Search

Aims: In the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial, greater platelet inhibition with prasugrel reduced the first occurrence of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke) compared with clopidogrel in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing planned percutaneous coronary intervention. We hypothesized that prasugrel would reduce not only first events but also recurrent primary endpoint events and therefore total events compared with clopidogrel. Methods and results: Poisson regression analysis was performed to compare the number of occurrences of the primary endpoint between prasugrel and clopidogrel in TRITON-TIMI 38. Landmark analytic methods were used to evaluate the risk of a recurrent primary endpoint event following an initial non-fatal endpoint event. Among patients with an initial non-fatal event, second events were significantly reduced with prasugrel compared to clopidogrel (10.8 vs. 15.4%, HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46–0.92; P = 0.016), as was CV death following the non-fatal event (3.7 vs. 7.1%, HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25–0.82; P = 0.008). Overall there was a reduction of 195 total primary efficacy events with prasugrel vs. clopidogrel (rate ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.71–0.87; P < 0.001). Recurrent bleeding events occurred infrequently (TIMI major non-CABG bleeds: four with prasugrel and two with clopidogrel). Study drug discontinuation was frequent following the initial major bleeding event (42% of patients discontinued study drug). Conclusion: While standard statistical analytic techniques for clinical trials censor patients who experience a component of the primary composite endpoint, total cardiovascular events remain important to both patients and clinicians. Prasugrel, a more potent anti-platelet agent, reduced both first and subsequent cardiovascular events compared with clopidogrel in patients with ACS.

Mavacamten is a first-in-class, targeted, cardiac-specific myosin inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of adults with symptomatic New York Heart Association Classes II and III obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM). Mavacamten was developed to target the hyper-contractile phenotype, which plays a critical role in the pathophysiology of the disease. In Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, mavacamten was well tolerated, reduced left ventricular outflow tract gradients, improved exercise capacity and symptoms, and was associated with improvements in other clinically relevant parameters, such as patient-reported outcomes and circulating biomarkers. In addition, treatment with mavacamten was associated with evidence of favourable cardiac remodelling in multi-modality imaging studies. Mavacamten substantially reduced guideline eligibility for septal reduction therapy candidates with oHCM and drug-refractory symptoms. In this article, the available efficacy and safety data from completed and ongoing clinical studies of mavacamten in patients with symptomatic oHCM are reviewed. Longer term extension studies may help address questions related to the positioning of mavacamten in current oHCM management algorithms, interactions with background therapy, as well as the potential for disease modification beyond symptomatic relief of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The PARAGLIDE-HF trial demonstrated reductions in natriuretic peptides with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction who had a recent worsening HF event, but was not adequately powered to examine clinical outcomes. PARAGON-HF included a subset of PARAGLIDE-HF-like patients who were recently hospitalized for HF. Participant-level data from PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were pooled to better estimate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in reducing cardiovascular and renal events in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction., Methods and Results: Both PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were multicentre, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF >40% in PARAGLIDE-HF and ≥45% in PARAGON-HF). In the pre-specified primary analysis, we pooled participants in PARAGLIDE-HF (all of whom were enrolled during or within 30 days of a worsening HF event) with a 'PARAGLIDE-like' subset of PARAGON-HF (those hospitalized for HF within 30 days). We also pooled the entire PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF populations for a broader context. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the composite of total worsening HF events (including first and recurrent HF hospitalizations and urgent visits) and cardiovascular death. The secondary endpoint was the pre-specified renal composite endpoint for both studies (≥50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline, end-stage renal disease, or renal death). Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced total worsening HF events and cardiovascular death in both the primary pooled analysis of participants with recent worsening HF [n = 1088; rate ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.99; P = 0.042] and in the pooled analysis of all participants (n = 5262; RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75-0.98; P = 0.027). In the pooled analysis of all participants, first nominal statistical significance was reached by Day 9 after randomization, and treatment benefits were larger in those with LVEF ≤60% (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) compared with those with LVEF >60% (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.86-1.40; Pinteraction = 0.021). Sacubitril/valsartan was also associated with lower rates of the renal composite endpoint in the primary pooled analysis [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67; 95% CI 0.43-1.05; P = 0.080] and the pooled analysis of all participants (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; P = 0.002)., Conclusion: In pooled analyses of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced cardiovascular and renal events among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. These data provide support for use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, particularly among those with an LVEF below normal, regardless of care setting., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The author declares no conflict of interest for this contribution.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from: AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; consulting for: Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb (MyoKardia), Cardurion, and Verve.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from: AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; consulting for: Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb (MyoKardia), Cardurion, and Verve.

