Search

OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS) who would have been eligible for inclusion in clinical trials of glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors with those of ineligible patients. DESIGN: Multinational, prospective, observational study (GRACE, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events). SETTING: Patients hospitalised for a suspected acute coronary syndrome and enrolled in GRACE between April 1999 and December 2004. PATIENTS: 29 039 patients with NSTE ACS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics and outcomes were compared for trial-eligible (75.0%) and trial-ineligible (25.0%) patients. RESULTS: GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors were administered to 20.0% of eligible and 15.3% of ineligible patients. Compared with eligible patients, ineligible patients who received GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors had significantly higher rates of hospital death (6.8% vs 3.7%) and major bleeding (4.9% vs 2.2%). After adjustment for their higher baseline risk, ineligible patients still experienced higher hospital death rates (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 2.39), but not higher bleeding rates, than the eligible group. Use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors was associated with a trend towards lower 6-month mortality in eligible (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.02) and ineligible (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.05) patients compared with those in whom this therapy was not used. CONCLUSIONS: GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors were markedly underused in the real-world population, irrespective of whether patients were trial-eligible or not. Despite the higher risk of ineligible patients, the benefits of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors appear to be no less than in eligible patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A recent randomized, controlled trial, the Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Acute Ischemic Syndromes (OASIS 5) trial, reported that major bleeding was 2-fold less frequent with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Renal dysfunction increases the risk for major bleeding.Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of fondaparinux and enoxaparin over the spectrum of renal dysfunction observed in the OASIS 5 trial.Design: Subgroup analysis of a randomized, controlled trial.Setting: Patients presenting to the hospital with non-ST-segment elevation ACS.Patients: 19,979 of the 20,078 patients in the OASIS 5 trial in whom creatinine was measured at baseline.Measurements: Death, myocardial infarction, refractory ischemia, and major bleeding were evaluated separately and as a composite end point at 9, 30, and 180 days. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was calculated by using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula.Results: The absolute differences in favor of fondaparinux (efficacy and safety) were most marked in patients with a GFR less than 58 mL/min per 1.73 m2; the largest differences occurred in major bleeding events. At 9 days, death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia occurred in 6.7% of patients receiving fondaparinux and 7.4% of those receiving enoxaparin (hazard ratio, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.11]); major bleeding occurred in 2.8% and 6.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.42 [CI, 0.32 to 0.56]). Statistically significant differences in major bleeding persisted at 30 and 180 days. The rates of the composite end point were lower with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin in all quartiles of GFR, but the differences were statistically significant only among patients with a GFR less than 58 mL/min per 1.73 m2.Limitations: Subgroup analyses warrant caution; the study was powered to detect noninferiority at 9 days. Fondaparinux is not approved for use in patients with ACS in the United States.Conclusions: The benefits of fondaparinux over enoxaparin when administered for non-ST-segment elevation ACS are most marked among patients with renal dysfunction and are largely explained by lower rates of major bleeding with fondaparinux. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Enoxaparin or the combination of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban with unfractionated heparin independently have shown superior efficacy over unfractionated heparin alone in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS). It is not clear if combining enoxaparin with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors is as safe or as effective as the current standard combination of unfractionated heparin with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors.Objective: To assess efficacy and safety of the combination of enoxaparin and tirofiban compared with unfractionated heparin and tirofiban in patients with non-ST-elevation ACS.Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, international, open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial of 1 mg/kg of enoxaparin every 12 hours (n = 2026) compared with weight-adjusted intravenous unfractionated heparin (n = 1961) in patients with non-ST-elevation ACS receiving tirofiban and aspirin. Phase A of the A to Z trial was conducted between December 1999 and May 2002.Main Outcome Measures: Death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia at 7 days in the intent-to-treat population with boundaries set for superiority and noninferiority. Safety based on measures of bleeding using the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) classification system.Results: A total of 169 (8.4%) of 2018 patients randomized to enoxaparin experienced death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia at 7 days compared with 184 (9.4%) of 1952 patients randomized to unfractionated heparin (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.08). This met the prespecified criterion for noninferiority. All components of the composite primary and secondary end points favored enoxaparin except death, which occurred in only 1% of patients (23 for enoxaparin and 17 for unfractionated heparin). Rates for any TIMI grade bleeding were low (3.0% for enoxaparin and 2.2% for unfractionated heparin; P =.13). Using a worst-case approach that combined 2 independent bleeding evaluations, use of enoxaparin was associated with 1 additional TIMI major bleeding episode for each 200 patients treated.Conclusions: In patients receiving tirofiban and aspirin, enoxaparin is a suitable alternative to unfractionated heparin for treatment of non-ST-elevation ACS. The 12% relative and 1% absolute reductions in the primary end point in favor of enoxaparin met criterion for noninferiority and are consistent with prior trials performed without the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Statins administered early in patients with acute coronary syndromes may lead to modest reductions in recurrent ischemic events.Objective: To examine the association between previous and early in-hospital statin therapy and the presentation and outcomes of an acute coronary syndrome.Design: Cohort study.Setting: 94 hospitals in 14 countries participating in the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE).Patients: 19,537 patients with an acute coronary syndrome who were enrolled from April 1999 to September 2002.Measurements: Statin use before and after presentation with an acute coronary syndrome and associated rates of myocardial infarction, hospital complications, and hospital mortality. The composite end point included death, in-hospital myocardial infarction, and stroke.Results: Patients who were already taking statins when they presented to the hospital were less likely to have ST-segment elevation (odds ratio [OR], 0.79 [95% CI, 0.71 to 0.88]) or myocardial infarction (OR, 0.78 [CI, 0.70 to 0.86]). Patients who continued to take statins in the hospital were less likely to experience complications or die than patients who never received statins (OR, 0.66 [CI, 0.56 to 0.77]). Patients not previously taking statins who began statin therapy in the hospital were less likely to die than patients who never received statin therapy (OR, 0.38 [CI, 0.30 to 0.48]). However, adjustment for the hospital of admission attenuated the association between initiation of statin therapy and the composite end point (OR, 0.84 [CI, 0.65 to 1.10]).Limitations: This observational study cannot exclude confounding by clinical and hospital factors.Conclusions: These data support the hypothesis that statin therapy can modulate early pathophysiologic processes in patients with acute coronary syndromes. A randomized trial of statin therapy in acute myocardial infarction is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the value of noninvasive predictors of death/mode of death in ambulant outpatients with chronic heart failure (HF).Background: Mortality in chronic HF remains high, with a significant number of patients dying of progressive disease. Identification of these patients is important.Methods: We recruited 553 ambulant outpatients age 63 +/- 10 years with symptoms of chronic HF (New York Heart Association functional class, 2.3 +/- 0.5) and objective evidence of left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction <45%, cardiothoracic ratio >0.55, or pulmonary edema on chest radiograph). After 2,365 patient-years of follow-up, 201 patients had died, with 76 events due to progressive HF.Results: Independent predictors of all-cause mortality assessed with the Cox proportional hazards model were as follows: a low standard deviation of all normal-to-normal RR intervals (SDNN); lower serum sodium and higher creatinine levels; higher cardiothoracic ratio; nonsustained ventricular tachycardia; higher left ventricular end-systolic diameter; left ventricular hypertrophy; and increasing age. Independent predictors of death specific to progressive HF were SDNN, serum sodium and creatinine levels. The hazard ratio of progressive HF death for a 10% decrease in SDNN was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.12); for a 2 mmol/l decrease in serum sodium, 1.22 (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.38); and for a 10 micromol/l increase in serum creatinine, 1.14 (95% CI, 1.09 to 1.19) (all p < 0.01).Conclusions: In ambulant outpatients with chronic HF, low serum sodium and SDNN and high serum creatinine identify patients at increased risk of death due to progressive HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study was designed to compare the long-term consequences of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and continued medical treatment.Background: The long-term effects of percutaneous coronary intervention need evaluating, especially in comparison with an alternative policy of continued medical treatment.Methods: The Second Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA-2) is a randomized trial of PTCA versus conservative (medical) care in 1,018 patients considered suitable for either treatment option. Information on clinical events, interventions, and symptoms is available for a median seven years follow-up.Results: Death or myocardial infarction (MI) occurred in 73 (14.5%) PTCA patients and 63 (12.3%) medical patients (difference +2.2%, 95% confidence interval -2.0% to +6.4%, p = 0.21). There were 43 deaths in both groups, of which 41% were cardiac-related. Among patients assigned PTCA 12.7% subsequently had coronary