Optimal antithrombotic strategy in patients with atrial fibrillation beyond 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation: Design and rationale of the randomized ADAPT AF-DES trial.

BACKGROUND: Both anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies are recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although contemporary guidelines recommend discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy 1 year after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation due to excessive bleeding risk, supporting randomized trials are still lacking. METHODS: The ADAPT AF-DES trial is a multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized, non-inferiority trial, enrolling 960 patients with AF with a CHA2DS2-VASc score > 1, who underwent PCI with DES implantation at least 12 months before enrollment. Eligible patients are randomly assigned to receive either non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) monotherapy or NOAC plus clopidogrel combination therapy. The primary outcome is net adverse clinical event (NACE) at 1 year after randomization, defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, systemic embolism, and major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding, as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria. We hypothesize that NOAC monotherapy would be non-inferior to NOAC plus clopidogrel combination therapy for NACE in patients with AF beyond 12 months after DES implantation. CONCLUSIONS: The ADAPT AF-DES trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOAC monotherapy versus NOAC plus clopidogrel combination therapy in patients with AF beyond 12 months after PCI with DES implantation. The ADAPT AF-DES trial will provide robust evidence for an optimal antithrombotic strategy in patients with AF after DES implantation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov. Unique identifier: NCT04250116.

Aspirin versus clopidogrel for chronic maintenance monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (HOST-EXAM): an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal antiplatelet monotherapy during the chronic maintenance period in patients who undergo coronary stenting is unknown. We aimed to compare head to head the efficacy and safety of aspirin and clopidogrel monotherapy in this population. METHODS: We did an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre trial at 37 study sites in South Korea. We enrolled patients aged at least 20 years who maintained dual antiplatelet therapy without clinical events for 6-18 months after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES). We excluded patients with any ischaemic and major bleeding complications. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a monotherapy agent of clopidogrel 75 mg once daily or aspirin 100 mg once daily for 24 months. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding type 3 or greater, in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02044250. FINDINGS: Between March 26, 2014, and May 29, 2018, we enrolled 5530 patients. 5438 (98·3%) patients were randomly assigned to either the clopidogrel group (2710 [49·8%]) or to the aspirin group (2728 [50·2%]). Ascertainment of the primary endpoint was completed in 5338 (98·2%) patients. During 24-month follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 152 (5·7%) patients in the clopidogrel group and 207 (7·7%) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio 0·73 [95% CI 0·59-0·90]; p=0·0035). INTERPRETATION: Clopidogrel monotherapy, compared with aspirin monotherapy during the chronic maintenance period after percutaneous coronary intervention with DES significantly reduced the risk of the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, and BARC bleeding type 3 or greater. In patients requiring indefinite antiplatelet monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention, clopidogrel monotherapy was superior to aspirin monotherapy in preventing future adverse clinical events. FUNDING: ChongKunDang, SamJin, HanMi, DaeWoong, and the South Korea Ministry of Health and Welfare.

Randomized Trial Evaluating Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for the Treatment of Chronic Total Occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Procedural results for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary vessels with chronic total occlusion (CTO) have improved in recent years, and PCI strategies have moved toward more complete revascularization with more liberal use of CTO-PCI. However, evidence evaluating CTO-PCI is limited to observational studies and small clinical trials. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, PCI-eligible patients were assigned to receive either 1 of 2 strategies: PCI or no PCI for the qualifying de novo CTO lesion with the option for PCI of obstructive non-CTO lesions at the discretion of the operator. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any revascularization. Health-related quality of life was assessed at baseline and at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Because of slow recruitment, the trial was stopped before completion of the 1284 planned enrollments. RESULTS: Between March 2010 and September 2016, 834 patients were randomly assigned to the CTO-PCI (n=417) or no CTO-PCI (n=398) strategy. Among the patients assigned to the no CTO-PCI strategy, 78 (19.6%) crossed over to receive staged CTO-PCI within 3 days of randomization. The overall CTO-PCI success rate was 90.6%. Serious nonfatal complications associated with CTO-PCI occurred in 3 patients (1 stroke, 1 cardiac tamponade, and 1 patient with recurrent episodes of ventricular tachyarrhythmia induced by intracoronary thrombus). Approximately half of the patients in each group underwent PCI for an average of 1.3 non-CTO lesions, resulting in a comparable residual SYNTAX score (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery; 3.7±5.4 versus 4.0±5.9, P=0.42) confined to non-CTO vessels. During a median follow-up of 4.0 years (interquartile range, 2.4 to 5.1 years), there was no significant difference between the CTO-PCI and the no CTO-PCI strategies in the incidence of the primary end point (22.3% versus 22.4%, hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.37; P=0.86). Both CTO-PCI and no CTO-PCI strategy were associated with significant improvements but without between-group differences in disease-specific health status that was sustained through 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: CTO-PCI was feasible with high success rates. There was no difference in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events with CTO-PCI versus no CTO-PCI, but the study was limited by low power for clinical end points and high crossover rates between groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01078051.

