Semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with obesity and prevalent heart failure: a prespecified analysis of the SELECT trial.

BACKGROUND: Semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in people with overweight or obesity, but the effects of this drug on outcomes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and heart failure are unknown. We report a prespecified analysis of the effect of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2·4 mg on ischaemic and heart failure cardiovascular outcomes. We aimed to investigate if semaglutide was beneficial in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with a history of heart failure compared with placebo; if there was a difference in outcome in patients designated as having heart failure with preserved ejection fraction compared with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; and if the efficacy and safety of semaglutide in patients with heart failure was related to baseline characteristics or subtype of heart failure. METHODS: The SELECT trial was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, event-driven phase 3 trial in 41 countries. Adults aged 45 years and older, with a BMI of 27 kg/m2 or greater and established cardiovascular disease were eligible for the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a block size of four using an interactive web response system in a double-blind manner to escalating doses of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide over 16 weeks to a target dose of 2·4 mg, or placebo. In a prespecified analysis, we examined the effect of semaglutide compared with placebo in patients with and without a history of heart failure at enrolment, subclassified as heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, or unclassified heart failure. Endpoints comprised MACE (a composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, and cardiovascular death); a composite heart failure outcome (cardiovascular death or hospitalisation or urgent hospital visit for heart failure); cardiovascular death; and all-cause death. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03574597. FINDINGS: Between Oct 31, 2018, and March 31, 2021, 17 604 patients with a mean age of 61·6 years (SD 8·9) and a mean BMI of 33·4 kg/m2 (5·0) were randomly assigned to receive semaglutide (8803 [50·0%] patients) or placebo (8801 [50·0%] patients). 4286 (24·3%) of 17 604 patients had a history of investigator-defined heart failure at enrolment: 2273 (53·0%) of 4286 patients had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, 1347 (31·4%) had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and 666 (15·5%) had unclassified heart failure. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients with and without heart failure. Patients with heart failure had a higher incidence of clinical events. Semaglutide improved all outcome measures in patients with heart failure at random assignment compared with those without heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·60-0·87 for MACE; 0·79, 0·64-0·98 for the heart failure composite endpoint; 0·76, 0·59-0·97 for cardiovascular death; and 0·81, 0·66-1·00 for all-cause death; all pinteraction>0·19). Treatment with semaglutide resulted in improved outcomes in both the heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HR 0·65, 95% CI 0·49-0·87 for MACE; 0·79, 0·58-1·08 for the composite heart failure endpoint) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction groups (0·69, 0·51-0·91 for MACE; 0·75, 0·52-1·07 for the composite heart failure endpoint), although patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction had higher absolute event rates than those with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. For MACE and the heart failure composite, there were no significant differences in benefits across baseline age, sex, BMI, New York Heart Association status, and diuretic use. Serious adverse events were less frequent with semaglutide versus placebo, regardless of heart failure subtype. INTERPRETATION: In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diease and overweight or obesity, treatment with semaglutide 2·4 mg reduced MACE and composite heart failure endpoints compared with placebo in those with and without clinical heart failure, regardless of heart failure subtype. Our findings could facilitate prescribing and result in improved clinical outcomes for this patient group. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes by Baseline HbA1c and Change in HbA1c in People With Overweight or Obesity but Without Diabetes in SELECT.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cardiovascular effects of semaglutide by baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and change in HbA1c in a prespecified analysis of Semaglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes in People With Overweight or Obesity (SELECT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In SELECT, people with overweight or obesity and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without diabetes were randomized to weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo. The primary end point of first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) (cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke) was reduced by 20% with semaglutide versus placebo. Analysis of outcomes included first MACE, its individual components, expanded MACE (cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke; coronary revascularization; or hospitalization for unstable angina), a heart failure composite (heart failure hospitalization or urgent medical visit or cardiovascular mortality), coronary revascularization, and all-cause mortality by baseline HbA1c subgroup and categories of HbA1c change (<-0.3, -0.3 to 0.3, and >0.3 percentage points) from baseline to 20 weeks using the intention-to-treat principle with Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS: Among 17,604 participants (mean age 61.6 years, 72.3% male), baseline HbA1c was <5.7% for 33.5%, 5.7% to <6.0% for 34.6%, and 6.0% to <6.5% for 31.9%. Cardiovascular risk reduction with semaglutide versus placebo was not shown to be different across baseline HbA1c groups and was consistent with that of the overall study for all end points, except all-cause mortality. Cardiovascular outcomes were also consistent across subgroups of HbA1c change. CONCLUSIONS: In people with overweight or obesity and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease but not diabetes, semaglutide reduced cardiovascular events irrespective of baseline HbA1c or change in HbA1c. Thus, semaglutide is expected to confer cardiovascular benefits in people with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who are normoglycemic at baseline and/or in those without HbA1c improvements.

