Search

Objective: To assess how reliable UK routine data are for ascertaining major bleeding events compared to adjudicated follow-up. Methods: The ASCEND (A Study of Cardiovascular Events in Diabetes) primary prevention trial randomised 15480 UK people with diabetes to aspirin versus matching placebo. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding (including intracranial haemorrhage, sight-threatening eye bleeding, serious gastrointestinal bleeding, and other major bleeding [epistaxis, haemoptysis, haematuria, vaginal, and other bleeding]) ascertained by direct-participant mail-based follow-up, with >90% of outcomes undergoing adjudication. Nearly all participants were linked to routinely collected hospitalisation and death data, (i.e. routine data). An algorithm categorised bleeding events from routine data as major/minor. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between data sources, and randomised comparisons were re-run using routine data. Results: When adjudicated follow-up and routine data were compared, there was agreement for 318 major bleeding events, with routine data identifying 281 additional-potential events, and not identifying 241 participant-reported events (kappa 0.53, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.49-0.57). Repeating ASCEND’s randomised comparisons using routine data only found estimated relative and absolute effects of allocation to aspirin versus placebo on major bleeding similar to adjudicated follow-up (adjudicated follow-up: aspirin 314[4.1%] vs placebo 245[3.2%]; rate ratio [RR] 1.29, 95%CI 1.09-1.52; absolute excess +6.3/5000 person-years [mean standard error ±2.1]; versus routine data: 327[4.2%] vs 272[3.5%]; RR 1.21, 95%CI 1.03-1.41; absolute excess +5.0/5000[±2.2]). Conclusions: Analyses of the ASCEND randomised trial found that major bleeding events ascertained via UK routine data sources provided relative and absolute treatment effects similar to adjudicated follow-up.

Introduction: We aimed to assess opportunities for trial streamlining and the scientific impact of adjudication on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in CKD. Methods: We analysed the effects of adjudication of ~2100 maintenance kidney replacement therapy (KRT) and ~1300 major atherosclerotic events (MAEs) recorded in SHARP. We first compared outcome classification before versus after adjudication, and then re-ran randomised comparisons using pre-adjudicated follow-up data. Results: For maintenance KRT, adjudication had little impact with only 1% of events being refuted (28/2115). Consequently, randomised comparisons using pre-adjudication reports found almost identical results (pre-adjudication: simvastatin/ezetimibe 1038 vs placebo 1077; risk ratio [RR] 0.95, 95%CI 0.88–1.04; post-adjudicated: 1057 vs 1084; RR=0.97, 95%CI 0.89–1.05). For MAEs, about one-quarter of patient reports were refuted (324/1275 [25%]), and reviewing 3538 other potential vascular events and death reports identified only 194 additional MAEs. Nevertheless, randomised analyses using SHARP’s pre-adjudicated data alone found similar results to analyses based on adjudicated outcomes (pre-adjudication: 573 vs 702; RR=0.80, 95%CI 0.72-0.89; adjudicated: 526 vs 619; RR=0.83, 95%CI 0.74–0.94), and also suggested refuted MAEs were likely to represent atherosclerotic disease (RR for refuted MAEs=0.80, 95%CI 0.65−1.00). Conclusions: These analyses provide three key insights. First, they provide a rationale for nephrology trials not to adjudicate maintenance KRT. Secondly, when an event that mimics an atherosclerotic outcome is not expected to be influenced by the treatment under study (e.g. heart failure), the aim of adjudicating atherosclerotic outcomes should be to remove such events. Lastly, restrictive definitions for the remaining suspected atherosclerotic outcomes may reduce statistical power.

Aims REVEAL was the first randomized controlled trial to demonstrate that adding cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor therapy to intensive statin therapy reduced the risk of major coronary events. We now report results from extended follow-up beyond the scheduled study treatment period. Methods and results A total of 30 449 adults with prior atherosclerotic vascular disease were randomly allocated to anacetrapib 100 mg daily or matching placebo, in addition to open-label atorvastatin therapy. After stopping the randomly allocated treatment, 26 129 survivors entered a post-trial follow-up period, blind to their original treatment allocation. The primary outcome was first post-randomization major coronary event (i.e. coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization) during the in-trial and post-trial treatment periods, with analysis by intention-to-treat. Allocation to anacetrapib conferred a 9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3–15%; P = 0.004] proportional reduction in the incidence of major coronary events during the study treatment period (median 4.1 years). During extended follow-up (median 2.2 years), there was a further 20% (95% CI 10–29%; P Conclusion The beneficial effects of anacetrapib on major coronary events increased with longer follow-up, and no adverse effects emerged on non-vascular mortality or morbidity. These findings illustrate the importance of sufficiently long treatment and follow-up duration in randomized trials of lipid-modifying agents to assess their full benefits and potential harms. Trial registration International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 48678192; ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT01252953; EudraCT No. 2010-023467-18.

