Search

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Drs Warraich and Califf are employees of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Dr Warraich previously served on the medical advisory board for GoodRx. Dr Califf has been an employee of and held equity in Verily Life Sciences and Google Health (Alphabet); and has served on boards of directors for Cytokinetics, Centessa, Clinetic, Keystone Symposia, the Critical Path Institute (C-Path), the Clinical Research Forum, and One Fifteen.

The misuse of opioids continues to be epidemic, resulting in dependency and a recent upsurge in drug overdoses that have contributed to a significant decrease in life expectancy in the United States. Moreover, recent data suggest that commonly used opioids for the management of pain may produce undesirable pharmacological actions and interfere with critical medications commonly used in cardiovascular disease and stroke; however, the impact on outcomes remains controversial. The American Heart Association developed an advisory statement for health care professionals and researchers in the setting of cardiovascular and brain health to synthesize the current literature, to provide approaches for identifying patients with opioid use disorder, and to address pain management and overdose. A literature and internet search spanning from January 1, 2012, to February 15, 2021, and limited to epidemiology studies, reviews, consensus statements, and guidelines in human subjects was conducted. Suggestions and considerations listed in this document are based primarily on published evidence from this review whenever possible, as well as expert opinion. Several federal and institutional consensus documents and clinical resources are currently available to both patients and clinicians; however, none have specifically addressed cardiovascular disease and brain health. Although strategic tools and therapeutic approaches for recognition of opioid use disorder and safe opioid use are available for health care professionals who manage patients with cardiovascular disease and stroke, high-quality evidence does not currently exist. Therefore, there is an urgent need for more research to identify the most effective approaches to improve care for these patients.

During the past year, clinicians and the public have been focused on the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and its associated societal and economic effects. However, once the acute phase of this crisis has passed, we will face an enormous wave of death and disability as a result of common chronic diseases (CCDs), with cardiometabolic diseases at the crest (Figure). A tsunami results when an earthquake on the ocean floor creates huge waves that can wreak devastation far distant from the original upheaval, especially when warnings are ignored. Similarly, underlying global and national demographic and risk factor profiles have for some time presaged an overwhelming burden of CCDs. However, although the pandemic has created additional impetus that unless heeded will amplify the consequences of this burden, the rapid adaptations and innovations in care and research prompted by the urgent response to it may also offer us the means to stem this flood.

The availability of large datasets from multiple sources [e.g. registries, biobanks, electronic health records (EHRs), claims or billing databases, implantable devices, wearable sensors, and mobile apps], coupled with advances in computing and analytic technologies, have provided new opportunities for conducting innovative health research. Equally, improved digital access to health information has facilitated the conduct of efficient randomized controlled trials (RCTs) upon which clinical management decisions can be based, for instance, by permitting the identification of eligible patients for recruitment and/or linkage for follow-up via their EHRs. Given these advances in cardiovascular data science and the complexities they behold, it is important that health professionals have clarity on the appropriate use and interpretation of observational, so-called 'real-world', and randomized data in cardiovascular medicine. The Cardiovascular Roundtable of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) held a workshop to explore the future of RCTs and the current and emerging opportunities for gathering and exploiting complex observational datasets in cardiovascular research. The aim of this article is to provide a perspective on the appropriate use of randomized and observational data and to outline the ESC plans for supporting the collection and availability of clinical data to monitor and improve the quality of care of patients with cardiovascular disease in Europe and provide an infrastructure for undertaking pragmatic RCTs. Moreover, the ESC continues to campaign for greater engagement amongst regulators, industry, patients, and health professionals in the development and application of a more efficient regulatory framework that is able to take maximal advantage of new opportunities for improving the design and efficiency of observational studies and RCT in patients with cardiovascular disease., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Understanding and addressing the unique health needs of people residing in rural America is critical to the American Heart Association's pursuit of a world with longer, healthier lives. Improving the health of rural populations is consistent with the American Heart Association's commitment to health equity and its focus on social determinants of health to reduce and ideally to eliminate health disparities. This presidential advisory serves as a call to action for the American Heart Association and other stakeholders to make rural populations a priority in programming, research, and policy. This advisory first summarizes existing data on rural populations, communities, and health outcomes; explores 3 major groups of factors underlying urban-rural disparities in health outcomes, including individual factors, social determinants of health, and health delivery system factors; and then proposes a set of solutions spanning health system innovation, policy, and research aimed at improving rural health.

Responding to concerns about the potential for increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, specifically myocardial infarction, associated with certain glucose-lowering therapies, the US Food and Drug Administration and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the European Medicines Agency issued guidance to the pharmaceutical industry in 2008. Glucose-lowering therapies were granted regulatory approval primarily from smaller studies that have demonstrated reductions in glycated hemoglobin concentration. Such studies were overall underpowered and of insufficient duration to show any effect on cardiovascular outcomes. The 2008 guidance aimed to ensure the cardiovascular safety of new glucose-lowering therapies to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This resulted in a plethora of new cardiovascular outcome trials, most designed primarily as placebo-controlled noninferiority trials, but with many also powered for superiority. Several of these outcome trials demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of the newer agents, resulting in the first-ever cardiovascular protection indications for glucose-lowering therapies. Determining whether the guidance continues to have value in its current form is critically important as we move forward after the first decade of implementation. In February 2018, a think tank comprising representatives from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies convened to consider the guidance in light of the findings of the completed cardiovascular outcome trials. The group made several recommendations for future regulatory guidance and for cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering therapies. These recommendations include requiring only the 1.3 noninferiority margin for regulatory approval, conducting trials for longer durations, considering studying glucose-lowering therapies as first-line management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, considering heart failure or kidney outcomes within the primary outcome, considering head-to-head active comparator trials, increasing the diversity of patients enrolled, evaluating strategies to streamline registries and the study of unselected populations, and identifying ways to improve translation of trial results to general practice.

