Search

The article looks at some examples from cardiovascular medicine to discuss the impact of the existing and evolving information on trial design concerning the choice of placebo or active comparator agents. Topics mentioned include the use of surrogate measures to direct therapeutic decisions, early data on blood pressure and outcomes, and a graph that shows trials influencing blood-pressure thresholds at which antihypertensive medications should be used.

Background: Among patients with chronic heart failure, angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduce mortality and hospitalization, but the role of a renin inhibitor in such patients is unknown. We compared the ACE inhibitor enalapril with the renin inhibitor aliskiren (to test superiority or at least noninferiority) and with the combination of the two treatments (to test superiority) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction.Methods: After a single-blind run-in period, we assigned patients, in a double-blind fashion, to one of three groups: 2336 patients were assigned to receive enalapril at a dose of 5 or 10 mg twice daily, 2340 to receive aliskiren at a dose of 300 mg once daily, and 2340 to receive both treatments (combination therapy). The primary composite outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure.Results: After a median follow-up of 36.6 months, the primary outcome occurred in 770 patients (32.9%) in the combination-therapy group and in 808 (34.6%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.03). The primary outcome occurred in 791 patients (33.8%) in the aliskiren group (hazard ratio vs. enalapril, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.10); the prespecified test for noninferiority was not met. There was a higher risk of hypotensive symptoms in the combination-therapy group than in the enalapril group (13.8% vs. 11.0%, P=0.005), as well as higher risks of an elevated serum creatinine level (4.1% vs. 2.7%, P=0.009) and an elevated potassium level (17.1% vs. 12.5%, P<0.001).Conclusions: In patients with chronic heart failure, the addition of aliskiren to enalapril led to more adverse events without an increase in benefit. Noninferiority was not shown for aliskiren as compared with enalapril. (Funded by Novartis; ATMOSPHERE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00853658.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on a trial on using angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 (L) with enalapril (E) in heart-failure patients with a reduced ejection fraction in 2014. Based on results, L, like E, reduced hospitalization risk by 21% and lessened heart failure symptoms and physical limitation, with the Lgroup having more patients with hypotension and less patients with renal impairment than the E group. L was found to be superior to E in reducing death and hospitalization risks.

The authors discuss the lessons learned from the Heart failure Endpoint evaluation of Angiotensin II Antagonists Losartan (HEAAL) trial, which evaluates angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in the treatment of heart failure (HF) patients. They think that the ARB trials were innovative, as they were the first to tackle the issue of comparing two drugs acting through a similar pathophysiological pathway. They conclude that both clinical practice and clinical trial design are informed by the ARB trials.

Presents a study on the possibility of patients with chronic kidney disease to have a heightened risk of cardiovascular disease. Use of effective therapeutic interventions; Effectiveness of strategy for reducing population burden; Inclusion of heart failure and coronary heart disease.

Background Angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers have favourable effects on haemodynamic measurements, neurohumoral activity, and left-ventricular remodelling when added to angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). We aimed to find out whether these drugs improve clinical outcome. Methods Between March, 1999, and November, 1999, we enrolled 2548 patients with New York Heart Association functional class II--IV CHF and left-ventricular ejection fraction 40% or lower, and who were being treated with ACE inhibitors. We randomly assigned patients candesartan (n=1276, target dose 32 mg once daily) or placebo (n=1272). At baseline, 55% of patients were also treated with blockers and 17% with spironolactone. The primary outcome of the study was the composite of cardiovascular death or hospital admission for CHF. Analysis was done by intention to treat. Findings The median follow-up was 41 months. 483 (38%) patients in the candesartan group and 538 (42%) in the placebo group experienced the primary outcome (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.85 [95% CI 0.75--0.96], p=0.011; covariate adjusted p=0.010). Candesartan reduced each of the components of the primary outcome significantly, as well as the total number of hospital admissions for CHF. The benefits of candesartan were similar in all predefined subgroups, including patients receiving baseline blocker treatment. Interpretation The addition of candesartan to ACE inhibitor and other treatment leads to a further clinically important reduction in relevant cardiovascular events in patients with CHF and reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses a study held by Dipak Kotecha and colleagues regarding the effectiveness of β blockers in treating patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Topics discussed include the response of cardiac rhythm on the potential drug, the adverse drug interaction of β blocker and digoxin, and the result of a meta-analysis which revealed that β blockers are harmful on patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

The author discusses the lessons learned from the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial in the U.S. Topics covered include the reduced potential benefits of spironolactone therapy for heart failure patients and the importance of natriuretic peptide levels as a predictor of adverse outcomes in heart failure patients particularly for those with preserved ejection fraction.

Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.Methods: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 610 sites across 28 countries. We randomly assigned patients aged 40 years and older with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (at a 1:1 ratio) to groups that either received a subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30-50 mg, based on glycaemic response and tolerability) or of a matched volume of placebo once a week, in addition to their standard care. Investigators used an interactive voice or web response system to obtain treatment assignment, and patients and all study investigators were masked to their treatment allocation. We hypothesised that albiglutide would be non-inferior to placebo for the primary outcome of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. If non-inferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of less than 1·30, closed testing for superiority was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02465515.Findings: Patients were screened between July 1, 2015, and Nov 24, 2016. 10 793 patients were screened and 9463 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups: 4731 patients were assigned to receive albiglutide and 4732 patients to receive placebo. On Nov 8, 2017, it was determined that 611 primary endpoints and a median follow-up of at least 1·5 years had accrued, and participants returned for a final visit and discontinuation from study treatment; the last patient visit was on March 12, 2018. These 9463 patients, the intention-to-treat population, were evaluated for a median duration of 1·6 years and were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 (7%) of 4731 patients at an incidence rate of 4·6 events per 100 person-years in the albiglutide group and in 428 (9%) of 4732 patients at an incidence rate of 5·9 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·68-0·90), which indicated that albiglutide was superior to placebo (p<0·0001 for non-inferiority; p=0·0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (ten patients in the albiglutide group and seven patients in the placebo group), pancreatic cancer (six patients in the albiglutide group and five patients in the placebo group), medullary thyroid carcinoma (zero patients in both groups), and other serious adverse events did not differ between the two groups. There were three (<1%) deaths in the placebo group that were assessed by investigators, who were masked to study drug assignment, to be treatment-related and two (<1%) deaths in the albiglutide group.Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. Evidence-based glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should therefore be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes.Funding: GlaxoSmithKline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To evaluate the effects of digoxin in patients with the newly described phenotype of heart failure (HF) and mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF), attributed to mild left ventricular systolic dysfunction.Methods and Results: We carried out a retrospective analysis of the Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) trial which had 7788 patients available for analysis with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ranging between 3% and 85%. We compared the effect of digoxin to placebo in three mutually exclusive groups of patients defined by LVEF category: <40% (HF with reduced LVEF, HFrEF, n = 5874), 40-49% (HFmrEF, n = 1195) and ≥50% (HF with preserved LVEF, HFpEF, n = 719). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalisation. Patients with HFmrEF resembled patients with HFrEF, more than those with HFpEF, with respect to age, sex and aetiology but were more like HFpEF patients with respect to blood pressure and the prevalence of hypertension. Event rates in patients with HFmrEF were similar to those in HFpEF and much lower than in HFrEF. Digoxin reduced the primary endpoint in patients with HFrEF, mainly due to reduced HF hospitalisation: the digoxin/placebo hazard ratio (HR) for HF hospitalisation was 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.77]. The digoxin/placebo HR for HF hospitalisation in patients with HFmrEF was 0.80 (95% CI 0.63-1.03) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.62-1.17) in those with HFpEF. The digoxin/placebo HR for the composite of HF death or HF hospitalisation was 0.74 (95% CI 0.68-0.81) in HFrEF, 0.83 (95% CI 0.66-1.05) in HFmrEF and 0.88 (95% CI 0.65-1.19) in HFpEF.Conclusions: In this study, event rates in patients with HFmrEF were closer to those in HFpEF than HFrEF. Digoxin had most effect on HF hospitalisation in patients with HFrEF, an intermediate effect in HFmrEF, and the smallest effect in HFpEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) in reducing heart failure hospitalization in the EMPA‐REG OUTCOMES trial has raised the possibility of using these agents to treat established heart failure. We hypothesize that osmotic diuresis induced by SGLT2 inhibition, a distinctly different diuretic mechanism than that of other diuretic classes, results in greater electrolyte‐free water clearance and, ultimately, in greater fluid clearance from the interstitial fluid (IF) space than from the circulation, potentially resulting in congestion relief with minimal impact on blood volume, arterial filling and organ perfusion. We utilize a mathematical model to illustrate that electrolyte‐free water clearance results in a greater reduction in IF volume compared to blood volume, and that this difference may be mediated by peripheral sequestration of osmotically inactive sodium. By coupling the model with data on plasma and urinary sodium and water in healthy subjects who received either the SGLT2i dapagliflozin or loop diuretic bumetanide, we predict that dapagliflozin produces a 2‐fold greater reduction in IF volume compared to blood volume, while the reduction in IF volume with bumetanide is only 78% of the reduction in blood volume. Heart failure is characterized by excess fluid accumulation, in both the vascular compartment and interstitial space, yet many heart failure patients have arterial underfilling because of low cardiac output, which may be aggravated by conventional diuretic treatment. Thus, we hypothesize that, by reducing IF volume to a greater extent than blood volume, SGLT2 inhibitors might provide better control of congestion without reducing arterial filling and perfusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Because of concerns about the safety of aliskiren in patients with diabetes, study treatment was stopped prematurely in the Aliskiren Trial of Minimizing OutcomeS for Patients with HEart failuRE (ATMOSPHERE). We examined outcomes and treatment effect in these patients compared with those without diabetes.Methods and Results: ATMOSPHERE included 7016 patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) randomly assigned to enalapril plus aliskiren, aliskiren alone, or enalapril. At baseline, 1944 (27.7%) patients had diabetes. Median follow-up was shorter in patients with diabetes compared with those without (24 months vs. 46 months). Among patients with diabetes, the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 216 patients (33.1%) in the enalapril group (reference), 172 (27.4%) in the aliskiren group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.00; P = 0.053], and 196 (29.5%) in the combination group (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.04; P = 0.13). The effects of the treatments studied did not differ significantly compared with patients without diabetes. In patients with diabetes, aliskiren monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of symptomatic hypotension compared to enalapril [42 (6.7%) vs. 65 (10.0%); P = 0.04], whereas other adverse events were generally balanced between the three groups.Conclusion: In patients with HFrEF and diabetes, there was no signal of harm and a trend towards benefit when direct renin inhibition monotherapy was compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, whereas combined aliskiren and enalapril treatment led to more adverse events with no improvement in outcomes. Treatment effects did not differ in patients with diabetes compared with those without. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00853658. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Lessons in uncertainty and humility — clinical trials involving hypertension," by Marc A. Pfeffer and John J. V. McMurray in the November 3, 2016 issue.

