Heterogeneity and Utility of Pharmaceutical Company Sharing of Individual-Participant Data Packages.

Importance: The pharmaceutical industry has made substantial investments in developing processes for sharing individual-participant data (IPD) from clinical trials. However, the utility and completeness of shared IPD and supporting documents must be evaluated to ensure the potential for scientific advancements from the data sharing ecosystem can be realized. Objective: To assess the utility and completeness of IPD and supporting documents provided from industry-sponsored clinical trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: From February 9, 2022, to February 9, 2023, 91 of 203 clinical trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration registrations of anticancer medicines for the treatment of solid tumors from the past decade were confirmed as eligible for IPD request. This quality improvement study performed a retrospective audit of the utility and completeness of the IPD and supporting documents provided from the 91 clinical trials for a planned meta-analysis. Exposures: Request for IPD from 91 clinical oncology trials indicated as eligible for the request. Main Outcomes and Measures: The utility and completeness of the IPD and supporting documents provided. Results: The IPD packages were obtained from 70 of 91 requested clinical trials (77%). The median time to data provision was 123 (range, 117-352) days. Redactions were observed in 18 of the acquired IPD packages (26%) for outcome data, 11 (16%) for assessment variables, and 19 (27%) for adjustment data. Additionally, 20 IPD packages (29%) lacked a clinical study report, 4 (6%) had incomplete or missing data dictionaries, and 20 (29%) were missing anonymization or redaction description files. Access to IPD from 21 eligible trials (23%) was not granted. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, there was substantial variability within the provided IPD packages regarding the completeness of key data variables and supporting documents. To improve the data sharing ecosystem, key areas for enhancement include (1) ensuring that clinical trials are eligible for IPD sharing, (2) making eligible IPD transparently accessible, and (3) ensuring that IPD packages meet a standard of utility and completeness.

Baseline characteristics of patients in the randomized study to investigate the efficacy and safety of ferric carboxymaltose as treatment for heart failure with iron deficiency: HEART-FID trial.

BACKGROUND: Prior clinical trials have investigated intravenous iron in patients with heart failure (HF) and iron deficiency, but the safety and efficacy of this therapy remains unclear. METHODS: We report the baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of patients enrolled in the HEART-FID study and compare HEART-FID participants with patients within other contemporary clinical trials of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), including other intravenous iron trials. RESULTS: In the 3,065 participants randomized in HEART-FID, median (IQR) age was 69.7 (62.0-76.5) years, 1,037 (33.8%) were female, 322 (10.5%) were Black, median ejection fraction was 32% (25%-37%), 1,837 (60.0%) had ischemic etiology, and baseline median NT-proBNP was 1,462 (721-2,966) pg/mL. Median baseline hemoglobin was 12.6 (11.6-13.6) g/dL, and median 6-minute walk test distance was 272 (196-350) m, similar to prior intravenous iron HFrEF trials. Common comorbidities included atrial fibrillation/flutter (43.7%), and type 2 diabetes (45.2%). Compared with several recent HFrEF trials, patients enrolled in HEART-FID had similar baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, though a greater proportion of women and Black participants were recruited in HEART-FID. In HEART-FID, HFrEF therapy included a beta-blocker in 92.5%, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) in 86.1% (with 29.7% ARNI), and a mineralocorticoid antagonist (MRA) in 55.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients enrolled in HEART-FID were similar to those enrolled in other contemporary HFrEF trials and registries, including trials of intravenous iron in HFrEF. However, the HEART-FID cohort is substantially larger and more racially diverse than prior trials of intravenous iron in HFrEF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03037931).

