Search

Background: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) improve outcome in the setting of post-myocardial infarction (MI) heart failure (HF).Objectives: The study sought to assess the benefit of an early MRA regimen in acute MI irrespective of the presence of HF or left ventricular (LV) dysfunction.Methods: We randomized 1,603 patients to receive an MRA regimen with a single intravenous bolus of potassium canrenoate (200 mg) followed by oral spironolactone (25 mg once daily) for 6 months in addition to standard therapy or standard therapy alone. The primary outcome of the study was the composite of death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, significant ventricular arrhythmia, indication for implantable defibrillator, or new or worsening HF at 6-month follow-up. Key secondary/safety outcomes included death and other individual components of the primary outcome and rates of hyperkalemia at 6 months.Results: The primary outcome occurred in 95 (11.8%) and 98 (12.2%) patients in the treatment and control groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.28). Death occurred in 11 (1.4%) and 17 (2.1%) patients in the treatment and control groups, respectively (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.38). In a non-pre-specified exploratory analysis, the odds of death were reduced in the treatment group (3 [0.5%] vs. 15 [2.4%]; HR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.70) in the subgroup of ST-segment elevation MI (n = 1,229), but not in non-ST-segment elevation MI (p for interaction = 0.01). Hyperkalemia >5.5 mmol/l(-1) occurred in 3% and 0.2% of patients in the treatment and standard therapy groups, respectively (p < 0.0001).Conclusions: The study failed to show the benefit of early MRA use in addition to standard therapy in patients admitted for MI. (Aldosterone Lethal effects Blockade in Acute myocardial infarction Treated with or without Reperfusion to improve Outcome and Survival at Six months follow-up; NCT01059136). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A lack of clarity exists about the role of complete coronary revascularization in patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare long-term outcomes in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events of 2 different complete coronary revascularization strategies in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: 1-stage percutaneous coronary intervention (1S-PCI) during the index procedure versus multistage percutaneous coronary intervention (MS-PCI) complete coronary revascularization during the index hospitalization.Methods: In the SMILE (Impact of Different Treatment in Multivessel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients: One Stage Versus Multistaged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, 584 patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to 1S-PCI or MS-PCI. The primary study endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, which were defined as cardiac death, death, reinfarction, rehospitalization for unstable angina, repeat coronary revascularization (target vessel revascularization), and stroke at 1 year.Results: The occurrence of the primary endpoint was significantly lower in the 1-stage group (1S-PCI: n = 36 [13.63%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 61 [23.19%]; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.549 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.363 to 0.828]; p = 0.004). The 1-year rate of target vessel revascularization was significantly higher in the MS-PCI group (1S-PCI: n = 22 [8.33%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 40 [15.20%]; HR: 0.522 [95% CI: 0.310 to 0.878]; p = 0.01; p log-rank = 0.013). When the analyses were limited to cardiac death (1S-PCI: n = 9 [3.41%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 14 [5.32%]; HR: 0.624 [95% CI: 0.270 to 1.441]; p = 0.27) and myocardial infarction (1S-PCI: n = 7 [2.65%] vs. MS-PCI: n = 10 [3.80%]; HR: 0.678 [95% CI: 0.156 to 2.657]; p = 0.46), no significant differences were observed between groups.Conclusions: In multivessel non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients, complete 1-stage coronary revascularization is superior to multistage PCI in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. (Impact of Different Treatment in Multivessel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [NSTEMI]Patients: One Stage Versus Multistaged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] [SMILE]: NCT01478984). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In the HORIZONS-AMI (Harmonizing Outcomes with RevasculariZatiON and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial, 3,602 patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with bivalirudin had lower bleeding and mortality rates, but higher acute stent thrombosis rates compared with heparin + a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI). Subsequent changes in primary PCI, including the use of potent P2Y 12 inhibitors, frequent radial intervention, and pre-hospital medication administration, were incorporated into the EUROMAX (European Ambulance Acute Coronary Syndrome Angiography) trial, which assigned 2,218 patients to bivalirudin versus heparin ± GPI before primary PCI. Objectives The goal of this study was to examine the outcomes of procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin ± GPI for primary PCI, given the evolution in primary PCI. Methods Databases from HORIZONS-AMI and EUROMAX were pooled for patient-level analysis. The Breslow-Day test evaluated heterogeneity between trials. Results A total of 5,800 patients were randomized to bivalirudin (n = 2,889) or heparin ± GPI (n = 2,911). The radial approach was used in 21.3% of patients, prasugrel/ticagrelor was used in 18.1% of patients, and GPI was used in 84.8% of the control group. Bivalirudin compared with heparin ± GPI resulted in reduced 30-day rates of major bleeding (4.2% vs. 7.8%; relative risk [RR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43 to 0.66; p < 0.0001), thrombocytopenia (1.4% vs. 2.9%, RR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.71; p = 0.0002), and cardiac mortality (2.0% vs. 2.9%; RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.97; p = 0.03), with nonsignificantly different rates of reinfarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, stroke, and all-cause mortality. Bivalirudin resulted in increased acute (<24 h) stent thrombosis rates (1.2% vs. 0.2%; RR: 6.04; 95% CI: 2.55 to 14.31; p < 0.0001), with nonsignificantly different rates of subacute stent thrombosis. Composite net adverse clinical events were lower with bivalirudin (8.8% vs. 11.9%; RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.86; p < 0.0001). There was no significant heterogeneity between the 2 trials for these outcomes, and results were consistent across major subgroups. Conclusions Despite increased acute stent thrombosis, primary PCI with bivalirudin improved 30-day net clinical outcomes, with significant reductions in major bleeding, thrombocytopenia, and transfusions compared with heparin ± GPI, results that were consistent with evolution in PCI technique and pharmacotherapy. (Harmonizing Outcomes with RevasculariZatiON and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction [HORIZONS-AMI]; NCT00433966 ) (European Ambulance Acute Coronary Syndrome Angiography [EUROMAX]; NCT01087723 ) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), we sought to evaluate the relative influences of mechanical, electrical, and scar properties at the left ventricular lead position (LVLP) on cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) response and clinical events. Background: CMR cine displacement encoding with stimulated echoes (DENSE) provides high-quality strain for overall dyssynchrony (circumferential uniformity ratio estimate [CURE] 0 to 1) and timing of onset of circumferential contraction at the LVLP. CMR DENSE, late gadolinium enhancement, and electrical timing together could improve upon other imaging modalities for evaluating the optimal LVLP. Methods: Patients had complete CMR studies and echocardiography before CRT. CRT response was defined as a 15% reduction in left ventricular end-systolic volume. Electrical activation was assessed as the time from QRS onset to LVLP electrogram (QLV). Patients were then followed for clinical events. Results: In 75 patients, multivariable logistic modeling accurately identified the 40 patients (53%) with CRT response (area under the curve: 0.95 [p < 0.0001]) based on CURE (odds ratio [OR]: 2.59/0.1 decrease), delayed circumferential contraction onset at LVLP (OR: 6.55), absent LVLP scar (OR: 14.9), and QLV (OR: 1.31/10 ms increase). The 33% of patients with CURE <0.70, absence of LVLP scar, and delayed LVLP contraction onset had a 100% response rate, whereas those with CURE ≥0.70 had a 0% CRT response rate and a 12-fold increased risk of death; the remaining patients had a mixed response profile. Conclusions: Mechanical, electrical, and scar properties at the LVLP together with CMR mechanical dyssynchrony are strongly associated with echocardiographic CRT response and clinical events after CRT. Modeling these findings holds promise for improving CRT outcomes. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: This study sought to report the treatment effect of ticagrelor on myocardial infarction (MI) and the strategy for and impact of event adjudication in the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) trial. Background: In PLATO, ticagrelor reduced cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Methods: A clinical events committee (CEC) prospectively defined and adjudicated all suspected MI events, on the basis of events reported by investigators and by triggers on biomarkers. Treatment comparisons used CEC-adjudicated data, and per protocol, excluded silent MI. Results: Overall, 1,299 (610 ticagrelor, 689 clopidogrel) MIs reported by the CEC occurred during the trial. Of these, 1,097 (504 ticagrelor, 593 clopidogrel) contributed to the primary composite endpoint. Site investigators reported 1,198 (580 ticagrelor, 618 clopidogrel) MIs. Ticagrelor significantly reduced overall MI rates (12-month CEC-adjudicated Kaplan-Meier rates: 5.8% ticagrelor, 6.9% clopidogrel; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 0.95). Nonprocedural MI (HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.01) and MI related to percutaneous coronary intervention or stent thrombosis tended to be lower with ticagrelor. MIs related to coronary artery bypass graft surgery were few, but numerical excess was observed in patients assigned ticagrelor. Analyses of overall MIs using investigator-reported data showed similar results but did not reach statistical significance (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.00). Conclusions: In patients with ACS, ticagrelor significantly reduced the incidence of MI compared with clopidogrel, with consistent results across most MI subtypes. CEC procedures identified more MI endpoints compared with site investigators. (A Comparison of Ticagrelor [AZD6140] and Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [PLATO]; NCT00391872) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine whether, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the reduction in cardiac mortality in those taking bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (UFH+GPI) can be fully attributed to reduced bleeding. Background: The association between hemorrhagic complications and mortality may explain the survival benefit with bivalirudin. Methods: A total of 3,602 STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI were randomized to bivalirudin versus UFH+GPI. Three-year cardiac mortality was analyzed in patients with and without major bleeding. Results: When compared with UFH+GPI, bivalirudin resulted in lower 3-year rates of major bleeding (6.9% vs. 10.5%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51 to 0.80], p < 0.0001) and cardiac mortality (2.9% vs. 5.1%, HR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.40 to 0.80], p = 0.001). Three-year cardiac mortality was reduced in bivalirudin-treated patients with major bleeding (20 fewer deaths with bivalirudin; 5.8% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.025) and without major bleeding (18 fewer deaths with bivalirudin; 2.6% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.048). In a fully-adjusted multivariable model accounting