Search

Background There are limited data on the use of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) in minority populations with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. We used data from the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) registry to evaluate ARNI initiation and associated changes in health status and clinical outcomes across different races and ethnicities. Methods and Results CHAMP-HF was a prospective, observational registry of US outpatients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction. We compared patients starting ARNI with patients not starting ARNI using a propensity-matched analysis. Patients were grouped as Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, or non-Hispanic other individuals, where "non-Hispanic other" consists of all patients who did not identify as Hispanic, Black, or White. Health status was assessed using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Outcomes were analyzed with multivariable models that included race and ethnicity, ARNI initiation, and an interaction term between race and ethnicity and ARNI initiation. Cox proportional hazards models were used for death/HF hospitalization, and multiple regression was used for change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score. The analysis included 1516 patients, with 758 patients in each group (ARNI and no ARNI). Changes in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score after ARNI initiation were similar among all race and ethnicity groups (mean [SD], non-Hispanic White individuals, 3.5 [19.0]; non-Hispanic Black individuals, 2.0 [17.0]; non-Hispanic other individuals, 5.5 [20.3]; and Hispanic individuals, 3.2 [20.1]), with no statistically significant interaction between race and ethnicity and ARNI initiation (P=0.21). There was similarly no statistically significant interaction between race and ethnicity and ARNI initiation for HF hospitalization (P=0.82) or all-cause mortality (P=0.92). Conclusions In a large registry of outp

Background There are limited data on the use of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) in minority populations with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. We used data from the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients With Heart Failure) registry to evaluate ARNI initiation and associated changes in health status and clinical outcomes across different races and ethnicities. Methods and Results CHAMP-HF was a prospective, observational registry of US outpatients with chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction. We compared patients starting ARNI with patients not starting ARNI using a propensity-matched analysis. Patients were grouped as Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, or non-Hispanic other individuals, where "non-Hispanic other" consists of all patients who did not identify as Hispanic, Black, or White. Health status was assessed using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Outcomes were analyzed with multivariable models that included race and ethnicity, ARNI initiation, and an interaction term between race and ethnicity and ARNI initiation. Cox proportional hazards models were used for death/HF hospitalization, and multiple regression was used for change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score. The analysis included 1516 patients, with 758 patients in each group (ARNI and no ARNI). Changes in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score after ARNI initiation were similar among all race and ethnicity groups (mean [SD], non-Hispanic White individuals, 3.5 [19.0]; non-Hispanic Black individuals, 2.0 [17.0]; non-Hispanic other individuals, 5.5 [20.3]; and Hispanic individuals, 3.2 [20.1]), with no statistically significant interaction between race and ethnicity and ARNI initiation (P=0.21). There was similarly no statistically significant interaction between race and ethnicity and ARNI initiation for HF hospitalization (P=0.82) or all-cause mortality (P=0.92). Conclusions In a large registry of outp

Background Previous studies of patients with nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) suggest better outcomes at hospitals with higher case and procedural volumes, but the shape of the volume-outcome curve has not been defined. We sought to establish minimum volume criteria for SAH and aneurysm obliteration procedures that could be used for comprehensive stroke center certification. Methods and Results Data from 8512 discharges in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2010 to 2011 were analyzed using logistic regression models to evaluate the association between clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality and the NIS-SAH Outcome Measure [NIS-SOM]) and measures of hospital annual case volume (nontraumatic SAH discharges, coiling, and clipping procedures). Sensitivity and specificity analyses for the association of desirable outcomes with different volume thresholds were performed. During 8512 SAH hospitalizations, 28.7% of cases underwent clipping and 20.1% underwent coiling with rates of 21.2% for in-hospital mortality and 38.6% for poor outcome on the NIS-SOM. The mean (range) of SAH, coiling, and clipping annual case volumes were 30.9 (1-195), 8.7 (0-94), and 6.1 (0-69), respectively. Logistic regression demonstrated improved outcomes with increasing annual case volumes of SAH discharges and procedures for aneurysm obliteration, with attenuation of the benefit beyond 35 SAH cases/year. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity using different volume thresholds confirmed these results. Analysis of previously proposed volume thresholds, including those utilized as minimum standards for comprehensive stroke center certification, showed that hospitals with more than 35 SAH cases annually had consistently superior outcomes compared with hospitals with fewer cases, although some hospitals below this threshold had similar outcomes. The adjusted odds ratio demonstrating lower risk of poor outcomes with SAH annual case volume ≥35 compared with 20 to 34 was 0.82 for the NIS

AimsThe aim of our study was to investigate heterogeneity of health status treatment response of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Methods and resultsWe leveraged data from CHAMP-HF, an observational registry of 140 US clinics and 5026 outpatients with chronic HFrEF, where health status was serially assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)-12 Overall Summary Scale (range from 0 to 100; ≥20-point improvement is a very large improvement). In 334 patients newly initiated on sacubitril/valsartan, we used hierarchical multivariable logistic regression (13 patient-level characteristics as well as baseline KCCQ-12 score) to calculate the odds ratio (OR) of any characteristic being associated with a very large health status improvement. A total of 104/334 (31.1%) of patients achieved the primary endpoint, where only worse baseline health status [KCCQ-12 score of 0-60 points had an OR = 0.86/5-point higher score (CI 0.79, 0.93)], and those with a KCCQ-12 score of 60-80 points had an OR = 0.61/5-point higher score (0.45-0.82), which was associated with a very large benefit. No other patient characteristic was associated with a very large health status improvement (P > 0.05).ConclusionsWe found that, after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, only worse baseline health status was associated with very large health status improvement. Accordingly, a trial of therapy-particularly in those with worse symptoms, function, and quality of life-and assessing treatment response are likely to be the best prospective strategy.

