| 11. |
- Minners, Jan, et al.
(författare)
-
Adjusting parameters of aortic valve stenosis severity by body size
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Heart. - : BMJ. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 100:13, s. 1024-1030
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Adjustment of cardiac dimensions by measures of body size appears intuitively convincing and in patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area (AVA) is commonly adjusted by body surface area (BSA). However, there is little evidence to support such an approach. Objective To identify the adequate measure of body size for the adjustment of aortic stenosis severity. Methods Parameters of aortic stenosis severity (jet velocity, mean pressure gradient (MPG) and AVA) and measures of body size (height, weight, BSA and body mass index (BMI)) were analysed in 2843 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis (jet velocity >= 2.5 m/s) and related to outcomes in a second cohort of 1525 patients from the Simvastatin/Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study. Results Whereas jet velocity and MPG were independent of body size, AVA was significantly correlated with height, weight, BSA and BMI (Pearson correlation coefficient (r) 0.319, 0.281, 0.317 and 0.126, respectively, all p<0.001) to the effect that larger patients presented with larger AVA (less severe stenosis). Of the anthropometric measures used for linear adjustment, BSA was most effective in eliminating the correlation between AVA and body size (r=0.007), rivalled only by allometric (non-linear) models, findings that are confirmed in 1525 prospectively followed patients from the SEAS study. Predictive accuracy for aortic valve events and cardiovascular death during 46 months of follow-up was unchanged by adjusting AVA, regardless of measure of body size (area under the receiver operating curve for AVA 0.72 (CI 0.58 to 0.87) versus, for example, AVA/BSA 0.75 (CI 0.61 to 0.88), p=0.22). Conclusions In the assessment of aortic stenosis, linear adjustment of AVA by BSA improves comparability between patients with diverging body size without, however, increasing the predictive accuracy for clinical events in a population with mild to moderate stenosis.
|
|
| 12. |
- Olsson, Anders, et al.
(författare)
-
LDL cholesterol goals and cardiovascular risk during statin treatment: the IDEAL study
- 2011
-
Ingår i: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR PREVENTION and REHABILITATION. - : Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. - 1741-8267. ; 18:2, s. 262-269
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: We assessed the proportion of patients treated with either simvastatin 20 or 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg who achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals of 2.5 or 2.0 mmol/l in the Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) study. We explored how lipoprotein components related to cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes in these groups. Methods and results: For subjects who reached on-treatment LDL-C goals, Cox regression models were used to assess the ability of lipoprotein components to predict CVD events. Treatment with simvastatin or atorvastatin resulted in 40 per cent and 80 per cent of patients, respectively, reaching the 2.5 mmol/l goal and 12 per cent and 52 per cent, respectively, reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal, after 1 year (all p andlt; 0.001 between groups). Adjusting for baseline LDL-C levels, hazard ratio (HR) for those reaching 2.0-2.5 mmol/l LDL-C versus those reaching andlt; 2.0 mmol/l was 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.33, p = 0.023). An increase of the apolipoprotein B/A1 (apoB/A1) ratio by 1 standard deviation in participants who reached 2.0 mmol/l showed a HR for CVD of 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04-1.25, p = 0.004). Conclusion: More CVD patients treated with atorvastatin than simvastatin achieved either LDL-C goal and those reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal exhibited significantly less CVD than those only reaching 2.5 mmol/l. In those reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal, the apoB/A1 ratio still bears a relation to CVD outcome. The use of apoB/A1 ratio may provide additional predictive value to that of LDL-C.