Background: In patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction, little is known about the characteristics of, and outcomes in, those with and without diabetes mellitus.Methods: We examined clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and outcomes in the I-Preserve trial (Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction) according to history of diabetes mellitus. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios for cardiovascular outcomes adjusted for known predictors, including age, sex, natriuretic peptides, and comorbidity. Echocardiographic data were available in 745 patients and were additionally adjusted for in supplementary analyses.Results: Overall, 1134 of 4128 patients (27%) had diabetes mellitus. Compared with those without diabetes mellitus, they were more likely to have a history of myocardial infarction (28% versus 22%), higher body mass index (31 versus 29 kg/m2), worse Minnesota Living With Heart Failure score (48 versus 40), higher median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration (403 versus 320 pg/mL; all P<0.01), more signs of congestion, but no significant difference in left ventricular ejection fraction. Patients with diabetes mellitus had a greater left ventricular mass and left atrial area than patients without diabetes mellitus. Doppler E-wave velocity (86 versus 76 cm/s; P<0.0001) and the E/e' ratio (11.7 versus 10.4; P=0.010) were higher in patients with diabetes mellitus. Over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization occurred in 34% of patients with diabetes mellitus versus 22% of those without diabetes mellitus (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-2.05), and 28% versus 19% of patients with and without diabetes mellitus died (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.59; confidence interval, 1.33-1.91).Conclusions: In heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, patients with diabetes mellitus have more signs of congestion, worse quality of life, higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels, and a poorer prognosis. They also display greater structural and functional echocardiographic abnormalities. Further investigation is needed to determine the mediators of the adverse impact of diabetes mellitus on outcomes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and whether they are modifiable.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00095238. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Return to work is important financially, as a marker of functional status and for self-esteem in patients developing chronic illness. We examined return to work after first heart failure (HF) hospitalization.Methods: By individual-level linkage of nationwide Danish registries, we identified 21 455 patients of working age (18-60 years) with a first HF hospitalization in the period from 1997 to 2012. Of these patients, 11 880 (55%) were in the workforce before HF hospitalization and comprised the study population. We applied logistic regression to estimate odds ratios for associations between age, sex, length of hospital stay, level of education, income, comorbidity, and return to work.Results: One year after first HF hospitalization, 8040 (67.7%) returned to the workforce, 2981 (25.1%) did not, 805 (6.7%) died, and 54 (0.5%) emigrated. Predictors of return to work included younger age (18-30 versus 51-60 years; odds ratio [OR], 3.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.42-4.03), male sex (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34), and level of education (long-higher versus basic school; OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.63-2.60). Conversely, hospital stay >7 days (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.51-0.62) and comorbidity including history of stroke (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45-0.69), chronic kidney disease (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.36-0.59), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52-0.75), diabetes mellitus (OR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.85), and cancer (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40-0.61) were all significantly associated with lower chance of return to work.Conclusions: Patients in the workforce before HF hospitalization had low mortality but high risk of detachment from the workforce 1 year later. Young age, male sex, and a higher level of education were predictors of return to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many episodes of worsening of heart failure (HF) are treated by increasing oral therapy or temporary intravenous treatment in the community or emergency department (ED), without hospital admission. We studied the frequency and prognostic importance of these episodes of worsening in the Prospective Comparison of ARNI (angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitor) with ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure Trial (PARADIGM-HF).Methods and Results: Outpatient