Search

Background: The AEGIS-II trial hypothesized that CSL112, an intravenous formulation of human apoA-I, would lower the risk of plaque disruption, decreasing the risk of recurrent events such as myocardial infarction (MI) among high-risk patients with MI., Objectives: This exploratory analysis evaluates the effect of CSL112 therapy on the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) death and recurrent MI., Methods: The AEGIS-II trial was an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized 18,219 high-risk acute MI patients to 4 weekly infusions of apoA-I (6 g CSL112) or placebo., Results: The incidence of the composite of CV death and type 1 MI was 11% to 16% lower in the CSL112 group over the study period (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.7-1.0; P = 0.056 at day 90; HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.74-0.99; P = 0.048 at day 180; and HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79-1.01; P = 0.07 at day 365). Similarly, the incidence of CV death or any MI was numerically lower in CSL112-treated patients throughout the follow-up period (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.80-1.05 at day 90, HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79-0.996 at day 180, HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.83-1.01 at day 365). The effect of CSL112 treatment on MI was predominantly observed for type 1 MI and type 4b (MI due to stent thrombosis)., Conclusions: Although CSL112 did not significantly reduce the occurrence of the primary study endpoints, patients treated with CSL112 infusions had numerically lower rates of CV death and MI, type-1 MI, and stent thrombosis-related MI compared with placebo. These findings could suggest a role of apoA-I in reducing subsequent plaque disruption events via enhanced cholesterol efflux. Further prospective data would be needed to confirm these observations., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by CSL Behring. Dr Povsic has received research funding paid to his institution from CSL Behring; has received research funding from Xylocor Inc, Ionis, Bayer, Roche, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH); and has received consulting income from Novo Nordisk, Corvia, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Korjian has received research grant support paid to the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School from CSL Behring. Dr Bahit has received modest honorarium from MSD, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Anthos Therapeutics. Dr Chi has received research grant support paid to the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School from Bayer, Janssen Scientific Affairs, and CSL Behring. Dr Duffy is an employee of CSL Behring. Dr Alexander has received research grants from Artivion/CryoLife, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Ferring, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Humacyte, and the NIH; and has received advisory board/consulting payments from AbbVie, Artivion/CryoLife, AtriCure, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Ferring, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novostia, Pfizer, Portola, Theravance, and Veralox. Dr Vinereanu has received research grants from CSL Behring, Bayer, Novartis, Amgen, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received consultancy fees from Bayer, Novartis, Amgen, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Tricoci, Ms Mears, and Dr Deckelbaum are employees of CSL Behring. Dr Bonaca is the Executive Director of CPC, a nonprofit academic research organization affiliated with the University of Colorado, that receives or has received research grant/consulting funding between August 2021 and the present from Abbott Laboratories, Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Alexion Pharma, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Amgen Inc, Angionetics, Inc, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, Inc, Array BioPharma, Inc, AstraZeneca and Affiliates, Atentiv LLC, Audentes Therapeutics, Inc, Bayer and Affiliates, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Better Therapeutics, Inc, Boston Clinical Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Cambrian Biopharma, Inc, Cardiol Therapeutics Inc, CellResearch Corp, Cleerly Inc, Cook Regentec LLC, CSL Behring LLC, Eidos Therapeutics, Inc, EP Trading Co Ltd, EPG Communication Holdings Ltd, Epizon Pharma, Inc, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc, Everly Well, Inc, Exicon Consulting Pvt Ltd, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Foresee Pharmaceuticals Co Ltd, Fortress Biotech, Inc, HDL Therapeutics Inc, HeartFlow Inc, Hummingbird Bioscience, Insmed Inc, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, IQVIA Inc, Janssen and Affiliates, Kowa Research Institute, Inc, Kyushu University, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Medimmune Ltd, Medpace, Merck & Affiliates, Nectero Medical Inc, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp, Novo Nordisk, Inc, Osiris Therapeutics Inc, Pfizer Inc, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, Inc, PPD Development, LP, Prairie Education and Research Cooperative, Prothena Biosciences Limited, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Regio Biosciences, Inc, Saint Luke’s Hospital of Kansas City, Sanifit Therapeutics S.A., Sanofi-Aventis Groupe, Silence Therapeutics PLC, Smith & Nephew plc, Stanford Center for Clinical Research, Stealth BioTherapeutics Inc, State of Colorado CCPD Grant, The Brigham & Women's Hospital, Inc, The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Thrombosis Research Institute, University of Colorado, University of Pittsburgh, VarmX, Virta Health Corporation, Worldwide Clinical Trials Inc, WraSer, LLC, and Yale Cardiovascular Research Group. Dr Ridker has received institutional research grant support from Kowa, Novartis, Amarin, Pfizer, Esperion, Novo Nordisk, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI); during the past 5 years has served as a consultant to Novartis, Flame, Agepha, Ardelyx, Arrowhead, AstraZeneca, CSL Behring, Janssen, Civi Biopharm, GlaxoSmithKline, SOCAR, Novo Nordisk, Health Outlook, Montai Health, Eli Lilly, New Amsterdam, Boehringer Ingelheim, RTI, Zomagen, Cytokinetics, Horizon Therapeutics, and Cardio Therapeutics; has minority shareholder equity positions in Uppton, Bitteroot Bio, and Angiowave; and has received compensation for service on the Peter Munk Advisory Board (University of Toronto), the Leducq Foundation, Paris FR, and the Baim Institute (Boston, Massachusetts). Dr Goodman has received research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and/or speaker/consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, CYTE Ltd, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, JAMP Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tolmar Pharmaceuticals, and Valeo Pharma; and has received salary support/honoraria from the Canadian Heart Failure Society, Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Centre for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Jewish General Hospital, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, PERFUSE Research Institute, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre Clinical Trials and Translation Unit, and TIMI Study Group (Brigham Health). Dr Cornel has served on advisory boards for Amgen and AstraZeneca. Dr Lewis has received consulting fees from Janssen R&D and Idorsia. Prof Parkhomenko has received research grants from CSL Behring, Amgen, Novo Nordisk, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received consulting or speaking fees from Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Lopes has received research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis; has received funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Novo Nordisk; and has received funding for consulting or other services from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Aylward has received research support from CSL and Janssen Advisory Board; and has received honoraria and speaker fees from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, and AstraZeneca. Dr Lincoff has received honoraria for consulting activities from Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Akebia, Ardelyx, Becton Dickson, Endologix, Fibrogen, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Neovasc, Provention Bio, ReCor, Brainstorm Cell, Alnylam, and Intarcia; and has received research funding to his institution from AbbVie, Esperion, AstraZeneca, CSL Behring, Novartis, and Eli Lilly. Dr Heise is an employee of CSL Behring. Dr Sacks has received support from CSL Behring. Dr Nicolau is recipient of a scholarship from National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico – CNPq) # 303448/2021-0; has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Dalcor, Esperion, Ionis, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Vifor; and has received consulting fees from Libbs. Prof Merkely has received direct personal payment (speaker fees, studies) from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Medtronic, and Novartis; and has received institutional grants (for the Heart and Vascular Center of Semmelweis University) from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novartis, Terumo, and Vifor Pharma. Dr Trebacz has received research support from CSL Behring. Dr Libby is an unpaid consultant to, or involved in clinical trials for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baim Institute, Beren Therapeutics, Esperion Therapeutics, Genentech, Kancera, Kowa Pharmaceuticals, Medimmune, Merck, Moderna, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Regeneron; and is a member of the scientific advisory board for Amgen, Caristo Diagnostics, Cartesian Therapeutics, CSL Behring, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, Eulicid Bioimaging, Kancera, Kowa Pharmaceuticals, Olatec Therapeutics, Medimmune, Novartis, PlaqueTec, TenSixteen Bio, Soley Therapeutics, and XBiotech, Inc; has received research funding to his laboratory in the past 2 years from Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Genentech; is on the Board of Directors of XBiotech, Inc; has a financial interest in XBiotech, a company developing therapeutic human antibodies, in TenSixteen Bio, a company targeting somatic mosaicism and clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential to discover and develop novel therapeutics to treat age-related diseases, and in Soley Therapeutics, a biotechnology company that is combining artificial intelligence with molecular and cellular response detection for discovering and developing new drugs, currently focusing on cancer therapeutics; and has received funding support from the NHLBI (1R01HL134892 and 1R01HL163099-01), the RRM Charitable Fund, and the Simard Fund. Dr Nicholls has received research support from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Anthera, CSL Behring, Cerenis, Cyclarity, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Resverlogix, New Amsterdam Pharma, Novartis, InfraReDx, and Sanofi-Regeneron; and has served as a consultant for Amgen, Akcea, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Kowa, Merck, Takeda, Pfizer, Sanofi-Regeneron, Vaxxinity, CSL Sequiris, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Pocock has served as a consultant for CSL Behring as a member of executive and publications committees. Dr Bhatt discloses the following relationships: Advisory Board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Stasys; Board of Directors: American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (stock options), Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock); Consultant: Broadview Ventures, GlaxoSmithKline, Hims, SFJ, Youngene; 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, 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; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant 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), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), 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, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor); Patent: Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham & Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham & Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); research funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, 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, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, 89Bio; royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); site co-investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, Vascular Solutions; trustee: American College of Cardiology; unfunded research: FlowCo. Dr Kastelein has served on a clinical trials steering committee for Novartis, NewAmsterdam Pharma, and CSL Behring; has served as a consultant or speaker for Scribe, CiVi Biotech, Draupnir, 89Bio, and Esperion Therapeutics; and is Chief Science Officer at NewAmsterdam Pharma. Dr Bode has received research support from CSL Behring. Dr Mahaffey has received research funding from the American Heart Association, Apple, Inc, Bayer, California Institute of Regenerative medicine, CLS Behring, Eidos, Ferring, Gilead, Google (Verily), Idorsia, Johnson & Johnson, Luitpold, Novartis, PAC-12, Predordior, and Sanifit; has served as a consultant for Applied Therapeutics, Bayer, BMS, BridgeBio, CSL Behring, Elsevier, Fosun Pharma, Human, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna, Myokardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Phasebio, Portola, Quidel, and Theravance; and has equity in Human, Medeloop, Precordior, and Regencor. Dr Steg has received research grants from Amarin and Sanofi; has served on clinical trials (steering committee, clinical events committee, data and safety monitoring board [DSMB]) for Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Idorsia, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served as a consultant or speaker for Amarin, Amgen, BMS, and Novo Nordisk; and is Senior Associate Editor at Circulation. Dr Tendera has received consultation fees from the PERFUSE Group for participation in the executive committee, sponsored by CSL Behring for meetings of the study; has received consultation fees from Bayer, Janssen-Cilag, Kowa, and Servier for activities unrelated to the study; and has received a lecture honorarium from Bayer. Dr Bainey has received research support from CSL Behring. Dr Harrington has research relationships with Baim Institute (DSMB), CSL (Randomized Controlled Trial [RCT] Executive Committee), Janssen (RCT Chair), NHLBI (RCT Executive Committee; DSMB Chair), PCORI (RCT Co-Chair), and DCRI; has served as a consultant for Atropos Health, Bitterroot Bio, BMS, BridgeBio, Element