Search

Context Elevated concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) at presentation in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are associated with long-term mortality. Few data exist regarding serial assessment of BNP levels during follow-up. Objective To determine whether concentrations of BNP at study entry (prior to hospital discharge for ACS) and at outpatient follow-up at 4 months and 12 months are associated with subsequent clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Patients Prospective observational substudy of 4497 patients with non–ST-elevation or ST-elevation ACS who were enrolled in phase Z of the A to Z trial, which was conducted in 41 countries at 322 acute care hospitals between 1999 and 2003. Main Outcome Measure Death from any cause or new onset of congestive heart failure (CHF) through 2 years. Results Levels of BNP were available in 4266 patients at study entry (prior to hospital discharge), 3618 patients at 4 months, and 2966 patients at 12 months. During follow-up there were 230 deaths and 163 incident cases of CHF. Adjusting for age, sex, index event, renal function, hypertension, prior heart failure, and diabetes, elevated levels of BNP (>80 pg/mL) were associated with subsequent death or new CHF when measured at study entry (111 [21%] vs 246 [7%]; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.3), at 4 months (34 [19%] vs 125 [4%]; adjusted HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.6-6.0), and at 12 months (19 [11%] vs 37 [1%]; adjusted HR, 4.7; 95% CI, 2.5-8.9). Patients with newly elevated levels of BNP at 4 months were at increased risk of death or new CHF (10 [15%] vs 105 [3%]); HR, 4.5; 95% CI, 2.3-8.6). Patients with elevated levels of BNP at study entry and with BNP levels lower than 80 pg/mL at 4 months tended to have only modestly increased risk (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.9) compared with patients with BNP levels lower than 80 pg/mL at both visits. Conclusions Serial determinations of BNP levels during outpatient follow-up after ACS predict the risk of death or new CHF. Changes in BNP levels over time are associated with long-term clinical outcomes and may provide a basis for enhanced clinical decision making in patients after onset of ACS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Abstract Objective The nonalcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score (NFS) is comprised of unique metabolic risk indicators that may accurately predict residual cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with established coronary disease and metabolic dysfunction. Methods We applied the NFS prospectively to 14,819 post-ACS patients randomized to ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) or placebo/simvastatin (P/S), in the IMPROVE-IT trial, using validated NFS cutoffs. The primary endpoint included CV death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, revascularization or stroke. Outcomes were compared between NFS categories and treatment arms using frequency of events, KM rates and adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. The ability of the NFS to predict recurrent CV events was independently validated in 5395 placebo-treated patients enrolled in the SOLID-TIMI 52 trial. Results Among 14,819 patients enrolled in IMPROVE-IT, 14.2% (N = 2106) were high-risk (NFS > 0.67). The high-risk group had a 30% increased risk of recurrent major CV events, compared to the low-risk NFS group (HR 1.30 [1.19–1.43]; p < 0.001). Among high-risk patients, ezetimibe/simvastatin conferred a 3.7% absolute reduction in risk of recurrent CV events, compared to placebo/simvastatin (HR 0.85 [0.74–0.98]), translating to a number-needed-to-treat of 27. Similar benefit was not found in the low-risk group (HR ezetimibe/simvastatin vs. placebo/simvastatin, 1.01 [0.91–1.12]; p-interaction = 0.053). The relationship between NFS category and recurrent CV events was independently validated in patients enrolled in SOLID-TIMI 52 (HR for NFS > 0.67 vs. NFS < −1.455 = 1.55 [1.32–1.81]; p < 0.001). Conclusion Stratification of cardiovascular risk by NFS identifies an independent population of patients who are at highest risk of recurrent events, and most likely to benefit from dual lipid-lowering therapy. Clinical trials.gov : NCT00202878. Highlights • The NFS is a novel tool for predicting residual CV risk in established CAD. • A high-risk NFS group had 30% higher risk of CV events, compared to low-risk NFS. • A high-risk NFS group was significantly more likely to benefit from early ezetimibe. • The positive association between high-risk NFS and CV risk was externally validated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients who experience an acute coronary syndrome are at heightened risk of recurrent ischemic events, including stroke. Ezetimibe improved cardiovascular outcomes when added to statin therapy in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome. We investigated the efficacy of the addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin for the prevention of stroke and other adverse cardiovascular events in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial), with a focus on patients with a stroke before randomization.Methods: Patients who experienced acute coronary syndrome were randomized to a placebo/simvastatin or ezetimibe/simvastatin regimen and followed for a median of 6 years. Treatment efficacy was assessed for the entire population and by subgroups for the first and total (first and subsequent) events for the end points of stroke of any etiology, stroke subtypes, and the primary trial end point at 7 years.Results: Of 18 144 patients, 641 (3.5%) experienced at least 1 stroke; most were ischemic (527, 82%). Independent predictors of stroke included prior stroke, older age, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, and renal dysfunction. There was a nonsignificant reduction in the first event of stroke of any etiology (4.2% versus 4.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.00; P=0.052) with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus placebo/simvastatin, driven by a significant 21% reduction in ischemic stroke (3.4% versus 4.1%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.94; P=0.008) and a nonsignificant increase in hemorrhagic stroke (0.8% versus 0.6%; HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.93-2.04; P=0.11). Evaluating total events, including the first and all recurrent strokes, ezetimibe/simvastatin reduced stroke of any etiology (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.98; P=0.029) and ischemic stroke (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91; P=0.003). Patients who had experienced a stroke prior to randomization were at a higher risk of recurrence and demonstrated an absolute risk reduction of 8.6% for stroke of any etiology (10.2% versus 18.8%; number needed to treat=12; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95; P=0.030) and 7.6% for ischemic stroke (8.7% versus 16.3%; number needed to treat=13; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31-0.86; P=0.011) with ezetimibe added to simvastatin therapy.Conclusions: The addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome reduces the frequency of ischemic stroke, with a particularly large effect seen in patients with a prior stroke.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00202878. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The IMPROVE-IT trial showed that the cholesterol-lowering drug ezetimibe, when added to simvastatin, provides greater improvement in cardiovascular outcomes among patients with diabetes vs those without diabetes in a population with acute coronary syndrome. Additionally, the rate of new-onset diabetes was not increased among patients treated with ezetimibe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a common and distressing condition. Prior studies suggest that psychotropic medication or pain coping skills training (CST) may benefit NCCP patients. To our knowledge, no clinical trials have examined the separate and combined effects of CST and psychotropic medication in the management of NCCP. This randomized clinical trial examined the separate and combined effects of CST and antidepressant medication (sertraline) in participants with non-cardiac chest pain. A sample of individuals diagnosed with NCCP was randomly assigned to one of four treatments: (1) CST plus sertraline (CST+sertraline), (2) CST plus placebo (CST+placebo), (3) sertraline alone, or (4) placebo alone. Assessments of pain intensity, pain unpleasantness, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, depression, and physical disability were collected prior to treatment, and at 10- and 34-weeks following randomization. Data analyses revealed that CST and sertraline either alone or in combination significantly reduced pain intensity and pain unpleasantness. The combination of CST plus sertraline may have the greatest promise in that, when compared to placebo alone, it not only significantly reduced pain but also pain catastrophizing and anxiety. Overall, these findings support the importance of further research on the effects of CST and sertraline for non-cardiac chest pain. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