intensification of HF therapy was added to an expanded composite outcome with ED visits, HF hospitalizations, and cardiovascular deaths. In an examination of first nonfatal events, 361 of 8399 patients (4.3%) had outpatient intensification of HF therapy without a subsequent event (ie, ED visit/HF hospitalizations) within 30 days; 78 of 8399 (1.0%) had an ED visit without previous outpatient intensification of HF therapy or a subsequent event within 30 days; and 1107 of 8399 (13.2%) had HF hospitalizations without a preceding event. The risk of death (in comparison with no-event patients) was similar after each manifestation of worsening: outpatient intensification of HF therapy (hazard ratio, 4.8; 95% confidence interval, 3.9-5.9); ED visit (hazard ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 3.0-6.7); HF hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 5.9; 95% confidence interval, 5.2-6.6). The expanded composite added 14% more events and shortened time to accrual of a fixed number of events. The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril was similar to the primary outcome for the expanded composite (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.86) and was consistent across the components of the latter.Conclusions: Focusing only on HF hospitalizations underestimates the frequency of worsening and the serious implications of all manifestations of worsening. For clinical trials conducted in an era of heightened efforts to avoid HF hospitalizations, inclusion of episodes of outpatient treatment intensification (and ED visits) in a composite outcome adds an important number of events and shortens the time taken to accrue a target number of end points in an event-driven trial.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality are higher among patients with type 2 diabetes, particularly those with concomitant cardiovascular diseases, than in most other populations. We assessed the effects of lixisenatide, a glucagon-like peptide 1-receptor agonist, on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes who had had a recent acute coronary event.Methods: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes who had had a myocardial infarction or who had been hospitalized for unstable angina within the previous 180 days to receive lixisenatide or placebo in addition to locally determined standards of care. The trial was designed with adequate statistical power to assess whether lixisenatide was noninferior as well as superior to placebo, as defined by an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio of less than 1.3 and 1.0, respectively, for the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina.Results: The 6068 patients who underwent randomization were followed for a median of 25 months. A primary end-point event occurred in 406 patients (13.4%) in the lixisenatide group and in 399 (13.2%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.17), which showed the noninferiority of lixisenatide to placebo (P<0.001) but did not show superiority (P=0.81). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of hospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio in the lixisenatide group, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.23) or the rate of death (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.13). Lixisenatide was not associated with a higher rate of serious adverse events or severe hypoglycemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic neoplasms, or allergic reactions than was placebo.Conclusions: In patients with type 2 diabetes and a recent acute coronary syndrome, the addition of lixisenatide to usual care did not significantly alter the rate of major cardiovascular events or other serious adverse events. (Funded by Sanofi; ELIXA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01147250.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We have previously demonstrated an association between increased sFRP3 expression and adverse outcome in a population of HF irrespective of cause and left ventricular ejection fraction. In this study we evaluated the prognostic value of sFRP3 in older patients with chronic systolic HF of ischemic origin. Methods: We evaluated sFRP3, by tertiles, as a risk factor for the primary endpoint (cardiovascular [CV] mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke), all-cause mortality, CV mortality, death from worsening HF (WHF), any coronary event, including sudden death, as well as hospitalizations for CV causes and WHF in 1444 patients from the CORONA population, randomly assigned to 10 mg rosuvastatin or placebo. Results: Kaplan-Meier curves for the primary endpoint, as well as all-cause- and CV mortality revealed a markedly better survival for patients with sFRP3 levels in the middle tertile of compared to the 1st and 3rd tertile. In multivariable Cox-regression, after full adjustment including high-sensitive CRP and NT-proBNP, a lower event rate for the primary end point, all cause and CV mortality was observed for