Background: Medicare insurance claims may provide an efficient means to ascertain follow-up of older participants in clinical research. We sought to determine the accuracy and completeness of claims- versus site-based follow-up with clinical event committee (+CEC) adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes., Methods: We performed a retrospective study using linked Medicare and Duke Database of Clinical Trials data. Medicare claims were linked to clinical data from 7 randomized cardiovascular clinical trials. Of 52,476 trial participants, linking resulted in 5,839 (of 10,497 linkage-eligible) Medicare-linked trial participants with fee-for-service A and B coverage. Death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and revascularization incidences were compared using Medicare inpatient claims only, site-reported events (+CEC) only, or a combination of the 2. Randomized treatment effects were compared as a function of whether claims-based, site-based (+CEC), or a combined system was used for event detection., Results: Among the 5,839 study participants, the annual event rates were similar between claims- and site-based (+CEC) follow-up: death (overall rate 5.2% vs 5.2%; adjusted κ 0.99), MI (2.2% vs 2.3%; adjusted κ 0.96), stroke (0.7% vs 0.7%; adjusted κ 0.99), and any revascularization (7.4% vs 7.9%; adjusted κ 0.95). Of events detected by claims yet not reported by CEC, a minority were reported by sites but negatively adjudicated by CEC (39% of MIs and 18% of strokes). Differences in individual case concordance led to higher event rates when claims- and site-based (+CEC) systems were combined. Randomized treatment effects were similar among the 3 approaches for each outcome of interest., Conclusions: Claims- versus site-based (+CEC) follow-up identified similar overall cardiovascular event rates despite meaningful differences in the events detected. Randomized treatment effects were similar using the 2 methods, suggesting claims data could be used to support clinical research leveraging routinely collected data. This approach may lead to more effective evidence generation, synthesis, and appraisal of medical products and inform the strategic approaches toward the National Evaluation System for Health Technology., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy reduces the risk of recurrent cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with prior acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The role of biomarkers in identifying subsets of patients who may derive greater clinical benefit with ezetimibe is unknown., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the role of established CV biomarkers in assessing likely benefit with ezetimibe added to statin therapy in post-ACS patients., Methods: In a pre-specified nested analysis within a randomized, double-blind trial of ezetimibe/simvastatin versus placebo/simvastatin (IMPROVE-IT [Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial]), high-sensitivity troponin T, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, growth-differentiation factor-15, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein was measured in 7,195 patients stabilized (1 month post-randomization) after ACS. A multimarker approach based on biomarker values was used to examine the risk of recurrent CV events and clinical benefit with ezetimibe., Results: Elevated levels of each biomarker were independently associated with higher risks of CV death/myocardial infarction/stroke and CV death/heart failure (p trend  < 0.001 for each). There was a pattern of greater absolute risk reduction in CV death/myocardial infarction/stroke with the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy in patients at higher risk on the basis of biomarker levels. High-risk patients (≥3 biomarkers "positive"; n = 1,437) had an absolute risk difference of -7.3% (95% confidence interval: -13.8% to -0.8%; p = 0.02) with ezetimibe, and intermediate-risk patients (1 to 2 biomarkers positive; n = 3,842) had an absolute risk difference of -4.4% (95% confidence interval: -9.7% to 0.8%), translating into numbers needed to treat at 7 years of 14 and 23, respectively. Low-risk patients (0 biomarkers positive; n = 1,916) did not appear to benefit from the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy., Conclusions: A biomarker-based strategy identifies a gradient of risk among patients post-ACS, offering the potential to identify higher-risk patients with a correspondingly high absolute benefit from the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cluster-randomized trials (CRTs) are being increasingly used to test a range of interventions, including medical interventions commonly used in clinical practice. Policies created by the NIH and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) require the reporting of demographics and the examination of demographic heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) for individually randomized trials. Little is known about how frequent demographics are reported and HTE analyses are conducted in CRTs., Objectives: We sought to understand the prevalence of HTE analyses and the statistical methods used to conduct them in CRTs focused on treating cardiovascular disease, cancer, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. Additionally, we also report on the proportion of CRTs that reported on baseline demographics of its populations and conducted demographic HTE analyses., Data Sources: We searched PubMed and Embase for CRTs published between 1/1/2010 and 3/29/2016 that focused on treating the top 3 Center for Disease Control causes of death (cardiovascular disease, chronic lower respiratory disease, and cancer). Evidence Screening And Review: Of 1,682 unique titles, 117 abstracts were screened. After excluding 53 articles, we included 64 CRT publications and abstracted information on study characteristics and demographic information, statistical analysis, HTE analysis, and study quality., Results: Age and sex were reported in greater than 95.3% of CRTs, while race and ethnicity were reported in only 20.3% of CRTs. HTE analyses were conducted in 28.1% (n = 18) of included CRTs and 77.8% (n = 12) were prespecified analyses. Four CRTs conducted a demographic subgroup analysis. Only 6/18 CRTs used interaction testing to determine whether HTE existed., Conclusions: Baseline demographic reporting was high for age and sex in CRTs, but was uncommon for race and ethnicity. HTE analyses were uncommon and was rare for demographic subgroups, which limits the ability to examine the extent of benefits or risks for treatments tested with CRT designs., Competing Interests: MA Starks - none; GD Sanders - none; RR Coeytaux - none; IL Riley - none; LR Jackson - education support from Medtronic and Biotronik; honoraria from Biotronik; AM Brooks - none; KL Thomas - Consultant: Pfizer, BMS, Janssen; KR Choudhury - none; RM Califf - sits on the corporate board for Cytokinetics and is board chair for the People-Centered Research Foundation. He receives personal fees for consulting from Merck, Amgen, Biogen, Genentech, Eli Lilly, and Boehringer Ingelheim. He is also employed as an advisor by Verily Life Sciences (Alphabet); AF Hernandez - consulting fees from Sanofi, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, and Cortera; research support from Amylin and Scios/Johnson & Johnson. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Importance: Clinical decisions are ideally based on evidence generated from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical outcomes, but historically, few clinical guideline recommendations have been based entirely on this type of evidence., Objective: To determine the class and level of evidence (LOE) supporting current major cardiovascular society guideline recommendations, and changes in LOE over time., Data Sources: Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) clinical guideline documents (2008-2018), as identified on cardiovascular society websites, and immediate predecessors to these guideline documents (1999-2014), as referenced in current guideline documents., Study Selection: Comprehensive guideline documents including recommendations organized by class and LOE., Data Extraction and Synthesis: The number of recommendations and the distribution of LOE (A [supported by data from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT], B [supported by data from observational studies or a single RCT], and C [supported by expert opinion only]) were determined for each guideline document., Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of guideline recommendations supported by evidence from multiple RCTs (LOE A)., Results: Across 26 current ACC/AHA guidelines (2930 recommendations; median, 121 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 76-155]), 248 recommendations (8.5%) were classified as LOE A, 1465 (50.0%) as LOE B, and 1217 (41.5%) as LOE C. The median proportion of LOE A recommendations was 7.9% (25th-75th percentiles, 0.9%-15.2%). Across 25 current ESC guideline documents (3399 recommendations; median, 130 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 111-154]), 484 recommendations (14.2%) were classified as LOE A, 1053 (31.0%) as LOE B, and 1862 (54.8%) as LOE C. When comparing current guidelines with prior versions, the proportion of recommendations that were LOE A did not increase in either ACC/AHA (median, 9.0% [current] vs 11.7% [prior]) or ESC guidelines (median, 15.1% [current] vs 17.6% [prior])., Conclusions and Relevance: Among recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines, only a small percentage were supported by evidence from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT. This pattern does not appear to have meaningfully improved from 2008 to 2018.

