Search

The mechanism underlying thrombus formation in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) involves both platelets and thrombin. While both pathways are targeted in acute care, platelet inhibition has been predominantly administered in the chronic phase, yet thrombin plays a key role in platelet activation and fibrin formation. Among ACS patients, there is also a persistent chronic increase in thrombin generation, which is associated with a higher rate of adverse events. In the setting of post-ACS care with rivaroxaban or vorapaxar, targeting thrombin has been associated with decreased thrombin generation and reduced cardiovascular events, but has been associated with increased bleeding risk. We explored the evidence supporting thrombin generation in the pathophysiology of recurrent events post-ACS and the role of thrombin as a viable therapeutic target. One specific target is factor XI inhibition, which is involved in thrombin generation, but may also allow for the preservation of normal hemostasis. • Thrombin generation remains elevated post-ACS • Elevated thrombin levels are associated with higher event rates • Strategies targeting thrombin improve outcomes, but increase bleeding • Factor XI inhibition may reduce ischemic events without major bleeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The AEGIS-II trial hypothesized that CSL112, an intravenous formulation of human apoA-I, would lower the risk of plaque disruption, decreasing the risk of recurrent events such as myocardial infarction (MI) among high-risk patients with MI. This exploratory analysis evaluates the effect of CSL112 therapy on the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) death and recurrent MI. The AEGIS-II trial was an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized 18,219 high-risk acute MI patients to 4 weekly infusions of apoA-I (6 g CSL112) or placebo. The incidence of the composite of CV death and type 1 MI was 11% to 16% lower in the CSL112 group over the study period (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.7-1.0; P = 0.056 at day 90; HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.74-0.99; P = 0.048 at day 180; and HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79-1.01; P = 0.07 at day 365). Similarly, the incidence of CV death or any MI was numerically lower in CSL112-treated patients throughout the follow-up period (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.80-1.05 at day 90, HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.79-0.996 at day 180, HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.83-1.01 at day 365). The effect of CSL112 treatment on MI was predominantly observed for type 1 MI and type 4b (MI due to stent thrombosis). Although CSL112 did not significantly reduce the occurrence of the primary study endpoints, patients treated with CSL112 infusions had numerically lower rates of CV death and MI, type-1 MI, and stent thrombosis–related MI compared with placebo. These findings could suggest a role of apoA-I in reducing subsequent plaque disruption events via enhanced cholesterol efflux. Further prospective data would be needed to confirm these observations. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Variation in patient characteristics and practice patterns may influence outcomes at a regional level. We assessed differences in demographics, practice patterns, outcomes, and the effect of apixaban compared with warfarin in ARISTOTLE (n = 18,201) by prespecified regions: North America, Latin America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. The primary outcomes were stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. Compared with other regions, patients from Asia Pacific were younger, more women were enrolled in Latin America. Coronary artery disease was more prevalent in Europe and Asia Pacific had the highest rate of prior stroke and renal impairment. Over 50% of patients in North America were taking ≥9 drugs at randomization, compared with 10% in Latin America. North America had the highest rates of temporary study drug discontinuation and procedures. Time in therapeutic range (INR 2.0–3.0) on warfarin was highest in North America and lowest in Asia Pacific. After adjustment and compared with Europe, patients in Asia Pacific had 2-fold higher risk of stroke/systemic embolism and 3-fold higher risk of intracranial hemorrhage. Patients in Latin America had 2-fold increased risk of all-cause death compared with Europe. The benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin were consistent across regions; there was a pronounced reduction in major bleeding in patients from Asia Pacific compared with other regions (p-interaction = 0.03). Patients with AF enrolled in prespecified regions in ARISTOTLE had differences in clinical baseline characteristics and practice patterns. After adjustment, patients in Asia Pacific and Latin America had worse outcomes than patients from other regions. The relative benefits of apixaban compared with warfarin were consistent across regions with an even greater treatment effect in the reduction of bleeding in patients from Asia Pacific. • In patients with AF, there are differences in patient characteristics and practice patterns by region. • Patients in the Asia Pacific region had worse outcomes than patients in other regions. • There is an even greater benefit of less bleeding with apixaban than warfarin in patients from Asia Pacific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations but not all-cause mortality when