Growth differentiation factor 15 and cardiovascular risk: individual patient meta-analysis.

AIMS: Levels of growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), a cytokine secreted in response to cellular stress and inflammation, have been associated with multiple types of cardiovascular (CV) events. However, its comparative prognostic performance across different presentations of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: An individual patient meta-analysis was performed using data pooled from eight trials including 53 486 patients. Baseline GDF-15 concentration was analyzed as a continuous variable and using established cutpoints (<1200 ng/L, 1200-1800 ng/L, > 1800 ng/L) to evaluate its prognostic performance for CV death/hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and their components using Cox models adjusted for clinical variables and established CV biomarkers. Analyses were further stratified on ASCVD status: acute coronary syndrome (ACS), stabilized after recent ACS, and stable ASCVD. Overall, higher GDF-15 concentration was significantly and independently associated with an increased rate of CV death/HHF and MACE (P < 0.001 for each). However, while GDF-15 showed a robust and consistent independent association with CV death and HHF across all presentations of ASCVD, its prognostic association with future myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke only remained significant in patients stabilized after recent ACS or with stable ASCVD [hazard ratio (HR): 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-1.31 and HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.05-1.28 for MI and stroke, respectively] and not in ACS (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.90-1.06 and HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.39-1.92, respectively). CONCLUSION: Growth differentiation factor 15 consistently adds prognostic information for CV death and HHF across the spectrum of ASCVD. GDF-15 also adds prognostic information for MI and stroke beyond clinical risk factors and cardiac biomarkers but not in the setting of ACS.

A care pathway for the cardiovascular complications of COVID-19: Insights from an institutional response.

The infection caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2, or COVID-19, can result in myocardial injury, heart failure, and arrhythmias. In addition to the viral infection itself, investigational therapies for the infection can interact with the cardiovascular system. As cardiologists and cardiovascular service lines will be heavily involved in the care of patients with COVID-19, our division organized an approach to manage these complications, attempting to balance resource utilization and risk to personnel with optimal cardiovascular care. The model presented can provide a framework for other institutions to organize their own approaches and can be adapted to local constraints, resource availability, and emerging knowledge.

Benefit of Adding Ezetimibe to Statin Therapy on Cardiovascular Outcomes and Safety in Patients With Versus Without Diabetes Mellitus: Results From IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial).

BACKGROUND: Ezetimibe, when added to simvastatin, reduces cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndrome. We explored outcomes stratified by diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: In IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial), 18 144 patients after acute coronary syndrome with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol 50 to 125 mg/dL were randomized to 40 mg ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) or 40 mg placebo/simvastatin. The primary composite end point was cardiovascular death, major coronary events, and stroke. DM was a prespecified subgroup. RESULTS: The 4933 (27%) patients with DM were more often older and female, had had a prior myocardial infarction and revascularization, and presented more frequently with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome compared with patients without DM (each P<0.001). The median admission low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was lower among patients with DM (89 versus 97 mg/dL, P<0.001). E/S achieved a significantly lower median time-weighted average low-density lipoprotein cholesterol compared with placebo/simvastatin, irrespective of DM (DM: 49 versus 67 mg/dL; no DM: 55 versus 71 mg/dL; both P<0.001). In patients with DM, E/S reduced the 7-year Kaplan-Meier primary end point event rate by 5.5% absolute (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.94); in patients without DM, the absolute difference was 0.7% (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.04; Pint=0.02). The largest relative reductions in patients with DM were in myocardial infarction (24%) and ischemic stroke (39%). No differences in safety outcomes by treatment were present regardless of DM. When stratified further by age, patients ≥75 years of age had a 20% relative reduction in the primary end point regardless of DM (Pint=0.91), whereas patients <75 years of age with DM had greater benefit than those without (Pint=0.011). When stratified by the TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) Risk Score for Secondary Prevention, all patients with DM demonstrated benefit with E/S regardless of risk. In contrast, among patients without DM, those with a high risk score experienced a significant (18%) relative reduction in the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke with E/S compared with placebo/simvastatin, whereas patients without DM at low or moderate risk demonstrated no benefit with the addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin (Pint =0.034). CONCLUSIONS: In IMPROVE-IT, the benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin was enhanced in patients with DM and in high-risk patients without DM. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

Prevention of Stroke with the Addition of Ezetimibe to Statin Therapy in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial).