We examined the effects of intensive statin therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) and previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) participating in the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy–Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 22 (PROVE-IT TIMI 22) and the Aggrastat to Zocor (A to Z) trials. Of the 8,655 patients enrolled in PROVE IT-TIMI 22 or A to Z, 640 (7.4%) had undergone CABG before enrollment. After a median follow-up of 2 years, compared with patients without previous CABG, those with previous CABG had a higher risk of cardiovascular death (6.2% vs 2.8%), myocardial infarction (14.2% vs 6.6%), and readmission for ACS (7.9% vs 4.4%, p <0.001 for all comparisons) but a lower rate of repeat coronary revascularization (22.7% vs 26.9%, p = 0.01). Compared with moderate statin therapy, intensive statin therapy appeared to decrease the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stoke, and readmission for an ACS (A to Z primary end point) to a similar extent in patients with (26.1% vs 21.6%, hazard ratio 0.84, p = 0.27) and without (13.9% vs 12.0%, hazard ratio 0.86, p = 0.016) previous CABG, although the decrease was not statistically significant in the previous CABG group, likely due to the small number of patients with previous CABG. In conclusion, compared with patients with ACS without previous CABG, those with previous CABG have a higher risk for adverse cardiac events and may derive similar benefit from intensive statin therapy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article attempts to evaluate relevant outcomes of patients from randomized controlled trials comparing early statin therapy with placebo or usual care at one and four months following acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The short-term impact of early treatment with statins in patients after the onset of ACS for the outcomes of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke is unknown. The authors concluded that, based on the available evidence, initiation of statin therapy within 14 days following onset of ACS does not reduce death, myocardial infarction, or stroke up to four months.

Presents a study to systematically evaluate the end points of all-cause death and nonfatal myocardial infarction, transfusion, and major bleeding observed in the 6 randomized controlled trials comparing enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin in treatment of acute coronary syndromes. Description of the study and its results; Conclusion.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes," by C. P. Cannon and colleagues in the June 18, 2015 issue.

Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Shah reports research grants from Amgen, Janssen, and the National Institutes of Health. He also serves as consultant-advisor for Esperion, Amgen, and Novartis. Drs Cavalier and Blazing report no disclosures or financial arrangements with any company that may constitute a conflict of interest with respect to this article.

