Search

Aims: Rosuvastatin (10 mg per day) compared with placebo reduced major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events by 24% in 12 705 participants at intermediate CV risk after 5.6 years. There was no benefit of blood pressure (BP) lowering treatment in the overall group, but a reduction in events in the third of participants with elevated systolic BP. After cessation of all the trial medications, we examined whether the benefits observed during the active treatment phase were sustained, enhanced, or attenuated., Methods and Results: After the randomized treatment period (5.6 years), participants were invited to participate in 3.1 further years of observation (total 8.7 years). The first co-primary outcome for the entire length of follow-up was the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or CV death [major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE)-1], and the second was MACE-1 plus resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure, or coronary revascularization (MACE-2). In total, 9326 (78%) of 11 994 surviving Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE)-3 subjects consented to participate in extended follow-up. During 3.1 years of post-trial observation (total follow-up of 8.7 years), participants originally randomized to rosuvastatin compared with placebo had a 20% additional reduction in MACE-1 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.99] and a 17% additional reduction in MACE-2 (95% CI 0.68-1.01). Therefore, over the 8.7 years of follow-up, there was a 21% reduction in MACE-1 (95% CI 0.69-0.90, P = 0.005) and 21% reduction in MACE-2 (95% CI 0.69-0.89, P = 0.002). There was no benefit of BP lowering in the overall study either during the active or post-trial observation period, however, a 24% reduction in MACE-1 was observed over 8.7 years., Conclusion: The CV benefits of rosuvastatin, and BP lowering in those with elevated systolic BP, compared with placebo continue to accrue for at least 3 years after cessation of randomized treatment in individuals without cardiovascular disease indicating a legacy effect., Trial Registration Number: NCT00468923., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD). We explored whether CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc or CHADS 2 scores, well-validated tools for assessing risk of thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation, can identify vascular patients at highest risk of recurrent events who may derive greatest benefits of treatment. Methods Predictive accuracies of the CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHADS 2 scores for MACE, were assessed in this analysis of the COMPASS trial. Kaplan-Meier estimates of cumulative risk were used to compare the effects of rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n = 9152) with aspirin alone (n = 9126) according to risk scores. Results High CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (6-9) or CHADS 2 (3-6) scores were associated with over three times greater absolute risk of MACE compared with CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score of 1-2 or CHADS 2 score of 0. The effects of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone were consistent across CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHADS 2 score categories for MACE, bleeding and net clinical benefit, with greatest reduction in MACE observed in patients treated for 30 months with highest CHADS 2 score (3-6) (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.53-0.86, p = 0.0012, 25 events per 1000 patients prevented). Conclusion The CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and CHADS 2 scores can be used in patients with chronic CAD and/or PAD to identify patients who are at highest risk of MACE. Those identified at highest risk by CHADS 2 scores had greatest benefit from dual pathway inhibition with rivaroxaban plus aspirin. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01776424., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Strokes were significantly reduced by the combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin in comparison with aspirin in the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies). We present detailed analyses of stroke by type, predictors, and antithrombotic effects in key subgroups., Methods: Participants had stable coronary artery or peripheral artery disease and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin 100 mg once daily (n=9126), rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily (n=9117), or rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin (n=9152). Patients who required anticoagulation or had a stroke within 1 month, previous lacunar stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage were excluded., Results: During a mean follow-up of 23 months, fewer patients had strokes in the rivaroxaban plus aspirin group than in the aspirin group (83 [0.9% per year] versus 142 [1.6% per year]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76; P<0.0001). Ischemic/uncertain strokes were reduced by nearly half (68 [0.7% per year] versus 132 [1.4% per year]; HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.68; P<0.0001) by the combination in comparison with aspirin. No significant difference was noted in the occurrence of stroke in the rivaroxaban alone group in comparison with aspirin: annualized rate of 