Background: Large trials have shown that sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of adverse kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure or chronic kidney disease, or with type 2 diabetes and high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. None of the trials recruiting patients with and without diabetes were designed to assess outcomes separately in patients without diabetes. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of SGLT2 inhibitor trials. We searched the MEDLINE and Embase databases for trials published from database inception to Sept 5, 2022. SGLT2 inhibitor trials that were double-blind, placebo-controlled, performed in adults (age ≥18 years), large (≥500 participants per group), and at least 6 months in duration were included. Summary-level data used for analysis were extracted from published reports or provided by trial investigators, and inverse-variance-weighted meta-analyses were conducted to estimate treatment effects. The main efficacy outcomes were kidney disease progression (standardised to a definition of a sustained ≥50% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] from randomisation, a sustained low eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from kidney failure), acute kidney injury, and a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure. Other outcomes were death from cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular disease considered separately, and the main safety outcomes were ketoacidosis and lower limb amputation. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022351618. Findings: We identified 13 trials involving 90 413 participants. After exclusion of four participants with uncertain diabetes status, we analysed 90 409 participants (74 804 [82·7%] participants with diabetes [>99% with type 2 diabetes] and 15 605 [17·3%] without diabetes; trial-level mean baseline eGFR range 37–85 mL/min per 1·73 m2). Compared with placebo, allocation to an SGLT2 inhibitor reduced the risk of kidney disease progression by 37% (relative risk [RR] 0·63, 95% CI 0·58–0·69) with similar RRs in patients with and without diabetes. In the four chronic kidney disease trials, RRs were similar irrespective of primary kidney diagnosis. SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of acute kidney injury by 23% (0·77, 0·70–0·84) and the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure by 23% (0·77, 0·74–0·81), again with similar effects in those with and without diabetes. SGLT2 inhibitors also reduced the risk of cardiovascular death (0·86, 0·81–0·92) but did not significantly reduce the risk of non-cardiovascular death (0·94, 0·88–1·02). For these mortality outcomes, RRs were similar in patients with and without diabetes. For all outcomes, results were broadly similar irrespective of trial mean baseline eGFR. Based on estimates of absolute effects, the absolute benefits of SGLT2 inhibition outweighed any serious hazards of ketoacidosis or amputation. Interpretation: In addition to the established cardiovascular benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors, the randomised data support their use for modifying risk of kidney disease progression and acute kidney injury, not only in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, but also in patients with chronic kidney disease or heart failure irrespective of diabetes status, primary kidney disease, or kidney function.

The Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy (RECOVERY) Trial was set up in March 2020 to evaluate treatments for people hospitalised with COVID-19. To maximise recruitment it was designed to fit into routine clinical care throughout the UK, and as a result it has enrolled more patients than any other COVID-19 treatment trial. RECOVERY has shown four drugs to be life-saving - dexamethasone, tocilizumab, baricitinib and casirivimab-imdevimab - and a further six have been shown to be of little or no benefit. In each case, results from RECOVERY were clear enough to rapidly influence global practice. Some of the reasons for this success relate to its particular setting in the UK during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, but many are generalisable to other contexts. In particular, its focus on recruiting large numbers of patients to identify or rule out moderate but worthwhile benefits of treatment, and the design decisions that followed from this. Similar large streamlined trials could produce similarly clear answers about the treatment of many other common diseases.