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

Importance: Studies have demonstrated an association between single measures of high-sensitivity troponin (hsTn) and future cardiovascular events in patients with chronic coronary syndromes. However, limited data exist regarding the association between changes in serial values of hsTn and subsequent cardiovascular events in this patient population., Objective: To evaluate the association between changes in high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) and subsequent cardiovascular events in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a secondary analysis from the Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT), a randomized clinical trial of ezetimibe vs placebo on a background of simvastatin in 18 144 patients hospitalized for an ACS across 1147 sites in 39 countries. The current biomarker substudy includes the 6035 participants consenting to the biomarker substudy with available hsTnT at months 1 and 4. Data were collected from October 26, 2005, through July 8, 2010, with the database locked October 21, 2014. Data were analyzed from February 28, 2021, through August 14, 2022., Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of interest were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Associations of absolute and relative changes in hsTnT between month 1 and month 4 as a function of the starting month 1 hsTnT and the composite outcome were examined using landmark analyses., Results: Of 6035 patients in this analysis (median [IQR] age, 64 [57-71]), 1486 (24.6%) were female; 361 (6.0%) were Asian; 121 were (2.0%) Black; 252 (4.2%) were Spanish descent; 4959 were (82.2%) White; and 342 (5.7%) reported another race (consolidated owing to small numbers), declined to respond, or were not asked to report race owing to regulatory prohibitions. Most patients (4114 [68.2%]) had stable hsTnT values (change <3 ng/L), with 1158 (19.2%) and 763 (12.6%) having changes of 3 to less than 7 ng/L and 7 ng/L or more, respectively. After adjustment for clinical risk factors and stratification by the starting month 1 hsTnT level, an absolute increase in hsTnT of 7 ng/L or more was associated with a more than 3-fold greater risk of the composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.33; 95% CI, 1.99-5.57; P < .001), whereas decreases of 7 ng/L or more were associated with similar to lower risk (aHR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26-1.03; P = .06) compared with stable values. There was a stepwise association moving from larger absolute decreases (aHR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26-1.03) to larger absolute increases (aHR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.99-5.57) in hsTnT with future risk of the composite outcome (P trend <.001). A similar association was observed when analyzed on the basis of relative percent and continuous change., Conclusions and Relevance: Among stable patients post-ACS, changes in hsTnT were associated with a gradient of risk of subsequent cardiovascular events across the range of starting hsTnT values. Serial assessment of hsTnT may refine risk stratification with the potential to guide therapy decisions in this patient population., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00202878.

Importance: Lipid management typically focuses on levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and, to a lesser extent, triglycerides (TG). However, animal models and genetic studies suggest that the atherogenic particle subpopulations (LDL and very-low-density lipoprotein [VLDL]) are both important and that the number of particles is more predictive of cardiac events than their lipid content., Objective: To determine whether common measures of cholesterol concentration, TG concentration, or their ratio are associated with cardiovascular risk beyond the number of apolipoprotein B (apoB)-containing lipoproteins., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort analysis included individuals from the population-based UK Biobank and from 2 large international clinical trials, FOURIER and IMPROVE-IT. The median (IQR) follow-up was 11.1 (10.4-11.8) years in UK Biobank and 2.5 (2.0-4.7) years in the clinical trials. Two populations were studied in this analysis: 389 529 individuals in the primary prevention group who were not taking lipid-lowering therapy and 40 430 patients with established atherosclerosis who were receiving statin treatment., Exposures: ApoB, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), LDL-C, and TG., Main Outcome and Measures: The primary study outcome was incident myocardial infarction (MI)., Results: Of the 389 529 individuals in the primary prevention group, 224 097 (58%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 56.0 (49.5-62.5) years. Of the 40 430 patients with established atherosclerosis, 9647 (24%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 63 (56.2-69.0) years. In the primary prevention cohort, apoB, non-HDL-C, and TG each individually were associated with incident MI. However, when assessed together, only apoB was associated (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] per 1 SD, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.15-1.40; P < .001). Similarly, only apoB was associated with MI in the secondary prevention cohort. Adjusting for apoB, there was no association between the ratio of TG to LDL-C (a surrogate for the ratio of TG-rich lipoproteins to LDL) and risk of MI, implying that for a given concentration of apoB-containing lipoproteins, the relative proportions of particle subpopulations may no longer be a predictor of risk., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, risk of MI was best captured by the number of apoB-containing lipoproteins, independent from lipid content (cholesterol or TG) or type of lipoprotein (LDL or TG-rich). This suggests that apoB may be the primary driver of atherosclerosis and that lowering the concentration of all apoB-containing lipoproteins should be the focus of therapeutic strategies.