Background Previous studies of patients with nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) suggest better outcomes at hospitals with higher case and procedural volumes, but the shape of the volume-outcome curve has not been defined. We sought to establish minimum volume criteria for SAH and aneurysm obliteration procedures that could be used for comprehensive stroke center certification. Methods and Results Data from 8512 discharges in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2010 to 2011 were analyzed using logistic regression models to evaluate the association between clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality and the NIS-SAH Outcome Measure [NIS-SOM]) and measures of hospital annual case volume (nontraumatic SAH discharges, coiling, and clipping procedures). Sensitivity and specificity analyses for the association of desirable outcomes with different volume thresholds were performed. During 8512 SAH hospitalizations, 28.7% of cases underwent clipping and 20.1% underwent coiling with rates of 21.2% for in-hospital mortality and 38.6% for poor outcome on the NIS-SOM. The mean (range) of SAH, coiling, and clipping annual case volumes were 30.9 (1-195), 8.7 (0-94), and 6.1 (0-69), respectively. Logistic regression demonstrated improved outcomes with increasing annual case volumes of SAH discharges and procedures for aneurysm obliteration, with attenuation of the benefit beyond 35 SAH cases/year. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity using different volume thresholds confirmed these results. Analysis of previously proposed volume thresholds, including those utilized as minimum standards for comprehensive stroke center certification, showed that hospitals with more than 35 SAH cases annually had consistently superior outcomes compared with hospitals with fewer cases, although some hospitals below this threshold had similar outcomes. The adjusted odds ratio demonstrating lower risk of poor outcomes with SAH annual case volume ≥35 compared with 20 to 34 was 0.82 for the NIS

AimsThe aim of our study was to investigate heterogeneity of health status treatment response of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Methods and resultsWe leveraged data from CHAMP-HF, an observational registry of 140 US clinics and 5026 outpatients with chronic HFrEF, where health status was serially assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)-12 Overall Summary Scale (range from 0 to 100; ≥20-point improvement is a very large improvement). In 334 patients newly initiated on sacubitril/valsartan, we used hierarchical multivariable logistic regression (13 patient-level characteristics as well as baseline KCCQ-12 score) to calculate the odds ratio (OR) of any characteristic being associated with a very large health status improvement. A total of 104/334 (31.1%) of patients achieved the primary endpoint, where only worse baseline health status [KCCQ-12 score of 0-60 points had an OR = 0.86/5-point higher score (CI 0.79, 0.93)], and those with a KCCQ-12 score of 60-80 points had an OR = 0.61/5-point higher score (0.45-0.82), which was associated with a very large benefit. No other patient characteristic was associated with a very large health status improvement (P > 0.05).ConclusionsWe found that, after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, only worse baseline health status was associated with very large health status improvement. Accordingly, a trial of therapy-particularly in those with worse symptoms, function, and quality of life-and assessing treatment response are likely to be the best prospective strategy.

Background Previous studies of patients with nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) suggest better outcomes at hospitals with higher case and procedural volumes, but the shape of the volume-outcome curve has not been defined. We sought to establish minimum volume criteria for SAH and aneurysm obliteration procedures that could be used for comprehensive stroke center certification. Methods and Results Data from 8512 discharges in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2010 to 2011 were analyzed using logistic regression models to evaluate the association between clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality and the NIS-SAH Outcome Measure [NIS-SOM]) and measures of hospital annual case volume (nontraumatic SAH discharges, coiling, and clipping procedures). Sensitivity and specificity analyses for the association of desirable outcomes with different volume thresholds were performed. During 8512 SAH hospitalizations, 28.7% of cases underwent clipping and 20.1% underwent coiling with rates of 21.2% for in-hospital mortality and 38.6% for poor outcome on the NIS-SOM. The mean (range) of SAH, coiling, and clipping annual case volumes were 30.9 (1-195), 8.7 (0-94), and 6.1 (0-69), respectively. Logistic regression demonstrated improved outcomes with increasing annual case volumes of SAH discharges and procedures for aneurysm obliteration, with attenuation of the benefit beyond 35 SAH cases/year. Analysis of sensitivity and specificity using different volume thresholds confirmed these results. Analysis of previously proposed volume thresholds, including those utilized as minimum standards for comprehensive stroke center certification, showed that hospitals with more than 35 SAH cases annually had consistently superior outcomes compared with hospitals with fewer cases, although some hospitals below this threshold had similar outcomes. The adjusted odds ratio demonstrating lower risk of poor outcomes with SAH annual case volume ≥35 compared with 20 to 34 was 0.82 for the NIS

Background: Biomedical research projects deal with data management requirements from multiple sources like funding agencies' guidelines, publisher policies, discipline best practices, and their own users' needs. We describe functional and quality requirements based on many years of experience implementing data management for the CRC 1002 and CRC 1190. A fully equipped data management software should improve documentation of experiments and materials, enable data storage and sharing according to the FAIR Guiding Principles while maximizing usability, information security, as well as software sustainability and reusability. Results: We introduce the modular web portal software menoci for data collection, experiment documentation, data publication, sharing, and preservation in biomedical research projects. Menoci modules are based on the Drupal content management system which enables lightweight deployment and setup, and creates the possibility to combine research data management with a customisable project home page or collaboration platform. Conclusions: Management of research data and digital research artefacts is transforming from individual researcher or groups best practices towards project- or organisation-wide service infrastructures. To enable and support this structural transformation process, a vital ecosystem of open source software tools is needed. Menoci is a contribution to this ecosystem of research data management tools that is specifically designed to support biomedical research projects., Comment: Preprint. 19 pages, 2 figures

We explored associations between INR measures and clinical outcomes in patients with AF using warfarin, and whether INR history predicted future INR measurements. We included patients in ARISTOTLE who were randomized to and received warfarin. Among patients who had events, we included those with ≥ 3 INR values in the 180 days prior to the event, with the most recent ≤ 60 days prior to the event, who were on warfarin at the time of event (n = 545). Non-event patients were included in the control group if they had ≥ 180 days of warfarin exposure with ≥ 3 INR measurements (n = 7259). The median (25th, 75th) number of INR values per patient was 29 (21, 38) over a median follow-up of 1.8 years. A total of 87% had at least one INR value < 1.5; 49% had at least one value > 4.0. The last INRs before events (median 14 [24, 7] days) were < 3.0 for at least 75% of patients with major bleeding and > 2.0 for half of patients with ischemic stroke. Historic time in therapeutic range (TTR) was weakly associated with future TTR (R2 = 0.212). Historic TTR ≥ 80% had limited predictive ability to discriminate future TTR ≥ 80% (C index 0.61). In patients with AF receiving warfarin, most bleeding events may not have been preventable despite careful INR control. Our findings suggest that INRs collected through routine management are not sufficiently predictive to provide reassurance about future time in therapeutic range or to prevent subsequent outcomes, and might be over-interpreted in clinical practice.

IntroductionPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction endpoints are increasingly important in clinical trials and may be associated with treatment adherence. In this post hoc substudy from ROCKET AF, we examined whether patient-reported satisfaction was associated with study drug discontinuation.MethodsROCKET AF (n = 14,264) compared rivaroxaban with warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. We analyzed treatment satisfaction scores: the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version II (TSQM II). We compared satisfaction with study drug between the two treatment arms, and examined the association between satisfaction and patient-driven study drug discontinuation (stopping study drug due to withdrawal of consent, noncompliance, or loss to follow-up).ResultsA total of 1577 (11%) patients participated in the Patient Satisfaction substudy; 1181 (8.3%) completed both the ACTS and TSQM II 4 weeks after starting study drug. Patients receiving rivaroxaban did not experience significant differences in satisfaction compared with those receiving warfarin. During a median follow-up of 1.6 years, 448 premature study drug discontinuations occurred (213 rivaroxaban group; 235 warfarin group), of which 116 (26%) were patient-driven (52 [24%] rivaroxaban group; 64 [27%] warfarin group). No significant differences were observed between satisfaction level and rates of patient-driven study drug discontinuation.ConclusionsStudy drug satisfaction did not predict rate of study drug discontinuation. No significant difference was observed between satisfaction with warfarin and rivaroxaban, as expected given the double-blind trial design. Although these results are negative, the importance of PRO data will only increase, and these analyses may inform future studies that explore the relationship between drug-satisfaction PROs, adherence, and clinical outcomes. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT

BackgroundWhen used in appropriately selected heart failure (HF) patients, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces mortality and hospitalization. It is not understood whether CRT implantation during hospitalization for HF is associated with similar benefits.HypothesisTiming of CRT implantation relative to hospitalization for HF is associated with clinical outcomes.MethodsThis analysis included patients eligible for CRT and discharged alive between January 2005 and December 2012 from 388 hospitals in Get With The Guidelines-HF. Participants were linked with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to evaluate outcomes of all-cause mortality and HF re-hospitalization based on CRT status (present on admission, placed during hospitalization, and prescribed at discharge; reference = no CRT).ResultsOf 15 619 CRT-eligible HF patients, 2408 (15%) had CRT on admission, 1269 (8%) underwent CRT implantation during hospitalization and 643 (4%) had CRT prescribed at discharge. Compared with patients without CRT, mortality was lower in those who received CRT implantation during HF hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; P < 0.0001) and those prescribed CRT at discharge (adjusted HR 0.78; P = 0.048). A reduction in HF re-hospitalization was observed in patients with CRT implanted during hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.64; P < 0.0001), but not in those who were prescribed CRT at discharge (adjusted HR 1.02; P = 0.77).ConclusionCRT implantation during HF hospitalization was associated with lower rates of mortality and HF re-hospitalization. These data suggest that a CRT utilization strategy that does not delay implantation to the post-discharge period may be appropriate. Randomized data are needed to definitively identify optimal timing of CRT implantation.

Item does not contain fulltext, We explored associations between INR measures and clinical outcomes in patients with AF using warfarin, and whether INR history predicted future INR measurements. We included patients in ARISTOTLE who were randomized to and received warfarin. Among patients who had events, we included those with >/= 3 INR values in the 180 days prior to the event, with the most recent /= 180 days of warfarin exposure with >/= 3 INR measurements (n = 7259). The median (25th, 75th) number of INR values per patient was 29 (21, 38) over a median follow-up of 1.8 years. A total of 87% had at least one INR value < 1.5; 49% had at least one value > 4.0. The last INRs before events (median 14 [24, 7] days) were < 3.0 for at least 75% of patients with major bleeding and > 2.0 for half of patients with ischemic stroke. Historic time in therapeutic range (TTR) was weakly associated with future TTR (R(2) = 0.212). Historic TTR >/= 80% had limited predictive ability to discriminate future TTR >/= 80% (C index 0.61). In patients with AF receiving warfarin, most bleeding events may not have been preventable despite careful INR control. Our findings suggest that INRs collected through routine management are not sufficiently predictive to provide reassurance about future time in therapeutic range or to prevent subsequent outcomes, and might be over-interpreted in clinical practice.

BackgroundWhen used in appropriately selected heart failure (HF) patients, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces mortality and hospitalization. It is not understood whether CRT implantation during hospitalization for HF is associated with similar benefits.HypothesisTiming of CRT implantation relative to hospitalization for HF is associated with clinical outcomes.MethodsThis analysis included patients eligible for CRT and discharged alive between January 2005 and December 2012 from 388 hospitals in Get With The Guidelines-HF. Participants were linked with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to evaluate outcomes of all-cause mortality and HF re-hospitalization based on CRT status (present on admission, placed during hospitalization, and prescribed at discharge; reference = no CRT).ResultsOf 15 619 CRT-eligible HF patients, 2408 (15%) had CRT on admission, 1269 (8%) underwent CRT implantation during hospitalization and 643 (4%) had CRT prescribed at discharge. Compared with patients without CRT, mortality was lower in those who received CRT implantation during HF hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; P < 0.0001) and those prescribed CRT at discharge (adjusted HR 0.78; P = 0.048). A reduction in HF re-hospitalization was observed in patients with CRT implanted during hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.64; P < 0.0001), but not in those who were prescribed CRT at discharge (adjusted HR 1.02; P = 0.77).ConclusionCRT implantation during HF hospitalization was associated with lower rates of mortality and HF re-hospitalization. These data suggest that a CRT utilization strategy that does not delay implantation to the post-discharge period may be appropriate. Randomized data are needed to definitively identify optimal timing of CRT implantation.

IntroductionPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction endpoints are increasingly important in clinical trials and may be associated with treatment adherence. In this post hoc substudy from ROCKET AF, we examined whether patient-reported satisfaction was associated with study drug discontinuation.MethodsROCKET AF (n = 14,264) compared rivaroxaban with warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. We analyzed treatment satisfaction scores: the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version II (TSQM II). We compared satisfaction with study drug between the two treatment arms, and examined the association between satisfaction and patient-driven study drug discontinuation (stopping study drug due to withdrawal of consent, noncompliance, or loss to follow-up).ResultsA total of 1577 (11%) patients participated in the Patient Satisfaction substudy; 1181 (8.3%) completed both the ACTS and TSQM II 4 weeks after starting study drug. Patients receiving rivaroxaban did not experience significant differences in satisfaction compared with those receiving warfarin. During a median follow-up of 1.6 years, 448 premature study drug discontinuations occurred (213 rivaroxaban group; 235 warfarin group), of which 116 (26%) were patient-driven (52 [24%] rivaroxaban group; 64 [27%] warfarin group). No significant differences were observed between satisfaction level and rates of patient-driven study drug discontinuation.ConclusionsStudy drug satisfaction did not predict rate of study drug discontinuation. No significant difference was observed between satisfaction with warfarin and rivaroxaban, as expected given the double-blind trial design. Although these results are negative, the importance of PRO data will only increase, and these analyses may inform future studies that explore the relationship between drug-satisfaction PROs, adherence, and clinical outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL

Item does not contain fulltext, We explored associations between INR measures and clinical outcomes in patients with AF using warfarin, and whether INR history predicted future INR measurements. We included patients in ARISTOTLE who were randomized to and received warfarin. Among patients who had events, we included those with >/= 3 INR values in the 180 days prior to the event, with the most recent /= 180 days of warfarin exposure with >/= 3 INR measurements (n = 7259). The median (25th, 75th) number of INR values per patient was 29 (21, 38) over a median follow-up of 1.8 years. A total of 87% had at least one INR value < 1.5; 49% had at least one value > 4.0. The last INRs before events (median 14 [24, 7] days) were < 3.0 for at least 75% of patients with major bleeding and > 2.0 for half of patients with ischemic stroke. Historic time in therapeutic range (TTR) was weakly associated with future TTR (R(2) = 0.212). Historic TTR >/= 80% had limited predictive ability to discriminate future TTR >/= 80% (C index 0.61). In patients with AF receiving warfarin, most bleeding events may not have been preventable despite careful INR control. Our findings suggest that INRs collected through routine management are not sufficiently predictive to provide reassurance about future time in therapeutic range or to prevent subsequent outcomes, and might be over-interpreted in clinical practice.

Item does not contain fulltext, We explored associations between INR measures and clinical outcomes in patients with AF using warfarin, and whether INR history predicted future INR measurements. We included patients in ARISTOTLE who were randomized to and received warfarin. Among patients who had events, we included those with >/= 3 INR values in the 180 days prior to the event, with the most recent /= 180 days of warfarin exposure with >/= 3 INR measurements (n = 7259). The median (25th, 75th) number of INR values per patient was 29 (21, 38) over a median follow-up of 1.8 years. A total of 87% had at least one INR value < 1.5; 49% had at least one value > 4.0. The last INRs before events (median 14 [24, 7] days) were < 3.0 for at least 75% of patients with major bleeding and > 2.0 for half of patients with ischemic stroke. Historic time in therapeutic range (TTR) was weakly associated with future TTR (R(2) = 0.212). Historic TTR >/= 80% had limited predictive ability to discriminate future TTR >/= 80% (C index 0.61). In patients with AF receiving warfarin, most bleeding events may not have been preventable despite careful INR control. Our findings suggest that INRs collected through routine management are not sufficiently predictive to provide reassurance about future time in therapeutic range or to prevent subsequent outcomes, and might be over-interpreted in clinical practice.

ObjectivesThis study sought to describe the short-term health status benefits of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).BackgroundAlthough therapy with sacubitril/valsartan, a neprilysin inhibitor, improved patients' health status (compared with enalapril) at 8 months in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACE inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) study, the early impact of ARNI on patients' symptoms, functions, and quality of life is unknown.MethodsHealth status was assessed by using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) in 3,918 outpatients with HFrEF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% across 140 U.S. centers in the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry. ARNI therapy was initiated in 508 patients who were matched 1:2 to 1,016 patients who were not initiated on ARNI (no-ARNI), using a nonparsimonious time-dependent propensity score (6 sociodemographic factors, 23 clinical characteristics), prior KCCQ overall summary (KCCQ-OS) score, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker status.ResultsMultivariate linear regression demonstrated a greater mean improvement in KCCQ-OS in patients initiated on ARNI therapy (5.3 ± 19 vs. 2.5 ± 17.4, respectively; p < 0.001) over a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 57 (32 to 104) days. The proportions of ARNI versus no-ARNI groups with ≥10-point (large) and ≥20-point (very large) improvements in KCCQ-OS were 32.7% versus 26.9%, respectively, and 20.5% versus 12.1%, respectively, consistent with numbers needed to treat of 18 and 12, respectively.ConclusionsIn routine clinical care, ARNI therapy was associated with early improvements in health status, with 20% experiencing a very large health status benefit compared with 12% who were not started on