Importance: Routinely collected data could substantially decrease the cost of conducting trials. Objective: To assess the accuracy and completeness of UK routine data for ascertaining serious vascular events (SVEs) compared with adjudicated follow-up data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. From June 24, 2005, to July 28, 2011, the ASCEND (A Study of Cardiovascular Events in Diabetes) primary prevention trial used mail-based methods to randomize people with diabetes without evidence of atherosclerotic vascular disease using a 2 × 2 factorial design to aspirin and/or ω-fatty acids vs matching placebo in the UK. Direct participant mail-based follow-up was the main source of outcome data, with more than 90% of the primary outcome events undergoing adjudication. Follow-up was completed on July 31, 2017. In parallel, more than 99% of participants were linked to routinely collected hospital admission and death registry data (ie, routine data), enabling post hoc randomized comparisons of different sources of outcome data (conducted from September 1, 2018, to October 1, 2021). Interventions: Random allocation to 100 mg of aspirin once daily vs matching placebo and separately to 1 g of ω-3 fatty acids once daily vs placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome consisted of SVEs (a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack [TIA], or vascular death, excluding hemorrhagic stroke). Results: A total of 15 480 participants were randomized (mean [SD] age, 63 [9] years; 9684 [62.6%] men) and followed up for a mean (SD) of 7.4 (1.8) years. For SVEs, agreement between adjudicated direct follow-up and routine data sources was strong (1401 vs 1127 events; κ = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.76-0.80]; sensitivity, 72.0% [95% CI, 69.7%-74.4%]; specificity, 99.2% [95% CI, 99.0%-99.3%]), and sensitivity improved for SVEs excluding transient ischemic attack (1129 vs 1026 events; sensitivity, 80.6% [95% CI, 78.3%-82.9%]). Rate ratios for the aspirin-randomized comparison for adjudicated direct follow-up vs follow-up solely through routine data alone were 0.88 (95% CI, 0.79-0.97) vs 0.91 (95% CI, 0.81-1.02) for the primary outcome and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.82-1.03) vs 0.91 (95% CI, 0.80-1.02) for SVEs excluding TIA. Results were similar for the ω-3 fatty acid comparison, and adjudication did not seem to markedly change rate ratios. Conclusions and Relevance: Post hoc analyses of the ASCEND trial suggest that routinely collected hospital admission and death registry data in the UK could be used as the sole method of follow-up for myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke resulting in hospitalization, vascular death, and arterial revascularization in primary prevention cardiovascular trials, without the need for verification by clinical adjudication.

SUMMARYBackgroundAspirin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its antithrombotic properties.MethodsIn this randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial, several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients hospitalised with COVID-19. Eligible and consenting adults were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either usual standard of care plus 150mg aspirin once daily until discharge or usual standard of care alone using web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04381936).FindingsBetween 01 November 2020 and 21 March 2021, 7351 patients were randomly allocated to receive aspirin and 7541 patients to receive usual care alone. Overall, 1222 (17%) patients allocated to aspirin and 1299 (17%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0·89-1·04; p=0·35). Consistent results were seen in all pre-specified subgroups of patients. Patients allocated to aspirin had a slightly shorter duration of hospitalisation (median 8 vs. 9 days) and a higher proportion were discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (75% vs. 74%; rate ratio 1·06; 95% CI 1·02-1·10; p=0·0062). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, there was no significant difference in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (21% vs. 22%; risk ratio 0·96; 95% CI 0·90-1·03; p=0·23). Aspirin use was associated with an absolute reduction in thrombotic events of 0.6% (SE 0.4%) and an absolute increase in major bleeding events of 0.6% (SE 0.2%).InterpretationIn patients hospitalised with COVID-19, aspirin was not associated with reductions in 28-day mortality or in the risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death but was associated with a small increase in the rate of being discharged alive within 28 days.FundingUK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), National Institute of Health Research (Grant ref: MC_PC_19056), and the Wellcome Trust (Grant Ref: 222406/Z/20/Z) through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator.