Science, Edwards Lifesciences, Foresite Labs, and Medscape/WebMD; and has served on the board of directors for American Heart Association, College of the Holy Cross, and Cytokinetics. Dr Mehran has received institutional research payments from Abbott, Abiomed, Affluent Medical, Alleviant Medical, Amgen, AM-Pharma, Arena, AstraZeneca, AtriCure Inc, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CeloNova, CERC, Chiesi, Cleerly Health Inc, Concept Medical, Cytosorbents, Daiichi-Sankyo, Duke, Element Science, Essential Medical, Faraday, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, MedAlliance, Mediasphere, Medtelligence, Medtronic, MJH Healthcare, Novartis, OrbusNeich, Penumbra, PhaseBio, Philips, Pi-Cardia, PLx Pharma, Population Health Research Institute, Protembis, RecCor Medical Inc, RenalPro, RM Global, Sanofi, Shockwave, Vivasure, and Zoll; has received personal fees from Affluent Medical, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiovascular Research Foundation (CRF), Cordis, Daiichi-Sankyo Brasil, E.R. Squibb & Sons, Esperion Science/Innovative Biopharma, Europa Group/Boston Scientific, Gaffney Events, Educational Trust, Henry Ford Health Cardiology, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Lilly and Company, MedCon International, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PeerView Institute for Medical Education, TERUMO Europe N.V., Vectura, VoxMedia, WebMD, IQVIA, Radcliffe, and TARSUS Cardiology; has served on the Scientific Advisory Board fpr AMA; has served as a Women in Innovations Committee Member for SCAI; has received faculty CRF honorarium from JAMA Cardiology (Associate Editor), ACC (BOT Member, SC Member CTR Program); and has equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, Stel, CntrolRad (spouse). Dr Duerschmied has received speaker honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer Healthcare, Boston Scientific, Pfizer, and AOP Health; and has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific, CSL Behring, and Johnson & Johnson. Dr Kingwell is an employee and shareholder of CSL Ltd. Dr Gibson has received research funding from CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Corporation, and SCAD Alliance; has received consulting from Angel/Avertix Medical Corporation, AstraZeneca, Bayer Corporation, Beren Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Clinical Research Institute, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiovascular Research Foundation, CeleCor Therapeutics, CSL Behring, DCRI, Esperion, EXCITE International ($0 received), Fortress Biotech, Gilead Sciences, Inc, Janssen, Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson Corporation, MashUp MD, MD Magazine, Microport, MJHealth, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Pfizer, PHRI, PLxPharma, SCAI, Solstic Health/New Amsterdam Pharma, Somahlution/Marizyme, Vectura, Web MD, and Women as One; has equity in nference, Dyad Medical, Absolutys, Fortress Biotech; and has received royalties as contributor to UpToDate., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cardiovascular events frequently recur after acute myocardial infarction, and low cholesterol efflux - a process mediated by apolipoprotein A1, which is the main protein in high-density lipoprotein - has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. CSL112 is human apolipoprotein A1 derived from plasma that increases cholesterol efflux capacity. Whether infusions of CSL112 can reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events after acute myocardial infarction is unclear., Methods: We conducted an international, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with acute myocardial infarction, multivessel coronary artery disease, and additional cardiovascular risk factors. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either four weekly infusions of 6 g of CSL112 or matching placebo, with the first infusion administered within 5 days after the first medical contact for the acute myocardial infarction. The primary end point was a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes from randomization through 90 days of follow-up., Results: A total of 18,219 patients were included in the trial (9112 in the CSL112 group and 9107 in the placebo group). There was no significant difference between the groups in the risk of a primary end-point event at 90 days of follow-up (439 patients [4.8%] in the CSL112 group vs. 472 patients [5.2%] in the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.05; P = 0.24), at 180 days of follow-up (622 patients [6.9%] vs. 683 patients [7.6%]; hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.01), or at 365 days of follow-up (885 patients [9.8%] vs. 944 patients [10.5%]; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.02). The percentage of patients with adverse events was similar in the two groups; a higher number of hypersensitivity events was reported in the CSL112 group., Conclusions: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction, multivessel coronary artery disease, and additional cardiovascular risk factors, four weekly infusions of CSL112 did not result in a lower risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes than placebo through 90 days. (Funded by CSL Behring; AEGIS-II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03473223.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Aims: Low-dose colchicine reduces cardiovascular risk in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), but absolute benefits may vary between individuals. This study aimed to assess the range of individual absolute benefits from low-dose colchicine according to patient risk profile., Methods and Results: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline-recommended SMART-REACH model was combined with the relative treatment effect of low-dose colchicine and applied to patients with CAD from the Low-Dose Colchicine 2 (LoDoCo2) trial and the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART) study (n = 10 830). Individual treatment benefits were expressed as 10-year absolute risk reductions (ARRs) for myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death (MACE), and MACE-free life-years gained. Predictions were also performed for MACE plus coronary revascularization (MACE+), using a new lifetime model derived in the REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry. Colchicine was compared with other ESC guideline-recommended intensified (Step 2) prevention strategies, i.e. LDL cholesterol (LDL-c) reduction to 1.4 mmol/L and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction to 130 mmHg. The generalizability to other populations was assessed in patients with CAD from REACH North America and Western Europe (n = 25 812). The median 10-year ARR from low-dose colchicine was 4.6% [interquartile range (IQR) 3.6-6.0%] for MACE and 8.6% (IQR 7.6-9.8%) for MACE+. Lifetime benefit was 2.0 (IQR 1.6-2.5) MACE-free years, and 3.4 (IQR 2.6-4.2) MACE+-free life-years gained. For LDL-c and SBP reduction, respectively, the median 10-year ARR for MACE was 3.0% (IQR 1.5-5.1%) and 1.7% (IQR 0.0-5.7%), and the lifetime benefit was 1.2 (IQR 0.6-2.1) and 0.7 (IQR 0.0-2.3) MACE-free life-years gained. Similar results were obtained for MACE+ and in American and European patients from REACH., Conclusion: The absolute benefits of low-dose colchicine vary between individual patients with chronic CAD. They may be expected to be of at least similar magnitude to those of intensified LDL-c and SBP reduction in a majority of patients already on conventional lipid-lowering and blood pressure-lowering therapy., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J.W.E. reported receiving grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Janssen, and Sanofi-Aventis; and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi-Aventis, and Servier. P.L.T. reported receiving institutional research grants from the National Health Medical Research Council of Australia and Sir Charles Gairdner Research Advisory Committee; and the provision of colchicine and a matching placebo from Aspen Pharma Australia. J.H.C. reported receiving institutional research grants from the Withering Foundation Netherlands, The Netherlands Heart Foundation, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and a consortium of Teva, Disphar, and Tiofarma; and consulting fees from Amgen and Sanofi. P.G.S. reported receiving research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, Amarin, Bayer, and Servier; and consulting fees from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb/Myokardia, Idorsia, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Regeneron, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier; and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk; and support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca; and participating in advisory boards for Monash University, PHRI, Sanofi, and Servier. D.L.B. discloses the following relationships: Advisory Board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; Board of Directors: Angiowave (stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS. LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; Chair: Inaugural chair, American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Consultant: Broadview Ventures, Hims; Data Monitoring Committee: 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, and Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, and 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), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), 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, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and US 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), and Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), and VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Patent: Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); Research Funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, 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, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); Site Co-Investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo, and Takeda. A.M. reported institutional research grants from the Withering Foundation The Netherlands, The Netherlands Heart Foundation, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Novartis, and a consortium of Teva, Disphar, and Tiofarma; A.M. will not accept personal fees from pharma. Other authors reported no disclosures., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Low-dose colchicine significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic coronary disease. An increase of non-cardiovascular death raised concerns about its safety. This study reports cause-specific mortality and baseline predictors of mortality in the Low-Dose Colchicine 2 (LoDoCo2) trial., Methods: Patients with chronic coronary disease were randomly allocated to colchicine 0.5 mg once daily or placebo on a background of optimal medical therapy. Cause-specific mortality data were analysed, stratified by treatment status. Multivariate analyses were performed to examine the predictors of mortality as well as cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular death., Results: After a median 28.6 months follow-up, 133 out of 5522 participants (2.4%) died. Forty-five deaths were cardiovascular (colchicine versus placebo: 20 [0.7%] versus 25 [0.9%], HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.44-1.44), while eighty-eight deaths were non-cardiovascular (53 [1.9%] versus 35 [1.3%]; HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.99-2.31). Forty-eight deaths were due to cancer (26 [0.9%] versus 22 [0.8%]), thirteen end-stage pulmonary disease (9 [0.3%] versus 4 [0.1%]), eight infection (4 [0.1%] versus 4 [0.1%]), five dementia (4 [0.1%] versus 1 [0.0%]) and five related multiple organ failure (3 [0.1%] versus 2 [0.1%]). Multivariable analysis demonstrated age > 65 years was the only independent baseline characteristic associated with non-cardiovascular death (HR, 3.65; 95% CI, 2.06-6.47)., Conclusions: During the LoDoCo2 trial, assignment to colchicine was not associated with an adverse effect on any specific causes of death. Most deaths were related to non-cardiovascular causes, underscoring the importance of comorbidities as drivers of all-cause mortality in patients with chronic coronary disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no relationships that could be construed as a conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background The pathobiology of myocardial infarction (MI) with nonobstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) is often uncertain. Investigating biomarker concentrations and their changes may offer novel pathophysiological insights. Methods and Results In this post hoc study of the PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) trial, concentrations of hs-cTnT (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T), NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), hs-CRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein), and GDF-15 (growth differentiation factor 15) were measured in patients with MINOCA at baseline (n=554) and at 1-month follow-up (n=107). For comparisons, biomarkers were also measured in patients with MI with obstructive (stenosis ≥50%) coronary artery disease (baseline: n=11 106; follow-up: n=2755]). Adjusted linear regression models were used to compare concentrations and their short- and long-term changes. The adjusted geometric mean ratios (GMRs) in patients with MINOCA (median age, 61 years; 50.4% women) indicated lower hs-cTnT (GMR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.68-0.88]) but higher hs-CRP (GMR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.08-1.37]) and GDF-15 concentrations (GMR, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.11]) at baseline compared with patients with MI with obstructive coronary artery disease, whereas NT-proBNP concentrations were similar. Temporal decreases in hs-cTnT, NT-proBNP, and hs-CRP concentrations until 1-month follow-up were more pronounced in patients with MINOCA. At follow-up, patients with MINOCA had lower concentrations of hs-cTnT (GMR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.60-0.84]), NT-proBNP (GMR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.36-0.56]), and hs-CRP (GMR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.53-0.86]). One-month GDF-15 concentrations were similar between both groups with MI. Conclusions Biomarker concentrations suggest greater initial inflammatory activity, similar degree of myocardial dysfunction, and less pronounced myocardial injury during the acute phase of MINOCA compared with MI with obstructive coronary artery disease but also faster myocardial recovery. Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00391872.

