Impact of proton pump inhibitor use on clinical outcomes in East Asian patients receiving clopidogrel following drug-eluting stent implantation.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is common, but PPI may reduce the antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We evaluated the impact of PPI use on clinical outcomes in post-PCI patients, by incorporating P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) and CYP2C19 genotyping results. METHODS: From a multicenter registry of patients who underwent PCI with drug-eluting stent implantation and received clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), patients who were prescribed a PPI at the time of PCI (PPI users) were compared to those who were not (non-users). The primary outcome included all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or cerebrovascular accident at 12 months. Major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3-5) and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (BARC types 3-5) were important secondary outcomes. The adjusted outcomes were compared using a 1:1 propensity-score (PS) matching and competing risk analysis. RESULTS: Of 13,160 patients, 2,235 (17.0%) were prescribed PPI, with an average age of 65.4 years. PPI users had higher on-treatment PRU levels than non-users. After PS matching, the primary outcome occurred in 51 patients who were PPI users (cumulative incidence, 4.7%) and 41 patients who were non-users (cumulative incidence, 3.7%; log-rank p = 0.27). In carriers of both CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles, PPI use was linked to an increased risk of the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 3.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-8.78). The incidence of major bleeding and GI bleeding (BARC types 3-5) was comparable between PPI users and non-users in the PS-matched cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In post-PCI patients receiving clopidogrel-based DAPT, PPI use was not linked to an increased risk of adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, but there was a small but significant increase in on-treatment PRU. Future research using a more individualized approach would further elucidate these interactions and guide evidence-based clinical practices.

The Use of Coronary Imaging for Predicting Future Cardiovascular Events.

Background: Despite advancements in coronary artery disease (CAD) treatment with drug-eluting stent, its morbidity and mortality remain high. In context, intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly recommended for better clinical outcomes in patient with CAD. Near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound (NIRS-IVUS), as one of the intravascular imaging methods, is effective in detecting lipid-rich plaques, which is crucial for identifying high-risk or vulnerable plaques employing near-infrared light. High lipid core burden, as identified by NIRS-IVUS, correlates with an increased risk of adverse cardiac events and shows varying degrees of efficacy in plaque management and event prevention. Summary: This article addresses about how NIRS-IVUS can be used to predict event of CAD. The study highlights the crucial role of NIRS-IVUS in predicting future cardiovascular events. Findings indicate that the presence of high lipid core burden is related to increased risks of periprocedural myocardial infarction and reduced coronary flow during PCI. The study also outlines the predictive value of NIRS-IVUS in non-culprit lesions, where plaques with high lipid core burden significantly increase the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events as demonstrated in the PROSPECT II trial. In terms of therapeutic strategies, the study reviews the effectiveness of high-intensity lipid-lowering strategies in stabilizing vulnerable plaques, as evidenced in trials such as the YELLOW and PACMAN AMI trials. Key Messages: NIRS-IVUS emerges as a valuable diagnostic tool in treating CAD. It effectively identifies vulnerable plaques and aids in predicting and preventing future adverse cardiac events. However, to enhance its practicality and promote widespread adoption in clinical settings, further long-term outcome research of NIRS-IVUS-guided PCI is necessary. These efforts can potentially make NIRS-IVUS a more accessible and indispensable tool in cardiovascular disease management.

Assessing GPT-4's Performance in Delivering Medical Advice: Comparative Analysis With Human Experts.

Background: Accurate medical advice is paramount in ensuring optimal patient care, and misinformation can lead to misguided decisions with potentially detrimental health outcomes. The emergence of large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI's GPT-4 has spurred interest in their potential health care applications, particularly in automated medical consultation. Yet, rigorous investigations comparing their performance to human experts remain sparse. Objective: This study aims to compare the medical accuracy of GPT-4 with human experts in providing medical advice using real-world user-generated queries, with a specific focus on cardiology. It also sought to analyze the performance of GPT-4 and human experts in specific question categories, including drug or medication information and preliminary diagnoses. Methods: We collected 251 pairs of cardiology-specific questions from general users and answers from human experts via an internet portal. GPT-4 was tasked with generating responses to the same questions. Three independent cardiologists (SL, JHK, and JJC) evaluated the answers provided by both human experts and GPT-4. Using a computer interface, each evaluator compared the pairs and determined which answer was superior, and they quantitatively measured the clarity and complexity of the questions as well as the accuracy and appropriateness of the responses, applying a 3-tiered grading scale (low, medium, and high). Furthermore, a linguistic analysis was conducted to compare the length and vocabulary diversity of the responses using word count and type-token ratio. Results: GPT-4 and human experts displayed comparable efficacy in medical accuracy ("GPT-4 is better" at 132/251, 52.6% vs "Human expert is better" at 119/251, 47.4%). In accuracy level categorization, humans had more high-accuracy responses than GPT-4 (50/237, 21.1% vs 30/238, 12.6%) but also a greater proportion of low-accuracy responses (11/237, 4.6% vs 1/238, 0.4%; P=.001). GPT-4 responses were generally longer and used a less diverse vocabulary than those of human experts, potentially enhancing their comprehensibility for general users (sentence count: mean 10.9, SD 4.2 vs mean 5.9, SD 3.7; P<.001; type-token ratio: mean 0.69, SD 0.07 vs mean 0.79, SD 0.09; P<.001). Nevertheless, human experts outperformed GPT-4 in specific question categories, notably those related to drug or medication information and preliminary diagnoses. These findings highlight the limitations of GPT-4 in providing advice based on clinical experience. Conclusions: GPT-4 has shown promising potential in automated medical consultation, with comparable medical accuracy to human experts. However, challenges remain particularly in the realm of nuanced clinical judgment. Future improvements in LLMs may require the integration of specific clinical reasoning pathways and regulatory oversight for safe use. Further research is needed to understand the full potential of LLMs across various medical specialties and conditions.