Background: The size of any causal contribution of central and general adiposity to chronic kidney disease (CKD) risk and the underlying mechanism of mediation are unknown. Methods: 281,228 UK Biobank participants were included in estimates of the relevance of waist-to-hip ratio and body-mass index (BMI) to CKD prevalence. Conventional approaches used logistic regression. Genetic analyses employed Mendelian Randomisation and data from 394 waist-to-hip ratio and 773 BMI-associated loci. Models assessed the role of known mediators (diabetes and blood pressure [BP]) by adjusting for measured values (conventional analyses) or genetic associations of the selected loci (i.e. multivariable MR). Results: 18,034 (6.4%) participants had evidence of CKD. Each 0.06 higher measured waist-to-hip ratio and 5 kg/m2 were associated with a 69% (odds ratio 1.69, 95%CI 1.64-1.74) and 58% (1.58, 1.55-1.62) higher odds of CKD. In analogous MR analyses each 0.06 genotype-predicted higher waist-to-hip ratio was associated with a 29% (1.29, 1.20-1.38) increased odds of CKD, and each 5 kg/m2 genotype-predicted higher BMI, a 49% increased odds (1.49, 1.39-1.59). After conventional models were adjusted for diabetes mellitus and measured BP, 2 values for associations for waist-to-hip ratio and BMI reduced by 56%. In contrast, mediator adjustment using multivariate MR found 83% and 69% reductions in 2 values for genotype-predicted waist-to-hip ratio and BMI models, respectively. Conclusions: Genetic analyses suggest conventional associations between central and general adiposity with CKD are largely causal. However, conventional approaches underestimate mediating roles of diabetes, BP and their correlates. Genetic approaches suggest these mediators explain the majority of adiposity-CKD associated risk.

BACKGROUND Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with diffuse lung damage. Glucocorticoids may modulate inflammation-mediated lung injury and thereby reduce progression to respiratory failure and death. METHODS In this controlled, open-label trial comparing a range of possible treatments in patients who were hospitalized with Covid-19, we randomly assigned patients to receive oral or intravenous dexamethasone (at a dose of 6 mg once daily) for up to 10 days or to receive usual care alone. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Here, we report the preliminary results of this comparison. RESULTS A total of 2104 patients were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 4321 to receive usual care. Overall, 482 patients (22.9%) in the dexamethasone group and 1110 patients (25.7%) in the usual care group died within 28 days after randomization (age-adjusted rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.93; P CONCLUSIONS In patients hospitalized with Covid-19, the use of dexamethasone resulted in lower 28-day mortality among those who were receiving either invasive mechanical ventilation or oxygen alone at randomization but not among those receiving no respiratory support. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research and others; RECOVERY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04381936. opens in new tab; ISRCTN number, 50189673. opens in new tab.)

ObjectiveTo evaluate the associations between adiposity measures (body mass index, waist circumference, and waist-to-height ratio) with decline in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and with all cause mortality.DesignIndividual participant data meta-analysis.SettingCohorts from 40 countries with data collected between 1970 and 2017.ParticipantsAdults in 39 general population cohorts (n=5 459 014), of which 21 (n=594 496) had data on waist circumference; six cohorts with high cardiovascular risk (n=84 417); and 18 cohorts with chronic kidney disease (n=91 607).Main outcome measuresGFR decline (estimated GFR decline ≥40%, initiation of kidney replacement therapy or estimated GFR 2) and all cause mortality.ResultsOver a mean follow-up of eight years, 246 607 (5.6%) individuals in the general population cohorts had GFR decline (18 118 (0.4%) end stage kidney disease events) and 782 329 (14.7%) died. Adjusting for age, sex, race, and current smoking, the hazard ratios for GFR decline comparing body mass indices 30, 35, and 40 with body mass index 25 were 1.18 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.27), 1.69 (1.51 to 1.89), and 2.02 (1.80 to 2.27), respectively. Results were similar in all subgroups of estimated GFR. Associations weakened after adjustment for additional comorbidities, with respective hazard ratios of 1.03 (0.95 to 1.11), 1.28 (1.14 to 1.44), and 1.46 (1.28 to 1.67). The association between body mass index and death was J shaped, with the lowest risk at body mass index of 25. In the cohorts with high cardiovascular risk and chronic kidney disease (mean follow-up of six and four years, respectively), risk associations between higher body mass index and GFR decline were weaker than in the general population, and the association between body mass index and death was also J shaped, with the lowest risk between body mass index 25 and 30. In all cohort types, associations between higher waist circumference and higher waist-to-height ratio with GFR decline were similar to that of body mass index; however, increased risk of death was not associated with lower waist circumference or waist-to-height ratio, as was seen with body mass index.ConclusionsElevated body mass index, waist circumference, and waist-to-height ratio are independent risk factors for GFR decline and death in individuals who have normal or reduced levels of estimated GFR.

