Association of early doses of diuretics and nitrates in acute heart failure with 30 days outcomes: ancillary analysis of ELISABETH study.

AIMS: The optimal dose of diuretics and nitrates for acute heart failure treatment remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess the association between intravenous nitrates and loop diuretics doses within the initial 4 h of emergency department presentation and the number of days alive and out of hospital (NDAOH) through 30 days. METHODS: This was an ancillary study of the ELISABETH stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial that included 502 acute heart failure patients 75 years or older in 15 French emergency departments. The primary endpoint was the NDAOH at 30 days. The total dose of intravenous nitrates and loop diuretics administered in the initial 4 h were each categorized into three classes: 'no nitrate', '> 0-16', and '> 16 mg' for nitrates and '< 60', '60', and '> 60 mg' for diuretics. Secondary endpoints included 30-day mortality, 30-day hospital readmission, and hospital length of stay in patients alive at 30 days. Generalized linear mixed models were used to examine associations with the endpoints. RESULTS: Of 502 patients, the median age was 87 years, with 59% women. The median administered dose within the initial 4 h was 16 mg (5.0; 40.0) for nitrates and 40 mg (40.0; 80.0) for diuretics. The median NDAOH at 30 days was 19 (0.0-24.0). The adjusted ratios of the NDAOH were 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63-1.23] and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.58-1.00) for patients that received 60 and > 60 mg, respectively, compared with patients that received 40 mg or less of diuretics. Compared with patients who did not receive nitrates, the adjusted ratios of the NDAOH were 1.17 (95% CI: 0.82-1.67) and 1.45 (95% CI: 0.90-2.33) for patients who received 1-16 and > 16 mg, respectively. There was no significant association with any of the secondary endpoints. CONCLUSION: In this ancillary analysis, there was no significant association between different doses of diuretics and nitrates with the NDAOH at 30 days. Point estimates and CIs may suggest that the optimal doses are less than 60 mg of diuretics, and more than 16 mg of nitrates in the first 4 h.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus in acute myocardial infarction: a persistent significant burden on long-term mortality.

Objective: The long-term impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has not been thoroughly investigated yet. This study aimed to assess the long-term impact of T2DM after AMI. Research design and methods: We analyzed the data of three nationwide observational studies from the French Registry of Acute ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) program, conducted over a 1-month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015. Patients presenting T2DM were classified as diabetic, and patients presenting type 1 diabetes mellitus were excluded. We identified factors related to all-cause death at 1-year follow-up and divided 1,897 subjects into two groups, paired based on their estimated 1-year probability of death as determined by a logistic regression model. Results: A total of 9,181 AMI patients were included in the analysis, among them 2,038 (22.2%) had T2DM. Patients with diabetes were significantly older (68.2 ± 12.0 vs. 63.8 ± 14.4, p < 0.001) and had a higher prevalence of a prior history of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), or heart failure (22.5% vs. 13.0%, 7.1% vs. 3.1% and 6.7 vs. 3.8% respectively, p < 0.001 for all). Even after matching two groups of 1,897 patients based on propensity score for their 1-year probability of death, diabetes remained associated with long-term mortality, with an HR of 1.30, 95%CI (1.17-1.45), p < 0.001. Conclusions: T2DM per se has an adverse impact on long-term survival after myocardial infarction. Independently of the risk of short-term mortality, patients with diabetes who survived an AMI have a 30% higher risk of long-term mortality.

Corticosteroid burst therapy in patients with acute heart failure: Design of the CORTAHF pilot study.

AIMS: Inflammation has emerged as a potential key pathophysiological mechanism in heart failure (HF) in general and acute HF (AHF) specifically, with inflammatory biomarkers shown to be highly predictive of adverse outcomes in these patients. The CORTAHF study builds on both these data and the fact that steroid burst therapy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of respiratory diseases and COVID-19. Our hypothesis is that in patients with AHF and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) levels without symptoms or signs of infection, a 7-day course of steroid therapy will lead to reduced inflammation and short-term improvement in quality of life and a reduced risk of worsening HF (WHF) events. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study, which is currently ongoing, will include 100 patients with AHF ages 18-85, regardless of ejection fraction, screened within 12 h of presentation. Patients will be included who have NT-proBNP > 1500 pg/mL and CRP > 20 mg/L at screening. Exclusion criteria include haemodynamic instability and symptoms and signs of infection. After signed consent, eligible patients will be randomized according to a central randomization scheme stratified by centre 1:1 to either treatment once daily for 7 days with 40 mg prednisone orally or to standard care. Patients will be assessed at study day 2, day 4 or at discharge if earlier, and at days 7 and 31 at the hospital; and at day 91 through a telephone follow-up. The primary endpoint is the change in CRP level from baseline to day 7, estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) including all measured timepoints, in patients without a major protocol violation. Secondary endpoints include the time to the first event of WHF adverse event, readmission for HF, or death through day 91; and changes to day 7 in EQ-5D visual analogue scale score and utility index. Additional clinical and laboratory measures will be assessed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study will add to the knowledge of the role of inflammation in AHF and potentially inform the design of larger studies with possibly longer duration of anti-inflammatory therapies in AHF.