Although advances in care have spurred improvements in cardiovascular outcomes, cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in the United States and around the world. Previous declines in cardiovascular disease mortality have slowed and even reversed for certain demographics. Further concerns exist with regard to cardiovascular drug innovation, quality of care, and healthcare costs. The Value in Healthcare Initiative-Transforming Cardiovascular Care, a collaboration of the American Heart Association and Duke University, Robert J. Margolis, MD, Center for Health Policy, aims to increase access to and affordability of cardiovascular treatment and to decrease barriers to care. The following Call to Action describes trends in cardiovascular care, identifies gaps in areas of cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment, highlights challenges with medical product innovation, and finally, outlines a series of learning collaboratives that will aid in the development of road maps for transforming cardiovascular care.

Background: Modern cardiometabolic clinical trials often include cardiovascular death as a component of a composite primary outcome, requiring central adjudication by a clinical events committee to classify cause of death. However, sometimes the cause of death cannot be determined from available data. The US Food and Drug Administration has indicated that this circumstance should occur only rarely, but its prevalence has not been formally assessed., Methods: Data from 9 global clinical trials (2009-2017) with long-term follow-up and blinded, centrally adjudicated cause of death were used to calculate the proportion of deaths attributed to cardiovascular, noncardiovascular, or undetermined causes by therapeutic area (diabetes mellitus/pre-diabetes mellitus, stable atherosclerosis, atrial fibrillation, and acute coronary syndrome), region of patient enrollment, and year of trial manuscript publication. Patient- and trial-level variables associated with undetermined cause of death were identified using a logistic model., Results: Across 127 049 enrolled participants from 9 trials, there were 9259 centrally adjudicated deaths: 5012 (54.1%) attributable to cardiovascular causes, 2800 (30.2%) attributable to noncardiovascular causes, and 1447 (15.6%) attributable to undetermined causes. There was variability in the proportion of deaths ascribed to undetermined causes by trial therapeutic area, region of enrollment, and year of trial manuscript publication. On multivariable analysis, acute coronary syndrome or atrial fibrillation trial (versus atherosclerotic vascular disease or diabetes mellitus/pre-diabetes mellitus), longer time from enrollment to death, more recent trial manuscript publication year, enrollment in North America (versus Western Europe), female sex, and older age were associated with greater likelihood of death of undetermined cause., Conclusions: In 9 cardiometabolic clinical trials with long-term follow-up, approximately 16% of deaths had undetermined causes. This provides a baseline for quality assessment of clinical trials and informs operational efforts to potentially reduce the frequency of undetermined deaths in future clinical research.