Introduction: The 2019 European Society of Cardiology and European Atherosclerosis Society (2019 ESC/EAS) guidelines stress the importance of managing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) after myocardial infarction (MI) to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events. Information on guideline implementation is limited. The aim of this survey was to describe current clinical practice regarding LDL-C management in the first year post-MI across Europe, improving understanding of the role of ESC/EAS guidelines on clinical practice., Methods: A qualitative web-based cross-sectional physician survey about the patient pathway and LDL-C management post-MI was conducted in 360 physicians from France, Italy, Germany, The Netherlands, Spain, and the UK (n = 60/country) between December 2019 and June 2020. Secondary and primary care physicians (SCPs/PCPs) described their experiences treating patients post-MI over the preceding 2 months., Results: Physicians reported that on average 90.7% of patients not prescribed lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) before an MI initiated LLT as inpatients; for patients already taking LLT, treatment was intensified for 64.7% of inpatients post-MI. SCPs reported prescribing higher-intensity statins and/or ezetimibe for between 72.3% (Italy) and 88.6% (UK) of patients post-MI. More than 80.0% of SCPs and 51.2% of PCPs stated that they would initiate a change in LLT immediately if patients did not achieve their LDL-C treatment goal by 12 weeks post-MI; 82.0% of SCPs and 55.1% of PCPs reported referring to 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines for management of patients post-MI. Barriers to initiating PCSK9 inhibitors (PCSK9is) included prior prescription of a maximally tolerated dose of statin (49.4%) and/or ezetimibe (38.9%), requirement to reach threshold LDL-C levels (44.9%), and pre-authorization requirements (30.4%)., Conclusion: Differences in clinical practice post-MI were reported across the countries surveyed, including divergence between 2019 ESC/EAS and local guidelines. Increased use of innovative medicines to achieve LDL-C goals should reduce risk of subsequent cardiovascular events in very high-risk patients post-MI., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aims: Recent randomized trials demonstrated a benefit of low-dose colchicine added to guideline-based treatment in patients with recent myocardial infarction or chronic coronary disease. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to obtain best estimates of the effects of colchicine on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)., Methods and Results: We searched the literature for randomized clinical trials of long-term colchicine in patients with atherosclerosis published up to 1 September 2020. The primary efficacy endpoint was MACE, the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. We combined the results of five trials that included 11 816 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 578 patients. Colchicine reduced the risk for the primary endpoint by 25% [relative risk (RR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.92; P = 0.005], myocardial infarction by 22% (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.94; P = 0.010), stroke by 46% (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.86; P = 0.009), and coronary revascularization by 23% (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.90; P < 0.001). We observed no difference in all-cause death (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71-1.62; P = 0.73), with a lower incidence of cardiovascular death (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55-1.23; P = 0.34) counterbalanced by a higher incidence of non-cardiovascular death (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.99-1.92; P = 0.060)., Conclusion: Our meta-analysis indicates that low-dose colchicine reduced the risk of MACE as well as that of myocardial infarction, stroke, and the need for coronary revascularization in a broad spectrum of patients with coronary disease. There was no difference in all-cause mortality and fewer cardiovascular deaths were counterbalanced by more non-cardiovascular deaths., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel coronary disease (MVD) are at high risk for recurrent coronary events., Objectives: The authors investigated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus placebo in patients with MVD in the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 54) trial., Methods: Patients with a history of MI 1 to 3 years before inclusion in the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial were stratified in a pre-specified analysis based on the presence of MVD. The effect of ticagrelor (60 mg and 90 mg) on the composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE]), as well as the composite of coronary death, MI, or stent thrombosis (coronary events), and on TIMI major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and fatal bleeding were evaluated over a median of 33 months., Results: A total of 12,558 patients (59.4%) had MVD. In the placebo arm, compared with patients without MVD, those with MVD were at higher risk for MACE (9.37% vs. 8.57%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR adj ]: 1.24; p = 0.026) and for coronary events (7.67% vs. 5.34%, HR adj : 1.49; p = 0.0005). In patients with MVD, ticagrelor reduced the risk of MACE (7.94% vs. 9.37%, HR: 0.82; p = 0.004) and coronary events (6.02% vs. 7.67%, HR: 0.76; p < 0.0001), including a 36% reduction in coronary death (HR: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.48 to 0.85; p = 0.002). In this subgroup, ticagrelor increased the risk of TIMI major bleeding (2.52% vs. 1.08%, HR: 2.67; p < 0.0001), but not ICH or fatal bleeds., Conclusions: Patients with prior MI and MVD are at increased risk of MACE and coronary events, and experience substantial relative and absolute risk reductions in both outcomes with long-term ticagrelor treatment relative to those without MVD. Ticagrelor increases the risk of TIMI major bleeding, but not ICH or fatal bleeding. For patients with prior MI and MVD, ticagrelor is an effective option for long-term antiplatelet therapy. (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events [e.g., Death From Heart or Vascular Disease, Heart Attack, or Stroke] in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin [PEGASUS]; NCT01225562)., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved., Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death., Results: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P=0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P=0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P=0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P=0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P=0.31)., Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846 .).