Effect of the 1-h bundle on mortality in patients with suspected sepsis in the emergency department: a stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of the 1-h bundle for emergency department (ED) patients with suspected sepsis, which includes lactate measurement, blood culture, broad-spectrum antibiotics administration, administration of 30 mL/kg crystalloid fluid for hypotension or lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L, remains controversial. METHODS: We carried out a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in 23 EDs in France and Spain. Adult patients with Sepsis-3 criteria or a quick sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2 or a lactate > 2 mmol/L were eligible. The intervention was the implementation of the 1-h sepsis bundle. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality truncated at 28 days. Secondary outcomes included volume of fluid resuscitation at 24 h, acute heart failure at 24 h, SOFA score at 72 h, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, number of days on mechanical ventilation or renal replacement therapy, vasopressor free days, unnecessary antibiotic administration, and mortality at 28 days. 1148 patients were planned to be analysed; the study period ended after 873 patients were included. RESULTS: 872 patients (mean age 66, 42% female) were analyzed: 387 (44.4%) in the intervention group and 485 (55.6%) in the control group. Median SOFA score was 3 [1-5]. Median time to antibiotic administration was 40 min in the intervention group vs 113 min in the control group (difference - 73 [95% confidence interval (CI) - 93 to - 53]). There was a significantly higher rate, volume, and shorter time to fluid resuscitation within 3 h in the intervention group. There were 47 (12.1%) in-hospital deaths in the intervention group compared to 61 (12.6%) in the control group (difference in percentage - 0.4 [95% CI - 5.1 to 4.2], adjusted relative risk (aRR) 0.81 [95% CI 0.48 to 1.39]). There were no differences between groups for other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with suspected sepsis in the ED, the implementation of the 1-h sepsis bundle was not associated with significant difference in in-hospital mortality. However, this study may be underpowered to report a statistically significant difference between groups.

Whole blood transcriptome signature predicts severe forms of COVID-19: Results from the COVIDeF cohort study.

COVID-19 is associated with heterogeneous outcome. Early identification of a severe progression of the disease is essential to properly manage the patients and improve their outcome. Biomarkers reflecting an increased inflammatory response, as well as individual features including advanced age, male gender, and pre-existing comorbidities, are risk factors of severe COVID-19. Yet, these features show limited accuracy for outcome prediction. The aim was to evaluate the prognostic value of whole blood transcriptome at an early stage of the disease. Blood transcriptome of patients with mild pneumonia was profiled. Patients with subsequent severe COVID-19 were compared to those with favourable outcome, and a molecular predictor based on gene expression was built. Unsupervised classification discriminated patients who would later develop a COVID-19-related severe pneumonia. The corresponding gene expression signature reflected the immune response to the viral infection dominated by a prominent type I interferon, with IFI27 among the most over-expressed genes. A 48-genes transcriptome signature predicting the risk of severe COVID-19 was built on a training cohort, then validated on an external independent cohort, showing an accuracy of 81% for predicting severe outcome. These results identify an early transcriptome signature of severe COVID-19 pneumonia, with a possible relevance to improve COVID-19 patient management.

Rationale and design of the FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation (FRENCHIE) study.

BACKGROUND: Despite major advances in prevention and treatment, cardiovascular diseases - particularly acute myocardial infarction - remain a leading cause of death worldwide and in France. Collecting contemporary data about the characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction in France is important. AIMS: The main objectives are to describe baseline characteristics, contemporary management, in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction hospitalized in tertiary care centres in France; secondary objectives are to investigate determinants of prognosis (including periodontal disease and sleep-disordered breathing), to identify gaps between evidence-based recommendations and management and to assess medical care costs for the index hospitalization and during the follow-up period. METHODS: FRENCHIE (FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation) is an ongoing prospective multicentre observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04050956) enrolling more than 19,000 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction with onset of symptoms within 48hours in 35 participating centres in France since March 2019. Main exclusion criteria are age<18 years, lack of health coverage and procedure-related myocardial infarction (types 4a and 5). Detailed information was collected prospectively, starting at admission, including demographic data, risk factors, medical history and treatments, initial management, with prehospital care pathways and medication doses, and outcomes until hospital discharge. The follow-up period (up to 20 years for each patient) is ensured by linking with the French national health database (Système national des données de santé), and includes information on death, hospital admissions, major clinical events, healthcare consumption (including drug reimbursement) and total healthcare costs. FRENCHIE is also used as a platform for cohort-nested studies - currently three randomized trials and two observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide large contemporary cohort with very long-term follow-up will improve knowledge about acute myocardial infarction management and outcomes in France, and provide a useful platform for nested studies and trials.