Clinical features differentiating Takotsubo cardiomyopathy in the peripartum period from peripartum cardiomyopathy.

There are some similarities in clinical features between Takotsubo cardiomyopathy during the peripartum period (PTCM) and peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM). Both conditions present as acute heart failure and decreased left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction in the peripartum period in previously heart-healthy women. The present study aimed to evaluate the differences in clinical features and outcomes between PTCM and PPCM. Between January 2004 and December 2016, 37 consecutive patients who demonstrated LV dysfunction during the peripartum period without previous heart disease were recruited retrospectively. The clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic data of these patients were comprehensively reviewed. Twenty-one (57%) and 16 (43%) patients were classified into PPCM and PTCM groups, respectively, based on echocardiographic findings. The initial LV ejection fraction did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. However, all patients with PTCM showed complete recovery of LV ejection fraction at the 1-month follow-up. However, among 20 patients with PPCM who underwent 1-month echocardiography, only 6 (30%) showed complete recovery of LV ejection fraction at the 1-month follow-up. At the 12-month follow-up, only 10 patients showed complete recovery of LV ejection fraction. The incidence of PTCM was much higher than expected. Although LV dysfunction was similar at the initial diagnosis, the prognosis of LV recovery was more favorable in PTCM than in PPCM. Therefore, physicians should differentiate these two diseases entities, although they have several similarities in acute LV dysfunction.

Effect of Pre-Procedural Beta-Blocker on Clinical Outcome after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome.

The efficacy of pre-procedural beta-blocker use in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is not well established in the current percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era. We investigate the effect of pre-procedural beta-blocker use on clinical outcomes in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Among 44,967 consecutive cases of PCI enrolled in the nationwide, retrospective, multicenter registry (K-PCI registry), 31,040 patients with ACS were selected and analyzed. We classified patients into pre-procedural beta-blocker group (n = 8,678) and pre-procedural no-beta-blocker group (n = 22,362) according to the use of beta-blockers at least for two weeks before index PCI. Propensity score-matching analysis was performed and resulted in 7,445 pairs. The primary outcome was in-hospital cardiac death. In propensity score-matched populations, the pre-procedural beta-blocker group had a lower incidence of in-hospital cardiac death compared with the pre-procedural no-beta-blocker group (1.1% versus 2.0%, unadjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-0.73, P < 0.01). In subgroup analysis, the pre-procedural beta-blocker group had a lower incidence of in-hospital cardiac death, compared with the pre-procedural no-beta-blocker group in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction subpopulation (3.1% versus 6.1%, unadjusted OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.34-0.71, P < 0.01) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction subpopulation (1.5% versus 2.9%, unadjusted OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.79, P < 0.01). However, in unstable angina subpopulation, the in-hospital cardiac death rate was comparable between both groups. In conclusion, the use of pre-procedural beta-blocker was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital cardiac death in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. This result adds to the body of evidence that use of pre-procedural beta-blocker in patients with ACS might be reasonable.

Association of elevated blood pressure during exercise with cerebral white matter lesions.

OBJECTIVES: Cerebral white matter lesions (WMLs) are regarded to be subclinical ischemic changes of the cerebral parenchyma. Many previous studies have shown that baseline blood pressure (BP) is one of the most important factors for WMLs, but the relation between exercise BP and WMLs has not been fully evaluated. So, we sought to investigate the relationships between cerebral WMLs and peak exercise BP. METHODS: Brain magnetic resonance imaging scan and treadmill testing were performed simultaneously in 130 consecutive subjects without history of stroke or transient ischemic stroke. RESULTS: Among 130 subjects, 42 individuals (32%) presented WMLs. Individuals with WMLs were older than those without WMLs, and baseline systolic BP and pulse pressure were higher in subjects with WMLs. During treadmill test, peak exercise systolic BP was more significantly elevated in subjects with WMLs. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, elevated baseline systolic BP, not peak exercise systolic BP, was associated with the presence of WMLs, independently of age. However, in multivariable logistic regression analysis of 88 normotensive subjects, elevated peak systolic BP during exercise was the only determinant for the presence of WMLs. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated peak systolic BP during exercise is significantly related with WMLs, subclinical small vessel disease of brain, especially in normotensive subjects.