Ferric Carboxymaltose in Heart Failure with Iron Deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Ferric carboxymaltose therapy reduces symptoms and improves quality of life in patients who have heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction and iron deficiency. Additional evidence about the effects of ferric carboxymaltose on clinical events is needed. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned ambulatory patients with heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less, and iron deficiency, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive intravenous ferric carboxymaltose or placebo, in addition to standard therapy for heart failure. Ferric carboxymaltose or placebo was given every 6 months as needed on the basis of iron indexes and hemoglobin levels. The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite of death within 12 months after randomization, hospitalizations for heart failure within 12 months after randomization, or change from baseline to 6 months in the 6-minute walk distance. The significance level was set at 0.01. RESULTS: We enrolled 3065 patients, of whom 1532 were randomly assigned to the ferric carboxymaltose group and 1533 to the placebo group. Death by month 12 occurred in 131 patients (8.6%) in the ferric carboxymaltose group and 158 (10.3%) in the placebo group; a total of 297 and 332 hospitalizations for heart failure, respectively, occurred by month 12; and the mean (±SD) change from baseline to 6 months in the 6-minute walk distance was 8±60 and 4±59 m, respectively (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney P = 0.02; unmatched win ratio, 1.10; 99% confidence interval, 0.99 to 1.23). Repeated dosing of ferric carboxymaltose appeared to be safe with an acceptable adverse-event profile in the majority of patients. The number of patients with serious adverse events occurring during the treatment period was similar in the two groups (413 patients [27.0%] in the ferric carboxymaltose group and 401 [26.2%] in the placebo group). CONCLUSIONS: Among ambulatory patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction and iron deficiency, there was no apparent difference between ferric carboxymaltose and placebo with respect to the hierarchical composite of death, hospitalizations for heart failure, or 6-minute walk distance. (Funded by American Regent, a Daiichi Sankyo Group company; HEART-FID ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03037931.).

Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Attainment and Outcomes in Dialysis-Requiring Versus Nondialysis Chronic Kidney Disease in the ISCHEMIA-CKD Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis (CKD G5D) have worse cardiovascular outcomes than patients with advanced nondialysis CKD (CKD G4-5: estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/[min·1.73m2]). Our objective was to evaluate the relationship between achievement of cardiovascular guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) goals and clinical outcomes for CKD G5D versus CKD G4-5. METHODS: This was a subgroup analysis of ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease) participants with CKD G4-5 or CKD G5D and moderate-to-severe myocardial ischemia on stress testing. Exposures included dialysis requirement at randomization and GDMT goal achievement during follow-up. The composite outcome was all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction. Individual GDMT goal (smoking cessation, systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL, statin use, aspirin use) trajectory was modeled. Percentage point difference was estimated for each GDMT goal at 24 months between CKD G5D and CKD G4-5, and for association with key predictors. Probability of survival free from all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction by GDMT goal achieved was assessed for CKD G5D versus CKD G4-5. RESULTS: A total of 415 CKD G5D and 362 CKD G4-5 participants were randomized. Participants with CKD G5D were less likely to receive statin (-6.9% [95% CI, -10.3% to -3.7%]) and aspirin therapy (-3.0% [95% CI, -5.6% to -0.6%]), with no difference in other GDMT goal attainment. Cumulative exposure to GDMT achieved during follow-up was associated with reduction in all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.87-0.90]; per each GDMT goal attained over 60 days), irrespective of dialysis status. CONCLUSIONS: CKD G5D participants received statin or aspirin therapy less often. Cumulative exposure to GDMT goals achieved was associated with lower incidence of all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction in participants with advanced CKD and chronic coronary disease, regardless of dialysis status. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01985360.

Causes of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular death in the ISCHEMIA trial.

BACKGROUND: The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches trial demonstrated no overall difference in the composite primary endpoint and the secondary endpoints of cardiovascular (CV) death/myocardial infarction or all-cause mortality between an initial invasive or conservative strategy among participants with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe myocardial ischemia. Detailed cause-specific death analyses have not been reported. METHODS: We compared overall and cause-specific death rates by treatment group using Cox models with adjustment for pre-specified baseline covariates. Cause of death was adjudicated by an independent Clinical Events Committee as CV, non-CV, and undetermined. We evaluated the association of risk factors and treatment strategy with cause of death. RESULTS: Four-year cumulative incidence rates for CV death were similar between invasive and conservative strategies (2.6% vs 3.0%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.98; 95% CI [0.70-1.38]), but non-CV death rates were higher in the invasive strategy (3.3% vs 2.1%; HR 1.45 [1.00-2.09]). Overall, 13% of deaths were attributed to undetermined causes (38/289). Fewer undetermined deaths (0.6% vs 1.3%; HR 0.48 [0.24-0.95]) and more malignancy deaths (2.0% vs 0.8%; HR 2.11 [1.23-3.60]) occurred in the invasive strategy than in the conservative strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches, all-cause and CV death rates were similar between treatment strategies. The observation of fewer undetermined deaths and more malignancy deaths in the invasive strategy remains unexplained. These findings should be interpreted with caution in the context of prior studies and the overall trial results.

