Prevention of arterial and venous thrombotic events in symptomatic peripheral arterial disease patients after lower extremity revascularization in the VOYAGER PAD trial: Dual anticoagulant/antiplatelet regimen vs antiplatelet therapy alone.

BACKGROUND: Vascular disease burden after lower extremity revascularization (LER) comprises more than the first event, more vascular beds than the local arteries, and more than one clinical event type. OBJECTIVES: Assess total arterial and venous thrombotic burden after LER for symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD) and effect of low-dose anticoagulation added to low-dose antiplatelet therapy. PATIENTS/METHODS: VOYAGER PAD randomized 6564 symptomatic PAD patients undergoing LER to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice-daily or placebo on aspirin background. Marginal proportional-hazards models used to generate treatment hazard ratios and associated 95% CIs for first and total events; non-thrombotic deaths treated as competing terminal events. Incidence rates calculated as number of events per 100 patient-years follow-up. RESULTS: Over 2.5 years (median), first and total thrombotic event rates: 7.1 and 10.3 events/100 patient-years, respectively, in placebo group. Two-thirds (925/1372) of total thrombotic events (arterial 95%, venous 5%) were nonfatal first events. Nearly one-third of patients with first event had a second arterial or venous thrombotic event. Rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced first and total arterial and venous thrombotic events to 5.4 and 7.9 events/100 patient-years, respectively, a reduction in total thrombotic events over aspirin of 23% (HR: 0.77, 95%CI: 0.67-0.89, p = .0005), preventing 6.1 total arterial and venous thrombotic events at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Assessing total arterial and venous thrombotic events, not just first events, provides more complete information about disease burden and absolute on-treatment impact. Following LER, judicious modulation of more than one coagulation pathway can provide broader benefit than intensifying inhibition of one hemostatic system component.

Role of Combination Antiplatelet and Anticoagulation Therapy in Diabetes Mellitus and Cardiovascular Disease: Insights From the COMPASS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with established coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease often have diabetes mellitus. These patients are at high risk of future vascular events. METHODS: In a prespecified analysis of the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies), we compared the effects of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg daily) versus placebo plus aspirin in patients with diabetes mellitus versus without diabetes mellitus in preventing major vascular events. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary end points included all-cause mortality and all major vascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major adverse limb events, including amputation). The primary safety end point was a modification of the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria for major bleeding. RESULTS: There were 10 341 patients with diabetes mellitus and 17 054 without diabetes mellitus in the overall trial. A consistent and similar relative risk reduction was seen for benefit of rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n=9152) versus placebo plus aspirin (n=9126) in patients both with (n=6922) and without (n=11 356) diabetes mellitus for the primary efficacy end point (hazard ratio, 0.74, P=0.002; and hazard ratio, 0.77, P=0.005, respectively, Pinteraction=0.77) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.81, P=0.05; and hazard ratio, 0.84, P=0.09, respectively; Pinteraction=0.82). However, although the absolute risk reductions appeared numerically larger in patients with versus without diabetes mellitus, both subgroups derived similar benefit (2.3% versus 1.4% for the primary efficacy end point at 3 years, Gail-Simon qualitative Pinteraction<0.0001; 1.9% versus 0.6% for all-cause mortality, Pinteraction=0.02; 2.7% versus 1.7% for major vascular events, Pinteraction<0.0001). Because the bleeding hazards were similar among patients with and without diabetes mellitus, the prespecified net benefit for rivaroxaban appeared particularly favorable in the patients with diabetes mellitus (2.7% versus 1.0%; Gail-Simon qualitative Pinteraction=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In stable atherosclerosis, the combination of aspirin plus rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily provided a similar relative degree of benefit on coronary, cerebrovascular, and peripheral end points in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Given their higher baseline risk, the absolute benefits appeared larger in those with diabetes mellitus, including a 3-fold greater reduction in all-cause mortality. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Comparison of atorvastatin 80 mg/day versus simvastatin 20 to 40 mg/day on frequency of cardiovascular events late (five years) after acute myocardial infarction (from the Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] trial).

