Long-term safety and tolerability of ambrisentan treatment for pediatric patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: An open-label extension study.

This open-label, extension study assessed long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of ambrisentan in a pediatric population (age 8- < 18 years) with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Following completion of a 6-month, randomized study, participants entered the long-term extension at individualized ambrisentan dosages (2.5/5/7.5 or 10 mg/day). Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), AEs of special interest, and serious AEs (SAEs); efficacy outcomes included 6-min walking distance (6MWD) and World Health Organization functional class (WHO FC). Thirty-eight of 41 (93%) randomized study participants entered the extension; 21 (55%) completed (reaching age 18 years). Most participants received concomitant phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (n = 25/38, 66%). Median ambrisentan exposure was 3.5 years. Most participants experienced ≥ 1 AE (n = 34/38, 89%), and 21 (55%) experienced SAEs, most commonly worsening PAH (n = 3/38, 8%), acute cardiac failure, pneumonia, or anemia (n = 2/38; 5% each); none considered ambrisentan-related. Seven participants (18%) died, with recorded reasons (MedDRA preferred term): cardiac failure (n = 2), PAH (n = 2), COVID-19 (n = 1), acute right ventricular failure (n = 1), and failure to thrive (n = 1); median time to death: 5.2 years. Anemia and hepatotoxicity AEs were generally mild to moderate and did not require ambrisentan dose adjustment. Assessed at study end in 29 participants (76%), mean 6MWD improved by 17% (standard deviation: 34.3%), and all (29/29, 100%) had improved or unchanged WHO FC.    Conclusion: Long-term weight-based ambrisentan dosing, alone or combined with other PAH therapies in children with PAH aged 8- < 18 years, exhibited tolerability and clinical improvements consistent with prior randomized study results.    Trial registration: NCT01342952, April 27, 2011. What is Known: • The endothelin receptor antagonist, ambrisentan, is indicated for treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Previous studies have shown similar efficacy and tolerability in pediatric patients as in adults. What is New: • This open-label extension study assessed the long-term use of ambrisentan in pediatric patients (8-<18 years) with PAH, most of whom were also receiving recommended background PAH treatment. • Weight-based dosing of ambrisentan, given alone or in combination with other PAH therapies, was well tolerated with clinical improvements consistent with prior randomized study results.

Pharmacodynamic evaluation and safety assessment of treatment with antibodies to serum amyloid P component in patients with cardiac amyloidosis: an open-label Phase 2 study and an adjunctive immuno-PET imaging study.

BACKGROUND: In a Phase I study treatment with the serum amyloid P component (SAP) depleter miridesap followed by monoclonal antibody to SAP (dezamizumab) showed removal of amyloid from liver, spleen and kidney in patients with systemic amyloidosis. We report results from a Phase 2 study and concurrent immuno-positron emission tomography (PET) study assessing efficacy, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety and cardiac uptake (of dezamizumab) following the same intervention in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. METHODS: Both were uncontrolled open-label studies. After SAP depletion with miridesap, patients received ≤ 6 monthly doses of dezamizumab in the Phase 2 trial (n = 7), ≤ 2 doses of non-radiolabelled dezamizumab plus [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab (total mass dose of 80 mg at session 1 and 500 mg at session 2) in the immuno-PET study (n = 2). Primary endpoints of the Phase 2 study were changed from baseline to follow-up (at 8 weeks) in left ventricular mass (LVM) by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and safety. Primary endpoint of the immuno-PET study was [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab cardiac uptake assessed via PET. RESULTS: Dezamizumab produced no appreciable or consistent reduction in LVM nor improvement in cardiac function in the Phase 2 study. In the immuno-PET study, measurable cardiac uptake of [89Zr]Zr-dezamizumab, although seen in both patients, was moderate to low. Uptake was notably lower in the patient with higher LVM. Treatment-associated rash with cutaneous small-vessel vasculitis was observed in both studies. Abdominal large-vessel vasculitis after initial dezamizumab dosing (300 mg) occurred in the first patient with immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis enrolled in the Phase 2 study. Symptom resolution was nearly complete within 24 h of intravenous methylprednisolone and dezamizumab discontinuation; abdominal computed tomography imaging showed vasculitis resolution by 8 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous observations of visceral amyloid reduction, there was no appreciable evidence of amyloid removal in patients with cardiac amyloidosis in this Phase 2 trial, potentially related to limited cardiac uptake of dezamizumab as demonstrated in the immuno-PET study. The benefit-risk assessment for dezamizumab in cardiac amyloidosis was considered unfavourable after the incidence of large-vessel vasculitis and development for this indication was terminated. Trial registration NCT03044353 (2 February 2017) and NCT03417830 (25 January 2018).