Association of Heart Failure With Outcomes Among Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights From EUCLID.

Background Peripheral artery disease (PAD) and heart failure (HF) are each independently associated with poor outcomes. Risk factors associated with new-onset HF in patients with primary PAD are unknown. Furthermore, how the presence of HF is associated with outcomes in patients with PAD is unknown. Methods and Results This analysis examined risk relationships of HF on outcomes in patients with symptomatic PAD randomized to ticagrelor or clopidogrel as part of the EUCLID (Examining Use of Ticagrelor in Peripheral Arterial Disease) trial. Patients were stratified based on presence of HF at enrollment. Cox models were used to determine the association of HF with outcomes. A separate Cox model was used to identify risk factors associated with development of HF during follow-up. Patients with PAD and HF had over twice the rate of concomitant coronary artery disease as those without HF. Patients with PAD and HF had significantly increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13-1.51) and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.19-1.63). In patients with PAD, the presence of HF was associated with significantly less bleeding (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.96). Characteristics associated with HF development included age ≥66 (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.18-1.40 per 5 years), diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.41-2.43), and weight (bidirectionally associated, ≥76 kg, HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.64-0.93; <76 kg, HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.16). Conclusions Patients with PAD and HF have a high rate of coronary artery disease with a high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events and death. These data support the possible need for aggressive treatment of (recurrent) atherosclerotic disease in PAD, especially patients with HF.

Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of Ferric Carboxymaltose in Heart Failure With Iron Deficiency: Rationale and Design.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency (ID) has a prevalence of ≈40% to 50% among patients in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction and is associated with worse prognosis. Several trials demonstrated that intravenous ferric carboxymaltose leads to early and sustained improvement in patient-reported outcomes and functional capacity in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction with ID, yet morbidity and mortality data are limited. METHODS: The objective of the HEART-FID trial (Ferric Carboxymaltose in Heart Failure With Iron Deficiency) is to assess efficacy and safety of ferric carboxymaltose compared with placebo as treatment for symptomatic HF with reduced ejection fraction with ID. HEART-FID is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolling ≈3014 patients at ≈300 international centers. Eligible patients are aged ≥18 years in stable chronic HF with New York Heart Association functional class II to IV symptoms, ejection fraction ≤40%, ID (ferritin <100 ng/mL or ferritin 100-300 ng/mL with a transferrin saturation <20%), and documented HF hospitalization or elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. Consented patients are assigned to ferric carboxymaltose or placebo at baseline, with repeated visits/assessments every 6 months for additional study drug based on hemoglobin and iron indices for the trial duration. The primary end point is a hierarchical composite of death and HF hospitalization at 12 months and change from baseline to 6 months in the 6-minute walk test distance. CONCLUSIONS: The HEART-FID trial will inform clinical practice by clarifying the role of long-term treatment with intravenous ferric carboxymaltose, added to usual care, in ambulatory patients with symptomatic HF with reduced ejection fraction with ID. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03037931.

Myocardial Infarction in the ISCHEMIA Trial: Impact of Different Definitions on Incidence, Prognosis, and Treatment Comparisons.

BACKGROUND: In the ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches), an initial invasive strategy did not significantly reduce rates of cardiovascular events or all-cause mortality in comparison with a conservative strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate/severe myocardial ischemia. The most frequent component of composite cardiovascular end points was myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: ISCHEMIA prespecified that the primary and major secondary composite end points of the trial be analyzed using 2 MI definitions. For procedural MI, the primary MI definition used creatine kinase-MB as the preferred biomarker, whereas the secondary definition used cardiac troponin. Procedural thresholds were >5 times the upper reference level for percutaneous coronary intervention and >10 times for coronary artery bypass grafting. Procedural MI definitions included (1) a category of elevated biomarker only events with much higher biomarker thresholds, (2) new ST-segment depression of ≥1 mm for the primary and ≥0.5 mm for the secondary definition, and (3) new coronary dissections >National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grade 3. We compared MI type, frequency, and prognosis by treatment assignment using both MI definitions. RESULTS: Procedural MIs accounted for 20.1% of all MI events with the primary definition and 40.6% of all MI events with the secondary definition. Four-year MI rates in patients undergoing revascularization were more frequent with the invasive versus conservative strategy using the primary (2.7% versus 1.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.98 [95% CI, 1.87-4.73]) and secondary (8.2% versus 2.0%; adjusted HR, 5.04 [95% CI, 3.64-6.97]) MI definitions. Type 1 MIs were less frequent with the invasive versus conservative strategy using the primary (3.40% versus 6.89%; adjusted HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.41-0.69]; P<0.0001) and secondary (3.48% versus 6.89%; adjusted HR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.41-0.69]; P<0.0001) definitions. The risk of subsequent cardiovascular death was higher after a type 1 MI than after no MI using the primary (adjusted HR, 3.38 [95% CI, 2.03-5.61]; P<0.001) or secondary MI definition (adjusted HR, 3.52 [2.11-5.88]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In ISCHEMIA, type 1 MI events using the primary and secondary definitions during 5-year follow-up were more frequent with an initial conservative strategy and associated with subsequent cardiovascular death. Procedural MI rates were greater in the invasive strategy and with the use of the secondary MI definition. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

