Earlier trials have shown that a routine invasive strategy improves outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. However, the optimal timing of such intervention ...remains uncertain.
We randomly assigned 3031 patients with acute coronary syndromes to undergo either routine early intervention (coronary angiography < or = 24 hours after randomization) or delayed intervention (coronary angiography > or = 36 hours after randomization). The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 6 months. A prespecified secondary outcome was death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia at 6 months.
Coronary angiography was performed in 97.6% of patients in the early-intervention group (median time, 14 hours) and in 95.7% of patients in the delayed-intervention group (median time, 50 hours). At 6 months, the primary outcome occurred in 9.6% of patients in the early-intervention group, as compared with 11.3% in the delayed-intervention group (hazard ratio in the early-intervention group, 0.85; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.68 to 1.06; P=0.15). There was a relative reduction of 28% in the secondary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia in the early-intervention group (9.5%), as compared with the delayed-intervention group (12.9%) (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89; P=0.003). Prespecified analyses showed that early intervention improved the primary outcome in the third of patients who were at highest risk (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89) but not in the two thirds at low-to-intermediate risk (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.56; P=0.01 for heterogeneity).
Early intervention did not differ greatly from delayed intervention in preventing the primary outcome, but it did reduce the rate of the composite secondary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia and was superior to delayed intervention in high-risk patients. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00552513.)
Patients with known cardiovascular disease who have not had a recent acute event are often referred to as having stable coronary artery disease (CAD). The concept of 'stable' CAD is misleading for ...two important reasons: the continuing risks of cardiovascular events over the longer term and the diverse spectrum of powerful risk characteristics. The risks of cardiovascular events are frequently underestimated and continue to exist, despite current standards of care for secondary prevention, including lifestyle changes, optimal medical therapy, myocardial revascularization and the use of antiplatelet agents to limit thrombosis. In dispelling the myth of 'stable' CAD, we explore the pathophysiology of the disease and the relative contribution of plaque and systemic factors to cardiovascular events. A broader concept of the vulnerable patient, not just the vulnerable plaque, takes into account the diversity and future risks of atherothrombotic events. We also evaluate new and ongoing research into medical therapies aimed at further reducing the risks of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic - but not stable - atherothrombotic disease.
Advances in antiplatelet therapies for patients with cardiovascular disease have improved patient outcomes over time, but the challenge of balancing the risks of ischaemia and bleeding remains ...substantial. Moreover, many patients with cardiovascular disease have a residual risk of ischaemic events despite receiving antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, novel strategies are needed to prevent clinical events through mechanisms beyond platelet inhibition and with an acceptable associated risk of bleeding. The advent of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, which attenuate fibrin formation by selective inhibition of factor Xa or thrombin, has renewed the interest in dual-pathway inhibition strategies that combine an antiplatelet agent with an anticoagulant drug. In this Review, we highlight the emerging pharmacological rationale and clinical development of dual-pathway inhibition strategies for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with different manifestations of cardiovascular disease, such as coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease and peripheral artery disease.
The use of warfarin reduces the rate of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but requires frequent monitoring and dose adjustment. Rivaroxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, may ...provide more consistent and predictable anticoagulation than warfarin.
In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 14,264 patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were at increased risk for stroke to receive either rivaroxaban (at a daily dose of 20 mg) or dose-adjusted warfarin. The per-protocol, as-treated primary analysis was designed to determine whether rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the primary end point of stroke or systemic embolism.
In the primary analysis, the primary end point occurred in 188 patients in the rivaroxaban group (1.7% per year) and in 241 in the warfarin group (2.2% per year) (hazard ratio in the rivaroxaban group, 0.79; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.66 to 0.96; P<0.001 for noninferiority). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary end point occurred in 269 patients in the rivaroxaban group (2.1% per year) and in 306 patients in the warfarin group (2.4% per year) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.03; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.12 for superiority). Major and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 1475 patients in the rivaroxaban group (14.9% per year) and in 1449 in the warfarin group (14.5% per year) (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.11; P=0.44), with significant reductions in intracranial hemorrhage (0.5% vs. 0.7%, P=0.02) and fatal bleeding (0.2% vs. 0.5%, P=0.003) in the rivaroxaban group.
In patients with atrial fibrillation, rivaroxaban was noninferior to warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. There was no significant between-group difference in the risk of major bleeding, although intracranial and fatal bleeding occurred less frequently in the rivaroxaban group. (Funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; ROCKET AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00403767.).
It has been suggested that clopidogrel may be less effective in reducing the rate of cardiovascular events among persons who are carriers of loss-of-function CYP2C19 alleles that are associated with ...reduced conversion of clopidogrel to its active metabolite.
We genotyped patients from two large, randomized trials that showed that clopidogrel, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of cardiovascular events (the primary efficacy outcome) among patients with acute coronary syndromes and among patients with atrial fibrillation. Patients were genotyped for three single-nucleotide polymorphisms (*2, *3, *17) that define the major CYP2C19 alleles.
