Search

Mari Nordbø Gynnild,1,2 Steven HJ Hageman,3 Jannick AN Dorresteijn,3 Olav Spigset,4,5 Stian Lydersen,6 Torgeir Wethal,1,2 Ingvild Saltvedt,1,7 Frank LJ Visseren,3 Hanne Ellekjær1,2 1Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, NTNU – Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway; 2Department of Stroke, Clinic of Medicine, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway; 3Department of Vascular Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands; 4Department of Clinical Pharmacology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway; 5Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, NTNU – Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway; 6Department of Mental Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU – Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway; 7Department of Geriatrics, Clinic of Medicine, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, NorwayCorrespondence: Mari Nordbø GynnildDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU – Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, NorwayEmail mari.nordbo.gynnild@ntnu.noPurpose: Suboptimal secondary prevention in patients with stroke causes a remaining cardiovascular risk desirable to reduce. We have validated a prognostic model for secondary preventive settings and estimated future cardiovascular risk and theoretical benefit of reaching guideline recommended risk factor targets.Patients and Methods: The SMART-REACH (Secondary Manifestations of Arterial Disease-Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) model for 10-year and lifetime risk of cardiovascular events was applied to 465 patients in the Norwegian Cognitive Impairment After Stroke (Nor-COAST) study, a multicenter observational study with two-year follow-up by linkage to national registries for cardiovascular disease and mortality. The residual risk when reaching recommended targets for blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, smoking cessation and antithrombotics was estimated.Results: In total, 11.2% had a new event. Calibration plots showed adequate agreement between estimated and observed 2-year prognosis (C-statistics 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.55– 0.71). Median estimated 10-year risk of recurrent cardiovascular events was 42% (Interquartile range (IQR) 32– 54%) and could be reduced to 32% by optimal guideline-based therapy. The corresponding numbers for lifetime risk were 70% (IQR 63– 76%) and 61%. We estimated an overall median gain of 1.4 (IQR 0.2– 3.4) event-free life years if guideline targets were met.Conclusion: Secondary prevention was suboptimal and residual risk remains elevated even after optimization according to current guidelines. Considerable interindividual variation in risk exists, with a corresponding variation in benefit from intensification of treatment. The SMART-REACH model can be used to identify patients with the largest benefit from more intensive treatment and follow-up.Keywords: secondary prevention, ischemic stroke, risk factors, risk assessment, risks and benefits, cardiovascular diseases

Objectives In contrast to the general population, no decline in cardiovascular disease ( CVD) has been noted in HIV-infected patients over the last 10 years. We compared the carotid artery intima media thickness ( CIMT) of HIV-infected patients to that of age- and gender-matched reference values and determined the relationship between CVD risk factors and CIMT. Methods A total of 292 HIV-infected patients were enrolled in the study. Data collected included vascular screening data, data obtained using a questionnaire, data obtained from laboratory assessments and CIMT measurement. Using linear regression (adjusted for age/gender/known HIV), the association between HIV-specific and classical cardiovascular risk factors and CIMT was evaluated. Results The cohort comprised for 91% of male patients, aged 49.4 ± 10.5 years, with a known duration of HIV infection of 8.8 ± 6.7 years. The mean with standard deviation (mean ± SD) CIMT was 0.77 ± 0.19 mm, compared with 0.58 ± 0.05 mm in the controls. A steeper increase of CIMT per age was seen in the HIV-infected patients. A significant relationship between CIMT and hypertension, diabetes mellitus, smoking, systolic blood pressure, HbA1c (glycated hemoglobin) and ankle brachial index was found. Of the HIV-specific variables, only a relationship between CIMT and length of cART use and between CIMT and (inversely) current cART use was seen. Conclusions A greater CIMT was found in HIV-infected patients compared with controls. In contrast to HIV-specific variables, classical CVD risk factors were associated with a greater CIMT and should therefore be the focus of preventive measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The aim of the study was to compare the predictions of five popular cardiovascular disease ( CVD) risk prediction models, namely the Data Collection on Adverse Events of Anti- HIV Drugs ( D: A: D) model, the Framingham Heart Study ( FHS) coronary heart disease ( FHS-CHD) and general CVD ( FHS-CVD) models, the American Heart Association ( AHA) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score ( ASCVD) model and the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation for the Netherlands ( SCORE-NL) model. Methods A cross-sectional design was used to compare the cumulative CVD risk predictions of the models. Furthermore, the predictions of the general CVD models were compared with those of the HIV-specific D: A: D model using three categories (< 10%, 10-20% and > 20%) to categorize the risk and to determine the degree to which patients were categorized similarly or in a higher/lower category. Results A total of 997 HIV-infected patients were included in the study: 81% were male and they had a median age of 46 [interquartile range ( IQR) 40-52] years, a known duration of HIV infection of 6.8 ( IQR 3.7-10.9) years, and a median time on ART of 6.4 ( IQR 3.0-11.5) years. The D: A: D, ASCVD and SCORE-NL models gave a lower cumulative CVD risk, compared with that of the FHS-CVD and FHS-CHD models. Comparing the general CVD models with the D: A: D model, the FHS-CVD and FHS-CHD models only classified 65% and 79% of patients, respectively, in the same category as did the D: A: D model. However, for the ASCVD and SCORE-NL models, this percentage was 89% and 87%, respectively. Furthermore, FHS-CVD and FHS-CHD attributed a higher CVD risk to 33% and 16% of patients, respectively, while this percentage was < 6% for ASCVD and SCORE-NL. Conclusions When using FHS-CVD and FHS-CHD, a higher overall CVD risk was attributed to the HIV-infected patients than when using the D: A: D, ASCVD and SCORE-NL models. This could have consequences regarding overtreatment, drug-related adverse events and drug−drug interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Self-management can improve health behaviors and influence reduction of vascular risk. We developed a 1-year self-management intervention and investigated its effect on vascular risk factors and quality of life in patients with different vascular diseases. DESIGN AND METHODS: This observational cohort study involved 223 patients (self-management group, n=125; usual care group n=98) with at least two modifiable vascular risk factors. RESULTS: Patients in the self-management group achieved treatment goals for LDL-cholesterol (difference 13%; 95%CI 1-26) and HDL-cholesterol (difference 9% 95%CI 0-19) significantly more often than did patients in the usual care group. Mean systolic blood pressure decreased significantly by 5mm Hg (95%CI -9 to 0) in the self-management group and mean BMI increased significantly by 0.4 kg/m(2) (95%CI -0.8 to -0.1) in the usual care group. No significant differences were seen in waist circumference, smoking, or triglycerides. General health (RAND36) improved more in the self-management group (by 8 points 95%CI 3-12) than in the usual care group. CONCLUSION: After 1 year, the self-management intervention was more effective than usual care on several important vascular risk factors in patients with vascular diseases. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This self-management intervention used in a hospital population may be applicable in different care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Vascular risk can be reduced by adequate medical treatment of vascular risk factors and by adopting a healthy lifestyle, a behavioral change that is influenced by social support. We investigated whether social support is associated with change in vascular risk factors in patients with vascular diseases during 1 year. METHODS: 140 patients who had 2 modifiable vascular risk factors participated. Social support was measured with a questionnaire about the patient's perception of active involvement, protective buffering, and overprotection. RESULTS: Most types of social support were not associated with a change in vascular risk factors over 1 year. Having a partner was associated with a reduction in BMI of 1.4 kg/m2 (95%CI -2.2 to -0.5), less protective buffering was associated with a decrease in blood glucose of 0.47 mmol/l (95%CI 0.09-0.84), and less active involvement was associated with an increase in BMI of 0.42 kg/m2) (95%CI 0.05-0.78). CONCLUSION: Having a partner and active involvement are only associated with a decrease in BMI but not with changes in other vascular risk factors. Protective buffering is only associated with blood glucose whereas overprotection is not associated with changes in vascular risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) has been associated with increased cardiovascular risk when untreated or when normal LDL-C concentrations are not reached. Some patients with FH do not reach LDL-C goals despite intensive combination therapy. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of colesevelam added to maximally tolerated, stable-dose combination treatment with a statin + ezetimibe. METHODS: This Phase IV, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled patients aged 18 to 75 years with FH and an LDL-C concentration >2.5 mmol/L who were receiving a maximally tolerated and stable regimen of a statin + ezetimibe. Patients were randomly assigned to receive colesevelam 3.75 g/d or placebo added to the statin + ezetimibe for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was the difference in LDL-C between the colesevelam and placebo groups after 6 weeks. Secondary efficacy outcomes were between-group differences in LDL-C, total cholesterol (TC), HDL-C, triglyceride (Tg), apolipoprotein (apo) B, and apoA-I concentrations, as well as apoB/apoA-I ratio after 12 weeks. Tolerability was assessed based on the prevalences of adverse events by organ system class in each treatment group. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were randomized (45 colesevelam, 41 placebo), of whom 84 (44 colesevelam, 40 placebo) were included in the primary analysis. The mean (SD) age of the participants was 52.8 (10.8) years, and 51 (59%) were men. The difference (95% CI) in LDL-C between colesevelam and placebo after 6 weeks was -18.5% (-25.3 to -11.8). Between-group differences in LDL-C, TC, HDL-C, Tg, and apoB/apoA-I ratio after 12 weeks were -12.0% (-17.8 to -6.3), -7.3% (-12.0 to -2.6), +3.3% (-2.4 to +9.0), +2.8% (-10.4 to +15.9), and -12.2% (-20.2 to -4.2), respectively. Colesevelam was generally well tolerated, with gastrointestinal adverse events in 12 of 45 patients (27%) versus 7 of 40 (18%) in the placebo group (P = NS). CONCLUSION: In these patients with FH, colesevelam added to a combination of a statin + ezetimibe was associated with significantly improved LDL-C concentrations compared with placebo during the 12-week study period and was generally well tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE), a rare genetic disorder presenting with slowly progressing calcification of various tissues, including the arteries, is caused by mutations in the ABCC6 gene that lead to the reduction of pyrophosphate, a natural inhibitor of calcification. We showed that, compared to a placebo, the cyclical administration of etidronate, a stable pyrophosphate analog, significantly reduced arterial calcification assessed by low-dose CT scans after one year. The aim of the present prospective, single center, observational cohort study was the assessment of the efficacy and safety of cyclical etidronate in patients treated for periods longer than one year. Methods: Seventy-three patients were followed for a median of 3.6 years without etidronate and 2.8 years with etidronate, and each patient served as their own control. Results: The median absolute yearly progression of total calcification volume during the period with etidronate (388 [83-838] µL) was significantly lower than that without etidronate (761 [362-1415] µL; p < 0.001). The rates of the relative progression of arterial calcification were 11.7% (95% CI: 9.6-13.9) without etidronate compared to 5.3% (95% CI: 3.7-7.0) with etidronate, after adjustment for confounders. Conclusions: The cyclical administration of etidronate for nearly 3 years significantly reduced the progression rate of arterial calcification in patients with PXE with pre-existing calcifications without any serious adverse effects.

Background: Unhealthy dietary habits are an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and adopting a healthy diet is a central recommendation in CVD prevention. This study assessed the dietary habits of patients with established CVD, their compliance to dietary guidelines, and the relationship between guideline-compliance and recurrent cardiovascular event risk., Methods: 2656 patients with established CVD from the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART) prospective cohort study, were included between 1996 and 2022. Data on dietary intake was retrospectively collected for all participants in December 2022 using a 160-item food frequency questionnaire. Compliance with dietary guidelines was quantified using an amended version of the Dutch Healthy Diet 2015 (DHD-15) index (range: 0-135). Cox proportional hazard models were used to quantify the relationship with cardiovascular events (stroke and myocardial infarction)., Results: Among 2656 CVD patients (77% male, mean age 59 ± 9 years), median energy intake was 1922 [IQR: 1536-2351] kcal/day. The median DHD-15 index was 81.7 [IQR 71.2-92.0], with high compliance scores for recommendations on legumes and fish, and low scores for recommendations on whole grains, red meat, processed meat, and dairy. A higher DHD-15 score was associated with lower stroke risk (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.92 per 10-point increase) but not with myocardial infarction., Conclusion: Compliance with dietary guidelines was suboptimal in patients with established CVD. High compliance was associated with a clinically significant reduction in stroke risk in patients with established CVD, emphasizing the importance of dietary counseling., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Marinho is supported by the Lemann Foundation Cardiovascular Research Fellowship. Dr Everett has received grants from PCORI and Novo Nordisk; has received royalties from UpToDate; and has been a consultant for Circulation/American Heart Association, Eli Lilly and Company, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Novo Nordisk, Gilead Pharmaceuticals, Ipsen Biosciences Inc, Johnson & Johnson, Provention Bio, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Aday has received compensation for consultant services from Aeglea. Ms MacFadyen has received salary support from a research grant to BWH from Kowa Research Institute. Dr Santos has received honoraria related to consulting and/or speaker activities from Aché, Abbott, Amryt, Amgen, Biolab, EMS, Eli Lilly, Getz Pharma, Pfizer, PTC Therapeutics, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi/Regeneron; and has received research grants from Amgen, Esperion, Kowa, Novartis, and Sanofi/Regeneron. Dr Libby is an unpaid consultant to or involved in clinical trials for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baim Institute, Beren Therapeutics, Esperion Therapeutics, Genentech, Kancera, Kowa, Medimmune, Merck, Moderna, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Regeneron; and is a member of the scientific advisory board for Amgen, Caristo Diagnostics, Cartesian Therapeutics, CSL Behring, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, Elucid