Statin-based treatments reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in patients with non-dialysis chronic kidney disease (CKD), but it is unclear which regimen is the most cost-effective. We used the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP) CKD-CVD policy model to evaluate the effect of statins and ezetimibe on quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health care costs in the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK). Net costs below USD 100,000 /QALY (US) or £20,000/QALY (UK) were considered cost-effective. We investigated statin regimens with or without ezetimibe 10 mg. Treatment effects on cardiovascular risk were estimated per 1-mmol/L reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol as reported in the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration meta-analysis, and reductions in LDL cholesterol were estimated for each statin/ezetimibe regimen. In the US, atorvastatin 40 mg (USD 0.103/day as of January 2019) increased life expectancy by 0.23 to 0.31 QALYs in non-dialysis patients with stages 3B to 5 CKD, at a net cost of USD 20,300 to USD 78,200/QALY. Adding ezetimibe 10 mg (USD 0.203/day) increased life expectancy by an additional 0.05 to 0.07 QALYs, at a net cost of USD 43,600 to USD 91,500/QALY. The cost-effectiveness findings and policy implications in the UK were similar. In summary, in patients with non-dialysis-dependent CKD, the evidence suggests that statin/ezetimibe combination therapy is a cost-effective treatment to reduce the risk of CVD.

Item does not contain fulltext Aims: Both hypo- and hyperkalaemia can have immediate deleterious physiological effects, and less is known about long-term risks. The objective was to determine the risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and end-stage renal disease associated with potassium levels across the range of kidney function and evaluate for consistency across cohorts in a global consortium. Methods and results: We performed an individual-level data meta-analysis of 27 international cohorts [10 general population, 7 high cardiovascular risk, and 10 chronic kidney disease (CKD)] in the CKD Prognosis Consortium. We used Cox regression followed by random-effects meta-analysis to assess the relationship between baseline potassium and adverse outcomes, adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics, overall and across strata of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria. We included 1 217 986 participants followed up for a mean of 6.9 years. The average age was 55 +/- 16 years, average eGFR was 83 +/- 23 mL/min/1.73 m2, and 17% had moderate- to-severe increased albuminuria levels. The mean baseline potassium was 4.2 +/- 0.4 mmol/L. The risk of serum potassium of >5.5 mmol/L was related to lower eGFR and higher albuminuria. The risk relationship between potassium levels and adverse outcomes was U-shaped, with the lowest risk at serum potassium of 4-4.5 mmol/L. Compared with a reference of 4.2 mmol/L, the adjusted hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.29] at 5.5 mmol/L and 1.49 (95% CI 1.26-1.76) at 3.0 mmol/L. Risks were similar by eGFR, albuminuria, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor use, and across cohorts. Conclusions: Outpatient potassium levels both above and below the normal range are consistently associated with adverse outcomes, with similar risk relationships across eGFR and albuminuria.

The work was supported by the UK Biobank, and undertaken with the support of the National Centre for Population Health and Wellbeing Research (NCPHWR) and the Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research. The NCPHWR is funded by Health and Care Research Wales (grant ref. : CA02). The Farr Institute is funded by a consortium of ten UK research organisations (grant ref. : MR/K006525/1): Arthritis Research UK, the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, the Economic and Social Research Council, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, the Medical Research Council, the National Institute of Health Research, the National Institute for Social Care and Health Research (Welsh Government) and the Chief Scientist Office (Scottish Government Health Directorates). WGD was supported by an MRC Clinician Scientist Fellowship (G0902272). Objectives : 1) To use data-driven method to examine clinical codes (risk factors) of a medical condition in primary care electronic health records (EHRs) that can accurately predict a diagnosis of the condition in secondary care EHRs. 2) To develop and validate a disease phenotyping algorithm for rheumatoid arthritis using primary care EHRs. Methods : This study linked routine primary and secondary care EHRs in Wales, UK. A machine learning based scheme was used to identify patients with rheumatoid arthritis from primary care EHRs via the following steps: i) selection of variables by comparing relative frequencies of Read codes in the primary care dataset associated with disease case compared to non-disease control (disease/non-disease based on the secondary care diagnosis); ii) reduction of predictors/associated variables using a Random Forest method, iii) induction of decision rules from decision tree model. The proposed method was then extensively validated on an independent dataset, and compared for performance with two existing deterministic algorithms for RA which had been developed using expert clinical knowledge. Results : Primary care EHRs were available for 2,238,360 patients over the age of 16 and of these 20,667 were also linked in the secondary care rheumatology clinical system. In the linked dataset, 900 predictors (out of a total of 43,100 variables) in the primary care record were discovered more frequently in those with versus those without RA. These variables were reduced to 37 groups of related clinical codes, which were used to develop a decision tree model. The final algorithm identified 8 predictors related to diagnostic codes for RA, medication codes, such as those for disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, and absence of alternative diagnoses such as psoriatic arthritis. The proposed data-driven method performed as well as the expert clinical knowledge based methods. Conclusion : Data-driven scheme, such as ensemble machine learning methods, has the potential of identifying the most informative predictors in a cost-effective and rapid way to accurately and reliably classify rheumatoid arthritis or other complex medical conditions in primary care EHRs. Publisher PDF

