Search

Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) with a strong genetic component [1,2]. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have successfully identified over 240 genetic loci that are statistically associated with risk of developing IBD, and these associations provide valuable insights into disease pathobiology. Building on GWAS findings, conventional polygenic risk scores (cPRS) aim to quantify the aggregated disease risk based on DNA variation, and these scores can identify individuals at high risk. While stratifying individuals based on cPRS has the potential to inform clinical care, the development of novel therapeutics requires deep insight into how aggregated genetic risk leads to disruption of specific biological pathways. Here, we developed a pathway-specific PRS (pPRS) methodology to assess IBD common variant genetic risk burden across 31 manually curated pathways. We first prioritized 206 genes based on comprehensive fine-mapping and eQTL colocalization analyses of genome-wide significant IBD GWAS loci and 58 highly penetrant genes based on their involvement in early onset IBD or autoimmunity-related colitis. These 264 genes were assigned to at least one of the 31 pathways based on Gene Ontology annotations and manual curation. Finally, we integrated these inputs into a novel pPRS model and performed an extensive investigation of IBD disease risk, severity, complications, and anti-TNF treatment response by applying our pPRS approach to three complementary datasets encompassing IBD cases and controls. Our analysis identified multiple promising pathways that can inform drug target discovery and provides a patient stratification method that offers insights into the biology of treatment response.

Background Lesion length has been an important factor in predicting a worse outcome after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI); however, the safety and efficacy of second-generation drug eluting stents in very long coronary lesions has not been validated in large scale randomized controlled trials. Methods We performed a patient level pooled analysis of 13,266 patients undergoing planned overlapping stent treatment of very long coronary lesions with the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system from 6 trials evaluating the XIENCE V stent (Spirit II, III, IV, V, Spirit Small Vessel and XIENCE V USA). Patients were divided into two cohorts, a very long lesion (VLL) group (lesions ≥35 mm) and a control group (lesions >24 to

Background Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) are intestinal chronic inflammatory conditions characterized by altered epithelial barrier function and tissue damage. Despite significant efforts to understanding the biological mechanisms responsible for gut inflammation, the pathophysiology of CD and UC remains poorly understood. Methods To help elucidate the potential mechanisms responsible for gut inflammation in CD and UC, transcriptomic and proteomic profiling of human colon biopsy specimens was performed. Dysregulated genes and proteins in disease tissues compared with normal tissues were characterized from the expression profiles and further subjected to pathway analysis to identify altered biological processes and signaling pathways. Results Sample analysis showed 4250 genes with matched protein expression and a wide range of correlation of RNA-protein abundance across samples. Pathway analysis of dysregulated genes and proteins in CD and UC showed alterations in immune and inflammatory responses, complement cascade, and the suppression of metabolic processes and PPAR signaling. In CD, increased T-helper cell differentiation and elevated toll-like receptor and JAK/STAT signaling were observed. Interestingly, increased MAPK signaling was only observed in UC. Weighted gene co-expression network analysis suggested a possible role of epigenetic regulation in UC. Of note, a large discrepancy between regulation of RNA and protein levels in inflamed colon samples was detected for previously identified biomarkers including MMP14 and LAMP1. Conclusions With the analysis of dysregulated genes and pathways, the present study unravels key mechanisms contributing to CD and UC pathogenesis and emphasizes that integrative analysis of multi-omics data sets can provide more insight into understanding complex disease mechanisms.