Effect of darapladib on major coronary events after an acute coronary syndrome: the SOLID-TIMI 52 randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2) has been hypothesized to be involved in atherogenesis through pathways related to inflammation. Darapladib is an oral, selective inhibitor of the Lp-PLA2 enzyme. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of darapladib in patients after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: SOLID-TIMI 52 was a multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized 13,026 participants within 30 days of hospitalization with an ACS (non-ST-elevation or ST-elevation myocardial infarction [MI]) at 868 sites in 36 countries. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to either once-daily darapladib (160 mg) or placebo on a background of guideline-recommended therapy. Patients were followed up for a median of 2.5 years between December 7, 2009, and December 6, 2013. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point (major coronary events) was the composite of coronary heart disease (CHD) death, MI, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia. Kaplan-Meier event rates are reported at 3 years. RESULTS: During a median duration of 2.5 years, the primary end point occurred in 903 patients in the darapladib group and 910 in the placebo group (16.3% vs 15.6% at 3 years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.00 [95% CI, 0.91-1.09]; P = .93). The composite of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke occurred in 824 in the darapladib group and 838 in the placebo group (15.0% vs 15.0% at 3 years; HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.90-1.09]; P = .78). There were no differences between the treatment groups for additional secondary end points, for individual components of the primary end point, or in all-cause mortality (371 events in the darapladib group and 395 in the placebo group [7.3% vs 7.1% at 3 years; HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.82-1.08]; P = .40). Patients were more likely to report an odor-related concern in the darapladib group vs the placebo group (11.5% vs 2.5%) and also more likely to report diarrhea (10.6% vs 5.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients who experienced an ACS event, direct inhibition of Lp-PLA2 with darapladib added to optimal medical therapy and initiated within 30 days of hospitalization did not reduce the risk of major coronary events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01000727.

Pediatric Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Exposure-Response Analysis of Ambrisentan in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Comparison With Adult Data.

This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model of ambrisentan in pediatric patients (8 to <18 years) with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and compare pediatric ambrisentan systemic exposure with previously reported adult data. Association of ambrisentan exposure with efficacy (6-minute walking distance) and safety (adverse events) were exploratory analyses. A population PK model was developed using pediatric PK data. Steady-state systemic exposure metrics were estimated for the pediatric population and compared with previously reported data in adult patients with PAH and healthy subjects. No covariates had a significant effect on PK parameters; therefore, the final covariate model was the same as the base model. The pediatric population PK model was a 2-compartment model including the effect of body weight (allometric scaling), first-order absorption and elimination, and absorption lag time. Steady-state ambrisentan exposure was similar between the pediatric and adult population when accounting for body weight differences. Geometric mean area under the concentration-time curve at steady state in pediatric patients receiving ambrisentan low dose was 3% lower than in the adult population (and similar in both populations receiving high dose). Geometric mean maximum plasma concentration at steady state in pediatric patients receiving low and high doses was 11% and 18% higher, respectively, than in the adult population. There was no apparent association in the pediatric or adult population between ambrisentan exposure and change in 6-minute walking distance or incidence of ambrisentan-related adverse events in pediatric patients. The similar ambrisentan exposure and exposure-response profiles observed in pediatric and adult populations with PAH suggests appropriateness of body-weight-based dosing in the pediatric population with PAH.

An observational, non-interventional study for the follow-up of patients with amyloidosis who received miridesap followed by dezamizumab in a phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Miridesap depletes circulating serum amyloid P (SAP) and dezamizumab (anti-SAP monoclonal antibody) targets SAP on amyloid deposits, triggering amyloid removal. In a phase 1, first-in-human study (FIHS), progressive amyloid removal was observed in some patients after ≤ 3 cycles of miridesap/dezamizumab. METHODS: This observational, non-interventional study in patients who received miridesap/dezamizumab during the FIHS (planned follow-up: 5 years) evaluated response to treatment based on routine assessments of disease status and key organ function. In a post hoc analysis, patients responding to treatment in the FIHS during follow-up were identified as responders and further categorized as sustained or declining responders. RESULTS: In the FIHS, 17/23 patients were treatment responders. Of these patients, seven (immunoglobulin light chain [AL], n = 6; serum amyloid A, n = 1) were considered sustained responders and ten (fibrinogen-a alpha chain [AFib], n = 5; AL, n = 4; apolipoprotein A-I, n = 1) were considered declining responders. We primarily present responder patient-level data for functional, cardiac, laboratory and imaging assessments conducted during the follow-up period, with non-responder data presented as supplementary. CONCLUSION: No further development of miridesap/dezamizumab is planned in amyloidosis. However, long-term follow-up of these patients may provide insight into whether active removal of amyloid deposits has an impact on disease progression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01777243. Registered 28 January 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01777243 .