Re-adjudication of the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS) with study-level meta-analysis of hospitalization for heart failure from cardiovascular outcomes trials with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS) assessed the cardiovascular (CV) safety of sitagliptin versus placebo on CV outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and CV disease and found sitagliptin noninferior to placebo. Subsequently, based on feedback from FDA, the Sponsor of the trial, Merck & Co., Inc., engaged a separate academic research organization, the TIMI Study Group, to re-adjudicate a prespecified set of originally adjudicated events. METHODS: TIMI adjudicated in a blinded fashion all potential hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) events, all potential MACE+ events previously adjudicated as not an endpoint event, and a random subset (~10%) of MACE+ events previously adjudicated as an endpoint event. An updated study-level meta-analysis of four randomized, placebo-controlled, CV outcomes trials with dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors was then performed. RESULTS: After re-adjudication of potential HHF events in the intent-to-treat population, there were 224 patients with a confirmed event in the sitagliptin arm (1.05/100 person-years) and 239 patients in the placebo arm (1.13/100 person-years), corresponding to a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.78-1.13, p = .49). Concordance between the outcome of the original adjudication and the re-adjudication for HHF events was 82.7%. The meta-analysis of CV outcomes trials with DPP-4 inhibitors with placebo and involving 43 522 patients yielded an HR of 1.07 (95% CI: 0.83-1.39), with moderate heterogeneity (p = .45, I2 = 62.07%). CONCLUSION: The results of this independent re-adjudication process and analyses of CV outcomes from TECOS were consistent with the original adjudication results and overall study findings. An updated study-level meta-analysis showed no overall significant risk for HHF with DPP-4 inhibitors, but with statistical heterogeneity.

Evaluation of the Usage and Dosing of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Patients in Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: Although strategies for optimization of pharmacologic therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are scripted by guidelines, data from HF registries suggests that guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) are underutilized among eligible patients. Whether this discrepancy reflects medication intolerance, contraindications, or a quality of care issue remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this initiative was to identify reasons for underutilization and under-dosing of HFrEF therapy in patients at a large, academic medical center. METHODS: Among 500 patients with HFrEF enrolled in a quality improvement project at a tertiary center, we evaluated usage and dosing of 4 categories of GDMT: ACE inhibitors/Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ACE-i/ARB), Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors (ARNi), beta blockers, and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists (MRA). Reasons for nonprescription and usage of suboptimal doses were abstracted from notes in the chart and from telephone review of previous medication trials with the patient. RESULTS: Of 500 patients identified, 472 subjects had complete data for analysis. Among eligible patients, ACE-i/ARB were prescribed in 81.4% (293 of 360) and beta blockers in 94.4% (442 of 468). Of these patients, 10.6% were prescribed target doses of ACE-i/ARB and 12.4% were prescribed target doses of beta blockers. Utilization of other categories of GDMT was lower, with 54% of eligible patients prescribed MRAs and 27% prescribed an ARNi. In most cases, the reasons for nonprescription or under-dosing of GDMT were not apparent on review of the health record or discussion with the patient. CONCLUSION: Clear rationale for nonprescription and under-dosing of GDMT often cannot be ascertained from detailed review and is only rarely related to documented medication intolerance or contraindications, suggesting an opportunity for quality improvement.

