New York Heart Association class and the survival benefit from primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators: A pooled analysis of 4 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) reduce all-cause mortality by reducing sudden cardiac death. There are conflicting data regarding whether patients with more advanced heart failure derive ICD benefit owing to the competing risk of nonsudden death. METHODS: We performed a patient-level meta-analysis of New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II/III heart failure patients (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%) from 4 primary prevention ICD trials (MADIT-I, MADIT-II, DEFINITE, SCD-HeFT). Bayesian-Weibull survival regression models were used to assess the impact of NYHA class on the relationship between ICD use and mortality. RESULTS: Of the 2,763 patients who met study criteria, 68% (n=1,867) were NYHA II and 52% (n=1,435) were randomized to an ICD. In a multivariable model including all study patients, the ICD reduced mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% posterior credibility interval [PCI]) 0.40-0.99). The interaction between NYHA class and the ICD on mortality was significant (posterior probability of no interaction=.036). In models including an interaction term for the NYHA class and ICD, the ICD reduced mortality among NYHA class II patients (HR 0.55, PCI 0.35-0.85), and the point estimate suggested reduced mortality in NYHA class III patients (HR 0.76, PCI 0.48-1.24), although this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prevention ICDs reduce mortality in NYHA class II patients and trend toward reducing mortality in the heterogeneous group of NYHA class III patients. Improved risk stratification tools are required to guide patient selection and shared decision making among NYHA class III primary prevention ICD candidates.

Predicting appropriate shocks in patients with heart failure: Patient level meta-analysis from SCD-HeFT and MADIT II.

BACKGROUND: No precise tools exist to predict appropriate shocks in patients with a primary prevention ICD. We sought to identify characteristics predictive of appropriate shocks in patients with a primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). METHODS: Using patient-level data from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial II (MADIT II) and the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT), we identified patients with any appropriate shock. Clinical and demographic variables were included in a logistic regression model to predict appropriate shocks. RESULTS: There were 1,463 patients randomized to an ICD, and 285 (19%) had ≥1 appropriate shock over a median follow-up of 2.59 years. Compared with patients without appropriate ICD shocks, patients who received any appropriate shock tended to have more severe heart failure. In a multiple logistic regression model, predictors of appropriate shocks included NYHA class (NYHA II vs. I: OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.07-2.55; NYHA III vs. I: OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.10-2.76), lower LVEF (per 1% change) (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06), absence of beta-blocker therapy (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.23-2.12), and single chamber ICD (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.13-2.45). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of patient level data from MADIT-II and SCD-HeFT, higher NYHA class, lower LVEF, no beta-blocker therapy, and single chamber ICD (vs. dual chamber) were significant predictors of appropriate shocks.

Long-term effects of intensive glucose lowering on cardiovascular outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Intensive glucose lowering has previously been shown to increase mortality among persons with advanced type 2 diabetes and a high risk of cardiovascular disease. This report describes the 5-year outcomes of a mean of 3.7 years of intensive glucose lowering on mortality and key cardiovascular events. METHODS: We randomly assigned participants with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level of 7 to 7.9%). After termination of the intensive therapy, due to higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group, the target glycated hemoglobin level was 7 to 7.9% for all participants, who were followed until the planned end of the trial. RESULTS: Before the intensive therapy was terminated, the intensive-therapy group did not differ significantly from the standard-therapy group in the rate of the primary outcome (a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) (P=0.13) but had more deaths from any cause (primarily cardiovascular) (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.44) and fewer nonfatal myocardial infarctions (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.95). These trends persisted during the entire follow-up period (hazard ratio for death, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.38; and hazard ratio for nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96). After the intensive intervention was terminated, the median glycated hemoglobin level in the intensive-therapy group rose from 6.4% to 7.2%, and the use of glucose-lowering medications and rates of severe hypoglycemia and other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy for 3.7 years to target a glycated hemoglobin level below 6% reduced 5-year nonfatal myocardial infarctions but increased 5-year mortality. Such a strategy cannot be recommended for high-risk patients with advanced type 2 diabetes. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.).