Objectives This study sought to investigate whether the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) is superior to the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) with respect to long-term individual clinical outcomes. Background Individual studies have indicated a clinical advantage of coronary EES compared with PES with respect to restenosis and the composite endpoint of major adverse cardiac events. However, these trials were not powered for superiority in low-frequency event rates and have reported limited data beyond 1-year follow-up. Methods We conducted a meta-analysis of the final 3-year results from the international SPIRIT (Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) II, III, and IV clinical trials. Individual patient data from 4,989 patients who were prospectively randomized to treatment with EES (n = 3,350) or PES (n = 1,639) were pooled for analysis. Results At 3-year follow-up, EES was superior to PES in reducing the following event rates: target lesion failure (8.9% vs. 12.5%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 0.85; p = 0.0002), all-cause mortality (3.2% vs 5.1%, HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.86; p = 0.003), myocardial infarction (3.2% vs. 5.1%, HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.85; p = 0.002), cardiac death or myocardial infarction (4.4% vs. 6.3%, HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.90; p = 0.005), ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (6.0% vs. 8.2%, HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.90; p = 0.004), stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 1.7%, HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.78; p = 0.003), and major adverse cardiac events (9.4% vs. 13.0%, HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.85; p = 0.0002). No interaction was present between stent type and the 3-year relative rates of target lesion failure across a broad range of subgroups, with the exception of diabetes and vessel (left anterior descending vs. other). Conclusions In this large dataset with 3-year follow-up, coronary implantation of EES compared with PES resulted in reduced rates of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, and target lesion failure. Further research is warranted to characterize possible interactions between stent type, diabetes, and vessel.

Background— A consensus definition for periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) in coronary stent trials has not been established. Differences between a historic definition, based on modified World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, and a proposed universal definition have not been compared in a prospective clinical trial. Methods and Results— We randomly assigned 3687 patients with stable coronary artery disease to undergo stenting with either everolimus-eluting stents (2458 patients) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (1229 patients). Serial creatine kinase (CK) and CKMB or troponin measurements were obtained before and after stenting. MI was classified by protocol according to the WHO definition (total CK >2× normal with elevated CKMB) and post hoc according to the Universal/Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definition (CKMB or troponin >3× normal). Protocol MI was determined in 58 (1.6%) and universal/ARC MI in 287 (7.8%) patients within 48 hours post index procedure. There were substantial differences in frequency of universal/ARC MI if only CKMB (5.4%) or troponin (18.7%) data were included for evaluation. Total stent length was a strong predictor of both protocol and universal/ARC MI. Mortality at 2 years was low (2.3%) and was not different for either MI definition. The mortality rates did not increase with elevations of CKMB or troponin to >10× normal. Conclusions— There was a marked difference in periprocedural MI rates according to protocol or universal/ARC MI definitions. No association was present between periprocedural MI and mortality up to 2 years by either definition. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00307047.

To evaluate whether the improved outcomes with newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES) utilising thin-strut stents are consistent among different patient and angiographic subgroups.Clinical outcomes over three years were collected in the SPIRIT III trial comparing the XIENCE V® everolimus-eluting stents (EES) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) to the TAXUS® paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA). Potential predictors of adverse clinical outcomes were assessed using demographic, clinical, and procedural variables by logistic and Cox regression analyses. For three-year target vessel failure, the independent predictors identified by Cox regression were number of vessels treated (HR=2.19 [1.50, 3.19], p0.0001), HbA1c (%) (HR=1.17 [1.05, 1.29], p=0.004), total cholesterol (200 mg/dl) (HR=1.63 [1.13, 2.36], p=0.009), and female gender (HR=1.42 [1.01, 2.01], p=0.05). Logistic regression analysis identified the same predictors except for the female gender. The clinical results with EES compared to PES were consistent among the multiple subgroups examined with the possible exception of patients with diabetes.Clinical factors and stent type were the most important multivariable predictors of adverse clinical outcomes in this contemporary trial of first versus second generation DES. The benefit of the EES compared to the PES was consistent across a wide range of patient and angiographic subgroups with the possible exception of patients with diabetes.