Previous studies have demonstrated that benefits of intensive statin therapy compared to standard statin therapy begin shortly after an acute event and are continued up to 2 years of follow-up. However, whether efficacy and safety of intensive statin therapy in patients with a recent cardiac event are maintained in longer-term follow-up has not been evaluated. We conducted a post hoc analysis of a subgroup of 999 patients who had a first acute myocardial infarction (MI) <2 months before randomization in a prospective, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial of 8,888 patients with a history of MI that compared intensive statin therapy (atorvastatin 80 mg) to standard statin therapy (simvastatin 20 to 40 mg) over approximately 5 years of follow-up. We analyzed the same composite end point used in the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy (PROVE IT) trial (death, MI, hospitalization for unstable angina, revascularization, and stroke). Rates of the composite end point were 44.7% (n = 226) in the simvastatin group and 37.9% (n = 187) in the atorvastatin group (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.99, p = 0.04). Although statistical power was smaller than that of the PROVE IT trial, the relative risk decrease observed at 5 years is consistent with that in the 2-year follow-up in PROVE IT. The 2 treatment regimens were well tolerated. In conclusion, our analysis provides support for the strategy of placing patients with recent MI on intensive statin therapy and maintaining the high dose over the long term, beyond 2 years.

Total cardiovascular disease burden: comparing intensive with moderate statin therapy insights from the IDEAL (Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering) trial.

OBJECTIVES: This post-hoc analysis of the IDEAL (Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering) trial was designed to assess the comparative treatment efficacy of high-dose atorvastatin and usual-dose simvastatin for the prevention of events subsequent to the first event, using the Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld method. BACKGROUND: Time-to-first-event analysis of data is frequently utilized to provide efficacy outcome information in coronary heart disease prevention trials. However, during the course of such long-term trials, a large number of events occur subsequent to the first event, the analysis of which will be precluded by this approach. METHODS: The Wei, Lin, and Weissfeld method allows the analysis of repeated occurrence of events of the same type or of entirely different natures. It regards the recurrence times as multivariate event (failure) times, and models the marginal (individual) distribution for each event with the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: In the IDEAL trial, compared with patients taking simvastatin 20 to 40 mg daily, patients receiving atorvastatin 80 mg daily had their relative risk of a first cardiovascular event reduced by 17% (p < 0.0001), of a second by 24% (p < 0.0001), of a third by 19% (p = 0.035), of a fourth by 24% (p = 0.058), and of a fifth by 28% (p = 0.117). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that intensive statin therapy continues to be more effective than standard statin therapy, even beyond the first event, and suggest that clinicians should not hesitate to prescribe high-dose statin therapy for patients experiencing multiple recurrent cardiovascular events.

Effects of high-dose atorvastatin in patients > or =65 years of age with acute coronary syndrome (from the myocardial ischemia reduction with aggressive cholesterol lowering [MIRACL] study).

After acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), older patients are particularly susceptible to early complications, including death and recurrent ACS. Lipid management guidelines do not differentiate elderly from younger patients, and lack of evidence for statin benefits in older patients has led to underutilization of statins in the elderly. The MIRACL study randomized 3,086 patients to 16 weeks of 80 mg/day of atorvastatin or placebo 24 to 96 hours after ACS and demonstrated significant decreases in the combined primary end point (nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, recurrent symptomatic myocardial ischemia). This post hoc analysis compared benefits of 80 mg of atorvastatin in older (> or =65 years) versus younger (<65 years) patients. Event rates were approximately two- to threefold higher in older than in younger patients. Treatment-by-age heterogeneity testing indicated no difference in treatment effect by age for any of the primary or secondary end points, and relative risk decreases in the primary end point with atorvastatin versus placebo were similar in younger and older patients (22% vs 14%, respectively). The safety profile of atorvastatin was similar between the 2 age groups. In conclusion, these results and a greater immediate cardiovascular risk in older patients argue for early, intensive atorvastatin therapy as routine practice after ACS.

