Search

Background: Heart failure (HF) is common among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), and accurate risk assessment is clinically important., Objectives: The goal of this study was to investigate the incremental prognostic performance of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), and growth differentiation factor (GDF)-15 for HF risk stratification in patients with AF., Methods: Individual patient data from 3 large randomized trials comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with warfarin (ARISTOTLE [Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation], ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 [Effective Anticoagulation With Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 48], and RE-LY [Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulation Therapy]) from the COMBINE-AF (A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in Atrial Fibrillation) cohort were pooled; all patients with available biomarkers at baseline were included. The composite endpoint was hospitalization for HF (HHF) or cardiovascular death (CVD), and secondary endpoints were HHF and HF-related death. Cox regression was used, adjusting for clinical factors, and interbiomarker correlation was addressed using weighted quantile sum regression analysis., Results: In 32,041 patients, higher biomarker values were associated with a graded increase in absolute risk for CVD/HHF, HHF, and HF-related death. Adjusting for clinical variables and all biomarkers, NT-proBNP (HR per 1 SD: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.59-1.77), hs-cTnT (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.33-1.44), and GDF-15 (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.15-1.25) were significantly associated with CVD/HHF. The discrimination of the clinical model improved significantly upon addition of the biomarkers (c-index: 0.70 [95% CI: 0.69-0.71] to 0.77 [95% CI: 0.76-0.78]; likelihood ratio test, P < 0.001). Using weighted quantile sum regression analysis, the contribution to risk assessment was similar for NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT for CVD/HHF (38% and 41%, respectively); GDF-15 provided a statistically significant but lesser contribution to risk assessment. Results were similar for HHF and HF-related death, individually, and across key subgroups of patients based on a history of HF, AF pattern, and reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction., Conclusions: NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and GDF-15 contributed significantly and independently to the risk stratification for HF endpoints in patients with AF, with hs-cTnT being as important as NT-proBNP for HF risk stratification. Our findings support a possible future use of these biomarkers to distinguish patients with AF at low or high risk for HF., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Haller is supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)–10086/1-1. Dr S.M. Patel is supported by a T32 postdoctoral training grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (T32HL007604). RE-LY was funded by Boehringer Ingelheim, ARISTOTLE was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer, and ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 was funded by Daiichi-Sankyo. No outside funding was obtained to support the creation of the COMBINE AF database or for these analyses. Dr Haller has received travel grants from the German Center of Cardiovascular Research (DZHK); and has received funding by the German Foundation for Heart Research and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)–10086/1-1. Dr Jarolim has received research support through BWH from Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Inc, AstraZeneca, LP, Daiichi-Sankyo, Roche Diagnostic Corporation, and Siemens Healthineers. Dr Antman received grants from Daiichi-Sankyo during the conduct of the study. Mr Eikelboom has received honoraria and/or research support from Anthos, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Idorsia, Janssen, Merck, and Pfizer. Dr Granger has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Abiomed, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Anthos, Bayer Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomic, CeleCor Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer, Philips, and Roche; has salary funded by Duke grants sponsored by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, NHLBI, Novartis, Pfizer, and Philips; and has equity in tenac.io. Dr Healey has received research grants and speaking fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, and Servier; and has been a consultant for Bayer. Dr Hijazi has received lecture and consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Roche Diagnostics; and has received research support from Hjärt-Lungfonden (The Swedish Heart-Lung Foundation and Uppsala University Hospital). Dr M.R. Patel has received consulting fees from Bayer, Janssen, and Novartis; and has received research grants from the NHLBI, Bayer, Novartis, and Philips. Dr S.M. Patel has received consulting fees from Janssen. Dr Ruff has received research grants through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Anthos, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, and Novartis; and has received honoraria for scientific advisory boards and consulting from Anthos, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, and Pfizer. Dr Wallentin has received institutional research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roche Diagnostics; and is a patent holder on GDF-15 for prognostication in acute coronary syndrome. Dr Braunwald has received research grants through his institution from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; and has consulted for Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardurion, Edgewise, and Verve. Dr Giugliano has received research support from Anthos Therapeutics and Daiichi-Sankyo; has received honoraria for lectures from Daiichi-Sankyo, Medical Education Resources (MER), Menarini, Pfizer, SAJA Pharmaceuticals, Servier, and Shanghai Medical Telescope; and has received consulting fees from Artivion, Inc, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Perosphere, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, Samsung, Sanofi, Syneos Health, and Thrombosis Research Institute. Dr Morrow has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories, ARCA Biopharma, InCarda, Inflammatix, Merck & Co, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Haller, Dr Morrow, Mr Palazzolo, Dr Bellavia, Dr Ruff, Dr Braunwald, and Dr Giugliano are members of the TIMI Study Group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Roche, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is not known., Objectives: The authors sought to determine which antithrombotic regimen best balances safety and efficacy., Methods: AUGUSTUS, a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial design randomized trial compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and aspirin with placebo in patients with AF with recent ACS and/or PCI treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor. We conducted a 4-way analysis comparing safety and efficacy outcomes in the 4 randomized groups. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes over 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary endpoint., Results: A total of 4,614 patients were enrolled. All patients were treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor. The primary endpoint occurred in 21.9% of patients randomized to apixaban plus placebo, 27.3% randomized to apixaban plus aspirin, 28.0% randomized to VKA plus placebo, and 33.3% randomized to VKA plus aspirin. Rates of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding and hospitalization for cardiovascular causes were lower with apixaban and placebo compared with the other 3 antithrombotic strategies. There was no difference between the 4 randomized groups with respect to all-cause death., Conclusions: In patients with AF and a recent ACS and/or PCI, an antithrombotic regimen that included a P2Y 12 inhibitor and apixaban without aspirin resulted in a lower incidence of the composite of death, bleeding, or cardiovascular hospitalization than regimens including VKA, aspirin, or both. (An Open-label, 2 x 2 Factorial, Randomized Controlled, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Aspirin Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; NCT02415400)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The AUGUSTUS study and this analysis were funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Dr Berwanger has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bayer, Amgen, Novartis, Servier, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Fanaroff has received research grants from the American Heart Association and National Institutes of Health; and has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories. Dr Granger has received research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, The Medicines Company, Medtronic Foundation, Medtronic Inc, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Abbvie, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, The Medicines Company, National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Sirtex, Verseon, Apple, Medscape, LLC, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Rho Pharmaceuticals. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly/Daiichi-Sankyo, Medtronic, Novartis, and OrbusNeich; has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Medscape, Siemens Medical Solutions, Roivant Sciences Inc, and Sanofi; has consulted (no fees) for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc; has received institutional consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Spectranetics/Phillips/Volcano Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Watermark Research; is an executive committee member for Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb; and has <1% equity in Claret Medical and Elixir Medical. Dr Aronson is an employee of Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Windecker has received institutional research and educational grants from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. Dr Goodman has received research grant support and/or speaker/consulting honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Fenix Group International, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, Janssen/Johnson and Johnson, Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Matrizyme, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tenax Therapeutics, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto, Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Duke Clinical Research Institute, and PERFUSE. Dr Alexander has received research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, CryoLife, CSL Behring, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, Sanofi, and VoluMetrix; and has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, CSL Behring, Novo Nordisk, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Quantum Genomics, Teikoku Pharmaceuticals, VA Cooperative Studies, and Zafgen. Dr Lopes has received research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has received funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Novo Nordisk; and has received funding for consulting or other services from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation) demonstrated that apixaban, compared with aspirin, significantly reduced stroke and systemic embolism (SE) but increased major bleeding in patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation., Objectives: To help inform decision making, the authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of apixaban according to baseline CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score., Methods: We performed a subgroup analysis according to baseline CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score and assessed both the relative and absolute differences in stroke/SE and major bleeding., Results: Baseline CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores were <4 in 1,578 (39.4%) patients, 4 in 1,349 (33.6%), and >4 in 1,085 (27.0%). For patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc >4, the rate of stroke was 0.98%/year with apixaban and 2.25%/year with aspirin; compared with aspirin, apixaban prevented 1.28 (95% CI: 0.43-2.12) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.68 (95% CI: -0.23 to 1.57) major bleeds. For CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc <4, the stroke/SE rate was 0.85%/year with apixaban and 0.97%/year with aspirin. Apixaban prevented 0.12 (95% CI: -0.38 to 0.62) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.33 (95% CI: -0.27 to 0.92) major bleeds. For patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc =4, apixaban prevented 0.32 (95% CI: -0.16 to 0.79) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.28 (95% CI: -0.30 to 0.86) major bleeds., Conclusions: One in 4 patients in ARTESiA with subclinical atrial fibrillation had a CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score >4 and a stroke/SE risk of 2.2% per year. For these patients, the benefits of treatment with apixaban in preventing stroke/SE are greater than the risks. The opposite is true for patients with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score <4. A substantial intermediate group (CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc =4) exists in which patient preferences will inform treatment decisions. (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation; NCT01938248)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The ARTESiA study was funded by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (201610PTJ-378238), the Bristol Myers Squibb–Pfizer Alliance, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Stroke Prevention Intervention Network, Hamilton Health Sciences, the Accelerating Clinical Trials Network, the Population Health Research Institute, and Medtronic. The sponsors had no role in data analysis, interpretation, or publication. Dr Lopes has received research grants from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi US Services Inc; and has served as a consultant to Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Portola Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi US Services Inc. Dr Granger has received research grants from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has served as a consultant to Anthos, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cadrenal, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, Janssen Global Services, LLC, Merck, Pfizer Inc, and Tenac.io. Dr McIntyre has served as a consultant to Servier Pharmaceuticals LLC. Dr Rivard has received research grants from Bayer Inc, Heart and Stroke Foundation, Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and FRQS (Fonds de Recherche Quebec-Sante). Dr Atar has received speaker fees from Amgen, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Philips, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Takeda, and Vifor; and has received institutional grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Medtronic, Bayer, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Boriani has received speaker fees from Bayer, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, and Sanofi. Dr Duray has served as a consultant to Medtronic and Biotronik. Dr Gold has received institutional research support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr Hohnloser has served as a consultant to Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sanofi. Dr Kutyifa has received research grants from Boston Scientific, ZOLL, National Institutes of Health, and Spire Inc; has received speaker fees from Medtronic, Abbott, and Biotronik; and has received consultant fees from Biotronik. Dr Sticherling has served as a consultant to Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Biotronik. Dr Benz has received lecture fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca; and has participated in an educational program supported by Boston Scientific (“Fellowship Herzrhythmus”). Dr Linde has received research support from the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, Swedish Royal Society of Science, and Stockholm County Council; has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Roche Diagnostics; has received speaker honoraria from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Vifor Pharma, Medtronic, and Impulse Dynamics; and has served on advisory boards for Astra Zeneca. Dr Kautzner has served as a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific Corporation, GE Healthcare, and Medtronic, Inc. Dr Mairesse has received consultant or speaker fees from Abbott, Biotronik, Microport, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, and Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr Connolly has received research grants from Pfizer Inc; and has served as a consultant for Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo Company, and Javelin Ventures. Dr Healey has received research grants from Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Medtronic, and Pfizer; has served as a consultant for Bayer, Boston Scientific Corporation, Medtronic, Novartis, and Servier Affaires Medicales; and has served as an expert witness for Bayer., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients who sustain an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), remain at high risk for heart failure (HF), coronary events, and death. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have been shown to significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular events in both STEMI and NSTEMI patients., Objectives: The objectives were to determine whether angiotensin-receptor blockade and neprilysin inhibition with sacubitril/valsartan, compared with ramipril, has impact on reducing cardiovascular events according to the type of AMI., Methods: The PARADISE-MI (Prospective ARNI versus ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction) trial enrolled patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and/or pulmonary congestion and at least 1 risk-enhancing factor. Patients were randomized to either sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. The primary endpoint was death from cardiovascular causes or incident HF. In this prespecified analysis, we stratified patients according to AMI type., Results: Of 5,661 enrolled patients, 4,291 (75.8%) had STEMI. These patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities and cardiovascular risk factors than NSTEMI patients. After adjustment for potential confounders, the risk for the primary outcome was marginally higher in NSTEMI vs STEMI patients (adjusted HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.00-1.41), with borderline statistical significance (P = 0.05). The primary composite outcome occurred at similar rates in patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs ramipril in STEMI (10% vs 12%; HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.73-1.04; P = 0.13) and NSTEMI patients (17% vs 17%; HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.75-1.25; P = 0.80; P interaction = 0.53)., Conclusions: Compared with ramipril, sacubitril/valsartan did not significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular death and HF in patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction, irrespective of the type of AMI. (Prospective ARNI vs ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI; NCT02924727)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The PARADISE-MI trial was funded by Novartis. Dr Braunwald has received research grants through his institution from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; and has consultancies with Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Cardurion, and Verve. Dr Claggert has received consultancy fees from Novartis, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardurion, Corvia, and Myokardia. Dr Granger has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Duke Clinical Research Institute, FDA, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, L.P., Medtronic Foundation, Novartis Pharmaceutic Company, and Pfizer; has received consulting fees from Abbvie, Abiomed, Alnylam Pharm, Bayer Corporation US, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomic, CeleCor Therapeutics, HengRui USA, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Medscape, LLC, Medtronic Inc, Merck, NIH, Novo Nordisk, Novartis Pharmaceutic Company, Pfizer, Phillips, and REATA; and owns equity in Tenac.io. Dr Kerkar has received speaker fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer Zydus, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cipla, Dr Reddy’s, Emcure, Intas, Johnson and Johnson, Mankind, Pfizer, Torrent, and USV. Dr Kober has received speaker honorarium from Nova, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer. Dr Lewis has received personal fees from Amgen and Dal-Cor. Dr Maggioni has received personal fees for participation in committees of studies supported by Bayer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Fresenius, outside the present work. Dr Mann has received consulting fees from Cardurion, HAYA Therapeutics, Tenaya, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Mehran has received institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, AM-Pharma, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, BAIM, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CeloNova, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, DSI, Duke University, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia, Insel Gruppe AG, Magenta, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, Philips, RenalPro, Vivasure, and Zoll; has received personal fees from Cine-Med Research and WebMD; has received consulting fees paid to the institution from Abbott, Janssen, Medtronic, and Novartis; has equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, STEL, and CONTROLRAD (spouse); and is on the Scientific Advisory Board for AMA, ACC (BOT Member), SCAI (Women in Innovations Committee Member), and JAMA Associate Editor; and Faculty CRF (no fee). Dr McMurray has received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cardurion, Cytokinetics, GSK, KBP Biosciences, and Novartis; has received personal consultancy fees from Alnylam Pharma, Bayer, BMS, George Clinical PTY Ltd, Ionis Pharma, Novartis, Regeneron Pharma, and River 2 Renal Corporation; has received personal lecture fees from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, AstraZeneca, Blue Ocean Scientific Solutions Ltd., Boehringer Ingelheim, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge, Emcure Pharma. Ltd, Eris Lifesciences, European Academy of CME, Hikma Pharmaceuticals, Imagica health, Intas Pharma, J.B. Chemicals & Pharma. Ltd, Lupin Pharma, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Sun Pharma., The Corpus, Translation Research Group, and Translational Medicine Academy; and he is a director of Global Clinical Trial Partners Ltd. Dr Nunez has received personal fees from or is on the advisory boards for Alleviant, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Rovi, and Vifor Pharma. Dr Pfeffer has received research grant support through his institution from Novartis; has been a consultant to Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, Corvidia, DalCor, GlaxoSmithKline, Lexicon, NHLBI CONNECTs (Master Protocol Committee), Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Peerbridge, and Sanofi; and has equity in DalCor. Dr Rouleau has received consultant fees from Novartis, BMS, Bayer, and AstraZeneca. Dr Sim has received research grants from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, BMS, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GSK, Ionis, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, NIH/NHLBI, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has consulted for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Cardior, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, GSK, Lilly, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, Theracos, Quantum Genomics, Cardurion, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellProThera, Moderna, American Regent, Sarepta, Lexicon, Anacardio, Akros, and Puretech Health. Dr Solomon has received research grants from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health/NHLBI, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has consulted for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardior, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, Theracos, Quantum Genomics, Cardurion, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellPro-Thera, Moderna, American Regent, and Sarepta. Dr Steg has received research grants from Amarin, Bayer, Sanofi, and Servier; and has received speaker or consultant fees from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Kowa, Idorsia, Lexicon, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Servier. Dr Van der Meer has received consultancy fees and/or grants, through the University Medical Center Groningen, from Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Vifor Pharma, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Pharma Nord, BridgeBio, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Ionis. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of death and disability in older adults. Despite decades of high-quality evidence to support their use, guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) that reduce death and disease burden in HF have been suboptimally implemented. Approaches to closing care gaps have focused largely on strategies proven to be ineffective, whilst effective interventions shown to improve GDMT uptake have not been instituted. This review synthesizes implementation interventions that increase the uptake of GDMT, discusses barriers and facilitators of implementation, summarizes conceptual frameworks in implementation science that could improve knowledge uptake, and offers suggestions for trial design that could better facilitate end-of-trial implementation. We propose an evidence-to-care conceptual model that could foster the simultaneous generation of evidence and long-term implementation. By adopting principles of implementation science, policymakers, researchers, and clinicians can help reduce the burden of HF on patients and health care systems worldwide., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Breathett was supported by research grant funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K01HL142848, R01HL159216, R01HL16074) and the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dr Granger has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Abiomed, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Anthos, Bayer Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomics, CeleCor Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis Pharmaceutical Company, Pfizer, Philips, REATA, and NephroSynergy; has salary funded by Duke grants sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis Pharmaceutical Company, Pfizer, and Philips; and owns equity in Tenac.io. Dr Januzzi is a Trustee of the American College of Cardiology; has served as a board member for Imbria Pharmaceuticals and director at Jana Care; has received grant support from Abbott Diagnostics, Applied Therapeutics, Innolife, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics; has received consulting income from Abbott, Abiomed, Beckman Coulter, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Prevencio, and Roche Diagnostics; and has served on clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Bayer, CVRx, Janssen, Pfizer, and Takeda. Dr Zannad has received personal fees from 89Bio, Applied Therapeutics, Bayer, Boehringer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, Cardior, Cereno Pharmaceutical, CellProthera, CEVA, KPB, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, Otsuka, Roche Diagnostics, Servier, and US2.2; owns stock options at G3Pharmaceutical and equities at Cereno pharmaceutical, Cardiorenal, and Eshmoun Clinical Research; and is founder of Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists. Dr Yeh has served as a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Elixir Medical, Medtronic, Shockwave, and Zoll; and has received research funding from Abbott Vascular, BD Bard, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Medtronic, and Philips. Dr Yancy has served on various National Institutes of Health– and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute–sponsored clinical trial and clinical research network oversight committees; has served as President (past) of the American Heart Association; and has a spouse who was previously employed by Abbott Labs, Inc. Dr Fonarow has served as a consultant for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Gibson has received funding from CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Corporation, and SCAD Alliance; has served as a consultant for Angel Medical Corporation, AstraZeneca, Bayer Corporation, Bioclinica, Boston Clinical Research Institute, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Caladrius Biosciences, Cardiovascular Research Foundation, CeleCor Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, the Duke Clinical Research Institute, EXCITE International ($0 received), Fortress Biotech, Gilead Sciences, Inari, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Corporation, MashUp MD, MD Magazine, MedImmune, Medtelligence, Merck, Microport, Micodrop, Miracor, MJ Health, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Paratek, PERT Consortium, Pfizer, PhaseBio, the Population Health Research Institute, PLxPharma, Revance Therapeutics, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Solstic Health/New Amsterdam Pharma, Somahlution/Marizyme, Vectura, Web MD, and Woman As One; owns equity in Absolutys, nference, Dyad Medical, and Fortress Biotech; and has received royalties as a contributor to UpToDate in Cardiovascular Medicine. Dr Van Spall has received research support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada; and has received educational program grants from Novartis and Boehringer Ingelheim. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the efficacy of combination therapy is unclear., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of GLP-1 RAs on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D treated with or without SGLT2 inhibitors., Methods: Post hoc analysis of Harmony Outcomes (Albiglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease) evaluating the effect of albiglutide in T2D with cardiovascular disease by background SGLT2 inhibitor use. Additionally, a trial-level meta-analysis of Harmony Outcomes and AMPLITUDE-O (Effect of Efpeglenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes), which evaluated T2D with cardiovascular or renal disease, was performed, combining the treatment effect estimates according to SGLT2 inhibitor use., Results: Of the 9,462 participants in Harmony Outcomes, 575 (6.1%) were treated with SGLT2 inhibitors at baseline. The effect of albiglutide on reducing the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events) was consistent with or without SGLT2 inhibitors (P interaction = 0.70). The effect of albiglutide on secondary outcomes and adverse events was not modified by SGLT2 inhibitors. A meta-analysis of Harmony Outcomes and AMPLITUDE-O included 13,538 patients, of whom 1,193 (8.8%) used SGLT2 inhibitors. Compared to placebo, GLP1-RAs reduced major adverse cardiovascular events without effect modification by SGLT2 inhibitor use (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.68-0.87 without SGLT2 inhibitors; and HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.49-1.24 with SGLT2 inhibitors) (P for interaction = 0.95) and reduced heart failure hospitalization (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.55-0.92 vs HR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.12-0.96) (P for interaction = 0.18)., Conclusions: In patients with T2D and cardiovascular disease, GLP-1 RAs reduced cardiovascular events independently of SGLT2 inhibitor use. These findings suggest that the combination of GLP-1 RAs with SGLT2 inhibitors may further reduce cardiovascular risk. Clinical trials with combination therapy are needed., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was supported by national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., under the scope of the Cardiovascular R&D Center-Cardiovascular R&D Unit (UIDB/00051/2020 and UIDP/00051/2020). Dr Neves has received consulting or speaker fees from AstraZeneca, BIAL, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Borges Canha has received speaker fees from AstraZeneca and Medinfar. Dr Green has received institutional grant funding from Boehringer Ingelheim–Lilly, Merck, Roche, and Sanofi and Lexicon; and has received consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim–Lilly, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Sanofi and Lexicon, Hawthorne Effect and Omada, Pfizer, Valo, Anji, Vertex, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Leiter has received research funding from, has provided continuing medical education on behalf of, and/or has acted as an advisor to AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GSK, Lexicon, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier. Dr Granger has received research grants from AKROS, Apple, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Duke Clinical Research Institute, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, LP, Medtronic Foundation, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Pfizer; and has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Abiomed, Anthos Therapeutic, LLC, Bayer Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, CeleCor Therapeutics, Correvio, Espero BioPharma, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, LP, Medscape, LLC, Medtronic Inc, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis Pharmaceutical Company, Pfizer, Phillips, Rhoshan Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Carvalho has received consulting or speaker fees from AstraZeneca, BIAL, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Merck Co, Medinfar, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Dr Hernandez has received grants from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer and Verily; and has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Del Prato has received grants from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; has received consulting fees from Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Hengrui Pharmaceuticals Co, Menarini International, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; and has received honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Dr McMurray has received institutional grant funding from AstraZeneca; has received consultancy fees from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, Eris Lifesciences, Hikma, Lupin, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Heart.Org (Medscape Cardiology), ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier, and The Corpus; and has received fees paid to his institution for other advisory roles by Cytokinetics, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Theracos, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, DalCor, Cardurion, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, KBP Biosciences, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Ferreira is a consultant for Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received research support from AstraZeneca and Novartis. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Infection remains a serious complication associated with the cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), leading to substantial clinical and economic burden globally. This review assesses the burden of cardiac implantable electronic device infection (CIED-I), evidence for treatment recommendations, barriers to early diagnosis and appropriate therapy, and potential solutions. Multiple clinical practice guidelines recommended complete system and lead removal for CIED-I when appropriate. CIED extraction for infection has been consistently reported with high success, low complication, and very low mortality rates. Complete and early extraction was associated with significantly better clinical and economic outcome compared with no or late extraction. However, significant gaps in knowledge and poor recommendation compliance have been reported. Barriers to optimal management may include diagnostic delay, knowledge gaps, and limited access to expertise. A multipronged approach, including education of all stakeholders, a CIED-I alert system, and improving access to experts, could help bring paradigm shift in the treatment of this serious condition., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by Philips Image Guided Therapy Corporation. Dr Lakkireddy is a consultant for Philips and Abbott; and has received honoraria from Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Biosense Webster. Dr Sood is an employee of Philips Image Guided Therapy Corporation. Dr Wu is an employee of EVERSANA which has received funding from Philips Image Guided Therapy Corporation. Dr Rao has received honoraria from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Philips for educational activity and consultancy. Dr Sohail is a consultant for Medtronic Inc, Philips, and Aziyo Biologics, Inc. Dr Pokorney receives modest consultant/advisory board support from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Zoll; and has received modest research support from the Food and Drug Administration, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Janssen, Gilead, Philips, Sanofi, and Boston Scientific. Dr Blomström-Lundqvist is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Cathprint. Dr Piccini is a consultant for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Philips; has received grants for clinical research from Abbott, American Heart Association, Boston Scientific, and Philips; and is supported by R01AG074185 from the National Institutes of Aging. Dr Granger has clinical research contracts from Boehringer Ingelheim, CeleCor, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, Pfizer, Janssen, and Phillips; has received consulting/honoraria from AbbVie, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Hengrui, Janssen, Pfizer, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, NovoNordisk, and Reata; and has equity from tenac.io. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Factor XI/XIa (FXI/FXIa) represents a potential target for improved precision in anticoagulation because it is involved primarily in thrombus formation and plays a much smaller role in clotting and hemostasis. This suggests that the inhibition of FXI/XIa could prevent pathologic thrombi from forming, but largely preserve a patient's ability to clot in response to bleeding or trauma. This theory is supported by observational data showing that patients with congenital FXI deficiency have lower rates of embolic events without an increase in spontaneous bleeding. Small phase 2 trials of FXI/XIa inhibitors have offered encouraging data with regard to bleeding and safety and evidence of efficacy for the prevention of venous thromboembolism. However, larger clinical trials across multiple patient groups are needed for this emerging class of anticoagulants to understand their possible role in clinical use. Here we review the potential clinical indications for FXI/XIa inhibitors, data available to date, and consider future trials., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Harrington has received salary support from T32 training grant T32HL069749. Dr Piccini is supported by R01AG074185 from the National Institutes of Aging; receives grants for clinical research from Abbott, the American Heart Association, the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, Bayer, Boston Scientific, iRhythm, and Philips; and serves as a consultant to Abbott, Abbvie, ARCA biopharma, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb (Myokardia), Element Science, Itamar Medical, LivaNova, Medtronic, Milestone, ElectroPhysiology Frontiers, ReCor, Sanofi, Philips, and Up-to-Date. Dr Alexander has institutional research grants from Artivion/CryoLife, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Ferring, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Humacyte, U.S. National Institutes of Health, and XaTek; and has received advisory board or consulting payments from AbbVie, Akros, Artivion/CryoLife, AtriCure, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ferring, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pfizer, Portola, and Quantum Genomics. Dr Granger has received consulting fees from Abbvie, Abiomed, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomics, CeleCor Therapeutics, HengRui USA, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Medscape, LLC, Medtronic, Inc, Merck, National Institutes of Health, Novo Nordisk, Novartis Pharmaceutical Company, PLX Pharma, Pfizer, Philips, REATA, and NephroSynergy; has salary funded by Duke grants sponsored by Boehinger Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis Pharmaceutical Company, Pfizer, and Philips; and has equity in Tenacio. Dr Patel has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, Mytomy, and Procyrion; and has served as an advisor to Bayer, Janssen, and Novartis., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus. These high-risk patients benefit from aggressive risk factor management, with blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol treatment, glycemic control, kidney protection, and lifestyle intervention. There are several recommendation and guideline documents across cardiology, endocrinology, nephrology, and general medicine professional societies from the United States and Europe with recommendations for cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Although there are some noteworthy differences, particularly in risk stratification, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol and blood pressure treatment targets, and the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, overall there is considerable alignment across recommendations from different professional societies., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Kelsey is supported by National Institute of Health (NIH) training grant 5T32HL069749-18. Dr Granger has received research grants from AKROS, Apple, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Duke Clinical Research Institute, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, L.P., Medtronic Foundation, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and Pfizer; and has received consulting fees from Abbvie, Abiomed, Anthos Therapeutic, LLC, Bayer Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, CeleCor Therapeutics, Correvio, Espero BioPharma, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P., Medscape, LLC, Medtronic Inc, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis Pharmaceutical Company, Pfizer, Phillips, Rhoshan Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Green has received research support from Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Sanofi/Lexicon, Merck, and Roche; and has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly Alliance, NovoNordisk, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Hawthorne Effect/Omada. Dr Peterson has received research support from Amgen Inc, Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Esperion; and has received consulting fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Products, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Cerner. Dr McGuire has received honoraria for clinical trial leadership from Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi Aventis, Merck & Co, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Esperion, Lilly USA, Lexicon, and CSL Behring; and has received honoraria for consultancy from Lilly USA, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck & Co, Novo Nordisk, Applied Therapeutics, Metavant, Sanofi Aventis, and Afimmune. Dr Pagidipati has received research grants from Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, Baseline Study LLC, Boehringer Ingelheim, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Eli Lilly & Company, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk Pharmaceutical Company, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Sanofi-S.A., and Verily Sciences Research Company; and has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Esperion Therapeutics, Eli Lilly & Company, and Novo Nordisk Pharmaceutical Company. Dr Nelson has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Preventive therapy among patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is generally underused. Whether new guideline recommendations and a focus on implementation have improved the use of high-intensity statins is unknown., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the patterns and predictors of statin use among patients with ASCVD., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, pharmacy and medical claims data from a commercial health plan were queried for patients with established ASCVD between January 31, 2018, and January 31, 2019. Statin use on an index date of January 31, 2019, was evaluated, as was 12-month adherence and discontinuation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine independent associations with statin use of varying intensities., Results: Of the 601,934 patients with established ASCVD, 41.7% were female, and the mean age was 67.5 ± 13.3 years. Overall, 22.5% of the cohort were on a high-intensity statin, 27.6% were on a low- or moderate-intensity statin, and 49.9% were not on any statin. In multivariable analysis, younger patients, female patients, and those with higher Charlson comorbidity score were less likely to be prescribed any statin. Among statin users, female patients, older patients, and those with peripheral artery disease were less likely to be on a high-intensity formulation, whereas a cardiology encounter in the prior year increased the odds. The majority of high-intensity stain users achieved high levels of adherence., Conclusions: Substantial underuse of statins persists in a large, insured, and contemporary cohort of patients with ASCVD from the United States. In particular, concerning gaps in appropriate statin use remain among younger patients, women, and those with noncoronary ASCVD., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Nelson has received grants from Diabetes Australia and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians. Dr Haynes is an employee of HealthCore, a subsidiary of Anthem. Dr Shambhu is an employee of HealthCore, a subsidiary of Anthem. Dr Eapen is a previous employee of HealthCore. Dr Cziraky is an employee of HealthCore, a subsidiary of Anthem. Dr Nanna has received funding from the American College of Cardiology Foundation supported by the George F. and Ann Harris Bellows Foundation, and from the National Institute on Aging/National Institutes of Health from R03AG074067 (GEMSSTAR award). Dr Calvert is supported by U.S. Food and Drug Administration grant U18FD005292 and Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative membership fees. Dr Gallagher is an employee of HealthCore. Dr Pagidipati has received grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Regeneron, Sanofi, Verily Life Sciences; and has received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Granger has received research grants and consulting/speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, LP, and Pfizer; has received research grants from AKROS, Apple, AstraZeneca, Daichii-Sankyo, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic Foundation, and Novartis Pharmaceutical Company; and has received consulting/speaker fees from AbbVie, Bayer Corp US, Boston Scientific Corp, CeleCor Therapeutics, Correvio, Espero BioPharma, Medscape, Medtronic Inc, Merck, National Institutes of Health, Novo Nordisk, Rhoshan Pharmaceuticals, and Roche Diagnostics., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of apixaban instead of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) as well as dropping aspirin results in less bleeding and comparable ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y 12 inhibitor., Objectives: The authors assessed the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens according to HAS-BLED and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores in AUGUSTUS (The Open-Label, 2 × 2 Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome and/or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention)., Methods: In AUGUSTUS, 4,614 patients were randomized in a 2-by-2 factorial design to open-label apixaban or VKA and blinded aspirin or placebo. The primary endpoint was major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding over 6 months of follow-up. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess treatment effects by baseline HAS-BLED (≤2 vs ≥3) and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (≤2 vs ≥3) scores., Results: Of 4,386 (95.1%) patients with calculable scores, 66.8% had HAS-BLED ≥3 and 81.7% had CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥3. Bleeding rates were lower with apixaban than VKA irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.78 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.59-0.88 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.23). Aspirin increased bleeding irrespective of baseline risk (HR: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.36-2.56 [HAS-BLED ≤2]; HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.47-2.23 [HAS-BLED ≥3]; interaction P = 0.88). Apixaban resulted in a lower risk of death or hospitalization than VKA without a significant interaction with baseline stroke risk (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.25 [CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≤2]; HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.73-0.94 [CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥3]; interaction P = 0.53)., Conclusions: Our findings support the use of apixaban and a P2Y 12 inhibitor without aspirin for most patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome and/or percutaneous coronary intervention, irrespective of a patient's baseline bleeding and stroke risk (NCT02415400)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The AUGUSTUS trial and this analysis were supported by Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Dr Fanaroff has received research grants and consulting fees from the American Heart Association; and has received research grants from Boston Scientific. Dr Lopes has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic PLC, and Sanofi; and has received consulting fees from Amgen, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Goodman has received research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and/or speaker/consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, JAMP Pharma, Janssen/Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, and Valeo Pharma; and has received salary support/honoraria from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) (Chair), Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Centre for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, and PERFUSE Research Institute. Dr Thomas has received institutional research grants from Akili Interactive Labs Inc, Amgen Inc, Gilead, and Novartis. Dr Aronson is an employee of Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Windecker has received Institutional research and educational grants from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Polares, and Sinomed. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly/Daiichi-Sankyo, Medtronic, Novartis, and OrbusNeich; has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Medscape, Siemens Medical Solutions, Roivant Sciences Inc, and Sanofi; has performed consulting (no fees) for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals; has received institutional consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Spectranetics/Phillips/Volcano Corporation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Watermark Research; has served as an executive committee member for Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb; and has <1% equity in Claret Medical and Elixir Medical. Dr Granger has received research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, GlaxoSmithKline, The Medicines Company, Medtronic Foundation, Medtronic Inc, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer, Abbvie, Armetheon, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, The Medicines Company, National Institutes of Health, Novartis, Sirtex, Verseon, Apple, Medscape, LLC, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Rho Pharmaceuticals. Dr Alexander has received institutional research grants and consulting fees/honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and CSL Behring; has received institutional research grants from AstraZeneca, CryoLife, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, Sanofi, VoluMetrix, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received consulting fees/honoraria from Pfizer, AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, NovoNordisk, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Quantum Genetics, Teikoku Pharmaceuticals, VA Cooperative Studies Program, and Zafgen. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Concerns about the external validity of traditional randomized clinical trials (RCTs), together with the widespread availability of real-world data and advanced data analytic tools, have led to claims that common sense and clinical observation, rather than RCTs, should be the preferred method to generate evidence to support clinical decision-making. However, over the past 4 decades, results from well-done RCTs have repeatedly contradicted practices supported by common sense and clinical observation. Common sense and clinical observation fail for several reasons: incomplete understanding of pathophysiology, biases and unmeasured confounding in observational research, and failure to understand risks and benefits of treatments within complex systems. Concerns about traditional RCT models are legitimate, but randomization remains a critical tool to understand the causal relationship between treatments and outcomes. Instead, development and promulgation of tools to apply randomization to real-world data are needed to build the best evidence base in cardiovascular medicine., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Smoking is a well-established risk factor for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); however, once STEMI occurs, smoking has been associated with favorable short-term outcomes, an observation termed the "smoker's paradox." It has been postulated that smoking might exert protective effects that could reduce infarct size, a strong independent predictor of worse outcomes after STEMI., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship among smoking, infarct size, microvascular obstruction (MVO), and adverse outcomes after STEMI., Methods: Individual patient-data were pooled from 10 randomized trials of patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Infarct size was assessed at median 4 days by either cardiac magnetic resonance imaging or technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography. Multivariable analysis was used to assess the relationship between smoking, infarct size, and the 1-year rates of death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization and reinfarction., Results: Among 2,564 patients with STEMI, 1,093 (42.6%) were recent smokers. Smokers were 10 years younger and had fewer comorbidities. Infarct size was similar in smokers and nonsmokers (adjusted difference: 0.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.3% to 3.3%; p = 0.99). Nor was the extent of MVO different between smokers and nonsmokers. Smokers had lower crude 1-year rates of all-cause death (1.0% vs. 2.9%; p < 0.001) and death or HF hospitalization (3.3% vs. 5.1%; p = 0.009) with similar rates of reinfarction. After adjustment for age and other risk factors, smokers had a similar 1-year risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [adjHR]: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.84) and higher risks of death or HF hospitalization (adjHR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.09 to 2.02) as well as reinfarction (adjHR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.17 to 3.33)., Conclusions: In the present large-scale individual patient-data pooled analysis, recent smoking was unrelated to infarct size or MVO, but was associated with a worse prognosis after primary PCI in STEMI. The smoker's paradox may be explained by the younger age and fewer cardiovascular risk factors in smokers compared with nonsmokers., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The impact of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in ESRD patients is uncertain., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of OAC use in ESRD patients with AF and their associations with cardiovascular outcomes., Methods: Using Medicare fee-for-service 5% claims data from 2007 to 2013, we analyzed treatment and outcomes in a cohort of patients with ESRD and AF. Prescription drug benefit information was used to determine the timing of OAC therapy. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to compare outcomes including death, all-cause stroke, ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and bleeding hospitalizations in ESRD patients treated with or without OAC., Results: The cohort included 8,410 patients with AF and ESRD. A total of 3,043 (36.2%) patients were treated with OAC at some time during the study period. Propensity scores used to match 1,519 patients with AF and ESRD on OAC with 3,018 ESRD patients without OAC. Treatment with OAC was not associated with hospitalization for stroke (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23 to 1.35; p = 0.97) or death (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.10; p = 0.62). OAC was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for bleeding (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.46; p = 0.0017) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.59; p = 0.0094)., Conclusions: OAC utilization was low in patients with AF and ESRD. We found no association between OAC use and reduced risk of stroke or death. OAC use was associated with increased risks of hospitalization for bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage. Alternative stroke prevention strategies are needed in patients with ESRD and AF., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial, patients with atrial fibrillation and ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria (age ≥80 years, weight ≤60 kg, or creatinine ≥1.5 mg/dl [133 μmol/l]) were randomized to receive apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily or warfarin., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the effects of apixaban dose adjustment on clinical and pharmacological outcomes., Methods: Patients receiving the correct dose of study drug were included (n = 18,073). The effect of apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily versus warfarin on population pharmacokinetics, D-dimer, prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (PF1+2), and clinical outcomes was compared with the standard dose (5 mg twice daily)., Results: Patients receiving apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily exhibited lower apixaban exposure (median area under the concentration time curve at a steady state 2,720 ng/ml vs. 3,599 ng/ml; p < 0.0001) than those receiving the standard dose. In patients with ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria, reductions in D-dimers (p interaction = 0.20) and PF1+2 (p interaction = 0.55) were consistent with those observed in the standard-dose population. Patients with ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria (n = 751) were at higher risk for stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, and all-cause death than the standard-dose population (0 or 1 dose-adjustment criterion, n = 17,322). The effect of apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily versus warfarin in the ≥2 dose-adjustment criteria population was consistent with the standard dose in the reductions in stroke or systemic embolism (p interaction = 0.26), major bleeding (p interaction = 0.25), and death (p interaction = 0.72)., Conclusions: Apixaban drug concentrations were lower in patients receiving 2.5 mg twice daily compared with 5 mg twice daily. However, the effects of apixaban dose adjustment to 2.5 mg versus warfarin were consistent for coagulation biomarkers and clinical outcomes, providing reassuring data on efficacy and safety. (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]; NCT00412984)., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