Long-acting antimuscarinic therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease receiving beta-blockers.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blocker therapies for cardiovascular comorbidities are often withheld in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) due to potential adverse effects on airway obstruction. We carried out a post hoc analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of aclidinium in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and increased cardiovascular risk receiving beta-blockers at baseline versus non-users. METHODS: ASCENT-COPD was a Phase 4, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to aclidinium or placebo twice-daily for up to 3 years. Outcomes included risk of (time to first) major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause mortality, and lung function over 3 years, and exacerbations over 1 year. RESULTS: Of 3589 patients, 1269 (35.4%) used beta-blockers and 2320 (64.6%) were non-users at baseline. Aclidinium did not statistically increase the risk of MACE (beta-blocker user: hazard ratio 1.01 [95% CI 0.62-1.64]; non-user: 0.80 [0.51-1.24]; interaction P = 0.48) or all-cause mortality (beta-blocker user: 1.13 [0.78-1.64]; non-user: 0.89 [0.62-1.26]; interaction P = 0.35), in patients using beta-blockers. Aclidinium reduced annualized rate of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbation (beta-blocker user: rate ratio 0.75 [95% CI 0.60-0.94, P = 0.013]; non-user: 0.79 [0.67-0.93, P = 0.005]), delayed time to first exacerbation, and improved lung function versus placebo. There was greater trough FEV1 benefit in beta-blocker users versus non-users (least squares mean difference at 52 weeks: 111 mL [95% CI 74 mL-147 mL] versus 69 mL [42 mL-97 mL]; interaction P = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis supports long-acting anti-muscarinic use with concomitant beta-blockers in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and cardiovascular comorbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01966107, Registered 16 October 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01966107 .

Genetic Risk Score to Identify Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Cardiometabolic Disease.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and has a known genetic contribution. We tested the performance of a genetic risk score for its ability to predict VTE in 3 cohorts of patients with cardiometabolic disease. METHODS: We included patients from the FOURIER (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Patients With Elevated Risk), PEGASUS-TIMI 54 (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin), and SAVOR-TIMI 53 (Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus) trials (history of a major atherosclerotic cardiovascular event, myocardial infarction, and diabetes, respectively) who consented for genetic testing and were not on baseline anticoagulation. We calculated a VTE genetic risk score based on 297 single nucleotide polymorphisms with established genome-wide significance. Patients were divided into tertiles of genetic risk. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios for VTE across genetic risk groups. The polygenic risk score was compared with available clinical risk factors (age, obesity, smoking, history of heart failure, and diabetes) and common monogenic mutations. RESULTS: A total of 29 663 patients were included in the analysis with a median follow-up of 2.4 years, of whom 174 had a VTE event. There was a significantly increased gradient of risk across VTE genetic risk tertiles (P-trend <0.0001). After adjustment for clinical risk factors, patients in the intermediate and high genetic risk groups had a 1.88-fold (95% CI, 1.23-2.89; P=0.004) and 2.70-fold (95% CI, 1.81-4.06; P<0.0001) higher risk of VTE compared with patients with low genetic risk. In a continuous model adjusted for clinical risk factors, each standard deviation increase in the genetic risk score was associated with a 47% (95% CI, 29-68) increased risk of VTE (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In a broad spectrum of patients with cardiometabolic disease, a polygenic risk score is a strong, independent predictor of VTE after accounting for available clinical risk factors, identifying 1/3 of patients who have a risk of VTE comparable to that seen with established monogenic thrombophilia.

Effect of vorapaxar on cardiovascular and limb outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease with and without coronary artery disease: Analysis from the TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 trial.

Intensive antithrombotic therapy reduces major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse limb events (MALE) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Recent studies have suggested heterogeneity in risk and benefit in those with and without concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral revascularization. We evaluated the risk of MACE and MALE in patients with PAD stratified by history of concomitant CAD and prior peripheral revascularization and whether the efficacy and safety of vorapaxar were similar in these subgroups. The TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 trial randomized 26,449 patients with prior MI, ischemic stroke, or PAD to vorapaxar or placebo. This analysis examined the effect of vorapaxar in a broad population of 6136 patients with PAD. Overall, vorapaxar significantly reduced MACE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73, 0.99; p = 0.034) and MALE (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92; p = 0.011) in patients with PAD. The absolute risk reduction (ARR) for MACE was greater in patients with PAD and CAD versus those with PAD alone (-2.2% vs 0.1%: number needed to treat (NNT) 45 vs 1000). Conversely, the ARR for MALE was higher in those with prior lower extremity revascularization (2.5% vs 0.2%: NNT 40 vs 500). Vorapaxar increased major bleeding (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.12, 1.71; p = 0.003). The net clinical outcome in all patients with PAD was reduced with vorapaxar (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72, 0.94; p = 0.004), with benefits driven by reductions in MACE for those with CAD and by reductions in MALE for those with prior peripheral revascularization. Among patients with PAD, vorapaxar resulted in a net clinical benefit; however, the drivers of benefit were heterogeneous, with greater reductions in MACE in those with concomitant CAD and greater reductions in MALE in those with prior lower extremity revascularization, and unclear benefit in patients with neither. These clinical characteristics may be useful in identifying the subgroups of patients with PAD most likely to benefit from potent antithrombotic therapies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00526474.