Aims: Levels of growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), a cytokine secreted in response to cellular stress and inflammation, have been associated with multiple types of cardiovascular (CV) events. However, its comparative prognostic performance across different presentations of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains unknown., Methods and Results: An individual patient meta-analysis was performed using data pooled from eight trials including 53 486 patients. Baseline GDF-15 concentration was analyzed as a continuous variable and using established cutpoints (<1200 ng/L, 1200-1800 ng/L, > 1800 ng/L) to evaluate its prognostic performance for CV death/hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and their components using Cox models adjusted for clinical variables and established CV biomarkers. Analyses were further stratified on ASCVD status: acute coronary syndrome (ACS), stabilized after recent ACS, and stable ASCVD. Overall, higher GDF-15 concentration was significantly and independently associated with an increased rate of CV death/HHF and MACE (P < 0.001 for each). However, while GDF-15 showed a robust and consistent independent association with CV death and HHF across all presentations of ASCVD, its prognostic association with future myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke only remained significant in patients stabilized after recent ACS or with stable ASCVD [hazard ratio (HR): 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-1.31 and HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.05-1.28 for MI and stroke, respectively] and not in ACS (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.90-1.06 and HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.39-1.92, respectively)., Conclusion: Growth differentiation factor 15 consistently adds prognostic information for CV death and HHF across the spectrum of ASCVD. GDF-15 also adds prognostic information for MI and stroke beyond clinical risk factors and cardiac biomarkers but not in the setting of ACS., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: E.T.K. reports receiving lecture fees from Astellas, Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli-Lilly Japan KK, Daiichi-Sankyo, Menarini, Ono Pharmaceutical, Ootsuka Pharmaceutical, MSD KK, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Tanabe-Mitsubishi, Bayer, Pfizer; consultant fee from Boehringer Ingelheim and Daiichi-Sankyo; research fund from Abbott, Ono Pharmaceutical, and Tanabe-Mitsubishi; D.M. reports grants to the Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Eisai, Medicines Co., Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Diagnostics, and Siemens; and consultant fees from InCardia, Inflammatix, Merck & Co, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics. D.M. is a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences; J.G. is a member of the TIMI Study Group which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s from Abbott Laboratories, Amgen; AstraZeneca; Critical Diagnostics, Daiichi-Sankyo; Eisai; Genzyme; Gilead; GlaxoSmithKline; Intarcia; Janssen Research and Development; Medicines Company; MedImmune; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Poxel; Roche Diagnostics; and Takeda; D.D.B. is supported by Harvard Catalyst KL2/CMeRIT (NIH/NCATS grant UL 1TR002541). He has received research grant support to his institution from AstraZeneca and Pfizer; consulting fees from AstraZeneca; and participates on a clinical endpoint committee for a study sponsored by Kowa Pharmaceuticals. M.B. has no conflict of interest; E.A.B. is a member 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, Zora Biosciences. E.A.B. has received personal fees from Servier, Kowa, Medscape, Novo Nordisk, Amgen, PriMed and Merck; M.P.B. is the Executive Director of CPC, a non-profit academic research organization affiliated with the University of Colorado, that receives research grant/consulting funding from: Abbott, Agios, Alexion Pharma, Alnylam, Amgen, Angionetics, ARCA Biopharma, Array, AstraZeneca, Atentiv, Audentes, Bayer, Better Therapeutics, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardiol Therapeutics, CellResearch, Cook Medical, Cook, CSL Behring, Eidos Therapeutics, EP Trading Co, Esperion Therapeutics, EverlyWell, Faraday, Fortress Biotech, HDL Therapeutics, Heartflow, Hummingbird Bioscience, Insmed, Janssen, Kowa Research, Lexicon, Merck, Medtronic, Moderna, Novate Medical, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PPD Development, Prairie Education and Research, Prothena Ciosciences, Regeneron, Regio Biosciences, Sanifit Therapeutics, Sanofi, Smith and Nephew, Stealth BioTherapeutics, University of Colorado, Worldwide Clinical Trials, Wraser, Yale Cardiovascular Research Group. M.P.B. also reports stock in Medtronic and Pfizer and consulting fees from Audent; C.P.C. reports research grants from: Amgen, Better Therapeutics, Boehringer-Ingelheim (BI), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Consulting fees from Aegerion/Amryt, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Ascendia, BI, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Lexicon, Merck, Pfizer, Rhoshan, and Sanofi. C.P.C. serve on Data and Safety Monitoring Boards for the Veteran’s Administration, Applied Therapeutics and NovoNordisk; J.A.d.L reports grant support from Roche Diagnostics and Abbott Diagnostics, consulting fees from Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Siemen’s Health Care Diagnostics, Beckman Coulter, and Quidel; R.P.G. reports clinical trials/research support from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, honoraria for Lectures/CME Programs for Amgen, Centrix, Daiichi Sankyo, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Medical Education Resources (MER), Medscape, Menarini, Merck, Pfizer, SAJA Pharmaceuticals, Servier, Shanghai Medical Telescope, Voxmedia, Consultant fee from Amarin, Amgen, Boston Scientific, CryoLife, CSL Behring, CVS Caremark, Daiichi Sankyo, Esperion, Gilead, Hengrui, Inari, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, St. Lukes, Samsung; P.J. reports research support from Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, LP, Daiichi-Sankyo, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., Inc., Regeneron, Roche Diagnostics Corporation, and Siemens Healthineers; T.K. has been a paid consultant for and/or received honoraria payments from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, and Vifor and has received research support from Vifor; K.N. reports research funding through Duke University from Roche Diagnostics; Consulting honoraria from Beckman-Coulter; M.O’. reports Grants via Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Amgen, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Intarcia, Merck, Pfizer. Honararia from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Janssen; M.A.P. reports Research Grant Support from Novartis; consultant to AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly Alliance, DalCor, GlaxoSmithKline, Lexicon, NHLBI CONNECTs (Master Protocol Committee), Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Peerbridge and Sanofi; and has equity in DalCor; N.R. has no conflic of interest; S.D.W. reports research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Janssen, and Merck. He reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boston Clinical Research Institute, ICON Clinical, Novo Nordisk. Spouse, Dr. Caroline Fox is an employee of Merck. S.D.W. is a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from: Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., BRAHMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Intarcia, Janssen, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Takeda, The Medicines Company, Zora Biosciences; S.D.W. has been a paid consultant for and has received research support from Boehringer Ingelheim, and has received honoraria payments from Roche Diagnostics. T.K. and S.D.W. hold patents (EP 2047275 B1 and US 8951742) and have a licensing contract with Roche Diagnostics related to GDF-15; E.B. reports research grants through his institution from Astra Zeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck and Novartis, and consultancies with Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, Novo Nordisk, and Verve; M.S. report research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Amgen; Anthos Therapeutics; AstraZeneca; Bayer; Daiichi-Sankyo; Eisai; Intarcia; Ionis; Medicines Company; MedImmune; Merck; Novartis; Pfizer; Quark Pharmaceuticals. Consulting for: Althera; Amgen; Anthos Therapeutics; AstraZeneca; Beren Therapeutics; Bristol-Myers Squibb; DalCor; Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories; Fibrogen; Intarcia; Merck; Moderna; Novo Nordisk; Silence Therapeutics. Additionally, M.S. is a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has also received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, ARCA Biopharma, Inc., Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc., Softcell Medical Limited, Regeneron, Roche, and Zora Biosciences., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Interest in targeted screening programmes for atrial fibrillation (AF) has increased, yet the role of genetics in identifying patients at highest risk of developing AF is unclear., Methods and Results: A total of 36,662 subjects without prior AF were analyzed from four TIMI trials. Subjects were divided into quintiles using a validated polygenic risk score (PRS) for AF. Clinical risk for AF was calculated using the CHARGE-AF