For secondary prevention of coronary artery disease (CAD), oral antiplatelet therapy is essential. In case of coronary intervention, temporary dual antiplatelet therapy is mandatory as well. Recently, low-dose oral anticoagulation has entered the CAD arena. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often seen in CAD and vice versa. In most patients stroke prevention in AF consists of oral anticoagulation. In many cases of CAD in patients with AF, anticoagulation has to be combined with antiplatelet agents (so called, dual pathway antithrombotic therapy). Excess bleeding in these conditions is a rapidly rising problem. This review addresses the antithrombotic options in CAD alone, in AF alone, and in their combination, when either an invasive or a noninvasive approach has been chosen., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is considered a disease of the elderly, younger patients are not spared from this syndrome., Objectives: This study therefore investigated the associations among age, clinical characteristics, and outcomes in patients with HFpEF., Methods: Using data on patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥45% from 3 large HFpEF trials (TOPCAT [Aldosterone Antagonist Therapy for Adults With Heart Failure and Preserved Systolic Function], I-PRESERVE [Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Systolic Function], and CHARM Preserved [Candesartan Cilexetil in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity]), patients were categorized according to age: ≤55 years (n = 522), 56 to 64 years (n = 1,679), 65 to 74 years (n = 3,405), 75 to 84 years (n = 2,464), and ≥85 years (n = 398). This study compared clinical and echocardiographic characteristics, as well as mortality and hospitalization rates, mode of death, and quality of life across age categories., Results: Younger patients (age ≤55 years) with HFpEF were more often obese, nonwhite men, whereas older patients with HFpEF were more often white women with a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease (eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m 2 ). Despite fewer comorbidities, younger patients had worse quality of life compared with older patients (age ≥85 years). Compared with patients age ≤55 years, patients age ≥85 years had higher mortality (hazard ratio: 6.9; 95% confidence interval: 4.2 to 11.4). However, among patients who died, sudden death was, proportionally, the most common mode of death (p < 0.001) in patients age ≤55 years. In contrast, older patients (age ≥85 years) died more often from noncardiovascular causes (34% vs. 20% in patients age ≤55 years; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Compared with the elderly, younger patients with HFpEF were less likely to be white, were more frequently obese men, and died more often of cardiovascular causes, particularly sudden death. In contrast, elderly patients with HFpEF had more comorbidities and died more often from noncardiovascular causes. (Aldosterone Antagonist Therapy for Adults With Heart Failure and Preserved Systolic Function [TOPCAT]; NCT00094302; Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Systolic Function [I-PRESERVE]; NCT00095238; Candesartan Cilexetil in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity [CHARM Preserved]; NCT00634712)., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Most patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and risk factors for stroke require oral anticoagulation (OAC) to decrease the risk of stroke or systemic embolism. This is now best achieved with direct oral anticoagulants that decrease the risk of intracranial bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonists. Of note, approximately 5% to 10% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention have AF, which complicates antithrombotic therapy in daily practice, because the guidelines recommend that these patients also receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce the risk of ischemic complications. However, combining OAC with DAPT, a strategy also known as triple antithrombotic therapy, is known to increase the risk of bleeding compared with the use of OAC or DAPT alone. Studies of direct oral anticoagulants are now emerging that show the favorable safety profile of double antithrombotic therapy with OAC and a P2Y 12 inhibitor in comparison with triple antithrombotic therapy including the use of vitamin K antagonists. The scope of this review is to provide an update on this topic as well as to discuss future directions in the management of antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in AF patients requiring chronic OAC., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The efficacy of ticagrelor in the long-term post-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with fibrinolytic therapy remains uncertain., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ticagrelor when compared with clopidogrel in STEMI patients treated with fibrinolytic therapy., Methods: This international, multicenter, randomized, open-label with blinded endpoint adjudication trial enrolled 3,799 patients (age <75 years) with STEMI receiving fibrinolytic therapy. Patients were randomized to ticagrelor (180-mg loading dose, 90 mg twice daily thereafter) or clopidogrel (300- to 600-mg loading dose, 75 mg daily thereafter). The key outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and the same composite outcome with the addition of severe recurrent ischemia, transient ischemic attack, or other arterial thrombotic events at 12 months., Results: The combined outcome of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 129 of 1,913 patients (6.7%) receiving ticagrelor and in 137 of 1,886 patients (7.3%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio: 0.93; 95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 1.18; p = 0.53). The composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, severe recurrent ischemia, transient ischemic attack, or other arterial thrombotic events occurred in 153 of 1,913 patients (8.0%) treated with ticagrelor and in 171 of 1,886 patients (9.1%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 1.09; p = 0.25). The rates of major, fatal, and intracranial bleeding were similar between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups., Conclusion: Among patients age <75 years with STEMI, administration of ticagrelor after fibrinolytic therapy did not significantly reduce the frequency of cardiovascular events when compared with clopidogrel. (Ticagrelor in Patients With ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Pharmacological Thrombolysis [TREAT]; NCT02298088)., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is little mechanistic information on factors predisposing atrial fibrillation (AF) patients to thromboembolism or bleeding, but generation of nitric oxide (NO) might theoretically contribute to both., Objectives: The authors tested the hypothesis that plasma levels of the methylated arginine derivatives asymmetric and symmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA/SDMA), which inhibit NO generation, might be associated with outcomes in AF., Methods: Plasma samples were obtained from 5,004 patients with AF at randomization to warfarin or apixaban in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial. ADMA and SDMA concentrations were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Relationships to clinical characteristics were evaluated by multivariable analyses. Associations with major outcomes, during a median of 1.9 years follow-up, were evaluated by adjusted Cox proportional hazards models., Results: Both ADMA and SDMA plasma concentrations at study entry increased significantly with patients' age, female sex, renal impairment, permanent AF, or congestive heart failure. ADMA and SDMA increased (p < 0.001) with both increased CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED scores, but decreased in the presence of diabetes. On multivariable analysis adjusting for established risk factors and treatment, tertile groups of ADMA concentrations were significantly associated with stroke/systemic embolism (p = 0.034), and death (p < 0.0001), whereas tertile groups of SDMA were associated with major bleeding and death (p < 0.001 for both). Incorporating ADMA and SDMA into CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc or HAS-BLED predictive models improved C-indices for those outcomes. Neither ADMA nor SDMA predicted differential responses to warfarin or apixaban., Conclusions: In anticoagulated patients with AF, elevated ADMA levels are weakly associated with thromboembolic events, elevated SDMA levels with bleeding events and both are strongly associated with increased mortality. These findings suggest that disturbances of NO function modulate both thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk in anticoagulated patients with AF. (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]; NCT00412984)., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients ≥80 years of age. Nonetheless, older patients have typically been under-represented in cardiovascular clinical trials. Understanding the pathophysiology, epidemiology, and optimal means of diagnosis and treatment of CAD in older adults is crucial to improving outcomes in this high-risk population. A patient-centered approach, taking into account health status, functional ability and frailty, cognitive skills, and patient preferences is essential when caring for older adults with CAD. The present systematic review focuses on the current knowledge base, gaps in understanding, and directions for future investigation pertaining to CAD in patients ≥80 years of age., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Digoxin is widely used in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Objectives: The goal of this paper was to explore whether digoxin use was independently associated with increased mortality in patients with AF and if the association was modified by heart failure and/or serum digoxin concentration., Methods: The association between digoxin use and mortality was assessed in 17,897 patients by using a propensity score-adjusted analysis and in new digoxin users during the trial versus propensity score-matched control participants. The authors investigated the independent association between serum digoxin concentration and mortality after multivariable adjustment., Results: At baseline, 5,824 (32.5%) patients were receiving digoxin. Baseline digoxin use was not associated with an increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96 to 1.23; p = 0.19). However, patients with a serum digoxin concentration ≥1.2 ng/ml had a 56% increased hazard of mortality (adjusted HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.04) compared with those not on digoxin. When analyzed as a continuous variable, serum digoxin concentration was associated with a 19% higher adjusted hazard of death for each 0.5-ng/ml increase (p = 0.0010); these results were similar for patients with and without heart failure. Compared with propensity score-matched control participants, the risk of death (adjusted HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.37 to 2.31) and sudden death (adjusted HR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.11 to 4.12) was significantly higher in new digoxin users., Conclusions: In patients with AF taking digoxin, the risk of death was independently related to serum digoxin concentration and was highest in patients with concentrations ≥1.2 ng/ml. Initiating digoxin was independently associated with