BACKGROUND: Patients who experience an acute coronary syndrome are at heightened risk of recurrent ischemic events, including stroke. Ezetimibe improved cardiovascular outcomes when added to statin therapy in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome. We investigated the efficacy of the addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin for the prevention of stroke and other adverse cardiovascular events in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial), with a focus on patients with a stroke before randomization. METHODS: Patients who experienced acute coronary syndrome were randomized to a placebo/simvastatin or ezetimibe/simvastatin regimen and followed for a median of 6 years. Treatment efficacy was assessed for the entire population and by subgroups for the first and total (first and subsequent) events for the end points of stroke of any etiology, stroke subtypes, and the primary trial end point at 7 years. RESULTS: Of 18 144 patients, 641 (3.5%) experienced at least 1 stroke; most were ischemic (527, 82%). Independent predictors of stroke included prior stroke, older age, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, and renal dysfunction. There was a nonsignificant reduction in the first event of stroke of any etiology (4.2% versus 4.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.00; P=0.052) with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus placebo/simvastatin, driven by a significant 21% reduction in ischemic stroke (3.4% versus 4.1%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67-0.94; P=0.008) and a nonsignificant increase in hemorrhagic stroke (0.8% versus 0.6%; HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.93-2.04; P=0.11). Evaluating total events, including the first and all recurrent strokes, ezetimibe/simvastatin reduced stroke of any etiology (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.98; P=0.029) and ischemic stroke (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.91; P=0.003). Patients who had experienced a stroke prior to randomization were at a higher risk of recurrence and demonstrated an absolute risk reduction of 8.6% for stroke of any etiology (10.2% versus 18.8%; number needed to treat=12; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95; P=0.030) and 7.6% for ischemic stroke (8.7% versus 16.3%; number needed to treat=13; HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.31-0.86; P=0.011) with ezetimibe added to simvastatin therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome reduces the frequency of ischemic stroke, with a particularly large effect seen in patients with a prior stroke. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

Ezetimibe Added to Statin Therapy after Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels and the risk of cardiovascular events, but whether the addition of ezetimibe, a nonstatin drug that reduces intestinal cholesterol absorption, can reduce the rate of cardiovascular events further is not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial involving 18,144 patients who had been hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome within the preceding 10 days and had LDL cholesterol levels of 50 to 100 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 2.6 mmol per liter) if they were receiving lipid-lowering therapy or 50 to 125 mg per deciliter (1.3 to 3.2 mmol per liter) if they were not receiving lipid-lowering therapy. The combination of simvastatin (40 mg) and ezetimibe (10 mg) (simvastatin-ezetimibe) was compared with simvastatin (40 mg) and placebo (simvastatin monotherapy). The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring rehospitalization, coronary revascularization (≥30 days after randomization), or nonfatal stroke. The median follow-up was 6 years. RESULTS: The median time-weighted average LDL cholesterol level during the study was 53.7 mg per deciliter (1.4 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 69.5 mg per deciliter (1.8 mmol per liter) in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (P<0.001). The Kaplan-Meier event rate for the primary end point at 7 years was 32.7% in the simvastatin-ezetimibe group, as compared with 34.7% in the simvastatin-monotherapy group (absolute risk difference, 2.0 percentage points; hazard ratio, 0.936; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 0.99; P=0.016). Rates of prespecified muscle, gallbladder, and hepatic adverse effects and cancer were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: When added to statin therapy, ezetimibe resulted in incremental lowering of LDL cholesterol levels and improved cardiovascular outcomes. Moreover, lowering LDL cholesterol to levels below previous targets provided additional benefit. (Funded by Merck; IMPROVE-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00202878.).