BACKGROUND:The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guidelines recommend high-intensity statins for patients after myocardial infarction (MI) rather than treating to a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal, as the previous ATP III (Adult Treatment Panel third report) guidelines had advised. METHODS AND RESULTS:To evaluate the frequency of postdischarge lipid testing and high-intensity statin use among MI patients discharged on a statin during the ATP III guidelines era, we linked ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry data to Medicare claims for 11 046 MI patients aged ≥65 years who were discharged alive on a statin from 347 hospitals (2007-2009). Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association between lipid testing and 1-year high-intensity statin use. Only 21% of MI patients were discharged on a high-intensity statin. By 90 days after MI, 44% of patients discharged on a statin underwent lipid testing (43% on low- or moderate-intensity statins and 49% on high-intensity statins; P=0.001). Follow-up lipid testing rates were 47% among patients with in-hospital low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥100 mg/dL and 47% among newly prescribed statin recipients. By 1 year, only 14% of patients were on high-intensity statins. Only 4% of patients discharged on low- or moderate-dose statin were uptitrated to high intensity; postdischarge lipid testing was associated with a slightly higher likelihood of high-intensity statin use by 1 year (5.4% versus 2.9%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-2.41). CONCLUSIONS:Previous guidelines recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal-directed statin therapy, but lipid testing and high-intensity statin use were infrequent after MI. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines may promote more intensive cardiovascular risk reduction by eliminating treatment

The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guidelines recommend high-intensity statins for patients after myocardial infarction (MI) rather than treating to a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal, as the previous ATP III (Adult Treatment Panel third report) guidelines had advised. To evaluate the frequency of postdischarge lipid testing and high-intensity statin use among MI patients discharged on a statin during the ATP III guidelines era, we linked ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry data to Medicare claims for 11 046 MI patients aged ≥65 years who were discharged alive on a statin from 347 hospitals (2007-2009). Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association between lipid testing and 1-year high-intensity statin use. Only 21% of MI patients were discharged on a high-intensity statin. By 90 days after MI, 44% of patients discharged on a statin underwent lipid testing (43% on low- or moderate-intensity statins and 49% on high-intensity statins; P=0.001). Follow-up lipid testing rates were 47% among patients with in-hospital low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥100 mg/dL and 47% among newly prescribed statin recipients. By 1 year, only 14% of patients were on high-intensity statins. Only 4% of patients discharged on low- or moderate-dose statin were uptitrated to high intensity; postdischarge lipid testing was associated with a slightly higher likelihood of high-intensity statin use by 1 year (5.4% versus 2.9%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-2.41). Previous guidelines recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal-directed statin therapy, but lipid testing and high-intensity statin use were infrequent after MI. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines may promote more intensive cardiovascular risk reduction by eliminating treatment dependence on lipid testing.

ImportanceThe extent to which levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), a known marker of increased cardiovascular risk, are elevated and are associated with standard cardiovascular risk factors in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI) is unknown.ObjectivesTo determine the pattern and determinants of the distribution of hs-CRP in those with a prior MI in the United States using a nationally representative sample.Design and participantsAdults with hs-CRP data in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys from 1999-2010.ResultsAmong 1296 individuals in our cohort, the median age was 65 years and the median hs-CRP level was 2.69 mg/L, measured an average of 7.1 years after the MI. Among these patients, 22% had hs-CRP levels of <1 mg/L, 61% had ≥2 mg/L, and 48% had ≥3 mg/L. Increasing hs-CRP was associated in a multivariable model with increasing body mass index (partial R2 [pR2] 0.113, P < .001), increasing non-high-density lipoprotein [HDL] (pR2 0.030, P < .001), increasing age (pR2 0.008, P = .017), and decreasing HDL (pR2 0.005, P = .046). Adjusted mean hs-CRP was also higher in women (3.6 vs 2.7 mg/L; P < .001), in people with hypertension (3.5 vs. 2.8, P = .030), and among smokers (4.2 vs 2.3 mg/L; P < .001), and lower in people with hyperlipidemia (2.8 vs. 3.5, P = .007). Standard cardiovascular risk factors accounted for only 22% of the variability in hs-CRP levels.Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with prior MI, elevated hs-CRP is prevalent several years after the MI, and standard cardiovascular risk factors explain only a small proportion of hs-CRP variability. In light of emerging evidence on the importance of inflammation in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease, the high prevalence of elevated hs-CRP in patients with prior MI in the United States may have public health implications.

AimsPost-stroke hypertension is associated with poor short-term outcome, although the results have been conflicting. Our objective was to evaluate the association of blood pressure (BP) and in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute ischaemic stroke.Methods and resultsPatients in the Get With The Guidelines-Stroke registry with acute ischaemic stroke were included. Admission systolic and diastolic BP was used to compute mean arterial pressure (MAP) and pulse pressure (PP). The outcomes of interest were: in-hospital mortality, not discharged home, inability to ambulate independently at discharge and haemorrhagic complications due to thrombolytic therapy. A total of 309 611 patients with an ischaemic stroke were included. There was a J-shaped/U-shaped relationship between systolic BP and outcomes. Both lower and higher systolic BP values, compared with a central reference value, had higher risk of in-hospital death [e.g. adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) (OR[CI]) = 1.16[1.13-1.20] for 120 vs. 150 mmHg and 1.24[1.19-1.30] for 200 vs. 150 mmHg], not discharged home (OR[CI] = 1.11[1.09-1.13] for 120 vs. 150 mmHg and 1.15[1.12-1.18] for 200 vs. 150 mmHg), inability to ambulate independently at discharge (OR[CI] = 1.16[1.13-1.18] for 120 vs. 150 mmHg and 1.09[1.06-1.11] for 200 vs. 150 mmHg). However, risk of haemorrhagic complications of thrombolytic therapy was lower with lower systolic BP (OR[CI] = 0.89[0.83-0.97] for 120 vs. 150 mmHg), while higher with higher systolic BP (OR[CI] = 1.21[1.11-1.32] for 200 vs. 150 mmHg). The results were largely similar for admission diastolic BP, MAP, and PP.ConclusionIn patients hospitalized with ischaemic stroke, J-shaped, or U-shaped relationships were observed between BP variables and short-term outcomes. However, haemorrhagic complications with thrombolytic therapy were lower with lower BP.