High-dose atorvastatin after stroke or transient ischemic attack.

BACKGROUND: Statins reduce the incidence of strokes among patients at increased risk for cardiovascular disease; whether they reduce the risk of stroke after a recent stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) remains to be established. METHODS: We randomly assigned 4731 patients who had had a stroke or TIA within one to six months before study entry, had low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels of 100 to 190 mg per deciliter (2.6 to 4.9 mmol per liter), and had no known coronary heart disease to double-blind treatment with 80 mg of atorvastatin per day or placebo. The primary end point was a first nonfatal or fatal stroke. RESULTS: The mean LDL cholesterol level during the trial was 73 mg per deciliter (1.9 mmol per liter) among patients receiving atorvastatin and 129 mg per deciliter (3.3 mmol per liter) among patients receiving placebo. During a median follow-up of 4.9 years, 265 patients (11.2 percent) receiving atorvastatin and 311 patients (13.1 percent) receiving placebo had a fatal or nonfatal stroke (5-year absolute reduction in risk, 2.2 percent; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.71 to 0.99; P=0.03; unadjusted P=0.05). The atorvastatin group had 218 ischemic strokes and 55 hemorrhagic strokes, whereas the placebo group had 274 ischemic strokes and 33 hemorrhagic strokes. The five-year absolute reduction in the risk of major cardiovascular events was 3.5 percent (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.92; P=0.002). The overall mortality rate was similar, with 216 deaths in the atorvastatin group and 211 deaths in the placebo group (P=0.98), as were the rates of serious adverse events. Elevated liver enzyme values were more common in patients taking atorvastatin. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recent stroke or TIA and without known coronary heart disease, 80 mg of atorvastatin per day reduced the overall incidence of strokes and of cardiovascular events, despite a small increase in the incidence of hemorrhagic stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00147602 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Evidence suggests that more intensive lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) than is commonly applied clinically will provide further benefit in stable coronary artery disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of 2 strategies of lipid lowering on the risk of cardiovascular disease among patients with a previous myocardial infarction (MI). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The IDEAL study, a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial conducted at 190 ambulatory cardiology care and specialist practices in northern Europe between March 1999 and March 2005 with a median follow-up of 4.8 years, which enrolled 8888 patients aged 80 years or younger with a history of acute MI. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive a high dose of atorvastatin (80 mg/d; n = 4439), or usual-dose simvastatin (20 mg/d; n = 4449). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Occurrence of a major coronary event, defined as coronary death, confirmed nonfatal acute MI, or cardiac arrest with resuscitation. RESULTS: During treatment, mean LDL-C levels were 104 (SE, 0.3) mg/dL in the simvastatin group and 81 (SE, 0.3) mg/dL in the atorvastatin group. A major coronary event occurred in 463 simvastatin patients (10.4%) and in 411 atorvastatin patients (9.3%) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78-1.01; P = .07). Nonfatal acute MI occurred in 321 (7.2%) and 267 (6.0%) in the 2 groups (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .02), but no differences were seen in the 2 other components of the primary end point. Major cardiovascular events occurred in 608 and 533 in the 2 groups, respectively (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.98; P = .02). Occurrence of any coronary event was reported in 1059 simvastatin and 898 atorvastatin patients (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P<.001). Noncardiovascular death occurred in 156 (3.5%) and 143 (3.2%) in the 2 groups (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.15; P = .47). Death from any cause occurred in 374 (8.4%) in the simvastatin group and 366 (8.2%) in the atorvastatin group (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.13; P = .81). Patients in the atorvastatin group had higher rates of drug discontinuation due to nonserious adverse events; transaminase elevation resulted in 43 (1.0%) vs 5 (0.1%) withdrawals (P<.001). Serious myopathy and rhabdomyolysis were rare in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with previous MI, intensive lowering of LDL-C did not result in a significant reduction in the primary outcome of major coronary events, but did reduce the risk of other composite secondary end points and nonfatal acute MI. There were no differences in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Patients with MI may benefit from intensive lowering of LDL-C without an increase in noncardiovascular mortality or other serious adverse reactions.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00159835.