Cause of Death Among Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights From the EUCLID Trial.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral artery disease is common and associated with high mortality. There are limited data detailing causes of death among patients with peripheral artery disease. METHODS: EUCLID (Examining Use of Ticagrelor in Peripheral Artery Disease) was a randomized clinical trial that assigned patients with peripheral artery disease to clopidogrel or ticagrelor. We describe the causes of death in EUCLID using mortality end points adjudicated through a clinical events classification process. The association between baseline factors and cardiovascular death was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards modeling. The competing risk of noncardiovascular death was assessed by the cumulative incidence function for cardiovascular death and the Fine and Gray method to ascertain the association between baseline characteristics and cardiovascular mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1263 out of 13 885 (9.1%) patients died (median follow-up: 30 months). There were 706 patients (55.9%) with a cardiovascular cause of death and 522 (41.3%) with a noncardiovascular cause of death. The most common cause of cardiovascular death was sudden cardiac death (20.1%); while myocardial infarction (5.2%) and ischemic stroke (3.2%) were uncommon. The most common causes of noncardiovascular death were malignancies (17.9%) and infections (11.9%). The factor most associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular death was age per 5 year increase (HR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.20-1.32]). Female sex was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular death (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.56-0.82]). To evaluate the effect of noncardiovascular death as a competing risk, we superimposed the cumulative incidence function curve with the Kaplan-Meier curve. These curves closely approximated each other. After accounting for the competing risk of noncardiovascular death, the magnitude and direction of the factors associated with cardiovascular death were minimally changed. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease, noncardiovascular causes of death reflected a high proportion (40%) of deaths. Accounting for noncardiovascular deaths as a competing risk, there was not a significant change in the risk estimation for cardiovascular death. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01732822.

The MARBLE Study Protocol: Modulating ApoE Signaling to Reduce Brain Inflammation, DeLirium, and PostopErative Cognitive Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative neurocognitive disorders (PND) are common complications in older adults associated with increased 1-year mortality and long-term cognitive decline. One risk factor for worsened long-term postoperative cognitive trajectory is the Alzheimer's disease (AD) genetic risk factor APOE4. APOE4 is thought to elevate AD risk partly by increasing neuroinflammation, which is also a theorized mechanism for PND. Yet, it is unclear whether modulating apoE4 protein signaling in older surgical patients would reduce PND risk or severity. OBJECTIVE: MARBLE is a randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled phase II sequential dose escalation trial designed to evaluate perioperative administration of an apoE mimetic peptide drug, CN-105, in older adults (age≥60 years). The primary aim is evaluating the safety of CN-105 administration, as measured by adverse event rates in CN-105 versus placebo-treated patients. Secondary aims include assessing perioperative CN-105 administration feasibility and its efficacy for reducing postoperative neuroinflammation and PND severity. METHODS: 201 patients undergoing non-cardiac, non-neurological surgery will be randomized to control or CN-105 treatment groups and receive placebo or drug before and every six hours after surgery, for up to three days after surgery. Chart reviews, pre- and postoperative cognitive testing, delirium screening, and blood and CSF analyses will be performed to examine effects of CN-105 on perioperative adverse event rates, cognition, and neuroinflammation. Trial results will be disseminated by presentations at conferences and peer-reviewed publications. CONCLUSION: MARBLE is a transdisciplinary study designed to measure CN-105 safety and efficacy for preventing PND in older adults and to provide insight into the pathogenesis of these geriatric syndromes.

Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

P2Y12 Inhibitor Switching in Response to Routine Notification of CYP2C19 Clopidogrel Metabolizer Status Following Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Importance: Physician behavior in response to knowledge of a patient's CYP2C19 clopidogrel metabolizer status is unknown. Objective: To investigate the association of mandatory reporting of CYP2C19 pharmacogenomic testing, provided to investigators with no direct recommendations on how to use these results, with changes in P2Y12 inhibitor use, particularly clopidogrel, in the Randomized Trial to Compare the Safety of Rivaroxaban vs Aspirin in Addition to Either Clopidogrel or Ticagrelor in Acute Coronary Syndrome (GEMINI-ACS-1) clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: The GEMINI-ACS-1 trial compared rivaroxaban, 2.5 mg twice daily, with aspirin, 100 mg daily, plus open-label clopidogrel or ticagrelor (provided), in patients with recent acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The trial included 371 clinical centers in 21 countries and 3037 patients with ACS. Data were analyzed between May 2017 and February 2019. Interventions: Investigators were required to prestipulate their planned response to CYP2C19 metabolizer status. In response to a regulatory mandate, results for all patients were reported to investigators approximately 1 week after randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Reasons for switching P2Y12 inhibitors and occurrence of bleeding and ischemic events were collected. Results: Of 3037 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 62.8 [9.0] years; 2275 men [74.9%], and 2824 white race/ethnicity [93.0%]), investigators initially treated 1704 (56.1%) with ticagrelor and 1333 (43.9%) with clopidogrel. Investigators prestipulated that they would use CYP2C19 metabolizer status to change P2Y12 inhibitor in 48.5% of genotyped clopidogrel-treated patients (n = 642 of 1324) and 5.5% of genotyped ticagrelor-treated patients (n = 93 of 1692). P2Y12 inhibitor switching for any reason occurred in 197 patients and was more common in patients treated with ticagrelor (146 of 1704 [8.6%]) compared with clopidogrel (51 of 1333 [3.8%]). Of patients initially treated with ticagrelor, only 1 (0.1% overall; 0.7% of all who switched) was switched based on CYP2C19 status. Of patients initially treated with clopidogrel, 23 (1.7% overall,;45.1% of all who switched) were switched owing to metabolizer status. Of 48 patients (3.6%) with reduced metabolizer status treated initially with clopidogrel, 15 (31.3%) were switched based on metabolizer status, including 48.1% (13 of 27) in which switching was prestipulated. Conclusions and Relevance: Physicians were evenly split on how to respond to knowledge of CYP2C19 metabolizer status in clopidogrel-treated patients. Mandatory provision of this information rarely prompted P2Y12 inhibitor switching overall, including a minority of patients with reduced metabolizer status. These findings highlight the clinical equipoise among physicians regarding use of this information and the reluctance to use information from routine genotyping in the absence of definitive clinical trial data demonstrating the efficacy of this approach. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02293395.

Incidence, Characteristics, and Outcomes of Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights From the EUCLID Trial.

Importance: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at high risk for myocardial infarction (MI). Objective: To characterize the incidence and types of MI in a PAD population, identify factors associated with MI, and determine the association of MI with cardiovascular mortality and acute limb ischemia. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Study Comparing Cardiovascular Effects of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease (EUCLID) was a double-blind randomized clinical trial conducted at 811 sites in 28 countries that randomized 13 885 patients with symptomatic PAD to monotherapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. Participants had an ankle-brachial index (ABI) of 0.80 or less or previous lower extremity revascularization. Median follow-up was 30 months. For these analyses, patients were evaluated for MI occurrence during follow-up irrespective of treatment. Data were analyzed from June 2017 to September 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: An adjudication clinical events committee classified MI as type 1 (spontaneous), type 2 (secondary), type 3 (sudden cardiac death), type 4a (less than 48 hours after percutaneous coronary intervention), type 4b (definite stent thrombosis), or type 5 (less than 72 hours after coronary artery bypass graft). A multivariate regression model was developed by stepwise selection to identify factors associated with MI, and a time-dependent multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the association of MI with cardiovascular death and acute limb ischemia requiring hospitalization. Results: Of the 13 885 patients included in this analysis, 9997 (72.0%) were male, and the median (interquartile range) age was 66 (60-73) years. Myocardial infarction occurred in 683 patients (4.9%; 2.4 events per 100 patient-years) during a median follow-up of 30 months. Patients experiencing MI were older (median [interquartile range] age, 69 [62-75] vs 66 [60-72] years), more likely to have diabetes (349 of 683 [51.1%] vs 4996 of 13 202 [37.8%]) or a previous lower extremity revascularization (466 of 683 [68.2%] vs 7409 of 13 202 [56.1%]), and had a lower ABI (if included by ABI) compared with censored patients. Of the 683 patients with MI during follow-up, the most common MI type was type 1 (405 [59.3%]), followed by type 2 (236 [34.6%]), type 4a (14 [2.0%]), type 3 (12 [1.8%]), type 4b (11 [1.6%]), and type 5 (5 [0.7%]). Postrandomization MI was independently associated with cardiovascular death (adjusted hazard ratio, 9.0; 95% CI, 7.3-11.2; P < .001) and acute limb ischemia requiring hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3-5.0; P = .008). Conclusions and Relevance: Approximately 5% of patients with symptomatic PAD had an MI during a median follow-up of 30 months. Type 1 MI (spontaneous) was the most common MI type; however, one-third of MIs were type 2 MI (secondary). More research is needed to identify therapies to reduce the risk of MI in patients with PAD and to improve management of type 2 MI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01732822.