Biomarker of Collagen Turnover (C-Terminal Telopeptide) and Prognosis in Patients With Non- ST -Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Background Small studies have suggested an association between markers of collagen turnover and adverse outcomes in heart failure ( HF ). We examined C-terminal telopeptide (beta- CT x) and the risk of cardiovascular death or new or worsening HF in non- ST -elevation acute coronary syndrome. Methods and Results We measured baseline serum beta- CT x, NT -pro BNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), hsTnT (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T) and hs CRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein) (Roche Diagnostics) in a nested biomarker analysis (n=4094) from a study of patients with non- ST -elevation acute coronary syndrome. The relationship between quartiles of beta- CT x and cardiovascular death or HF over a median follow-up time of 12 months was analyzed using adjusted Cox models. Higher beta- CT x levels identified a significantly higher risk of cardiovascular death/ HF (Q4 10.9% versus Q1 3.8%, Logrank P<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, beta- CT x in the top quartile (Q4) was associated with cardiovascular death/ HF (Q4 versus Q1: adjusted hazard ratio 2.22 [1.50-3.27]) and its components (Q4 versus Q1: cardiovascular death: adjusted hazard ratio 2.48 [1.46-4.21]; HF : adjusted hazard ratio 2.04 [1.26-3.30]). In an adjusted multimarker model including NT -pro BNP , hsTnT, and hs CRP , beta- CT x remained independently associated with cardiovascular death/ HF (Q4 versus Q1: adjusted hazard ratio 1.98 [1.34-2.93]) and its components. Beta- CT x correlated weakly with NT -pro BNP ( r=0.17, P<0.001) and left ventricular ejection fraction ( r=-0.05, P=0.008) and did not correlate with hsTnT ( r=0.02, P=0.20), or hs CRP ( r=-0.03, P=0.09). Conclusions Levels of beta- CT x, a biomarker of collagen turnover, were associated with cardiovascular death and HF in patients with non- ST -elevation acute coronary syndrome. This biomarker, which correlated only weakly or not significantly with traditional biomarkers of cardiovascular death and HF , may provide complementary pathobiological insight and risk stratification in these patients.

Prognostic role of GDF-15 across the spectrum of clinical risk in patients with NSTE-ACS.

Background Growth differentiation factor (GDF)-15 has been shown to predict cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) using non-commercial assays. We evaluated the prognostic performance of GDF-15 measured with the first clinically available assay. Furthermore, we evaluated whether GDF-15 was associated with CV death or heart failure (HF) across the spectrum of risk in non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE)-ACS. Methods We measured baseline GDF-15 (Roche, Elecsys) in 4330 patients with NSTE-ACS enrolled in MERLIN-TIMI 36. Patients were categorized using a priori thresholds of GDF-15 levels (<1200, 1200-1800, ≥1800 ng/L) and stratified according to estimated clinical risk per TIMI risk score (0-2, 3-4, and ≥5). Cox modeling included age, sex, BMI, smoking, HF, diabetes, renal function, NT-proBNP, hsTnT, and hsCRP. Results There were 2286 (53%), 1104 (25%), and 940 (22%) pts with GDF-15 <1200, 1200-1800, and ≥1800 respectively. GDF-15 was significantly associated after multivariable adjustment with CV death/HF modeled either as a categorical (1200-1800 ng/L: Adj hazard ratios [HR] 1.55 [1.09-2.19]; ≥1800 ng/L: Adj HR 1.94 [1.34-2.79]) or continuous variable (Adj HR 1.36 [1.16-1.60] per 1-unit increase in log2-transformed GDF-15). Notably, there was an interaction (Pinteraction=0.003) between TIMI risk score and GDF-15, with GDF-15 identifying the greatest incremental relative risk in those at lowest risk based on the TIMI risk score alone. Conclusions Using a clinically available assay, GDF-15 can be applied using established cut-off points to independently predict risk of CV death/HF in patients with NSTE-ACS. This incremental risk appears to be particularly robust among individuals traditionally identified as low risk.