artery bypass grafts, and 14.5% required additional non-randomized PTCA. Most of these re-interventions occurred within a year of randomization, and after two years the re-intervention rate was 2.3% per annum. In the medical group, 35.4% required myocardial revascularization: 15.0% in the first year and an annual rate of 3.6% after two years. An initial policy of PTCA was associated with improved anginal symptoms and exercise times. These treatment differences narrowed over time, mainly because of coronary interventions in medical patients with severe symptoms.Conclusions: In RITA-2 an initial strategy of PTCA did not influence the risk of death or MI, but it improved angina and exercise tolerance. Patients considered suitable for PTCA or medical therapy can be safely managed with continued medical therapy, but percutaneous intervention is appropriate if symptoms are not controlled. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The long-term use of aspirin (ASA) reduces the risk of subsequent acute coronary syndromes in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). It is less clear whether ASA therapy benefits patients who develop an acute coronary syndrome despite its use. Baseline characteristics, type of acute coronary syndrome, and in-hospital events were compared on the basis of previous use of ASA in 11,388 patients with and without a history of CAD presenting to 94 multinational hospitals. A total of 73.0% of patients with a history of CAD (n = 4,974) were previously on long-term ASA therapy compared with 19.4% of patients without a history of CAD (n = 6,414). After multivariate regression analysis controlling for various potentially confounding factors, patients with a history of CAD who were previously taking ASA were significantly less likely to present with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.52, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.44 to 0.61) or die during hospitalization (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.95) in comparison to patients who were not taking ASA. Patients without a history of CAD and who were previously taking ASA also had a lower risk of developing ST-segment elevation MI (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.40) and a trend toward a decreased hospital death rate (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.07). These results demonstrate that patients with a history of CAD who present with an acute coronary syndrome despite prior ASA use have less severe clinical presentation, fewer hospital complications, and lower in-hospital death rates than patients not previously taking ASA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether stroke prevention strategy, comorbidity management, and clinical outcome risks differ across atrial fibrillation (AF) care specialties., Methods: Newly diagnosed non-valvular AF patients enrolled in the international, prospective GARFIELD-AF registry (enrolment: 2010-2016) were analysed. Prescription of oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy and select comorbidities was assessed by baseline care specialty: cardiology, primary care, or other specialties (internist/neurologist/geriatrician). Associations between care specialty and 2-year clinical outcomes were evaluated using multivariable Cox frailty models to account for within-country homogeneity., Results: In 52,011 patients, 34,172 (65.7 %) were diagnosed and initially managed in cardiology care, 7396 (14.2 %) in primary care, and 10,443 (20.1 %) in other specialties. The inter-country care specialty distribution varied considerably. Non-vitamin K OAC (NOAC) therapy among CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc ≥2 patients was more common in cardiology care (31.0 %) than primary care (19.8 %) and other specialty care (24.9 %), but comorbidity management was similar across specialties. Compared to cardiology care, primary care was associated with greater non-cardiovascular mortality (1.21 [1.01-1.45]), major bleeding (1.31 [1.05-1.62]), and new/worsening heart failure risk (2.09 [1.69-2.59]). Care in other specialties was associated with greater all-cause (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.19 [95 % CI, 1.09-1.29]), cardiovascular (1.15 [1.01-1.31]), and non-cardiovascular mortality (1.29 [1.13-1.47]), as well as non-haemorrhagic stroke/systemic embolism (1.48 [1.26-1.73]), major bleeding (1.21 [1.02-1.43]), and new/worsening heart failure risk (1.45 [1.21-1.75]) than cardiology care., Conclusion: Comorbidity management was similar across AF care specialties, but patients outside of cardiology care had fewer NOAC prescriptions and greater risk for most clinical endpoints. Cardiology expertise may have important implications for AF prognosis., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www., Clinicaltrials: gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF: NCT01090362., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest C Fielder Camm reports honoraria from Bayer. John W Eikelboom reports grant or in-kind support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi-Aventis and honoraria from Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol-Myer-Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli-Lilly, Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Merck, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier. Ali Oto reports grants from Pfizer and personal fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Daiichi, A. Menarini Research and Business Service GmbH, and Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals. Keith AA Fox reports grants and personal fees from Bayer/Janssen, and Astra Zeneca. AJ Camm reports institutional grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo, and personal fees from