0.7% (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.05). The occurrence of fatal and disabling stroke (modified Rankin Scale, 3-6) was decreased by the combination (32 [0.3% per year] versus 55 [0.6% per year]; HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.89; P=0.01). Independent predictors of stroke were prior stroke, hypertension, systolic blood pressure at baseline, age, diabetes mellitus, and Asian ethnicity. Prior stroke was the strongest predictor of incident stroke (HR, 3.63; 95% CI, 2.65-4.97; P<0.0001) and was associated with a 3.4% per year rate of stroke recurrence on aspirin. The effect of the combination in comparison with aspirin was consistent across subgroups with high stroke risk, including those with prior stroke., Conclusions: Low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin is an important new antithrombotic option for primary and secondary stroke prevention in patients with clinical atherosclerosis., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Background: Previous trials have shown that the use of statins to lower cholesterol reduces the risk of cardiovascular events among persons without cardiovascular disease. Those trials have involved persons with elevated lipid levels or inflammatory markers and involved mainly white persons. It is unclear whether the benefits of statins can be extended to an intermediate-risk, ethnically diverse population without cardiovascular disease., Methods: In one comparison from a 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned 12,705 participants in 21 countries who did not have cardiovascular disease and were at intermediate risk to receive rosuvastatin at a dose of 10 mg per day or placebo. The first coprimary outcome was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, and the second coprimary outcome additionally included revascularization, heart failure, and resuscitated cardiac arrest. The median follow-up was 5.6 years., Results: The overall mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 26.5% lower in the rosuvastatin group than in the placebo group. The first coprimary outcome occurred in 235 participants (3.7%) in the rosuvastatin group and in 304 participants (4.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.91; P=0.002). The results for the second coprimary outcome were consistent with the results for the first (occurring in 277 participants [4.4%] in the rosuvastatin group and in 363 participants [5.7%] in the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88; P<0.001). The results were also consistent in subgroups defined according to cardiovascular risk at baseline, lipid level, C-reactive protein level, blood pressure, and race or ethnic group. In the rosuvastatin group, there was no excess of diabetes or cancers, but there was an excess of cataract surgery (in 3.8% of the participants, vs. 3.1% in the placebo group; P=0.02) and muscle symptoms (in 5.8% of the participants, vs. 4.7% in the placebo group; P=0.005)., Conclusions: Treatment with rosuvastatin at a dose of 10 mg per day resulted in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events than placebo in an intermediate-risk, ethnically diverse population without cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and AstraZeneca; HOPE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00468923.).

Background: Antihypertensive therapy reduces the risk of cardiovascular events among high-risk persons and among those with a systolic blood pressure of 160 mm Hg or higher, but its role in persons at intermediate risk and with lower blood pressure is unclear., Methods: In one comparison from a 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned 12,705 participants at intermediate risk who did not have cardiovascular disease to receive either candesartan at a dose of 16 mg per day plus hydrochlorothiazide at a dose of 12.5 mg per day or placebo. The first coprimary outcome was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke; the second coprimary outcome additionally included resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure, and revascularization. The median follow-up was 5.6 years., Results: The mean blood pressure of the participants at baseline was 138.1/81.9 mm Hg; the decrease in blood pressure was 6.0/3.0 mm Hg greater in the active-treatment group than in the placebo group. The first coprimary outcome occurred in 260 participants (4.1%) in the active-treatment group and in 279 (4.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P=0.40); the second coprimary outcome occurred in 312 participants (4.9%) and 328 participants (5.2%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.11; P=0.51). In one of the three prespecified hypothesis-based subgroups, participants in the subgroup for the upper third of systolic blood pressure (>143.5 mm Hg) who were in the active-treatment group had significantly lower rates of the first and second coprimary outcomes than those in the placebo group; effects were neutral in the middle and lower thirds (P=0.02 and P=0.009, respectively, for trend in the two outcomes)., Conclusions: Therapy with candesartan at a dose of 16 mg per day plus hydrochlorothiazide at a dose of 12.5 mg per day was not associated with a lower rate of major cardiovascular events than placebo among persons at intermediate risk who did not have cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00468923.).