Background Unlike patients with low ejection fraction after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), little is known about the long-term incidence and influence of cardiovascular events before sudden death among stabilized patients after ACS. Methods and Results A total of 18 144 patients stabilized within 10 days after ACS in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) were studied. Cumulative incidence rates (IRs) and IRs per 100 patient-years of sudden death were calculated. Using Cox proportional hazards, the association of ≥1 additional postrandomization cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, and hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure) with sudden death was examined. Early (≤1 year after ACS) and late sudden deaths (>1 year) were compared. Of 2446 total deaths, 402 (16%) were sudden. The median time to sudden death was 2.7 years, with 109 early and 293 late sudden deaths. The cumulative IR was 2.47% (95% CI, 2.23%-2.73%) at 7 years of follow-up. The risk of sudden death following a postrandomization cardiovascular event (150/402 [37%] sudden deaths; median 1.4 years) was greater (IR/100 patient-years, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.23-1.69]) than the risk with no postrandomization cardiovascular event (IR/100 patient-years, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.24-0.30]). Postrandomization myocardial infarction (hazard ratio [HR], 3.64 [95% CI, 2.85-4.66]) and heart failure (HR, 4.55 [95% CI, 3.33-6.22]) significantly increased future risk of sudden death. Conclusions Patients stabilized within 10 days of an ACS remain at long-term risk of sudden death with the greatest risk in those with an additional cardiovascular event. These results refine the long-term risk and risk effectors of sudden death, which may help clinicians identify opportunities to improve care. Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

Background: The 2018 U.S. cholesterol management guideline recommends additional lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe for secondary prevention in very high-risk patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 mg/dL despite maximally tolerated statin., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between baseline LDL-C above and below 70 mg/dL and the benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin in patients post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS)., Methods: IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo/simvastatin in post-ACS patients followed for 6 years (median). A total of 17,999 patients were stratified by LDL-C at qualifying event into 3 groups (50-<70, 70-<100, and 100-125 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, major coronary events, or stroke., Results: Absolute differences in median LDL-C achieved at 4 months between treatment arms were similar (17-20 mg/dL). The effect of ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo/simvastatin on primary endpoint was consistent regardless of baseline LDL-C of 50-<70 mg/dL (HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.80-1.05]), 70-<100 mg/dL (HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-1.01]), or 100-125 mg/dL (HR: 0.94 [95% CI: 0.86-1.03]; P interaction = 0.95). Normalized relative risk reductions per 1-mmol/L difference in achieved LDL-C at 4 months between treatment arms were 21% in patients with baseline LDL-C of 50-<70 mg/dL, 16% in those with 70-<100 mg/dL, and 13% in those with 100-125 mg/dL (P interaction = 0.91). No significant treatment interactions by baseline LDL-C were present for safety endpoints., Conclusions: Adding ezetimibe to statin consistently reduced the risk for cardiovascular events in post-ACS patients irrespective of baseline LDL-C values, supporting the use of intensive lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe even in patients with baseline LDL-C <70 mg/dL. (IMPROVE-IT: Examining Outcomes in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Vytorin [Ezetimibe/Simvastatin] vs Simvastatin [P04103]; NCT00202878)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The IMPROVE-IT trial was supported by Merck and Co. Dr Oyama has received a grant from JSPS Overseas Research Fellowships. Dr Giugliano has received grants from Amgen and Anthos Therapeutics; has received honoraria from Amgen, Centrix, Daiichi-Sankyo, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Medical Education Resources, Medscape, Menarini, Pfizer, SAJA Pharmaceuticals, Servier, and Voxmedia; and has received consultant fees from Amarin, Amgen, Bayer, CryoLife, Daiichi-Sankyo, Esperion, Gilead, Hengrui, Inari, Pfizer, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, St Lukes, and Sanofi. Dr Blazing has received research support from Merck; has received consulting fees from Espirion (<$10,000); and has received indirect support from Sanofi through Duke Clinical Research Institute. Dr Park has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Roche, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. Dr Tershakovec is a former employee of Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck and Co, Inc, and may own stock in the company. Dr Sabatine has received research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, IONIS, The Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Quark Pharmaceuticals; and has received consulting fees from Althera, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVS Caremark, DalCor, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Fibrogen, IFM Therapeutics, Intarcia, MedImmune, Merck, Moderna, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Cannon has received grant support and consulting fees from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Pfizer, and Merck; has received grant support from Daiichi-Sankyo; and has received consulting fees from Aegerion, Alnylam, Amarin, Applied Clinical Therapeutics, Ascendia, Corvidia, HLS Therapeutics, Innovent, Kowa, Eli Lilly, and Rhoshan. Dr Braunwald has received research grants through the Brigham and Women’s Hospital from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck, and Novartis; has served as a consultant for Amgen, Cardurion, MyoKardia, NovoNordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, IMMEDIATE, and Verve; and has performed uncompensated consultancies and lectures for The Medicines Company., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are critical in advancing patient care, yet conducting such large-scale trials requires tremendous resources and coordination. Clinical site start-up performance metrics can provide insight into opportunities for improved trial efficiency but have not been well described., Objective: To measure the start-up time needed to reach prespecified milestones across sites in large cardiovascular RCTs in North America and to evaluate how these metrics vary by time and type of regulatory review process., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated cardiovascular RCTs conducted from July 13, 2004, to February 1, 2017. The RCTs were coordinated by a single academic research organization, the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Nine consecutive trials with completed enrollment and publication of results in their target journal were studied. Data were analyzed from December 4, 2019, to January 11, 2021., Exposures: Year of trial enrollment initiation (2004-2007 vs 2008-2012) and use of a central vs local institutional review board (IRB)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the median start-up time (from study protocol delivery to first participant enrollment) as compared by trial year and type of IRB used. The median start-up time for the top 10% of sites was also reported. Secondary outcomes included time to site regulatory approval, time to contract execution, and time to site activation., Results: For the 9 RCTs included, the median site start-up time shortened only slightly over time from 267 days (interquartile range [IQR], 185-358 days) for 2004-2007 trials to 237 days (IQR, 162-343 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 255 days [IQR, 177-350 days]; P < .001). For the top 10% of sites, median start-up time was 107 days (IQR, 95-121 days) for 2004-2007 trials vs 104 days (IQR, 84-118 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 106 days [IQR, 90-120 days]; P = .04). The median start-up time was shorter among sites using a central IRB (199 days [IQR, 140-292 days]) than those using a local IRB (287 days [IQR, 205-390 days]; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of North American research sites in large cardiovascular RCTs found a duration of nearly 9 months from the time of study protocol delivery to the first participant enrollment; this metric was only slightly shortened during the study period but was reduced to less than 4 months for top-performing sites. These findings suggest that the use of central IRBs has the potential to improve RCT efficiency.