Combination of Clinical Exam, MRI and EEG to Predict Outcome Following Cardiac Arrest and Targeted Temperature Management.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread adoption of targeted temperature management (TTM), coma after cardiac arrest remains a common problem with a high proportion of patients suffering substantial disability. Prognostication after cardiac arrest, particularly the identification of patients with likely good outcome, remains difficult. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 78 patients who underwent TTM after cardiac arrest and were evaluated with both electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We hypothesized that combining malignant versus non-malignant EEG classification with clinical exam and quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging would improve prognostic ability. RESULTS: Consistent with prior literature, presence of a malignant EEG pattern was 100% specific for poor outcome. We found that decreased whole brain ADC signal intensity was associated with poor outcome (853 ± 14 vs. 950 ± 17.5 mm2/s, p < 0.0001). Less than 15% total brain volume with ADC signal intensity < 650 mm2/s was predictive of good outcome with 100% sensitivity, 51% specificity and an area under the curve of 0.787. A model combining this ADC marker with non-malignant EEG and flexor-or-better motor response was 100% sensitive and 91.1% specific for good outcome following cardiac arrest and targeted temperature management. CONCLUSION: We conclude that in the absence of malignant EEG findings, combination of physical exam and MRI findings can be a useful to identify those patients who have potential for recovery. Variability in timing of imaging and findings in different modalities argue for the need for future prospective studies of multimodal outcome prediction after cardiac arrest.

Frequency, Predictors, and Impact of Combined Antiplatelet Therapy on Venous Thromboembolism in Patients With Symptomatic Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies suggest that symptomatic atherosclerosis may be associated with risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Prior randomized studies have demonstrated a significant reduction in recurrent VTE with aspirin monotherapy. Whether VTE risk is associated with more severe symptomatic atherosclerosis and more intensive antiplatelet therapy reduces VTE risk beyond aspirin monotherapy is unknown. METHODS: TRA2P-TIMI 50 (Thrombin Receptor Antagonist in Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Ischemic Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) (vorapaxar) and PEGASUS-TIMI 54 (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 54) (ticagrelor) were blinded, randomized placebo-controlled trials of antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of ischemic events in stable patients with symptomatic atherosclerosis. Two blinded vascular specialists systematically identified symptomatic venous thromboembolic events in both trials. RESULTS: Of 47 611 patients with stable vascular disease followed for 3 years in both studies there were 343 VTE events in 301 patients (Kaplan-Meier rate at 3 years, 0.9% for placebo). The risk of VTE was independently associated with age, body mass index, polyvascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and malignancy. The burden of atherosclerosis manifested as an increasing number of symptomatic vascular territories was associated with a graded increase in the 3-year rates of VTE (0.76% for 1, 1.53% for 2, and 2.45% for 3 territories). More intensive antiplatelet therapy (vorapaxar and ticagrelor pooled) significantly reduced the risk of VTE by 29% compared with background antiplatelet therapy, from 0.93% to 0.64% at 3 years (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.89; P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of VTE in patients with atherosclerosis is ≈0.3% per year while on treatment with ≥1 antiplatelet agent, with increased risk independently associated with the number of symptomatic vascular territories. More intensive antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of VTE. These data suggest a relationship between atherosclerosis burden and VTE risk, and they support inclusion of VTE as a prospective end point in long-term secondary prevention trials evaluating the risks and benefits of antiplatelet therapies in patients with atherosclerosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01225562.

Vorapaxar in patients with coronary artery bypass grafting: Findings from the TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 trial.

