| 11. |
- Fox, Keith A. A., et al.
(author)
-
Long-Term Outcome of a Routine Versus Selective Invasive Strategy in Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome A Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data
- 2010
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 55:22, s. 2435-2445
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to determine: 1) whether a routine invasive (RI) strategy reduces the long-term frequency of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) using a meta-analysis of individual patient data from all randomized studies with 5-year outcomes; and 2) whether the results are influenced by baseline risk. BACKGROUND: Pooled analyses of randomized trials show early benefit of routine intervention, but long-term results are inconsistent. The differences may reflect differing trial design, adjunctive therapies, and/or limited power. This meta-analysis (n = 5,467 patients) is designed to determine whether outcomes are improved despite trial differences. METHODS: Individual patient data, with 5-year outcomes, were obtained from FRISC-II (Fragmin and Fast Revascularization during Instability in Coronary Artery Disease), ICTUS (Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes), and RITA-3 (Randomized Trial of a Conservative Treatment Strategy Versus an Interventional Treatment Strategy in Patients with Unstable Angina) trials for a collaborative meta-analysis. A Cox regression analysis was used for a multivariable risk model, and a simplified integer model was derived. RESULTS: Over 5 years, 14.7% (389 of 2,721) of patients randomized to RI strategy experienced cardiovascular death or nonfatal MI versus 17.9% (475 of 2,746) in the selective invasive (SI) strategy (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71 to 0.93; p = 0.002). The most marked treatment effect was on MI (10.0% RI strategy vs. 12.9% SI), and there were consistent trends for cardiovascular deaths (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.01; p = 0.068) and all deaths (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.05). There were 2.0% to 3.8% absolute reductions in cardiovascular death or MI in the low and intermediate risk groups and an 11.1% absolute risk reduction in highest risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: An RI strategy reduces long-term rates of cardiovascular death or MI and the largest absolute effect in seen in higher-risk patients.
|
|
| 12. |
- Hess, Otto M., et al.
(author)
-
Why don't we return to bare metal stents?
- 2008
-
In: EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology. - 1774-024X. ; 4:1, s. 36-41
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 13. |
- James, Stefan
(author)
-
Coagulation, Inflammation and Myocardial Dysfunction in Unstable Coronary Artery Disease and the Influence of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibition and Low Molecular Weight Heparin
- 2003
-
Doctoral thesis (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Hjärt-kärl sjukdom är den vanligaste dödsorsaken i västvärlden. Samtidigt som antalet patienter med hjärtinfarkt har minskat, har antalet patienter med instabil kranskärlsjukdom d.v.s. svår kärlkramp ökat påtagligt. Diagnosen är nu den vanligaste orsaken till vård på hjärtinfarktavdelningar i Sverige. Modern behandling av instabil kranskärlssjukdom består av en kombination av läkemedel för att minska blodproppsbildning och avlasta hjärtarbetet samt, i de flesta fall, s.k. ballongvidning eller operation av hjärtats kranskärl. Trots stora behandlingsframsteg är risken för hjärtinfarkt och död hög, såväl på kort som lång sikt. Det finns därför ett stort behov av ytterligare förbättrad behandling utan att samtidigt erhålla oacceptabelt hög risk för allvarliga biverkningar. För att erbjuda en effektiv behandling till patienter med hög risk och samtidigt undvika dyr och potentiellt riskfylld behandling till patienter med låg risk behövs också bättre instrument för tidig riskbedömning. Syftet med avhandlingen var att undersöka en stor grupp patienter med instabil kranskärlssjukdom avseende säkerhet och effektivitet av en behandlingskombination av två moderna blodproppshämmande läkemedel, dalteparin och abciximab (ca 1000 patienter). Syftet