The XIENCE V® Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System (EECSS) has been evaluated in multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with several different comparators (SPIRIT FIRST, SPIRIT II, SPIRIT III, SPIRIT IV, COMPARE, ISAR-TEST 4, SORT-OUT IV, and RESOLUTE All-Comers RCT). The available results consistently demonstrated numerically low stent thrombosis (ST) rates in the XIENCE V arm treated patients. The use of XIENCE V in complex patients with diabetes, overlapping stents, multistenting, and other known risk factors has not significantly increased the occurrence of ST, as evident in the 2-year rates of both per protocol and Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-defined ST rates in the SPIRIT IV RCT, as well as the COMPARE real-world RCT. Furthermore, available long-term follow-up in the SPIRIT FIRST, SPIRIT II, and SPIRIT III RCTs showed continued numerically low very late ST rates as well. High compliance rates of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were observed in the SPIRIT trials, which may have contributed to consistently numerically low ST rates in the XIENCE V arm treated patients. Several potential risk factors for developing ST may well have been minimized through the selective XIENCE V thin strut design, biocompatible polymers, and antiproliferative drug usage. (J Interven Cardiol 2011;24:326-341).

TGFβ is a potent immunosuppressive cytokine, acting on multiple cell types of both the innate and adaptive immune systems. Emerging preclinical and clinical data implicate TGFβ in tumor immune evasion, poor prognosis and resistance to PD1/PDL1 directed checkpoint therapy. Thus, neutralization of TGFβ is suggested to relieve immunosuppression via mechanisms that are distinct yet complementary to checkpoint inhibitors such as PD1. SAR439459 is a potent human pan-neutralizing anti-TGFβ antibody that has entered first-in-human studies in advanced solid tumors (NCT03192345*). I. Biomarkers for indication selection: A gene expression signature of TGFβ pathway activation was derived from analysis of TGFβ-stimulated versus naïve cancer cell lines. Queries of the signature against The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) revealed that primary head and neck, ovarian, and colorectal cancers are enriched for activation. II. Biomarkers for patient selection: An analysis of the patients enriched for activation revealed that mesenchymal tumors predominate. Machine learning methods were applied to panels of gene expression data for colorectal (CRC), ovarian serous and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma to derive a two-gene biomarker for selection of patients with mesenchymal tumors. Implementation in a logistic regression model achieves good for prediction in CRC, and similar performance in other indications. Patient cohorts are enriched over three-fold for the mesenchymal subtype and false-negative rates are acceptable. Implementation of the two-gene biomarker on a low complexity platform and its validation on an independent panel of samples is described. III. Biomarkers for assessment of the tumor microenvironment: In partnership with NeoGenomics, the immune contexture of patient tumors was evaluated using MultiOmyx, a multiplex IHC assay, on CRC and melanoma. Multiplexing was conducted with 12 biomarkers (jointly describing 22 immune cell types) on single FFPE section from each tumor sample. Pilot studies included a range of inflammation to evaluate how well the analytics assess each tumor type and correlate to possible treatment effects. Statistical methods were developed to assess differences at the cell population level, including replicate concordance, volcano plots for analyses of variance, and correlation matrices. The MultiOmyx assay demonstrated excellent technical reproducibility and precision, a favorable dynamic range, inflammation status differences in select immune cells and regions of interest, and included both positive and negative correlations between cell populations. * https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03192345 Citation Format: Joachim Theilhaber, Jean Cavallo, Stephen L. Madden, Charlene Manning, Sherry Cao, Parminder Mankoo, Robert Pomponio, Hongjing Qu, Natalia Malkova, Gary Shapiro, Christopher Winter, Dmitri Wiederschain, Michele Sanicola-Nadel, Fangxian Sun, Tun Tun Lin, Richard C. Gregory, Jack Pollard. Translational biomarkers for SAR439459, an anti-TGFβ antibody for cancer immunotherapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 5550.

Previous studies have established the superiority of coronary everolimus-eluting stents over paclitaxel-eluting stents with respect to angiographic findings. However, these trials were not powered for superiority in clinical end points.We randomly assigned 3687 patients at 66 U.S. sites to receive everolimus-eluting stents or paclitaxel-eluting stents without routine follow-up angiography. The primary end point was the 1-year composite rate of target-lesion failure (defined as cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization).Everolimus-eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel-eluting stents with respect to the primary end point of target-lesion failure (4.2% vs. 6.8%; relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.82; P=0.001). Everolimus-eluting stents were also superior with respect to the major secondary end point of the 1-year rate of ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (P=0.001) and were noninferior with respect to the major secondary end point of the 1-year composite rate of cardiac death or target-vessel myocardial infarction (P0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.09 for superiority). The 1-year rates of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis were also lower with everolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (1.9% vs. 3.1%, P=0.02 for myocardial infarction; 0.17% vs. 0.85%, P=0.004 for stent thrombosis). Target-lesion failure was consistently reduced with everolimus-eluting stents as compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents in 12 prespecified subgroups, except in the subgroup of patients with diabetes (6.4% vs. 6.9%, P=0.80).Everolimus-eluting stents, as compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents, resulted in reduced rates of target-lesion failure at 1 year, results that were consistent in all patients except those with diabetes, in whom the results were nonsignificantly different. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00307047.)