started within 14 days of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This study sought to evaluate the association of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), congestion, or both, with outcomes and the impact of empagliflozin in reducing HF risk post-AMI. In the EMPACT-MI (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial, patients were randomized within 14 days of an AMI complicated by either newly reduced LVEF<45%, congestion, or both, to empagliflozin (10 mg daily) or placebo and were followed up for a median of 17.9 months. Among 6,522 patients, the mean baseline LVEF was 41 ± 9%; 2,648 patients (40.6%) presented with LVEF <45% alone, 1,483 (22.7%) presented with congestion alone, and 2,181 (33.4%) presented with both. Among patients in the placebo arm of the trial, multivariable adjusted risk for each 10-point reduction in LVEF included all-cause death or HF hospitalization (HR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.31-1.69; P < 0.0001), first HF hospitalization (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.37-1.96; P < 0.0001), and total HF hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR]: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.51-2.36; P < 0.0001). The presence of congestion was also associated with a significantly higher risk for each of these outcomes (HR: 1.52, 1.94, and RR: 2.03, respectively). Empagliflozin reduced the risk for first (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.60-0.98) and total (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.89) HF hospitalizations, irrespective of LVEF or congestion, or both. The safety profile of empagliflozin was consistent across baseline LVEF and irrespective of congestion status. In patients with AMI, the severity of left ventricular dysfunction and the presence of congestion was associated with worse outcomes. Empagliflozin reduced first and total HF hospitalizations across the range of LVEF with and without congestion. (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction [EMPACT-MI]; NCT04509674) [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) events in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, chronic kidney disease, or prevalent HF irrespective of ejection fraction. Whereas the EMPACT-MI trial (Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction) showed that empagliflozin does not reduce the risk of the composite of hospitalization for HF and all-cause death, the effect of empagliflozin on first and recurrent HF events after myocardial infarction is unknown. METHODS: EMPACT-MI was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial that randomized 6522 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction at risk for HF on the basis of newly developed left ventricular ejection fraction of <45% or signs or symptoms of congestion to receive empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo within 14 days of admission. In prespecified secondary analyses, treatment groups were analyzed for HF outcomes. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 17.9 months, the risk for first HF hospitalization and total HF hospitalizations was significantly lower in the empagliflozin compared with the placebo group (118 [3.6%] versus 153 [4.7%] patients with events; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60, 0.98]; P =0.031, for first HF hospitalization; 148 versus 207 events; rate ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.51, 0.89]; P =0.006, for total HF hospitalizations). Subgroup analysis showed consistency of empagliflozin benefit across clinically relevant patient subgroups for first and total HF hospitalizations. The need for new use of diuretics, renin-angiotensin modulators, or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists after discharge was less in patients randomized to empagliflozin versus placebo (all P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin reduced the risk of HF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction or congestion after acute myocardial infarction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04509674. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Vericiguat significantly reduced the primary composite outcome of heart failure (HF) hospitalization or cardiovascular death in the VICTORIA trial. It is unknown if these outcome benefits are related to reverse left ventricular (LV) remodelling with vericiguat in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The aim of this study was to compare the effects of vericiguat versus placebo on LV structure and function after 8 months of therapy in patients with HFrEF. Methods and results: Standardized transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) was performed at baseline and after 8 months of therapy in a subset of HFrEF patients in VICTORIA. The co‐primary endpoints were changes in LV end‐systolic volume index (LVESVI) and LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Quality assurance and central reading were performed by an echocardiographic core laboratory blinded to treatment assignment. A total of 419 patients (208 vericiguat, 211 placebo) with high‐quality paired TTE at baseline and 8 months were included. Baseline clinical characteristics were well balanced between treatment groups and echocardiographic characteristics were representative of patients with HFrEF. LVESVI significantly declined (60.7 ± 26.8 to 56.8 ± 30.4 ml/m2; p < 0.01) and LVEF significantly increased (33.0 ± 9.4% to 36.1 ± 10.2%; p < 0.01) in the