var också att studera hur denna behandling påverkar system för inflammation och koagulation (ca 400 patienter). Dessutom ville vi värdera hur blodnivåer av markörer för inflammation, hjärtmuskelskada och nedsatt hjärtfunktion kan förutsäga risken för framtida komplikationer (ca 7000 patienter). Tillägg av abciximab till dalteparin minskade inte risken för dödsfall eller hjärtinfarkt inom trettio dagar. Däremot ökade antalet blödningskomplikationer. Totala antalet blödningar var emellertid relativt lågt och behandlingen syntes vara lika säker som kombinationen av abciximab och det internationellt mycket använda blodproppshämmande medlet heparin. Trots den kraftfulla behandlingskombinationen skedde en samtidig aktivering av system för såväl inflammation som koagulation. Detta kan vara en orsak till den observerade avsaknaden av behandlingseffekt av abciximab. Att hindra denna aktivering skulle samtidigt kunna innebära möjligheter för nya behandlingsstrategier. Förhöjda nivåer av markörer för hjärtmuskelskada (troponin T), inflammation (CRP), nedsatt hjärtfunktion (proBNP) eller nedsatt njurfunktion (kreatininclearance) ökade risken för dödlig utgång både på kort och lång sikt, oberoende av andra riskfaktorer. En kombination av två av dessa markörer gav den högsta risken för dödlig utgång. Således dog endast 0.3 % av patienter med låga nivåer av proBNP och normal njurfunktion inom ett år, jämfört med 25.7 % av patienter med höga nivåer av proBNP och nedsatt njurfunktion. Förhöjda nivåer av troponin T eller nedsatt kreatininclearance (men inte av CRP eller proBNP) ökade dessutom risken för hjärtinfarkt. Resultaten i avhandlingsarbetet har givit kliniskt tillämpbar kunskap om hur kärlkrampspatienter med hög respektive låg risk kan selekteras tidigt efter inkomst till sjukhus och ny kunskap om behandlingseffekt av abciximab och dalteparin. Resultaten har redovisats på internationella kongresser och i högt rankade medicinska tidskrifter och har citerats i europeiska och amerikanska ”guidelines” för behandling av instabil kranskärlssjukdom.
|
|
| 14. |
- Lindholm, Daniel, 1982-, et al.
(author)
-
Biomarker-Based Risk Model to Predict Cardiovascular Mortality in Patients With Stable Coronary Disease
- 2017
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 70:7, s. 813-826
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Currently, there is no generally accepted model to predict outcomes in stable coronary heart disease (CHD).Objectives This study evaluated and compared the prognostic value of biomarkers and clinical variables to develop a biomarker-based prediction model in patients with stable CHD.Methods In a prospective, randomized trial cohort of 13,164 patients with stable CHD, we analyzed several candidate biomarkers and clinical variables and used multivariable Cox regression to develop a clinical prediction model based on the most important markers. The primary outcome was cardiovascular (CV) death, but model performance was also explored for other key outcomes. It was internally bootstrap validated, and externally validated in 1,547 patients in another study.Results During a median follow-up of 3.7 years, there were 591 cases of CV death. The 3 most important biomarkers were N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, where NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT had greater prognostic value than any other biomarker or clinical variable. The final prediction model included age (A), biomarkers (B) (NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), and clinical variables (C) (smoking, diabetes mellitus, and peripheral arterial disease). This “ABC-CHD” model had high discriminatory ability for CV death (c-index 0.81 in derivation cohort, 0.78 in validation cohort), with adequate calibration in both cohorts.Conclusions This model provided a robust tool for the prediction of CV death in patients with stable CHD. As it is based on a small number of readily available biomarkers and clinical factors, it can be widely employed to complement clinical assessment and guide management based on CV risk. (The Stabilization of Atherosclerotic Plaque by Initiation of Darapladib Therapy Trial [STABILITY]; NCT00799903)
|
|
| 15. |
- O'Donoghue, Michelle, et al.