Objective: This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of the XIENCE V® 4.0 mm stent for the treatment of de novo native coronary artery lesions. Background: In the SPIRIT III trial, the XIENCE V® everolimus-eluting stent (EES), compared with the TAXUS EXPRESS2 paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in 2.5–3.75 mm diameter coronary arteries, resulted in reduced angiographic late loss (LL), noninferior rates of target vessel failure (TVF), and fewer major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Methods: The SPIRIT III 4.0 mm registry was a concurrent arm of the SPIRIT III trial consisting of 69 nonrandomized patients with lesions ≤28 mm in length and reference vessel diameter 3.75–4.25 mm treated with a 4.0 mm EES. The primary endpoint was 8-month in-segment LL compared with the randomized PES arm. Results: In-segment LL was 0.17 ± 0.38 mm in the 4.0 mm EES registry compared with 0.28 ± 0.48 mm in the PES arm (P < 0.0001 for noninferiority). The 1-year rates of ischemia-driven TVF (cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], or target vessel revascularization) and MACE (cardiac death, MI, or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) were numerically, but not statistically, lower in the 4.0 mm EES patients compared with the randomized PES patients (5.9 vs. 11.3%, P = 0.27 and 5.9 vs. 10.3%, P = 0.36, respectively). There was no difference in 8-month LL or 1-year TVF or MACE between the 4.0 mm EES and randomized EES patients. Conclusions: In large coronary arteries, the 4.0 mm EES results in low rates of LL at 8 months and adverse clinical events at 1 year. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Aims To investigate the clinical impact of the following observations in the randomized SPIRIT II and III trials: an incremental increase in in-stent neointima between 1 and 2 years with the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) but not with the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in SPIRIT II; a tendency of lower stent thrombosis in EES than in PES among those who first discontinued a thienopyridine after 6 months. Methods and results A pooled analysis was performed using the 2-year clinical data from the SPIRIT II and III trials randomizing a total of 1302 patients with de novo coronary artery lesions either to EES or to PES. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were comparable between two trials. Major adverse cardiac event (MACE) was defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). At 2 years, MACE rates were 7.1% in EES vs. 12.3% in PES, respectively (log-rank P = 0.0014), without late increase in TLR. Among those who first discontinued a thienopyridine after 6 months, Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definite or probable stent thrombosis was 1.1% in EES vs. 1.3% in PES ( P = 1.00). Conclusion The benefits of EES in reducing TLR were robust between 6 months and 2 years. No significant difference in the thrombosis rate among those who first stopped a thienopyridine after 6 months was observed.

