Search

BACKGROUND Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) may be associated with better outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared to other current-generation limus-eluting stents (LES). AIMS To compare BP-BES with other current-generation LES in ACS patients undergoing PCI. METHODS We pooled individual data of Non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE)-ACS patients from two large randomized controlled trials (GLASSY and TWILIGHT). The BP-BES groups consisted mostly of GLASSY patients, while the control group (other current-generation LES) included exclusively TWILIGHT patients. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis; the key secondary outcome was target-vessel failure (TVF). To account for trial design differences, outcomes were assessed at 3 months (short-term) and between 3 and 12 months (long-term) after PCI and subsequently pooled to estimate the 12-month hazards. RESULTS Of 7107 and 6053 NSTE-ACS patients included in the short- and long-term analysis, 32.7% and 36.5% received a BP-BES, respectively. Risk of MACE associated with BP-BES versus other LES was similar at short-term (1.1% vs 1.4%, adjusted HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.51-1.29), lower at long-term (1.7% vs 3.1%, adjusted HR 0.46, 95%CI 0.32-0.67), and lower in the entire 12-month period (pooled adjusted HR 0.58, 95%CI 0.43-0.77). The cumulative 12-month risk of TVF was reduced with BP-BES (adjusted HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.38-0.70). CONCLUSION BP-BES was associated with lower 12-month risks of MACE and TVF compared to other current generation LES among NSTE-ACS patients treated with abbreviated or standard ticagrelor-based DAPT. These non-randomized findings are hypothesis-generating. CONDENSED ABSTRACT Differences in clinical outcomes may exist between biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and other current-generation limus-eluting stent (LES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We pooled individual data of about 7000 Non-ST-segment elevation ACS patients undergoing PCI and treated with ticagrelor with or without aspirin from two large randomized controlled trials (GLASSY and TWILIGHT). BP-BES patients derived very largely from GLASSY and other LES patients from TWILIGHT. In this population, BP-BES compared to other current generation LES, were associated with a lower 12-month risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and target-vessel failure.

Background: The risk/benefit tradeoff of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention may vary in East Asian patients as compared with their non-East Asian counterparts. Methods: The double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized TWILIGHT trial (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) enrolled patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. After 3 months of treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free and adherent patients remained on ticagrelor and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding; the key secondary end point was the first occurrence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Results: Of 9006 enrolled and 7119 randomized patients in TWILIGHT, 1169 patients (13.0%) were enrolled at 27 Chinese sites in this prespecified substudy, of whom 1028 (14.4%) patients were randomized after 3 months. The incidence of the primary end point was 6.2% in the ticagrelor+aspirin group versus 3.5% in the ticagrelor+placebo group between randomization and 1 year (hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.31–0.99]; P =0.048). The key secondary end point occurred in 3.4% of patients in the ticagrelor+aspirin group versus 2.4% in the ticagrelor+placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.33–1.46]; P =0.34). There was no interaction between the region of randomization (China versus the rest of the world) and randomized treatment assignment in terms of the primary or key secondary end points. Conclusions: Ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced clinically relevant bleeding without increasing ischemic events as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in Chinese patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02270242.

Obesity continues to be a major public health issue, with more than two-thirds of adults in the USA categorized as overweight or obese. Bariatric surgery is effective and yields durable weight loss; however, few qualified candidates choose to undergo surgical treatment. Less-invasive alternatives to bariatric surgery are being developed to bridge the treatment gap. Recognizing the burden of conducting pivotal clinical trials and traditional post-approval studies for medical devices, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health has encouraged the development of real-world data content and quality that is sufficient to provide evidence for Total Product Life Cycle medical device evaluation. A key first step is to establish a minimum core data structure that provides a common lexicon for endoscopic obesity devices and its corresponding interoperable data elements. Such a structure would facilitate data capture across existing workflow with a ‘coordinated registry network’ capability. On July 29, 2016, a workshop entitled, ‘GI Coordinated Registry Network: A Case for Obesity Devices’ was held at the FDA White Oak Campus by the Medical Device Epidemiology Network public–private partnership and FDA to initiate the work of developing a common lexicon and core data elements in the metabolic device space, which marked the inauguration of the Gastrointestinal Coordinated Registry Network project. Several work groups were subsequently formed to address clinical issues, data quality issues, registry participation, and data sharing.