Benefit of Ezetimibe Added to Simvastatin in Reduced Kidney Function.

Efficacy of statin-based therapies in reducing cardiovascular mortality in individuals with CKD seems to diminish as eGFR declines. The strongest evidence supporting the cardiovascular benefit of statins in individuals with CKD was shown with ezetimibe plus simvastatin versus placebo. However, whether combination therapy or statin alone resulted in cardiovascular benefit is uncertain. Therefore, we estimated GFR in 18,015 individuals from the IMPROVE-IT (ezetimibe plus simvastatin versus simvastatin alone in individuals with cardiovascular disease and creatinine clearance >30 ml/min) and examined post hoc the relationship of eGFR with end points across treatment arms. For the primary end point of cardiovascular death, major coronary event, or nonfatal stroke, the relative risk reduction of combination therapy compared with monotherapy differed by eGFR (P=0.04). The difference in treatment effect was observed at eGFR≤75 ml/min per 1.73 m2 and most apparent at levels ≤60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 Compared with individuals receiving monotherapy, individuals receiving combination therapy with a baseline eGFR of 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 experienced a 12% risk reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.82 to 0.95); those with a baseline eGFR of 45 ml/min per 1.73 m2 had a 13% risk reduction (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.98). In stabilized individuals within 10 days of acute coronary syndrome, combination therapy seemed to be more effective than monotherapy in individuals with moderately reduced eGFR (30-60 ml/min per 1.73 m2). Further studies examining potential benefits of combination lipid-lowering therapy in individuals with CKD are needed.

The benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin therapy in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery and acute coronary syndrome in the IMPROVE-IT trial.

AIMS: To examine the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe added to statin in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) following hospitalization for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the IMPROVE-IT trial, post-ACS patients with mean low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of 93.8 mg/dL at presentation were randomized to simvastatin/ezetimibe or simvastatin/placebo. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular death, major coronary event or stroke, and the median follow-up was 6 years. Efficacy and safety endpoints were examined by prior CABG status. Among 18 134 patients, 1684 (9.3%) had a prior CABG (median age 69 years, 82% male). During the trial, the median time-weighted LDL-C level was 55.0 mg/dL with simvastatin/ezetimibe vs. 69.9 mg/dL with simvastatin/placebo in patients with prior CABG (P < 0.001), and it was 53.6 mg/dL vs. 69.5 mg/dL, respectively, in patients without prior CABG (P < 0.001). The rate of the primary endpoint was higher in patients with vs. without prior CABG [56% vs. 32%, adj. hazard ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33-1.58]. Patients with prior CABG receiving simvastatin/ezetimibe had an 8.8% (95% CI 3.1-14.6%) lower absolute risk over simvastatin/placebo in the primary endpoint, whereas patients without prior CABG had a 1.3% (95% CI 0-2.6%) lower absolute risk (P-interaction = 0.02). There were no between-group significant differences in safety endpoints. CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin appears to be enhanced in patients with prior CABG, supporting the use of intensive lipid lowering therapy in these high-risk patients following ACS.

Achievement of dual low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein targets more frequent with the addition of ezetimibe to simvastatin and associated with better outcomes in IMPROVE-IT.

