The effect of vardenafil, a potent and highly selective phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor for the treatment of erectile dysfunction, on the cardiovascular response to exercise in patients with coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: The effect of vardenafil, a potent and highly selective phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE5) inhibitor, on symptom-limited exercise time, time to first awareness of angina, and time to ischemic threshold (ST-segment depression > or =1 mm from baseline) during exercise tolerance testing (ETT) was examined in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is common among men with CAD. PDE5 inhibition is increasingly the preferred treatment option for ED. However, the effect of PDE5 inhibition on exercise-induced ischemia in CAD patients has received limited prospective evaluation. METHODS: In this double-blind, crossover, single-dose multicenter study, 41 men with reproducible stable exertional angina due to ischemic CAD received vardenafil 10 mg or placebo, followed by ETT (5 to 10 metabolic equivalents [METS], Bruce protocol) 1 h postdose. Sublingual nitrate use was prohibited for > or =24 h pre- and postexercise study days. End points included symptom-limited treadmill exercise time, time to first awareness of angina, time to ischemic threshold, and safety. RESULTS: Relative to placebo, vardenafil 10 mg did not alter exercise treadmill time (427 +/- 105 s vs. 433 +/- 109 s, p = 0.39), or time to first awareness of angina (292 +/- 110 s vs. 291 +/- 123 s, p = 0.59), but significantly prolonged time to ischemic threshold (334 +/- 108 s vs. 381 +/- 108, p = 0.0004). At peak exercise, vardenafil 10 mg did not alter blood pressure, heart rate, or rate-pressure product relative to placebo. The most common adverse events (facial flushing and headache) were of mild or moderate intensity, and short-lived. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil 10 mg did not impair the ability of patients with stable CAD to exercise at levels equivalent or greater than that attained during sexual intercourse (average of 2.5 to 3.3 METS).

Potential modification of the UKPDS risk engine and evaluation of macrovascular event rates in controlled clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate a modified UKPDS risk engine in order to establish a risk prediction benchmark for the general diabetes population. METHODS: Data sources were summary demographic and risk factor data from the major type 2 diabetes mellitus outcomes studies, including ACCORD, ADVANCE, VADT, RECORD, PROactive, ADOPT, and BARI 2D. Patients in these studies spanned a wide spectrum of disease, from drug-naïve to insulin-dependent. Cardiovascular events/major adverse coronary events (CVE/MACE) were primary or safety end points. Overall observed rates for cardiovascular events/MACE were summarized, and the observed annualized event rates were calculated using linear approximation. Simulation studies were then conducted using original (cardiovascular history excluded) and modified (cardiovascular history included) United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) models; the predicted event rates were then compared with the observed event rates for all studies. The consistency of the predicted rates derived from each model was then evaluated using descriptive statistics and linear regression. RESULTS: The original UKPDS model tended to overestimate event rates across studies. The ratio of predicted events versus observed MACE ranged from 0.9 to 2.0, with mean of 1.5 ± 0.4 and a coefficient of variation of 26% (R(2) = 0.80). However, cardiovascular risk predictions were more precise using a modified UKPDS model; the ratio of predicted versus observed MACE events ranged from 1.8 to 2.4, with a mean of 2.1 ± 0.25 and a coefficient of variation of 13% (R(2) = 0.94). CONCLUSION: A modified UKPDS model which includes adjustments for prior cardiovascular history has the potential for use as a tool for benchmarking and may be useful for predicting cardiovascular rates in clinical studies. This modification could be further evaluated, recalibrated, and validated using patient-level information derived from prospective clinical studies to yield greater predictability.