Bioimaging, Kancera, Kowa Pharmaceuticals, Olatec Therapeutics, Medimmune, Novartis, PlaqueTec, TenSixteen Bio, Soley Therapeutics, and XBiotech, Inc. Dr Libby’s laboratory has received research funding in the last 2 years from Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Genentech; is on the Board of Directors of XBiotech, Inc; and has a financial interest in Xbiotech (a company developing therapeutic human antibodies), in TenSixteen Bio (a company targeting somatic mosaicism and clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential to discover and develop novel therapeutics to treat age-related diseases), and in Soley Therapeutics (a biotechnology company that is combining artificial intelligence with molecular and cellular response detection for discovering and developing new drugs, currently focusing on cancer therapeutics). Dr Fruchart is a consultant to Kowa. Dr Ridker has received institutional research grant support from Kowa Research Institute, Novartis, Amarin, Pfizer, Esperion, Novo Nordisk, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; has served as a consultant to Novartis, Flame, Agepha, Ardelyx, AstraZeneca, Janssen, CiVi Biopharma, GlaxoSmithKline, SOCAR, Novo Nordisk, Health Outlook, Montai Health, Eli Lilly, New Amsterdam, Boehringer Ingelheim, RTI, Zomagen, Cytokinetics, Horizon Therapeutics, and Cardiol Therapeutics; has minority shareholder equity positions in Uppton, Bitterroot Bio, and ANGIOWave; and receives compensation for service on the Peter Munk Advisory Board (University of Toronto), the Leducq Foundation, Paris FR, and the Baim Institute. Dr Pradhan has received research grants from Kowa Research Europe and Denka, LTD; has received compensation for consultant services from Optum, Novo Nordisk, and Reliant Medical Foundation; receives compensation for lectures from Medtelligence and NACE; and is currently employed by Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scores provide point estimates of individual risk without uncertainty quantification. The objective of the current study was to demonstrate the feasibility and clinical utility of calculating uncertainty surrounding individual CVD-risk predictions using Bayesian methods., Study Design and Setting: Individuals with established atherosclerotic CVD were included from the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART). In 8,355 individuals, followed for median of 8.2 years (IQR 4.2-12.5), a Bayesian Weibull model was derived to predict the 10-year risk of recurrent CVD events., Results: Model coefficients and individual predictions from the Bayesian model were very similar to that of a traditional ('frequentist') model but the Bayesian model also predicted 95% credible intervals (CIs) surrounding individual risk estimates. The median width of the individual 95%CrI was 5.3% (IQR 3.6-6.5) and 17% of the population had a 95%CrI width of 10% or greater. The uncertainty decreased with increasing sample size used for derivation of the model. Combining the Bayesian Weibull model with sampled hazard ratios based on trial reports may be used to estimate individual estimates of absolute risk reduction with uncertainty measures and the probability that a treatment option will result in a clinically relevant risk reduction., Conclusion: Estimating uncertainty surrounding individual CVD risk predictions using Bayesian methods is feasible. The uncertainty regarding individual risk predictions could have several applications in clinical practice, like the comparison of different treatment options or by calculating the probability of the individual risk being below a certain treatment threshold. However, as the individual uncertainty measures only reflect sampling error and no biases in risk prediction, physicians should be familiar with the interpretation before widespread clinical adaption., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors report no conflicts of interest relevant to the current study., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Individuals with or at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) often receive long-term treatment with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapies, but whether the effects of LDL-C reduction remain stable over time is uncertain. This study aimed to establish the course of the effects of LDL-C reduction on cardiovascular risk over time., Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of LDL-C lowering therapies were identified through a search in MEDLINE and EMBASE (1966-January 2023). The primary analyses were restricted to statins, ezetimibe, and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, with other therapies included in sensitivity analyses. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to establish the hazard ratio (HR) for major vascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, coronary revascularization, or stroke) per 1 mmol/L LDL-C reduction. Course of the effects over time was assessed using random-effects meta-regression analyses for the association between follow-up duration, age, and the HR for major vascular events per 1 mmol/L LDL-C reduction. Additionally, treatment-by-time interactions were evaluated in an individual participant data meta-analysis of six atorvastatin trials., Results: A total of 60 RCTs were identified (408,959 participants, 51,425 major vascular events). The HR for major vascular events per 1 mmol/L LDL-C reduction was 0.78 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.75-0.81). Follow-up duration was not associated with a change in the HR for major vascular events (HR for change per year 0.994; 95 % CI 0.970-1.020; p = 0.66). The HR attenuated with increasing age in primary prevention (HR for change per 5 years 1.097; 95 % CI 1.031-1.168; p = 0.003), but not secondary prevention (HR for change per 5 years 0.987; 95 % CI 0.936-1.040; p = 0.63). Consistent results were found for statin trials only, and all trials combined. In the individual participant data meta-analysis (31,310 participants, 6734 major vascular events), the HR for major vascular events did not significantly change over follow-up time (HR for change per year 0.983; 95 % CI 0.943-1.025; p = 0.42), or age (HR for change per 5 years 1.022; 95 % CI 0.990-1.055; p = 0.18)., Conclusions: Based on available RCT data with limited follow-up duration, the relative treatment effects of LDL-C reduction are stable over time in secondary prevention, but may attenuate with higher age in primary prevention., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To quantify the relationship of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) with cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), independent of C-reactive protein (CRP)., Methods: Patients with T2D from the UCC-SMART-cohort were studied using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. The relationship of NLR and CRP with vascular events (cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction and vascular death) and all-cause mortality was quantified., Results: During 10,833 person-years, 232 vascular events and 302 deaths occurred in 1,239 patients with T2D. Risk of vascular events and all-cause mortality increased per standard deviation (SD) in NLR (hazard ratio (HR) 1.27; 95 % confidence interval (CI):1.11-1.46) and 1.15; 95 % CI:1.02-1.30) after adjustment for CRP. CRP was not associated with vascular events after adjustment for NLR, (HR per SD 1.03; 95 % CI: 0.90-1.19), but was associated with all-cause mortality (HR per SD 1.18; 95 % CI: 1.04-1.33). Notably, NLR was related to vascular events in patients with CRP < 2 mg/L (HR per unit 1.45; 95 % CI: 1.19-1.77)., Conclusion: In patients with T2D, NLR is related to higher risk of CVD and all-cause mortality, independently from CRP. NLR is related to CVD even when CRP is low, indicating that NLR is a marker of CVD-risk in addition to CRP. Both NLR and CRP are independently related to all-cause mortality in T2D patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess whether implementation of the 2019 ESC/EAS dyslipidaemia guidelines observed between 2020-2021 improved between 2021-2022 in the SANTORINI study., Methods: High- or very-high cardiovascular (CV) risk patients