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., Background: Genetic studies have shown lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) to be an important causal risk factor for coronary disease. Apolipoprotein(a) isoform size is the chief determinant of Lp(a) levels, but its impact on the benefits of therapies that lower Lp(a) remains unclear. Methods: HPS2-THRIVE (Heart Protection Study 2–Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events) is a randomized trial of niacin–laropiprant versus placebo on a background of simvastatin therapy. Plasma Lp(a) levels at baseline and 1 year post-randomization were measured in 3978 participants from the United Kingdom and China. Apolipoprotein(a) isoform size, estimated by the number of kringle IV domains, was measured by agarose gel electrophoresis and the predominantly expressed isoform identified. Results: Allocation to niacin–laropiprant reduced mean Lp(a) by 12 (SE, 1) nmol/L overall and 34 (6) nmol/L in the top quintile by baseline Lp(a) level (Lp[a] ≥128 nmol/L). The mean proportional reduction in Lp(a) with niacin–laropiprant was 31% but varied strongly with predominant apolipoprotein(a) isoform size (PTrend=4×10−29) and was only 18% in the quintile with the highest baseline Lp(a) level and low isoform size. Estimates from genetic studies suggest that these Lp(a) reductions during the short term of the trial might yield proportional reductions in coronary risk of ≈2% overall and 6% in the top quintile by Lp(a) levels. Conclusions: Proportional reductions in Lp(a) were dependent on apolipoprotein(a) isoform size. Taking this into account, the likely benefits of niacin–laropiprant on coronary risk through Lp(a) lowering are small. Novel therapies that reduce high Lp(a) levels by at least 80 nmol/L (≈40%) may be needed to produce worthwhile benefits in people at the highest risk because of Lp(a). Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00461630.

We aimed to compare long-term mortality trends in end-stage renal disease versus general population controls after accounting for differences in age, sex and comorbidity. Cohorts of 45,000 patients starting maintenance renal replacement therapy (RRT) and 5.3 million hospital controls were identified from two large electronic hospital inpatient data sets: the Oxford Record Linkage Study (1965-1999) and all-England Hospital Episode Statistics (2000-2011). All-cause and cause-specific three-year mortality rates for both populations were calculated using Poisson regression and standardized to the age, sex, and comorbidity structure of an average 1970-2008 RRT population. The median age at initiation of RRT in 1970-1990 was 49 years, increasing to 61 years by 2006-2008. Over that period, there were increases in the prevalence of vascular disease (from 10.0 to 25.2%) and diabetes (from 6.7 to 33.9%). After accounting for age, sex and comorbidity differences, standardized three-year all-cause mortality rates in treated patients with end-stage renal disease between 1970 and 2011 fell by about one-half (relative decline 51%, 95% confidence interval 41-60%) steeper than the one-third decline (34%, 31-36%) observed in the general population. Declines in three-year mortality rates were evident among those who received a kidney transplant and those who remained on dialysis, and among those with and without diabetes. These data suggest that the full extent of mortality rate declines among RRT patients since 1970 is only apparent when changes in comorbidity over time are taken into account, and that mortality rates in RRT patients appear to have declined faster than in the general population.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Hypertension is the most prevalent comorbidity in individuals with chronic kidney disease. However, whether the association of the kidney disease measures, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and albuminuria, with mortality or end-stage renal disease (ESRD) differs by hypertensive status is unknown. METHODS: We did a meta-analysis of studies selected according to Chronic Kidney Disease Prognosis Consortium criteria. Data transfer and analyses were done between March, 2011, and June, 2012. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of mortality and ESRD associated with eGFR and albuminuria in individuals with and without hypertension. FINDINGS: We analysed data for 45 cohorts (25 general population, seven high-risk, and 13 chronic kidney disease) with 1,127,656 participants, 364,344 of whom had hypertension. Low eGFR and high albuminuria were associated with mortality irrespective of hypertensive status in the general population and high-risk cohorts. All-cause mortality risk was 1.1-1.2 times higher in individuals with hypertension than in those without hypertension at preserved eGFR. A steeper relative risk gradient in individuals without hypertension than in those with hypertension at eGFR range 45-75 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) led to much the same mortality risk at lower eGFR. With a reference eGFR of 95 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) in each group to explicitly assess interaction, adjusted HR for all-cause mortality at eGFR 45 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) was 1.77 (95% CI 1.57-1.99) in individuals without hypertension versus 1.24 (1.11-1.39) in those with hypertension (p for overall interaction=0.0003). Similarly, for albumin-creatinine ratio of 300 mg/g (vs 5 mg/g), HR was 2.30 (1.98-2.68) in individuals without hypertension versus 2.08 (1.84-2.35) in those with hypertension (p for overall interaction=0.019). We recorded much the same results for cardiovascular mortality. The associations of eGFR and albuminuria with ESRD, however, did not differ by hypertensive status. Results for chronic kidney disease cohorts were similar to those for general and high-risk population cohorts. INTERPRETATION: Chronic kidney disease should be regarded as at least an equally relevant risk factor for mortality and ESRD in individuals without hypertension as it is in those with hypertension. FUNDING: US National Kidney Foundation.