Cardiovascular Outcomes After Lower Extremity Endovascular or Surgical Revascularization: The EUCLID Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lower extremity revascularization (LER) is a common treatment in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), but long-term outcomes are poorly defined. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to analyze LER in the EUCLID (Examining Use of tiCagreLor In paD) trial to determine predictors and cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: Patients were grouped according to whether they received a post-randomization LER (n = 1,738) or not (n = 12,147). All variables were assessed for significance in univariable and parsimonious multivariable models. The primary endpoint was myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiovascular death; major adverse limb events (MALE) included acute limb ischemia or major amputation. RESULTS: A post-randomization LER occurred in 12.5% of patients and was an endovascular LER in 74.7%. Endovascular LERs were performed more often in North America, whereas surgical procedures occurred more frequently in Europe. Independent factors predicting LER were prior and type of prior LER, geographic region, limb symptoms, diabetes, and smoking. A post-randomization LER was associated with an increased risk for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio: 1.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.35 to 1.90; p < 0.0001) and MALE (hazard ratio: 12.0; 95% confidence interval: 9.47 to 15.30; p < 0.0001). Event rates for the primary endpoint after LER were numerically higher in the surgical subgroup, but MALE were similar between surgical and endovascular LER. CONCLUSIONS: In the EUCLID trial, LER was most often endovascular. Following LER, there was an increased hazard for the primary endpoint (with higher event rates in the surgical group) and a markedly increased risk for MALE events (with similar event rates between surgical and endovascular LER procedures). (A Study Comparing Cardiovascular Effects of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease [EUCLID]; NCT01732822).

Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease and prior coronary artery disease: Insights from the EUCLID trial.

Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at heightened risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We sought to evaluate the risk of concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with symptomatic PAD versus PAD without diagnosed CAD, and whether ticagrelor was superior to clopidogrel in reducing that risk. The EUCLID trial randomized 13,885 patients with PAD to antithrombotic monotherapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. CAD was defined as prior myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Median follow-up was 30 months. Among 4032 (29%) patients with PAD and CAD, 63% had prior MI, 54% prior PCI, and 38% prior CABG. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, patients with PAD and CAD had significantly higher rates of the primary endpoint (cardiovascular death/MI/stroke, 15.3% vs 8.9%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% CI: 1.13-1.99; p=0.005), but no statistically significant increase in acute limb ischemia (HR 1.28, 95% CI: 0.57-2.85; p=0.55) or major bleeding (HR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.49-2.48; p=0.81) versus PAD without CAD. Among patients with PAD and CAD, there was no differential treatment effect between ticagrelor versus clopidogrel for the primary efficacy endpoint (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87-1.19; p=0.84), acute limb ischemia (HR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.63-1.69; p=0.89), or major bleeding (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.66-1.69; p=0.81). There was a statistically significant interaction between prior coronary stent placement and study treatment ( p=0.03) with a numerical reduction in the primary efficacy endpoint with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel (13.8% vs 16.8%, HR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.65-1.03; p=0.09). Patients with PAD and prior CAD had higher composite rates of cardiovascular death, MI, and ischemic stroke versus PAD without diagnosed CAD. There were no significant differences between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in cardiovascular events or major bleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01732822.