model. Kaplan-Meier event rates, adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), C-indices, and net reclassification improvement were used to determine if the addition of the PRS improved prediction compared with clinical risk and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). Over 2.3 years, 1018 new AF cases developed. AF PRS predicted a significant risk gradient for AF with a 40% increased risk per 1-SD increase in PRS [HR: 1.40 (1.32-1.49); P < 0.001]. Those with high AF PRS (top 20%) were more than two-fold more likely to develop AF [HR 2.45 (1.99-3.03), P < 0.001] compared with low PRS (bottom 20%). Furthermore, PRS provided an additional gradient of risk stratification on top of the CHARGE-AF clinical risk score, ranging from a 3-year incidence of 1.3% in patients with low clinical and genetic risk to 8.7% in patients with high clinical and genetic risk. The subgroup of patients with high clinical risk, high PRS, and elevated NT-proBNP had an AF risk of 16.7% over 3 years. The C-index with the CHARGE-AF clinical risk score alone was 0.65, which improved to 0.67 (P < 0.001) with the addition of NT-proBNP, and increased further to 0.70 (P < 0.001) with the addition of the PRS., Conclusion: In patients with cardiovascular conditions, AF PRS is a strong independent predictor of incident AF that provides complementary predictive value when added to a validated clinical risk score and NT-proBNP., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: N.A.M. reports grant support from the National Institutes of Health and involvement in clinical trials with Amgen, Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Ionis without personal fees, payments, or increase in salary. A.C.G., F.K.K., and G.M.M. report no disclosures. C.R. is supported by a grant from Bayer AG to the Broad Institute focused on the development of therapeutics for cardiovascular disease. P.J. reports research support from Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, LP, Daiichi-Sankyo, Inc., Eisai, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche Diagnostics Corporation, Siemens Healthineers, Takeda Global Research and Development Center, and Waters Technologies Corporation, and consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics Corporation. D.D.B. is supported by Harvard Catalyst KL2/CMeRIT (NIH/NCATS UL 1TR002541) and has received research grant support to his institution from AstraZeneca and Pfizer and consulting fees from AstraZeneca. D.L.B. reports grants from AstraZeneca, during the conduct of the study; grants from Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Garmin, Owkin, HLS Therapeutics, Eisai, Ethicon, Medtronic, 89Bio, sanofi aventis, Contego Medical, The Medicines Company, Roche, Pfizer, Forest Laboratories/AstraZeneca, Stasys, Ischemix, Amgen, Lilly, Chiesi, Ironwood, Merck, Abbott, Regeneron, Idorsia, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Javelin, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Moderna, Beren, Aker Biomarine, Recardio, Acesion Pharma, Synaptic, Fractyl, Afimmune, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Lexicon; other from FlowCo, Clinical Cardiology, VA, Takeda, Endotronix, Vascular Solutions, and Svelte, grants and other from PLx Pharma, Novartis, NirvaMed, MyoKardia/BMS, Janssen, Novo Nordisk, Cardax, and Boston Scientific, PhaseBio, Novo Nordisk, Cereno Scientific, CellProthera; personal fees from Duke Clinical Research Institute, Oakstone CME, High Enroll, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Mayo Clinic, Arnold and Porter law firm, Piper Sandler, Cowen and Company, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Rutgers University, Wiley, AngioWave, K2P, Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, TobeSoft, Bayer, MJH Life Sciences, Level Ex, Population Health Research Institute, Belvoir Publications, Slack Publications, WebMD, Elsevier, Harvard Clinical Research Institute (now Baim Institute for Clinical Research), HMP Global, Cleveland Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Medtelligence/ReachMD, CSL Behring; personal fees from from DRS. LINQ, non-financial support, and other from American College of Cardiology; other from Medscape Cardiology, Philips, Regado Biosciences, Boston VA Research Institute, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Biotronik, CSI; personal fees and non-financial support from Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care; non-financial support from American Heart Association; grants, personal fees, and other from Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. M.P.B. discloses grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Sanofi. C.P.C. reports research grants from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim (BI), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Merck, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer. Consulting fees from Aegerion, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Ascendia, BI, BMS, Corvidia, Eli Lilly, HLS Therapeutics, Innovent, Janssen, Kowa, Merck, Pfizer, Rhoshan, and Sanofi. R.P.G. reports grants from Amgen and Daiichi-Sankyo, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Akcea, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lexicon, American College of Cardiology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CVS Caremark, Pfizer, Servier, outside the submitted work; grants and personal fees from Amarin, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, Amgen; and Institutional research grant to the TIMI Study Group at Brigham and Women’s Hospital for research he is not directly involved in from Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., BRAHMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Intarcia, Janssen, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Takeda, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. M.L.O. reports institutional research grants from Amgen, Janssen, The Medicines Company, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, and Astra Zeneca. I.R. received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Concenter BioPharma, and Silkim, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novo Nordisk, Orgenesis, Pfizer, Sanofi, SmartZyme Innovation, Panaxia, FutuRx, Insuline Medical, Medial EarlySign, CameraEyes, Exscopia, Dermal Biomics, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Teva, GlucoMe, and DarioHealth. B.M.S. reports research grants from AstraZeneca, Eisai, Novartis, and Merck and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Biogen Idec, Boehringer Ingelheim, Covance, Dr Reddy’s Laboratories, Eisai, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, GlaxoSmithKline, Lexicon, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and St Jude’s Medical; and has equity in Health [at] Scale. E.B. reports research grants through the Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Astra Zeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis. Consultancies with Amgen, Cardurion, MyoKardia, NovoNordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, IMMEDIATE, and Verve. Uncompensated consultancies and lectures with The Medicines Company. D.A.M. reports grants to Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott Laboratories, AstraZeneca, BRAHMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Medicines Company, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Roche Diagnostics, Takeda, and Zora Biosciences. He has received consulting fees from Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer Pharma, InCarda, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics. P.T.E. receives sponsored research support from Bayer AG and IBM Health, and he has consulted for Bayer AG, Novartis, MyoKardia, and Quest Diagnostics. S.A.L. receives sponsored research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Fitbit, and IBM and has consulted for Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Bayer AG, and Blackstone Life Sciences. Dr. Lubitz is supported by NIH grants R01HL139731, R01HL157635 and American Heart Association 18SFRN34250007. C.T.R. Honoraria; Modest; Bristol-Myers Squib, Pfizer, Portola, Honoraria; Significant; Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen, Research Grant; Modest; Daiichi-Sankyo, MedImmune, National Institute of Health, Research Grant; Significant; Boehringer Ingelheim. M.S.S.: Other; Modest; Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CVS Caremark, DalCor, IFM Therapeutics, Intarcia, Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, Other; Significant; Amgen, Research Grant; Significant; Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai; Intarcia, Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aim: In patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) on aspirin, the addition of ticagrelor reduces ischaemic risk but increases bleeding risk. The simultaneous assessment of baseline ischaemic and bleeding risk may assist clinicians in selecting patients who are most likely to have a favourable risk/benefit profile with long-term ticagrelor., Methods and Results: PEGASUS-TIMI 54 randomized 21 162 prior MI patients, 13 956 of which to the approved 60 mg dose or placebo and who had all necessary data. The primary efficacy endpoint was cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke, and the primary safety outcome was TIMI major bleeding; differences in Kaplan-Meier event rates at 3 years are presented. Post-hoc subgroups based on predictors of bleeding and ischaemic risk were merged into a selection algorithm. Patients were divided into four groups: those with a bleeding predictor (n = 2721, 19%) and then those without a bleeding predictor and either 0-1 ischaemic risk factor (IRF; n = 3004, 22%), 2 IRF (n = 4903, 35%), or ≥3 IRF (n = 3328, 24%). In patients at high bleeding risk, ticagrelor increased bleeding [absolute risk difference (ARD) +2.