(author)
-
Early invasive vs conservative treatment strategies in women and men with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction : a meta-analysis
- 2008
-
In: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 0098-7484 .- 1538-3598. ; 300:1, s. 71-80
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- CONTEXT: Although an invasive strategy is frequently used in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS), data from some trials suggest that this strategy may not benefit women. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized trials to compare the effects of an invasive vs conservative strategy in women and men with NSTE ACS. DATA SOURCES: Trials were identified through a computerized literature search of the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases (1970-April 2008) using the search terms invasive strategy, conservative strategy, selective invasive strategy, acute coronary syndromes, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and unstable angina. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials comparing an invasive vs conservative treatment strategy in patients with NSTE ACS. DATA EXTRACTION: The principal investigators for each trial provided the sex-specific incidences of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and rehospitalization with ACS through 12 months of follow-up. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were combined across 8 trials (3075 women and 7075 men). The odds ratio (OR) for the composite of death, MI, or ACS for invasive vs conservative strategy in women was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.01; 21.1% vs 25.0%) and in men was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.55-0.98; 21.2% vs 26.3%) without significant heterogeneity between sexes (P for interaction = .26). Among biomarker-positive women, an invasive strategy was associated with a 33% lower odds of death, MI, or ACS (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.88) and a nonsignificant 23% lower odds of death or MI (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.47-1.25). In contrast, an invasive strategy was not associated with a significant reduction in the triple composite end point in biomarker-negative women (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61-1.44; P for interaction = .36) and was associated with a nonsignificant 35% higher odds of death or MI (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.78-2.35; P for interaction = .08). Among men, the OR for death, MI, or ACS was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.46-0.67) if biomarker-positive and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) if biomarker-negative (P for interaction = .09). CONCLUSIONS: In NSTE ACS, an invasive strategy has a comparable benefit in men and high-risk women for reducing the composite end point of death, MI, or rehospitalization with ACS. In contrast, our data provide evidence supporting the new guideline recommendation for a conservative strategy in low-risk women.
|
|
| 16. |
- O'Donoghue, Michelle L., et al.
(author)
-
An Invasive or Conservative Strategy in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes A Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials
- 2012
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 60:2, s. 106-111
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives The purpose of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to examine an invasive or conservative strategy in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients. Background Diabetic patients are at increased risk of cardiovascular events after an acute coronary syndrome, yet it remains unknown whether they derive enhanced benefit from an invasive strategy.Methods Randomized trials comparing an invasive versus conservative treatment strategy were identified. The prevalence of cardiovascular events through 12 months was reported for each trial, stratified by diabetes mellitus status and randomized treatment strategy. Relative risk (RR) ratios and absolute risk reductions were combined using random-effects models.Results Data were combined across 9 trials comprising 9,904 subjects of whom 1,789 (18.1%) had diabetes mellitus. The RRs for death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or rehospitalization with an acute coronary syndrome for an invasive versus conservative strategy were similar between diabetic patients (RR: 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.03) and nondiabetic patients (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.06; p interaction = 0.83). An invasive strategy reduced nonfatal MI in diabetic patients (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.92), but not in nondiabetic patients (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.29; p interaction = 0.09). The absolute risk reduction in MI with an invasive strategy was greater in diabetic than nondiabetic patients (absolute risk reduction: 3.7% vs. 0.1%; p interaction = 0.02). There were no differences in death or stroke between groups (p interactions 0.68 and 0.20, respectively).Conclusions An early invasive strategy yielded similar RR reductions in overall cardiovascular events in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. However, an invasive strategy appeared to reduce recurrent nonfatal MI to a greater extent in diabetic patients. These data support the updated guidelines that recommend an invasive strategy for patients with diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.
|
|
| 17. |
- Swahn, Eva, et al.