Background: Elevated blood pressure and elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. Lowering both should reduce the risk of cardiovascular events substantially., Methods: In a trial with 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned 12,705 participants at intermediate risk who did not have cardiovascular disease to rosuvastatin (10 mg per day) or placebo and to candesartan (16 mg per day) plus hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg per day) or placebo. In the analyses reported here, we compared the 3180 participants assigned to combined therapy (with rosuvastatin and the two antihypertensive agents) with the 3168 participants assigned to dual placebo. The first coprimary outcome was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, and the second coprimary outcome additionally included heart failure, cardiac arrest, or revascularization. The median follow-up was 5.6 years., Results: The decrease in the LDL cholesterol level was 33.7 mg per deciliter (0.87 mmol per liter) greater in the combined-therapy group than in the dual-placebo group, and the decrease in systolic blood pressure was 6.2 mm Hg greater with combined therapy than with dual placebo. The first coprimary outcome occurred in 113 participants (3.6%) in the combined-therapy group and in 157 (5.0%) in the dual-placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.90; P=0.005). The second coprimary outcome occurred in 136 participants (4.3%) and 187 participants (5.9%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.89; P=0.003). Muscle weakness and dizziness were more common in the combined-therapy group than in the dual-placebo group, but the overall rate of discontinuation of the trial regimen was similar in the two groups., Conclusions: The combination of rosuvastatin (10 mg per day), candesartan (16 mg per day), and hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 mg per day) was associated with a significantly lower rate of cardiovascular events than dual placebo among persons at intermediate risk who did not have cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00468923.).

Background: Cholesterol and blood pressure (BP) can be effectively and safely lowered with statin drugs and BP-lowering drugs, reducing major cardiovascular (CV) events by 20%-30% within 5 years in high-risk individuals. However, there are limited data in lower-risk populations. The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation-3 (HOPE-3) trial is evaluating whether cholesterol lowering with a statin drug, BP lowering with low doses of 2 antihypertensive agents, and their combination safely reduce major CV events in individuals at intermediate risk who have had no previous vascular events and have average cholesterol and BP levels., Methods: A total of 12,705 women 65 years or older and men 55 years or older with at least 1 CV risk factor, no known CV disease, and without any clear indication or contraindication to the study drugs were randomized to rosuvastatin 10 mg/d or placebo and to candesartan/hydrochlorothiazide 16/12.5 mg/d or placebo (2 × 2 factorial design) and will be followed for a mean of 5.8 years. The coprimary study outcomes are the composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and nonfatal stroke and the composite of CV death, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure, and arterial revascularization., Results: Participants were recruited from 21 countries in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Mean age at randomization was 66 years and 46% were women., Conclusions: The HOPE-3 trial will provide new information on cholesterol and BP lowering in intermediate-risk populations with average cholesterol and BP levels and is expected to inform approaches to primary prevention worldwide (HOPE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00468923)., (Copyright © 2016 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: Stroke is a major global health problem. It is the third leading cause of death and the leading cause of adult disability. INTERHEART, a global case-control study of acute myocardial infarction in 52 countries (29,972 participants), identified nine modifiable risk factors that accounted for >90% of population-attributable risk. However, traditional risk factors (e.g. hypertension, cholesterol) appear to exert contrasting risks for stroke compared with coronary heart disease, and the etiology of stroke is far more heterogeneous. In addition, our knowledge of risk factors for stroke in low-income countries is inadequate, where a very large burden of stroke occurs. Accordingly, a similar epidemiological study is required for stroke, to inform effective population-based strategies to reduce the risk of stroke., Methods: INTERSTROKE is an international, multicenter case-control study. Cases are patients with a first stroke within 72 h of hospital presentation in whom CT or MRI is performed. Proxy respondents are used for cases unable to communicate. Etiological and topographical stroke subtype is documented for all cases. Controls are hospital- and community-based, matched for gender, ethnicity and age (+/-5 years). A questionnaire (cases and controls) is used to acquire information on known and proposed risk factors for stroke. Cardiovascular (e.g. blood pressure) and anthropometric (e.g. waist-to-hip ratio) measurements are obtained at the time of interview. Nonfasting blood samples and random urine samples are obtained from cases and controls. Study Significance: An effective global strategy to reduce the risk of stroke mandates systematic measurement of the contribution of the major vascular risk factors within defined ethnic groups and geographical locations., (Copyright 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: The degree of adherence to guideline recommendations that patients following myocardial infarction (MI) with congestive heart failure (CHF) undergo early angiography, and angioplasty if indicated, is unknown., Methods: We prospectively evaluated the use of invasive procedures in patients with segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI and CHF, admitted in 1 month to 16 Australian hospitals., Results: Of 475 post-MI patients (248 (52.2%) with STEMI), 112 (23.6%) had CHF, (57 (23.0%) with STEMI). Patients with CHF, compared with those without CHF, were older (67.8 vs 63.2 years; P = 0.002) and were more often women (34 vs 24%, P = 0.03), but had similar rates of other risk factors. Compared with post-MI patients without CHF, patients with CHF had fewer invasive procedures: angiography 72.3% versus 85.1% (P = 0.002) and angioplasty 33.9% versus 52.9% (P < 0.001) (12 (2.5%) patients underwent coronary surgery in-hospital); and among STEMI patients (angiography 72.3% CHF vs 89.5% no CHF [P < 0.001]; angioplasty 50.9% CHF vs 69.1% no CHF [P = 0.011]); these differences remained significant after adjustment for clinical covariates. Of the 121 (25.5%) post-MI patients aged > or =75 years, compared with those <75 years, the frequencies of angiography and angioplasty procedures were 66.1% versus 87.6% (P < 0.001) and 33.9% versus 53.4% (P < 0.001), respectively; 66% of the elderly with, and without, CHF had angiography., Conclusion: The presence of CHF post-MI resulted in lower rates of use of angiography and angioplasty, which was not explained by lower procedure rates in the elderly. As these guideline-recommended procedures may improve survival in patients with CHF post-MI, future strategies should aim to enhance their use.