Portola. Karen S Pieper has consultancies with Johnson & Johnson, Element Science, Artivion, and Novartis. Shinya Goto was a recipient of personal fees from Jansen, Merck & Co., Inc., Amgen Inc., and Anthos, as well as fees from the American Heart Association as an Associate Editor for Circulation, and Steering Committee fees from TIMI Study group. Ajay K Kakkar received personal fees and grants from Bayer AG, Sanofi S.A. and Anthos Therapeutics Inc. All other authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To determine characteristics and clinical outcomes of German patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with or without peripheral artery disease (PAD) who initiated dual pathway inhibition (DPI) using rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg once daily in clinical practice in Germany and to compare those with the results for CAD patients of the COMPASS trial., Methods and Results: XATOA was an international prospective registry with a mean follow-up period of 15 months. There were 1641 German CAD patients included, of which 747 patients (45.5%) had CAD only and 894 patients (54.5%) had both CAD and PAD. Baseline characteristics (age, sex, medical history, prior medications) were similar between the subgroups of German CAD patients and comparable to CAD patients of COMPASS. The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was comparable between CAD patient subgroups of XATOA Germany (only CAD patients: 3.7%, CAD + PAD patients: 3.9%) and was similar to the incidence for CAD patients overall in XATOA and in COMPASS (All CAD patients XATOA: 3.8% vs. 4.2% COMPASS CAD). Incidence for major bleeding was markedly lower in CAD patients of XATOA Germany compared to COMPASS CAD patients (All CAD patients XATOA: 1.1% vs. 3.2% in COMPASS CAD)., Conclusion: In this real world experience among German patients with CAD enrolled in XATOA, DPI with rivaroxaban and aspirin was associated with low incidence of MACE and major bleeding., Competing Interests: Declarations. Conflict of interest: U.Z. received research grants from Bayer AG, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer, Ferrer and speaker honoraria from Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Ferrer, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Zoll. U.R-K. received speaker fees and financial funding for a research project from Bayer, speaker and advisor fees from Sanofi Aventis, Nova Biomedical Corporation, Leo Pharm and Boehringer Ingelheim. J.H. received honoraria for advisory boards and travel support from Leo Pharma, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, and Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly. R.B. received research grants from CPC, FADOI, Viatris and worked as a paid consultant and received speaker fees from Bayer AG, Bristol-Myers Squibb, LEO Pharma, Pfizer Inc., and Viatris Inc., (© 2025. Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

The Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction recommends a classification based on aetiology, in recognition that the underlying pathophysiology of myocardial infarction influences the approach to investigation and treatment. Type 1 myocardial infarction occurs due to atherosclerotic plaque rupture with thrombosis, whereas type 2 myocardial infarction occurs due to an imbalance in myocardial oxygen supply or unmet need in myocardial oxygen demand, without atherothrombosis, usually in the context of another acute illness. In this state-of-the-art review, the diagnosis, investigation, and treatment of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction are considered, with general advice for clinical practice and a consideration of future research directions., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: To assess the characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) in XATOA receiving dual pathway inhibition (DPI) with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin according to lower extremity revascularisation (LER) history., Methods: XATOA is an international, multicentre, prospective, single arm registry study. This subanalysis investigated patients with lower extremity PAD according to LER history. Patients with coronary artery disease, PAD, or both, receiving DPI were followed for 12 or more months. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were assessed according to LER history. A time dependency analysis assessed outcomes by time between the most recent LER procedure and the start of DPI. A multivariable analysis assessed the influence of patient characteristics on clinical outcomes., Results: In XATOA (n = 5 532), 2 820 (51.0%) patients had lower extremity PAD, of whom 1 736 (61.6%) had prior LER and 1 084 (38.4%) had no prior LER. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between patients with or without prior LER. A higher proportion of patients with prior LER experienced any treatment emergency clinical events compared with those without prior LER (15.0% vs. 9.4%, respectively), with greater differences observed between incidence rates of limb events, including major adverse limb events (9.06 vs. 4.09 events per 100 patient years, respectively). Similar rates of myocardial infarction, stroke, and major bleeding were observed in both subgroups. Clinical event rates were generally higher in patients who had previous LER for six months or less compared with patients who had previous LET for more than six months before starting DPI, regardless of LER type. Multivariable analyses showed that prior LER was predictive of limb events., Conclusion: This subanalysis of XATOA found that prior LER was associated with increased rates of limb events, consistent with results of COMPASS and VOYAGER PAD. Rates of bleeding were also low regardless of LER history and consistent with the findings from these trials., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Whether a conservative strategy of medical therapy alone or a strategy of medical therapy plus invasive treatment is more beneficial in older adults with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains unclear., Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial involving patients 75 years of age or older with NSTEMI at 48 sites in the United Kingdom. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a conservative strategy of the best available medical therapy or an invasive strategy of coronary angiography and revascularization plus the best available medical therapy. Patients who were frail or had a high burden of coexisting conditions were eligible. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes (cardiovascular death) or nonfatal myocardial infarction assessed in a time-to-event analysis., Results: A total of 1518 patients underwent randomization; 753 patients were assigned to the invasive-strategy group and 765 to the conservative-strategy group. The mean age of the patients was 82 years, 45% were women, and 32% were frail. A primary-outcome event occurred in 193 patients (25.6%) in the invasive-strategy group and 201 patients (26.3%) in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.14; P = 0.53) over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. Cardiovascular death occurred in 15.8% of the patients in the invasive-strategy group and 14.2% of the patients in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.44). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 11.7% in the invasive-strategy group and 15.0% in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.99). Procedural complications occurred in less than 1% of the patients., Conclusions: In older adults with NSTEMI, an invasive strategy did not result in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (the composite primary outcome) than a conservative strategy over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation; BHF SENIOR-RITA ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN11343602.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: The incidence of major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in patients on low-dose direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is relatively unknown. Estimates from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking., Aims: To assess GIB incidence and predictors from RCT data of patients on aspirin, low-dose rivaroxaban, or both., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of RCT data wherein patients received aspirin 100 mg daily and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.d., aspirin alone, or rivaroxaban 5 mg b.d. Patients were followed from 2013 to 2016 at 602 centres. Outcomes included overall, upper, and lower GIB. We employed multivariable logistic regression to yield odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for potential exposures., Results: Among 27,395 patients, the annual incidence of GIB on rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.d. with aspirin was 801.7 per 100,000 compared with 372.3 in 100,000 for aspirin. Age (OR 4.16, 2.53-6.82 for ≥75 vs. 55-64), peptic ulcer disease (PUD, OR 1.57, 1.01-2.44), liver disease (OR 2.09, 1.01-4.33), hypertension (OR 1.42, 1.04-1.94), and smoking (OR 1.85, 1.26-2.73) were associated with overall GIB. Kidney disease (OR 1.68, 1.12-2.51) was significantly associated with upper GIB, whereas diverticular disease (OR 3.75, 1.88-7.49) was associated with lower GIB. Addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin was associated more with lower GIB (OR 2.82, 1.64-4.84) than upper GIB (OR 1.86, 1.18-2.92)., Conclusions: We established incidences and identified risk factors for GIB in users of low-dose DOACs. Novel risk factors included current or former smoking and diverticulosis. Future studies should aim to validate these risk factors., (© 2024 The Author(s). Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The extent to which differences in results from Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) and Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial (ROCKET) atrial fibrillation (AF)-the landmark trials for the approval of apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively, for non-valvular AF-were influenced by differences in their protocols is debated. The potential influence of selection criteria on trial results was assessed by emulating these trials in data from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field (GARFIELD)-AF registry., Methods: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and non-vitamin K oral antagonist (NOAC) users from GARFIELD-AF were selected according to eligibility for the original ARISTOTLE or ROCKET AF trials. A propensity score overlap weighted Cox model was used to emulate trial randomisation between treatment groups. Adjusted HRs for stroke or systemic embolism (SE) within 2 years of enrolment were calculated for each NOAC versus VKA., Results: Among patients on apixaban, rivaroxaban and VKA, 2570, 3560 and 8005 were eligible for ARISTOTLE, respectively, and 1612, 2005 and 4368, respectively, for ROCKET AF. When selecting for ARISTOTLE criteria, apixaban users had significantly lower stroke/SE risk versus VKA (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.94) while no reduction was observed with rivaroxaban (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.68 to 1.40). When selecting for ROCKET AF criteria, safety and efficacy versus VKA were similar across the NOACs., Conclusion: Apixaban and rivaroxaban showed similar results versus VKA in high-risk patients selected according to ROCKET AF criteria, whereas differences