Background: Patients with evidence of vascular disease are at increased risk for subsequent vascular events despite effective use of statins to lower the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level. Niacin lowers the LDL cholesterol level and raises the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, but its clinical efficacy and safety are uncertain.Methods: After a prerandomization run-in phase to standardize the background statin-based LDL cholesterol–lowering therapy and to establish participants' ability to take extended-release niacin without clinically significant adverse effects, we randomly assigned 25,673 adults with vascular disease to receive 2 g of extended-release niacin and 40 mg of laropiprant or a matching placebo daily. The primary outcome was the first major vascular event (nonfatal myocardial infarction, death from coronary causes, stroke, or arterial revascularization).Results: During a median follow-up period of 3.9 years, participants who were assigned to extended-release niacin–laropiprant had an LDL cholesterol level that was an average of 10 mg per deciliter (0.25 mmol per liter as measured in the central laboratory) lower and an HDL cholesterol level that was an average of 6 mg per deciliter (0.16 mmol per liter) higher than the levels in those assigned to placebo. Assignment to niacin–laropiprant, as compared with assignment to placebo, had no significant effect on the incidence of major vascular events (13.2% and 13.7% of participants with an event, respectively; rate ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.03; P=0.29). Niacin–laropiprant was associated with an increased incidence of disturbances in diabetes control that were considered to be serious (absolute excess as compared with placebo, 3.7 percentage points; PConclusions: Among participants with atherosclerotic vascular disease, the addition of extended-release niacin–laropiprant to statin-based LDL cholesterol–lowering therapy did not significantly reduce the risk of major vascular events but did increase the risk of serious adverse events. (Funded by Merck and others; HPS2-THRIVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00461630.)

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated current use of ACEI/ARB among high risk patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) in China and factors affecting ACEI/ARB use in these patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was performed between June to December 2007 and May to November 2009 in 51 hospitals from 14 cities. The characteristics of patients with established CHD were collected by electronic questionnaire. RESULTS: Only 45.8% high risk CHD patients were taking ACEI/ARB and the ACEI/ARB medication decreased significantly with time after initial CHD diagnosis. ACEI/ARB was taken in 46.1% CHD patients complicated with diabetes mellitus and in 56.3% CHD patients complicated with hypertension. Logistic regression analysis showed that comorbid hypertension was the strongest factor associated with ACEI/ARB use. In addition, male gender, history of myocardial infarction (MI), PCI and the time after initial CHD diagnosis were independent factors affecting the use of ACEI/ARB. Captopril was the most commonly prescribed ACEI in this cohort. CONCLUSION: ACEI/ARB is underused in secondary prevention among high risk CHD patients in China. It remains a major challenge for healthcare professionals and policy makers to make efforts on narrowing the gap between evidence and practice.