were recruited across 14 European countries from March 2020-February 2021, with 1-year prospective follow-up until May 2022. Lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and 2019 ESC/EAS risk-based low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment (defined as <1.4 mmol/L for patients at very high CV risk and <1.8 mmol/L for patients at high CV risk) at 1-year follow-up were compared with baseline. ., Results: Of 9559 patients enrolled, 9136 (2626 high risk, 6504 very high risk) had any follow-up data, and 7210 (2033 high risk, 5173 very high risk) had baseline and follow-up LDL-C data. LLT was escalated in one-third of patients and unchanged in two-thirds. Monotherapy and combination therapy usage rose from 53.6% and 25.6% to 57.1% and 37.9%, respectively. Mean LDL-C levels decreased from 2.4 mmol/L to 2.0 mmol/L. Goal attainment improved from 21.2% to 30.9%, largely driven by LLT use among those not on LLT at baseline. Goal attainment was greater with combination therapy compared with monotherapy at follow-up (39.4 vs 25.5%)., Conclusions: LLT use and achievement of risk-based lipid goals increased over 1-year follow-up particularly when combination LLT was used. Nonetheless, most patients remained above goal, hence strategies are needed to improve implementation of combination LLT., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To develop and externally validate the LIFE-T1D model for the estimation of lifetime and 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in individuals with type 1 diabetes., Materials and Methods: A sex-specific competing risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model was derived in individuals with type 1 diabetes without prior CVD from the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR), using age as the time axis. Predictors included age at diabetes onset, smoking status, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, glycated haemoglobin level, estimated glomerular filtration rate, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, albuminuria and retinopathy. The model was externally validated in the Danish Funen Diabetes Database (FDDB) and the UK Biobank., Results: During a median follow-up of 11.8 years (interquartile interval 6.1-17.1 years), 4608 CVD events and 1316 non-CVD deaths were observed in the NDR (n = 39 756). The internal validation c-statistic was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.85) and the external validation c-statistics were 0.77 (95% CI 0.74-0.81) for the FDDB (n = 2709) and 0.73 (95% CI 0.70-0.77) for the UK Biobank (n = 1022). Predicted risks were consistent with the observed incidence in the derivation and both validation cohorts., Conclusions: The LIFE-T1D model can estimate lifetime risk of CVD and CVD-free life expectancy in individuals with type 1 diabetes without previous CVD. This model can facilitate individualized CVD prevention among individuals with type 1 diabetes. Validation in additional cohorts will improve future clinical implementation., (© 2024 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Purpose: Risk factors for stroke differ between women and men in general populations. However, little is known about sex differences in secondary prevention. We investigated if sex interacted with modifiable risk factors for stroke in a large arterial disease cohort., Methods: Within the prospective UCC-SMART study, 13,898 patients (35% women) with atherosclerotic disease or high-risk factor profile were followed up to 23 years for stroke incidence or recurrence. Hypertension, smoking, diabetes, overweight, dyslipidemia, high alcohol use, and physical inactivity were studied as risk factors. Association between these factors and ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke incidence or recurrence was studied in women and men using Cox proportional hazard models and Poisson regression models. Women-to-men relative hazard ratios (RHR) and rate differences (RD) were estimated for each risk factor. Left-truncated age was used as timescale., Results: The age-adjusted stroke incidence rate was lower in women than men (3.9 vs 4.4 per 1000 person-years), as was the age-adjusted stroke recurrence rate (10.0 vs 11.7). Hypertension and smoking were associated with stroke risk in both sexes. HDL cholesterol was associated with lower stroke incidence in women but not in men (RHR 0.49; CI 0.27-0.88; and RD 1.39; CI - 1.31 to 4.10). Overweight was associated with a lower stroke recurrence in women but not in men (RHR 0.42; CI 0.23-0.80; and RD 9.05; CI 2.78-15.32)., Conclusions: In high-risk population, sex modifies the association of HDL cholesterol on stroke incidence, and the association of overweight on stroke recurrence. Our findings highlight the importance of sex-specific secondary prevention., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Aims: Body adiposity is known to affect mortality risk in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). We examined associations of body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) with long term mortality in Dutch CAD patients, and potential and effect modification of these associations by lifestyle and health determinants., Methods: 10,370 CAD patients (mean age ∼65 y; 20% female; >80% on cardiovascular drugs) from the prospective Alpha Omega Cohort and Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Secondary Manifestations of ARTerial disease study were included. Cox models were used to estimate categorical and continuous associations (using restricted cubic splines) of measured BMI and WC with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk, adjusting for age, sex, smoking, alcohol, physical activity and educational level. Analyses were repeated in subgroups of lifestyle factors (smoking, physical activity, diet quality), education and health determinants (diabetes, self-rated health)., Results: During ∼10 years of follow-up (91,947 person-years), 3,553 deaths occurred, including 1,620 from cardiovascular disease. U-shaped relationships were found for BMI and mortality risk, with the lowest risk for overweight patients (BMI ∼27 kg/m2). For obesity (BMI ≥30), the HR for all-cause mortality was 1.31 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.41) in male patients and 1.10 (95% CI: 0.92, 1.30) in female patients, compared to BMI 25-30 kg/m2. WC was also non-linearly associated with mortality, and HRs were 1.18 (95%CI:1.06, 1.30) in males and 1.31 (95%CI:1.05, 1.64) in females for the highest vs. middle category of WC. Results for cardiovascular mortality were mostly in line with the results for all-cause mortality. U-shaped associations were found in most subgroups, associations were moderately modified by physical activity, smoking and educational level., Conclusions: CAD patients with obesity and a large WC were at increased risk of long-term CVD and all-cause mortality, while mildly overweight patients had the lowest risk. These associations were consistent across subgroups of patients with different lifestyles and health status., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Cruijsen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Aims/hypothesis: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is increasingly used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, but the effects on glycaemic control are unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide a comprehensive overview of the effect of CGM on glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We performed a systematic review using Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until 2 May 2023. We included RCTs investigating real-time CGM (rtCGM) or intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in adults with type 2 diabetes. Studies with an intervention duration <6 weeks or investigating professional CGM, a combination of CGM and additional glucose-lowering treatment strategies or GlucoWatch were not eligible. Change in HbA 1c and the CGM metrics time in range (TIR), time below range (TBR), time above range (TAR) and glycaemic variability were extracted. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2. Data were synthesised by performing a meta-analysis. We also explored the effects of CGM on severe hypoglycaemia and micro- and macrovascular complications., Results: We found 12 RCTs comprising 1248 participants, with eight investigating rtCGM and four isCGM. Compared with SMBG, CGM use (rtCGM or isCGM) led to a mean difference (MD) in HbA 1c of -3.43 mmol/mol (-0.31%; 95% CI -4.75, -2.11, p<0.00001, I 2 =15%; moderate certainty). This effect was comparable in studies that included individuals using insulin with or without oral agents (MD -3.27 mmol/mol [-0.30%]; 95% CI -6.22, -0.31, p=0.03, I 2 =55%), and individuals using oral agents only (MD -3.22 mmol/mol [-0.29%]; 95% CI -5.39, -1.05, p=0.004, I 2 =0%). Use of rtCGM showed a trend towards a larger effect (MD -3.95 mmol/mol [-0.36%]; 95% CI -5.46 to -2.44, p<0.00001, I 2 =0%) than use of isCGM (MD -1.79 mmol/mol [-0.16%]; 95% CI -5.28, 1.69, p=0.31, I 2 =64%). CGM was also associated with an increase in TIR (+6.36%; 95% CI +2.48, +10.24, p=0.001, I 2 =9%) and a decrease in TBR (-0.66%; 95% CI -1.21, -0.12, p=0.02, I 2 =45%), TAR (-5.86%; 95% CI -10.88, -0.84, p=0.02, I 2 =37%) and glycaemic variability (-1.47%; 95% CI -2.94, -0.01, p=0.05, I 2 =0%). Three studies reported one or more events of severe hypoglycaemia and macrovascular complications. In comparison with SMBG, CGM use led to a non-statistically significant difference in the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.15, 3.00, p=0.57, I 2 =0%) and macrovascular complications (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.42, 5.72, p=0.52, I 2 =29%). No trials reported data on microvascular complications., Conclusions/interpretation: CGM use compared with SMBG is associated with improvements in glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. However, all studies were open label. In addition, outcome data on incident severe hypoglycaemia and incident microvascular and macrovascular complications were scarce., Registration: This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (ID CRD42023418005)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Aims: Icosapent ethyl lowers triglycerides and significantly reduces major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), though treatment effects may vary between individuals. This study aimed to determine the relative and absolute effects of icosapent ethyl on MACE according to baseline CVD risk in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)., Methods: Participants from REDUCE-IT with ASCVD were included (n = 5,785). The primary outcome was 3-point MACE, i.e. non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. Baseline 5-year risk of MACE was estimated using the ESC guideline-recommended SMART2 risk score. Modification of the relative treatment effects of icosapent ethyl by baseline risk was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models including a treatment-by-risk interaction. Next, treatment effects were assessed stratified by quartiles of baseline risk., Results: During a median follow-up of 4.8 years (interquartile range 3.2-5.3), MACE occurred in 361 vs 489 patients in the icosapent ethyl vs placebo group (95% confidence interval [CI]); hazard ratio (HR) 0.72 (0.63-0.82), absolute risk reduction (ARR) 4.4% (2.6-6.2%), number needed to treat (NNT) 23 (16-38), 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimated cumulative incidence reduction (CIR) 5.7% (3.5-7.9%). Icosapent ethyl significantly reduced MACE in all risk quartiles, with an HR (95% CI) of 0.62 (0.43-0.88), 0.66 (0.48-0.92), 0.69 (0.53-0.90), and 0.78 (0.63-0.96) respectively (p for treatment-by-risk interaction = 0.106). The ARR (95% CI) increased across risk quartiles, i.e. was 3.9% (1.0-6.8%), 4.3% (1.2-7.3%), 5.1% (1.4-8.7%), and 5.6% (1.3-10.0%) respectively. This translates to NNTs (95% CI) of 26 (15-98), 24 (14-84), 20 (11-70), and 18 (10-77). The 5-year CIR (95% CI) was 4.8% (1.3-8.2%), 5.0% (1.3-8.7%), 6.1% (1.7-10.5%), and 7.7% (2.3-13.2%) respectively. Consistent results were obtained for 5-point MACE, additionally including coronary revascularization and unstable angina., Conclusions: Among patients with ASCVD and elevated triglyceride levels, icosapent ethyl significantly reduces the risk of MACE irrespective of baseline CVD risk, though absolute benefits are largest for patients at the highest risk., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the stepwise approach for cardiovascular (CV) risk factor treatment as outlined by the European Society for Cardiology 2021 guidelines on CV disease (CVD) prevention in patients with established atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD)., Methods and Results: In patients with ASCVD, included in UCC-SMART (n = 8730) and European parts of the REACH registry (n = 18 364), the 10-year CV risk was estimated using SMART2. Treatment effects were derived from meta-analyses and trials. Step 1 recommendations were LDL cholesterol (LDLc) < 1.8 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 140 mmHg, using any antithrombotic medication, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibition, and smoking cessation. Step 2 recommendations were LDLc < 1.4 mmol/L, SBP < 130 mmHg, dual-pathway inhibition (DPI, aspirin plus low-dose rivaroxaban), colchicine, glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists, and eicosapentaenoic acid. Step 2 was modelled accounting for Step 1 non-attainment. With current treatment, residual CV risk was 22%, 32%, and 60% in the low, moderate, and pooled (very) high European risk regions, respectively. Step 2 could prevent up to 198, 223 and 245 events per 1000 patients treated, respectively. Intensified LDLc reduction, colchicine, and DPI could be applied to most patients, preventing up to 57, 74, and 59 events per 1000 patients treated, respectively. Following Step 2, the number of patients with a CV risk of <10% could increase from 20%, 6.4%, and 0.5%, following Step 1, to 63%, 48%, and 12%, in the respective risk regions., Conclusion: With current treatment, residual CV risk in patients with ASCVD remains high across all European risk regions. The intensified Step 2 treatment options result in marked further reduction of residual CV risk in patients with established ASCVD., Key Findings: Guideline-recommended intensive treatment of patients with cardiovascular disease could prevent additional 198-245 new cardiovascular events for every 1000 patients treated., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: D.L.B.: advisory board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, and Stasys; board of directors: American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (stock options), Bristol-Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), and High Enroll (stock); consultant: Broadview Ventures, GlaxoSmithKline, Hims, SFJ, and Youngene; data monitoring committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, and Population Health Research Institute; Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT trial); honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol-Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor); Patent: sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women’s Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham and Women’s Hospital receive any income from this patent); research funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); site co-investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; trustee: American College of Cardiology; and unfunded research: FlowCo. K.K.R. has received grants from Amgen, Sanofi, Regeneron, Daiichi Sankyo, and Ultragenyx; consulting fees from Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Kowa, Esperion, Novo Nordisk, MSD, Lilly, Silence Therapeutics, AZ, NewAmsterdam Pharma, Bayer, Beren Therapeutics, CLEERLY, EMENDOBIO, SCRIBE, CRISPR, VAXXINITY, Amarin, Regeneron, Ultragenyx, Cargene, and Resverlogix; and speaking fees from Novartis, BI, AZ, Novo Nordisk, Viatris, Amarin, Biologix Pharma, Sanofi, Amgen, Esperion, Daiichi Sankyo, and Macleods Pharma, is president of the EAS, and hold stocks in NewAmsterdam Pharma and PEMI31. P.G.S. has received grants from Amarin and Sanofi; was involved in clinical trials (steering committee, CEC, DSMB): Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Idorsia, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi; has