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in CKD: a meta-analysis of patient-level data from 3 randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of a primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) among patients with chronic kidney disease is uncertain. STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis of patient-level data from randomized controlled trials. SETTING & POPULATION: Patients with symptomatic heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction<35%. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: From 7 available randomized controlled studies with patient-level data, we selected studies with available data for important covariates. Studies without patient-level data for baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were excluded. INTERVENTION: Primary prevention ICD versus usual care effect modification by eGFR. OUTCOMES: Mortality, rehospitalizations, and effect modification by eGFR. RESULTS: We included data from the Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial I (MADIT-I), MADIT-II, and the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT). 2,867 patients were included; 36.3% had eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73m2. Kaplan-Meier estimate of the probability of death during follow-up was 43.3% for 1,334 patients receiving usual care and 35.8% for 1,533 ICD recipients. After adjustment for baseline differences, there was evidence that the survival benefit of ICDs in comparison to usual care depends on eGFR (posterior probability for null interaction P<0.001). The ICD was associated with survival benefit for patients with eGFR≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (adjusted HR, 0.49; 95% posterior credible interval, 0.24-0.95), but not for patients with eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (adjusted HR, 0.80; 95% posterior credible interval, 0.40-1.53). eGFR did not modify the association between the ICD and rehospitalizations. LIMITATIONS: Few patients with eGFR<30 mL/min/1.73 m2 were available. Differences in trial-to-trial measurement techniques may lead to residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in baseline eGFR decrease the survival benefit associated with the ICD. These findings should be confirmed by additional studies specifically targeting patients with varying eGFRs.

From expert-derived user needs to user-perceived ease of use and usefulness: a two-phase mixed-methods evaluation framework.

Underspecified user needs and frequent lack of a gold standard reference are typical barriers to technology evaluation. To address this problem, this paper presents a two-phase evaluation framework involving usability experts (phase 1) and end-users (phase 2). In phase 1, a cross-system functionality alignment between expert-derived user needs and system functions was performed to inform the choice of "the best available" comparison system to enable a cognitive walkthrough in phase 1 and a comparative effectiveness evaluation in phase 2. During phase 2, five quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods are mixed to assess usability: time-motion analysis, software log, questionnaires - System Usability Scale and the Unified Theory of Acceptance of Use of Technology, think-aloud protocols, and unstructured interviews. Each method contributes data for a unique measure (e.g., time motion analysis contributes task-completion-time; software log contributes action transition frequency). The measures are triangulated to yield complementary insights regarding user-perceived ease-of-use, functionality integration, anxiety during use, and workflow impact. To illustrate its use, we applied this framework in a formative evaluation of a software called Integrated Model for Patient Care and Clinical Trials (IMPACT). We conclude that this mixed-methods evaluation framework enables an integrated assessment of user needs satisfaction and user-perceived usefulness and usability of a novel design. This evaluation framework effectively bridges the gap between co-evolving user needs and technology designs during iterative prototyping and is particularly useful when it is difficult for users to articulate their needs for technology support due to the lack of a baseline.

Effects of combination lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: We investigated whether combination therapy with a statin plus a fibrate, as compared with statin monotherapy, would reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were at high risk for cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5518 patients with type 2 diabetes who were being treated with open-label simvastatin to receive either masked fenofibrate or placebo. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years. RESULTS: The annual rate of the primary outcome was 2.2% in the fenofibrate group and 2.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the fenofibrate group, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.08; P=0.32). There were also no significant differences between the two study groups with respect to any secondary outcome. Annual rates of death were 1.5% in the fenofibrate group and 1.6% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.10; P=0.33). Prespecified subgroup analyses suggested heterogeneity in treatment effect according to sex, with a benefit for men and possible harm for women (P=0.01 for interaction), and a possible interaction according to lipid subgroup, with a possible benefit for patients with both a high baseline triglyceride level and a low baseline level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.057 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of fenofibrate and simvastatin did not reduce the rate of fatal cardiovascular events, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, as compared with simvastatin alone. These results do not support the routine use of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence from randomized trials to support a strategy of lowering systolic blood pressure below 135 to 140 mm Hg in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We investigated whether therapy targeting normal systolic pressure (i.e., <120 mm Hg) reduces major cardiovascular events in participants with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events. METHODS: A total of 4733 participants with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to intensive therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, or standard therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 140 mm Hg. The primary composite outcome was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years. RESULTS: After 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 119.3 mm Hg in the intensive-therapy group and 133.5 mm Hg in the standard-therapy group. The annual rate of the primary outcome was 1.87% in the intensive-therapy group and 2.09% in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio with intensive therapy, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.06; P=0.20). The annual rates of death from any cause were 1.28% and 1.19% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.35; P=0.55). The annual rates of stroke, a prespecified secondary outcome, were 0.32% and 0.53% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.89; P=0.01). Serious adverse events attributed to antihypertensive treatment occurred in 77 of the 2362 participants in the intensive-therapy group (3.3%) and 30 of the 2371 participants in the standard-therapy group (1.3%) (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, did not reduce the rate of a composite outcome of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

An Integrated Model for Patient Care and Clinical Trials (IMPACT) to support clinical research visit scheduling workflow for future learning health systems.