A randomized clinical trial comparing long-term clopidogrel vs aspirin monotherapy beyond dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting coronary stent implantation: Design and rationale of the Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of coronary artery stenosis-Extended Antiplatelet Monotherapy (HOST-EXAM) trial.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been developed by drug-eluting stent (DES), but stent implantation has brought the issue of stent thrombosis and optimal antiplatelet therapy. Guidelines recommend at least 6- to 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor such as clopidogrel. Beyond DAPT after PCI with DES, however, there has been still a debate for antiplatelet regimen. Therefore, we report on the upcoming HOST-EXAM trial (NCT02044250), which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspirin and clopidogrel monotherapies beyond DAPT after DES implantation. TRIAL DESIGN: The HOST-EXAM is a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter, comparative effectiveness trial, to compare between clopidogrel (75 mg once daily) and aspirin (100 mg once daily) as long-term antiplatelet agents. A total of 5,530 patients with no clinical events during combined antiplatelet therapy for 12±6 months after index PCI will be screened, enrolled, and randomized to either group (1:1 ratio) receiving antiplatelet monotherapy for 2 years. The primary endpoint will be the rate of clinical events defined as a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, or major bleeding at 24 months after randomization. CONCLUSIONS: The HOST-EXAM will be the first large-scale randomized controlled study to directly compare the efficacy and safety of long-term antiplatelet monotherapy beyond DAPT after DES implantation. This study will provide clinical evidence to establish optimal regimen for long-term antiplatelet therapy after DES implantation.

Association of insulin resistance and coronary artery remodeling: an intravascular ultrasound study.

BACKGROUND: There are few studies that investigated the correlation between insulin resistance (IR) and the coronary artery remodeling. The aim of the study is to investigate the association of IR measured by homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and coronary artery remodeling evaluated by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). METHODS: A total of 298 consecutive patients who received percutaneous coronary interventions under IVUS guidance were retrospectively enrolled. The value of HOMA-IR more than 2.5 was considered as IR positive. Metabolic syndrome was classified according to NCEP ATP III guidelines. The remodeling index was defined as the ratio of the external elastic membrane (EEM) area at the lesion site to the EEM area at the proximal reference site. RESULTS: A total of 369 lesions were analyzed (161 lesions in HOMA-IR positive and 208 lesions in HOMA-IR negative). Remodeling index was significantly higher in the HOMA-IR positive group compared with the negative group (HOMA-IR positive vs. negative: 1.074 ± 0.109 vs. 1.042 ± 0.131, p = 0.013). There was a significant positive correlation between remodeling index and HOMA-IR (p = 0.010). Analysis of HOMA-IR according to remodeling groups showed increasing tendency of HOMA-IR, and it was statistically significant (p = 0.045). Multivariate analysis revealed that only HOMA-IR was an independent predictor of remodeling index (r = 0.166, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Increased IR estimated by HOMA-IR was significantly associated with a higher remodeling index and positive coronary artery remodeling.

Sex differences in the impact of body mass index on outcomes of coronary artery disease in Koreans.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is often considered a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, but recent studies have shown conflicting results regarding the effect of BMI on the prognosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between BMI and clinical outcomes of CAD according to sex in a Korean population. METHODS: A total of 3476 patients with a significant CAD who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled. Patients were classified as follows according to BMI using the Asia-Pacific cutoff points: underweight (<18.5 kg/m 2 ), normal weight (18.5-22.9 kg/m 2 ), overweight (23.0-24.9 kg/m 2 ) and obese (≥25 kg/m 2 ) patients. Underweight and normal weight patients were further categorized into the lower BMI group, whereas overweight and obese patients were categorized into the higher BMI group. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among women, the higher BMI group showed poor clinical features in the prevalence of hypertension and chest pain presentation, and among men, the higher BMI group had a significantly lower rate of chronic renal failure. At the end of the follow-up period (median 53.5 months), the all-cause mortality rate was lower in the higher BMI group in men, and cardiovascular death and stroke rates were significantly lower in the higher BMI group in women. CONCLUSION: In Korean CAD patients treated with PCI, inverse correlations were observed between the clinical outcomes and BMI, but there were differences between men and women.