Previous decades have seen significant progress in the biological understanding of cardiovascular disease, as well as major advances in computational and information technologies. However, anticipated improvements in outcomes, quality, and cost of cardiovascular medicine at the individual and population levels from these advances have lagged expectations. Further, trends showing widening gaps in the pace of technological development and its successful uptake and application in practice suggests that substantial systemic changes are needed. Recent declines in key U.S. health outcomes have added further urgency to seek scalable approaches that deliver the right treatment to the right patient and to develop information-driven policies that improve health. The clinical care and research enterprises are currently in the midst of assimilating changes entrained by a "fourth industrial revolution" marked by the convergence of biology, physical sciences, and information science. These changes, if managed appropriately, can simultaneously enable cost-effective personalized medical care as well as more effective and targeted population health interventions. In this paper derived from a lecture in honor of cardiologist Paul Dudley White, the author explores how White's prescient insights into prevention and treatment continue to resonate today as we seek to assimilate ubiquitous computing, sophisticated sensor technologies, and bidirectional digital communication into the practice of cardiology. How the ongoing acceleration in basic science and information technologies can be wedded to the principles articulated by White as we pursue scalable approaches to personalized medicine is also examined., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: Robert Califf was the Commissioner of Food and Drugs for the US Food and Drug Administration from February 2016 to January 2017, and Deputy Commissioner for Medical Products and Tobacco for the US Food and Drug Administration from February 2015 to January 2016. Robert Califf serves on the corporate board for Cytokinetics. He also reports receiving consulting fees from Merck and Boehringer Ingelheim, and is employed as a scientific advisor by Verily Life Sciences (Alphabet). Frank Harrell has no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Medication nonadherence, a major problem in cardiovascular disease (CVD), contributes yearly to approximately 125,000 preventable deaths, which is partly attributable to only about one-half of CVD patients consistently taking prescribed life-saving medications. Current interest has focused on how labeling and education influence adherence. This paper summarizes the scope of CVD nonadherence, describes key U.S. Food and Drug Administration initiatives, and identifies potential targets for improvement. We describe key adherence factors, methods, and technological applications for simplifying regimens and enhancing adherence, and 4 areas where additional collaborative research and implementation involving the regulatory system and clinical community could substantially reduce nonadherence: 1) identifying monitoring methods; 2) improving the evidence base to better understand adherence; 3) developing patient/health provider team-based engagement strategies; and 4) alleviating health disparities. Alignment of U.S. Food and Drug Administration approaches to dissemination of information about appropriate use with clinical practice could improve adherence, and thereby reduce CVD death and disability., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To report baseline characteristics and cardiovascular (CV) risk management by region, age, sex and CV event type for 14 724 participants in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial exploring whether sitagliptin added to usual type 2 diabetes (T2DM) care affects time to first event in the composite endpoint of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke or unstable angina hospitalization., Methods: TECOS enrolled patients aged ≥50 years, with T2DM and CV disease from 38 countries in five regions: North America, Eastern Europe, Western Europe, Asia Pacific and Latin America. Participants had a glycated haemoglobin concentration of 6.5-8.0% (48-64 mmol/mol) and were receiving oral and/or insulin-based antihyperglycaemic therapy. Analysis of variance or logistic regression was used to compare regional CV risk factors and treatments, referenced to North America., Results: Patients had a mean [1 standard deviation (SD)] age of 66 (8) years, a median (interquartile range) diabetes duration of 9.4 (4.9, 15.3) years, and a mean (SD) body mass index 30.2 (5.7) kg/m² . Compared with North America, blood pressure and lipids were higher in all regions. Statin use was lowest in Latin America (68%) and Eastern Europe (70%) and aspirin use was lower compared with North America in all regions except Asia Pacific. Achievement of treatment targets did not differ by age group or insulin usage, but men and participants with previous MI were more likely than women or those with previous stroke or peripheral arterial disease to reach most treatment goals., Conclusion: The CV risk factors of participants in TECOS are reasonably controlled, but differences in CV risk management according to region, sex and history of disease exist. This diversity will enhance the generalizability of the trial results., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Diabetes and hypertension are chronic conditions that are growing in prevalence as major causal factors of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The need for chronic-illness surveillance, population-risk management, and successful treatment interventions are crucial for reducing the burden of future CVD. Addressing these problems will require population-risk stratification, task-sharing and -shifting, and community-as well as network-based care. Information technology tools also provide new opportunities for identifying those at risk and for implementing comprehensive approaches to achieving the goal of improved health locally, regionally, nationally, and globally. This article discusses ongoing efforts at one university health center in the implementation of management strategies for diabetes and hypertension at the local, regional, national, and global levels., (Copyright © 2015 World Heart Federation (Geneva). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Contemporary studies suggest an association between venous thromboembolism and a higher incidence of major cardiovascular events, mostly attributed to arterial atherothrombosis. Using data from the Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR) trial, we assessed the association of venous thromboembolism with major cardiovascular events., Methods: In NAVIGATOR, patients with impaired glucose tolerance were randomly allocated to receive valsartan or placebo and nateglinide or placebo in addition to lifestyle modification. Baseline characteristics and prior history of venous thromboembolism were assessed. After adjusting for important baseline covariates, Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to assess the association between venous thromboembolism and major cardiovascular outcomes., Results: Of the 9306 patients enrolled, 129 (1.4%) had a history of venous thromboembolism. Patients with venous thromboembolism were older, more frequently white and female, and had a higher body mass index. Patients with venous thromboembolism had higher 5-year event rates for the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, as compared with patients without venous thromboembolism (10.7% vs 5.9%; P < .001; adjusted hazard ratio 2.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-3.31; P = .001)., Conclusion: In patients with impaired glucose tolerance at high risk for cardiovascular events, the prevalence of venous thromboembolism was rare but associated with worse long-term cardiovascular outcomes, including arterial events. Venous thromboembolism is a marker of risk, and attention should be paid to this high-risk group of patients., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Increased physical activity is known to be beneficial in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but it is not known whether individuals change their activity levels after T2DM diagnosis. The present Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR) trial, conducted in participants with impaired glucose tolerance at high cardiovascular risk, assessed ambulatory activity annually using research-grade pedometers. Oral glucose tolerance tests were performed annually and repeated to confirm T2DM diagnosis. This observational analysis used general linear models to compare step counts before and after T2DM diagnosis in the 2816 participants with the requisite data. Participants were relatively inactive at baseline, taking a median (interquartile range) of 5488 (3258-8361) steps/day, which decreased after T2DM diagnosis by a mean (s.e.) of 258 (64) steps/day (p < 0.0001); however, after adjusting for background trend for activity, step count after T2DM diagnosis was unchanged [mean (s.e.) of 103 (87) fewer steps/day; p = 0.23]. Awareness of T2DM diagnosis had no impact on the trajectory of activity established before the diagnosis., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Early termination of clinical trials due to low recruitment represents an understudied challenge for clinical research. We aimed to describe characteristics of cardiovascular trials terminated because of low recruitment and identify the major predictors of such early termination., Methods: We reviewed all cardiovascular clinical trials (7,042 studies) registered in ClinicalTrials.gov from February 29, 2000, to January 17, 2013, and assessed information about trials that were completed and those that were terminated early. Logistic regression models were developed to identify independent predictors of early termination due to low recruitment., Results: Our search strategy identified 6,279 cardiovascular clinical trials, of which 684 (10.9%) were terminated prematurely. Of these halted trials, the main reason for termination was lower than expected recruitment (278 trials; 53.6%). When comparing trials that terminated early because of low recruitment with those that were completed, we found that studies funded by the National Institutes of Health or other US federal agencies (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.89), studies of behavior/diet intervention (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.19-0.65), and single-arm design studies (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42-0.78) were associated with a lower risk of early termination. University/hospital-funded (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.10-2.10) and mixed-source-funded studies (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.52-3.01) were associated with a higher likelihood of early termination due to lower than expected recruitment rates., Conclusions: Low recruitment represents the main cause of early termination of cardiovascular clinical trials. Funding source, type of intervention, and study design are factors associated with early termination due to low recruitment and might be good targets for improving enrollment into cardiovascular clinical trials., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The IMProved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT) is evaluating the potential benefit for reduction in major cardiovascular (CV) events from the addition of ezetimibe versus placebo to 40 mg/d of simvastatin therapy in patients who present with acute coronary syndromes and have low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≤ 125 mg/dL., Methods: The primary composite end point is CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, rehospitalization for unstable angina (UA), and coronary revascularization (≥ 30 days postrandomization). The simvastatin monotherapy arm's LDL-C target is <70 mg/dL. Ezetimibe was assumed to further lower LDL-C by 15 mg/dL and produce an estimated ~8% to 9% treatment effect. The targeted number of events is 5,250., Results: We enrolled 18,144 patients with either ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI, n = 5,192) or UA/non-ST-segment elevation MI (UA/NSTEMI, n = 12,952) from October 2005 to July 2010. Western Europe (40%) and North America (38%) were the leading enrolling regions. The STEMI cohort was younger and had a higher percentage of patients naive to lipid-lowering treatment compared with the UA/NSTEMI cohort. The UA/NSTEMI group had a higher prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, and prior MI. Median LDL-C at entry was 100 mg/dL for STEMI and 93 mg/dL for UA/NSTEMI patients., Conclusions: This trial is evaluating LDL-C lowering beyond previously targeted LDL-C levels. The results depend on achieving the desired separation of LDL-C with ezetimibe and on the assumption that ezetimibe's lowering of LDL-C will have similar event reduction efficacy as the LDL-C lowering from a statin. The results could affect future therapies and guidelines., (Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: ClinicalTrials.gov is an National Institutes of Health-sponsored registry of federally and privately funded trials. We sought to determine fundamental characteristics of registered pediatric cardiovascular trials (PCVTs)., Methods: A data set including 68,134 interventional clinical trials was downloaded from ClinicalTrials.gov and entered into a relational database. Aggregate data from PCVTs were compared with other trial specialties. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with improved trial quality metrics including blinding and randomization., Results: Between July 1, 2005, and September 27, 2010, 5035 (7%) registered trials targeted pediatric populations, including 213 PCVTs (4.2%), 1,176 pediatric infectious disease trials (23%), 664 pediatric mental health trials (13%), and 346 pediatric hematology/oncology trials (7%). Median (interquartile range) PCVT enrollment was 65 subjects (36-186) and median study duration was 2.3 years (1.3-3.7). The most common PCVTs targeted acquired diseases including hypertension (n = 41, 14%), obesity (n = 26, 9%), pulmonary hypertension (n = 25, 9%), and dyslipidemia (n = 19, 7%). Important factors associated with improved quality metrics included National Institutes of Health as opposed to industry funding (OR, 1.9; P < .0001); trial location (trials with both US and foreign enrollment vs trials with US only or foreign only enrollment, P = .02) and trials restricted to younger children as opposed to trials including adolescents (OR, 1.4; P < .0001)., Conclusion: PCVTs represent a small proportion of clinical trials relative to other pediatric subspecialties. Most PCVTs tend to parallel adult morbidities while there is a relative paucity of trials focused on congenital heart disease. These data may be useful to stakeholders in informing decisions regarding the conduct of PCVTs, and to provide insight into mechanisms to advance PCVT infrastructure., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The extent to which change in physical activity can modify the risk of cardiovascular disease in individuals at high cardiovascular risk is uncertain. We investigated whether baseline and change in objectively-assessed ambulatory activity is associated with the risk of a cardiovascular event in individuals at high cardiovascular risk with impaired glucose tolerance., Methods: We assessed prospective data from the NAVIGATOR trial involving 9306 individuals with impaired glucose tolerance who were recruited in 40 countries between January, 2002, and January, 2004. Participants also either had existing cardiovascular disease (if age ≥50 years) or at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor (if age ≥55 years). Participants were followed-up for cardiovascular events (defined as cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal stroke, or myocardial infarction) for 6 years on average and had ambulatory activity assessed by pedometer at baseline and 12 months. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models quantified the association of baseline and change in ambulatory activity (from baseline to 12 months) with the risk of a subsequent cardiovascular event, after adjustment for each other and potential confounding variables. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.govNCT00097786., Findings: During 45,211 person-years follow-up, 531 cardiovascular events occurred. Baseline ambulatory activity (hazard ratio [HR] per 2000 steps per day 0·90, 95% CI 0·84-0·96) and change in ambulatory activity (0·92, 0·86-0·99) were inversely associated with the risk of a cardiovascular event. Results for change in ambulatory activity were unaffected when also adjusted for changes in body-mass index and other potential confounding variables at 12 months., Interpretation: In individuals at high cardiovascular risk with impaired glucose tolerance, both baseline levels of daily ambulatory activity and change in ambulatory activity display a graded inverse association with the subsequent risk of a cardiovascular event., Funding: Novartis Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Sitagliptin, an oral dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, lowers blood glucose when administered as monotherapy or in combination with other antihyperglycemic agents. TECOS will evaluate the effects of adding sitagliptin to usual diabetes care on cardiovascular outcomes and clinical safety. TECOS is a pragmatic, academically run, multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial recruiting approximately 14,000 patients in 38 countries who have type 2 diabetes (T2DM), are at least 50 years old, have cardiovascular disease, and have an hemoglobin A1c value between 6.5% and 8.0%. Eligible participants will be receiving stable mono- or dual therapy with metformin, sulfonylurea, or pioglitazone, or insulin alone or in combination with metformin. Randomization is 1:1 to double-blind sitagliptin or matching placebo, in addition to existing therapy in a usual care setting. Follow-up occurs at 4-month intervals in year 1 and then twice yearly until 1300 confirmed primary end points have occurred. Glycemic equipoise between randomized groups is a desired aim. The primary composite cardiovascular endpoint is time to the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina, with cardiovascular events adjudicated by an independent committee blinded to study therapy. TECOS is a pragmatic-design cardiovascular outcome trial assessing the cardiovascular effects of sitagliptin when added to usual T2DM management., (© 2013.)