Study design and rationale for the Stabilization of pLaques usIng Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (SOLID-TIMI 52) trial in patients after an acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Higher levels of lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) (Lp-PLA(2)) are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events and may play a causal role in atherogenesis. Darapladib inhibits Lp-PLA(2) activity in plasma and in arterial plaques and may confer clinical benefit in preventing cardiovascular events. STUDY DESIGN: The SOLID-TIMI 52 trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, event-driven trial. Approximately 13,000 subjects are being randomized to darapladib (160 mg enteric-coated tablet daily) or matching placebo within 30 days of hospitalization with an acute coronary syndrome. The primary end point is the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Secondary end points include major and total coronary events, individual components of the primary end point, and all-cause mortality. The study will continue until approximately 1,500 primary end point events have occurred to achieve 90% power to detect a 15.5% reduction in the primary end point. The median treatment duration is anticipated to be approximately 3 years, with a total study duration of approximately 4.1 years. CONCLUSIONS: The SOLID-TIMI 52 trial will determine the clinical benefit of direct inhibition of Lp-PLA(2) activity with darapladib in patients after an acute coronary syndrome.

A Randomized Study of Safety and Efficacy of Two Doses of Ambrisentan to Treat Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in Pediatric Patients Aged 8 Years up to 18 Years.

Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of the endothelin receptor antagonist ambrisentan in pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Study design: In this open-label, phase IIb study, patients with PAH aged 8 to <18 years were randomized to low- or high-dose ambrisentan for 24 weeks. Most patients were receiving other PAH medication(s) that could not be changed during the trial. The primary outcome was safety (treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs]); secondary outcome was efficacy (including change from baseline to week 24 in 6-minute walking distance and World Health Organization functional class). Study staff were blinded to treatment. No statistical testing was performed. Results: Most of the 41 patients randomized (80%) experienced ≥1 TEAE; most were mild (22%) or moderate (49%) in severity (no difference between dose groups). Most common TEAEs were headache (24%), nausea (17%), abdominal pain (12%), and nasopharyngitis (12%). Eight patients had serious TEAEs; 2 were fatal (unrelated to study treatment). Improved 6-minute walking distance was observed from baseline to week 24: total mean (SD) change, +40.69 (84.58) meters; World Health Organization functional class was maintained or improved in 70% and 27% patients, respectively. Conclusions: Ambrisentan was well tolerated; TEAEs were consistent with the adult safety profile. Efficacy was similar to previous findings in adult PAH; however, interpretation is limited by small sample size. Findings support a potentially similar benefit:risk profile in pediatric (8 to <18 years) and adult patients with PAH. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01332331.

Adherence with once daily versus twice daily carvedilol in patients with heart failure: the Compliance And Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Suboptimal compliance in taking guideline-based pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) potentially increases the burden of hospitalizations and diminishes quality of life. By simplifying the medical regimen, once-daily dosing can potentially improve compliance. The Compliance And Quality of Life Study Comparing Once-Daily Controlled-Release Carvedilol CR and Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Carvedilol IR in Patients with Heart Failure (CASPER) Trial was designed to measure differential compliance, satisfaction, and quality of life in chronic HF patients taking carvedilol immediate release (IR) twice daily versus the bioequivalent carvedilol controlled-release (CR) once daily. METHODS AND RESULTS: CASPER was a prospective multicenter, 3-arm, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial for a 5-month period. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate and compare compliance with carvedilol IR twice daily (BID) and carvedilol phosphate CR once daily (QD) in patients with chronic HF who were taking carvedilol IR. Secondary objectives included comparisons of quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire), satisfaction with medication, and brain natriuretic peptide levels between subjects taking the two formulations. A total of 405 patients with chronic HF and left ventricular dysfunction were randomized to: (A) carvedilol IR twice daily, given double blind; (B) carvedilol CR taken in the morning and placebo in the afternoon, given double blind; or (C) carvedilol CR once daily, open label. Compliance was measured using the medication event monitoring system that captures time of bottle opening. The primary end point was a comparison of taking compliance (doses taken divided by total number of prescribed doses over the actual duration of the study) between the double-blind carvedilol IR BID versus the open-label carvedilol CR QD groups. Sample size estimates were based on assumptions of 75% compliance with BID dosing and 90% compliance with QD dosing. Mean compliance with carvedilol IR BID was 89.3% compared with 88.2% for carvedilol CR QD, and differential mean compliance was 1.1% (95% CI -4.4%, 6.6%; ie, not significant). There were no statistically significant differences in compliance between any of the 3 groups, nor differences in quality of life, treatment satisfaction, or physiologic measures among the 3 study arms. There were also no significant differences in adverse events or side effects among patients switching from carvedilol IR to carvedilol CR in arms B or C over the 5-month study duration compared with patients remaining on carvedilol IR. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance among chronic HF patients in the CASPER trial was high at baseline and unaffected by QD versus BID dosing. Over the 5-month follow-up period, there were no differences in adverse events among patients switching from carvedilol IR to CR.