Impact of Age on Antiplatelet Monotherapy in the Chronic Maintenance Period After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Post Hoc Analysis From the HOST-EXAM Extended Study.

BACKGROUNDS: The HOST-EXAM Extended study reported the benefit of clopidogrel monotherapy over aspirin monotherapy in secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This age-specific subgroup analysis of the study aimed to assess the impact of age on antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI. METHODS: We analysed data from the per-protocol population (4717 patients) with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. The old age group comprised 2033 patients (43.1%), defined as those 65 years of age or older. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding type 3 or greater. The secondary end points were thrombotic composite outcomes and any bleeding. RESULTS: Age correlated with an elevated risk of adverse events, particularly from age 65. Clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with a reduction of the primary end point in both the old age group (19.4% vs 23.1%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.802, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.664-0.968; P = 0.022) and the young age group (7.8% vs 11.7%, HR 0.646, 95% CI 0.506-0.825; P < 0.001), without significant interaction (interaction P = 0.167). These findings were consistent for the secondary composite thrombotic end point and any bleeding events (interaction P value of secondary thrombotic end point: 0.786; interaction P value of any bleeding end point: 0.565). Consistent results were observed in analyses with a 75-year age cutoff and in subgroup analyses by 10-year age intervals. CONCLUSIONS: In patients requiring antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI, occurrence of both ischemic and bleeding events dramatically increased from age 65. The beneficial impact of clopidogrel over aspirin monotherapy was consistent regardless of age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02044250.

Lipid-Lowering Efficacy of Combination Therapy With Moderate-Intensity Statin and Ezetimibe Versus High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy: A Randomized, Open-Label, Non-Inferiority Trial From Korea.

Objective: This phase IV, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, and parallel clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and moderate intensity rosuvastatin combination therapy to that of high intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Methods: This study enrolled patients with ASCVD and after a four-week screening period, patients were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (RE 10/10 group) or high-intensity rosuvastatin (R20 group) only in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the difference in the percent change in the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 12 weeks between two groups after treatment. Results: The study found that after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, the RE10/10 group had a greater reduction in LDL-C level compared to the R20 group (-22.9±2.6% vs. -15.6 ± 2.5% [p=0.041] and -24.2±2.5% vs. -12.9±2.4% [p=0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Moreover, a greater number of patients achieved the target LDL-C level of ≤70 mg/dL after the treatment period in the combination group (74.6% vs. 59.9% [p=0.012] and 76.2% vs. 50.8% [p<0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between two groups. Conclusion: Moderate-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy had better efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels without increasing adverse effects in patients with ASCVD than high-intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03494270.

Clinical safety and effectiveness of the Genoss drug-eluting stent in real-world clinical practice.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The Genoss DES™ is a novel, biodegradable, polymer-coated, sirolimus-eluting stent with a cobalt- chromium stent platform and thin strut. Although the safety and effectiveness of this stent have been previously investigated, real-world clinical outcomes data are lacking. Therefore, the aim of this prospective, multicenter trial was to evaluate the clinical safety and effectiveness of the Genoss DES™ in all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: The Genoss DES registry is a prospective, single-arm, observational trial for evaluation of clinical outcomes after Genoss DES™ implantation in all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from 17 sites in South Korea. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite outcome of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 1,999 patients (66.4 ± 11.1 years of age; 72.8% male) were analyzed. At baseline, 62.8% and 36.7% of patients had hypertension and diabetes, respectively. The implanted stent number, diameter, and length per patient were 1.5 ± 0.8, 3.1 ± 0.5 mm, and 37.0 ± 25.0 mm, respectively. The primary endpoint occurred in 1.8% patients, with a cardiac death rate of 1.1%, target vessel-related MI rate of 0.2%, and clinically driven TLR rate of 0.8%. CONCLUSION: In this real-world registry, the Genoss DES™ demonstrated excellent safety and effectiveness at 12 months among all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. These findings suggest that the Genoss DES™ may be a viable treatment option for patients with coronary artery disease.

Efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: a post-hoc analysis of the RACING trial.