Background: Cardiovascular medicine is widely regarded as a vanguard for evidence-based drug and technology development. Our goal was to describe the cardiovascular clinical research portfolio from ClinicalTrials.gov., Methods and Results: We identified 40 970 clinical research studies registered between 2007 and 2010 in which patients received diagnostic, therapeutic, or other interventions per protocol. By annotating 18 491 descriptors from the National Library of Medicine's Medical Subject Heading thesaurus and 1220 free-text terms to select those relevant to cardiovascular disease, we identified studies that related to the diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of diseases of the heart and peripheral arteries in adults (n = 2325 [66%] included from review of 3503 potential studies). The study intervention involved a drug in 44.6%, a device or procedure in 39.3%, behavioral intervention in 8.1%, and biological or genetic interventions in 3.0% of the trials. More than half of the trials were postmarket approval (phase 4, 25.6%) or not part of drug development (no phase, 34.5%). Nearly half of all studies (46.3%) anticipated enrolling 100 patients or fewer. The majority of studies assessed biomarkers or surrogate outcomes, with just 31.8% reporting a clinical event as a primary outcome., Conclusions: Cardiovascular studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov span a range of study designs. Data have limited verification or standardization and require manual processes to describe and categorize studies. The preponderance of small and late-phase studies raises questions regarding the strength of evidence likely to be generated by the current portfolio and the potential efficiency to be gained by more research consolidation.