|
|
| 13. |
- Pedersen, Terje R, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of Atorvastatin 80 mg/day Versus Simvastatin 20 to 40 mg/day on Frequency of Cardiovascular Events Late (Five Years) After Acute Myocardial Infarction (from the Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] Trial)
- 2010
-
Ingår i: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY. - : Elsevier Science B. V., Amsterdam. - 0002-9149. ; 106:3, s. 354-359
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Previous studies have demonstrated that benefits of intensive statin therapy compared to standard statin therapy begin shortly after an acute event and are continued up to 2 years of follow-up. However, whether efficacy and safety of intensive statin therapy in patients with a recent cardiac event are maintained in longer-term follow-up has not been evaluated. We conducted a post hoc analysis of a subgroup of 999 patients who had a first acute myocardial infarction (MI) andlt;2 months before randomization in a prospective, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial of 8,888 patients with a history of MI that compared intensive statin therapy (atorvastatin 80 mg) to standard statin therapy (simvastatin 20 to 40 mg) over approximately 5 years of follow-up. We analyzed the same composite end point used in the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy (PROVE IT) trial (death, MI, hospitalization for unstable angina, revascularization, and stroke). Rates of the composite end point were 44.7% (n = 226) in the simvastatin group and 37.9% (n = 187) in the atorvastatin group (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.99, p = 0.04). Although statistical power was smaller than that of the PROVE IT trial, the relative risk decrease observed at 5 years is consistent with that in the 2-year follow-up in PROVE IT. The 2 treatment regimens were well tolerated. In conclusion, our analysis provides support for the strategy of placing patients with recent MI on intensive statin therapy and maintaining the high dose over the long term, beyond 2 years.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
- Tikkanen, Matti J., et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin on cardiovascular outcomes in coronary heart disease patients with mild-to-moderate baseline elevations in alanine aminotransferase levels
- 2013
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 168:4, s. 3846-3852
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Statins may reduce cardiovascular (CV) morbidity in patients with mild-to-moderate elevations in liver enzyme levels. This post-hoc analysis of the IDEAL study compared intensive versus moderate statin therapy for the prevention of CV events in coronary heart disease patients with normal and elevated baseline levels of serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT). less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanMethods: Cox regression analysis was used to investigate the effect of atorvastatin 80 mg/day versus simvastatin 20-40 mg/day on the risk of IDEAL study end points in patients with normal baseline ALT (defined as ALT andlt; ULN [upper limit of normal]) versus elevated baseline ALT (ALT andgt;= ULN). less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanResults: Of 8863 IDEAL patients with non-missing baseline ALT values, 7782 (87.8%) had an ALT andlt; ULN and 1081 (12.2%) had an ALT andgt;= ULN. In patients with elevated baseline ALT, major CV event rates were 11.5% for simvastatin and 6.5% for atorvastatin, indicating a significant risk reduction with intensive statin therapy (hazard ratio, 0.556; 95% confidence interval, 0.367-0.842; p = 0.0056). Significant heterogeneity of treatment effect was observed for major CV events, cerebrovascular events, and major coronary events, with a trend towards treatment difference for the other outcomes, indicating a greater benefit with atorvastatin in the elevated ALT group. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanConclusions: The CV benefit of intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin compared with a more moderate regimen with simvastatin was generally greater in patients with mildly-to-moderately elevated baseline ALT than patients with normal baseline ALT. Moderate elevations in liver enzyme levels should not present a barrier to prescribing statins, even at higher doses, in high-risk patients.
|
|
| 16. |
- White, Harvey D, et al.
(författare)
-
Darapladib for preventing ischemic events in stable coronary heart disease
- 2014
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 370:18, s. 1702-1711
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND:Elevated lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 activity promotes the development of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques, and elevated plasma levels of this enzyme are associated with an increased risk of coronary events. Darapladib is a selective oral inhibitor of lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2.METHODS:In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 15,828 patients with stable coronary heart disease to receive either once-daily darapladib (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included the components of the primary end point as well as major coronary events (death from coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia) and total coronary events (death from coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or any coronary revascularization).RESULTS:During a median follow-up period of 3.7 years, the primary end point occurred in 769 of 7924 patients (9.7%) in the darapladib group and 819 of 7904 patients (10.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the darapladib group, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.03; P=0.20). There were also no significant between-group differences in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. Darapladib, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of major coronary events (9.3% vs. 10.3%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.00; P=0.045) and total coronary events (14.6% vs. 16.1%; hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.98; P=0.02).CONCLUSIONS:In patients with stable coronary heart disease, darapladib did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; STABILITY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00799903.).
|
|
| 17. |
- White, Harvey D., et al.
(författare)
-
Survival with Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy in Mild Heart Failure
- 2014
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 370:18, s. 1702-1711
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Elevated lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) activity promotes the development of vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques, and elevated plasma levels of this enzyme are associated with an increased risk of coronary events. Darapladib is a selective oral inhibitor of lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2). Methods: In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 15,828 patients with stable coronary heart disease to receive either once-daily darapladib (at a dose of 160 mg) or placebo. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included the components of the primary end point as well as major coronary events (death from coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia) and total coronary events (death from coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or any coronary revascularization). Results: During a median follow-up period of 3.7 years, the primary end point occurred in 769 of 7924 patients (9.7%) in the darapladib group and 819 of 7904 patients (10.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the darapladib group, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.03; P=0.20). There were also no significant between-group differences in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. Darapladib, as compared with placebo, reduced the rate of major coronary events (9.3% vs. 10.3%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.00; P=0.045) and total coronary events (14.6% vs. 16.1%; hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.98; P=0.02). ConclusionsIn patients with stable coronary heart disease, darapladib did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; STABILITY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00799903.)
|
|