patients with tertile 2 sFRP3 levels (HR 0.57 [0.44–0.74], 0.55 [0.44–0.74] and 0.52 [0.39–0.69]; p<0.001), as well as for the number of coronary events (HR 0.62 [0.47–0.82], p = 0.001) and sudden death (HR 0.55 [0.37–0.82], p = 0.002). Applying sFRP3 values to the fully adjusted regression model resulted in highly significant continuous net reclassification improvements for the primary endpoint, all cause and CV mortality, coronary events and sudden death (range 0.24–0.31; p≤0.002 for all). Conclusions: Intermediate serum sFRP3 levels are associated with better survival and fewer CV events than low or high sFRP3 levels, independently of conventional risk factors, in older patients with chronic systolic HF of ischemic origin. Our study suggests that balanced Wnt activity might confer protective effects in a clinical HF setting. Trial Registration: [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim In the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and Survival Study in Heart Failure (EMPHASIS-HF), aldosterone blockade with eplerenone decreased mortality and hospitalisation in patients with mild symptoms (New York Heart Association class II) and chronic systolic heart failure (HF). The present study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of eplerenone in the treatment of these patients in the UK and Spain. Methods and results Results from the EMPHASIS-HF trial were used to develop a discrete-event simulation model estimating lifetime direct costs and effects (life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained) of the addition of eplerenone to standard care among patients with chronic systolic HF and mild symptoms. Eplerenone plus standard care compared with standard care alone increased lifetime direct costs per patient by £4284 for the UK and €7358 for Spain, with additional quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.22 QALYs for the UK and 1.33 QALYs for Spain. Mean lifetime costs were £3520 per QALY in the UK and €5532 per QALY in Spain. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested a 100% likelihood of eplerenone being regarded as cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY (UK) or €30 000 per QALY (Spain). Conclusions By currently accepted standards of value for money, the addition of eplerenone to optimal medical therapy for patients with chronic systolic HF and mild symptoms is likely to be cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background--High-sensitivity troponin-I (hs-TnI) measurement improves risk assessment for cardiovascular events in many clinical settings, but the added value in atrial fibrillation patients has not been described. Methods and Results--At randomization, hs-TnI was analyzed in 14 821 atrial fibrillation patients in the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial comparing apixaban with warfarin. The associations between hs-TnI concentrations and clinical outcomes were evaluated by using adjusted Cox analysis. The hs-TnI assay detected troponin (≥1.3 ng/L) in 98.5% patients, 50% had levels >5.4, 25% had levels >10.1, and 9.2% had levels ≥23 ng/L (the 99th percentile in healthy individuals). During a median of 1.9 years follow-up, annual rates of stroke or systemic embolism ranged from 0.76% in the lowest hs-TnI quartile to 2.26% in the highest quartile (>10.1 ng/L). In multivariable analysis, hs-TnI was significantly associated with stroke or systemic embolism, adjusted hazard ratio 1.98 (1.42-2.78), P=0.0007. hs-TnI was also significantly associated with cardiac death; annual rates ranged from 0.40% to 4.24%, hazard ratio 4.52 (3.05-6.70), P<0.0001, in the corresponding groups, and for major bleeding hazard ratio 1.44 (1.11-1.86), P=0.0250. Adding hs-TnI levels to the CHA2DS2VASc score improved c-statistics from 0.629 to 0.653 for stroke or systemic embolism, and from 0.591 to 0.731 for cardiac death. There were no significant interactions with study treatment. Conclusions--Troponin-I is detected in 98.5% and elevated in 9.2% of atrial fibrillation patients. The hs-TnI level is independently associated with a raised risk of stroke, cardiac death, and major bleeding and improves risk stratification beyond the CHA2DS2VASc score. The benefits of apixaban in comparison with warfarin are consistent regardless of hs-TnI levels. Clinical Trial Registration--URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00412984. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on a study related to the treatment of pancreatitis with the help of lipid modification. Meta analysis method was used in the collection of several data related to randomize clinical trials. It mentions that treatment of pancreatitis that statin and ezetimibe with placebo were effective in controlling the disease and hypertriglyceridemia was reported to be the common cause of pancreatitis. A flowchart and a table are also presented related to several lipid modification trials. The author states that they were not able to differentiate pancreatitis in chronic and acute cases.