Metabolic syndrome and the risk of adverse cardiovascular events after an acute coronary syndrome.

Background The incremental prognostic value of assessing the metabolic syndrome has been disputed. Little is known regarding its prognostic value in patients after an acute coronary syndrome. Design and methods The presence of metabolic syndrome (2005 International Diabetes Federation) was assessed at baseline in SOLID-TIMI 52, a trial of patients within 30 days of acute coronary syndrome (median follow-up 2.5 years). The primary endpoint was major coronary events (coronary heart disease death, myocardial infarction or urgent coronary revascularization). Results At baseline, 61.6% ( n = 7537) of patients met the definition of metabolic syndrome, 34.7% (n = 4247) had diabetes and 29.3% had both ( n = 3584). The presence of metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risk of major coronary events (adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 1.29, p < 0.0001) and recurrent myocardial infarction (adjHR 1.30, p < 0.0001). Of the individual components of the definition, only diabetes (adjHR 1.48, p < 0.0001) or impaired fasting glucose (adjHR 1.21, p = 0.002) and hypertension (adjHR 1.46, p < 0.0001) were associated with the risk of major coronary events. In patients without diabetes, metabolic syndrome was numerically but not significantly associated with the risk of major coronary events (adjHR 1.13, p = 0.06). Conversely, diabetes was a strong independent predictor of major coronary events in the absence of metabolic syndrome (adjHR 1.57, p < 0.0001). The presence of both diabetes and metabolic syndrome identified patients at highest risk of adverse outcomes but the incremental value of metabolic syndrome was not significant relative to diabetes alone (adjHR 1.07, p = 0.54). Conclusions After acute coronary syndrome, diabetes is a strong and independent predictor of adverse outcomes. Assessment of the metabolic syndrome provides only marginal incremental value once the presence or absence of diabetes is established.

Effects of carvedilol early after myocardial infarction: analysis of the first 30 days in Carvedilol Post-Infarct Survival Control in Left Ventricular Dysfunction (CAPRICORN).

BACKGROUND: In the CAPRICORN trial, carvedilol reduced all-cause mortality by 23% over a mean follow-up of 1.3 years in clinically stabilized post-myocardial infarction (MI) patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) with or without signs of heart failure. This analysis sought to assess the impact of carvedilol within the first 30 days of randomization. METHODS: The effect of carvedilol initiated after acute MI with LVD (n = 975) was compared with the effect of placebo (n = 984) added to other standard-of-care therapies on mortality, fatal or nonfatal infarction, cardiac arrest, and their composite as well as withdrawals for adverse events during the first 30 days of therapy. RESULTS: The carvedilol group experienced a reduction in mortality in the first 30 days (19 vs 33, hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.33-1.02); fatal or nonfatal MI (13 vs 23, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.29-1.12); the composite end point of death, nonfatal MI, or cardiac arrest (31 vs 53, HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38-0.91); and the composite of all-cause mortality or nonfatal MI (29 vs 51, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.90). These effects were similar in direction and magnitude to those observed during the entire trial. The rates of adverse events leading to withdrawal were similar in the carvedilol and placebo groups, except for hypotension. CONCLUSIONS: In clinically stabilized post-MI patients with LVD, there is an early benefit with carvedilol treatment that is similar to that seen during long-term therapy.