Objectives: We evaluated the role of gender on clinical and angiographic results of the everolimus-eluting stent in the SPIRIT III trial. Background: The SPIRIT III trial demonstrated superior efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent compared with the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent. Whether these results are applicable to women is unknown. Methods: A total of 1,002 patients with coronary artery lesions of 28 mm or less long in 2.5–3.75 mm diameter vessels were prospectively randomized to receive percutaneous coronary intervention with either XIENCE V stent or TAXUS stent placement. Post hoc gender subset analysis was performed. Results: A total of 669 patients (200 women) received the XIENCE V stent, and 332 patients (114 women) were assigned to the TAXUS stent. Women were older and had more hypertension and diabetes than men. At 1 year, rates of MACE (11.1% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.004), TVF (13.7% vs. 7.5%, P = 0.003), TVR (10.8% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.0007), and TLR (7.2% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.002) were higher in women compared with men. The difference in 1 year MACE and TVF rates between men and women remained after adjusting for baseline covariates. Although the angiographic characteristics at baseline were similar among the female cohort, women assigned to XIENCE V had lower in-stent late loss (0.19 vs. 0.42 mm, P = 0.01) compared with women treated with the TAXUS stent. Although 30-day clinical outcomes were similar for women treated with XIENCE V and TAXUS stents, at 1 year, women with XIENCE V stents had significantly lower MACE (8.2% vs. 16.1 %, P = 0.04) and TVR (3.1% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.03) compared with those treated with TAXUS stents. Stent thrombosis rates were similar between women receiving either XIENCE V or TAXUS stents. Conclusions: Women in the SPIRIT III trial had inherently higher MACE and TVF rates than men. However, the angiographic and clinical benefits of using XIENCE V stents are generalizable to women. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Lesion length has been an important factor in predicting a worse outcome after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI); however, the safety and efficacy of second-generation drug eluting stents in very long coronary lesions has not been validated in large scale randomized controlled trials.We performed a patient level pooled analysis of 13,266 patients undergoing planned overlapping stent treatment of very long coronary lesions with the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system from 6 trials evaluating the XIENCE V stent (Spirit II, III, IV, V, Spirit Small Vessel and XIENCE V USA). Patients were divided into two cohorts, a very long lesion (VLL) group (lesions ≥35 mm) and a control group (lesions24 to35 mm). The primary outcome measures were Target Lesion Failure (TLF), Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE), and Academic Research Consortium (ARC) defined definite and probable stent thrombosis at 1 year.A total of 13,266 patients were included in the pooled analysis of which 2.4% (323 patients with 328 total lesions) had a mean lesion length of 47.1 ± 13.7 mm in the VLL group which were compared to controls comprised of 3.6% of the cohort (482 patients with 500 total lesions) with mean lesion length of 28.1 ± 2.4 mm.There was no significant difference in the rates of TLF between the VVL and control groups (8.9 vs. 10%, P = 0.63), MACE (9.2 vs. 10%, P = 0.74) or stent thrombosis (1.6 vs. 1.5%, P = 0.92) at 1 year.In the treatment of very long coronary lesions, the XIENCE V stent appears as safe and effective as percutaneous coronary interventions for long lesions. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Aims Theoretically, bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVSs) may provide superior long-term results compared with permanent metallic drug-eluting stents (DESs). However, whether BVSs are as safe and effective as metallic DESs prior to complete bioresorption is unknown. Methods and results ABSORB Japan was a single-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, randomized trial designed to support regulatory approval of the Absorb BVS in Japan. Eligible patients with one or two de novo lesions in different epicardial vessels were randomized at 38 Japanese sites in a 2:1 ratio to Absorb BVS vs. cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EESs). The primary endpoint was target lesion failure [TLF: a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction attributable to target vessel, or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR)] at 12 months, powered for non-inferiority. The major secondary endpoint was angiographic in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 13 months. A total of 400 patients were randomized to BVSs (266 patients and 275 lesions) or CoCr-EESs (134 patients and 137 lesions). TLF through 12 months was 4.2% with BVSs and 3.8% with CoCr-EESs [difference (upper one-sided 95% confidence limit) = 0.39% (3.95%); P non-inferiority < 0.0001]. Definite/probable stent/scaffold thrombosis at 12 months occurred in 1.5% of the patients with both devices ( P = 1.0), and ID-TLR for restenosis was infrequent (1.1% with BVSs and 1.5% with CoCr-EESs, P = 1.0). With 96.0% angiographic follow-up, in-segment LLL at 13 months was 0.13 ± 0.30 mm with BVSs and 0.12 ± 0.32 mm with CoCr-EESs [difference (upper one-sided 95% confidence limit) = 0.01 (0.07); P non-inferiority < 0.0001). Conclusion In the ABSORB Japan randomized trial, 12-month clinical and 13-month angiographic outcomes of BVSs were comparable to CoCr-EESs. Clinical registration ClinicalTrials.gov, number [NCT01844284][1]. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT01844284&atom=%2Fehj%2Fearly%2F2015%2F08%2F28%2Feurheartj.ehv435.atom