We describe a clinical research visit scheduling system that can potentially coordinate clinical research visits with patient care visits and increase efficiency at clinical sites where clinical and research activities occur simultaneously. Participatory Design methods were applied to support requirements engineering and to create this software called Integrated Model for Patient Care and Clinical Trials (IMPACT). Using a multi-user constraint satisfaction and resource optimization algorithm, IMPACT automatically synthesizes temporal availability of various research resources and recommends the optimal dates and times for pending research visits. We conducted scenario-based evaluations with 10 clinical research coordinators (CRCs) from diverse clinical research settings to assess the usefulness, feasibility, and user acceptance of IMPACT. We obtained qualitative feedback using semi-structured interviews with the CRCs. Most CRCs acknowledged the usefulness of IMPACT features. Support for collaboration within research teams and interoperability with electronic health records and clinical trial management systems were highly requested features. Overall, IMPACT received satisfactory user acceptance and proves to be potentially useful for a variety of clinical research settings. Our future work includes comparing the effectiveness of IMPACT with that of existing scheduling solutions on the market and conducting field tests to formally assess user adoption.

Diabetes control among Hispanics in the action to control cardiovascular risk in diabetes trial.

BACKGROUND: Hispanics in the United States represent diverse racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups, and manifest heterogeneous cardiovascular risks including diabetes. It is not known if there are residual differences in the control of diabetes among Hispanic groups given uniform access to diabetes care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate glucose control differences among Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Dominicans receiving substantial diabetes care and support in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from a randomized trial comparing two treatment strategies: intensive, targeting glycated hemoglobin below 6.0 %, and standard, targeting glycated hemoglobin between 7.0 % and 7.9 %. PARTICIPANTS: Seven hundred and sixteen Hispanic and 6066 non-Hispanic white participants were recruited from 77 clinical sites across the United States and Canada. There were 243 Mexicans, 199 Puerto Ricans, and 150 Dominicans; and 135 of these Hispanic groups were born in the United States. MAIN MEASURE: Glycated hemoglobin RESULTS: Compared to Puerto Ricans, Mexicans were more likely (HR=1.38, CI:0.90-2.10) and Dominicans as likely (HR=1.01, CI:0.66-1.54) to achieve glycated hemoglobin goal in the intensive arm. Participants born in the United States achieved glycated hemoglobin goal at a higher rate than those born elsewhere (HR=1.57, CI:0.99-2.51 in the intensive arm, HR=1.51, CI:0.95-2.43 in the standard arm). These differences were not statistically significant. In the intensive arm, Puerto Ricans (OR=0.47, CI:0.31-0.71), and Dominicans (OR=0.41, CI:0.26-0.66) were less likely than non-Hispanic whites to achieve glycated hemoglobin goal, whereas the difference between non-Hispanic whites and Mexicans was not statistically significant, (OR=0.66, CI:0.43-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic groups, given access to comprehensive diabetes care, differed from each other non-significantly and had a variable divergence from non-Hispanic whites in achieving intensive glycated hemoglobin goal. These differences, if confirmed, could be due to such factors as variable acculturation and functional health literacy levels that were not measured in the ACCORD trial, but should be further explored in future studies.

Women, but not men, have prolonged QT interval if depressed after an acute coronary syndrome.

