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author YW on reasonable request.
XZ, ZY, and KZ concept and designed the research; HL, SW, WS, FH, YM, RH, and CW contributed to the data collection; ZY, XL, YW and YL contributed to analyzing the data; ZY and KZ wrote the manuscript; HL, SW, XL, WS, FH, YM, RH, CW, XZ, YW and YL revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors have participated sufficiently in the work and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
The current retrospective study was approved by the Beijing Anzhen Hospital Medical Ethics Committee (No. KS2023004) and was designed and performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Not applicable.
This study was supported by Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 7172040), Beijing JST Research Funding (Grant No. ZR-202212), and Capital Medical University Major Science and Technology Innovation Research and Development Special Fund (Grant No. KCZD202201).
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: IMR Press stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.