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6, 3.9] and did not reduce the primary efficacy endpoint (ARD +0.08%, 95% CI -2.4 to 2.5). In patients at low bleeding risk, the ARDs in the primary efficacy endpoint with ticagrelor were -0.5% (-2.2, 1.3), -1.5% (-3.1, 0.02), and -2.6% (-5.0, -0.24, P = 0.03) in those with ≤1, 2, and 3 risk factors, respectively (P = 0.076 for trend across groups). There were significant trends for greater absolute risk reductions for cardiovascular death (P-trend 0.018), all-cause mortality (P-trend 0.027), and net outcomes (P-trend 0.037) with ticagrelor across these risk groups., Conclusion: In a post-hoc exploratory analysis of patients with prior MI, long-term ticagrelor therapy appears to be best suited for those with prior MI with multiple IRFs at low bleeding risk., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01225562 ClinicalTrials.gov., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The TIMI Study Group has received significant research grant support from Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., BRAHMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Intarcia, Janssen, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Takeda, The Medicines Company, Zora Biosciences. M.P.B. reports grant support to CPC clinical research from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Sanofi, Wraser. M.D. reports personal fees for lectures and trial steering committee participation from AstraZeneca and Novartis, personal fees for lectures from Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi and Bayer. Advisory Board: Amgen, Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, Novartis. Personal fees for serving on the Data Monitoring Committee: for the DAPA-MI trial, funded by AstraZeneca. R.F.S. reports institutional research grants/support from AstraZeneca, Cytosorbents, GlyCardial Diagnostics, and Thromboserin; and personal fees from Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, GlyCardial Diagnostics, Hengrui, Idorsia, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Medscape, Novartis, PhaseBio, Sanofi Aventis, and Thromboserin. D.L.B discloses the following relationships—Advisory Board: Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Janssen, Level Ex, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; Board of Directors: Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), Boston VA Research Institute, DRS.LINQ (stock options), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, TobeSoft; Chair: Inaugural Chair, American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Data Monitoring Committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute; Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME steering committees), Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Research Funding: Abbott, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); Site Co-Investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, Svelte; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo, Takeda. P.G.S. reports research grants from Amarin, Bayer, Merck, Sanofi, and Servier, speaking or consulting fees from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer/Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Idorsia, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Servier. M.C. reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Maquet, personal fees from malpractice attorneys, grants from Janssen, grants from Edwards, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from BMS/Pfizer, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from BI, personal fees from Lilly, outside the submitted work. K.I. is the member of the TIMI Study Group which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., BRAHMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Intarcia, Janssen, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Takeda, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. P.J. is an employee of AstraZeneca. E.B. reports grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis, Consultancies with Amgen, Cardurion, MyoKardia, Novo Nordisk, and Verve. M.S.S. received research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis, Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Quark Pharmaceuticals. Consulting for Althera, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Beren Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, DalCor, Dr Reddy’s Laboratories, Fibrogen, Intarcia, Merck, Moderna, Novo Nordisk, and Silence Therapeutics. Additionally, Dr Sabatine is a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has also received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from: ARCA Biopharma, Inc., Janssen Research and Development, LLC, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc., Softcell Medical Limited, Regeneron, Roche, and Zora Biosciences., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: The Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway is endorsed by guidelines to improve care of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, whether the benefit of ABC pathway-concordant care is consistent across anticoagulants remains unclear. We assessed the association between ABC-concordant care and outcomes in this post hoc analysis from the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, which was reported prior to the initial description of the ABC pathway., Methods and Results: Patients were retrospectively classified as receiving ABC-concordant care based on optimal anticoagulation, adequate rate control, management of co-morbidities and lifestyle measures. Associations between ABC-concordance and outcomes were assessed with adjustment for components of the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores. Of 20 926 patients, 7915 (37.8%) satisfied criteria of ABC-concordant care, which was associated with significantly lower incidence of stroke or systemic embolic event [stroke/SEE: hazard ratio (HRadj): 0.54; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47-0.63], major bleeding (HRadj 0.66; 95% CI: 0.58-0.75), major adverse cardiac events (HRadj 0.53; 95% CI: 0.48-0.58), primary net clinical outcome (composite of stroke/SEE, major bleeding or death; HRadj 0.61; 95% CI: 0.56-0.65), cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization (HRadj 0.78; 95% CI: 0.74-0.83), CV death (HRadj 0.52; 95% CI: 0.46-0.58), and all-cause mortality (HRadj 0.56; 95% CI: 0.51-0.62), P < 0.001 for each. These associations were qualitatively consistent for both edoxaban and warfarin and across patient subgroups., Conclusion: Atrial fibrillation Better Care pathway-concordant care is associated with reductions across multiple CV endpoints and all-cause mortality, with benefit in edoxaban- and warfarin-treated patients and across patient subgroups. Increasing implementation of ABC-concordant care may improve clinical outcomes of patients with AF irrespective of anticoagulant., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: S.A.M. has received research grant support, through her institution, from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Abbott Laboratories, Critical Diagnostics, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Genzyme, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Intarcia, Janssen Research and Development, Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Roche Diagnostics, and Takeda. E.M.A. has received grant support, through his institution, from Daiichi Sankyo and Eli Lilly. E.B. has received grant support, through his institution, from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck and Co, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Cardurion, MyoKardia, NovoNordisk, and Verve. G.Y.H.L. is a consultant and speaker for Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Daichii Sankyo. No fees are received personally. R.P.G. has received institutional research grants to the TIMI Study Group at Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, and Daiichi Sankyo; has received honoraria from Amgen, Centrix, Daiichi Sankyo, Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Medical Education Resources, Medscape, Menarini, Merck, Pfizer, SAJA Pharmaceuticals, Servier, Shanghai Medical Telescope and Voxmedia; and has received consulting fees from Amarin, Amgen, CryoLife, CSL Behring, CVS Caremark, Daiichi Sankyo, Esperion, Gilead, Hengrui, Inari, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, St. Lukes and Samsung. C.T.R. has received institutional research grants to the TIMI Study Group at Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Anthos, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, National Institutes of Health, Novartis; honoraria for consultancies with Anthos, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer. Consultancies with Anthos, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Pfizer; the TIMI Study Group has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, Inc., AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, The Medicines Company, Zora Biosciences., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from: AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; consulting for: Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb (MyoKardia), Cardurion, and Verve.