Background: There are conflicting data on whether changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) concentrations between time points (delta NT-proBNP and hs-CRP) are associated with a change in prognosis., Methods: We measured NT-proBNP and hs-CRP at 3 time points in 1665 patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). Cox proportional hazards was applied to the delta between temporal measurements to determine the continuous association with cardiovascular events. Effect estimates for delta NT-proBNP and hs-CRP are presented per 40% increase as the basic unit of temporal change., Results: Median NT-proBNP was 370.0 (25th, 75th percentiles, 130.0, 996.0), 340.0 (135.0, 875.0), and 267.0 (111.0, 684.0) ng/L; and median hs-CRP was 4.6 (1.7, 13.1), 1.9 (0.8, 4.5), and 1.8 (0.8, 4.4) mg/L at baseline, 30 days, and 6 months, respectively. The deltas between baseline and 6 months were the most prognostically informative. Every +40% increase of delta NT-proBNP (baseline to 6 months) was associated with a 14% greater risk of cardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.14, 95% CI, 1.03-1.27) and with a 14% greater risk of all-cause death (adjusted HR 1.14, 95% CI, 1.04-1.26), while every +40% increase of delta hs-CRP (baseline to 6 months) was associated with a 9% greater risk of the composite end point (adjusted HR 1.09, 95% CI, 1.02-1.17) and a 10% greater risk of myocardial infarction (adjusted HR 1.10, 95%, CI 1.00-1.20)., Conclusions: Temporal changes in NT-proBNP and hs-CRP are quantitatively associated with future cardiovascular events, supporting their role in dynamic risk stratification of NSTEACS., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00699998., (© 2017 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.)