Background: Moderate-intensity statin role with ezetimibe combination therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been thoroughly investigated, particularly compared to high-intensity statin monotherapy. We aimed to investigate the effect of ezetimibe combination with moderate-intensity statin in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease following PCI. Methods: This was a post-hoc analysis of a subset of patients who underwent PCI in the RACING trial. At 26 centres in South Korea, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) were randomly assigned to receive either moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy (rosuvastatin 10 mg with ezetimibe 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin 20 mg). The prespecified endpoints of the RACING trial were used. The primary endpoint was the 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, and nonfatal stroke. Event rates between the two groups were compared using log-rank tests, and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using Cox regression analysis. Consistent with the RACING trial, the primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were evaluated using an intention-to-treatment approach, and the safety endpoints were assessed in the safety population. The RACING trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03044665). Findings: Between Feb 14, 2017, and Dec 18, 2018, 3780 participants were enrolled in the RACING trial. Prior history of PCI was found in 2497 patients (67%, median 64 years, 79% male), and was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.69; p = 0.014). Among patients with prior PCI, moderate-intensity statin therapy with ezetimibe combination versus high-intensity statin therapy did not increase the risk of the primary endpoint (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74-1.24; p = 0.781). The proportion of patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) <70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years was 74%, 76%, and 73%, respectively, in the combination therapy group, and was significantly higher than that in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (57%, 62%, and 59%, respectively, all p < 0.001). Discontinuation of lipid-lowering drugs occurred less frequently in the combination group (4.2% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.001). Interpretation: The effects of ezetimibe combination therapy observed in the RACING trial were consistently preserved among patients with ASCVD following PCI. Ezetimibe combination could be considered as a suitable therapeutic strategy to achieve strict control of LDL-C and reduce drug intolerance in patients who underwent PCI. Funding: Hanmi Pharmaceutical, Seoul, South Korea.

Comparison of efficacy and safety between third-dose triple and third-dose dual antihypertensive combination therapies in patients with hypertension.

We compared the efficacy and safety of third-standard-dose triple and third-standard-dose dual antihypertensive combination therapies in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. This was a phase II multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, 245 participants were randomized to the third-dose triple combination (ALC group; amlodipine 1.67 mg + losartan potassium 16.67 mg + chlorthalidone 4.17 mg) or third-dose dual combination (AL group; amlodipine 1.67 mg + losartan potassium 16.67 mg, LC group; losartan potassium 16.67 mg + chlorthalidone 4.17 mg, AC group; amlodipine 1.67 mg + chlorthalidone 4.17 mg) therapy groups and followed up for 8 weeks. The mean systolic blood pressure (BP) reduction was -18.3 ± 13.2, -13.0 ± 13.3, -16.3 ± 12.4, and -13.8 ± 13.2 mmHg in the ALC, AL, LC, and AC groups, respectively. The ALC group showed significant systolic BP reduction compared to the AL and AC groups at weeks 4 (P = .010 and P = .018, respectively) and 8 (P = .017 and P = .036, respectively). At week 4, the proportion of systolic BP responders was significantly higher in the ALC group (42.6%) than in the AL (22.0%), LC (23.3%), and AC (27.1%) groups (P = .013, P = .021, and P = .045, respectively). At week 8, the proportion of systolic and diastolic BP responders was significantly higher in the ALC group (59.7%) than in the AL (39.3%) and AC (42.4%) groups (P = .022 and P = .049, respectively) at week 8. Third-standard-dose triple antihypertensive combination therapy demonstrated early effective BP control compared to third-standard-dose dual combination therapies, without increasing adverse drug reactions in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Efficacy and safety of standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg in primary hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter phase 3 trial.

The authors evaluated the efficacy, safety, and characteristics of patients who respond well to standard dose triple combination therapy including chlorthalidone 25 mg with telmisartan 80 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg in hypertensive patients. This is a multicenter, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3, randomized trial. Patients are randomized to triple combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 12.5 mg, TEL/AML/CHTD group) or dual combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg, TEL/AML group) treatment and then dose up titration to TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg and TEL80/AML5, respectively. The primary endpoint is the change of mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) at week 8. A Target BP achievement rate, a response rate, and the safety endpoints are also evaluated. Total 374 patients (mean age = 60.9 ± 10.7 years, male = 78.3%) were randomized to the study. The baseline MSSBPs/diastolic BPs were 149.9 ± 12.2/88.5 ± 10.4 mm Hg. After 8 weeks treatment, the change of MSSBPs at week 8 are -19.1 ± 14.9 mm Hg (TEL/AML/CHTD) and -11.4 ± 14.7 mm Hg (TEL/AML) (p < .0001). The achievement rates of target BP (53.8% vs. 37.8%, p = .0017) and responder rate (54.8% vs. 35.6%, p = .0001) at week 8 were significantly higher in TEL/AML/CHTD. There are no serious adverse event and no one discontinued medication due to adverse event. Among the TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg treatment group, patients of female or age ≥ 65 years old showed higher rate of target BP achievement than relatively young male. (61.4 vs. 46.8%, p = .042) Our study showed standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg is efficacious and safe in treatment of primary hypertension. Target BP achievement with triple therapy would be facilitated in female or old age.