The aim of this study was to evaluate if patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) could benefit from ticagrelor monotherapy in terms of bleeding reduction without any compromise in ischemic event prevention.Patients with history of MI who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain at risk for recurrent ischemic events. The optimal antithrombotic strategy for this cohort remains debated.In this prespecified analysis of the randomized TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, the authors evaluated the impact of history of MI on treatment effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stent with at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk feature and free from adverse events at 3 months after index PCI. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, and the key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, MI, or stroke, both at 12 months after randomization.A total of 1,937 patients (29.7%) with and 4,595 patients (70.3%) without prior MI were randomized to ticagrelor and placebo or ticagrelor and aspirin. At 1 year after randomization, patients with prior MI experienced higher rates of death, MI, or stroke (5.7% vs 3.2%; P 0.001) but similar BARC types 2 to 5 bleeding (5.0% vs 5.5%; P = 0.677) compared with patients without prior MI. Ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced the risk for the primary bleeding outcome in patients with (3.4% vs 6.7%; HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.33-0.76) and without (4.2% vs 7.0%; HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.76; PTicagrelor monotherapy is associated with significantly lower risk for bleeding events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, without any compromise in ischemic prevention, among high-risk patients with history of MI undergoing PCI. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242).

Balancing ischemic and bleeding risk is an evolving framework.Our objectives were to simulate changes in risks for adverse events and event-driven costs with use of ticagrelor or prasugrel versus clopidogrel according to varying levels of ischemic and bleeding risk. Using the validated PARIS risk functions, we estimated 1-year ischemic (myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis) and bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 or 5) event rates among PARIS study participants who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation for an acute coronary syndrome and were discharged with aspirin and clopidogrel (n=1497). Simulated changes in adverse events with ticagrelor or prasugrel were calculated by applying treatment effects from randomized trials for a 1-year time horizon. Event costs were estimated using National Inpatient Sample data. Net costs were calculated between antiplatelet therapy groups according to level of ischemic and bleeding risk. After weighting events for quality-of-life impact, we calculated event rates and costs for risk-tailored treatment versus clopidogrel under multiple drug pricing assumptions. One-year rates (per 1000 person-years) for ischemic events were 12.6, 24.1, and 66.1, respectively, among those at low (n=630), intermediate (n=536), and high (n=331) ischemic risk. Analogous bleeding rates were 11.0, 23.9, and 66.2, respectively, among low (n=728), intermediate (n=634), and high (n=135) bleeding risk patients. Mean per event costs were $22 174 (ischemic) and $12 203 (bleeding). When risks for ischemia matched or exceeded bleeding, simulated utility-weighted event rates favored ticagrelor/prasugrel, whereas clopidogrel reduced utility-weighted events when bleeding exceeded ischemic risk. One-year costs were sensitive to drug pricing assumptions, and risk-tailored treatment with either agent progressed from cost incurring to cost saving with increasing generic market share.Tailoring antiplatelet therapy intensity to patient risk may improve health utility and could produce cost savings in the first year after percutaneous coronary intervention.URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00998127.

Summary Background Few studies have examined the efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) for reducing aortocoronary saphenous vein bypass graft (SVG) failure compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing stenting of de-novo SVG lesions. We assessed the risks and benefits of the use of DES versus BMS in de-novo SVG lesions. Methods Patients were recruited to our double-blind, randomised controlled trial from 25 US Department of Veterans Affairs centres. Eligible participants were aged at least 18 years and had at least one significant de-novo SVG lesion (50–99% stenosis of a 2·25–4·5 mm diameter SVG) requiring percutaneous coronary intervention with intent to use embolic protection devices. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, by phone randomisation system to receive a DES or BMS. Randomisation was stratified by presence or absence of diabetes and number of target SVG lesions requiring percutaneous coronary intervention (one or two or more) within each participating site by use of an adaptive scheme intended to balance the two stent type groups on marginal totals for the stratification factors. Patients, referring physicians, study coordinators, and outcome assessors were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was the 12-month incidence of target vessel failure, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation. The DIVA trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01121224. Findings Between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2015, 599 patients were randomly assigned to the stent groups, and the data for 597 patients were used. The patients' mean age was 68·6 (SD 7·6) years, and 595 (>99%) patients were men. The two stent groups were similar for most baseline characteristics. At 12 months, the incidence of target vessel failure was 17% (51 of 292) in the DES group versus 19% (58 of 305) in the BMS group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·63–1·34, p=0·70). Between-group differences in the components of the primary endpoint, serious adverse events, or stent thrombosis were not significant. Enrolment was stopped before the revised target sample size of 762 patients was reached. Interpretation In patients undergoing stenting of de-novo SVG lesions, no significant differences in outcomes between those receiving DES and BMS during 12 months of follow-up were found. The study results have important economic implications in countries with high DES prices such as the USA, because they suggest that the lower-cost BMS can be used in SVG lesions without compromising either safety or efficacy. Funding US Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program.