Objective: To evaluate the use of cardiovascular medications in patients with and without heart failure after myocardial infarction (MI)., Design and Setting: Multicentre study of drug therapy for patients with MI in 16 major metropolitan teaching hospitals in Australia over a 1-month period at each hospital in the period November 2004 - March 2005., Participants: 479 patients admitted consecutively to the individual hospitals., Main Outcome Measures: Proportion of patients with and without heart failure who were prescribed key cardiovascular medications after MI., Results: 116 of the 479 patients admitted for MI (24.2%) had heart failure at some point during their hospitalisation. Patients with heart failure were older (68 v 63 years; P < 0.05), more likely to be women (34% v 24%; P < 0.05) and a higher proportion had diabetes (26% v 21%). There was significantly reduced prescribing of beta-blockers, clopidogrel and statins for patients with heart failure compared with those without heart failure. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use was low (< 10%) in the former group., Conclusions: We found reduced prescribing of some prognostically relevant medications for patients with heart failure. For beta-blockers, this may be explained by the greater clinical instability in patients with heart failure. Given the absolute benefit of drug therapy in patients with heart failure after MI, our findings suggest suboptimal prescribing in Australian teaching hospital practice.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequently occurring cardiac arrhythmia with often serious clinical consequences. Many patients have contraindications to anticoagulation, and it is often underused in clinical practice. The addition of clopidogrel to aspirin (ASA) has been shown to reduce vascular events in a number of high-risk populations. Irbesartan is an angiotensin receptor-blocking agent that reduces blood pressure and has other vascular protective effects., Methods and Results: ACTIVE W is a noninferiority trial of clopidogrel plus ASA versus oral anticoagulation in patients with AF and at least 1 risk factor for stroke. ACTIVE A is a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of clopidogrel in patients with AF and with at least 1 risk factor for stroke who receive ASA because they have a contraindication for oral anticoagulation or because they are unwilling to take an oral anticoagulant. ACTIVE I is a partial factorial, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of irbesartan in patients participating in ACTIVE A or ACTIVE W. The primary outcomes of these studies are composites of vascular events. A total of 14000 patients will be enrolled in these trials., Conclusions: ACTIVE is the largest trial yet conducted in AF. Its results will lead to a new understanding of the role of combined antiplatelet therapy and the role of blood pressure lowering with an angiotensin II receptor blocker in patients with AF.

