Are the cardiovascular properties of GLP-1 receptor agonists differentially modulated by sulfonylureas? Insights from post-hoc analysis of EXSCEL.

AIMS: To examine whether the cardiovascular effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are attenuated by concurrent sulfonylurea (SU) therapy in a post-hoc analysis of the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL). METHODS: We investigated whether SUs, as a class or by specific type, modulated the effects of once-weekly exenatide (EQW) on EXSCEL cardiovascular outcomes in intent-to-treat analyses of all trial participants, categorized as SU users or nonusers. Marginal structural models were used to evaluate whether there were differential EQW effects by SU category on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), depending on duration of SU use (6, 12, and 18 months). EQW-by-SU type interaction p-values and hazard ratios (95 % CIs) for EQW versus placebo for each baseline SU type (glibenclamide, gliclazide, glimepiride, other SUs) were calculated. RESULTS: Neither SU use nor baseline SU type modified the effect of EQW on time to MACE (pinteraction = 0.88 and 0.78, respectively), nor did individual SU types, including glibenclamide (a systemically wide-acting SU). CONCLUSIONS: SUs did not modulate the effect of EQW on cardiovascular outcomes, suggesting that SU treatment choices need not be altered to optimize the cardiovascular effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists in people with type 2 diabetes.

Health status and clinical outcomes in older adults with chronic coronary disease: the ISCHEMIA trial

BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

Initial invasive versus conservative management of stable ischemic heart disease patients with a history of heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction: Insights from the ISCHEMIA trial

Background: It is unknown whether an initial invasive strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia improves outcomes in patients with a history of heart failure (HF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) when EF >35%, but <45%. Methods: Among 5179 participants randomized into the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA), all of whom had LVEF >35%, we compared cardiovascular outcomes by treatment strategy in those with a history of HF or LV dysfunction (HF/LVD) at baseline versus those without HF/LVD. Median follow up was 3.2 years. Results: There were 398 (7.7%) participants with HF/LVD at baseline of whom 177 had HF/LVEF>45%, 28 had HF/LVEF 35-45% and 193 had LVEF 35-45% but no prior history of HF. HF/LVD was associated with more comorbidities at baseline, particularly prior myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and hypertension. Compared to those without HF/LVD, those with HF/LVD were more likely to experience a primary outcome composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or hospitalization for unstable angina, HF, or resuscitated cardiac arrest; four-year cumulative incidence rate (22.7% vs. 13.8%), cardiovascular death or MI (19.7% vs. 12.3%), and all-cause death or HF (15.0% vs. 6.9%). Those with HF/LVD randomized to the invasive versus conservative strategy had a lower rate of the primary outcome (17.2% vs. 29.3%, difference in 4- year event rate -12.1%; 95% CI: -22.6, -1.6%), whereas those without HF/LVD did not (13.0% vs. 14.6%, difference in 4-year event rate -1.6%; 95% CI: -3.8%, 0.7%; p-interaction = 0.055). A similar differential effect was seen for the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, and CV mortality when invasive versus conservative strategy associated outcomes were analyzed with LVEF as a continuous variable for those with and without prior HF. Conclusions: ISCHEMIA trial participants with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia with a history of HF or LVD were at increased risk for the primary outcome. In the small, high-risk subgroup with HF and LVEF 35-45%, an initial invasive approach was associated with a better event-free survival. This result should be considered hypothesis generating.

Clopidogrel use after myocardial revascularization: prevalence, predictors, and one-year survival rate

Abstract Introduction: Antiplatelet therapy after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) has been used. Little is known about the predictors and efficacy of clopidogrel in this scenario. Objective: Identify predictors of clopidogrel following CABG. Methods: We evaluated 5404 patients who underwent CABG between 2000 and 2009 at Duke University Medical Center. We excluded patients undergoing concomitant valve surgery, those who had postoperative bleeding or death before discharge. Postoperative clopidogrel was left to the discretion of the attending physician. Adjusted risk for 1-year mortality was compared between patients receiving and not receiving clopidogrel during hospitalization after undergoing CABG. Results: At hospital discharge, 931 (17.2%) patients were receiving clopidogrel. Comparing patients not receiving clopidogrel at discharge, users had more comorbidities, including hyperlipidemia, hypertension, heart failure, peripheral arterial disease and cerebrovascular disease. Patients who received aspirin during hospitalization were less likely to receive clopidogrel at discharge (P≤0.0001). Clopidogrel was associated with similar 1-year mortality compared with those who did not use clopidogrel (4.4% vs. 4.5%, P=0.72). There was, however, an interaction between the use of cardiopulmonary bypass and clopidogrel, with lower 1-year mortality in patients undergoing off-pump CABG who received clopidogrel, but not those undergoing conventional CABG (2.6% vs 5.6%, P Interaction = 0.032). Conclusion: Clopidogrel was used in nearly one-fifth of patients after CABG. Its use was not associated with lower mortality after 1 year in general, but lower mortality rate in those undergoing off-pump CABG. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the benefit of routine use of clopidogrel in CABG.

Cause of Death and Predictors of All-Cause Mortality in Anticoagulated Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation: DataFrom ROCKET AF

Atrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factorsfor all-cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and Results-—In the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identifiedfactors at randomization that were independently associated with all-cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intentionto-treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS2 score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow-up,1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan–Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio1.51, 95% CI 1.33–1.70, P<0.0001) and age ≥75 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.51–1.90, P<0.0001) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Multiple additional characteristics were independently associated with higher mortality, with decreasing creatinine clearance, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, male sex, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes being among the most strongly associated (model C-index 0.677). Conclusions-—In a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, 7 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereas <1 in 10 deaths were caused by nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. Optimal prevention and treatment of heart failure, renal impairment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes may improve survival...