Evaluation of antithrombotic treatments for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) requires balancing ischemic and bleeding risks to assess net benefit. We sought to compare the relative effects of ischemic and bleeding events on mortality., Methods: In the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, we compared spontaneous ischemic events (myocardial infarction or stroke) with spontaneous major bleeding events (PLATO major, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] major, Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries [GUSTO] severe) with respect to risk of mortality using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. The comparison was performed using ratio of hazard ratios for mortality increase after ischemic vs bleeding events., Results: A total of 822 patients (4.4%) had ≥1 spontaneous ischemic event; 485 patients (2.6%), ≥1 spontaneous PLATO major bleed, 282 (1.5%), ≥1 spontaneous TIMI major bleed; and 207 (1.1%), ≥1 spontaneous severe GUSTO bleed. In patients who had both events, bleeding occurred first in most patients. Regardless of classification, major bleeding events were associated with increased short- and long-term mortality that were not significantly different from the increase associated with spontaneous ischemic events: ratio of hazard ratios (95% CIs) for short- and long-term mortality after spontaneous ischemic vs bleeding events: 1.46 (0.98-2.19) and 0.92 (0.52-1.62) (PLATO major); 1.26 (0.80-1.96) and 1.19 (0.58-2.24) (TIMI major), 0.72 (0.47-1.10) and 0.83 (0.38-1.79) (GUSTO severe) (all P>0.05) CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS on dual antiplatelet therapy, spontaneous major bleeding events seem "prognostically equivalent" to spontaneous ischemic complications. This result allows quantitative comparisons between both actual and predicted bleeding and ischemic risks. Our findings help to better define net clinical benefit of antithrombotic treatments and more accurately estimate mortality after ischemic and bleeding events in patients with ACS., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the ability of the HEART score to predict the presence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) determined by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and its ability to predict the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients referred for CCTA after emergency department (ED) presentation., Methods: From December 2011 to August 2014, 710 ED patients with chest pain who underwent CCTA within 30 days were included. The HEART score was retrospectively calculated and patients were followed for MACE, comprised of death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization. Association of CAD at CCTA in the different categories of the HEART score was analyzed using χ test. The performance of the HEART score in discriminating between those with and without obstructive CAD was evaluated by receiver operating characteristics. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess MACE-free survival stratified by HEART-score categories., Results: During median follow-up of 826 days (interquartile range: 563-1056), MACE occurred in 46 (6.5%) patients; 3 (0.4%) myocardial infarction, 8 (1.1%) death, and 36 (5.1%) revascularizations. A low HEART score was a significant predictor for MACE-free survival (P = 0.010). CCTA revealed obstructive CAD in 11.7% of patients, with no significant difference between patients with a low and intermediate/high HEART score, respectively 10.7% and 13.2% (P = 0.29). The ability of the HEART score to identify obstructive CAD was poor with an AUC of the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.53., Conclusion: The HEART score does not adequately identify patients with obstructive CAD at CCTA. It does however predict occurrence of MACE in medium-term follow-up. Excluding patients from additional testing based solely on a low HEART score may lead to suboptimal patient management. CCTA had important implications on patient management and may be a more appropriate tool to further stratify risk in ED chest pain patients.

Background: Women with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are less likely to undergo invasive revascularization than men, but sex-specific differences in long-term outcomes and platelet reactivity among medically managed ACS patients remain uncertain. We examined sex-specific differences in long-term ischemic and bleeding outcomes and platelet reactivity for medically managed ACS patients randomized to prasugrel versus clopidogrel plus aspirin., Methods: Data from 9,326 patients enrolled in TRILOGY ACS were analyzed to determine differences in long-term ischemic and bleeding outcomes between women (n = 3,650 [39%]) and men (n = 5,676 [61%]) randomized to prasugrel 10 mg/d (5 mg/d for patients ≥75 years and/or <60 kg) versus clopidogrel 75 mg/d. Sex-specific differences in 30-day platelet reactivity were analyzed in 2,564 (27%) patients participating in a platelet function substudy., Results: Compared with men, women were older, weighed less, were less likely to have prior myocardial infarction or revascularization, and had lower baseline creatinine clearance and hemoglobin level values. Rates of the composite of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction/stroke (20.2% vs 19.1%; P = .56), all-cause mortality (12.2% vs 11.7%; P = .88), and Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries severe/life-threatening/moderate bleeding (3.8% vs 2.8%; P = .74) through 30 months were similar in women versus men. After adjustment, women had significantly lower risk for ischemic outcomes and all-cause mortality. There were no sex-specific, treatment-related differences in 30-day platelet reactivity., Conclusions: Long-term ischemic and bleeding outcomes in medically managed ACS patients were similar for women versus men, as was treatment-related platelet reactivity. Women had a higher baseline risk profile and, after adjustment, significantly lower risk of the primary composite end point and all-cause death through 30 months., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We sought to determine the feasibility of conducting percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in high-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients utilising the REG1 system consisting of pegnivacogin, an aptameric factor IXa inhibitor, and its controlling agent anivamersen., Methods and Results: In RADAR, ACS patients were randomised to pegnivacogin 1 mg/kg with 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100% anivamersen reversal or unfractionated heparin. Of the 640 patients randomised, 388 (61%) underwent PCI. Major modified ACUITY 30-day bleeding rates were 18% (25% reversal), 12% (50% reversal), 9% (75% reversal), and 7% (100% reversal), compared with 11% with heparin. The corresponding total bleeding rates were 68%, 39%, 35%, 34%, and 38% (heparin). Ischaemic events were less frequent in those receiving pegnivacogin versus heparin (4.4% vs. 7.3%, p=0.3). Thirty-day urgent TVR (1.1% vs. 0.9%, p=1.0), myocardial infarction (4.0% vs. 6.4%, p=0.3), and angiographic complication (11.2% and 10.8%, p=0.9) rates were similar with pegnivacogin and heparin. There were no incidences of clot formation on guidewires or catheters., Conclusions: High-level factor IXa inhibition in ACS patients undergoing PCI, with at least 50% reversal, has a favourable bleeding profile and appears effective at suppressing ischaemic events and thrombotic complications. Larger phase trials in PCI are warranted., Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00932100.

Importance: Elevated plasma glucose levels in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on hospital admission are associated with increased mortality. Clinical trials of glucose regulation have provided inconsistent results with respect to cardiovascular outcomes, perhaps because target glucose levels have been suboptimal., Objective: To study the effectiveness and safety of intensive glucose management in patients with ACS who have hyperglycemia, aiming at strict blood glucose normalization., Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-center, prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial in a large teaching hospital. Patients with ACS with an admission plasma glucose level of 140 to 288 mg/dL were eligible for inclusion and enrolled from July 23, 2008, to February 8, 2012. Patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus were excluded. Informed consent was obtained from 294 patients, who were randomized. Of these, 93.6% received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Interventions: Intensive glucose management strategy, aiming at a plasma glucose level of 85 to 110 mg/dL by using intravenous insulin, or to conventional expectative glucose management., Main Outcomes and Measures: End points were assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. The primary end point was high-sensitivity troponin T value 72 hours after admission (hsTropT72); secondary end points, area under the curve of creatine kinase, myocardial band (AUC-CK-MB), release and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy findings at 6 weeks' follow-up., Results: In the intensive management arm, median hsTropT72 was 1197 ng/L (25th and 75th percentiles of distribution, 541-2296 ng/L) vs 1354 ng/L (530-3057 ng/L) in the conventional arm (P = .41). Median AUC-CK-MB was 2372 U/L (1242-5004 U/L) vs 3171 U/L (1620-5337 U/L) (P = .18). The difference in median extent of myocardial injury measured by myocardial perfusion scintigraphy was not significant (2% vs 4%) (P = .07). Severe hypoglycemia (<50 mg/dL) was rare and occurred in 13 patients. Before discharge, death or a spontaneous second myocardial infarction occurred in 8 patients (5.7%) vs 1 (0.7%) (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Intensive glucose regulation did not reduce infarct size in hyperglycemic patients with ACS treated with PCI, and was associated with harm. Future studies should focus on patients with ACS who have persistently elevated blood glucose after PCI, and should evaluate alternative strategies for optimizing glycemia., Trial Registration: www.trialregister.nl Identifier: NTR1205.