higher mortality in patients with AF, regardless of heart failure., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recommendations for physical activity in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD) are based on modest evidence., Objectives: The authors analyzed the association between self-reported exercise and mortality in patients with stable CHD., Methods: A total of 15,486 patients from 39 countries with stable CHD who participated in the STABILITY (Stabilization of Atherosclerotic Plaque by Initiation of Darapladib Therapy) study completed questions at baseline on hours spent each week taking mild, moderate, and vigorous exercise. Associations between the volume of habitual exercise in metabolic equivalents of task hours/week and adverse outcomes during a median follow-up of 3.7 years were evaluated., Results: A graded decrease in mortality occurred with increased habitual exercise that was steeper at lower compared with higher exercise levels. Doubling exercise volume was associated with lower all-cause mortality (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79 to 0.85; adjusting for covariates, HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.93). These associations were similar for cardiovascular mortality (unadjusted HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.80 to 0.87; adjusted HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.88 to 0.96), but myocardial infarction and stroke were not associated with exercise volume after adjusting for covariates. The association between decrease in mortality and greater physical activity was stronger in the subgroup of patients at higher risk estimated by the ABC-CHD (Age, Biomarkers, Clinical-Coronary Heart Disease) risk score (p for interaction = 0.0007)., Conclusions: In patients with stable CHD, more physical activity was associated with lower mortality. The largest benefits occurred between sedentary patient groups and between those with the highest mortality risk., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Currently, there is no generally accepted model to predict outcomes in stable coronary heart disease (CHD)., Objectives: This study evaluated and compared the prognostic value of biomarkers and clinical variables to develop a biomarker-based prediction model in patients with stable CHD., Methods: In a prospective, randomized trial cohort of 13,164 patients with stable CHD, we analyzed several candidate biomarkers and clinical variables and used multivariable Cox regression to develop a clinical prediction model based on the most important markers. The primary outcome was cardiovascular (CV) death, but model performance was also explored for other key outcomes. It was internally bootstrap validated, and externally validated in 1,547 patients in another study., Results: During a median follow-up of 3.7 years, there were 591 cases of CV death. The 3 most important biomarkers were N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, where NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT had greater prognostic value than any other biomarker or clinical variable. The final prediction model included age (A), biomarkers (B) (NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), and clinical variables (C) (smoking, diabetes mellitus, and peripheral arterial disease). This "ABC-CHD" model had high discriminatory ability for CV death (c-index 0.81 in derivation cohort, 0.78 in validation cohort), with adequate calibration in both cohorts., Conclusions: This model provided a robust tool for the prediction of CV death in patients with stable CHD. As it is based on a small number of readily available biomarkers and clinical factors, it can be widely employed to complement clinical assessment and guide management based on CV risk. (The Stabilization of Atherosclerotic Plaque by Initiation of Darapladib Therapy Trial [STABILITY]; NCT00799903)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) associated with acute myocardial infarction (MI) confers high in-hospital mortality; however, among those patients who survive, little is known regarding their post-discharge mortality and health care use rates., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine 1-year survival and readmission rates after hospital discharge of older MI survivors with and without OHCA., Methods: Using linked Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines and Medicare data, this study analyzed 54,860 patients with MI who were older than 65 years of age and who had been discharged alive from 545 U.S. hospitals between April 2011 and December 2012. Multivariable models examined the associations between MI-associated OHCA and 1-year post-discharge mortality or all-cause readmission rates. Patients discharged to hospice were excluded, given their known poor prognosis., Results: Following hospital discharge, compared with older MI survivors without OHCA (n = 54,219), those with OHCA (n = 641, 1.2%) were more likely to be younger, male, and smokers, but less likely to have diabetes, heart failure, or prior revascularization. OHCA patients presented more often with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (63.2% vs. 29.6%) and cardiogenic shock (29.0% vs. 2.2%); however, among in-hospital MI survivors, OHCA was not associated with 1-year post-discharge mortality (unadjusted 13.8% vs. 15.8%, p = 0.17, adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68 to 1.15). In contrast, MI survivors with OHCA actually had lower unadjusted and adjusted risk of the composite outcome of 1-year mortality or all-cause readmission than patients without OHCA (44.0% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.03, adjusted HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.97)., Conclusions: Among older patients with MI who survived to hospital discharge and were not discharged to hospice, those presenting with OHCA did not have higher 1-year mortality or health care use rates compared with those MI survivors without OHCA. These findings show that the early risk of adverse events in patients with OHCA does not persist after hospital discharge, and they support efforts to improve initial survival rates of older patients with MI and OHCA., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prompt reperfusion in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) reduces infarct size and improves survival. However, the intuitive link between infarct size and prognosis has not been convincingly demonstrated in the contemporary era., Objectives: This study sought to determine the strength of the relationship between infarct size assessed early after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in STEMI and subsequent all-cause mortality, reinfarction, and hospitalization for heart failure., Methods: We performed a pooled patient-level analysis from 10 randomized primary PCI trials (total 2,632 patients) in which infarct size was assessed within 1 month after randomization by either cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging or technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), with clinical follow-up for ≥ 6 months., Results: Infarct size was assessed by CMR in 1,889 patients (71.8%) and by SPECT in 743 patients (28.2%). Median (25th, 75th percentile) time to infarct size measurement was 4 days (3, 10 days) after STEMI. Median infarct size (% left ventricular myocardial mass) was 17.9% (8.0%, 29.8%), and median duration of clinical follow-up was 352 days (185, 371 days). The Kaplan-Meier estimated 1-year rates of all-cause mortality, reinfarction, and HF hospitalization were 2.2%, 2.5%, and 2.6%, respectively. A strong graded response was present between infarct size (per 5% increase) and subsequent mortality (Cox-adjusted hazard ratio: 1.19 [95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 1.20]; p < 0.0001) and hospitalization for heart failure (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.20 [95% confidence interval: 1.19 to 1.21]; p < 0.0001), independent of age, sex, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, current smoking, left anterior descending versus non-left anterior descending infarct vessel, symptom-to-first device time, and baseline TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) flow 0/1 versus 2/3. Infarct size was not significantly related to subsequent reinfarction., Conclusions: Infarct size, measured by CMR or technetium-99m sestamibi SPECT within 1 month after primary PCI, is strongly associated with all-cause mortality and hospitalization for HF within 1 year. Infarct size may, therefore, be useful as an endpoint in clinical trials and as an important prognostic measure when caring for patients with STEMI., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and cardiogenic shock survive hospitalization; little is known about their subsequent prognosis., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the associations between cardiogenic shock and post-discharge mortality and all-cause hospitalization among hospital survivors., Methods: We included patients ≥65 years of age with AMI from the ACTION Registry-GWTG (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines) who survived hospitalization and linked these patients with Medicare claims data. We used proportional hazards models to test the association between cardiogenic shock and outcomes, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. Hazard ratios (HRs) are reported for early (1 to 60 days) and late (61 to 365 days) post-discharge time periods., Results: Among 112,668 AMI survivors, 5% had cardiogenic shock during hospitalization. The rate of death was significantly higher among patients with cardiogenic shock at 60 days (9.6% vs. 5.5%) and 1 year (22.4% vs. 16.7%). After accounting for baseline characteristics, the risk of death remained higher for cardiogenic shock patients in the first 60 days after discharge (adjusted HR: 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.46 to 1.80), but was similar to nonshock patients thereafter (adjusted HR: 1.08 for days 61 to 365; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.18). The rate of all-cause hospitalization or death was significantly higher among shock patients at 60 days (33.9% vs. 24.9%) and 1 year (59.1% vs. 52.3%). After adjustment, the risk of this outcome was also clustered in the first 60 days (adjusted HR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.21 to 1.35) and was similar thereafter (adjusted HR: 0.95 for days 61 to 365; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.01)., Conclusions: Hospital survivors of AMI who had cardiogenic shock have a higher risk of death and/or hospitalization during the first year after discharge. The risk is time-dependent and is clustered in the early post-discharge period, after which the prognosis is similar in patients with and without cardiogenic shock., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation has become more complex due to the introduction of new anticoagulant agents, the number and kinds of patients requiring therapy, and the interactions of those patients in the matrix of care. The management of anticoagulation has become a "team sport" involving multiple specialties in multiple sites of care. The American College of Cardiology, through the College's Anticoagulation Initiative, convened a roundtable of experts from multiple specialties to discuss topics important to the management of patients requiring anticoagulation and to make expert recommendations on issues such as the initiation and interruption of anticoagulation, quality of anticoagulation care, management of major and minor bleeding, and treatment of special populations. The attendees continued to work toward consensus on these topics, and present the key findings of this roundtable in a state-of- the-art review focusing on the practical aspects of anticoagulation care for the patient with atrial fibrillation., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Amiodarone is an effective medication in preventing atrial fibrillation (AF), but it interferes with the metabolism of warfarin., Objectives: This study sought to examine the association of major thrombotic clinical events and bleeding