received consulting/speaking fees from Amarin, Amgen, BMS, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk; and is a Senior Associate Editor at Circulation. The other authors have nothing to declare., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Identifying patients with established cardiovascular disease (CVD) who are at high risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) may allow for early interventions, reducing the development of T2D and associated morbidity. The aim of this study was to develop and externally validate the CVD2DM model to estimate the 10-year and lifetime risks of T2D in patients with established CVD., Methods and Results: Sex-specific, competing risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were derived in 19 281 participants with established CVD and without diabetes at baseline from the UK Biobank. The core model's pre-specified predictors were age, current smoking, family history of diabetes mellitus, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, fasting plasma glucose, and HDL cholesterol. The extended model also included HbA1c. The model was externally validated in 3481 patients from the UCC-SMART study. During a median follow-up of 12.2 years (interquartile interval 11.3-13.1), 1628 participants with established CVD were diagnosed with T2D in the UK Biobank. External validation c-statistics were 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.82] for the core model and 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.84) for the extended model. Calibration plots showed agreement between predicted and observed 10-year risk of T2D., Conclusion: The 10-year and lifetime risks of T2D can be estimated with the CVD2DM model in patients with established CVD, using readily available clinical predictors. The model would benefit from further validation across diverse ethnic groups to enhance its applicability. Informing patients about their T2D risk could motivate them further to adhere to a healthy lifestyle., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: M.W. has received consultancy fees from Amgen and Freeline. The other authors have nothing to declare., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background and Aims: Guidelines no longer recommend low-fat diets and currently recommend more plant-based diets to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Furthermore, these guidelines have consistently recommended salt-reduced diets. This article describes current self-reported use and time-trends in the self-reported use of low-fat, low-salt and vegetarian diets in ASCVD patients and examines patient characteristics associated with each diet., Methods and Results: 9005 patients with ASCVD included between 1996 and 2019 in the UCC-SMART cohort were studied. The prevalence of self-reported diets was assessed and multi-variable logistic regression was used to identify the determinants of each diet. Between 1996-1997 and 2018-2019, low-fat diets declined from 22.4 % to 3.8 %, and low-salt diets from 14.7 % to 4.6 %. The prevalence of vegetarian diets increased from 1.1 % in 1996-1997 to 2.3 % in 2018-2019. Patients with cerebrovascular disease (CeVD) and peripheral artery disease or an abdominal aortic aneurysm (PAD/AAA) were less likely to report a low-salt diet than coronary artery disease (CAD) patients (OR 0.62 [95%CI 0.49-0.77] and 0.55 [95%CI 0.41-0.72])., Conclusion: In the period 1996 to 2019 amongst patients with ASCVD, the prevalence of self-reported low-fat diets was low and decreased in line with changes in recommendations in major guidelines. The prevalence of self-reported vegetarian diets was low but increased in line with societal and guideline changes. The prevalence of self-reported low-salt diets was low, especially in CeVD and PAD/AAA patients compared to CAD patients, and decreased over time. Renewed action is needed to promote low-salt diets in ASCVD patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The efficacy of a healthy lifestyle in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is well established and a first-line recommendation in CVD prevention guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess if they are also cost-effective in patients with established CVD., Methods: A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed comparing a combined Mediterranean diet and physical activity intervention to usual care in CVD patients. The CUA had a healthcare perspective and lifetime horizon. Costs and utilities were estimated using a microsimulation on a cohort of 100,000 CVD patients sampled from the UCC-SMART study (N = 8,947, mean age 62 ±8.7 years and 74% male). Cost-effectiveness was expressed as incrementalcost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefit (INHB) and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB)., Results: Mediterranean diet and physical activity yielded 2.0 incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost reductions of €1,236 per person compared to usual care, resulting in an ICER of €-626/QALY (95%CI -1,929 to 2,673). At a willingness-to-pay of €20,000/QALY, INHB was 2.04 (95%CI 0.99-3.58) QALY and INMB was €40,757 (95%CI 19,819-71,605). The interventions remained cost-effective in a wide range of sensitivity analyses, including worst-case scenarios and scenarios with reimbursement for food and physical activity costs., Conclusion: In patients with established CVD, a combined Mediterranean diet and physical activity intervention was cost-saving and highly cost-effective compared to usual care. These findings strongly advocate for the incorporation of lifestyle interventions as integral components of care for all CVD patients., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Objective: Assessment of generalisability of guideline-informing trials on antithrombotic treatment intensification to real-world patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD)., Methods: Inclusion and exclusion criteria of the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS), Clopidogrel for High Atherothrombotic Risk and Ischemic Stabilization, Management and Avoidance (CHARISMA), Prevention of Cardiovascular events in Patients with Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (PEGASUS-TIMI) and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) study were applied to coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) patients from Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of Arterial Disease (UCC-SMART) to determine real-world eligibility. Eligible and ineligible patients were compared on baseline characteristics, cardiovascular events, major bleeding and mortality., Results: Eligibility ranged from 11%-94% for CAD to 75%-90% for patients with PAD. Cardiovascular, bleeding and mortality risks were higher in COMPASS-eligible patients with CAD (rate ratios (RR) 1.98 (95% CI 1.74 to 2.26), 2.02 (95% CI 1.47 to 2.78) and 3.11 (95% CI 2.71 to 3.57), respectively) and CHARISMA-eligible patients (RR 1.51 (95% CI 1.12 to 2.06), 2.25 (95% CI 1.01 to 6.21) and 4.43 (95% CI 2.79 to 7.51), respectively), and lower in COMPASS-eligible patients with PAD (RR 0.45 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.56), 0.29 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.46) and 0.45 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.54), respectively) and DAPT-eligible patients with CAD (RR CVD 0.49 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.69) and mortality 0.67 (95% CI 0.48 to 0.94)) than ineligible patients. After adjustment for trial eligibility criteria, only higher cardiovascular and mortality risks in COMPASS-eligible patients with CAD and lower cardiovascular risks in CHARISMA-eligible and DAPT-eligible patients persisted with CAD., Conclusion: A large proportion of contemporary CVD patients would be eligible for intensified antithrombotic treatment trials, with mostly similar adjusted event risks to ineligible patients. Trial-based guideline recommendations are largely applicable to real-world patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Improving dietary habits is a first-line recommendation for patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). It is unclear which dietary pattern most effectively lowers cardiovascular risk factors and what the short- and long-term effects are. Therefore, this network meta-analysis compared the effects of popular dietary patterns on cardiovascular risk factors in patients with established CVD., Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, SCOPUS and Web of Science was conducted up to 1 April 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of popular dietary patterns (Mediterranean, moderate carbohydrate, low glycemic index, low-fat and minimal dietary intervention) on cardiovascular risk factors (body weight, systolic blood pressure, lipids) in CVD populations were selected. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed., Results: Seventeen RCTs comprising 6,331 participants were included. The moderate carbohydrate diet had the most beneficial effect on body weight (-4.6 kg, 95%CrI -25.1; 15.8) and systolic blood pressure (-7.0 mmHg 95%CrI -16.8; 2.7) compared to minimal intervention. None of the included dietary patterns had a favorable effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. After 12 months, the effects were attenuated compared to those at < 6 months., Conclusions: In this network meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials, potentially clinically relevant effects of dietary interventions on CV risk factors were observed, but there was considerable uncertainty due to study heterogeneity, low adherence, or actual diminished effects in the medically treated CVD population. It was not possible to select optimal dietary patterns for secondary CVD prevention. Given recent clinical trials demonstrating the potential of dietary patterns to significantly reduce cardiovascular event risk, it is likely that these effects are effectuated through alternative physiological pathways., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: To quantify the relationship between self-reported, long-term lifestyle changes (smoking, waist circumference, physical activity, and alcohol consumption) and clinical outcomes in patients with established cardiovascular disease (CVD)., Methods and Results: Data were used from 2011 participants (78% male, age 57 ± 9 years) from the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of ARTerial disease cohort who returned for a re-assessment visit (SMART2) after ∼10 years. Self-reported lifestyle change was classified as persistently healthy, improved, worsened, or persistently unhealthy. Cox proportional hazard models were used to quantify the relationship between lifestyle changes and the risk of (cardiovascular) mortality and incident Type 2 diabetes (T2D). Fifty-seven per cent of participants was persistently healthy, 17% improved their lifestyle, 8% worsened, and 17% was persistently unhealthy. During a median follow-up time of 6.1 (inter-quartile range 3.6-9.6) years after the SMART2 visit, 285 deaths occurred, and 99 new T2D diagnoses were made. Compared with a persistently unhealthy lifestyle, individuals who maintained a healthy lifestyle had a lower risk of all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36-0.63], cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.87), and incident T2D (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28-0.73). Similarly, those who improved their lifestyle had a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.74), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26-0.81), and incident T2D (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27-0.92)., Conclusion: These findings suggest that maintaining or adopting a healthy lifestyle can significantly lower mortality and incident T2D risk in CVD patients. This study emphasizes the importance of ongoing lifestyle optimization in CVD patients, highlighting the potential for positive change regardless of previous lifestyle habits., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The European Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons (OP) models are recommended to identify individuals at high 10-year risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Independent validation and assessment of clinical utility is needed. This study aims to assess discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of low-risk SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP., Methods and Results: Validation in individuals aged 40-69 years (SCORE2) and 70-79 years (SCORE2-OP) without baseline CVD or diabetes from the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer (EPIC) Norfolk prospective population study. We compared 10-year CVD risk estimates with observed outcomes (cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke). For SCORE2, 19 560 individuals (57% women) had 10-year CVD risk estimates of 3.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6-3.7] vs. observed 3.8% (95% CI 3.6-4.1) [observed (O)/expected (E) ratio 1.0 (95% CI 1.0-1.1)]. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.75 (95% CI 0.74-0.77), with underestimation of risk in men [O/E 1.4 (95% CI 1.3-1.6)] and overestimation in women [O/E 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.8)]. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed clinical benefit. Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2-Older Persons in 3113 individuals (58% women) predicted 10-year CVD events in 10.2% (95% CI 10.1-10.3) vs. observed 15.3% (95% CI 14.0-16.5) [O/E ratio 1.6 (95% CI 1.5-1.7)]. The AUC was 0.63 (95% CI 0.60-0.65) with underestimation of risk across sex and risk ranges. Decision curve analysis showed limited clinical benefit., Conclusion: In a UK population cohort, the SCORE2 low-risk model showed fair discrimination and calibration, with clinical benefit for preventive treatment initiation decisions. In contrast, in individuals aged 70-79 years, SCORE2-OP demonstrated poor discrimination, underestimated risk in both sexes, and limited clinical utility., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: S.H.J.H., J.A.N.D., and F.L.J.V. are part of the SCORE2 working group and ESC cardiovascular risk collaboration. H.T.J. received unrestricted research grants to institution from Bayer, Amgen, and Sanofi and is a member of the national advisory board Amgen (The Netherlands). These funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; the collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Low-dose colchicine reduces cardiovascular risk in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), but absolute benefits may vary between individuals. This study aimed to assess the range of individual absolute benefits from low-dose colchicine according to patient risk profile., Methods and Results: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline-recommended SMART-REACH model was combined with the relative treatment effect of low-dose colchicine and applied to patients with CAD from the Low-Dose Colchicine 2 (LoDoCo2) trial and the Utrecht Cardiovascular Cohort-Second Manifestations of ARTerial disease (UCC-SMART) study (n = 10 830). Individual treatment benefits were expressed as 10-year absolute risk reductions (ARRs) for myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death (MACE), and MACE-free life-years gained. Predictions were also performed for MACE plus coronary revascularization (MACE+), using a new lifetime model derived in the REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) registry. Colchicine was compared with other ESC guideline-recommended intensified (Step 2) prevention strategies, i.e. LDL cholesterol (LDL-c) reduction to 1.4 mmol/L and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction to 130 mmHg. The generalizability to other populations was assessed in patients with CAD from REACH North America and Western Europe (n = 25 812). The median 10-year ARR from low-dose colchicine was 4.6% [interquartile range (IQR) 3.6-6.0%] for MACE and 8.6% (IQR 7.6-9.8%) for MACE+. Lifetime benefit was 2.0 (IQR 1.6-2.5) MACE-free years, and 3.4 (IQR 2.6-4.2) MACE+-free life-years gained. For LDL-c and SBP reduction, respectively, the median 10-year ARR for MACE was 3.0% (IQR 1.5-5.1%) and 1.7% (IQR 0.0-5.7%), and the lifetime benefit was 1.2 (IQR 0.6-2.1) and 0.7 (IQR 0.0-2.3) MACE-free life-years