vericiguat group, but similarly in the placebo group (absolute changes for vericiguat vs. placebo: LVESVI −3.8 ± 15.4 vs. −7.1 ± 20.5 ml/m2; p = 0.07 and LVEF +3.2 ± 8.0% vs. +2.4 ± 7.6%; p = 0.31). The absolute rate per 100 patient‐years of the primary composite endpoint at 8 months tended to be lower in the vericiguat group (19.8) than the placebo group (29.6) (p = 0.07). Conclusions: In this pre‐specified echocardiographic study, significant improvements in LV structure and function occurred over 8 months in both vericiguat and placebo in a high‐risk HFrEF population with recent worsening HF. Further studies are warranted to define the mechanisms of vericiguat's benefit in HFrEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Oral anticoagulation is underused in patients with atrial fibrillation. We assessed the impact of a multifaceted educational intervention, versus usual care, on oral anticoagulant use in patients with atrial fibrillation.Methods: This study was a two-arm, prospective, international, cluster-randomised, controlled trial. Patients were included who had atrial fibrillation and an indication for oral anticoagulation. Clusters were randomised (1:1) to receive a quality improvement educational intervention (intervention group) or usual care (control group). Randomisation was carried out centrally, using the eClinicalOS electronic data capture system. The intervention involved education of providers and patients, with regular monitoring and feedback. The primary outcome was the change in the proportion of patients treated with oral anticoagulants from baseline assessment to evaluation at 1 year. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02082548.Findings: 2281 patients from five countries (Argentina, n=343; Brazil, n=360; China, n=586; India, n=493; and Romania, n=499) were enrolled from 48 clusters between June 11, 2014, and Nov 13, 2016. Follow-up was at a median of 12·0 months (IQR 11·8-12·2). Oral anticoagulant use increased in the intervention group from 68% (804 of 1184 patients) at baseline to 80% (943 of 1184 patients) at 1 year (difference 12%), whereas in the control group it increased from 64% (703 of 1092 patients) at baseline to 67% (732 of 1092 patients) at 1 year (difference 3%). Absolute difference in the change between groups was 9·1% (95% CI 3·8-14·4); odds ratio of change in the use of oral anticoagulation between groups was 3·28 (95% CI 1·67-6·44; adjusted p value=0·0002). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a reduction in the secondary outcome of stroke in the intervention versus control groups (HR 0·48, 95% CI 0·23-0·99; log-rank p value=0·0434).Interpretation: A multifaceted and multilevel educational intervention, aimed to improve use of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and at risk for stroke, resulted in a significant increase in the proportion of patients treated with oral anticoagulants. Such an intervention has the potential to improve stroke prevention around the world for patients with atrial fibrillation.Funding: Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: In the ARISTOTLE trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was reduced by apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients with AF and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of stroke. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in prespecified subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. Methods: Between Dec 19, 2006, and April 2, 2010, patients were enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial at 1034 clinical sites in 39 countries. 18 201 patients with AF or atrial flutter were randomly assigned to receive apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2·0–3·0). The median duration of follow-up was 1·8 years (IQR 1·4–2·3). The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding in the on-treatment population. All participants, investigators, and sponsors were masked to treatment assignments. In this subgroup analysis, we estimated event rates and used Cox models to compare outcomes in patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. The ARISTOTLE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00412984. Findings: Of the trial population, 3436 (19%) had a previous stroke or TIA. In the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 2·46 per 100 patient-years of follow-up in the apixaban group and 3·24 in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·56 to 1·03); in the subgroup of patients without previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 1·01 per 100 patient-years of follow-up with apixaban and 1·23 with warfarin (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·03; p for interaction=0·71). The absolute reduction in the rate of stroke and systemic embolism with apixaban versus warfarin was 0·77 per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% CI −0·08 to 1·63) in patients with and 0·22 (−0·03 to 0·47) in those without previous stroke or TIA. The difference in major bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin was 1·07 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0·09–2·04) in patients with and 0·93 (0·54–1·32) in those without previous stroke or TIA. Interpretation: The effects of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with AF with and without previous stroke or TIA. Owing to the higher risk of these outcomes in patients with previous stroke or TIA, the absolute benefits of apixaban might be greater in this population. Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Aims: We evaluated the relation between baseline and new‐onset atrial fibrillation (AF) and outcomes, and assessed whether vericiguat modified the likelihood of new‐onset AF in patients with worsening heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction in VICTORIA. Methods and results: Of 5050 patients randomized, 5010 with recorded AF status at baseline were analysed. Patients were classified into three groups: no known AF (n = 2661, 53%), history of AF alone (n = 992, 20%), and AF on randomization electrocardiogram (n = 1357, 27%). Compared with those with no AF, those with history of AF alone had a higher risk of cardiovascular death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.47] without excess myocardial infarction or stroke; neither type of AF was associated with a higher risk of the primary composite outcome (time to cardiovascular death or first HF hospitalization), HF hospitalizations, or all cause‐death. The beneficial effect of vericiguat on the primary composite outcome and its components was evident irrespective of AF status at baseline. Over a median follow‐up of 10.8 months, new‐onset AF occurred in 6.1% of those with no AF and 18.3% with history of AF alone (P < 0.0001). These events were not influenced by vericiguat treatment (adjusted HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75–1.16; P = 0.51), but were associated with an increase in the hazard of both primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Atrial fibrillation was present in nearly half of this high‐risk population with worsening HF. A history of AF alone at baseline portends an increased risk of cardiovascular death. Neither type of AF affected the beneficial effect of vericiguat. Development of AF post‐randomization was associated with an increase in both cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization which was not influenced by vericiguat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the AUGUSTUS trial (An Open-Label, 2×2 Factorial, Randomized Controlled, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban Versus Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin Versus Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), apixaban resulted in less bleeding and fewer hospitalizations than vitamin K antagonists, and aspirin caused more bleeding than placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor. We evaluated the risk-benefit balance of antithrombotic therapy according to kidney function.Methods: In 4456 patients, the CKD-EPI (Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration) formula was used to calculate baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The effect of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonists and aspirin versus placebo was assessed across kidney function categories by using Cox models. The primary outcome was International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included death or hospitalization and ischemic events (death, stroke, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis [definite or probable], or urgent revascularization). Creatinine clearance <30 mL/min was an exclusion criterion in the AUGUSTUS trial.Results: Overall, 30%, 52%, and 19% had an eGFR of >80, >50 to 80, and 30 to 50 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2, respectively. At the 6-month follow-up, a total of 543 primary outcomes of bleeding, 1125 death or hospitalizations, and 282 ischemic events occurred. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, patients assigned apixaban had lower rates for all 3 outcomes across most eGFR categories without significant interaction. The absolute risk reduction with apixaban was most pronounced in those with an eGFR of 30 to 50 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 for bleeding events with rates of 13.1% versus 21.3% (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.84). Patients assigned aspirin had a higher risk of bleeding in all eGFR categories with an even greater increase among those with eGFR >80 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2: 16.6% versus 5.6% (hazard ratio, 3.22; 95% CI, 2.19-4.74; P for interaction=0.007). The risk of death or hospitalization and ischemic events were comparable to aspirin and placebo across eGFR categories with hazard ratios ranging from 0.97 (95% CI, 0.76-1.23) to 1.28 (95% CI, 1.02-1.59) and from 0.75 (95% CI, 0.48-1.17) to 1.34 (95% CI, 0.81-2.22), respectively.Conclusions: The safety and efficacy of apixaban was consistent irrespective of kidney function, compared with warfarin, and in accordance with the overall trial results. The risk of bleeding with aspirin was consistently higher across all kidney function categories. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02415400. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over 1.5 million deaths worldwide are caused by neurocardiogenic syndromes. Furthermore, the consequences of deleterious brain-heart interactions are not limited to fatal complications. Cardiac arrhythmias, heart failure, and nonfatal coronary syndromes are also common. The brain-heart axis is implicated in post-stroke cardiovascular complications known as the stroke-heart syndrome, sudden cardiac death, and Takotsubo syndrome, among other neurocardiogenic syndromes. Multiple pathophysiological mechanisms with the potential to be targeted with novel therapies have been identified in the last decade. In the present state-of-the-art review, we describe recent advances in the understanding of anatomical and functional aspects of the brain-heart axis, cardiovascular complications after stroke, and a comprehensive pathophysiological model of stroke-induced cardiac injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guidelines caution against the use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in patients with extremely high (>120 kg) or low (≤60 kg) body weight because of a lack of data in these populations.Methods: In a post hoc analysis of ARISTOTLE (Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation; n=18 201), a randomized trial comparing apixaban with warfarin for the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation, we estimated the randomized treatment effect (apixaban versus warfarin) stratified by body weight (≤60, >60-120, >120 kg) using a Cox regression model and tested the interaction between body weight and randomized treatment. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding.Results: Of the 18 139 patients with available weight and outcomes data, 1985 (10.9%) were in the low-weight group (≤60 kg), 15 172 (83.6%) were in the midrange weight group (>60-120 kg), and 982 (5.4%) were in the high-weight group (>120 kg). The treatment effect of apixaban versus warfarin for the efficacy outcomes of stroke/systemic embolism, all-cause death, or myocardial infarction was consistent across the weight spectrum (interaction P value>0.05). For major bleeding, apixaban had a better safety profile than warfarin in all weight categories and even showed a greater relative risk reduction in patients in the low (≤60 kg; HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.82) and midrange (>60-120 kg) weight groups (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.83; interaction P value=0.016).Conclusions: Our findings provide evidence that apixaban is efficacious and safe across the spectrum of weight, including in low- (≤60 kg) and high-weight patients (>120 kg). The superiority on efficacy and safety outcomes of apixaban compared with warfarin persists across weight groups, with even greater reductions in major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation with low to normal weight as compared with high weight. The superiority of apixaban over warfarin in regard to efficacy and safety for stroke prevention seems to be similar in patients with atrial fibrillation across the spectrum of weight, including in low- and very high-weight patients. Thus, apixaban appears to be appropriate for patients with atrial fibrillation irrespective of body weight.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00412984. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, is the standard antithrombotic treatment following acute coronary syndromes. The factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban reduced mortality and ischaemic events when added to DAPT, but caused increased bleeding. The safety of a dual pathway antithrombotic therapy approach combining low-dose rivaroxaban (in place of aspirin) with a P2Y12 inhibitor has not been assesssed in acute coronary syndromes. We aimed to assess rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily versus aspirin 100 mg daily, in addition to clopidogrel or ticagrelor (chosen at investigator discretion before randomisation), for patients with acute coronary syndromes started within 10 days after presentation and continued for 6-12 months.Methods: In this double-blind, multicentre, randomised trial (GEMINI-ACS-1) done at 371 clinical centres in 21 countries, eligible patients were older than 18 years with unstable angina, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) or ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), with positive cardiac biomarkers and either ischaemic electrocardiographic changes or an atherosclerotic culprit lesion identified during angiography. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) within 10 days after admission for the index acute coronary syndromes event to either aspirin or rivaroxaban based on a computer-generated randomisation schedule. Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks with size of four and was stratified based on the background P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel or ticagrelor) intended to be used at the time of randomisation. Investigators and patients were masked to treatment assignment. Patients received a minimum of 180 days of double-blind treatment with rivaroxaban 2·5 mg twice daily or aspirin 100 mg daily. The choice of clopidogrel or ticagrelor during trial conduct was not randomised and was based on investigator preference. The primary endpoint was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) clinically significant bleeding not related to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; major, minor, or requiring medical attention) up to day 390. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02293395.Findings: Between April 22, 2015, and Oct 14, 2016, 3037 patients with acute coronary syndromes were randomly assigned; 1518 to receive aspirin and 1519 to receive rivaroxaban. 