BACKGROUND: Statins lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP); addition of ezetimibe to statins further reduces LDL-C and hs-CRP. An analysis of the relationship between achieved LDL-C and hs-CRP targets and outcomes for simvastatin and ezetimibe/simvastatin was prespecified in Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT). METHODS AND RESULTS: The IMPROVE-IT trial randomly assigned 18 144 patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome to simvastatin or ezetimibe/simvastatin. LDL-C and hs-CRP were measured at baseline and 1 month after randomization. Outcomes were assessed in those achieving one or both of the prespecified targets of LDL-C<70 mg/dL and hs-CRP<2 mg/L versus achieving neither target, adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics. An exploratory analysis examined targets of LDL-C<50 mg/dL and hs-CRP<1 mg/L. Patients meeting both targets at baseline, with no 1-month values, or with end points before 1 month were excluded. Of 15 179 patients, 39% achieved the dual LDL-C (<70 mg/dL) and hs-CRP (<2 mg/L) targets at 1 month, 14% met neither target, 14% met only the hs-CRP target, and 33% met only the LDL-C target. Those achieving dual targets had lower primary end point rates than those meeting neither target (cardiovascular death, major coronary event, or stroke; 38.9% versus 28.0%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.73; 0.66-0.81; P<0.001). More patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin met dual targets than those treated with simvastatin alone (50% versus 29%, P<0.001). The association of dual-target attainment with improved outcomes was similar irrespective of treatment assignment (P-interaction=0.65). Similar findings were observed using the exploratory targets. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly more patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin met prespecified and exploratory dual LDL-C and hs-CRP targets than patients treated with simvastatin alone. Reaching both LDL-C and hs-CRP targets was associated with improved outcomes after multivariable adjustment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

On-treatment analysis of the Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of adding ezetimibe (Ez) to simvastatin (S) in a post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) population in a prespecified on-treatment analysis. METHODS: We evaluated 17,706 post-ACS patients from the IMPROVE-IT trial who had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values between 50 and 125 mg/dL and who received Ez 10 mg/d with S 40 mg/d (Ez/S) or placebo with simvastatin 40 mg/d (P/S). The primary composite end point was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, coronary revascularization ≥30 days postrandomization, or stroke. The on-treatment analysis included patients who received study drug for the duration of the trial or experienced a primary end point or noncardiovascular death within 30 days of drug discontinuation. RESULTS: Mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values at 1 year were 71 mg/dL for P/S and 54 mg/dL for Ez/S (absolute difference -17 mg/dL = -24%; P < .001). The 7-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of the primary end point occurred in 32.4% in the P/S arm and 29.8% in the Ez/S arm (absolute difference 2.6%; HRadj 0.92 [95% CI 0.87-0.98]; P = .01). The absolute treatment effect favoring Ez/S was 30% greater than in the intention-to-treat analysis of IMPROVE-IT. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides additional support for the efficacy and safety of adding Ez to S in this high-risk, post-ACS population.

Evaluating cardiovascular event reduction with ezetimibe as an adjunct to simvastatin in 18,144 patients after acute coronary syndromes: final baseline characteristics of the IMPROVE-IT study population.

BACKGROUND: The IMProved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT) is evaluating the potential benefit for reduction in major cardiovascular (CV) events from the addition of ezetimibe versus placebo to 40 mg/d of simvastatin therapy in patients who present with acute coronary syndromes and have low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≤ 125 mg/dL. METHODS: The primary composite end point is CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, rehospitalization for unstable angina (UA), and coronary revascularization (≥ 30 days postrandomization). The simvastatin monotherapy arm's LDL-C target is <70 mg/dL. Ezetimibe was assumed to further lower LDL-C by 15 mg/dL and produce an estimated ~8% to 9% treatment effect. The targeted number of events is 5,250. RESULTS: We enrolled 18,144 patients with either ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI, n = 5,192) or UA/non-ST-segment elevation MI (UA/NSTEMI, n = 12,952) from October 2005 to July 2010. Western Europe (40%) and North America (38%) were the leading enrolling regions. The STEMI cohort was younger and had a higher percentage of patients naive to lipid-lowering treatment compared with the UA/NSTEMI cohort. The UA/NSTEMI group had a higher prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, and prior MI. Median LDL-C at entry was 100 mg/dL for STEMI and 93 mg/dL for UA/NSTEMI patients. CONCLUSIONS: This trial is evaluating LDL-C lowering beyond previously targeted LDL-C levels. The results depend on achieving the desired separation of LDL-C with ezetimibe and on the assumption that ezetimibe's lowering of LDL-C will have similar event reduction efficacy as the LDL-C lowering from a statin. The results could affect future therapies and guidelines.