Background: An increased risk of malignancy was reported with simvastatin/ezetimibe in 1,873 patients in the SEAS (Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis) trial., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to clarify this unexpected finding in a larger sample size of patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome, we conducted a prospective systematic analysis of malignancy events in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial)., Methods: Within IMPROVE-IT, 17,708 patients post-acute coronary syndrome were randomized to either ezetimibe 10 mg or matching placebo on a background of simvastatin 40 mg who took ≥1 dose of the study drug. Suspected tumors (benign and malignant) reported by investigators or identified from a review of adverse events were adjudicated by oncologists without knowledge of drug assignment. The primary malignancy endpoint included new, relapsing, or progressive malignancies (excluding nonmelanotic skin malignancies). The secondary endpoint was death due to malignancy., Results: In this trial, 1,470 patients developed the primary malignancy endpoint during a median 6 years of follow-up. The most common malignancy locations were prostate (18.9%), lung (16.8%), and bladder (8.8%) with no differences by treatment group (p > 0.05 for each location). Kaplan-Meier 7-year rates of malignancies were similar with ezetimibe and placebo (10.2% vs. 10.3%; hazard ratio: 1.03; 95% confidence interval: 0.93 to 1.14; p = 0.56), as were the rates for malignancy death (3.8% vs. 3.6%; hazard ratio: 1.04; 95% confidence interval: 0.88 to 1.23; p = 0.68)., Conclusions: Among 17,708 patients receiving simvastatin 40 mg daily, those randomized to ezetimibe 10 mg daily had a similar incidence of malignancy and deaths due to malignancy compared with those receiving placebo during a median follow-up of 6 years (96,377 patient-years). (IMPROVE-IT: Examining Outcomes in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Vytorin [Ezetimibe/Simvastatin] vs Simvastatin [P04103]; NCT00202878)., (© 2020 The Authors.)

Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] is a low-density, cholesterol-containing lipoprotein that differs from other low-density lipoproteins due to the presence of apolipoprotein(a) bound to its surface apolipoprotein B100. Multiple epidemiologic studies, including Mendelian Randomization studies, have demonstrated that increasing Lp(a) levels are associated with increased risk of heart disease, including atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic stenosis. The risk associated with elevations in Lp(a) appears to be independent of other lipid markers. While the current treatment options for elevated Lp(a) are limited, promising new therapies are under development, leading to renewed interest in Lp(a). This review provides an overview of the biology and epidemiology of Lp(a), available outcome studies, and insights into future therapies., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Risk prediction following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains challenging. Data-driven machine-learning algorithms can potentially identify patients at high risk of clinical events. The Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial randomized 18,144 post-ACS patients to ezetimibe + simvastatin or placebo + simvastatin. We performed hierarchical cluster analysis to identify patients at high risk of adverse events. Associations between clusters and outcomes were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, unstable angina hospitalization, or coronary revascularization ≥30 days after randomization. We evaluated ezetimibe's impact on outcomes across clusters and the ability of the cluster analysis to discriminate for outcomes compared with the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score. Five clusters were identified. In cluster 1 (n = 13,252), most patients experienced a non-STEMI (54.8%). Cluster 2 patients (n = 2,719) had the highest incidence of unstable angina (n = 83.3%). Cluster 3 patients (n = 782) all identified as Spanish descent, whereas cluster 4 patients (n = 803) were primarily from South America (56.2%). In cluster 5 (n = 587), all patients had ST elevation. Cluster analysis identified patients at high risk of adverse outcomes (log-rank p <0.0001); Cluster 2 (vs 1) patients had the highest risk of outcomes (hazards ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.24 to 1.43). Compared with GRACE risk, cluster analysis did not provide superior outcome discrimination. A consistent ezetimibe treatment effect was identified across clusters (interaction p = 0.882). In conclusion, cluster analysis identified significant difference in risk of outcomes across cluster groups. Data-driven strategies to identify patients who may differentially benefit from therapies and for risk stratification require further evaluation., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although cholesterol-lowering medications can reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events, premature discontinuation limits effectiveness. Discontinuation rates have not been systematically reported for lipid-lowering trials., Methods and Results: We evaluated medication discontinuation in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial), which evaluated placebo+simvastatin versus ezetimibe+simvastatin in patients hospitalized with the acute coronary syndrome and followed longitudinally postdischarge. Reasons for discontinuation were evaluated from randomization through study end (median 71.9 [interquartile range 51.8-85.8] months). Kaplan-Meier (KM) discontinuation rates were evaluated at 30 days, 1 year, and through year 7, and compared by treatment arm and region, with Cox proportional hazards modeling used to evaluate predictors of discontinuation. Overall, 46.7% of subjects discontinued study medication (KM rate by study end 50.9% [95% CI, 50.1%-51.7%]). The risk of discontinuation was highest early in the trial but decreased with increasing time, with a terminal KM rate per 100 person-years of 8.4 (8.2-8.6) from years 1 to 7. Discontinuation was higher in the placebo+simvastatin versus ezetimibe+simvastatin arm (KM rate 52.0% versus 49.8%, P=0.049) and was highest in the United States (7-year KM rate 57.4%). In multivariable modeling, smoking, prior revascularization, hypertension, unstable angina, female sex, nonwhite race, and US location were associated with higher discontinuation rates., Conclusions: Although discontinuation was highest early and stabilized to 8% per year, because of prolonged follow-up, most discontinuation occurred after year 1. Adding ezetimibe to statin therapy did not increase discontinuation risk. Geographic differences and patient-level factors should be considered in trial design and analysis., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