1704 patients (56%) were in the ticagrelor and 1333 (44%) in the clopidogrel strata. Median duration of treatment was 291 days (IQR 239-354). TIMI non-CABG clinically significant bleeding was similar with rivaroxaban versus aspirin therapy (total 154 patients [5%]; 80 participants [5%] of 1519 vs 74 participants [5%] of 1518; HR 1·09 [95% CI 0·80-1·50]; p=0·5840).Interpretation: A dual pathway antithrombotic therapy approach combining low-dose rivaroxaban with a P2Y12 inhibitor for the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes had similar risk of clinically significant bleeding as aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor. A larger, adequately powered trial would be required to definitively assess the efficacy and safety of this approach.Funding: Janssen Research & Development and Bayer AG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background—Apixaban is approved for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. However, the ARISTOTLE trial included a substantial number of patients with valvular heart disease and only excluded patients with clinically significant mitral stenosis or mechanical prosthetic heart valves. Methods and Results—We compared the effect of apixaban and warfarin on rates of stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, and death in patients with and without moderate or severe valvular heart disease using Cox proportional hazards modeling. Of the 18,201 patients enrolled in ARISTOTLE, 4808 (26.4%) had a history of moderate or severe valvular heart disease or prior valve surgery. Patients with valvular heart disease had higher rates of stroke or systemic embolism and bleeding than patients without valvular heart disease. There was no evidence of a differential effect of apixaban over warfarin in patients with and without valvular heart disease in reducing stroke and systemic embolism (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.51-0.97 and HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67-1.04; interaction p=0.38), causing less major bleeding (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61-1.04 and HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.77; interaction p=0.23), and reducing mortality (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84-1.22 and HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.96; interaction p=0.10). Conclusions—More than a quarter of the patients in ARISTOTLE with "nonvalvular" atrial fibrillation had moderate or severe valvular heart disease. There was no evidence of a differential effect of apixaban over warfarin in reducing stroke or systemic embolism, causing less bleeding, and reducing death in patients with and without valvular heart disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Myocardial viability tests have been proposed as a key factor in the decision-making process concerning coronary revascularization procedures in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and coronary artery disease (LVD-CAD). Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that compared medical treatment with revascularization in patients with viable and non-viable myocardium and recorded mortality as outcome. Results Thirty-two non-randomized (4328 patients) and 4 randomized (1079 patients) studies were analyzed. In non-randomized studies, revascularization provided a significant mortality benefit compared with medical treatment (<0.05). Since the heterogeneity was significant (<0.05) a viability subgroup analysis was performed, showing that revascularization provided a significant mortality benefit compared with medical treatment in patients with viable myocardium (<0.05) but not in patients without (=0.34). There was a significant subgroup effect (<0.05) related to the intensity of the effect, but not to the direction. In randomized studies, revascularization did not provide a significant mortality benefit compared with medical treatment in either patients with viable myocardium or those without (=0.21). There was no significant subgroup effect (=0.72). Neither non-randomized nor randomized studies demonstrated any significant difference in outcomes between patients with and without viable myocardium. Conclusions The available data are inconclusive regarding the usefulness of myocardial viability tests for the decision-making process concerning revascularization in LVD-CAD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study on the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin for reduction of stroke an of bleeding in atrial fibrillation. The study employs double-blind randomised trial, Cox proportional hazard, and efficacy and safety analyses. Results reveal that apixaban is better than warfarin at prevention of systemic embolism and stroke, causes less bleeding and lower mortality.

Background: Vitamin K antagonists are highly effective in preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but have several limitations. Apixaban is a novel oral direct factor Xa inhibitor that has been shown to reduce the risk of stroke in a similar population in comparison with aspirin. Methods: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared apixaban (at a dose of 5 mg twice daily) with warfarin (target international normalized ratio, 2.0 to 3.0) in 18,201 patients with atrial fibrillation and at least one additional risk factor for stroke. The primary outcome was ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. The trial was designed to test for noninferiority, with key secondary objectives of testing for superiority with respect to the primary outcome and to the rates of major bleeding and death from any cause. Results: The median duration of follow-up was 1.8 years. The rate of the primary outcome was 1.27% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 1.60% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio with apixaban, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). The rate of major bleeding was 2.13% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 3.09% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.80; P<0.001), and the rates of death from any cause were 3.52% and 3.94%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.99; P=0.047). The rate of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.24% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 0.47% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.75; P<0.001), and the rate of ischemic or uncertain type of stroke was 0.97% per year in the apixaban group and 1.05% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.13; P=0.42). Conclusions: In patients with atrial fibrillation, apixaban was superior to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism, caused less bleeding, and resulted in lower mortality. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ARISTOTLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00412984.) [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: In the ARISTOTLE trial, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was reduced by apixaban compared with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Patients with AF and previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) have a high risk of stroke. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with warfarin in prespecified subgroups of patients with and without previous stroke or TIA.Methods: Between Dec 19, 2006, and April 2, 2010, patients were enrolled in the ARISTOTLE trial at 1034 clinical sites in 39 countries. 18,201 patients with AF or atrial flutter were randomly assigned to receive apixaban 5 mg twice daily or warfarin (target international normalised ratio 2·0-3·0). The median duration of follow-up was 1·8 years (IQR 1·4-2·3). The primary efficacy outcome was stroke or systemic embolism, analysed by intention to treat. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding in the on-treatment population. All participants, investigators, and sponsors were masked to treatment assignments. In this subgroup analysis, we estimated event rates and used Cox models to compare outcomes in patients with and without previous stroke or TIA. The ARISTOTLE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00412984.Findings: Of the trial population, 3436 (19%) had a previous stroke or TIA. In the subgroup of patients with previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 2·46 per 100 patient-years of follow-up in the apixaban group and 3·24 in the warfarin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76, 95% CI 0·56 to 1·03); in the subgroup of patients without previous stroke or TIA, the rate of stroke or systemic embolism was 1·01 per 100 patient-years of follow-up with apixaban and 1·23 with warfarin (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·65 to 1·03; p for interaction=0·71). The absolute reduction in the rate of stroke and systemic embolism with apixaban versus warfarin was 0·77 per 100 patient-years of follow-up (95% CI -0·08 to 1·63) in patients with and 0·22 (-0·03 to 0·47) in those without previous stroke or TIA. The difference in major bleeding with apixaban compared with warfarin was 1·07 per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0·09-2·04) in patients with and 0·93 (0·54-1·32) in those without previous stroke or TIA.Interpretation: The effects of apixaban versus warfarin were consistent in patients with AF with and without previous stroke or TIA. Owing to the higher risk of these outcomes in patients with previous stroke or TIA, the absolute benefits of apixaban might be greater in this population.Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: GDF-15, a biomarker of oxidative stress and inflammation, is an independent risk marker for major bleeding and death in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). However, it is not known whether the association of GDF-15 with major bleeding and death is similar across different geographical regions. Aims: To assess the consistency of the association of GDF-15 with major bleeding and with death in anticoagulated patients with AF across geographical regions. Methods: GDF-15 levels were measured in 14,585 patients at randomization in the ARISTOTLE trial and in 7,933 patients in the RELY trial and analyzed centrally at the UCR laboratory in Uppsala, Sweden. Participating countries were divided into the pre-specified regions according to study protocol: Asia/Pacific (16% in ARISTOTLE), Asia (9% in RELY), Europe (40% in ARISTOTLE, 54% in RELY), Latin America (20%, 7%) North America (24%, 22%) and others (7.2% in RELY, [Israel, Australia and South Africa]). The association between the outcomes and GDF-15 modelled as a restricted cubic spline, geographical region, and the interaction between GDF-15 and region was analyzed using Cox-regression analysis. Results: Overall, there were differences between the geographical regions concerning the risk of major bleeding and death in both studies (all p<0.05). GDF-15 was associated with major bleeding (p=<0.0001) and death (p=<0.0001) in both trials across regions. There was no interaction between GDF-15 and regions for either outcome in either trial cohort (p-values 0.81 and 0.14 in ARISTOTLE, and 0.08 and 0.84 in RELY, for major bleeding and death, respectively). Conclusions: The biomarker GDF-15 is associated with major bleeding and death in patients with AF on anticoagulation across all geographic regions. The ability of GDF-15 to prognosticate regarding these outcome events is similar across geographic regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]