In-Hospital Virtual Peer-to-Peer Consultation to Increase Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for Heart Failure: A Pilot Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Optimizing GDMT in the hospital is associated with greater long-term use in HFrEF. This study aimed to describe the efficacy of a multidisciplinary virtual HF intervention on GDMT optimization among patients with HFrEF admitted for any cause. METHODS: In this pilot randomized, controlled study, consecutive patients with HFrEF admitted to noncardiology medicine services for any cause were identified at a large academic tertiary care hospital between May to September 2021. Major exclusions were end-stage renal disease, hemodynamic instability, concurrent COVID-19 infection, and current enrollment in hospice care. Patients were randomized to a clinician-level virtual peer-to-peer consult intervention providing GDMT recommendations and information on medication costs versus usual care. Primary end points included (1) proportion of patients with new GDMT initiation or use and (2) changes to HF optimal medical therapy scores which included target dosing (range, 0-9). RESULTS: Of 242 patients identified, 91 (38%) were eligible and randomized to intervention (N=52) or usual care (N=39). Baseline characteristics were similar between intervention and usual care (mean age 63 versus 67 years, 23% versus 26% female, 46% versus 49% Black, mean ejection fraction 33% versus 31%). GDMT use on admission was also similar. There were greater proportions of patients with GDMT initiation or continuation with the intervention compared with usual care. After adjusting for optimal medical therapy score on admission, changes to optimal medical therapy score at discharge were higher for the intervention group compared with usual care (+0.44 versus -0.31, absolute difference +0.75, adjusted estimate 0.86±0.42; P=0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Among eligible patients with HFrEF hospitalized for any cause on noncardiology services, a multidisciplinary pilot virtual HF consultation increased new GDMT initiation and dose optimization at discharge.

Association of Serial High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T With Subsequent Cardiovascular Events in Patients Stabilized After Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Secondary Analysis From IMPROVE-IT.

Importance: Studies have demonstrated an association between single measures of high-sensitivity troponin (hsTn) and future cardiovascular events in patients with chronic coronary syndromes. However, limited data exist regarding the association between changes in serial values of hsTn and subsequent cardiovascular events in this patient population. Objective: To evaluate the association between changes in high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) and subsequent cardiovascular events in patients stabilized after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a secondary analysis from the Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT), a randomized clinical trial of ezetimibe vs placebo on a background of simvastatin in 18 144 patients hospitalized for an ACS across 1147 sites in 39 countries. The current biomarker substudy includes the 6035 participants consenting to the biomarker substudy with available hsTnT at months 1 and 4. Data were collected from October 26, 2005, through July 8, 2010, with the database locked October 21, 2014. Data were analyzed from February 28, 2021, through August 14, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes of interest were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Associations of absolute and relative changes in hsTnT between month 1 and month 4 as a function of the starting month 1 hsTnT and the composite outcome were examined using landmark analyses. Results: Of 6035 patients in this analysis (median [IQR] age, 64 [57-71]), 1486 (24.6%) were female; 361 (6.0%) were Asian; 121 were (2.0%) Black; 252 (4.2%) were Spanish descent; 4959 were (82.2%) White; and 342 (5.7%) reported another race (consolidated owing to small numbers), declined to respond, or were not asked to report race owing to regulatory prohibitions. Most patients (4114 [68.2%]) had stable hsTnT values (change <3 ng/L), with 1158 (19.2%) and 763 (12.6%) having changes of 3 to less than 7 ng/L and 7 ng/L or more, respectively. After adjustment for clinical risk factors and stratification by the starting month 1 hsTnT level, an absolute increase in hsTnT of 7 ng/L or more was associated with a more than 3-fold greater risk of the composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.33; 95% CI, 1.99-5.57; P < .001), whereas decreases of 7 ng/L or more were associated with similar to lower risk (aHR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26-1.03; P = .06) compared with stable values. There was a stepwise association moving from larger absolute decreases (aHR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26-1.03) to larger absolute increases (aHR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.99-5.57) in hsTnT with future risk of the composite outcome (P trend <.001). A similar association was observed when analyzed on the basis of relative percent and continuous change. Conclusions and Relevance: Among stable patients post-ACS, changes in hsTnT were associated with a gradient of risk of subsequent cardiovascular events across the range of starting hsTnT values. Serial assessment of hsTnT may refine risk stratification with the potential to guide therapy decisions in this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00202878.