Background: Polyvascular disease and type 2 diabetes are each associated with increased cardiovascular risk, but whether these risks are additive is unknown. In this exploratory analysis of a randomised trial, we explored the long-term cardiovascular risk associated with polyvascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and their combination in patients with acute coronary syndrome, and assessed the effect of ezetimibe given on top of statin therapy in patients with these concomitant conditions., Methods: IMPROVE-IT was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial assessing the effect of ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndrome. Recruitment was from Oct 26, 2005, to July 8, 2010, and the trial was done at 1158 sites in 39 countries. 18 144 patients aged 50 years and older who had been stabilised after an acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned to 40 mg per day simvastatin plus either 10 mg per day ezetimibe or matched placebo, for a median duration of 6 years. In this post-hoc exploratory analysis, we assessed the prespecified endpoints of the trial, including the primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular death, a major coronary event [non-fatal myocardial infarction, documented unstable angina requiring hospital admission, or coronary revascularisation occurring at least 30 days after randomisation], or stroke [ischaemic or haemorrhagic]) by concomitant polyvascular disease at baseline (peripheral artery disease or previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack) and stratified by concomitant type 2 diabetes. Efficacy analyses were done according to intention to treat and event rates. IMPROVE-IT is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00202878., Findings: 1005 patients (6%) had peripheral artery disease and 1071 (6%) had stroke or transient ischaemic attack at baseline. Of these, 388 (39%) and 409 (38%) also had concomitant type 2 diabetes, respectively. At 7 years, patients with either polyvascular disease or type 2 diabetes had similar rates of the primary endpoint (39·8% and 39·9%, respectively), which were higher than patients without polyvascular disease or diabetes (29·6%). Polyvascular disease with concomitant type 2 diabetes was associated with further heightened risk (60·0% 7-year Kaplan-Meier rate, adjusted hazard ratio versus those with polyvascular disease 1·60, 95% CI 1·38-1·85; p<0·0001). Ezetimibe reduced cardiovascular risk consistently across groups with greater numerical absolute risk reductions in the highest-risk subgroups., Interpretation: In patients with coronary artery disease, concomitant polyvascular disease or type 2 diabetes are associated with increased long-term cardiovascular risk. The combination of polyvascular disease and diabetes is additive, resulting in very high risk. The benefit of ezetimibe is consistent in patients with and without polyvascular disease and type 2 diabetes; however, by nature of their higher risk patients with one, or especially both, of these diseases might derive the greatest absolute benefits., Funding: Merck., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The natural history of patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with pre-existing versus (vs) de novo heart failure (HF) has not been previously reported over an extended duration of follow-up. The IMPROVE-IT trial enrolled 18,144 patients hospitalized for ACS and randomized them to combination simvastatin (40 mg)/ezetimibe (10 mg) vs simvastatin (40 mg). Subjects were divided into 3 groups: pre-existing HF (i.e., defined by past medical history), de novo HF (i.e., defined by Killip class II or greater during index admission), and no HF. The final analytical cohort included 14,792 patients (82%) with HF status recorded at baseline. In total, 790 patients (5.3%) reported a pre-existing diagnosis of HF and 1374 patients (9.3%) experienced de novo HF. Patients with pre-existing or de novo HF were older, more likely to be woman, and had a greater prevalence of atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus. The incidences of death/HF-hospitalizations at 5 years were 32%/20% for pre-existing HF, 18%/7% for de novo HF, and 8%/3% for no HF. After adjusting for potential confounders, a history of pre-existing or de novo HF was independently associated with increased risk of death (pre-existing HF: hazard ratio [HR] 1.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.68 to 2.22, p < 0.001; de novo HF: HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.72, p < 0.001) and hospitalizations for HF (pre-existing HF: HR 2.96, 95% CI 2.36 to 3.71, p < 0.001; de novo HF: HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.38, p < 0.001). There was no interaction among baseline HF status (i.e., pre-existing or de novo), lipid lowering therapy (i.e., simvastatin/ezetimibe vs simvastatin alone), and clinical outcomes. In conclusion, patients hospitalized for ACS with pre-existing or de novo HF were older and had a greater burden of medical co-morbidities. In conclusion, HF was independently associated with increased risk of long-term morbidity and mortality with the pre-existing HF cohort demonstrating the highest overall risk., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

We consider estimating the effect that discontinuing a beneficial treatment will have on the distribution of a time to event clinical outcome, and in particular assessing whether there is a period of time over which the beneficial effect may continue after discontinuation. There are two major challenges. The first is to make a distinction between mandatory discontinuation, where by necessity treatment has to be terminated and optional discontinuation which is decided by the preference of the patient or physician. The innovation in this article is to cast the intervention in the form of a dynamic regime "terminate treatment optionally at time v unless a mandatory treatment-terminating event occurs prior to v" and consider estimating the distribution of time to event as a function of treatment regime v. The second challenge arises from biases associated with the nonrandom assignment of treatment regimes, because, naturally, optional treatment discontinuation is left to the patient and physician, and so time to discontinuation may depend on the patient's disease status. To address this issue, we develop dynamic-regime Marginal Structural Models and use inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate the impact of time to treatment discontinuation on a time to event outcome, compared to the effect of not discontinuing treatment. We illustrate our methods using the IMPROVE-IT data on cardiovascular disease., (© 2018, The International Biometric Society.)