Objective: The effects of ticagrelor in the subpopulation of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were consistent with those observed in the overall Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) study. However, this subgroup included patients initially or ultimately treated conservatively. The aim of this study is to compare treatment using ticagrelor with treatment using clopidogrel in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: This post-hoc subgroup analysis compared ticagrelor with clopidogrel in 4949 PLATO patients with STEMI that were treated with primary PCI within 12h of admission. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke. The safety endpoint consisted of any major bleeding. Secondary endpoints included stent thrombosis. The analysis was not adequately powered to establish significance of any treatment effects. Results: During a median of 286days, the primary endpoint occurred in 7.9% of ticagrelor-treated patients versus 8.6% of clopidogrel-treated patients (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.12, p=0.38). Major bleeding occurred in 6.7% in ticagrelor-treated patients versus 6.8% of clopidogrel-treated patients (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.22, p=0.79). No interactions were observed for the treatment effect of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on the primary efficacy (p=0.40) and primary safety endpoints (p=0.15) as compared with the full PLATO population. Treatment with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel reduced the occurrence of definite stent thrombosis (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.89, p=0.013). Conclusions: In the subset of patients with STEMI treated with primary PCI, ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel was safe, and efficacy outcomes were consistent with the overall PLATO trial.

BackgroundClinical trials of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) for primary prevention enrolled a limited number of women. We sought to examine clinical practice data to compare survival rates among women with heart failure with or without a primary prevention ICD.Methods and resultsWe linked data from 264 US hospitals included in the Get With The Guidelines for Heart Failure registry with data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. From these sources, we propensity score matched 430 women with heart failure who received a primary prevention ICD to 430 women who did not; we further adjusted using a Cox proportional hazards model. Median follow-up was 3.4 and 3.0 years. For comparison, we matched 859 men receiving an ICD with 859 who did not; median follow-up was 3.9 versus 2.9 years. In the matched cohorts, an ICD was associated with similarly better survival in women (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.92; P=0.003) and men (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.87 P<0.001). There was no interaction between sex and presence of an ICD with respect to survival (P=0.79).ConclusionsAmong patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, a primary prevention ICD was associated with a significant survival advantage among women and among men. These findings support guideline-directed use of primary prevention ICDs in eligible patients.

BackgroundImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF), but whether this association holds among older patients with multiple comorbid illnesses and worse HF burden remains unclear.Methods and resultsUsing the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry and the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry linked with Medicare claims, we examined outcomes associated with primary-prevention ICD versus no ICD among HF patients aged ≥65 years in clinical practice. We included patients with an ejection fraction ≤35% who received (ICD Registry) and who did not receive (GWTG-HF) an ICD. Compared with patients with an ICD, patients in the non-ICD group were older and more likely to be female and white. In matched cohorts, the 3-year adjusted mortality rate was lower in the ICD group versus the non-ICD group (46.7% versus 55.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.83). There was no associated difference in all-cause readmission (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.08) but a lower risk of HF readmission (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.97). When compared with no ICD, ICDs were also associated with better survival in patients with ≤3 comorbidities (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87) and >3 comorbidities (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.93) and in patients with no hospitalization for HF (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.86) and at least 1 prior HF hospitalization (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82). In subgroup analyses, there were no interactions between ICD and mortality risk for comorbidity burden (P=0.95) and for prior HF hospitalization (P=0.46).ConclusionAmong older HF patients, ICDs for primary prevention were associated with lower risk of mortality even among those with high comorbid illness burden and prior HF hospitalization.

BackgroundDifferences in activation of emergency medical services (EMS) may contribute to racial/ethnic and sex disparities in stroke outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine whether EMS use varied by race/ethnicity and sex among a current, diverse national sample of hospitalized acute stroke patients.Methods and resultsWe analyzed data from 398,798 stroke patients admitted to 1613 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke participating hospitals between October 2011 and March 2014. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the associations between combinations of racial/ethnic and sex groups with EMS use, adjusting for potential confounders including demographics, medical history, and stroke symptoms. Patients were 50% female, 69% white, 19% black, 8% Hispanic, 3% Asian, and 1% other, and 86% had ischemic stroke. Overall, 59% of stroke patients were transported to the hospital by EMS. White women were most likely to use EMS (62%); Hispanic men were least likely to use EMS (52%). After adjustment for patient characteristics, Hispanic and Asian men and women had 20% to 29% lower adjusted odds of using EMS versus their white counterparts; black women were less likely than white women to use EMS (odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.77). Patients with weakness or paresis, altered level of consciousness, and/or aphasia were significantly more likely to use EMS than patients without each symptom; the observed racial/ethnic and sex differences in EMS use remained significant after adjustment for stroke symptoms.ConclusionsEMS use differed by race/ethnicity and sex. These contemporary data document suboptimal use of EMS transport among US stroke patients, especially by racial/ethnic minorities and those with less recognized stroke symptoms.

BackgroundDifferences in activation of emergency medical services (EMS) may contribute to racial/ethnic and sex disparities in stroke outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine whether EMS use varied by race/ethnicity and sex among a current, diverse national sample of hospitalized acute stroke patients.Methods and resultsWe analyzed data from 398,798 stroke patients admitted to 1613 Get With The Guidelines-Stroke participating hospitals between October 2011 and March 2014. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the associations between combinations of racial/ethnic and sex groups with EMS use, adjusting for potential confounders including demographics, medical history, and stroke symptoms. Patients were 50% female, 69% white, 19% black, 8% Hispanic, 3% Asian, and 1% other, and 86% had ischemic stroke. Overall, 59% of stroke patients were transported to the hospital by EMS. White women were most likely to use EMS (62%); Hispanic men were least likely to use EMS (52%). After adjustment for patient characteristics, Hispanic and Asian men and women had 20% to 29% lower adjusted odds of using EMS versus their white counterparts; black women were less likely than white women to use EMS (odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.77). Patients with weakness or paresis, altered level of consciousness, and/or aphasia were significantly more likely to use EMS than patients without each symptom; the observed racial/ethnic and sex differences in EMS use remained significant after adjustment for stroke symptoms.ConclusionsEMS use differed by race/ethnicity and sex. These contemporary data document suboptimal use of EMS transport among US stroke patients, especially by racial/ethnic minorities and those with less recognized stroke symptoms.

BackgroundImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF), but whether this association holds among older patients with multiple comorbid illnesses and worse HF burden remains unclear.Methods and resultsUsing the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry and the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) registry linked with Medicare claims, we examined outcomes associated with primary-prevention ICD versus no ICD among HF patients aged ≥65 years in clinical practice. We included patients with an ejection fraction ≤35% who received (ICD Registry) and who did not receive (GWTG-HF) an ICD. Compared with patients with an ICD, patients in the non-ICD group were older and more likely to be female and white. In matched cohorts, the 3-year adjusted mortality rate was lower in the ICD group versus the non-ICD group (46.7% versus 55.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.83). There was no associated difference in all-cause readmission (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.08) but a lower risk of HF readmission (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.97). When compared with no ICD, ICDs were also associated with better survival in patients with ≤3 comorbidities (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87) and >3 comorbidities (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.93) and in patients with no hospitalization for HF (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.86) and at least 1 prior HF hospitalization (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82). In subgroup analyses, there were no interactions between ICD and mortality risk for comorbidity burden (P=0.95) and for prior HF hospitalization (P=0.46).ConclusionAmong older HF patients, ICDs for primary prevention were associated with lower risk of mortality even among those with high comorbid illness burden and prior HF hospitalization.

BackgroundSudden cardiac death is the leading cause of death among end-stage kidney disease patients (ESKD) on dialysis, but the benefit of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in this population is uncertain. We conducted this investigation to compare the mortality of dialysis patients receiving a primary prevention ICD with matched controls.MethodsWe used data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry to select dialysis patients who received a primary prevention ICD, and the Get with the Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry to select a comparator cohort. We matched ICD recipients and no-ICD patients using propensity score techniques to reduce confounding, and overall survival was compared between groups.ResultsWe identified 108 dialysis patients receiving primary prevention ICDs and 195 comparable dialysis patients without ICDs. One year (3-year) mortality was 42.2% (68.8%) in the ICD registry cohort compared with 38.1% (75.7%) in the control cohort. There was no significant survival advantage associated with ICD [hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.13, log-rank P = 0.29]. After propensity matching, our analysis included 86 ICD patients and 86 matched controls. Comparing the propensity-matched cohorts, 1 year (3 years) mortality was 43.4% (74.0%) in the ICD cohort and 39.7% (76.6%) in the control cohort; there was no significant difference in mortality outcome between groups (HR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.67-1.31, log-rank P = 0.71).ConclusionsWe did not observe a significant association between primary prevention ICDs and reduced mortality among ESKD patients receiving dialysis. Consideration of the potential risks and benefits of ICD implantation in these patients should be undertaken while awaiting the results of definitive clinical trials.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess the benefit of primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) in women.BackgroundClinical trials of primary prevention ICDs enrolled a limited number of women.MethodsUsing a propensity score method, we matched 490 women ≥65 years of age who received an ICD during a hospitalization for heart failure in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2007, to 490 ICD-eligible women without an ICD hospitalized for heart failure in the Get With The Guidelines for Heart Failure database from January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2009. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality obtained from the Medicare Claims Database. An identical analysis was conducted in men.ResultsMedian follow-up for patients with an ICD was 4.6 years versus 3.2 years for patients with no ICD. Compared with women with no ICD, those with an ICD were younger and less frequently white. In the matched cohorts, the survival of women with an ICD was significantly longer than that of women without an ICD (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.95; p = 0.013). Similarly, men with an ICD had longer survival than men without an ICD (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.73, 95% confidence interval: 0.65 to 0.83; p < 0.0001). There was no interaction between sex and the presence of an ICD with respect to survival (p = 0.44).ConclusionsAmong older women with left ventricular dysfunction, a primary prevention ICD was associated with a significant survival benefit that was nearly identical to that seen in men. These findings support the use of primary prevention ICDs in eligible patients regardless of sex.

BackgroundRacial and ethnic minorities are under-represented in clinical trials of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). This analysis investigates the association between primary prevention ICDs and mortality among Medicare, racial/ethnic minority patients.Methods and resultsData from Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure Registry and National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry were used to perform an adjusted comparative effectiveness analysis of primary prevention ICDs in Medicare, racial/ethnic minority patients (nonwhite race or Hispanic ethnicity). Mortality data were obtained from the Medicare denominator file. The relationship of ICD with survival was compared between minority and white non-Hispanic patients. Our analysis included 852 minority patients, 426 ICD and 426 matched non-ICD patients, and 2070 white non-Hispanic patients (1035 ICD and 1035 matched non-ICD patients). Median follow-up was 3.1 years. Median age was 73 years, and median ejection fraction was 23%. Adjusted 3-year mortality rates for minority ICD and non-ICD patients were 44.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44.2%-45.7%) and 54.3% (95% CI, 53.4%-55.1%), respectively (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98; P=0.034). White non-Hispanic patients receiving an ICD had lower adjusted 3-year mortality rates of 47.8% (95% CI, 47.3%-48.3%) compared with 57.3% (95% CI, 56.8%-57.9%) for those with no ICD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67%-0.83%; P<0.0001). There was no significant interaction between race/ethnicity and lower mortality risk with ICD (P=0.70).ConclusionsPrimary prevention ICDs are associated with lower mortality in nonwhite and Hispanic patients, similar to that seen in white, non-Hispanic patients. These data support a similar approach to ICD patient selection, regardless of race or ethnicity.