Aims: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with higher rates of stroke and bleeding. Both higher dose edoxaban (60/30 mg) and lower dose edoxaban (30/15 mg) were non-inferior to warfarin for stroke and systemic embolism (SSE) and significantly reduced major bleeding in AF patients in the global study to assess the safety and effectiveness of edoxaban vs standard practice of dosing with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48) trial. Whether the efficacy and safety of these dosing strategies vs. warfarin are consistent in patients with AF and PAD has not been described., Methods and Results: Of 21 105 patients with AF randomized to warfarin, edoxaban 60/30 mg, or edoxaban 30/15 mg, 841 were identified with PAD. Endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), SSE, and major bleeding. Patients with PAD had higher risk of MACEs [adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-1.57, P = 0.001] and cardiovascular (CV) death (HRadj 1.49, 95% CI 1.21-1.83, P &lt; 0.001) than those without PAD, but not major bleeding. The efficacy of edoxaban 60/30 mg vs. warfarin was consistent regardless of PAD (SSE HR; PAD 1.16, 95% CI 0.42-3.20; no-PAD 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-1.02, P-interaction 0.57) as was major bleeding (PAD 0.96, 95% CI 0.54-1.70; no-PAD 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91, P-interaction 0.54). Edoxaban 30/15 mg was inferior for SSE, with significant heterogeneity when stratified by PAD status (P-interaction 0.039)., Conclusion: Patients with AF and PAD are at heightened risk of MACEs and CV death vs. those without PAD. The efficacy and safety of edoxaban 60/30 mg vs. warfarin in AF are consistent regardless of PAD; however, edoxaban 30/15 mg is inferior for stroke prevention in AF patients with PAD. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00781391., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from: AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; consulting for: Amgen, Boehringer-Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb (MyoKardia), Cardurion, and Verve.

Aims: Ceramide (Cer) and phosphatidylcholine (PC) lipids are associated with pathophysiological processes in cardiovascular (CV) diseases. A previously derived and validated plasma Cer-PC risk score (CERT2) was associated with CV death risk in patients with stable disease, but its prognostic value has not been evaluated in patients early post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Methods and Results: Prespecified plasma Cer and PC species in the CERT2 risk score were measured in 4871 subjects from SOLID-TIMI 52, which enrolled patients ≤30 days after ACS (median follow-up 2.5 years). The CERT2 score (scale 0-12 points) was calculated as previously defined. The primary outcome was CV death; Coronary heart disease death, all-cause death, hospitalization for heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke were also analyzed. Poisson models included baseline characteristics and established biomarkers. Patients with higher CERT2 risk scores were more likely to be older, female, current smokers, presenting with STEMI, and to have impaired renal function and higher LDL-C. After multivariable adjustment, patients in the highest risk score category remained at a nearly two-fold higher risk of CV death (adj relative risk [RR] 1.92, 95% CI 1.01-3.66, P = 0.047). Patients in the highest risk score category were also at higher risk of all-cause death (adj RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.21-3.35, P = 0.007), whereas the relationships with HF, MI, and stroke were attenuated with multivariable adjustment., Conclusions: A plasma ceramide and phospholipid-based risk score is associated with the risk of CV death independent of established clinical risk factors and biomarkers in patients after ACS., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: We investigated whether patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) demonstrate detectable changes in biomarkers including high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT), N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) over 12 months and whether such changes from baseline to 12 months are associated with the subsequent risk of stroke or systemic embolic events (S/SEE) and bleeding., Methods and Results: ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 was a randomized trial of the oral factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban in patients with AF and a CHADS2 score of ≥2. We performed a nested prospective biomarker study in 6308 patients, analysing hsTnT, NT-proBNP, and GDF-15 at baseline and 12 months. hsTnT was dynamic in 46.9% (≥2 ng/L change), NT-proBNP in 51.9% (≥200 pg/mL change), GDF-15 in 45.6% (≥300 pg/mL change) during 12 months. In a Cox regression model, upward changes in log2-transformed hsTnT and NT-proBNP were associated with increased risk of S/SEE [adjusted hazard ratio (adj-HR) 1.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36-2.23 and adj-HR 1.27; 95% CI 1.07-1.50, respectively] and log2-transformed GDF-15 with bleeding (adj-HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.02-1.92). Reassessment of ABC-stroke (age, prior stroke/transient ischaemic attack, hsTnT, and NT-proBNP) and ABC-bleeding (age, prior bleeding, haemoglobin, hsTnT, and GDF-15) risk scores at 12 months accurately reclassified a significant proportion of patients compared with their baseline risk [net reclassification improvement (NRI) 0.50; 95% CI 0.36-0.65; NRI 0.42; 95% CI 0.33-0.51, respectively]., Conclusion: Serial assessment of hsTnT, NT-proBNP, and GDF-15 revealed that a substantial proportion of patients with AF had dynamic values. Greater increases in these biomarkers measured over 1 year are associated with important clinical outcomes in anticoagulated patients with AF., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) increases the risk of stroke and systemic embolic events (SEE). This meta-analysis assessed the benefit/risk balance of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) vs. warfarin, and explored whether there was effect modification by DM or heterogeneity in outcomes between NOACs in patients with and without DM., Methods and Results: We performed a meta-analysis of 58 634 patients from four Phase 3 trials of NOAC vs. warfarin in patients with AF, comparing the primary outcomes of efficacy and safety and six other secondary outcomes in patients stratified by the presence of DM. Interaction testing was used to assess for heterogeneity of treatment effects. A meta-regression was performed to evaluate the influence of baseline characteristics. NOACs reduced the risk of stroke/SEE in 18 134 patients with DM [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.69-0.93), I2 3.90] to a similar degree as in 40 500 patients without DM [HR 0.82; 95% CI (0.74-0.91), I2 16.33; P-int 0.81]. There was no effect modification of DM on the relative reduction with NOACs vs. warfarin in major bleeding (DM: 0.95, 95% CI 0.75-1.20, I2 43.83; no DM: 0.83, 95% CI 0.55-1.24; I2 87.90; P-int 0.37). Intracranial haemorrhage (HRs 0.51 and 0.47, P-int 0.70) and cardiovascular death (HRs 0.87 and 0.90, P-int 0.70) were significantly reduced by NOACs in the presence or absence of DM., Conclusion: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants are more effective and safer than warfarin in AF patients with or without DM. Absent contraindications, NOACs should be the anticoagulation