Three-Year Outcomes With Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided or Angiography-Guided Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In patients with multivessel disease with successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, the FLOWER-MI trial (Flow Evaluation to Guide Revascularization in Multivessel ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) showed that a fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided strategy was not superior to an angiography-guided strategy for treatment of noninfarct-related artery lesions regarding the 1-year risk of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization. The extension phase of the trial was planned using the same primary outcome to determine whether a difference in outcomes would be observed with a longer follow-up. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease with successful percutaneous coronary intervention of the infarct-related artery to receive complete revascularization guided by either FFR (n=586) or angiography (n=577). RESULTS: After 3 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 52 of 498 patients (9.40%) in the FFR-guided group and in 44 of 502 patients (8.17%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.79-1.77]; P=0.4). Death occurred in 22 patients (4.00%) in the FFR-guided group and in 23 (4.32%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.53-1.71]); nonfatal myocardial infarction in 23 (4.13%) and 14 (2.56%), respectively (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 0.84-3.16]); and unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization in 21 (3.83%) and 18 (3.36%; hazard ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.61-2.16]), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although event rates in the trial were lower than expected, in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing complete revascularization, an FFR-guided strategy did not have a significant benefit over an angiography-guided strategy with respect to the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization up to 3 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02943954.

Limb Outcomes With Ticagrelor Plus Aspirin in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and increased bleeding in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and coronary artery disease. Limb events including revascularization, acute limb ischemia (ALI), and amputation are major morbidities in patients with T2DM and atherosclerosis. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the effect of ticagrelor on limb events. METHODS: Patients were randomized to ticagrelor or placebo on top of aspirin and followed for a median of 3 years. MACE (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), limb events (ALI, amputation, revascularization), and bleeding were adjudicated by an independent and blinded clinical events committee. The presence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) was reported at baseline. RESULTS: Of 19,220 patients randomized, 1,687 (8.8%) had PAD at baseline. In patients receiving placebo, PAD was associated with higher MACE (10.7% vs 7.3%; HR: 1.48; P < 0.001) and limb (9.5% vs 0.8%; HR: 10.67; P < 0.001) risk. Ticagrelor reduced limb events (1.6% vs 1.3%; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.61-0.96; P = 0.022) with significant reductions for revascularization (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.62-0.99; P = 0.044) and ALI (HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.70; P = 0.009). The benefit was consistent with or without PAD (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.58-1.11; and HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.55-1.05, respectively; Pinteraction = 0.81). There was no effect modification of ticagrelor vs placebo based on PAD for MACE (Pinteraction = 0.40) or TIMI major bleeding (Pinteraction = 0.3239). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T2DM and atherosclerosis are at high risk of limb events. Ticagrelor decreased this risk, but increased bleeding. Future trials evaluating the combination of ticagrelor and aspirin would further elucidate the benefit/risk of such therapy in patients with PAD, including those without coronary artery disease. (A Study Comparing Cardiovascular Effects of Ticagrelor Versus Placebo in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus [THEMIS]: NCT01991795).

Association of Use and Dose of Lipid-Lowering Therapy Post Acute Myocardial Infarction With 5-Year Survival in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Older people are underrepresented in randomized trials. The association between lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and its intensity after acute myocardial infarction and long-term mortality in this population deserves to be assessed. METHODS: The FAST-MI (French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) program consists of nationwide French surveys including all patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction ≤48 hours from onset over a 1- to 2-month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015, with long-term follow-up. Numerous data were collected and a centralized 10-year follow-up was organized. The present analysis focused on the association between prescription of LLT (atorvastatin ≥40 mg or equivalent, or any combination of statin and ezetimibe) and 5-year mortality in patients aged ≥80 years discharged alive. Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching were used to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Among the 2258 patients aged ≥80 years (mean age, 85±4 years; 51% women; 39% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 58% with percutaneous coronary intervention), 415 were discharged without LLT (18%), 866 with conventional doses (38%), and 977 with high-dose LLT (43%). Five-year survival was 36%, 47.5%, and 58%, respectively. Compared with patients without LLT, high-dose LLT was significantly associated with lower 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.66-0.92]), whereas conventional-intensity LLT was not (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.80-1.09]). In propensity score-matched cohorts (n=278 receiving high-intensity LLT and n=278 receiving no statins), 5-year survival was 52% with high-intensity LLT at discharge and 42% without statins (hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.62-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS: In these observational cohorts, high-intensity LLT at discharge after acute myocardial infarction was associated with reduced all-cause mortality at 5 years in an older adult population. These results suggest that high-intensity LLT should not be denied to patients on the basis of old age. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00673036, NCT01237418, and NCT02566200.

Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusions for Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anemia by Heart Failure Status: An RCT Subgroup Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell transfusion can cause fluid overload. We evaluated the interaction between heart failure (HF) at baseline and transfusion strategy on outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We used data from the randomized REALITY trial. HF was defined as history of HF or Killip class > 1 at randomization. Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE): composite of all-cause death, nonrecurrent AMI, stroke, or emergency revascularization prompted by ischemia at 30 days. RESULTS: Among 658 randomized patients, 311 (47.3%) had HF. Patients with HF had higher rates of MACE at 30 days and 1 year and higher rates of nonfatal new-onset HF. There was no interaction between HF and effect of randomized assignment on the primary outcome or nonfatal new-onset HF. A liberal transfusion strategy was associated with increased all-cause death at 30 days and at 1 year in patients with HF (Pinteraction = 0.009 and P = 0.049, respectively). The main numerical difference in cause of death between restrictive and liberal strategies was death by HF at 30 days (4 vs 11). CONCLUSIONS: HF is frequent in patients with AMI and anemia and is associated with higher risk of MACE (including all-cause death) and nonfatal new-onset HF. Although there was no interaction of HF with effect of transfusion strategy on MACE, a liberal transfusion strategy was associated with higher all-cause death that appears driven by a higher risk of early death caused by HF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02648113.

Data Monitoring Committees and clinical trials: From scientific justification to organisation.

Clinical trials often last several months or even several years. As the trial progresses, it can be tempting to find out whether the data obtained already answers the question posed at the start of the trial in order to stop inclusions or monitoring earlier. However, knowing and taking into account interim results can sometimes compromise the integrity of the results, which is counterproductive. To minimise this risk and ensure that the treatments are assessed reliably, safety and/or efficacy criteria are monitored during the study by a Data Monitoring Committee. After receiving the results confidentially, the Data Monitoring Committee assesses the benefit/risk ratio of the study treatment and recommends that the trial be continued, modified or terminated. Data Monitoring Committee members issuing these recommendations have an important responsibility: a hasty decision to end the trial may lead to inconclusive results unable to answer the initial question and, inversely, delaying the decision to end the trial may expose the subjects to potentially ineffective or even harmful interventions. The Data Monitoring Committee's task is therefore particularly complex. With this in mind, the round table discussion at the Giens workshops was a chance to review the scientific justification for creating Data Monitoring Committees and to recall the need for their members to receive comprehensive training on the complexities of multiple analyses, confidentiality requirements applying to the results and the need for them to be aware that recommendations to end a trial must be based on data that is robust enough to assess the benefit/risk ratio of the treatment studied.

Comparing the long-term outcomes in chronic coronary syndrome patients with prior ST-segment and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the TIGRIS registry.

OBJECTIVES: Compared with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients have more comorbidities and extensive coronary artery disease. Contemporary comparative data on the long-term prognosis of stable post-myocardial infarction subtypes are needed. DESIGN: Long-Term rIsk, clinical manaGement and healthcare Resource utilisation of stable coronary artery dISease (TIGRIS) was a multinational, observational and longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Patients were enrolled from 350 centres, with >95% coming from cardiology practices across 24 countries, from 19 June 2013 to 31 March 2017. PARTICIPANTS: This study enrolled 8277 stable patients 1-3 years after myocardial infarction with ≥1 additional risk factor. OUTCOME MEASURES: Over a 2 year follow-up, cardiovascular events and deaths and self-reported health using the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire score were recorded. Relative risk of clinical events and health resource utilisation in STEMI and NSTEMI patients were compared using multivariable Poisson regression models, adjusting for prognostically relevant patient factors. RESULTS: Of 7752 patients with known myocardial infarction type, 46% had NSTEMI; NSTEMI patients were older with more comorbidities than STEMI patients. NSTEMI patients had significantly poorer self-reported health and lower prevalence of dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge and at enrolment 1-3 years later. NSTEMI patients had a higher incidence of combined myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death (5.6% vs 3.9%, p<0.001) and higher all-cause mortality (4.2% vs 2.6%, p<0.001) compared with STEMI patients. Risks were attenuated after adjusting for other patient characteristics. Health resource utilisation was higher in NSTEMI patients, although STEMI patients had more cardiologist visits. CONCLUSIONS: Post-NSTEMI chronic coronary syndrome patients had a less favourable risk factor profile, poorer self-reported health and more adverse cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up than individuals post STEMI. Efforts are needed to recognise the risks of stable patients after NSTEMI and optimise secondary prevention and care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01866904.