Among 5059 genotyped patients with acute coronary syndromes, clopidogrel as compared with placebo significantly reduced the rate of the primary efficacy outcome, irrespective of the genetically determined metabolizer phenotype (P=0.12 for heterogeneity). The effect of clopidogrel in reducing the rate of the primary efficacy outcome was similar in patients who were heterozygous or homozygous for loss-of-function alleles and in those who were not carriers of the alleles (rate among carriers, 8.0% with clopidogrel vs. 11.6% with placebo; hazard ratio with clopidogrel, 0.69; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.49 to 0.98; rate among noncarriers, 9.5% vs. 13.0%; hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.87). In contrast, gain-of-function carriers derived more benefit from clopidogrel treatment as compared with placebo than did noncarriers (rate of primary outcome among carriers, 7.7% vs. 13.0%; hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.73; rate among noncarriers, 10.0% vs. 12.2%; hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.05; P=0.02 for interaction). The effect of clopidogrel on bleeding did not vary according to genotypic subgroups. Among 1156 genotyped patients with atrial fibrillation, there was no evidence of an interaction with respect to either efficacy or bleeding between the study treatment and the metabolizer phenotype, loss-of-function carrier status, or gain-of-function carrier status.
Among patients with acute coronary syndromes or atrial fibrillation, the effect of clopidogrel as compared with placebo is consistent, irrespective of CYP2C19 loss-of-function carrier status. (Funded by Sanofi-Aventis and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00249873.).
Acute coronary syndromes arise from coronary atherosclerosis with superimposed thrombosis. Since factor Xa plays a central role in thrombosis, the inhibition of factor Xa with low-dose rivaroxaban ...might improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome.
In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 15,526 patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome to receive twice-daily doses of either 2.5 mg or 5 mg of rivaroxaban or placebo for a mean of 13 months and up to 31 months. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke.
Rivaroxaban significantly reduced the primary efficacy end point, as compared with placebo, with respective rates of 8.9% and 10.7% (hazard ratio in the rivaroxaban group, 0.84; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.74 to 0.96; P=0.008), with significant improvement for both the twice-daily 2.5-mg dose (9.1% vs. 10.7%, P=0.02) and the twice-daily 5-mg dose (8.8% vs. 10.7%, P=0.03). The twice-daily 2.5-mg dose of rivaroxaban reduced the rates of death from cardiovascular causes (2.7% vs. 4.1%, P=0.002) and from any cause (2.9% vs. 4.5%, P=0.002), a survival benefit that was not seen with the twice-daily 5-mg dose. As compared with placebo, rivaroxaban increased the rates of major bleeding not related to coronary-artery bypass grafting (2.1% vs. 0.6%, P<0.001) and intracranial hemorrhage (0.6% vs. 0.2%, P=0.009), without a significant increase in fatal bleeding (0.3% vs. 0.2%, P=0.66) or other adverse events. The twice-daily 2.5-mg dose resulted in fewer fatal bleeding events than the twice-daily 5-mg dose (0.1% vs. 0.4%, P=0.04).
In patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome, rivaroxaban reduced the risk of the composite end point of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Rivaroxaban increased the risk of major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage but not the risk of fatal bleeding. (Funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bayer Healthcare; ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00809965.).
There is limited knowledge of the scale and impact of multimorbidity for patients who have had an acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Therefore, this study aimed to determine the extent to which ...multimorbidity is associated with long-term survival following AMI.
This national observational study included 693,388 patients (median age 70.7 years, 452,896 65.5% male) from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (England and Wales) who were admitted with AMI between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2013. There were 412,809 (59.5%) patients with multimorbidity at the time of admission with AMI, i.e., having at least 1 of the following long-term health conditions: diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma, heart failure, renal failure, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral vascular disease, or hypertension. Those with heart failure, renal failure, or cerebrovascular disease had the worst outcomes (39.5 95% CI 39.0-40.0, 38.2 27.7-26.8, and 26.6 25.2-26.4 deaths per 100 person-years, respectively). Latent class analysis revealed 3 multimorbidity phenotype clusters: (1) a high multimorbidity class, with concomitant heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, and hypertension, (2) a medium multimorbidity class, with peripheral vascular disease and hypertension, and (3) a low multimorbidity class. Patients in class 1 were less likely to receive pharmacological therapies compared with class 2 and 3 patients (including aspirin, 83.8% versus 87.3% and 87.2%, respectively; β-blockers, 74.0% versus 80.9% and 81.4%; and statins, 80.6% versus 85.9% and 85.2%). Flexible parametric survival modelling indicated that patients in class 1 and class 2 had a 2.4-fold (95% CI 2.3-2.5) and 1.5-fold (95% CI 1.4-1.5) increased risk of death and a loss in life expectancy of 2.89 and 1.52 years, respectively, compared with those in class 3 over the 8.4-year follow-up period. The study was limited to all-cause mortality due to the lack of available cause-specific mortality data. However, we isolated the disease-specific association with mortality by providing the loss in life expectancy following AMI according to multimorbidity phenotype cluster compared with the general age-, sex-, and year-matched population.
Multimorbidity among patients with AMI was common, and conferred an accumulative increased risk of death. Three multimorbidity phenotype clusters that were significantly associated with loss in life expectancy were identified and should be a concomitant treatment target to improve cardiovascular outcomes.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03037255.
The cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib substantially raises the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, reduces the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level, ...and enhances cellular cholesterol efflux capacity. We sought to determine the effect of evacetrapib on major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high-risk vascular disease.
In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, we enrolled 12,092 patients who had at least one of the following conditions: an acute coronary syndrome within the previous 30 to 365 days, cerebrovascular atherosclerotic disease, peripheral vascular arterial disease, or diabetes mellitus with coronary artery disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either evacetrapib at a dose of 130 mg or matching placebo, administered daily, in addition to standard medical therapy. The primary efficacy end point was the first occurrence of any component of the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina.
At 3 months, a 31.1% decrease in the mean LDL cholesterol level was observed with evacetrapib versus a 6.0% increase with placebo, and a 133.2% increase in the mean HDL cholesterol level was seen with evacetrapib versus a 1.6% increase with placebo. After 1363 of the planned 1670 primary end-point events had occurred, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the trial be terminated early because of a lack of efficacy. After a median of 26 months of evacetrapib or placebo, a primary end-point event occurred in 12.9% of the patients in the evacetrapib group and in 12.8% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.11; P=0.91).
Although the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib had favorable effects on established lipid biomarkers, treatment with evacetrapib did not result in a lower rate of cardiovascular events than placebo among patients with high-risk vascular disease. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ACCELERATE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01687998 .).
Aims
Patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and renal insufficiency are at increased risk for ischaemic stroke and bleeding during anticoagulation. Rivaroxaban, an oral, direct factor Xa ...inhibitor metabolized predominantly by the liver, preserves the benefit of warfarin for stroke prevention while causing fewer intracranial and fatal haemorrhages.
Methods and results
We randomized 14 264 patients with AF in a double-blind trial to rivaroxaban 20 mg/day 15 mg/day if creatinine clearance (CrCl) 30-49 mL/min or dose-adjusted warfarin (target international normalized ratio 2.0-3.0). Compared with patients with CrCl >50 mL/min (mean age 73 years), the 2950 (20.7%) patients with CrCl 30-49 mL/min were older (79 years) and had higher event rates irrespective of study treatment. Among those with CrCl 30-49 mL/min, the primary endpoint of stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 2.32 per 100 patient-years with rivaroxaban 15 mg/day vs. 2.77 per 100 patient-years with warfarin hazard ratio (HR) 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.23 in the per-protocol population. Intention-to-treat analysis yielded similar results (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.63-1.17) to the per-protocol results. Rates of the principal safety endpoint (major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding: 17.82 vs. 18.28 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.76) and intracranial bleeding (0.71 vs. 0.88 per 100 patient-years; P = 0.54) were similar with rivaroxaban or warfarin. Fatal bleeding (0.28 vs. 0.74% per 100 patient-years; P = 0.047) occurred less often with rivaroxaban.
Conclusion
Patients with AF and moderate renal insufficiency have higher rates of stroke and bleeding than those with normal renal function. There was no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect across dosing groups. Dose adjustment in ROCKET-AF yielded results consistent with the overall trial in comparison with dose-adjusted warfarin.
Although troponin assays have become increasingly more sensitive, it is unclear whether further reductions in the threshold of detection for plasma troponin concentrations will improve clinical ...outcomes in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
To determine whether lowering the diagnostic threshold for myocardial infarction (MI) with a sensitive troponin assay could improve clinical outcomes.
All consecutive patients admitted with suspected ACS to the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, before (n = 1038; February 1-July 31, 2008, during the validation phase) and after (n = 1054; February 1-July 31, 2009, during the implementation phase) lowering the threshold of detection for myocardial necrosis from 0.20 to 0.05 ng/mL with a sensitive troponin I assay were stratified into 3 groups (<0.05 ng/mL, 0.05-0.19 ng/mL, and ≥0.20 ng/mL). During the validation phase, only concentrations above the original diagnostic threshold of 0.20 ng/mL were reported to clinicians.
Event-free survival (recurrent MI and death) at 1 year in patients grouped by plasma troponin concentrations.
Plasma troponin concentrations were less than 0.05 ng/mL in 1340 patients (64%), 0.05 to 0.19 ng/mL in 170 patients (8%), and 0.20 ng/mL or more in 582 patients (28%). During the validation phase, 39% of patients with plasma troponin concentrations of 0.05 to 0.19 ng/mL were dead or had recurrent MI at 1 year compared with 7% and 24% of those patients with troponin concentrations of less than 0.05 ng/mL (P < .001) or 0.20 ng/mL or more (P = .007), respectively. During the implementation phase, lowering the diagnostic threshold to 0.05 ng/mL was associated with a lower risk of death and recurrent MI (from 39% to 21%) in patients with troponin concentrations of 0.05 to 0.19 ng/mL (odds ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.84; P = .01).
In patients with suspected ACS, implementation of a sensitive troponin assay increased the diagnosis of MI and identified patients at high risk of recurrent MI and death. Lowering the diagnostic threshold of plasma troponin was associated with major reductions in morbidity and mortality.
PDF