Background: Although more than 80% of the global burden of cardiovascular disease occurs in low-income and middle-income countries, knowledge of the importance of risk factors is largely derived from developed countries. Therefore, the effect of such factors on risk of coronary heart disease in most regions of the world is unknown., Methods: We established a standardised case-control study of acute myocardial infarction in 52 countries, representing every inhabited continent. 15152 cases and 14820 controls were enrolled. The relation of smoking, history of hypertension or diabetes, waist/hip ratio, dietary patterns, physical activity, consumption of alcohol, blood apolipoproteins (Apo), and psychosocial factors to myocardial infarction are reported here. Odds ratios and their 99% CIs for the association of risk factors to myocardial infarction and their population attributable risks (PAR) were calculated., Findings: Smoking (odds ratio 2.87 for current vs never, PAR 35.7% for current and former vs never), raised ApoB/ApoA1 ratio (3.25 for top vs lowest quintile, PAR 49.2% for top four quintiles vs lowest quintile), history of hypertension (1.91, PAR 17.9%), diabetes (2.37, PAR 9.9%), abdominal obesity (1.12 for top vs lowest tertile and 1.62 for middle vs lowest tertile, PAR 20.1% for top two tertiles vs lowest tertile), psychosocial factors (2.67, PAR 32.5%), daily consumption of fruits and vegetables (0.70, PAR 13.7% for lack of daily consumption), regular alcohol consumption (0.91, PAR 6.7%), and regular physical activity (0.86, PAR 12.2%), were all significantly related to acute myocardial infarction (p<0.0001 for all risk factors and p=0.03 for alcohol). These associations were noted in men and women, old and young, and in all regions of the world. Collectively, these nine risk factors accounted for 90% of the PAR in men and 94% in women., Interpretation: Abnormal lipids, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, abdominal obesity, psychosocial factors, consumption of fruits, vegetables, and alcohol, and regular physical activity account for most of the risk of myocardial infarction worldwide in both sexes and at all ages in all regions. This finding suggests that approaches to prevention can be based on similar principles worldwide and have the potential to prevent most premature cases of myocardial infarction.

Clinical approaches to the prevention of the potentially catastrophic consequences of coronary ischemic phenomena such as unstable angina and suspected non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) differ across the world. In addition to prevailing physician beliefs in different societies, the level of access to catheterization laboratories largely determines whether an interventionist or conservative strategy is adopted. The Organization to Assess Strategies for Ischemic Syndromes (OASIS)--a prospective registry of approximately 8,000 patients with acute myocardial ischemia with no ST elevation, treated in 95 hospitals across 6 countries--furnished a unique window into regional differences in clinical management and the frequency and timing of invasive procedures (i.e., angiography, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty [PTCA], and coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] surgery), as well as the outcomes of these trends. At 6 months after symptom onset, patients in the United States and Brazil, where the catheterization laboratory facilities are more accessible, underwent significantly (p <0.001) more angiography (69.4%), PTCA (23.6%), and CABG (25.2%) than in Canada and Australia, where the corresponding rates were 48.4%, 17.0%, and 16.8% (p <0.001), respectively; and in Hungary and Poland, where the respective rates were 23.5%, 5.8%, and 10.9% (p <0.001). This relatively aggressive approach led at 6 months to a more substantial decrease in refractory angina in the United States and Brazil than in Canada and Australia (20.4% vs 13.9%; p <0.001), but no improvement in rates of cardiovascular mortality and MI (10.5% versus 10.5%; p = 0.36). There was a significant (p < or = 0.012) increase in stroke, (1.9% vs 1.3%; p = 0.010) and major bleeding (1.9% vs 1.1%; p = 0.009) events. Furthermore, an inverse correlation emerged between baseline cardiovascular risk status and frequency of angiography and PTCA interventions preferentially for low-risk compared with high-risk patients. In concert with findings from other recent randomized trials, the OASIS Registry data suggest that although there are fewer hospital readmissions for unstable angina, there is a trend toward increased rates of death, MI, and stroke. These data urge a cautious approach to the use of invasive procedures in patients with unstable angina unless future trials demonstrate a clear benefit with an aggressive approach.

Background: There are wide variations between countries in the use of invasive cardiac catheterisation and revascularisation procedures for patients with acute ischaemic syndromes. We studied the relation between rates of such procedures and rates of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, refractory angina, and major bleeding in a prospective, registry-based study in six countries with widely varying intervention rates., Methods: 7987 consecutive patients presenting with unstable angina or suspected myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation were recruited prospectively from 95 hospitals in six countries and followed up for 6 months., Findings: The rates of all procedures were highest in patients in Brazil and the USA, intermediate in Canada and Australia, and lowest in Hungary and Poland. There were no significant differences in rates of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction among these countries (4.7% overall [range 3.7-5.6] at 7 days; 11% overall [9-12] at 6 months). For the countries with the highest rates of invasive procedures (59%) versus the rest (21%) there was no difference in rate of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction (adjusted odds ratio 0.88 at 7 days and 1.0 at 6 months). Rates of stroke were higher in Brazil and the USA than in the countries with lower intervention rates (adjusted odds ratio at 7 days 3.0, p=0.012; at 6 months 1.8, p=0.004) but rates of refractory angina at 7 days (0.7, p<0.001) and readmission for unstable angina at 6 months were lower (0.70, 0.63; both p<0.001). Comparison of results for hospitals without cardiac-catheterisation facilities and for those with such facilities gave adjusted odds ratios for cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 6 months of 0.83 (10.6% vs 12.5%, p=0.05) and for refractory angina of 1.25 (19.3% vs 16.1%, p=0.09)., Interpretation: Higher rates of invasive and revascularisation procedures were associated with lower rates of refractory angina or readmission for unstable angina, no apparent reduction in cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction, but with higher rates of stroke. Randomised trials should assess the relative impact of conservative and more aggressive approaches to invasive cardiac procedures and revascularisations in patients with unstable angina.