Background: Patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) who present with an acute coronary syndrome have a high risk for recurrent events. Whether intensive antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor might be beneficial compared with clopidogrel is unknown. In this substudy of the PLATO trial, we studied the effects of randomized treatment dependent on history of CABG., Methods: Patients participating in PLATO were classified according to whether they had undergone prior CABG. The trial's primary and secondary end points were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression., Results: Of the 18,613 study patients, 1,133 (6.1%) had prior CABG. Prior-CABG patients had more high-risk characteristics at study entry and a 2-fold increase in clinical events during follow-up, but less major bleeding. The primary end point (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) was reduced to a similar extent by ticagrelor among patients with (19.6% vs 21.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.91 [0.67, 1.24]) and without (9.2% vs 11.0%; adjusted HR, 0.86 [0.77, 0.96]; P(interaction) = .73) prior CABG. Major bleeding was similar with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel among patients with (8.1% vs 8.7%; adjusted HR, 0.89 [0.55, 1.47]) and without (11.8% vs 11.4%; HR, 1.08 [0.98, 1.20]; P(interaction) = .46) prior CABG., Conclusions: Prior-CABG patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome are a high-risk cohort for death and recurrent cardiovascular events but have a lower risk for major bleeding. Similar to the results in no-prior-CABG patients, ticagrelor was associated with a reduction in ischemic events without an increase in major bleeding., (© 2013.)

Background: The effect of intensified platelet inhibition for patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation who do not undergo revascularization has not been delineated., Methods: In this double-blind, randomized trial, in a primary analysis involving 7243 patients under the age of 75 years receiving aspirin, we evaluated up to 30 months of treatment with prasugrel (10 mg daily) versus clopidogrel (75 mg daily). In a secondary analysis involving 2083 patients 75 years of age or older, we evaluated 5 mg of prasugrel versus 75 mg of clopidogrel., Results: At a median follow-up of 17 months, the primary end point of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke among patients under the age of 75 years occurred in 13.9% of the prasugrel group and 16.0% of the clopidogrel group (hazard ratio in the prasugrel group, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.05; P=0.21). Similar results were observed in the overall population. The prespecified analysis of multiple recurrent ischemic events (all components of the primary end point) suggested a lower risk for prasugrel among patients under the age of 75 years (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.00; P=0.04). Rates of severe and intracranial bleeding were similar in the two groups in all age groups. There was no significant between-group difference in the frequency of nonhemorrhagic serious adverse events, except for a higher frequency of heart failure in the clopidogrel group., Conclusions: Among patients with unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation, prasugrel did not significantly reduce the frequency of the primary end point, as compared with clopidogrel, and similar risks of bleeding were observed. (Funded by Eli Lilly and Daiichi Sankyo; TRILOGY ACS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699998.).

Background: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed in large community hospitals without cardiac surgery back-up facilities (off-site) reduces door-to-balloon time compared with emergency transferal to tertiary interventional centers (on-site). The present study was performed to explore whether off-site PCI for acute myocardial infarction results in reduced infarct size., Methods and Results: One hundred twenty-eight patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly assigned to undergo primary PCI at the off-site center (n = 68) or to transferal to an on-site center (n = 60). Three days after PCI, (99m)Tc-sestamibi SPECT was performed to estimate infarct size. Off-site PCI significantly reduced door-to-balloon time compared with on-site PCI (94 +/- 54 versus 125 +/- 59 min, respectively, p < 0.01), although symptoms-to-treatment time was only insignificantly reduced (257 +/- 211 versus 286 +/- 146 min, respectively, p = 0.39). Infarct size was comparable between treatment centers (16 +/- 15 versus 14 +/- 12%, respectively p = 0.35). Multivariate analysis revealed that TIMI 0/1 flow grade at initial coronary angiography (OR 3.125, 95% CI 1.17-8.33, p = 0.023), anterior wall localization of the myocardial infarction (OR 3.44, 95% CI 1.38-8.55, p < 0.01), and development of pathological Q-waves (OR 5.07, 95% CI 2.10-12.25, p < 0.01) were independent predictors of an infarct size > 12%., Conclusions: Off-site PCI reduces door-to-balloon time compared with transferal to a remote on-site interventional center but does not reduce infarct size. Instead, pre-PCI TIMI 0/1 flow, anterior wall infarct localization, and development of Q-waves are more important predictors of infarct size.

We investigated whether primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients admitted with an acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction could be performed more rapidly and with comparable outcomes in a community hospital versus a tertiary center with cardiac surgery. We started the first PCI with an off-site surgery program in The Netherlands in 2002 and report the results of 439 consecutive patients. In the safety phase, 199 patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly assigned to treatment at our off-site center versus a more distant cardiac surgery center. In the confirmation phase, 240 consecutive patients were treated in the off-site hospital. Safety and efficacy end points were the rate of an angiographically successful PCI procedure (diameter stenosis <50% and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 3 flow) in the absence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 30 days. The randomization phase showed a 37-minute decrease in door-to-balloon time (p <0.001) with comparable procedural and clinical successes (91% Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 3 flow in the 2 groups). In the confirmation phase, the 30-day rate without major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was 95%. None of the 439 patients in the study required emergency surgery for failed primary PCI. In conclusion, time to treatment with primary PCI can be significantly shortened when treating patients in a community hospital setting with off-site cardiac surgery backup compared with transport for PCI to a referral center with on-site surgery. PCI at hospitals with off-site cardiac surgery backup can be considered a needed strategy to improve access to primary PCI for a larger segment of the population and can be delivered with a very favorable safety profile.

Aims: To compare the effectiveness of allopurinol with no treatment or placebo for the prevention of cardiovascular events in hyperuricemic patients. Methods and results: Pubmed, Web of Science and Cochrane library were searched from inception until July 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies in hyperuricemic patients without significant renal disease and treated with allopurinol, versus placebo or no treatment were included. Outcome measures were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or a combined endpoint (CM/MI/S). For RCT's a random effects meta-analysis was performed. For observational studies a narrative synthesis was performed. Of the original 1995 references we ultimately included 26 RCT's and 21 observational studies. We found a significantly reduced risk of combined endpoint (Risk Ratio 0.65 [95% CI] [0.46 to 0.91]; p = 0.012) and myocardial infarction (RR 0.47 [0.27 to 0.80]; p = 0.01) in the allopurinol group compared to controls. We found no significant effect of allopurinol on stroke or cardiovascular mortality. Of the 15 observational studies with sufficient quality, allopurinol was associated with reduced cardiovascular mortality in 1 out of 3 studies that reported this outcome, myocardial infarction in 6 out of 8, stroke in 4 out of 7, and combined end-point in 2 out of 2. Cardiovascular benefit was only observed when allopurinol therapy was prolonged for more than 6 months and when an appropriate allopurinol dose was administered (300 mg or more/day) or sufficient reduction of serum urate concentration was achieved (<0.36 mmol/l). Conclusions: Data from RCT's and observational studies indicate that allopurinol treatment reduces cardiovascular risk in patients with hyperuricemia. However, the quality of evidence from RCTs is low to moderate. To establish whether allopurinol lowers the risk of cardiovascular events a well-designed and adequately powered randomized, placebo-controlled trial is needed in high-risk patients with hyperuricemia. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration CRD42018089744 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses that according to Canakinumab Anti-inflammatory Thrombosis Outcome Study, implementing anti-inflammatory treatment with anti-inflammatory drug colchicine to patients with coronary disease have clinical benefit as the cardiac patients have life-long risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke.