The article presents a phase-2 study that examines the effect of cardiac myosin activator, omecamtiv mecarbil on cardiac function in systolic heart failure. It outlines the method of the double-blind placebo-controlled study in which the patients with stable heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction were given with omecamtiv mecarbil. The study found out that omecamtiv mecarbil can improve cardiac function in patients with heart failure.

Aims: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of 10 mg rosuvastatin daily for older patients with systolic heart failure in the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Study in Heart Failure (CORONA) trial. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background Half of patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) have preserved left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), but few treatments have specifically been assessed in such patients. In previous studies of patients with CHF and low LVEF or vascular disease and preserved LVEF, inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system is beneficial. We investigated the effect of addition of an angiotensin-receptor blocker to current treatments. Methods Between March, 1999, and July, 2000, we randomly assigned 3023 patients candesartan (n=1514, target dose 32 mg once daily) or matching placebo (n=1509). Patients had New York Heart Association functional class II--IV CHF and LVEF higher than 40%. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death or admission to hospital for CHF. Anaysis was done by intention to treat. Findings Median follow-up was 36.6 months. 333 (22%) patients in the candesartan and 366 (24%) in the placebo group experienced the primary outcome (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.77--1.03], p=0.118; covariate adjusted 0.86 [0.74--1.0], p=0.051). Cardiovascular death did not differ between groups (170 vs 170), but fewer patients in the candesartan group than in the placebo group were admitted to hospital for CHF once (230 vs 279, p=0.017) or multiple times. Composite outcomes that included non-fatal myocardial infarction and non-fatal stroke showed similar results to the primary composite (388 vs 429; unadjusted 0.88 [0.77--1.01], p=0.078; covariate adjusted 0.86 [0.75--0.99], p=0.037). Interpretation Candesartan has a moderate impact in preventing admissions for CHF among patients who have heart failure and LVEF higher than 40%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This section presents letters to the editor about the article "Cardiorenal end points in a trial of aliskiren for type 2 diabetes" by H. H. Parving et al. in the December 6, 2012 issue and the authors' reply which justified that their trial tested whether the addition of the direct renin inhibitor aliskiren to another inhibitor of the renin-angiotensin system would lower morbidity and mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for clinically crucial adverse cardiorenal events.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Aliskiren, enalapril, or aliskiren and enalapril in heart failure" by John J. V. McMurray, and colleagues in the April 21, 2016 issue.

A response from the authors of the article "Risk of Stroke in Chronic Heart Failure Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation: Analysis of the Controlled Rosuvastatin in Multinational Trial Heart Failure (CORONA) and the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell' Insufficienza Cardiaca-Heart Failure (GISSI-HF) Trials" in the 2015 issue is presented.