treatment choice in patients with diabetes., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is an acute heart failure syndrome, which shares many features with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Although TTS was initially described with angiographically normal coronary arteries, smaller studies recently indicated a potential coexistence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in TTS patients. This study aimed to determine the coexistence, features, and prognostic role of CAD in a large cohort of patients with TTS., Methods and Results: Coronary anatomy and CAD were studied in patients diagnosed with TTS. Inclusion criteria were compliance with the International Takotsubo Diagnostic Criteria for TTS, and availability of original coronary angiographies with ventriculography performed during the acute phase. Exclusion criteria were missing views, poor quality of angiography loops, and angiography without ventriculography. A total of 1016 TTS patients were studied. Of those, 23.0% had obstructive CAD, 41.2% had non-obstructive CAD, and 35.7% had angiographically normal coronary arteries. A total of 47 patients (4.6%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, and 3 patients had acute and 8 had chronic coronary artery occlusion concomitant with TTS, respectively. The presence of CAD was associated with increased incidence of shock, ventilation, and death from any cause. After adjusting for confounders, the presence of obstructive CAD was associated with mortality at 30 days. Takotsubo syndrome patients with obstructive CAD were at comparable risk for shock and death and nearly at twice the risk for ventilation compared to an age- and sex-matched ACS cohort., Conclusions: Coronary artery disease frequently coexists in TTS patients, presents with the whole spectrum of coronary pathology including acute coronary occlusion, and is associated with adverse outcome., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01947621., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has important implications for the safety of participants in clinical trials and the research staff caring for them and, consequently, for the trials themselves. Patients with heart failure may be at greater risk of infection with COVID-19 and the consequences might also be more serious, but they are also at risk of adverse outcomes if their clinical care is compromised. As physicians and clinical trialists, it is our responsibility to ensure safe and effective care is delivered to trial participants without affecting the integrity of the trial. The social contract with our patients demands no less. Many regulatory authorities from different world regions have issued guidance statements regarding the conduct of clinical trials during this COVID-19 crisis. However, international trials may benefit from expert guidance from a global panel of experts to supplement local advice and regulations, thereby enhancing the safety of participants and the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology on 21 and 22 March 2020 conducted web-based meetings with expert clinical trialists in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Asia. The main objectives of this Expert Position Paper are to highlight the challenges that this pandemic poses for the conduct of clinical trials in heart failure and to offer advice on how they might be overcome, with some practical examples. While this panel of experts are focused on heart failure clinical trials, these discussions and recommendations may apply to clinical trials in other therapeutic areas., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: PEGASUS-TIMI 54 demonstrated that long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with an acceptable increase in bleeding, in patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI). While much of the discussion around prolonged DAPT has been focused on stented patients, patients with prior MI without prior coronary stenting comprise a clinically important subgroup., Methods and Results: This was a pre-specified analysis from PEGASUS-TIMI 54, which randomized 21 162 patients with prior MI (1-3 years) and additional high-risk features to ticagrelor 60 mg, 90 mg, or placebo twice daily in addition to aspirin. A total of 4199 patients had no history of coronary stenting at baseline. The primary efficacy outcome (MACE) was the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke. Patients without history of coronary stenting had higher baseline risk of MACE [13.2% vs. 8.0%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.73, in the placebo arm]. The relative risk reduction in MACE with ticagrelor (pooled doses) was similar in patients without (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.99) and with prior stenting (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.96; P for interaction = 0.76)., Conclusion: Long-term ticagrelor reduces thrombotic events in patients with prior MI regardless of whether they had prior coronary stenting. These data highlight the benefits of DAPT in prevention of spontaneous atherothrombotic events and indicate that long-term ticagrelor may be considered in high-risk patients with prior MI even if they have not been treated with stenting., Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01225562., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Circulating high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hsTn) and soluble ST2 (sST2) reflect myocardial stress in patients with heart failure (HF). Production of cyclic guanosine 3'5' monophosphate (cGMP) in response to activation of natriuretic peptide receptors reduces cardiac afterload and preload. We assessed the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on these biomarkers in patients with reduced ejection fraction and acute decompensated HF (ADHF)., Methods and Results: PIONEER-HF was a randomized, double-blind trial of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in hospitalized patients with ADHF following haemodynamic stabilization. We measured circulating hsTnT, sST2, and urinary cGMP at baseline, 1, 2 (sST2, cGMP), 4, and 8 weeks (n = 694 with all baseline biomarkers). Ratios of geometric means (timepoint/baseline) were determined and compared as a ratio for sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan led to a significantly greater decline in hsTnT and sST2. This effect emerged as early as 1 week for sST2 and was significant for both at 4 weeks with a 16% greater reduction in hsTnT (P < 0.001) and 9% greater reduction in sST2 (P = 0.0033). Serial urinary cGMP increased with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril (P < 0.001, 1 week). The significant differences between treatment groups for each biomarker were sustained at 8 weeks. In an exploratory multivariable-adjusted analysis of cardiovascular death or HF-rehospitalization, the concentrations of hsTnT, sST2 at week 1 were significantly associated with subsequent outcome., Conclusion: Biomarkers of myocardial stress are elevated in patients with ADHF and associated with outcome. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduces myocardial injury and haemodynamic stress as reflected by biomarkers, with an onset that is apparent within 1-4 weeks., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02554890 clinical.trials.gov., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: In PEGASUS-TIMI 54, ticagrelor significantly reduced the risk of the composite of major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events by 15-16% in stable patients with a prior myocardial infarction (MI) 1-3 years earlier. We report the efficacy and safety in the subpopulation recommended for treatment in the European (EU) label, i.e. treatment with 60 mg b.i.d. initiated up to 2 years from the MI, or within 1 year after stopping previous adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitor treatment., Methods and Results: Of the 21 162 patients enrolled in PEGASUS-TIMI 54, 10 779 patients were included in the primary analysis for this study, randomized to ticagrelor 60 mg (n = 5388) or matching placebo (n = 5391). The cumulative proportions of patients with events at 36 months were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method. The composite of CV death, MI, or stroke occurred less frequently in the ticagrelor group (7.9% KM rate vs. 9.6%), hazard ratio (HR) 0.80 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.91; P = 0.001]. Ticagrelor also reduced the risk of all-cause mortality, HR 0.80 (0.67-0.96; P = 0.018). Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding was more frequent in the ticagrelor group 2.5% vs. 1.1%; HR 2.36 (1.65-3.39; P < 0.001). The corresponding HR for fatal or intracranial bleeding was 1.17 (0.68-2.01; P = 0.58)., Conclusion: In PEGASUS-TIMI 54, treatment with ticagrelor 60 mg as recommended in the EU label, was associated with a relative risk reduction of 20% in CV death, MI, or stroke. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding was increased, but fatal or intracranial bleeding was similar to placebo. There appears to be a favourable benefit-risk ratio for long-term ticagrelor 60 mg in this population., Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01225562., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Cardiac and renal diseases commonly occur with bidirectional interactions. We hypothesized that cardiac and inflammatory biomarkers may assist in identification of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) at high risk of worsening renal function., Methods: In this exploratory analysis from SAVOR-TIMI 53, concentrations of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-TnT), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) were measured in baseline serum samples of 12310 patients. The primary end point for this analysis was a ≥40% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at end of treatment (EOT) at a median of 2.1 years. The relationships between biomarkers and the end point were modeled using adjusted logistic and Cox regression., Results: After multivariable adjustment including baseline renal function, each biomarker was independently associated with an increased risk of ≥40% decrease in eGFR at EOT [Quartile (Q) Q4 vs Q1: hs-TnT adjusted odds ratio (OR), 5.63 (3.49-9.10); NT-proBNP adjusted OR, 3.53 (2.29-5.45); hs-CRP adjusted OR, 1.84 (95% CI, 1.27-2.68); all P values ≤0.001]. Furthermore, each biomarker was independently associated with higher risk of worsening of urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) category (all P values ≤0.002). Sensitivity analyses in patients without heart failure and eGFR >60 mL/min provided similar results. In an adjusted multimarker model, hs-TnT and NT-proBNP remained significantly associated with both renal outcomes (all P values <0.01)., Conclusions: hs-TnT, NT-proBNP, and hs-CRP were each associated with worsening of renal function [reduction in eGFR (≥40%) and deterioration in UACR class] in high-risk patients with T2DM. Patients with high cardiac or inflammatory biomarkers should be treated not only for their risk of cardiovascular outcomes but also followed for renal deterioration., (© 2019 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.)

Aims: Prior studies suggested that the risks of ischaemic stroke and bleeding in patients of Asian race with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be higher than that of non-Asians. In the analysis of ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, we compared clinical outcomes, edoxaban concentration, and anti-factor Xa (anti-FXa) activity, between Asian and non-Asian races., Methods and Results: There were 2909 patients of Asian race and 18 195 non-Asian race in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial. The risks of thromboembolism and bleeding events were compared for Asians and non-Asians treated with warfarin. The trough levels of edoxaban concentration and anti-FXa activity were also compared and correlated with the efficacy and safety of edoxaban vs. warfarin. Compared to non-Asian patients, the Asian population was on average 2 years younger and 20 kg lighter. In the warfarin group, the adjusted risk of ischaemic stroke did not differ significantly for patients of Asian and non-Asian race [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 1.12, P = 0.56). Asians treated with warfarin had a higher-adjusted risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH: aHR 1.71, P = 0.03) compared with non-Asians. The trough edoxaban concentration and anti-FXa activity were 20-25% lower for Asians compared with non-Asians. Compared to warfarin, higher dose edoxaban significantly reduced ICH while preserving the efficacy of stroke prevention in both Asians and non-Asians. Two of three net clinical outcomes appeared to be more favourably reduced with edoxaban in Asians compared with non-Asians (Pint = 0.063 for primary, 0.037 for secondary, and 0.032 for third net clinical outcomes, respectively)., Conclusion: Compared to warfarin, higher dose edoxaban preserved the efficacy for stroke prevention and was associated with a favourable safety profile for Asians, which may be due to the lower trough edoxaban concentration and anti-FXa activity achieved in patients of Asian race., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: To investigate the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods and Results: In the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, patients with AF were randomized to warfarin (international normalized ratio 2.0-3.0) or edoxaban. The cohort (N = 21 028) included patients across BMI categories (kg/m2): underweight (<18.5) in 0.8%, normal (18.5 to <25) in 21.4%, overweight (25 to <30) in 37.6%, moderately obese (30 to <35) in 24.8%, severely obese (35 to <40) in 10.0%, and very severely obese (≥40) in 5.5%. In an adjusted analysis, higher BMI (continuous, per 5 kg/m2 increase) was significantly and independently associated with lower risks of stroke/systemic embolic event (SEE) [hazard ratio (HR) 0.88, P = 0.0001], ischaemic stroke/SEE (HR 0.87, P < 0.0001), and death (HR 0.91, P < 0.0001), but with increased risks of major (HR 1.06, P = 0.025) and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (HR 1.05, P = 0.0007). There was a significant interaction between sex and increasing BMI category, with lower risk of ischaemic stroke/SEE in males and increased risk of bleeding in women. Trough edoxaban concentration and anti-Factor Xa activity were similar across BMI groups >18.5 kg/m2, while time in therapeutic range for warfarin improved significantly as BMI increased (P < 0.0001). The effects of edoxaban vs. warfarin on stroke/SEE, major bleeding, and net clinical outcome were similar across BMI groups., Conclusion: An increased BMI was independently associated with a lower risk of stroke/SEE, better survival, but increased risk of bleeding. The efficacy and safety profiles of edoxaban were similar across BMI categories