for major bleeding and other adverse events, bivalirudin was still associated with a 43% reduction in 3-year cardiac mortality (adjusted HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.39 to 0.83], p = 0.003). Conclusions: Bivalirudin reduces cardiac mortality in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, an effect that can only partly be attributed to prevention of bleeding. Further studies are required to identify the nonhematologic benefits of bivalirudin. (Harmonizing Outcomes With Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction; NCT00433966) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: The aim of this study was a comparison of risk-adjusted outcomes of 3 approaches to carotid revascularization in the open heart surgery (OHS) population. Background: Without randomized clinical trials, the best approach to managing coexisting severe carotid and coronary disease remains uncertain. Staged carotid endarterectomy (CEA) followed by OHS or combined CEA and OHS are commonly used. A recent alternative is carotid artery stenting (CAS). Methods: From 1997 to 2009, 350 patients underwent carotid revascularization within 90 days before OHS at a tertiary center: 45 staged CEA-OHS, 195 combined CEA-OHS, and 110 staged CAS-OHS. The primary composite endpoint was all-cause death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI). Staged CAS-OHS patients had higher prevalence of previous stroke (p = 0.03) and underwent more complex OHS. Therefore, the propensity score adjusted multiphase hazard function models with modulated renewal to account for staging, and competing risks were used. Results: Using propensity analysis, staged CAS-OHS and combined CEA-OHS had similar early hazard phase composite outcomes, whereas staged CEA-OHS incurred the highest risk driven by interstage MI. Subsequently, staged CAS-OHS patients experienced significantly fewer late hazard phase events compared with both staged CEA-OHS (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.33; 95% confidence interval: 0.15 to 0.77; p = 0.01) and combined CEA-OHS (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.35; 95% confidence interval: 0.18 to 0.70; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Staged CAS-OHS and combined CEA-OHS are associated with a similar risk of death, stroke, or MI in the short term, with both being better than staged CEA-OHS. However, the outcomes significantly favor staged CAS-OHS after the first year. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: There are limited head-to-head randomized data on patient-related versus stent-related outcomes for everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). Background: In the SORT OUT IV (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV) trial, comparing the EES with the SES in patients with coronary artery disease, the EES was noninferior to the SES at 9 months. Methods: The primary endpoint was a composite: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization. Safety and efficacy outcomes at 2 years were further assessed with specific focus on patient-related composite (all death, all MI, or any revascularization) and stent-related composite outcomes (cardiac death, target vessel MI, or symptom-driven target lesion revascularization). A total of 1,390 patients were assigned to receive the EES, and 1,384 patients were assigned to receive the SES. Results: At 2 years, the composite primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in the EES group and in 8.7% in the SES group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.22). The patient-related outcome: 15.0% in the EES group versus 15.6% in the SES group, (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.15), and the stent-related outcome: 5.2% in the EES group versus 5.3% in the SES group (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.35) did not differ between groups. Rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower in the EES group (0.2% vs. 0.9%, (HR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.80). Conclusions: At 2-year follow-up, the EES was found to be noninferior to the SES with regard to both patient-related and stent-related clinical outcomes. (The SORT OUT IV TRIAL [SORT OUT IV]; NCT00552877) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients taking aspirin before an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are at higher risk of recurrent events or mortality. Background: Controversy exists whether prior aspirin use is an independent predictor of worse outcomes in patients who experience an ACS. Methods: We evaluated 66,443 ACS patients from a merged database of previous Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction trials. We evaluated the differences in ACS type, total mortality, and the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction (MI), recurrent ischemia, or stroke between prior aspirin and nonprior aspirin users. We used multivariate analysis to control for differences in baseline characteristics. Results: Prior aspirin users (n = 17,839) were older (63 years vs. 59 years) and had more coronary risk factors and evidence of coronary artery disease (MI, angina, prior intervention) than nonprior aspirin users (n = 48,604) (all p < 0.0001). Prior aspirin use was associated with less severe types of ACS at presentation (e.g., unstable angina > non–ST-segment elevation MI > ST-segment elevation MI) than their nonaspirin user counterparts (p < 0.0001). After multivariate analysis, there was no difference in total mortality between prior aspirin users and nonaspirin users at day 30 (odds ratio [OR]: 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90 to 1.13) or by the last follow-up visit (mean 328 days) (hazard ratio: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.11). Prior aspirin use was modestly associated with recurrent MI (OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.43) and the composite end point (OR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.24). Conclusions: Prior aspirin use was associated with more comorbidities and coronary disease and a higher risk of recurrent MI, but not mortality. As such, it should best be considered a marker of a patient population at high risk for recurrent adverse events after ACS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to summarize the evidence of pre-procedural statin therapy to reduce periprocedure cardiovascular events. Background: Invasive procedures can result in adverse cardiovascular events, such as myocardial infarction (MI) and death. We hypothesized that statins might improve clinical outcomes when used before invasive procedures. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception to February 2010 for randomized, controlled trials that examined statin therapy before invasive procedures. Invasive procedures were defined as percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and noncardiac surgery. We required that studies initiated statins before the procedure and reported clinical outcomes. A DerSimonian-Laird model was used to construct random-effects summary risk ratios. Results: Eight percent of the screened trials (21 of 270) met our selection criteria, which included 4,805 patients. The use of pre-procedural statins significantly reduced post-procedural MI (risk ratio [RR]: 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46 to 0.70, p < 0.0001). This benefit was seen after both percutaneous coronary intervention (p < 0.0001) and noncardiac surgical procedures (p = 0.004), but not CABG (p = 0.40). All-cause mortality was nonsignificantly reduced by statin therapy (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.17, p = 0.15). Pre-procedural statins also reduced post-CABG atrial fibrillation (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.68, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Statins administered before invasive procedures significantly reduce the hazard of post-procedural MI. Additionally, statins reduce the risk of atrial fibrillation after CABG. The routine use of statins before invasive procedures should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of the study was to determine the prognostic significance and determinants of myocardial salvage assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in reperfused ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Background: In acute myocardial infarction, CMR can retrospectively detect the myocardium at risk and the irreversible injury. This allows for quantifying the extent of salvaged myocardium after reperfusion as a potential strong end point for clinical trials and outcome. Methods: We analyzed 208 consecutive ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary angioplasty <12 h after symptom onset. T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced CMR was used to calculate the myocardial salvage index (MSI). Patients were categorized into 2 groups defined by the median MSI. The primary end point of the study was occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events defined as death, reinfarction, and occurrence of new congestive heart failure within 6 months after the index event. Results: The median MSI was 48 (interquartile range 27 to 73). Major adverse cardiovascular events were significantly lower in the MSI ≥ median group (2.9% vs. 22.1%, p < 0.001). The stepwise Cox proportional hazards model revealed that the MSI was the strongest predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events at 6-month follow-up (p < 0.001). All prognostic clinical (symptom onset to reperfusion), angiographic (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade before angioplasty), and electrocardiographic (ST-segment resolution) parameters showed significant correlations with the MSI (p < 0.001 for all). Conclusions: This study for the first time demonstrates that the MSI assessed by CMR predicts the outcome in acute reperfused ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Therefore, MSI assessment has important implications for patient prognosis as well as for the design of future trials intended to test new reperfusion therapy efficacy. (Myocardial Salvage Assessed by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance—Impact on Outcome; NCT00952224). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: The goal of this analysis was to determine whether intensive statin therapy, compared with moderate-dose statin therapy, leads to a reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Background: When compared with moderate-dose statins, intensive statin therapy reduces MACE among patients with ACS. The role of intensive statin therapy specifically among patients who undergo PCI for ACS is unknown. Methods: Outcomes were compared in 2,868 patients who underwent PCI for ACS just prior to enrollment in the PROVE IT–TIMI 22 (Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy–Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 22) trial, which randomized patients to either atorvastatin 80 mg or pravastatin 40 mg daily. The incidence of the primary composite end point of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unstable angina leading to hospitalization, and revascularization after 30 days and stroke was evaluated, as was the incidence of target vessel revascularization (TVR) and non-TVR during follow-up. Results: Treatment with 80 mg atorvastatin reduced the incidence of the composite end point (21.5% vs. 26.5%, hazard ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.67 to 0.91, p = 0.002) and lowered the incidence of both TVR (11.4% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.001) and non-TVR (8.0% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.017) compared with 40 mg pravastatin. After adjusting for on-treatment serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and C-reactive protein concentrations, the odds of TVR with high-dose statin therapy remained significant (odds ratio: 0.74, p = 0.015) while the odds of non-TVR did not (odds ratio: 0.92, p = 0.55). Conclusions: Among patients with ACS who undergo PCI, intensive statin therapy reduces MACE compared with moderate-dose statin therapy. The reduction in the incidence of TVR was independent of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and C-reactive protein lowering and may therefore be due, at least in part, to a pleiotropic effect of high-dose statin therapy. (PROVE IT–TIMI 22; NCT00382460) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]