Efficacy of statin-based therapies in reducing cardiovascular mortality in individuals with CKD seems to diminish as eGFR declines. The strongest evidence supporting the cardiovascular benefit of statins in individuals with CKD was shown with ezetimibe plus simvastatin versus placebo. However, whether combination therapy or statin alone resulted in cardiovascular benefit is uncertain. Therefore, we estimated GFR in 18,015 individuals from the IMPROVE-IT (ezetimibe plus simvastatin versus simvastatin alone in individuals with cardiovascular disease and creatinine clearance >30 ml/min) and examined post hoc the relationship of eGFR with end points across treatment arms. For the primary end point of cardiovascular death, major coronary event, or nonfatal stroke, the relative risk reduction of combination therapy compared with monotherapy differed by eGFR ( P =0.04). The difference in treatment effect was observed at eGFR≤75 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 and most apparent at levels ≤60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 Compared with individuals receiving monotherapy, individuals receiving combination therapy with a baseline eGFR of 60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 experienced a 12% risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.82 to 0.95); those with a baseline eGFR of 45 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 had a 13% risk reduction (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.98). In stabilized individuals within 10 days of acute coronary syndrome, combination therapy seemed to be more effective than monotherapy in individuals with moderately reduced eGFR (30-60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ). Further studies examining potential benefits of combination lipid-lowering therapy in individuals with CKD are needed., (Copyright © 2017 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Background: Statin therapy reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels and the risk of cardiovascular events, but whether the addition of ezetimibe, a nonstatin drug that reduces intestinal cholesterol absorption, can reduce the rate of cardiovascular events further is not known., Methods: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial involving 18,144 patients who had been hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome within the preceding 10 days and had LDL cholesterol levels of 50 to 100 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 2.6 mmol per liter) if they were receiving lipid-lowering therapy or 50 to 125 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 3.2 mmol per liter) if they were not receiving lipid-lowering therapy. The combination of simvastatin (40 mg) and ezetimibe (10 mg) (simvastatin-ezetimibe) was compared with simvastatin (40 mg) and placebo (simvastatin monotherapy). The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring rehospitalization, coronary revascularization (≥30 days after randomization), or nonfatal stroke. The median follow-up was 6 years., Results: The median time-weighted average LDL cholesterol level during the study was 53.7 mg per deciliter (1.4 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 69.5 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier event rate for the primary end point at 7 years was 32.7% in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 34.7% in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (absolute risk difference, 2.0 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.936; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 0.99; P=0.016). Rates of prespecified muscle, gallbladder, and hepatic adverse effects and cancer were similar in the two groups., Conclusions: When added to statin therapy, ezetimibe resulted in incremental lowering of LDL cholesterol levels and improved cardiovascular outcomes. Moreover, lowering LDL cholesterol to levels below previous targets provided additional benefit. (Funded by Merck; IMPROVE-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00202878.).

Opinion Statement: Advances in the mechanistic understanding of atheroma initiation, repair, progression, and rupture have solidified the pivotal role played by the immune system in the pathophysiology of atherosclerotic vascular disease. These mechanistic findings have been extended into humans, with a strong evidence basis for the independent association between elevated blood markers of inflammation and future cardiovascular (CV) events. Investigations with statins as well as more conventional anti-inflammatory medications provide indirect evidence to support the concept that modifying immune responses can improve CV outcomes; however, robust evidence to support the use of anti-inflammatory treatment strategies to manage atherosclerotic vascular disease is still lacking. Such evidence may emerge from a new wave of clinical trials directly exploring the effects of targeted immune modulation on CV risk. These trials will provide key additional insights into atherosclerosis and will help determine the fate of immune modulation as a new treatment strategy in atherosclerotic vascular disease.

Unlabelled: Both renal dysfunction and elevated levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP) are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. However, it remains to be established whether the prognostic value of impaired estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) remains after accounting for markers of inflammation., Methods and Results: Glomerular filtration rate was estimated using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation in 4178 patients with non-ST or ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes, participating in the A to Z trial. The mean estimated GFR was 68 mL/min, with a median baseline CRP of 20.2 mg/L. Both an estimated GFR <60 mL/min (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.7-2.6) and a CRP in the fourth quartile (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2.2) were strong univariate predictors of a CV event (composite of CV death, recurrent myocardial infarction, heart failure, or stroke). After adjusting for baseline CRP, GFR <60 mL/min remained a strong multivariate predictor for CV death (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.1-2.97). Randomization to high-dose statin therapy was associated with a reduction in the CV composite (adjusted HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.5-0.95) irrespective of baseline renal function., Conclusions: In a population of patients without overt renal disease, moderate reductions in estimated GFR remain an important prognostic marker. This increased CV hazard associated with an estimated GFR <60 mL/min is independent and additive to markers of inflammation.

Background: Inflammation has been suggested as a factor in the initiation and maintenance of atrial fibrillation (AF). Several observational studies have suggested that statins, presumably through their anti-inflammatory properties, decrease the risk of AF., Methods: We analyzed 2 large, randomized trials, PROVE IT-TIMI 22 and phase Z of the A to Z trial, which compared lower- versus higher-intensity statin therapy to evaluate whether higher-intensity statin therapy lowered the risk of AF onset during the 2 years of follow-up. We hypothesized that higher-intensity statin therapy would decrease the risk of AF when compared to lower-intensity statin therapy. From each trial, patients experiencing the onset of AF during follow-up were identified from the adverse event reports., Results: Neither study showed a decreased AF risk with higher-dose statin. In PROVE IT-TIMI 22, 2.9% versus 3.3% in the high- versus standard-dose statin therapy, respectively, experienced the onset of AF over 2 years (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.61-1.23, P = .41). In A to Z, rates were 1.6% versus 0.99%, respectively (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.92-2.70, P = .096). In both trials, C-reactive protein levels (plasma or serum) tended to be higher among patients experiencing the onset of AF., Conclusion: Our randomized comparison among 8659 patients found that higher-dose statin therapy did not reduce the short term incidence of AF among patients after acute coronary syndromes when compared with standard dose statin treatment.