Cardiovascular Events and Long-Term Risk of Sudden Death Among Stabilized Patients After Acute Coronary Syndrome: Insights From IMPROVE-IT.

Background Unlike patients with low ejection fraction after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), little is known about the long-term incidence and influence of cardiovascular events before sudden death among stabilized patients after ACS. Methods and Results A total of 18 144 patients stabilized within 10 days after ACS in IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) were studied. Cumulative incidence rates (IRs) and IRs per 100 patient-years of sudden death were calculated. Using Cox proportional hazards, the association of ≥1 additional postrandomization cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, and hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure) with sudden death was examined. Early (≤1 year after ACS) and late sudden deaths (>1 year) were compared. Of 2446 total deaths, 402 (16%) were sudden. The median time to sudden death was 2.7 years, with 109 early and 293 late sudden deaths. The cumulative IR was 2.47% (95% CI, 2.23%-2.73%) at 7 years of follow-up. The risk of sudden death following a postrandomization cardiovascular event (150/402 [37%] sudden deaths; median 1.4 years) was greater (IR/100 patient-years, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.23-1.69]) than the risk with no postrandomization cardiovascular event (IR/100 patient-years, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.24-0.30]). Postrandomization myocardial infarction (hazard ratio [HR], 3.64 [95% CI, 2.85-4.66]) and heart failure (HR, 4.55 [95% CI, 3.33-6.22]) significantly increased future risk of sudden death. Conclusions Patients stabilized within 10 days of an ACS remain at long-term risk of sudden death with the greatest risk in those with an additional cardiovascular event. These results refine the long-term risk and risk effectors of sudden death, which may help clinicians identify opportunities to improve care. Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00202878.

Association of Apolipoprotein B-Containing Lipoproteins and Risk of Myocardial Infarction in Individuals With and Without Atherosclerosis: Distinguishing Between Particle Concentration, Type, and Content.

IMPORTANCE: Lipid management typically focuses on levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and, to a lesser extent, triglycerides (TG). However, animal models and genetic studies suggest that the atherogenic particle subpopulations (LDL and very-low-density lipoprotein [VLDL]) are both important and that the number of particles is more predictive of cardiac events than their lipid content. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether common measures of cholesterol concentration, TG concentration, or their ratio are associated with cardiovascular risk beyond the number of apolipoprotein B (apoB)-containing lipoproteins. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective cohort analysis included individuals from the population-based UK Biobank and from 2 large international clinical trials, FOURIER and IMPROVE-IT. The median (IQR) follow-up was 11.1 (10.4-11.8) years in UK Biobank and 2.5 (2.0-4.7) years in the clinical trials. Two populations were studied in this analysis: 389 529 individuals in the primary prevention group who were not taking lipid-lowering therapy and 40 430 patients with established atherosclerosis who were receiving statin treatment. EXPOSURES: ApoB, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), LDL-C, and TG. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The primary study outcome was incident myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: Of the 389 529 individuals in the primary prevention group, 224 097 (58%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 56.0 (49.5-62.5) years. Of the 40 430 patients with established atherosclerosis, 9647 (24%) were female, and the median (IQR) age was 63 (56.2-69.0) years. In the primary prevention cohort, apoB, non-HDL-C, and TG each individually were associated with incident MI. However, when assessed together, only apoB was associated (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] per 1 SD, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.15-1.40; P < .001). Similarly, only apoB was associated with MI in the secondary prevention cohort. Adjusting for apoB, there was no association between the ratio of TG to LDL-C (a surrogate for the ratio of TG-rich lipoproteins to LDL) and risk of MI, implying that for a given concentration of apoB-containing lipoproteins, the relative proportions of particle subpopulations may no longer be a predictor of risk. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, risk of MI was best captured by the number of apoB-containing lipoproteins, independent from lipid content (cholesterol or TG) or type of lipoprotein (LDL or TG-rich). This suggests that apoB may be the primary driver of atherosclerosis and that lowering the concentration of all apoB-containing lipoproteins should be the focus of therapeutic strategies.