ImportanceClinical trials of prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have included a minority of patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) between 30% and 35%. Because a large number of ICDs in the United States are implanted in such patients, it is important to study survival associated with this therapy.ObjectiveTo characterize patients with LVEF between 30% and 35% and compare the survival of those with and without ICDs.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD registry (January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2007) with an LVEF between 30% and 35% who received an ICD during a heart failure hospitalization and similar patients in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) database (January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2009) with no ICD. The analysis was repeated in patients with an LVEF less than 30%. There were 3120 patients with an LVEF between 30% and 35% (816 in matched cohorts) and 4578 with an LVEF less than 30% (2176 in matched cohorts). Propensity score matching and Cox models were applied.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was all-cause mortality; data were obtained from Medicare claims through December 31, 2011.ResultsThere were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics of the matched groups (n = 408 for both groups). Among patients with an LVEF between 30% and 35%, there were 248 deaths in the ICD Registry group, within a median follow-up of 4.4 years (interquartile range, 2.7-4.9) and 249 deaths in the GWTG HF group, within a median follow-up of 2.9 years (interquartile range, 2.1-4.4). The risk of all-cause mortality in patients with an LVEF between 30% and 35% and an ICD was significantly lower than that in matched patients without an ICD (3-year mortality rates: 51.4% vs 55.0%; hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.69-0.99]; P = .04). Presence of an ICD also was associated with better survival

Background In the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial, apixaban compared with warfarin reduced stroke and systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality. We evaluated treatment effects in relation to 2 predictions of time in therapeutic range (TTR). Methods and Results The trial randomized 18 201 patients with atrial fibrillation to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin for at least 12 months. For each patient, a center average TTR was estimated with the use of a linear mixed model on the basis of the real TTRs in its warfarin-treated patients, with a fixed effect for country and random effect for center. For each patient, an individual TTR was also predicted with the use of a linear mixed effects model including patient characteristics as well. Median center average TTR was 66% (interquartile limits, 61% and 71%). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality were consistently lower with apixaban than with warfarin across center average TTR and individual TTR quartiles. In the lowest and highest center average TTR quartiles, hazard ratios for stroke or systemic embolism were 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53–1.00) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.57–1.35) (Pinteraction=0.078), for mortality were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.74–1.13) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71–1.16) (Pinteraction=0.34), and for major bleeding were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.36–0.70) and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.58–0.97) (Pinteraction=0.095), respectively. Similar results were seen for quartiles of individual TTR. Conclusions The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin for stroke or systemic embolism, bleeding, and mortality appear similar across the range of centers’ and patients’ predicted quality of international normalized ratio control. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00412984.

Background— In the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial, apixaban compared with warfarin reduced stroke and systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality. We evaluated treatment effects in relation to 2 predictions of time in therapeutic range (TTR). Methods and Results— The trial randomized 18 201 patients with atrial fibrillation to apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin for at least 12 months. For each patient, a center average TTR was estimated with the use of a linear mixed model on the basis of the real TTRs in its warfarin-treated patients, with a fixed effect for country and random effect for center. For each patient, an individual TTR was also predicted with the use of a linear mixed effects model including patient characteristics as well. Median center average TTR was 66% (interquartile limits, 61% and 71%). Rates of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality were consistently lower with apixaban than with warfarin across center average TTR and individual TTR quartiles. In the lowest and highest center average TTR quartiles, hazard ratios for stroke or systemic embolism were 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53–1.00) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.57–1.35) ( P interaction =0.078), for mortality were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.74–1.13) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.71–1.16) ( P interaction =0.34), and for major bleeding were 0.50 (95% CI, 0.36–0.70) and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.58–0.97) ( P interaction =0.095), respectively. Similar results were seen for quartiles of individual TTR. Conclusions— The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin for stroke or systemic embolism, bleeding, and morta

Udgivelsesdato: 2008-Mar, AIMS: We sought to assess the incidence of and prognostic factors for heart failure (HF) hospitalization among survivors of high-risk acute myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the risk of an initial hospitalization for HF in 11 040 stable MI patients (no major non-fatal cardiovascular events or deaths within 45 days of randomization) without a prior history of HF enrolled in the VALIANT trial. Multivariable models were developed to identify independent predictors of HF and HF or cardiovascular death. Of 11 040 stable post-MI patients, 1139 (10.3%) developed HF during the median 25-month follow-up at a rate of approximately 3.4% per year. Most patients, 824 (72.3%), did not have a symptomatic recurrent MI between randomization and the onset of HF. The most important predictors of HF were older age, antecedent diabetes, prior MI before index MI, and reduced renal function. HF markedly increased the risk of death [HR(hazard ratio) 8.22; 95% CI(confidence interval), 7.49-9.01]. CONCLUSION: HF post high risk-MI occurs in a time-dependent fashion and is usually not directly related to re-infarction. Patients who experience HF beyond the acute phase have increased mortality. Long-term survivors of high-risk MI should be followed closely and treated aggressively beyond the acute MI period.

Udgivelsesdato: 2008-Mar, AIMS: We sought to assess the incidence of and prognostic factors for heart failure (HF) hospitalization among survivors of high-risk acute myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the risk of an initial hospitalization for HF in 11 040 stable MI patients (no major non-fatal cardiovascular events or deaths within 45 days of randomization) without a prior history of HF enrolled in the VALIANT trial. Multivariable models were developed to identify independent predictors of HF and HF or cardiovascular death. Of 11 040 stable post-MI patients, 1139 (10.3%) developed HF during the median 25-month follow-up at a rate of approximately 3.4% per year. Most patients, 824 (72.3%), did not have a symptomatic recurrent MI between randomization and the onset of HF. The most important predictors of HF were older age, antecedent diabetes, prior MI before index MI, and reduced renal function. HF markedly increased the risk of death [HR(hazard ratio) 8.22; 95% CI(confidence interval), 7.49-9.01]. CONCLUSION: HF post high risk-MI occurs in a time-dependent fashion and is usually not directly related to re-infarction. Patients who experience HF beyond the acute phase have increased mortality. Long-term survivors of high-risk MI should be followed closely and treated aggressively beyond the acute MI period.