We used baseline data from the NAVIGATOR trial to (1) identify risk factors for diabetes progression in those with impaired glucose tolerance and high cardiovascular risk, (2) create models predicting 5-year incident diabetes, and (3) provide risk classification tools to guide clinical interventions. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models estimated 5-year incident diabetes risk and simplified models examined the relative importance of measures of glycemia in assessing diabetes risk. The C-statistic was used to compare models; reclassification analyses compare the models' ability to identify risk groups defined by potential therapies (routine or intensive lifestyle advice or pharmacologic therapy). Diabetes developed in 3,254 (35%) participants over 5 years median follow-up. The full prediction model included fasting and 2-hour glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values but demonstrated only moderate discrimination for diabetes (C = 0.70). Simplified models with only fasting glucose (C = 0.67) or oral glucose tolerance test values (C = 0.68) had higher C statistics than models with HbA1c alone (C = 0.63). The models were unlikely to inappropriately reclassify participants to risk groups that might receive pharmacologic therapy. Our results confirm that in a population with dysglycemia and high cardiovascular risk, traditional risk factors are appropriate predictors and glucose values are better predictors than HbA1c, but discrimination is moderate at best, illustrating the challenges of predicting diabetes in a high-risk population. In conclusion, our novel risk classification paradigm based on potential treatment could be used to guide clinical practice based on cost and availability of screening tests., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Targeting a higher hemoglobin in patients with chronic kidney disease leads to adverse cardiovascular outcomes, yet the reasons remain unclear. Herein, we sought to determine whether changes in erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dose and in hemoglobin were predictive of changes in blood pressure (BP) and whether these changes were associated with cardiovascular outcomes., Methods: In this secondary analysis of 1421 Correction of Hemoglobin and Outcomes in Renal Disease (CHOIR) participants, mixed model analyses were used to describe monthly changes in ESA dose and hemoglobin with changes in diastolic BP (DBP) and systolic BP (SBP). Poisson modeling was performed to determine whether changes in hemoglobin and BP were associated with the composite end point of death or cardiovascular outcomes., Results: Monthly average DBP, but not SBP, was higher in participants in the higher hemoglobin arm. Increases in ESA doses and in hemoglobin were significantly associated with linear increases in DBP, but not consistently with increases in SBP. In models adjusted for demographics and comorbid conditions, increases in ESA dose (>0 U) and larger increases in hemoglobin (>1.0 g/dL/month) were associated with poorer outcomes [event rate ratio per 1000 U weekly dose per month increase 1.05, (1.02-1.08), P = 0.002 and event rate ratio 1.70 (1.02-2.85), P = 0.05, respectively]. However, increasing DBP was not associated with adverse outcomes [event rate ratio 1.01 (0.98-1.03), P = 0.7]., Conclusion: Among CHOIR participants, higher hemoglobin targets, increases in ESA dose and in hemoglobin were associated both with increases in DBP and with higher event rates; however, increasing DBP was not associated with adverse outcomes.