emerged when selecting for the more inclusive ARISTOTLE criteria. Our results highlight the importance of trial selection criteria in interpreting trial results and underline the problems faced in comparing treatments across rather than within clinical trials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JC reports institutional grants and personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer/BMS and Daiichi Sankyo and personal fees from Portola. KP has consultancies with Johnson & Johnson, Element Science, Artivion and Novartis. AO received a research grant from Pfizer and is Steering Committee Member and National Coordinator of the ENGAGE-AF (TIMI 48) study. BFJ received speaker honoraria from Boehringer, Sanofi, Aspen, Pfizer, Takeda and Astra Zeneca Jitendra Pal Singh Sawhney reports professional/advisory fees outside the submitted work from Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Sanofi, Torrent and Lupin. TWL has received research support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer. HG received honoraria from Bayer Australia, Eli Lilly Australia, Pfizer Australia and BMS Australia Shinya Goto was a recipient of quality personal fees from Jansen and Antos, and Phillips, fees from the American Heart Association as an Associate Editor for Circulation, and Steering Committee fees from Duke University. SH received personal fees from Bayer, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Sanofi. KAAF reports grants and personal fees from Bayer/Janssen and Astra Zeneca. PJ has served as a consultant or on an advisory board for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis. FV has received grants from Bayer Healthcare, and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, BMS/Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. AKK received personal fees and grants from Bayer AG, Sanofi S.A. and Anthos Therapeutics. JCLH, SV and REH report no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Aims: Older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) are less likely to receive guideline-recommended care including coronary angiography and revascularization. Evidence-based recommendations regarding interventional management strategies in this patient cohort are scarce. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of routine invasive vs. conservative management of NSTEACS by using individual patient data (IPD) from all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including older patients., Methods: MEDLINE, Web of Science and Scopus were searched between 1 January 2010 and 11 September 2023. RCTs investigating routine invasive and conservative strategies in persons >70 years old with NSTEACS were included. Observational studies or trials involving populations outside the target range were excluded. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 year. One-stage IPD meta-analyses were adopted by use of random-effects and fixed-effect Cox models. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023379819)., Results: Six eligible studies were identified including 1479 participants. The primary endpoint occurred in 181 of 736 (24.5%) participants in the invasive management group compared with 215 of 743 (28.9%) participants in the conservative management group with a hazard ratio (HR) from random-effects model of 0.87 (95% CI 0.63-1.22; P = .43). The hazard for MI at 1 year was significantly lower in the invasive group compared with the conservative group (HR from random-effects model 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.87; P = .006). Similar results were seen for urgent revascularization (HR from random-effects model 0.41, 95% CI 0.18-0.95; P = .037). There was no significant difference in mortality., Conclusions: No evidence was found that routine invasive treatment for NSTEACS in older patients reduces the risk of a composite of all-cause mortality and MI within 1 year compared with conservative management. However, there is convincing evidence that invasive treatment significantly lowers the risk of repeat MI or urgent revascularisation. Further evidence is needed from ongoing larger clinical trials., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Days alive out of hospital (DAOH) is an objective and patient-centered net benefit end point. There are no assessments of DAOH in clinical trials of interventions for atrial fibrillation (AF), and it is not known whether this end point is of clinical utility in these populations., Methods and Results: ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) was an international double-blind, double-dummy randomized clinical trial that compared rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation at increased risk for stroke. We assessed DAOH using investigator-reported event data for up to 12 months after randomization in ROCKET AF. We assessed DAOH overall, by treatment group, and by subgroup, including age, sex, and comorbidities, using Poisson regression. The mean±SD number of days dead was 7.3±41.2, days hospitalized was 1.2±7.2, and mean DAOH was 350.7±56.2, with notable left skew. Patients with comorbidities had fewer DAOH overall. There were no differences in DAOH by treatment arm, with mean DAOH of 350.6±56.5 for those randomized to rivaroxaban and 350.7±55.8 for those randomized to warfarin ( P =0.86). A sensitivity analysis found no difference in DAOH not disabled with rivaroxaban versus warfarin (DAOH not disabled, 349.2±59.5 days and 349.1 days±59.3 days, respectively, P =0.88)., Conclusions: DAOH did not identify a treatment difference between patients randomized to rivaroxaban versus warfarin. This may be driven in part by the low overall event rates in atrial fibrillation anticoagulation trials, which leads to substantial left skew in measures of DAOH.