Although percutaneous coronary intervention with everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation for native coronary artery disease has favorable results compared to first-generation drug-eluting stents, outcomes with EES for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) are unknown.The Xience V USA is a prospective multicenter registry evaluating outcomes in patients treated with EES. Here, we present the 12-month clinical outcomes in patients who received EES for the treatment of ISR and non-ISR. The primary outcome was the composite of target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization). Secondary outcomes were MI, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis (ST).In this registry, a total of 383 patients (64.4 ± 11.4 years; 68.4% male) received revascularization for single-vessel ISR and 4832 patients (64.4 ± 11.0 years; 69.0% male) received revascularization for non-ISR lesions. At 1 year, target lesion failure was 10.9% in the ISR group and 4.9% in the non-ISR group. MI, TLR, and definite ST rates were higher in the ISR group (MI, 2.2% ISR group and 1.6% non-ISR group; TLR, 10.3% ISR group and 2.9% non-ISR group; definite/probable ST, 1.98% ISR group and 0.36% non-ISR group). However, these differences ceased to exist when case-control matched patients in the non-ISR group were studied (target lesion failure, 8.8% ISR vs 7.4% non-ISR; cardiac death or MI, 2.7% ISR vs 1.4% non-ISR; TLR, 7.8% ISR vs 7.1% non-ISR; and definite/probable ST, 1.03% ISR vs 0.69% non-ISR).The treatment of ISR with EES appears to be safe and efficacious at 1 year. Compared to the non-ISR group, target lesion failure was much higher, indicating a higher risk profile of these patients. However, these differences ceased to exist with case-controlled matching.

Background: Medicare administrative data has been proposed as an efficient alternative for long-term event detection. The accuracy of these data relative to investigator reported and event adjudicated results are unknown. Methods: We linked 3217 older patients (65+ years) with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) from 4 ACS clinical trials to Medicare inpatient standard analytic files (SAFs) using a deterministic linkage and indirect patient identifiers (e.g., sex, date of birth, date of index hospitalization). We compared event ascertainment for death, all-cause rehospitalization, myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure and revascularization to 180 days after hospital discharge. Up to four Medicare ICD-9-CM coding algorithms were evaluated for each outcome. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were assessed for Medicare events considering trial records as the ‘gold standard’. Results: The 180 day incidences of adverse events following discharge were: death 4.6%, all-cause rehospitalization 50.9%, MI 5.6%, heart failure 15.1%, and any revascularization 13.2%. For most outcomes, Medicare claims displayed similar or higher event rates as those reported for trials. In general, Medicare claims had high sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value when compared to trial outcomes; however, these differed depending on the Medicare coding algorithm used (Table). Conclusions: Medicare claims detect similar or greater numbers of events as those identified by existing clinical trial mechanisms. These data demonstrate the potential utility of administrative claims for efficient long-term follow-up of older patients enrolled in clinical trials or post-market surveillance efforts. Further investigation is needed to both optimize Medicare coding algorithms and determine which mechanism is most accurate among discordant reported events.

Absrac Caegor: 7. CI - Adjuc harmacologyreseao Number: 2536-628Auhors: Usman Baber, Antonio Colombo, Giora Weisz, Alaide Chieffo, C. Michael Gibson, Maria Alu, Pushpam Barathi, Ziad Sergie, David Cohen, David Moliterno, Bernhard Witzenbichler, Mitchell Krucoff, Philippe Steg, Roxana Mehran, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, USABackground: ual a-laele hera (AT: Asr + Theorde) s a corersoe of reame for aes ho rese h acue coroar sdromes (AC), ad aes udergog ercuaeous coroar ereo (CI). Curre gudeles call for rologed AT for all s udergog CI h a drug-elug se (E), ad shorer durao (≥ 1 moh) for all s receg a bare meal se ( BM). hle remaure dscouao of AT has bee assocaed h a creased rs of se hromboss reous sudes, real-orld aers of adherece o DAT rescro hae o bee characerzed deal, or has relaosh of AT o-adherece o oher clcal oucomes bee esablshed.Methods: The ARI (aers of No-Adherece o A-laele Regmes eed aes) regsr s a mul-ceer, mulaoal, rosece obseraoal sud ha ll follo subjecs for 24 mohs afer se mlaao, ad ll exame he feaures of o-adherece o AT follog seg.Results: Amog 5033 subjecs, he mea age as 64 ears, 74.5% ere male, 40.9% reseed h AC, ad 82% receed a drug-elug se.37.6% of subjecs ere o AT re-rocedure, ad 99.6% ere o AT a he me of dscharge. A 30 das, he oerall cdece of o-adherece as 2.1% (104 subjecs, 147 esodes): dsruo 69%, erruo 19%, ad dscouao 12%. e hromboss (robable ad deie er ARC deios) as rare a 0.46%. Of he 26 s h T, 17 ere deie T, ad 9 ere robable T. The rae of T adhere oulao as 0.46% (23/4929), comared o 2.9% (3/104) amogs he o-adhere grou (OR: 6.3; 95% CI [1.9-21.4). To dae all s hae comleed 6 moh follo-u ad all resuls cludg adjudcaed aderse ees ll be reseed.Conclusion: I hs real-orld oulao of aes udergog CI h se mlaao, o-adherece o AT as lo a 30 das. hle he rae of T a 30 das as lo (0.46%), here as a srog assocao beee o-adherece ad T. Comlee 6 moh daa ll be reseed.