Next-generation sequencing has been evaluated at Genzyme as a means of identifying bioreactor contaminants due to its capability for detection of known and novel microbial species. In this approach, data obtained from next-generation sequencing is used to interrogate databases containing genomic sequences and identities of potential adventitious agents. We describe here the use of this approach to help identify the causative agent of a bioreactor contamination. We also present the results of spiking experiments to establish the limits of detection for DNA viruses, RNA viruses, and bacteria, in a background of Chinese hamster ovary cells, a cell line used for production of many human therapeutics. Using Illumina sequencing-based detection, all of the viruses included in this study were detected at less than 1 copy per cell, and bacteria were detected at 0.001 copy per cell. Thus, next-generation sequencing–based detection of adventitious agents is a valuable approach that can fill a critical unmet need in the detection of known and novel microorganisms in biopharmaceutical manufacturing. LAY ABSTRACT: Because biological products are manufactured in cells, the living environment must be kept sterile. Any introduction of microorganisms into the culture vessel may affect the growth and other biological properties of the cells or contaminate the product. It is therefore important to monitor the culture for such contaminants, but many methods can only detect a specific microorganism. In this study, we show that next-generation sequencing–based detection is a sensitive and complementary approach that can potentially detect a wide range of organisms.

XIENCE V USA is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, FDA condition- of-approval study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the XIENCE V® Everolimus Eluting Stent (XIENCE V, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) in a real-world, all-comer population. Clinical outcomes at 1 year in AMI patients

This study sought to investigate whether the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) is superior to the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) with respect to long-term individual clinical outcomes.Individual studies have indicated a clinical advantage of coronary EES compared with PES with respect to restenosis and the composite endpoint of major adverse cardiac events. However, these trials were not powered for superiority in low-frequency event rates and have reported limited data beyond 1-year follow-up.We conducted a meta-analysis of the final 3-year results from the international SPIRIT (Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) II, III, and IV clinical trials. Individual patient data from 4,989 patients who were prospectively randomized to treatment with EES (n = 3,350) or PES (n = 1,639) were pooled for analysis.At 3-year follow-up, EES was superior to PES in reducing the following event rates: target lesion failure (8.9% vs. 12.5%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 0.85; p = 0.0002), all-cause mortality (3.2% vs 5.1%, HR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.86; p = 0.003), myocardial infarction (3.2% vs. 5.1%, HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.85; p = 0.002), cardiac death or myocardial infarction (4.4% vs. 6.3%, HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.90; p = 0.005), ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (6.0% vs. 8.2%, HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.90; p = 0.004), stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 1.7%, HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.78; p = 0.003), and major adverse cardiac events (9.4% vs. 13.0%, HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.85; p = 0.0002). No interaction was present between stent type and the 3-year relative rates of target lesion failure across a broad range of subgroups, with the exception of diabetes and vessel (left anterior descending vs. other).In this large dataset with 3-year follow-up, coronary implantation of EES compared with PES resulted in reduced rates of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, and target lesion failure. Further research is warranted to characterize possible interactions between stent type, diabetes, and vessel.

AIMS The impact of age on outcomes following everolimus-eluting stent (EES) or paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation was evaluated in a patient-level pooled analysis of the SPIRIT III (n=1,002) and SPIRIT IV (n=3,687) trials. METHODS AND RESULTS Clinical outcomes with EES compared to PES in elderly (≥ 65 years, n=2,071) and younger (