Aims Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have high platelet reactivity and are at increased risk of ischaemic events and bleeding post-acute coronary syndromes (ACS). In the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, ticagrelor reduced the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, but with similar rates of major bleeding compared with clopidogrel. We aimed to investigate the outcome with ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel in patients with DM or poor glycaemic control. Methods and results We analysed patients with pre-existing DM (n = 4662), including 1036 patients on insulin, those without DM (n = 13 951), and subgroups based on admission levels of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c; n = 15 150). In patients with DM, the reduction in the primary composite endpoint (HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.76–1.03), all-cause mortality (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.66–1.01), and stent thrombosis (HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.36–1.17) with no increase in major bleeding (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.81–1.12) with ticagrelor was consistent with the overall cohort and without significant diabetes status-by-treatment interactions. There was no heterogeneity between patients with or without ongoing insulin treatment. Ticagrelor reduced the primary endpoint, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis in patients with HbA1c above the median (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70–0.91; HR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.65–0.93; and HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39–1.00, respectively) with similar bleeding rates (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.86–1.12). Conclusion Ticagrelor, when compared with clopidogrel, reduced ischaemic events in ACS patients irrespective of diabetic status and glycaemic control, without an increase in major bleeding events. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

: PurposeTo assess the prognostic value of markers of inflammation for rule-out purposes in patients admitted to the emergency department with troponin T–negative chest pain.: MethodsPatients presenting to the emergency department within 6 hours of symptom onset and who had a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram were eligible. The standard rule-out protocol, which included serial creatine kinase and creatine kinase-MB measurements, was applied, and markers of inflammation (C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and total white blood cell count and differential count) were measured. The study group comprised patients with negative serial troponin T results (<0.06 μg/L) who were discharged home after unstable coronary artery disease was ruled out. Endpoints during the 6-month follow-up were cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or rehospitalization for unstable angina.: ResultsA total of 382 troponin T–negative patients were discharged, of whom 2 died, 2 had a myocardial infarction, and 7 were rehospitalized for unstable angina. A positive C-reactive protein test result (>0.3 mg/dL) was associated with future clinical events (hazard risk [HR] = 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2 to 17.0; P = 0.03), as was a positive test (>13 mm/h) for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (HR = 5.6; 95% CI: 1.5 to 22.2; P = 0.01). Patients with positive results for both tests were at highest risk of clinical events (9.3%) compared with patients with other combinations of test results (1.1% to 2.1%; HR = 7.5; 95% CI: 2.2 to 25.5; P = 0.001).: ConclusionThe combination of C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate had prognostic value in patients with troponin T–negative chest pain and a normal or nondiagnostic electrocardiogram in whom unstable coronary artery disease was ruled out. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Assesses the influence of the severity of coronary artery stenosis and collateral circulation after revascularization in patients with myocardial infarction and chronic left ventricular dysfunction. Factors for functional recovery; Absence of correlation between diameter stenosis and viability index.