Effect of a fixed-dose combination of Telmisartan/S-amlodipine on circadian blood pressure compared with Telmisartan monotherapy: TENUVA-BP study.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the circadian efficacy of a telmisartan 40 mg/S-amlodipine 2.5 mg fixed-dose combination (Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5) compared to telmisartan 80 mg (Telmisartan80) in patients with essential hypertension who did not respond to 2-4 weeks' treatment with telmisartan 40 mg. METHODS: Eligible patients with essential hypertension (clinic mean sitting systolic blood pressure [MSSBP] ≥140 mmHg, or ≥ 130 mmHg in those with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease) were randomly assigned to Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 or Telmisartan80 for 8 weeks. All patients underwent ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) at baseline and 8 weeks later. Primary endpoints were changes in mean 24-h SBP and DBP on 24-h ABPM from baseline after 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints were changes in daytime, nighttime, and morning SBP and DBP, and clinic MSSBP and MSDBP. RESULTS: A total of 316 Korean patients were enrolled, 217 patients were randomized to treatment, and 192 patients completed the study. Compared to Telmisartan80, Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 showed significantly better reductions in 24-h mean SBP and DBP after 8 weeks. Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 also significantly reduced secondary endpoints compared to Telmisartan80. Among 15 adverse events (7 [Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5] and 8 [Telmisartan80]), there were five adverse drug reactions; 14 events were mild, and none were identified with significant between-group differences. CONCLUSIONS: Telmisartan40/S-Amlodipine2.5 was tolerable and more effective than Telmisartan80 in lowering 24-h mean ambulatory BP in patients with essential hypertension not responding adequately to Telmisartan40. Our findings support the fact that the combination of S-amlodipine with telmisartan is more appropriate than increasing the dose of telmisartan monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02231788 . Registered 4 September 2014.

Prevalence and prognostic significance of malnutrition in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.

The incidence and impact of malnutrition on acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, clinical relevance, and prognostic outcomes of malnutrition in patients with ACS treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. This retrospective study included 1930 consecutive patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and assessed their nutritional status using 3 scoring systems: Controlling Nutritional Status score, nutritional risk index (NRI), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The Controlling Nutritional Status, NRI, and PNI scores showed that 5.2%, 17.5%, and 3.9% of patients were moderately or severely malnourished, respectively. During a median follow-up of 67.2 months (interquartile range: 46.8-88.5 months), 74 (3.8%) patients died. Malnutrition was associated with a significantly increased risk for all-cause mortality compared with good nutrition (adjusted hazard ratios for moderate and severe malnutrition, respectively: 5.65 [95% confidence interval: 3.27-9.78] and 15.26 [7.50-31.05] for the NRI score, 5.53 [2.10-14.49] and 11.08 [5.69-21.59] for the PNI; P < .001). The current findings demonstrated that malnutrition is prevalent among patients with ACS and is closely associated with increased mortality. Further study is needed to evaluate the effects of nutritional interventions on the outcomes of patients with ACS.

Association of hemoglobin levels with clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndromes in Koreans.

Anemia is a well-known risk factor for cardiovascular disease. However, there are limited data on whether anemia on admission is a long-term prognostic factor in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. We sought to evaluate the prevalence and prognostic consequences of anemia in patients with ACS treated with percutaneous coronary intervention in Korea. We retrospectively enrolled 1930 consecutive patients. Among the anemic population (hemoglobin [Hb] < 13 g/dL in men, and < 12 g/dL in women), we classified patients with Hb ≥ 7 g/dL, <10 d/dL as moderate anemia, other cases classified as mild anemia. Among patients with normal hemoglobin levels, we classified those with Hb > 16.5 g/dL in men, and > 16.0 g/dL in women, as having high hemoglobin. We examined the relationship between anemia with all-cause mortality and secondary outcomes - including cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization. We classified 3.3%, 21.5%, and 5.3% of patients as moderate anemia, mild anemia, and high hemoglobin, respectively. During a median follow-up of 67.2 (interquartile range; 46.8-88.5) months, 74 (3.8%) patients died. Compared with patients with normal hemoglobin, we detected a significantly increased risk for all-cause mortality in patients with anemia (adjusted hazard ratios for moderate and mild anemia, respectively: 8.26 [95% confidence interval: 3.98-17.15], P < .001 and 2.60 [1.54-4.40], P < .001). Among patients with ACS, anemia is prevalent and is strongly associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular events. Clinical trials will prospectively evaluate the efficacy of treatment for anemia on the outcomes of patients with ACS.