Aims: Age is an important determinant of outcomes in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This report from the randomised multicentre SPIRIT III trial compares the outcomes in elderly and younger patients treated with everolimus-eluting stent (EES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES). Methods and results: A total of 1,002 patients with stable or unstable angina or inducible ischaemia undergoing PCI were randomised in a 2:1 ratio to receive EES or PES. Outcomes were examined across the randomised groups as a function of age and stent type. Patients >65 years of age (elderly) treated with EES vs. PES had lower in-segment late lumen loss (0.11±0.32 mm vs. 0.38±0.55 mm, respectively, p=0.0002) and lower rates of binary in-segment restenosis (3.4% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.004) at eight months, along with a 48% lower incidence of 3-year target vessel failure (TVF=cardiac death, myocardial infarction and ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation [TVR]; 10.8% vs. 20.8%, p=0.009), mainly due to a lower incidence of TVR (5.4% vs. 9.2%, p=0.20). Among EES patients, elderly compared to younger patients had comparable rates of binary in-segment restenosis (3.4% vs. 5.6%, p=0.44) at eight months but paradoxically lower rates of TVF (10.8% vs. 17.1%, p=0.03) at three years. Among PES patients, elderly compared to younger patients had a higher rate of binary in-segment restenosis (15.5% vs. 3.4%, p=0.01) at eight months and no difference in the rate of 3-year TVF (20.8% vs. 19.4%, p=0.77) .There was a significant interaction between stent assignment, age >65 years and 8-month angiographic in-segment late loss (p=0.001). Conclusions: Implantation of both EES and PES appeared to be safe in elderly patients, however EES compared to PES was more effective due to enhanced 3-year MACE- and TVF-free outcomes. Further research should clarify age-specific mechanisms of neointimal response after treatment with drug-eluting stents.

The XIENCE V® Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System (EECSS) has been evaluated in multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with several different comparators (SPIRIT FIRST, SPIRIT II, SPIRIT III, SPIRIT IV, COMPARE, ISAR-TEST 4, SORT-OUT IV, and RESOLUTE All-Comers RCT). The available results consistently demonstrated numerically low stent thrombosis (ST) rates in the XIENCE V arm treated patients. The use of XIENCE V in complex patients with diabetes, overlapping stents, multistenting, and other known risk factors has not significantly increased the occurrence of ST, as evident in the 2-year rates of both per protocol and Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-defined ST rates in the SPIRIT IV RCT, as well as the COMPARE real-world RCT. Furthermore, available long-term follow-up in the SPIRIT FIRST, SPIRIT II, and SPIRIT III RCTs showed continued numerically low very late ST rates as well. High compliance rates of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were observed in the SPIRIT trials, which may have contributed to consistently numerically low ST rates in the XIENCE V arm treated patients. Several potential risk factors for developing ST may well have been minimized through the selective XIENCE V thin strut design, biocompatible polymers, and antiproliferative drug usage. (J Interven Cardiol 2011;24:326-341).

To evaluate whether an everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with thinner stent struts and polymer results in less periprocedural myonecrosis and adverse outcomes.Higher periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) rates have been reported with the TAXUS® EXPRESS(2) paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) compared to the bare metal EXPRESS(2)® stent due to more frequent side branch compromise, presumably attributable to the thickness of the stent/polymer on the PES.In the SPIRIT III trial, we identified 113 patients in the XIENCE V® EES group and 63 patients in the TAXUS EXPRESS(2) PES group who met the criteria of having a lesion with a jailed side branch (2 mm diameter, and50% stenosis). Two-year clinical outcomes were evaluated.A periprocedural increase in Creatine Kinase-MB1× upper normal level occurred in 9.0% of EES compared to 29.7% of PES patients with jailed side branches, P = 0.01. Through 2 years, major adverse cardiac events (MACE; cardiac death, MI, or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) occurred in 6.8% of EES and 19.0% of PES jailed side branch patients (P = 0.03), with numerically lower rates of MI (2.9% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.07) and TLR (3.9% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.17) in the EES group, with comparable rates of cardiac death (1.9% vs. 1.7%, P = 1.00).In this post-hoc analysis of the SPIRIT III RCT, patients undergoing stenting of target lesions with jailed side branches with the thin strut and polymer XIENCE V EES compared to the thicker strut TAXUS PES had lower rates of MACE through 2 years due to fewer MIs and TLRs. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.