Background: Cardiovascular risk models remain incomplete. Small-molecule metabolites may reflect underlying disease and, as such, serve as novel biomarkers of cardiovascular risk., Methods: We studied 2,023 consecutive patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Mass spectrometry profiling of 69 metabolites and lipid assessments were performed in fasting plasma. Principal component analysis reduced metabolites to a smaller number of uncorrelated factors. Independent relationships between factors and time-to-clinical events were assessed using Cox modeling. Clinical and metabolomic models were compared using log-likelihood and reclassification analyses., Results: At median follow-up of 3.1 years, there were 232 deaths and 294 death/myocardial infarction (MI) events. Five of 13 metabolite factors were independently associated with mortality: factor 1 (medium-chain acylcarnitines: hazard ratio [HR] 1.12 [95% CI, 1.04-1.21], P = .005), factor 2 (short-chain dicarboxylacylcarnitines: HR 1.17 [1.05-1.31], P = .005), factor 3 (long-chain dicarboxylacylcarnitines: HR 1.14 [1.05-1.25], P = .002); factor 6 (branched-chain amino acids: HR 0.86 [0.75-0.99], P = .03), and factor 12 (fatty acids: HR 1.19 [1.06-1.35], P = .004). Three factors independently predicted death/MI: factor 2 (HR 1.11 [1.01-1.23], P = .04), factor 3 (HR 1.13 [1.04-1.22], P = .005), and factor 12 (HR 1.18 [1.05-1.32], P = .004). For mortality, 27% of intermediate-risk patients were correctly reclassified (net reclassification improvement 8.8%, integrated discrimination index 0.017); for death/MI model, 11% were correctly reclassified (net reclassification improvement 3.9%, integrated discrimination index 0.012)., Conclusions: Metabolic profiles predict cardiovascular events independently of standard predictors., (Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical predictive models leave gaps in our ability to stratify cardiovascular risk. High-throughput molecular profiling promises to improve risk classification., Methods: Horizon 1 of the Measurement to Understand the Reclassification of Disease of Cabarrus and Kannapolis (MURDOCK) Study was conceived to apply emerging molecular techniques to existing data sets to characterize mechanistic diversity underlying complex human diseases, response to therapy, and prognosis. No previous studies have applied multiple, complementary molecular techniques in combination with well-developed clinical risk models to refine cardiovascular risk prediction. The MURDOCK Cardiovascular Disease Study will assess molecular profiles integrated with clinical data in "clinomic" profiles for cardiovascular risk classification., Conclusion: Herein, we describe the design of and rationale for the MURDOCK Cardiovascular Disease Study., (2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

To assess the effect of prior cardiovascular interventions on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with symptomatic atherothrombosis, the risk factor profiles, treatment patterns, and 24-month outcomes of patients in the United States with and without prior cardiovascular intervention (catheter-based, surgical, or lower-limb amputation) enrolled in the global REACH (REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) Registry were compared. Of the 17,521 US outpatients aged > or =45 years with established coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, or peripheral artery disease enrolled in the REACH Registry between December 1, 2003 and June 1, 2004 who had > or =1 follow-up visit, 11,925 (68.1%) had a previous cardiovascular intervention. Prior intervention was most common in patients with coronary artery disease (76.7%) and least common in patients with cerebrovascular disease (14.6%) at baseline. Patients with prior cardiovascular intervention were significantly more likely to be taking antihypertensive, antithrombotic, or lipid-lowering therapies than those without prior intervention (P < 0.0001 for each therapy). However, 24-month Kaplan-Meier event rates for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke were similar between patients with and without prior intervention (9.10% vs. 9.00%; P = 0.49). Thus, in the US REACH Registry, prior cardiovascular intervention was not associated with an increased risk of subsequent cardiovascular ischemic events during follow-up. Patients without prior cardiovascular intervention had a lower intensity of risk factor modification at baseline and appear to represent an at-risk, undertreated population.