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable improvements in the care of patients with cardiovascular disease in various populations over the last few decades, there are still limited data about long-term treatment patterns among patients with various atherosclerotic vascular conditions in China, especially the use of statin therapy. METHODS: Between June 2007 and October 2009, 16 860 patients aged 50 - 80 years with established history of atherosclerotic vascular disease (coronary heart disease (CHD), atherosclerotic cerebrovascular disease (CVD), or peripheral arterial disease (PAD)) from 51 hospitals in 14 cities of China were screened for a large randomized trial. Detailed information about current use of statins and various other treatments was recorded and analyzed by prior disease history, adjusting for various baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Among the 16 860 patients, the mean age was 63 years and 74% were male. Overall, 78% of the patients had documented CHD, 40% had CVD, 5% had PAD and 21% reported more than one condition. The median time from initial diagnosis of vascular disease to screening was 18 months. At screening, the proportions who took various treatments were 83% for antiplatelet agents, 49% for beta-blockers, 47% for statins and 28% for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. The proportion treated with statin was much higher in CHD than in CVD or PAD patients (61% vs. 10% vs. 22% respectively) and decreased significantly with time from initial diagnosis. Simvastatin (mainly 20 mg) and atorvastatin (mainly 10 mg) each accounted for about 40% of total statin use. CONCLUSIONS: In urban China, there is still significant underuse of various proven secondary preventive therapies, with particularly low use of statins in patients with ischaemic stroke.

BACKGROUND: Well designed randomized trials and meta-analyses have clearly shown that statins reduce the risk of major vascular events, including ischemic stroke, in a wide range of patients and their routine use is recommended for patients at an increased cardiovascular risk. Survivors of a first ischemic stroke are at a risk of recurrence and of other vascular events and statins are generally recommended to reduce this risk. This study investigated how widely statins were being used for such patients in China. METHODS: Totally 6422 patients with a history of ischemic stroke were identified by reviewing medical records at 51 highest-ranking hospitals in 14 cities in China, and invited to attend a screening clinic to assess eligibility for a randomized trial. Their current statin and other drug uses were recorded alongside clinical and demographic characteristics. Univariate chi-square test and multivariate Logistic regression were used to determine the factors associated with treatment. RESULTS: Only 24% of these patients reported currently taking a statin. The most important predictor of statin use among these patients was prior history of coronary heart disease. History of diabetes or hypertension, as well as treated in university affiliated hospitals is related to increased use. The status had improved significantly during a 2-year period. Atorvastatin (40%) and simvastatin (39%) were the most commonly used. CONCLUSIONS: In China, statins are still underused for secondary prevention among survivors of ischemic stroke. Reasons for this poor use need to be understood in order to increase use of these evidence based therapies.

Background Lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol with statin therapy has been shown to reduce the incidence of atherosclerotic events in many types of patient, but it remains uncertain whether it is of net benefit among people with chronic kidney disease (CKD).Methods Patients with advanced CKD (blood creatinine >= 1.7 mg/dL [>= 150 mu mol/L] in men or >= 1.5 mg/dL [>= 130 mu mol/L] in women) with no known history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization were randomized in a ratio of 4:4:1 to ezetimibe 10 mg plus simvastatin 20 mg daily versus matching placebo versus simvastatin 20 mg daily (with the latter arm rerandomized at 1 year to ezetimibe 10 mg plus simvastatin 20 mg daily vs placebo). The key outcome will be major atherosclerotic events, defined as the combination of myocardial infarction, coronary death, ischemic stroke, or any revascularization procedure.Results A total of 9,438 CKD patients were randomized, of whom 3,056 were on dialysis. Mean age was 61 years, two thirds were male, one fifth had diabetes mellitus, and one sixth had vascular disease. Compared with either placebo or simvastatin alone, allocation to ezetimibe plus simvastatin was not associated with any excess of myopathy, hepatic toxicity, or biliary complications during the first year of follow-up. Compared with placebo, allocation to ezetimibe 10 mg plus simvastatin 20 mg daily yielded average LDL cholesterol differences of 43 mg/dL (1.10 mmol/L) at 1 year and 33 mg/dL (0.85 mmol/L) at 2.5 years. Follow-up is scheduled to continue until August 2010, when all patients will have been followed for at least 4 years.Conclusions SHARP should provide evidence about the efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol with the combination of ezetimibe and simvastatin among a wide range of patients with CKD. (Am Heart J 2010; 160:785-794.e10.)