BACKGROUND: Vorapaxar is a first-in-class protease-activated receptor-1 antagonist indicated for the reduction of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in stable patients with prior atherothrombosis, who have not had a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack. The aims of this study were to investigate: 1) the role of vorapaxar in patients with severe coronary artery disease treated previously with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); and 2) safety in patients undergoing CABG while receiving vorapaxar. METHODS: TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of vorapaxar in 26,449 stable patients with prior atherothrombosis followed for a median of 30 months. We 1) investigated the efficacy of vorapaxar among patients with a history of CABG prior to randomization ( n=2942); and 2) assessed the safety among 367 patients who underwent a new CABG during the trial. RESULTS: Patients with a prior CABG were at higher risk for cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at three years compared with patients without a prior CABG (13.7% vs. 7.8%, p<0.001). Among patients with a prior CABG, vorapaxar significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (11.9% vs. 15.6%, hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.88, p=0.001; number-needed-to-treat = 27). In patients undergoing CABG while receiving vorapaxar, the rate of Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction CABG major bleeding was 6.3% vs. 4.1% with placebo (hazard ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 0.58-4.01, p=0.39). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a prior CABG, vorapaxar significantly reduced the risk of recurrent major cardiovascular events. In patients undergoing CABG while receiving vorapaxar, bleeding risk appeared similar to that seen in the overall trial population.

Peripheral Revascularization in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease With Vorapaxar: Insights From the TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine whether the reduction in peripheral revascularization with vorapaxar in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) is directionally consistent across indications, including acute limb ischemia, progressively disabling symptoms, or both. BACKGROUND: The protease-activated receptor-1 antagonist vorapaxar reduces peripheral revascularization in patients with PAD. METHODS: The TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 (Thrombin Receptor Antagonist in Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Ischemic Events-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 50) trial randomized 26,449 patients with histories of myocardial infarction, stroke, or symptomatic PAD to vorapaxar or placebo on a background of standard therapy. A total of 5,845 patients had a known history of PAD at randomization. Peripheral revascularization procedures reported by the site were a pre-specified outcome. We explored whether the benefit of vorapaxar was consistent across indication and type of procedure. RESULTS: Of the 5,845 patients with known PAD, a total of 934 (16%) underwent at least 1 peripheral revascularization over 2.5 years (median). More than one-half (55%) were for worsening claudication, followed by critical limb ischemia (24%), acute limb ischemia (16%), and asymptomatic severe stenosis (4%). Vorapaxar significantly reduced peripheral revascularization (19.3% for placebo, 15.4% for vorapaxar; hazard ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 0.93; p = 0.003), with a consistent pattern of efficacy across indication. CONCLUSIONS: Vorapaxar reduces peripheral revascularization in patients with PAD. This benefit of vorapaxar is directionally consistent across type of procedure and indication. (Trial to Assess the Effects of Vorapaxar [SCH 530348; MK-5348] in Preventing Heart Attack and Stroke in Patients With Atherosclerosis [TRA 2°P - TIMI 50] [P04737]; NCT00526474).

Atherothrombotic Risk Stratification and the Efficacy and Safety of Vorapaxar in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease and Previous Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stable ischemic heart disease and previous myocardial infarction (MI) vary in their risk for recurrent cardiovascular events. Atherothrombotic risk assessment may be useful to identify high-risk patients who have the greatest potential to benefit from more intensive secondary preventive therapy such as treatment with vorapaxar. METHODS: We identified independent clinical indicators of atherothrombotic risk among 8598 stable, placebo-treated patients with a previous MI followed up for 2.5 years (median) in TRA 2°P-TIMI 50 [Thrombin Receptor Antagonist in Secondary Prevention of Atherothrombotic Ischemic Events-TIMI 50]. The efficacy and safety of vorapaxar (SCH 530348; MK-5348) were assessed by baseline risk among patients with previous MI without prior stroke or transient ischemic attack for whom there is a clinical indication for vorapaxar. End points were cardiovascular death, MI, or ischemic stroke and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) severe bleeding. RESULTS: The 9 independent risk predictors were age, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, smoking, peripheral arterial disease, previous stroke, previous coronary bypass grafting, heart failure, and renal dysfunction. A simple integer-based scheme using these predictors showed a strong graded relationship with the rate of cardiovascular death/MI/ischemic stroke and the individual components (P for trend <0.001 for all). High-risk patients (≥3 risk indicators; 20% of population) had a 3.2% absolute risk reduction in cardiovascular disease/MI/ischemic stroke with vorapaxar, and intermediate-risk patients (1-2 risk indicators; 61%) had a 2.1% absolute risk reduction (P<0.001 each), translating to a number needed to treat of 31 and 48. Bleeding increased across risk groups (P for trend<0.01); however, net clinical outcome was increasingly favorable with vorapaxar across risk groups. Fatal bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage was 0.9% with both treatments in high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Stratification of baseline atherothrombotic risk can assist with therapeutic decision making for vorapaxar use for secondary prevention after MI. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00526474.