High-dose atorvastatin reduces total plasma levels of oxidized phospholipids and immune complexes present on apolipoprotein B-100 in patients with acute coronary syndromes in the MIRACL trial.

BACKGROUND: Oxidized phospholipids (OxPL) are present within atherosclerotic plaques and bound by lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] in plasma. This study evaluated the impact of atorvastatin on oxidized LDL (OxLDL) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). METHODS AND RESULTS: OxLDL-E06 (OxPL content on apolipoprotein B-100 [apoB] detected by antibody E06), apoB-100 immune complexes (apoB-IC), OxLDL autoantibodies, and Lp(a) levels were measured in 2341 patients at baseline and after 16 weeks of treatment with atorvastatin 80 mg/d or placebo. The OxLDL-E06 and apoB-IC data are reported per apoB-100 particle (OxPL/apoB, IC/apoB) and as total levels on all apoB-100 particles (total apoB-OxPL and total apoB-IC [eg, OxPL/apoB or IC/apoBxapoB-100 levels]). Compared with baseline values, atorvastatin reduced apoB-100 (-33%), total apoB-OxPL (-29.7%), total apoB-IC IgG (-29.5%), and IgM (-25.7%) (P<0.0001 for all), whereas no change or an increase was observed with placebo. When normalized per apoB-100, compared with placebo, atorvastatin increased OxPL/apoB (9.5% versus -3.9%, P<0.0001) and Lp(a) (8.8% versus -0.7%, (P<0.0001). A strong correlation was noted between OxPL/apoB and Lp(a) (R=0.85, P<0.0001), consistent with previous data that Lp(a) binds OxPL. CONCLUSIONS: After atorvastatin treatment, total OxPL on all apoB-100 particles was decreased. However, there was enrichment of OxPL on a smaller pool of apoB-100 particles, in parallel with similar increases in Lp(a), suggesting binding by Lp(a). These data support the hypothesis that atorvastatin promotes mobilization and clearance of proinflammatory OxPL, which may contribute to a reduction in ischemic events after ACS.

High-dose atorvastatin enhances the decline in inflammatory markers in patients with acute coronary syndromes in the MIRACL study.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation promotes acute coronary syndromes and ensuing clinical complications. Although statins reduce inflammatory markers in asymptomatic adults or in patients with stable angina, the effect of statins on the markedly heightened inflammation in patients with acute coronary syndromes is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We measured C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), and interleukin 6 (IL-6) in 2402 subjects enrolled the Myocardial Ischemia Reduction with Aggressive Cholesterol Lowering (MIRACL) study. Subjects with unstable angina or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction were randomized to atorvastatin 80 mg/d or placebo within 24 to 96 hours of hospital admission and treated for 16 weeks. The effect of treatment on inflammatory markers was assessed by ANCOVA after adjustment for presenting syndrome, country, and initial level of marker. All 3 markers were markedly elevated at randomization and declined over the 16 weeks in both treatment groups. Compared with placebo, atorvastatin significantly reduced CRP, -83% (95% CI, -84%, -81%) versus -74% (95% CI, -75%, -71%) (P<0.0001) and SAA, -80% (95% CI, -82%, -78%) versus -77% (-79%, -75%) (P=0.0006) but not IL-6, -55% (95% CI, -57%, -53%) versus -53% (95% CI, -55%, -51%) (P=0.3). Reductions in CRP and SAA were observed in patients with unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, with initial LDL cholesterol <3.2 or > or =3.2 mmol/L (125 mg/dL), age > or =65 or <65 years, and in men and women. By 16 weeks, CRP was 34% lower with atorvastatin than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose atorvastatin potentiated the decline in inflammation in patients with acute coronary syndromes. This supports the value of early statin therapy in these patients.