Background: It is not known whether drugs that block the renin-angiotensin system reduce the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular events in patients with impaired glucose tolerance., Methods: In this double-blind, randomized clinical trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we assigned 9306 patients with impaired glucose tolerance and established cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular risk factors to receive valsartan (up to 160 mg daily) or placebo (and nateglinide or placebo) in addition to lifestyle modification. We then followed the patients for a median of 5.0 years for the development of diabetes (6.5 years for vital status). We studied the effects of valsartan on the occurrence of three coprimary outcomes: the development of diabetes; an extended composite outcome of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, arterial revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina; and a core composite outcome that excluded unstable angina and revascularization., Results: The cumulative incidence of diabetes was 33.1% in the valsartan group, as compared with 36.8% in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the valsartan group, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.92; P<0.001). Valsartan, as compared with placebo, did not significantly reduce the incidence of either the extended cardiovascular outcome (14.5% vs. 14.8%; hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.07; P=0.43) or the core cardiovascular outcome (8.1% vs. 8.1%; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.14; P=0.85)., Conclusions: Among patients with impaired glucose tolerance and cardiovascular disease or risk factors, the use of valsartan for 5 years, along with lifestyle modification, led to a relative reduction of 14% in the incidence of diabetes but did not reduce the rate of cardiovascular events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00097786.), (2010 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Background: The ability of short-acting insulin secretagogues to reduce the risk of diabetes or cardiovascular events in people with impaired glucose tolerance is unknown., Methods: In a double-blind, randomized clinical trial, we assigned 9306 participants with impaired glucose tolerance and either cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular risk factors to receive nateglinide (up to 60 mg three times daily) or placebo, in a 2-by-2 factorial design with valsartan or placebo, in addition to participation in a lifestyle modification program. We followed the participants for a median of 5.0 years for incident diabetes (and a median of 6.5 years for vital status). We evaluated the effect of nateglinide on the occurrence of three coprimary outcomes: the development of diabetes; a core cardiovascular outcome that was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure; and an extended cardiovascular outcome that was a composite of the individual components of the core composite cardiovascular outcome, hospitalization for unstable angina, or arterial revascularization., Results: After adjustment for multiple testing, nateglinide, as compared with placebo, did not significantly reduce the cumulative incidence of diabetes (36% and 34%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 1.15; P=0.05), the core composite cardiovascular outcome (7.9% and 8.3%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.94, 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.09; P=0.43), or the extended composite cardiovascular outcome (14.2% and 15.2%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.93, 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.03; P=0.16). Nateglinide did, however, increase the risk of hypoglycemia., Conclusions: Among persons with impaired glucose tolerance and established cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular risk factors, assignment to nateglinide for 5 years did not reduce the incidence of diabetes or the coprimary composite cardiovascular outcomes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00097786.), (2010 Massachusetts Medical Society)

The Nateglinide and Valsartan Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR) trial is exploring two pharmacological strategies (nateglinide and valsartan, both alone and in combination) in the prevention of overt diabetes mellitus (DM) and the reduction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in subjects at high risk for these events. In this analysis, we provide baseline characteristics of the randomized NAVIGATOR study population and contrast them with those from other trials of DM prevention. Key eligibility criteria include impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG), a history of CVD (in patients aged > or =50 years), and > or =1 cardiovascular risk factor (in patients aged > or =55 years). Baseline demographic characteristics, laboratory findings, cardiovascular risk factors, CVD history, and medication use are described and compared with other trials of DM prevention. The full analysis set of subjects (N = 9306) showed a clustering of risk factors consistent with the metabolic syndrome: high rates of hypertension (77.5%), dyslipidemia (44.7%), increased waist circumference (101.0 cm), and high body mass index (BMI) (47.5% with BMI > or =30 kg/m(2)). A minority of patients had a history of CVD (24.3%); of these, 11.7% had a history of myocardial infarction and most of the remainder had evidence of coronary artery disease. Subjects also had elevated blood pressure (BP) (predominantly systolic) (139.7/82.6 mm Hg), increased serum low-density lipoproteins cholesterol levels (3.27 mmol/L), and borderline elevation of triglyceride levels (1.97 mmol/L). Demographic data, BP, and lipid profiles in NAVIGATOR were similar to those of previous DM prevention trials, which were also based largely on meeting criteria for IGT. Medication use at baseline among NAVIGATOR subjects, which frequently included aspirin, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, and lipid-lowering agents, reflects enhanced CVD risk. However, little prescribing of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers was observed, likely due to protocol exclusion criteria. In conclusion, the NAVIGATOR study comprises prediabetic subjects who typically have concurrent BP and metabolic disturbances and an enhanced risk of CVD, and are thus at higher risk for cardiovascular events than subjects in previous DM prevention trials.

Background: Prior investigations to define ethnic-related differences in the risks, medical treatment, and outcomes of patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) have been limited., Methods: The impact of ethnicity on the risk factor profiles, use of evidence-based medical therapies, and 2-year cardiovascular outcomes were investigated in 2,168 individuals (blacks n = 237, Hispanics n = 115, whites n = 1,816) from the United States with PAD from the international Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health Registry., Results: Blacks and Hispanics were more likely to have diabetes mellitus and hypertension, whereas whites had a higher rate of diagnosed hypercholesterolemia. Control of blood pressure and cholesterol levels differed significantly in the groups at baseline: elevated blood pressure was present in 55% of blacks versus 48% of Hispanics versus 38% of whites (P < .01), whereas 41% of blacks versus 31% of Hispanics versus 25% of whites had elevated total cholesterol (P < .01). Aspirin use (62% of blacks vs 68% of Hispanics vs 72% of whites, P < .01) and statin use (72% of blacks vs 68% of Hispanics vs 77% of whites, P = .03) also varied significantly. In this context, rates by ethnicity for cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke seemed to be no different at 2 years, at 8.8% for the total population: 11.6% for blacks, 8.5% for whites, and 5.0% for Hispanics (P = .32). Fewer blacks (0.6%) had undergone peripheral arterial bypass surgery compared with whites (3.4%) and Hispanics (5.2%) (P = .02)., Conclusions: Ethnic-related differences have been documented in the prevalence and treatment of several atherosclerotic risk factors known to be associated with PAD, including a variation in the use of surgical revascularization procedures.