AIMS: Depression is a mortality risk marker for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. We hypothesized that the QT interval, a predictor for risk of sudden cardiac death, was related to depressive symptoms in ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed an analysis of admission electrocardiograms from hospitalized patients with unstable angina or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction from two prospective observational studies of depression in ACS. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and depression was defined as BDI score ≥10, compared with <5. Patients with QRS duration ≥120 ms and/or who were prescribed antidepressants were excluded. QT intervals were adjusted for heart rate by two methods. Our analyses included 243 men (40.0% with BDI ≥10) and 139 women (62.0% with BDI ≥ 10). Among women, average QT corrected by Fridericia's method (QTcF) was 435.4 ± 26.6 ms in the depressed group, vs. 408.6 ± 24.3 ms in the non-depressed group (P< 0.01). However, among men, average QTcF was not significantly different between the depressed and non-depressed groups (415.4 ± 23.6 vs. 412.0 ± 25.8 ms, P= 0.29). In multivariable analyses that included hypertension, diabetes, ACS type, left ventricular ejection fraction <0.40, and use of QT-prolonging medication, there was a statistically significant interaction between depressive symptoms and gender (P< 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this ACS sample, prolongation of the QT interval was associated with depressive symptoms in women, but not in men. Further investigation of the mechanism of the relationship between depression and abnormal cardiac repolarization, particularly in women, is warranted to develop treatment strategies.

Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic studies have shown a relationship between glycated hemoglobin levels and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. We investigated whether intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels would reduce cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes who had either established cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS: In this randomized study, 10,251 patients (mean age, 62.2 years) with a median glycated hemoglobin level of 8.1% were assigned to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level from 7.0 to 7.9%). Of these patients, 38% were women, and 35% had had a previous cardiovascular event. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The finding of higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group led to a discontinuation of intensive therapy after a mean of 3.5 years of follow-up. RESULTS: At 1 year, stable median glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.4% and 7.5% were achieved in the intensive-therapy group and the standard-therapy group, respectively. During follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 352 patients in the intensive-therapy group, as compared with 371 in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.04; P=0.16). At the same time, 257 patients in the intensive-therapy group died, as compared with 203 patients in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.46; P=0.04). Hypoglycemia requiring assistance and weight gain of more than 10 kg were more frequent in the intensive-therapy group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

Cardiac autonomic control and treatment of hostility: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test whether reduction in hostility increases autonomic regulation of the heart. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, participants were 158 healthy adults, aged 20 years to 45 years, who were 1 standard deviation (SD) above national norms on the Cook-Medley Hostility and the Spielberger Trait Anger Indices. Participants also were interviewed, using the Interpersonal Hostility Assessment Technique (IHAT). They were randomly assigned to a 12-week cognitive behavior therapy program for hostility reduction or a wait-list control condition. The main outcome measure was cardiac autonomic modulation, measured as RR interval variability (RRV) derived from 24-electrocardiographic recordings. RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis of variance assessing psychological outcomes of hostility, anger, and IHAT scores, there was a significant treatment effect with an average reduction across the three outcomes that was approximately 0.7 SD (ES = 0.685, SE = 0.184, p < .001) greater for the intervention group than for the control group. In contrast, the change in heart rate was -0.14 beat/min (95% Confidence Interval [CI] = -2.43, 2.14) in treatment participants and -1.36 beat/min (95% CI = -3.28, 0.61) in wait-list participants. High-frequency RRV, an index of cardiac parasympathetic modulation, increased by 0.07 ln ms(2) (95% CI = -0.10, 0.24) for participants in the treatment condition and decreased by 0.04 ln ms(2) (95% CI = -0.18, 0.10) for participants in the wait-list condition. These differences were not significant. The findings for other indices of RRV were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Reduction of hostility and anger was not accompanied by increases in cardiac autonomic modulation. These findings raise questions about the status of disordered autonomic nervous system regulation of the heart as a pathophysiological mechanism underlying the hostility-heart disease relationship and about whether hostility itself is a mechanism or merely a marker of elevated risk of heart disease.

Depression and coronary heart disease: recommendations for screening, referral, and treatment: a science advisory from the American Heart Association Prevention Committee of the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, and Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research: endorsed by the American Psychiatric Association.

Depression is commonly present in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and is independently associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Screening tests for depressive symptoms should be applied to identify patients who may require further assessment and treatment. This multispecialty consensus document reviews the evidence linking depression with CHD and provides recommendations for healthcare providers for the assessment, referral, and treatment of depression.

AHA science advisory. Depression and coronary heart disease. Recommendations for screening, referral, and treatment. A science advisory from the American Heart Association Prevention Committee to the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Epidemiology and Prevention, and Interdisciplinary Council on Quality of Care Outcomes Research. Endorsed by the American Psychiatric Association.

Depression is commonly present in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and is independently associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Screening tests for depressive symptoms should be applied to identify patients who may require further assessment and treatment. This multispecialty consensus document reviews the evidence linking depression with CHD and provides recommendations for healthcare providers for the assessment, referral, and treatment of depression.