(author)
-
Early invasive compared with a selective invasive strategy in women with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes : a substudy of the OASIS 5 trial and a meta-analysis of previous randomized trials
- 2012
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford Journals. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 33:1, s. 51-60
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims The aim of this study was to compare benefits and risks of a routine invasive compared with a selective invasive strategy in women with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. Methods and results We randomly assigned 184 women, either to a routine or to a selective invasive strategy as a substudy to the OASIS 5 trial, who were followed for 2 years. Meta-analysis of data from previous randomized trials was also done. There were no significant differences between the two treatment strategies in the primary outcome death/myocardial infarction (MI)/stroke [21.0 vs. 15.4%, HR = 1.46, 95% CI (0.73-2.94)], in the secondary outcome death/MI [18.8 vs. 14.3%, HR = 1.39, 95% CI (0.67-2.88)], or separately analysed outcomes MI [12.9 vs. 13.3%, HR = 0.95, 95% CI (0.42-2.19)] or stroke [2.3 vs. 4.4%, HR = 0.67, 95% CI (0.12-3.70)]. However, there were significantly more deaths after 1 year (8.8 vs. 1.1%, HR = 9.01, 95% CI (1.11-72.90) and a higher rate of major bleeding at 30 days [8.8 vs. 1.1%, HR = 11.45, 95% CI (1.43-91.96)] in the routine invasive strategy group. A meta-analysis including 2692 women in previous randomized trials, with a gender perspective, showed no significant difference in the composite outcome death/MI, OR = 1.18, 95% CI (0.92-1.53) but a higher mortality with a routine invasive strategy for women, OR = 1.51, 95% CI (1.00-2.29). Conclusion The rate of death, MI, or stroke in women was not different in patients treated with a routine invasive strategy compared with a selective invasive strategy, but there was a concerning trend towards higher mortality. When combined with data from previous trials, there does not appear to be a benefit of an early invasive strategy in women with ACS, which differs from the results in men. These data emphasize the lack of clear evidence in favour of an invasive strategy in women and suggest caution in extrapolating the results from men to women.
|
|
| 18. |
- White, Harvey D, et al.
(author)
-
Darapladib for preventing ischemic events in stable coronary heart disease
- 2014
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 370:18, s. 1702-1711
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.).
|
|
| 19. |
- White, Harvey D., et al.
(author)
-
Survival with Cardiac-Resynchronization Therapy in Mild Heart Failure
- 2014
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 370:18, s. 1702-1711
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.)
|
|
| 20. |
- Wykrzykowska, Joanna J, et al.
(author)
-
Bioresorbable Scaffolds versus Metallic Stents in Routine PCI.
- 2017
-
In: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 376:24, s. 2319-2328
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds were developed to overcome the shortcomings of drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We performed an investigator-initiated, randomized trial to compare an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent in the context of routine clinical practice.METHODS: We randomly assigned 1845 patients undergoing PCI to receive either a bioresorbable vascular scaffold (924 patients) or a metallic stent (921 patients). The primary end point was target-vessel failure (a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target-vessel revascularization). The data and safety monitoring board recommended early reporting of the study results because of safety concerns. This report provides descriptive information on end-point events.RESULTS: The median follow-up was 707 days. Target-vessel failure occurred in 105 patients in the scaffold group and in 94 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 11.7% and 10.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.48; P=0.43); event rates were based on Kaplan-Meier estimates in time-to-event analyses. Cardiac death occurred in 18 patients in the scaffold group and in 23 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 2.0% and 2.7%, respectively), target-vessel myocardial infarction occurred in 48 patients in the scaffold group and in 30 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 5.5% and 3.2%), and target-vessel revascularization occurred in 76 patients in the scaffold group and in 65 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 8.7% and 7.5%). Definite or probable device thrombosis occurred in 31 patients in the scaffold group as compared with 8 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 3.5% vs. 0.9%; hazard ratio, 3.87; 95% CI, 1.78 to 8.42; P<0.001).CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary report of a trial involving patients undergoing PCI, there was no significant difference in the rate of target-vessel failure between the patients who received a bioresorbable scaffold and the patients who received a metallic stent. The bioresorbable scaffold was associated with a higher incidence of device thrombosis than the metallic stent through 2 years of follow-up. (Funded by Abbott Vascular; AIDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01858077 .).
|
|