Objective: To establish safety and immunogenicity of a reformulated whole cell pertussis based diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine (DTPw) at the 18-month booster stage following a 2, 4, and 6-month primary immunization course., Method: Open trial in suburban Melbourne in 100 healthy children initially recruited through maternal and child health centres. Thirty-five subjects were bled prior to vaccination, and 4-6 weeks after vaccination. A 7-day diary card was used to record subject temperatures and other systemic and local clinical signs., Results: The increase in antibody geometric mean titres (GMT) after boosting was 19.5-fold (95%ci 14.2, 27.2) for tetanus and 26.5-fold (95%ci 16.6, 42.4) for diphtheria. Pertussis antibody GMTs also all showed substantial increases following the booster, with mean fold changes in titre ranging from 7.3 (Agg2) to 31.3 (Fha). Seventeen percent of subjects (95%ci 10%, 26%) experienced axillary temperatures > or = 38 degrees C during the 24-h period following vaccination. Low rates of significant (> 25 mm) injection site redness (13%) and swelling (8%) were recorded at 24 h postvaccination., Conclusion: This vaccine was well tolerated by children at 18 months of age, and showed substantial boosting of antibody to all components.

Objective: To establish safety, immunogenicity, and batch stability of a reformulated whole cell pertussis based diphtheriatetanus-whole cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine (nDTPw) compared to the currently marketed Australian DTPw vaccine (Triple Antigen) in a three dose 2, 4 and 6 month primary immunization course. Reformulation was necessary to make the DTPw vaccine suitable for combination with hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae b vaccines., Methods: Double blind randomized controlled trial in suburban Melbourne in 812 healthy infants recruited through maternal and child health centres, of whom 208 received Triple Antigen and 604 received nDTPw., Results: Results for both reactogenicity and immunogenicity were similar and were not significantly different for the three batches of nDTPw. No new, serious, or unexpected adverse effect was recorded. Nearly twice as many nDTPw infants experienced no general reaction to the third dose (18%) compared to Triple Antigen (11%, P = 0.06). An elevated temperature (> or = 38 degrees C axillary) occurred in about three out of 10 babies overall, with rates being slightly higher for both vaccines after the second vaccination. Local reaction rates were significantly less common for nDTPw on days 2 and 3 following each of the three vaccinations. After dose three, 30% of nDTPw subjects experienced no local reaction compared to 20% of Triple Antigen subjects (P = 0.015, 95% Cl on difference 2%, 19%). Swelling after doses one and three occurred in 30% and 24% of Triple Antigen subjects, compared to 23% (P = 0.07, 95% Cl diff 0%, 13%) and 14% (P = 0.017, 95% Cl diff 2%, 17%) of nDTPw subjects. Tenderness after doses two and three occurred in 80%, and 78% of Triple Antigen subjects, compared to 71% (P = 0.04, 95% Cl diff 1%, 17%) and 68% (P = 0.025, 95% Cl diff 2%, 19%) of nDTPw subjects. There was a significantly higher post immunization diphtheria antitoxin GMT (2.73 IU/mL) for Triple Antigen compared to nDTPw (1.89 IU/mL; P = 0.02), although no subject in either vaccine group had a tetanus or diphtheria antibody titre less than six times the protective level of 0.01 IU/mL following immunization. The nDTPw post immunization GMTs were significantly higher for Agg2, Fha, and pertactin compared to Triple Antigen geometric mean titres (GMTs)., Conclusion: nDTPw is a safe and immunogenic vaccine when compared to Triple Antigen. The reformulated vaccine is an acceptable replacement for the currently marketed formulation, and for evaluation as a component of future combination vaccines.