Heart rate variability in acute coronary syndrome patients with major depression: influence of sertraline and mood improvement.

CONTEXT: Major depressive disorder (MDD) associated with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) increases the risk of mortality. Decreased heart rate variability (HRV), also a predictor of mortality, is reduced in patients with MDD after ACS, and has been suggested to be a mediator of MDD mortality after ACS. Although selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors may reduce mortality post-ACS, little is known about their effects on HRV. OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of both sertraline and improvement in mood on HRV. METHODS: The Sertraline Antidepressant Heart Attack Randomized Trial assessed HRV from 24-hour Holter electrocardiogram recordings at baseline in 290 patients and from a second recording in 258 of these patients 16 weeks after randomization to sertraline or placebo. Frequency domain measures of HRV included high-frequency power, low-frequency power, very low-frequency power, ultra low-frequency power, and total power. Depression severity was measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Clinical response was measured with the Clinical Global Impressions Improvement scale. RESULTS: At baseline, prior episodes of MDD were associated with lower HRV. Sertraline significantly increased ultra low-frequency power, while improvement in mood was associated with higher low-frequency power independent of treatment. However, the expected recovery in HRV following ACS was not observed in patients with MDD. Higher ultra low-frequency during sertraline treatment and higher low-frequency power in patients whose mood improved resulted primarily from these measures decreasing in their comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS: Heart rate variability recovery is impaired in depressed patients after ACS. Previously reported differences in baseline HRV between patients with and without depression after ACS grew larger in the 16 weeks following a coronary event. Both sertraline treatment and symptomatic recovery from depression were associated with increased HRV compared with placebo-treated and nonrecovered post-ACS control groups, respectively, but this results primarily from decreased HRV in the comparison groups.

Preventing tomorrow's sudden cardiac death today: part I: Current data on risk stratification for sudden cardiac death.

Accurate and timely prediction of sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a necessary prerequisite for effective prevention and therapy. Although the largest number of SCD events occurs in patients without overt heart disease, there are currently no tests that are of proven predictive value in this population. Efforts in risk stratification for SCD have focused primarily on predicting SCD in patients with known structural heart disease. Despite the ubiquity of tests that have been purported to predict SCD vulnerability in such patients, there is little consensus on which test, in addition to the left ventricular ejection fraction, should be used to determine which patients will benefit from an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. On July 20 and 21, 2006, a group of experts representing clinical cardiology, cardiac electrophysiology, biostatistics, economics, and health policy were joined by representatives of the US Food and Drug administration, Centers for Medicare Services, Agency for Health Research and Quality, the Heart Rhythm Society, and the device and pharmaceutical industry for a round table meeting to review current data on strategies of risk stratification for SCD, to explore methods to translate these strategies into practice and policy, and to identify areas that need to be addressed by future research studies. The meeting was organized by the Duke Center for the Prevention of SCD at the Duke Clinical Research Institute and was funded by industry participants. This article summarizes the presentations and discussions that occurred at that meeting.

Preventing tomorrow's sudden cardiac death today: part II: Translating sudden cardiac death risk assessment strategies into practice and policy.

Although current evidence supporting a more precise strategy for identifying patients at highest risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD) is sparse, strategies for translating existing and future evidence into clinical practice and policy are needed today. A great many unanswered questions exist. Examples include the following: At what level of risk for SCD should we pursue further testing or therapy? How should clinical strategies ethically and economically balance alternative outcomes? How can we best translate optimal strategies into clinical practice so as to prevent tomorrow's SCDs? On July 20 and 21, 2006, a group of individuals with expertise in clinical cardiovascular medicine, biostatistics, economics, and health policy was joined by government (Food and Drug Administration; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), professional societies (Heart Rhythm Society), and industry to discuss strategies for risk assessment and prevention of SCD. The meeting was organized by the Duke Center for the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death and the Duke Clinical Research Institute. This article, the second of 2 documents, summarizes the policy discussions of that meeting, discusses an analytic framework for evaluating the risks and benefits associated with SCD prevention and risk stratification, and addresses the translation of SCD risk assessment strategies into practice and policy.

Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial: design and methods.