Long-Term Post-Discharge Risks in Older Survivors of Myocardial Infarction With and Without Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) associated with acute myocardial infarction (MI) confers high in-hospital mortality; however, among those patients who survive, little is known regarding their post-discharge mortality and health care use rates. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine 1-year survival and readmission rates after hospital discharge of older MI survivors with and without OHCA. METHODS: Using linked Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines and Medicare data, this study analyzed 54,860 patients with MI who were older than 65 years of age and who had been discharged alive from 545 U.S. hospitals between April 2011 and December 2012. Multivariable models examined the associations between MI-associated OHCA and 1-year post-discharge mortality or all-cause readmission rates. Patients discharged to hospice were excluded, given their known poor prognosis. RESULTS: Following hospital discharge, compared with older MI survivors without OHCA (n = 54,219), those with OHCA (n = 641, 1.2%) were more likely to be younger, male, and smokers, but less likely to have diabetes, heart failure, or prior revascularization. OHCA patients presented more often with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (63.2% vs. 29.6%) and cardiogenic shock (29.0% vs. 2.2%); however, among in-hospital MI survivors, OHCA was not associated with 1-year post-discharge mortality (unadjusted 13.8% vs. 15.8%, p = 0.17, adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68 to 1.15). In contrast, MI survivors with OHCA actually had lower unadjusted and adjusted risk of the composite outcome of 1-year mortality or all-cause readmission than patients without OHCA (44.0% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.03, adjusted HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Among older patients with MI who survived to hospital discharge and were not discharged to hospice, those presenting with OHCA did not have higher 1-year mortality or health care use rates compared with those MI survivors without OHCA. These findings show that the early risk of adverse events in patients with OHCA does not persist after hospital discharge, and they support efforts to improve initial survival rates of older patients with MI and OHCA.

Outcomes According to Cardiac Catheterization Referral and Clopidogrel Use Among Medicare Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Discharged Without In-hospital Revascularization.

BACKGROUND: While use of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor is recommended by guidelines, few studies have examined its effectiveness among older non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients who did not undergo coronary revascularization. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included unrevascularized non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients ≥65 years discharged home from 463 ACTION Registry-GWTG hospitals from 2007 to 2010. Rates of discharge clopidogrel use were described for patients with no angiography, angiography without obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD; ≥50% stenosis in ≥1 vessel), and angiography with obstructive CAD. Two-year outcomes were ascertained from linked Medicare data and included composite major adverse cardiac events (defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction readmission, or revascularization), and individual components. Outcomes associated with clopidogrel use were adjusted using inverse probability-weighted propensity modeling. Of 14 154 unrevascularized patients, 54.7% (n=7745) did not undergo angiography, 10.6% (n=1494) had angiography without CAD, and 34.7% (n=4915) had angiography with CAD. Discharge clopidogrel was prescribed for 42.2% of all unrevascularized patients: 37.8% without angiography, 34.1% without obstructive CAD at angiography, and 51.6% with obstructive CAD at angiography. Discharge clopidogrel use was not associated with major adverse cardiac events in any group: without angiography (adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.99 [0.93-1.06]), angiography without CAD (1.04 [0.74-1.47]), and angiography with CAD (1.12 [1.00-1.25], Pinteraction=0.20). CONCLUSIONS: We found no association between discharge clopidogrel use and long-term risk of major adverse cardiac events among older, unrevascularized non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients. Clopidogrel use in this population requires further prospective evaluation.