with the use of amiodarone in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial., Methods: Baseline characteristics of patients who received amiodarone at randomization were compared with those who did not receive amiodarone. The interaction between randomized treatment and amiodarone was tested using a Cox model, with main effects for randomized treatment and amiodarone and their interaction. Matching on the basis of a propensity score was used to compare patients who received and who did not receive amiodarone at the time of randomization., Results: In ARISTOTLE, 2,051 (11.4%) patients received amiodarone at randomization. Patients on warfarin and amiodarone had time in the therapeutic range that was lower than patients not on amiodarone (56.5% vs. 63.0%; p < 0.0001). More amiodarone-treated patients had a stroke or a systemic embolism (1.58%/year vs. 1.19%/year; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 to 2.10; p = 0.0322). Overall mortality and major bleeding rates were elevated, but were not significantly different in amiodarone-treated patients and patients not on amiodarone. When comparing apixaban with warfarin, patients who received amiodarone had a stroke or a systemic embolism rate of 1.24%/year versus 1.85%/year (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.15), death of 4.15%/year versus 5.65%/year (HR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.98), and major bleeding of 1.86%/year versus 3.06%/year (HR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39 to 0.96). In patients who did not receive amiodarone, the stroke or systemic embolism rate was 1.29%/year versus 1.57%/year (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.00), death was 3.43%/year versus 3.68%/year (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.05), and major bleeding was 2.18%/year versus 3.03%/year (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.62 to 0.84). The interaction p values for amiodarone use by apixaban treatment effects were not significant., Conclusions: Amiodarone use was associated with significantly increased stroke and systemic embolism risk and a lower time in the therapeutic range when used with warfarin. Apixaban consistently reduced the rate of stroke and systemic embolism, death, and major bleeding compared with warfarin in amiodarone-treated patients and patients who were not on amiodarone., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to characterize major bleeding on the basis of the components of the major bleeding definition, to explore major bleeding by location, to define 30-day mortality after a major bleeding event, and to identify factors associated with major bleeding., Background: Apixaban was shown to reduce the risk of major hemorrhage among patients with atrial fibrillation in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial., Methods: All patients who received at least 1 dose of a study drug were included. Major bleeding was defined according to the criteria of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Factors associated with major hemorrhage were identified using a multivariable Cox model., Results: The on-treatment safety population included 18,140 patients. The rate of major hemorrhage among patients in the apixaban group was 2.13% per year compared with 3.09% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60 to 0.80; p < 0.001). Compared with warfarin, major extracranial hemorrhage associated with apixaban led to reduced hospitalization, medical or surgical intervention, transfusion, or change in antithrombotic therapy. Major hemorrhage followed by mortality within 30 days occurred half as often in apixaban-treated patients than in those receiving warfarin (HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.74; p < 0.001). Older age, prior hemorrhage, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack, diabetes, lower creatinine clearance, decreased hematocrit, aspirin therapy, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were independently associated with an increased risk., Conclusions: Apixaban, compared with warfarin, was associated with fewer intracranial hemorrhages, less adverse consequences following extracranial hemorrhage, and a 50% reduction in fatal consequences at 30 days in cases of major hemorrhage., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the risk of major clinical and thromboembolic events after cardioversion for atrial fibrillation in subjects treated with apixaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, compared with warfarin., Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation, thromboembolic events may occur after cardioversion. This risk is lowered with vitamin K antagonists and dabigatran., Methods: Using data from the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation) trial, we conducted a post-hoc analysis of patients undergoing cardioversion., Results: A total of 743 cardioversions were performed in 540 patients: 265 first cardioversions in patients assigned to apixaban and 275 in those assigned to warfarin. The mean time to the first cardioversion for patients assigned to warfarin and apixaban was 243 ± 231 days and 251 ± 248 days, respectively; 75% of the cardioversions occurred by 1 year. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. In patients undergoing cardioversion, no stroke or systemic emboli occurred in the 30-day follow-up period. Myocardial infarction occurred in 1 patient (0.2%) receiving warfarin and 1 patient receiving apixaban (0.3%). Major bleeding occurred in 1 patient (0.2%) receiving warfarin and 1 patient receiving apixaban (0.3%). Death occurred in 2 patients (0.5%) receiving warfarin and 2 patients receiving apixaban (0.6%)., Conclusions: Major cardiovascular events after cardioversion of atrial fibrillation are rare and comparable between warfarin and apixaban. (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]; NCT00412984)., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-TnT) in addition to clinical risk factors and the CHA2DS2VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, 75 years of age and older, diabetes mellitus, previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, 65 to 74 years of age, female) risk score in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Background: The level of troponin is a powerful predictor of cardiovascular events and mortality., Methods: A total of 14,897 patients with AF were randomized to treatment with apixaban or warfarin in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation) trial. The associations between baseline hs-TnT levels and outcomes were evaluated using adjusted Cox regression models., Results: Levels of hs-TnT were measurable in 93.5% of patients; 75% had levels >7.5 ng/l, 50% had levels >11.0 ng/l, and 25% had levels >16.7 ng/l. During a median 1.9-year period, the annual rates of stroke or systemic embolism ranged from 0.87% in the lowest hs-TnT quartile to 2.13% in the highest hs-TnT quartile (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.35 to 2.78; p = 0.0010). The annual rates in the corresponding groups ranged from 0.46% to 4.24% (adjusted HR: 4.31; 95% CI: 2.91 to 6.37; p < 0.0001) for cardiac death and from 1.26% to 4.21% (adjusted HR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.43 to 2.56; p = 0.0001) for major bleeding. Adding hs-TnT levels to the CHA2DS2VASc score improved the C statistic from 0.620 to 0.635 for stroke or systemic embolism (p = 0.0226), from 0.592 to 0.711 for cardiac death (p < 0.0001), and from 0.591 to 0.629 for major bleeding (p < 0.0001). Apixaban reduced rates of stroke, mortality, and bleeding regardless of the hs-TnT level., Conclusions: Levels of hs-TnT are often elevated in patients with AF. The hs-TnT level is independently associated with an increased risk of stroke, cardiac death, and major bleeding and improves risk stratification beyond the CHA2DS2VASc risk score. The benefits of apixaban as compared with warfarin are consistent regardless of the hs-TnT level. (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]; NCT00412984)., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to determine the characteristics and outcomes of young adults with heart failure (HF)., Background: Few studies have focused on young and very young adults with HF., Methods: Patients were categorized into 5 age groups: 20 to 39, 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and ≥70 years., Results: The youngest patients with HF were more likely to be obese (youngest vs. oldest: body mass index ≥35 kg/m(2): 23% vs. 6%), of black ethnicity (18% vs. 2%), and have idiopathic-dilated cardiomyopathy (62% vs. 9%) (all p < 0.0001). They were less likely to adhere to medication (nonadherence in youngest vs. oldest: 24% vs. 7%, p = 0.001), salt intake, and other dietary measures (21% vs. 9%, p = 0.002). The youngest patients were less likely to have clinical and radiological signs of HF during hospitalization. Quality of life was worse, but all-cause mortality was lowest in the youngest age group (3-year mortality rates across the respective age categories: 12%, 13%, 13%, 19%, and 31%, respectively). Compared with the referent age group of 60 to 69 years, both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were lower in the youngest group even after multivariable adjustment (hazard ratio: 0.60, 95% confidence interval: 0.36 to 1.00; p = 0.049, and hazard ratio: 0.71, 95% confidence interval: 0.42 to 1.18, p = 0.186, respectively). Three-year HF hospitalization rates were 24%, 15%, 15%, 22%, and 28% in ages 20 to 39, 40 to 49, 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and ≥70 years, respectively (p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Beyond divergent etiology and comorbidities, younger patients exhibited striking differences in presentation and outcomes compared with older counterparts. Clinical and radiological signs of HF were less common, yet quality of life was more significantly impaired. Fatal and nonfatal outcomes were discordant, with better survival despite higher hospitalization rates., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to assess the prognostic value of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) enrolled in the ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation) trial, and the treatment effect of apixaban according to NT-proBNP levels., Background: Natriuretic peptides are associated with mortality and cardiovascular events in several cardiac diseases., Methods: In the ARISTOTLE trial, 18,201 patients with AF were randomized to apixaban or warfarin. Plasma samples at randomization were available from 14,892 patients. The association between NT-proBNP concentrations and clinical outcomes was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models, after adjusting for established cardiovascular risk factors., Results: Quartiles of NT-proBNP were: Q1, ≤363 ng/l; Q2, 364 to 713 ng/l; Q3, 714 to 1,250 ng/l; and Q4, >1,250 ng/l. During 1.9 years, the annual rates of stroke or systemic embolism ranged from 0.74% in the bottom NT-proBNP quartile to 2.21% in the top quartile, an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.35 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.62 to 3.40; p < 0.0001). Annual rates of cardiac death ranged from 0.86% in Q1 to 4.14% in Q4, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.50 (95% CI: 1.81 to 3.45; p < 0.0001). Adding NT-proBNP levels to the CHA2DS2VASc score improved C-statistics from 0.62 to 0.65 (p = 0.0009) for stroke or systemic embolism and from 0.59 to 0.69 for cardiac death (p < 0.0001). Apixaban reduced stroke, mortality, and bleeding regardless of the NT-proBNP level., Conclusions: NT-proBNP levels are often elevated in AF and independently associated with an increased risk of stroke and mortality. NT-proBNP improves risk stratification beyond the CHA2DS2VASc score and might be a novel tool for improved stroke prediction in AF. The efficacy of apixaban compared with warfarin is independent of the NT-proBNP level. (Apixaban for the Prevention of Stroke in Subjects With Atrial Fibrillation [ARISTOTLE]; NCT00412984)., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)