Most patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus develop cardiovascular disease (CVD), with substantial loss of life expectancy. Nonfatal CVD contributes greatly to excess healthcare costs and decreased quality of life in patients with diabetes. The current epidemic of obesity has raised expectations that CVD associated with type 2 diabetes will become an even greater public health challenge. Despite the importance of this health problem, there is a lack of definitive data on the effects of the intensive control of glycemia and other CVD risk factors on CVD event rates in patients with type 2 diabetes. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial is a randomized, multicenter, double 2 x 2 factorial design study involving 10,251 middle-aged and older participants with type 2 diabetes who are at high risk for CVD events because of existing CVD or additional risk factors. ACCORD is testing the effects of 3 medical treatment strategies to reduce CVD morbidity and mortality. All participants are in the glycemia trial, which is testing the hypothesis that a therapeutic strategy that targets a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level of <6.0% will reduce the rate of CVD events more than a strategy that targets an HbA1c level of 7.0%-7.9%. The lipid trial includes 5,518 of the participants, who receive either fenofibrate or placebo in a double-masked fashion to test the hypothesis of whether, in the context of good glycemic control, a therapeutic strategy that uses a fibrate to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lower triglyceride levels together with a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor (statin) to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol will reduce the rate of CVD events compared with a strategy that uses a statin plus a placebo. The blood pressure trial includes the remaining 4,733 participants and tests the hypothesis that a therapeutic strategy that targets a systolic blood pressure of <120 mm Hg in the context of good glycemic control will reduce the rate of CVD events compared with a strategy that targets a systolic blood pressure of <140 mm Hg. The primary outcome measure for all 3 research questions is the first occurrence of a major CVD event, specifically nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. Upon the expected completion of participant follow-up in 2009, the ACCORD trial should document for the first time the benefits and risks of intensive glucose control, intensive blood pressure control, and the combination of fibrate and statin drugs in managing blood lipids in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes.

Onset of major depression associated with acute coronary syndromes: relationship of onset, major depressive disorder history, and episode severity to sertraline benefit.

CONTEXT: Depression observed following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is common and associated with an increased risk of death. The Sertraline Antidepressant Heart Attack Trial (SADHART) tested the safety and efficacy of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in this population. No evidence of harm was seen, and sertraline hydrochloride had an overall beneficial effect on mood that occurred primarily in patients with a history of episodes of major depressive disorder (MDD). OBJECTIVES: To determine how frequently the MDD began before ACS and whether onset of the current MDD episode before or after the ACS event influenced response to sertraline. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment of 369 patients with ACS and MDD was conducted in 40 outpatient clinics in 10 countries between April 1, 1997, and April 30, 2001. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnosis of MDD, number of previous episodes of depression, and episode onset before or after hospitalization were established using the Diagnostic Interview Schedule. Treatment response was measured with the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale. RESULTS: Fifty-three percent of MDD episodes began before hospitalization for the index episode of ACS (for 197 of 369 patients), and 94% of the MDD episodes began more than 30 days before the index ACS episode. Episodes of MDD that began prior to ACS responded more frequently to sertraline than to placebo (63% vs 46%, respectively; odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-3.55) whereas depression with onset beginning after hospitalization showed a high placebo response rate (69% vs 60%, respectively) and low sertraline-placebo response ratio (1.15). Multivariate analysis indicated that time of onset of the current episode, history of MDD, and baseline severity independently predicted the sertraline-placebo response ratio. CONCLUSIONS: Half of the episodes of major depression associated with ACS began long before ACS and therefore were not caused by ACS. Patients whose current episodes of MDD begin before ACS, those with a history of MDD, and those whose episodes are severe should be treated because they will benefit considerably from sertraline. Since these 3 predictors of sertraline response are independent, having more than 1 of them substantially increases the benefit of sertraline while reducing the chance of spontaneous recovery.

A day in the life of a clinical research coordinator: observations from community practice settings.

One of the goals of the NIH Roadmap Initiative is to re-engineer the national clinical research enterprise, with an emphasis on information technology solutions. Understanding end-users' workflow is critical to developing technology systems that are grounded in the context of the users' environment and are designed to fulfill their needs. Community practices are becoming the prevailing setting for conducting clinical research. Few studies have assessed clinical research workflow in such settings. We have conducted a series of investigations to model the workflow and have previously reported on some basic aspects of it, like the lack of information systems to support the workflow. In this paper we describe finer details of the workflow, using results of observational studies. These findings highlight the needs and inefficiencies that suggest the kind of information system that must be developed to enhance collaboration, communication and improve efficiency. This preliminary investigation also opens ground for more extensive studies to further elucidate the workflow.