ranging from 18.5 to >40., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background:: Despite dual antiplatelet therapy, persistent thrombin generation and thrombin-mediated platelet activation account in part for the residual risk of atherothrombotic disease among patients with prior acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Inhibition of thrombin generation among high-risk ACS patients (biomarker-positive ACS) with the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban may limit ongoing thrombus formation and myocardial necrosis and thereby improve clinical outcomes., Objectives and Methods:: ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial that randomized ACS patients to either rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d., rivaroxaban 5 mg b.i.d., or placebo plus standard-of-care antiplatelet therapy for a mean of 13.1 months and up to 31 months ( N=15,526). This post-hoc analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban among biomarker-positive ACS patients with and without a history of prior stroke of transient ischemic attack in the ATLAS ACS 2-TIMI 51 trial., Results:: A total of 12,626 biomarker-positive ACS patients were included in this analysis. Among biomarker-positive patients without a prior history of stroke or transient ischemic attack, rivaroxaban 2.5 b.i.d. was associated with a reduction in the primary efficacy endpoint (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) as compared with placebo (hazard ratio=0.80, 95% confidence interval (0.68-0.94), p=0.007) at the expense of an increase in non-coronary-artery-bypass-graft-related Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding (1.9% vs. 0.7%, p<0.0001), but not a significant increase in either intracranial hemorrhage (0.4% vs. 0.2%, p=0.11) or fatal bleeding (0.1% vs. 0.3%, p=0.16)., Conclusion:: Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. was associated with a significant reduction in the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke with no increase in fatal bleeding. Biomarker-positive patients with no prior history of stroke or transient ischemic attack may be a optimal target population to receive "dual pathway" therapy with rivaroxaban plus dual antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention following ACS.

Background:: The relative efficacy and safety profile of the oral Factor Xa inhibitor edoxaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation and established coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been analyzed., Materials and Methods:: In the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, two edoxaban regimens were compared with warfarin in 21,105 patients with atrial fibrillation and CHADS 2 ⩾2. We analyzed the primary trial endpoints (efficacy: stroke or systemic embolic event, safety: International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major bleeding) in patients with versus without CAD, and used interaction testing to assess for treatment effect modification., Results:: The 4510 patients (21.4%) with known CAD were older, more likely male, on aspirin, with lower creatinine clearance and higher CHADS 2 and HAS-BLED scores ( p <0.001 for each). Treatment with the higher-dose edoxaban regimen (versus warfarin) in patients with known CAD tended to have a greater reduction in stroke/systemic embolic event compared with patients without CAD (CAD: hazard ratio 0.65 (0.46-0.92) versus no CAD: hazard ratio 0.94 (0.79-1.12), p-INT 0.062) and also in myocardial infarction (CAD: hazard ratio 0.69 (0.49-0.98) versus no CAD: hazard ratio 1.24 (0.89-1.72), p-INT 0.017), while there was a similar reduction in bleeding irrespective of CAD status (hazard ratio 0.81 and 0.80, p-INT 0.97). Presence or absence of CAD did not modify the efficacy or safety profile of the lower-dose edoxaban regimen (versus warfarin)., Conclusion:: The reduction in ischemic events with the higher-dose edoxaban regimen versus warfarin was greater in patients with CAD, while bleeding was significantly reduced with edoxaban regardless of CAD status. The efficacy and safety profile of the lower-dose edoxaban regimen relative to warfarin was unaffected by CAD status.

Aims: Pacemaker, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantations and generator changes are frequently performed in patients receiving direct oral anticoagulants. In an exploratory analysis, we investigated the outcome of patients undergoing such device procedures in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial., Methods and Results: During the trial, 1217 device procedures were performed in 1145 patients, with intervention dates available for 1203 procedures. Two hundred and twenty-five procedures (in 212 patients) were performed >30 days after study drug was stopped and are not included in the event analysis. For most interventions (n = 728, 74%), study drug was interrupted >3 days (median for the entire cohort: 5 days, interquartile range 0-11 days); 250 interventions were performed with ≤3 days study drug interruption. During the first 30 days after the procedure, six strokes/systemic embolic events (SEEs) (three each in the lower-dose edoxaban and warfarin arm) and one major bleeding event (in the lower-dose edoxaban arm) occurred; no stroke/SEEs or major bleeds occurred around the 295 device procedures in the higher-dose edoxaban arm. Two ischaemic and one major bleeding event occurred after the 288 device procedures performed with ≤3 days periprocedural interruption of study drug., Conclusion: In this first experience of patients undergoing device surgery with edoxaban, a low risk of ischaemic and bleeding events was observed during the first 30 days post-procedure. Our data are in line with current recommendations of no or only brief interruption of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants prior to cardiac device surgery.

Aims: Although presenting features and early sequelae of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) are well described, less is known about longer-term risks and modes of death. The purpose of this study was to characterize modes of death following NSTE-ACS in clinical trial populations., Methods and Results: We evaluated 66 252 patients with NSTE-ACS enrolled in 14 Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trials, examining baseline characteristics and modes and timing of death. Of the 66 252 patients followed for a median of 372 (interquartile range 218-521) days, 3147 (4.8%) died by the time of last follow-up. Of the 2606 patients (82.8%) with known modes of death, 75.1% were related to a cardiovascular (CV) event, 3.0% were related to a bleeding event (including intracranial haemorrhage), and 21.8% were related to a non-CV/non-bleeding event. The most common modes of CV death were sudden death (SD) and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) (36.4% and 23.4%, respectively, of CV deaths). The proportion of CV deaths related to recurrent MI was higher in the first 30 days than it was after 30 days following NSTE-ACS (30.6% vs. 18.7%), whereas the proportion of SD was lower in the first 30 days than after 30 days (21.6% vs. 46.2%)., Conclusion: Sudden death represents the largest proportion of CV deaths after 30 days among patients enrolled in CV clinical trials with NSTE-ACS. Further investigations aimed at defining the epidemiology of SD and developing specific therapies and management approaches to reduce SD following NSTE-ACS may be critical to reducing late mortality.