Outcomes of Patients with Critical Limb Ischaemia in the EUCLID Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Critical limb ischaemia (CLI) implies an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and the optimal antithrombotic treatment is not established. DESIGN, MATERIALS, METHODS: The EUCLID trial investigated the effect of monotherapy with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in 13,885 patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD); the primary endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischaemic stroke. Patients planned for revascularisation or amputation within 3 months, were excluded. This analysis focuses on the subgroup with CLI, defined by rest pain (58.8%), major (9.0%) or minor (32.2%) tissue loss. RESULTS: In EUCLID, 643 patients (4.6%) had CLI at baseline. Diabetes mellitus was more common in the CLI group, while coronary disease, carotid disease, and hypertension were more common in the non-CLI group. A majority of CLI patients (62.1%) had only lower extremity PAD. In patients enrolled on the ankle brachial index (ABI) criteria, ABI was 0.55 ± 0.21 (mean ± SD) for those with CLI versus 0.63 ± 0.15 for those without CLI. The primary efficacy endpoint significantly increased among patients with CLI compared with those without CLI with a rate of 8.85 versus 4.28/100 patient years (adjusted for baseline characteristics hazard ratio [HR] 1.43 [95% CI 1.16-1.76]; p = 0.0009). When acute limb ischaemia requiring hospitalisation was added to the model, significant differences remained (adjusted HR 1.38, [95% CI 1.13-1.69]; p = 0.0016). The 1 year mortality was 8.9%. A trend towards increased lower limb revascularisation among those with CLI was observed. Bleeding (TIMI major, fatal, intracranial) did not differ between those with and without CLI. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 5% of patients enrolled in EUCLID had CLI at baseline. Milder forms of CLI dominated, a result of the trial design. Patients with CLI had a significantly higher rate of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity versus those without CLI. Further efforts are required to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in PAD, especially in patients with CLI. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01732822.

Declaración SPIRIT 2013: definición de los elementos estándares del protocolo de un ensayo clínico / SPIRIT 2013 Statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials

El protocolo de un ensayo clínico es la base para planificar, ejecutar, publicar y evaluar el ensayo. Sin embargo, los protocolos y las guías que existen para su elaboración varían enormemente en cuanto a su calidad y contenido. En este artículo se describe la elaboración sistemática y el alcance de la Declaración SPIRIT 2013 (denominada así por la sigla en inglés de Standard Protocol items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials o Elementos estándares de un protocolo: recomendaciones para los ensayos de intervención), una guía en la que se establecen los contenidos mínimos que debe tener el protocolo de un ensayo clínico. La lista de comprobación de la declaración SPIRIT, que consta de 33 elementos, se aplica a los protocolos de todos los ensayos clínicos y se centra más en el contenido que en el formato. En esta lista se recomienda hacer una descripción completa de lo que se ha planificado, aunque no se establece cómo diseñar o ejecutar un ensayo. Al brindar orientación sobre los contenidos fundamentales, las recomendaciones SPIRIT procuran facilitar la redacción de protocolos de alta calidad. El cumplimiento de las recomendaciones SPIRIT debería mejorar la transparencia y la exhaustividad de los protocolos de los ensayos en beneficio de los investigadores, los participantes, los pacientes, los patrocinadores, los financiadores, los comités de ética de la investigación o las juntas de revisión institucionales, los revisores, las revistas biomédicas, los registros de ensayos, los formuladores de políticas, los organismos reguladores y otras partes interesadas clave.

The protocol of a clinical trial serves as the foundation for study planning, conduct, reporting, and appraisal. However, trial protocols and existing protocol guidelines vary greatly in content and quality. This article describes the systematic development and scope of SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013, a guideline for the minimum content of a clinical trial protocol. The 33-item SPIRIT checklist applies to protocols for all clinical trials and focuses on content rather than format. The checklist recommends a full description of what is planned; it does not prescribe how to design or conduct a trial. By providing guidance for key content, the SPIRIT recommendations aim to facilitate the drafting of high-quality protocols. Adherence to SPIRIT would also enhance the transparency and completeness of trial protocols for the benefit of investigators, trial participants, patients, sponsors, funders, research ethics committees or institutional review boards, peer reviewers, journals, trial registries, policymakers, regulators, and other key stakeholders.