Risk of incident diabetes with intensive-dose compared with moderate-dose statin therapy: a meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: A recent meta-analysis demonstrated that statin therapy is associated with excess risk of developing diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether intensive-dose statin therapy is associated with increased risk of new-onset diabetes compared with moderate-dose statin therapy. DATA SOURCES: We identified relevant trials in a literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (January 1, 1996, through March 31, 2011). Unpublished data were obtained from investigators. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled end-point trials that compared intensive-dose statin therapy with moderate-dose statin therapy and included more than 1000 participants who were followed up for more than 1 year. DATA EXTRACTION: Tabular data provided for each trial described baseline characteristics and numbers of participants developing diabetes and experiencing major cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, coronary revascularization). We calculated trial-specific odds ratios (ORs) for new-onset diabetes and major cardiovascular events and combined these using random-effects model meta-analysis. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic. RESULTS: In 5 statin trials with 32,752 participants without diabetes at baseline, 2749 developed diabetes (1449 assigned intensive-dose therapy, 1300 assigned moderate-dose therapy, representing 2.0 additional cases in the intensive-dose group per 1000 patient-years) and 6684 experienced cardiovascular events (3134 and 3550, respectively, representing 6.5 fewer cases in the intensive-dose group per 1000 patient-years) over a weighted mean (SD) follow-up of 4.9 (1.9) years. Odds ratios were 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.22; I(2) = 0%) for new-onset diabetes and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75-0.94; I(2) = 74%) for cardiovascular events for participants receiving intensive therapy compared with moderate-dose therapy. As compared with moderate-dose statin therapy, the number needed to harm per year for intensive-dose statin therapy was 498 for new-onset diabetes while the number needed to treat per year for intensive-dose statin therapy was 155 for cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: In a pooled analysis of data from 5 statin trials, intensive-dose statin therapy was associated with an increased risk of new-onset diabetes compared with moderate-dose statin therapy.

Baseline Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Clinical Outcomes of Combining Ezetimibe With Statin Therapy in IMPROVE-IT.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 U.S. cholesterol management guideline recommends additional lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe for secondary prevention in very high-risk patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 mg/dL despite maximally tolerated statin. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between baseline LDL-C above and below 70 mg/dL and the benefit of adding ezetimibe to statin in patients post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: IMPROVE-IT (Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo/simvastatin in post-ACS patients followed for 6 years (median). A total of 17,999 patients were stratified by LDL-C at qualifying event into 3 groups (50-<70, 70-<100, and 100-125 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, major coronary events, or stroke. RESULTS: Absolute differences in median LDL-C achieved at 4 months between treatment arms were similar (17-20 mg/dL). The effect of ezetimibe/simvastatin vs placebo/simvastatin on primary endpoint was consistent regardless of baseline LDL-C of 50-<70 mg/dL (HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.80-1.05]), 70-<100 mg/dL (HR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.87-1.01]), or 100-125 mg/dL (HR: 0.94 [95% CI: 0.86-1.03]; P interaction = 0.95). Normalized relative risk reductions per 1-mmol/L difference in achieved LDL-C at 4 months between treatment arms were 21% in patients with baseline LDL-C of 50-<70 mg/dL, 16% in those with 70-<100 mg/dL, and 13% in those with 100-125 mg/dL (P interaction = 0.91). No significant treatment interactions by baseline LDL-C were present for safety endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Adding ezetimibe to statin consistently reduced the risk for cardiovascular events in post-ACS patients irrespective of baseline LDL-C values, supporting the use of intensive lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe even in patients with baseline LDL-C <70 mg/dL. (IMPROVE-IT: Examining Outcomes in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Vytorin [Ezetimibe/Simvastatin] vs Simvastatin [P04103]; NCT00202878).