gained. Similar results were obtained for MACE+ and in American and European patients from REACH., Conclusion: The absolute benefits of low-dose colchicine vary between individual patients with chronic CAD. They may be expected to be of at least similar magnitude to those of intensified LDL-c and SBP reduction in a majority of patients already on conventional lipid-lowering and blood pressure-lowering therapy., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J.W.E. reported receiving grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Janssen, and Sanofi-Aventis; and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi-Aventis, and Servier. P.L.T. reported receiving institutional research grants from the National Health Medical Research Council of Australia and Sir Charles Gairdner Research Advisory Committee; and the provision of colchicine and a matching placebo from Aspen Pharma Australia. J.H.C. reported receiving institutional research grants from the Withering Foundation Netherlands, The Netherlands Heart Foundation, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and a consortium of Teva, Disphar, and Tiofarma; and consulting fees from Amgen and Sanofi. P.G.S. reported receiving research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb/Sanofi, Amarin, Bayer, and Servier; and consulting fees from Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb/Myokardia, Idorsia, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Regeneron, PhaseBio, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier; and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk; and support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca; and participating in advisory boards for Monash University, PHRI, Sanofi, and Servier. D.L.B. discloses the following relationships: Advisory Board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, and Stasys; Board of Directors: Angiowave (stock options), Boston VA Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS. LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; Chair: Inaugural chair, American Heart Association Quality Oversight Committee; Consultant: Broadview Ventures, Hims; Data Monitoring Committee: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic (including for the ExCEED trial, funded by Edwards), Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, and ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol-Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee, funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee, funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor-in-Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor, Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and US national co-leader, funded by Bayer), Slack Publications (Chief Medical Editor, Cardiology Today’s Intervention), Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care (Secretary/Treasurer), WebMD (CME steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor), NCDR-ACTION Registry Steering Committee (Chair), and VA CART Research and Publications Committee (Chair); Patent: Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); Research Funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); Site Co-Investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo, and Takeda. A.M. reported institutional research grants from the Withering Foundation The Netherlands, The Netherlands Heart Foundation, The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Novartis, and a consortium of Teva, Disphar, and Tiofarma; A.M. will not accept personal fees from pharma. Other authors reported no disclosures., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background and Aims: - Pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE) is a rare genetic disease caused by pathogenic mutations in the ABCC6 gene, resulting in low values of inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi). While low PPi is thought to contribute to arterial calcification, it remains unclear whether this fully explains premature calcification in PXE. It has been hypothesized that the ABCC6 gene could be related to dyslipidemia, which could contribute to vascular calcification seen in PXE. The aim of this study is to evaluate the relation between PXE and plasma lipid concentrations in a large cohort of PXE patients compared with reference values for the general population and compared with non-PXE controls., Methods: - The plasma concentrations of total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, tiglycerides, and LDL-cholesterol of 312 PXE patients were compared to age- and sex-matched modeled data of the general Dutch population. Differences in median lipid levels were compared with Mann-Whitney-U test. Secondly, plasma lipid concentrations of 44 PXE patients were compared to 44 not-genetically related relatives (spouses or friends), with linear models adjusted for age, sex and BMI., Results: - Total cholesterol in PXE patients was 5.6 [IQR 4.6-6.4] mmol/L versus 5.3 [IQR 4.7-6.0] mmol/L (p < 0.01) in the general population; triglycerides were 1.1 [IQR 0.9-1.7] mmol/L versus 1.0 [0.7-1.4] mmol/L (p < 0.01); HDL-c was 1.4 [IQR 1.2-1.7] mmol/L versus 1.5 [IQR 1.2-1.8] mmol/L (p = 0.03) and LDL-c was 3.3 [IQR 2.7-4.1] mmol/L versus 3.2 [IQR 2.7-3.8] mmol/L (p = 0.01). In the patient control analysis with 44 pairs and age, sex and BMI adjusted, comparison with the non-PXE controls only triglycerides were significantly different (mean difference: 0.38 (0.13-0.63))., Conclusion: -The lipid profiles of PXE patients are marginally different from the general population or compared to a matched control group, but the differences are unlikely to be clinically relevant . It is therefore unlikely that plasma lipids contribute to the premature vascular calcifications in PXE patients., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Purpose: To evaluate the validity of spot urine assay methods in estimating the 24-h urinary sodium, potassium and sodium-to-potassium ratio during three different sodium diets., Materials and Methods: Twelve healthy volunteers were asked to adhere to 3 dietary sodium targets (3.3-5.0g/day,<3.3 g/day and >5.0 g/day) for three consecutive weeks and to measure salt excretion daily in spot urine samples using a self-monitoring device. On day 7 of each week, 24-h urine was collected to compare measured with estimated 24-h salt excretion (by the Kawasaki, Tanaka and INTERSALT equations)., Results: Correlation coefficients relating measured and estimated 24-h sodium excretion were low and not significant for Kawasaki and INTERSALT and moderate for the Tanaka equation (τ 0.56-0.64, p <.05). Bland-Altman plots showed considerable differences between estimated and measured sodium excretion across all salt diets. Over 40% of the participants showed an absolute difference between measured and estimated 24-h sodium of more than 1000 mg/day. The correlation coefficients between 24-h and spot Na/K ratio were 0.67, 0.94 and 0.85( p <.05), and mean differences were 0.59, 0.06 and 0.48 for the intermediate, low and high sodium diets, respectively., Conclusion: These findings do not support estimation of individual 24-h salt excretion from spot urine by the Kawasaki, Tanaka, or INTERSALT formula. Plain language summaryAccurate monitoring of salt intake is essential to improve BP control. At present, measurement of sodium and potassium excretion in multiple non-consecutive 24-h urinary collections is considered the gold standard for measuring dietary sodium intake. However, this method is burdensome, time-consuming and error prone.Therefore, we assessed and compared the validity of three formula-based approaches to estimate 24-h urinary sodium and potassium excretion and the Na/K ratio from spot urine samples measured by a self-monitoring device under three different sodium diets using 24-h urine collections as the reference.We conclude that use of three commonly used equations that estimate 24-h urinary sodium and potassium excretion result in substantial bias, poor precision and poor accuracy and are therefore not recommended. The Na/K ratio based on multiple casual urine samples may be a useful, low-burden, low-cost alternative method to 24-h urine collection for monitoring daily salt intake.