Efficacy and Safety of SID142 in Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Active-Controlled, Parallel-Group, Phase III Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Renexin® is a combination pill of cilostazol and Ginkgo biloba leaf extract that is used for the improvement of ischemic symptoms associated with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). SID142 is a controlled-release tablet of cilostazol (200 mg) and G biloba leaf extract (160 mg) that was developed to address the limitation of BID administration with Renexin. This study aimed to verify that SID142 was not inferior to Renexin in the treatment of patients with PAD. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group, Phase III clinical trial. Study subjects were randomized to receive SID142 once daily or Renexin twice a day for 12 weeks. The primary end point was a change in the patient assessment of lower leg pain intensity with the use of a visual analog scale (VAS) after 12 weeks of treatment. If the lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI was greater than -10, the study drug was declared noninferior to the reference drug. Secondary efficacy end points included cold sensation, ankle-brachial index, ankle systolic pressure, maximum walking distance, pain-free walking distance, and investigator's global assessment. Study group results were compared 4, 8, and 12 weeks after treatment. Adverse events were assessed as a safety end point. FINDINGS: In total, 344 subjects from 19 medical centers were screened, and a total of 170 subjects were randomly assigned to either the SID142 (n = 86) or the Renexin (n = 84) group. Analysis of the change in lower extremity pain at 12 weeks compared with baseline revealed that SID142 was not inferior to Renexin (21.44 [19.23] vs 22.30 [17.75]; 95% CI, -7.70 to 5.97; P = 0.5942). No significant differences were found between groups in any secondary efficacy end point. However, the incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in the SID142 group (22.35% vs 39.29%; P = 0.0171). IMPLICATIONS: SID142 once daily was not inferior to Renexin twice a day for efficacy in patients with PAD. SID142 had a favorable safety profile. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT03318276.

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study on the efficacy and safety of a combination treatment involving fimasartan, amlodipine, rosuvastatin in patients with essential hypertension and dyslipidemia who fail to respond adequately to fimasartan monotherapy.

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy and safety of a combination therapy involving fimasartan, amlodipine, and rosuvastatin in patients with essential hypertension and dyslipidemia who fail to respond to fimasartan monotherapy. METHODS: This phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study was conducted in adults aged 19-70 years. Patients who voluntarily consented were screened for eligibility to enroll in the study. Patients who failed to respond to 4 weeks of fimasartan monotherapy were randomized with a 1:1:1 ratio to the fimasartan 60 mg/amlodipine 10 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg (FMS/ALD + RSV) as study group, fimasartan 60 mg/amlodipine 10 mg (FMS/ALD) as control 1 group, and fimasartan 60 mg + rosuvastatin 20 mg (FMS + RSV) as control 2 group. The primary efficacy endpoints were the change in the sitting systolic blood pressure and the rate of change in the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 8 weeks. The adverse events, adverse drug reactions, physical examination findings, laboratory test results, electrocardiograms, and vital signs were evaluated to assess safety in the study. RESULTS: Of 138 randomized patients, 131 were conducted efficacy analysis, and 125 completed the study. For the change in LDL-C and sitting SBP (SiSBP) as primary efficacy assessments, the change in LDL-C at week 8 was significantly reduce in the FMS/ALD + RSV group than in the control 1 group (P < 0.001). The change in SiSBP at week 8 were greater reduce in the FMS/ALD + RSV group than in the FMS + RSV group (both P < 0.001). For the safety evaluation, there were no differences among the treatment groups in the incidence of adverse drug reactions. CONCLUSIONS: The fimasartan/amlodipine + rosuvastatin combination therapy can effectively and safely lower blood pressure and improve lipid levels in patients with essential hypertension and dyslipidemia who fail to respond adequately to fimasartan monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03156842, Registered 17 May 2017.