Background: Colchicine reduces risk of cardiovascular events in patients post-myocardial infarction and in patients with chronic coronary disease. It remains unclear whether this effect is related to the time of onset of treatment following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS).Objectives: This study investigates risk for major adverse cardiovascular events in relation to history and timing of prior ACS, to determine whether the benefits of colchicine are consistent independent of prior ACS status.Methods: The LoDoCo2 (Low-Dose Colchicine 2) trial randomly allocated patients with chronic coronary disease to colchicine 0.5 mg once daily or placebo. The rate of the composite of cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or ischemia-driven coronary revascularization was compared between patients with no prior, recent (6-24 months), remote (2-7 years), or very remote (>7 years) ACS; interaction between ACS status and colchicine treatment effect was assessed.Results: In 5,522 randomized patients, risk of the primary endpoint was independent of prior ACS status. Colchicine consistently reduced the primary endpoint in patients with no prior ACS (incidence: 2.8 vs 3.4 events per 100 person-years; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-1.27), recent ACS (incidence: 2.4 vs 3.3 events per 100 person-years; HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.51-1.10), remote ACS (incidence: 1.8 vs 3.2 events per 100 person-years, HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.37-0.82), and very remote ACS (incidence: 3.0 vs 4.3 events per 100 person-years, HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51-0.96) (P for interaction = 0.59).Conclusions: The benefits of colchicine are consistent irrespective of history and timing of prior ACS. (The LoDoCo2 Trial: Low Dose Colchicine for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease [LoDoCo2] ACTRN12614000093684). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Purpose Disease management of stable coronary artery disease consists of controlling hemostasis and lipid regulation. No treatment strategies preventing plaque erosion or rupture are yet available. Cholesterol crystal–induced inflammation leading to plaque destabilization is believed to be an important factor contributing to plaque instability and might well be amenable to treatment with anti-inflammatory drugs. Colchicine has anti-inflammatory properties with the potential to address both the direct and indirect inflammatory mechanisms in the plaque. Methods A literature search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as in the clinical trial registries, to identify finished and ongoing clinical studies on colchicine in stable coronary artery disease. Findings Preclinical findings of colchicine in stable coronary artery disease have shown protective effects on surrogate outcomes, such as myocardial infarction size and postangioplasty restenosis. Retrospective cohort studies in patients with gout report a lower incidence of combined cardiovascular outcomes in those treated with colchicine. Thus far, one prospective, randomized clinical trial has provided evidence on a possible protective effect of colchicine in stable coronary artery disease. Meta-analysis of trials of colchicine in multiple cardiovascular diseases revealed a decrease in myocardial infarction with varying levels of evidence. Currently, 5 major clinical trials involving >10,000 patients are recruiting patients, all focusing on major cardiovascular outcomes. Implications The body and quality of evidence regarding the efficacy of colchicine for secondary prevention of stable and acute phases of coronary artery disease will be greatly expanded in the upcoming years, providing less biased and more accurate effect estimates. If colchicine's anti-inflammatory characteristics translate to improved event-free cardiovascular survival, this relatively safe, low-cost, and well-known drug may become the third pillar (next to lipid regulation and platelet inhibition) in the medical management of stable coronary artery disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, is the standard antithrombotic treatment following acute coronary syndromes. The factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban reduced mortality and ischaemic events when added to DAPT, but caused increased bleeding. The safety of a dual pathway antithrombotic therapy approach combining low-dose rivaroxaban (in place of aspirin) with a P2Y12 inhibitor has not been assesssed in acute coronary syndromes. We aimed to assess rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily versus aspirin 100 mg daily, in addition to clopidogrel or ticagrelor (chosen at investigator discretion before randomisation), for patients with acute coronary syndromes started within 10 days after presentation and continued for 6-12 months.Methods: In this double-blind, multicentre, randomised trial (GEMINI-ACS-1) done at 371 clinical centres in 21 countries, eligible patients were older than 18 years with unstable angina, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), with positive cardiac biomarkers and either ischaemic electrocardiographic changes or an atherosclerotic culprit lesion identified during angiography. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) within 10 days after admission for the index acute coronary syndromes event to either aspirin or rivaroxaban based on a computer-generated randomisation schedule. Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks with size of four and was stratified based on the background P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or ticagrelor) intended to be used at the time of randomisation. Investigators and patients were masked to treatment assignment. Patients received a minimum of 180 days of double-blind treatment with rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily or aspirin 100 mg daily. The choice of clopidogrel or ticagrelor during trial conduct was not randomised and was based on investigator preference. The primary endpoint was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) clinically significant bleeding not related to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; major, minor, or requiring medical attention) up to day 390. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02293395.Findings: Between April 22, 2015, and Oct 14, 2016, 3037 patients with acute coronary syndromes were randomly assigned; 1518 to receive aspirin and 1519 to receive rivaroxaban. 1704 patients (56%) were in the ticagrelor and 1333 (44%) in the clopidogrel strata. Median duration of treatment was 291 days (IQR 239-354). TIMI non-CABG clinically significant bleeding was similar with rivaroxaban versus aspirin therapy (total 154 patients [5%]; 80 participants [5%] of 1519 vs 74 participants [5%] of 1518; HR 1·09 [95% CI 0·80-1·50]; p=0·5840).Interpretation: A dual pathway antithrombotic therapy approach combining low-dose rivaroxaban with a P2Y12 inhibitor for the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes had similar risk of clinically significant bleeding as aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor. A larger, adequately powered trial would be required to definitively assess the efficacy and safety of this approach.Funding: Janssen Research & Development and Bayer AG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) scale has been proposed to standardize bleeding endpoint definitions and reporting in cardiovascular trials. Validation in large cohorts of patients is needed.Objectives: This study sought to investigate the relationship between BARC-classified bleeding and mortality and compared its prognostic value against 2 validated bleeding scales: TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries).Methods: We analyzed bleeding in 12,944 patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, with or without early invasive strategy. The main outcome measure was all-cause death.Results: During follow-up (median: 502 days), noncoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) bleeding occurred in 1,998 (15.4%) patients according to BARC (grades 2, 3, or 5), 484 (3.7%) patients according to TIMI minor/major, and 514 (4.0%) patients according to GUSTO moderate/severe criteria. CABG-related bleeding (BARC 4) occurred in 155 (1.2%) patients. Patients with BARC (2, 3, or 4) bleeding had a significant increase in risk of death versus patients without bleeding (BARC 0 or 1); the hazard was highest in the 30 days after bleeding (hazard ratio: 7.35; 95% confidence interval: 5.59 to 9.68; p < 0.0001) and remained significant up to 1 year. The hazard of mortality increased progressively with non-CABG BARC grades. BARC 4 bleeds were significantly associated with mortality within 30 days (hazard ratio: 10.05; 95% confidence interval: 5.41 to 18.69; p < 0.0001), but not thereafter. Inclusion of BARC (2, 3, or 4) bleeding in the 1-year mortality model with baseline characteristics improved it to an extent comparable to TIMI minor/major and GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding.Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation, bleeding assessed with the BARC scale was significantly associated with risk of subsequent death up to 1 year after the event and risk of mortality increased gradually with higher BARC grades. Our results support adoption of the BARC bleeding scale in ACS clinical trials. (Trial to Assess the Effects of Vorapaxar [SCH 530348; MK-5348] in Preventing Heart Attack and Stroke in Participants With Acute Coronary Syndrome [TRACER] [Study P04736]; NCT00527943). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: REG1 is a novel anticoagulation system consisting of pegnivacogin, an RNA aptamer inhibitor of coagulation factor IXa, and anivamersen, a complementary sequence reversal oligonucleotide. We tested the hypothesis that near complete inhibition of factor IXa with pegnivacogin during percutaneous coronary intervention, followed by partial reversal with anivamersen, would reduce ischaemic events compared with bivalirudin, without increasing bleeding.Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre, superiority trial to compare REG1 with bivalirudin at 225 hospitals in North America and Europe. We planned to randomly allocate 13,200 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in a 1:1 ratio to either REG1 (pegnivacogin 1 mg/kg bolus [>99% factor IXa inhibition] followed by 80% reversal with anivamersen after percutaneous coronary intervention) or bivalirudin. Exclusion criteria included ST segment elevation myocardial infarction within 48 h. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and unplanned target lesion revascularisation by day 3 after randomisation. The principal safety endpoint was major bleeding. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01848106. The trial was terminated early after enrolment of 3232 patients due to severe allergic reactions.Findings: 1616 patients were allocated REG1 and 1616 were assigned bivalirudin, of whom 1605 and 1601 patients, respectively, received the assigned treatment. Severe allergic reactions were reported in ten (1%) of 1605 patients receiving REG1 versus one (<1%) of 1601 patients treated with bivalirudin. The composite primary endpoint did not differ between groups, with 108 (7%) of 1616 patients assigned REG1 and 103 (6%) of 1616 allocated bivalirudin reporting a primary endpoint event (odds ratio [OR] 1·05, 95% CI 0·80-1·39; p=0·72). Major bleeding was similar between treatment groups (seven [<1%] of 1605 receiving REG1 vs two [<1%] of 1601 treated with bivalirudin; OR 3·49, 95% CI 0·73-16·82; p=0·10), but major or minor bleeding was increased with REG1 (104 [6%] vs 65 [4%]; 1·64, 1·19-2·25; p=0·002).Interpretation: The reversible factor IXa inhibitor REG1, as currently formulated, is associated with severe allergic reactions. Although statistical power was limited because of early termination, there was no evidence that REG1 reduced ischaemic events or bleeding compared with bivalirudin.Funding: Regado Biosciences Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on a randomized trial BIOMArCS-2 Glucose which was conducted to evaluate the effect of using intensive glucose control (IGC) in myocardial infarction (MI). Topics discussed include no association between use of IGC in hyperglycemic MI patients and improved outcomes, lowering blood glucose in hyperglycemic causes excess mortality and risk of higher mortality during long term follow-up.

Objectives: We investigated whether plasma amino-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), a marker of cardiac dysfunction and prognosis measured in CORONA (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure), could be used to identify the severity of heart failure at which statins become ineffective. Background: Statins reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in many patients with ischemic heart disease but not, overall, those with heart failure. There must be a transition point at which treatment with a statin becomes futile. Methods: In CORONA, patients with heart failure, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, and ischemic heart disease were randomly assigned to 10 mg/day rosuvastatin or placebo. The primary composite outcome was cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke. Results: Of 5,011 patients enrolled, NT-proBNP was measured in 3,664 (73%). The midtertile included values between 103 pmol/l (868 pg/ml) and 277 pmol/l (2,348 pg/ml). Log NT-proBNP was the strongest predictor (per log unit) of every outcome assessed but was strongest for death from worsening heart failure (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.71 to 2.30), was weaker for sudden death (HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.52 to 1.88), and was weakest for atherothrombotic events (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.40). Patients in the lowest tertile of NT-proBNP had the best prognosis and, if assigned to rosuvastatin rather than placebo, had a greater reduction in the primary end point (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.88) than patients in the other tertiles (heterogeneity test, p = 0.0192). This reflected fewer atherothrombotic events and sudden deaths with rosuvastatin. Conclusions: Patients with heart failure due to ischemic heart disease who have NT-proBNP values <103 pmol/l (868 pg/ml) may benefit from rosuvastatin. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]