High platelet reactivity strongly predicts early stent thrombosis in patients with drug-eluting stent implantation.

Stent thrombosis (ST) is a fatal complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The association between P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) level and stent thrombosis occurrence remains unclear. Based on the multicenter, observational PTRG-DES (Platelet function and genoType-Related long-term proGnosis in DES-treated patients) registry of patients with drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation, a total of 11,714 patients with PRU values were analyzed. We sought to identify the predictors of early stent thrombosis (EST) and compared the primary outcome, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization, between EST and non-EST groups. EST, defined as definite ST within 1 month after index PCI, occurred in 51 patients. PRU values were significantly higher in the EST group (263.5 ± 70.8 vs. 217.5 ± 78.7, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, PRU ≥ 252 (OR, 5.10; 95% CI 1.58-16.46; p = 0.006) and aspirin reaction unit ≥ 414 (OR 4.85; 95% CI 1.07-21.97; p = 0.040) were independent predictors of EST. The cumulative incidence of primary composite outcome at one year was significantly higher in the EST group (38.2% vs. 3.9%, Log-rank p < 0.001). In patients treated with clopidogrel after successful DES implantation, EST was associated with higher platelet reactivities, and a greater risk of cardiovascular events.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04734028.

Association of Age- and Body Mass Index-Stratified High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity With Coronary Intervention Outcomes in East Asian Patients.

BACKGROUND: Although age and body mass index (BMI) significantly affect platelet reactivity units and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention, there are limited data on the relationship between high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) and clinical outcomes on age and BMI differences. Thus, we investigated the association of HPR with clinical outcomes according to age and BMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study analyzed 11 714 patients who underwent platelet function tests after percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), whereas the secondary end point was major bleeding. HPR was defined as platelet reactivity units ≥252. Patients were categorized by age (<67 years of age or ≥67 years of age) and BMI (≤22.6 kg/m2 or >22.6 kg/m2). Patients <67 years of age with HPR had increases in both MACCEs (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.436 [95% CI, 1.106-1.867]; P=0.007) and major bleeding (adjusted HR, 1.584 [95% CI, 1.095-2.290]; P=0.015) compared with the those with non-HPR, respectively. In patients ≥67 years of age with HPR, there were no differences in MACCEs, but there was a decrease in major bleeding (adjusted HR, 0.721 [95% CI, 0.542-0.959]; P=0.024). Meanwhile, patients with HPR with BMI >22.6 kg/m2 had increases in MACCEs (adjusted HR, 1.387 [95% CI, 1.140-1.688]; P=0.001). No differences were shown in major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: HPR was linked to an increase in MACCEs or a decrease in major bleeding in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention, depending on age and BMI. This study is the first to observe that clinical outcomes in patients with HPR after percutaneous coronary intervention may vary based on age and BMI. Because the study is observational, the results should be viewed as hypothesis generating and emphasize the need for randomized clinical trials.

Prognostic Impact of CYP2C19 Genotypes on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Older Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Carriers of CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles have increased adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention, but limited data are available for older patients. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of CYP2C19 genotypes on clinical outcomes in older patients after percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study included 1201 older patients (aged ≥75 years) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and received clopidogrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy in South Korea. Patients were grouped on the basis of CYP2C19 genotypes. The primary outcome was 3-year major adverse cardiac events, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Older patients were grouped into 3 groups: normal metabolizer (36.6%), intermediate metabolizer (48.1%), and poor metabolizer (15.2%). The occurrence of the primary outcome was significantly different among the groups (3.1, 7.0, and 6.2% in the normal metabolizer, intermediate metabolizer, and poor metabolizer groups, respectively; P=0.02). The incidence rate of all-cause death at 3 years was greater in the intermediate metabolizer and poor metabolizer groups (8.1% and 9.2%, respectively) compared with that in the normal metabolizer group (3.5%, P=0.03) without significant differences in major bleeding. In the multivariable analysis, the intermediate metabolizer and poor metabolizer groups were independent predictors of 3-year clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients, the presence of any CYP2C19 loss-of-function allele was found to be predictive of a higher incidence of major adverse cardiac events within 3 years following percutaneous coronary intervention. This finding suggests a need for further investigation into an optimal antiplatelet strategy for older patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT04734028.

Comparison of Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy Versus Statin Monotherapy for Primary Prevention in Middle-Aged Adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Lipid lowering therapy is essential to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events; however, limited evidence exists regarding the use of statin with ezetimibe as primary prevention strategy for middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the impact of single pill combination therapy on clinical outcomes in relatively healthy middle-aged patients when compared with statin monotherapy. METHODS: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, a propensity score match analysis was performed for baseline characteristics of 92,156 patients categorized into combination therapy (n=46,078) and statin monotherapy (n=46,078) groups. Primary outcome was composite outcomes, including death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke. And secondary outcome was all-cause death. The mean follow-up duration was 2.9±0.3 years. RESULTS: The 3-year composite outcomes of all-cause death, coronary artery disease, and ischemic stroke demonstrated no significant difference between the 2 groups (10.3% vs. 10.1%; hazard ratio (HR), 1.022; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.980-1.064; p=0.309). Meanwhile, the 3-year all-cause death rate was lower in the combination therapy group than in the statin monotherapy group (0.2% vs. 0.4%; p<0.001), with a significant HR of 0.595 (95% CI, 0.460-0.769; p<0.001). Single pill combination therapy exhibited consistently lower mortality rates across various subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the statin monotherapy, the combination therapy for primary prevention showed no difference in composite outcomes but may reduce mortality risk in relatively healthy middle-aged patients. However, since the study was observational, further randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.