Beta-blocker dosing in community-based treatment of heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Community patients with heart failure (HF) are older, less often treated by HF specialists, and have more comorbidity than those in randomized clinical trials. These differences might affect beta-blocker prescribing in HF. METHODS: To explore patterns of beta-blocker prescribing for HF in the community and their association with outcomes, we determined carvedilol doses at end titration in 4113 patients from a community-based beta-blocker HF registry according to physician and patient characteristics, HF severity, and rates of hospitalization and death. RESULTS: Female sex, age > or = 65 years, and left ventricular ejection fraction > or = 35% were associated with lower beta-blocker doses. Average daily dose of beta-blocker was lower with worse baseline New York Heart Association class. More patients of cardiologists achieved carvedilol doses > or = 25 mg twice daily, whereas in those of noncardiologists lower doses were more common. Relative risk of HF hospitalizations or all-cause death was significantly lower with higher doses of beta-blocker. CONCLUSIONS: Beta-blocker dosing in community HF appears lower than in randomized clinical trials, especially when prescribed by noncardiologists. At all doses, patients taking the beta-blocker carvedilol have a lower incidence of death and HF hospitalization than those discontinuing it, regardless of physician type in the community setting.

Comparison of outcomes and usefulness of carvedilol across a spectrum of left ventricular ejection fractions in patients with heart failure in clinical practice.

Heart failure (HF) in the community differs meaningfully from that in clinical trials, particularly the higher prevalence of patients with preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) typically excluded from clinical trials, thus limiting knowledge of their responsiveness to beta-blocker therapy. From a community-based registry of 4,280 patients with HF starting treatment with the beta blocker carvedilol, we compared characteristics, carvedilol titration, and outcomes of patients according to LVEF >40% or <40% (as in clinical trials) and across the spectrum of LVEF <21%, 21% to 30%, 31% to 40%, and >40%. Patients with preserved EF (LVEF >40%) were older and more often women and hypertensive. Lower LVEF was associated with worse functional class and more HF hospitalizations in the previous year. Carvedilol dose decreased with increasing LVEF. Hospitalization rates for HF related inversely to LVEF before starting carvedilol therapy and decreased from the previous year in all LVEF groups during follow-up. Although 1-year mortality rate decreased from 8% with LVEF < or =20% to 6% with LVEF >40%, adjusted hazard ratios were not significantly different across LVEF groups. Thus, characteristics of community patients with HF vary across the spectrum of LVEF. Patients with HF and preserved EF treated with carvedilol in the community improve symptomatically and experience fewer HF hospitalizations after initiating carvedilol. In conclusion, without a control group, the effect of carvedilol on outcomes is not conclusive and trials of carvedilol in patients with HF and preserved EF should be undertaken.

The safety of amiodarone in patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty persists about the safety and efficacy of amiodarone for the management of heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomized 3029 patients with chronic heart failure to receive carvedilol or metoprolol and followed patients for a median of 58 months. One hundred fifty-five of 1466 patients in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II and 209 of 1563 in Class III or IV received amiodarone at baseline. Persistence with amiodarone treatment was high and 66% received amiodarone after 4 years. During follow-up, 38.7% and 58.9% of patients receiving amiodarone in NYHA Classes II and III + IV died versus 26.2% and 43.3% not receiving amiodarone (P < .001). This difference was maintained in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.7, P < .001). The difference was explained by an increased risk of death due to circulatory failure (HR 2.4, CI 1.9-3.1, P < .001) in patients receiving amiodarone. Sudden death was not different (HR 1.07, CI 0.8-1.4, P = .7). The increased risk was similar across NYHA classes with HR of 1.60 (CI 1.2-2.1, P < .001) in NYHA Class II versus 1.58 (CI 1.3-1.9, P < .001) in Classes III + IV. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with amiodarone was associated with an increased risk of death from circulatory failure independent of functional class.

Effect of carvedilol and metoprolol on the mode of death in patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: In the COMET study, carvedilol improved survival compared to metoprolol tartrate in 3029 patients with NYHA II-IV heart failure and EF <35%, followed for an average of 58 months. AIMS: To evaluate whether the effect on overall mortality was specific for a particular mode of death. This may help to identify the mechanism of the observed difference. METHODS: Of the 1112 total deaths, 972 were adjudicated as cardiovascular, including 480 sudden, 365 circulatory failure (CF) and 51 stroke deaths. For each mode of death, the effect of pre-specified baseline variables was assessed, including sex, age, NYHA class, aetiology, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, EF, atrial fibrillation, previous myocardial infarction or hypertension, renal function, concomitant medication, and study treatment allocation. RESULTS: In multivariate Cox regression analyses, compared to metoprolol, carvedilol reduced cardiovascular (RR 0.80, CI 0.7-0.91, p=0.0009), sudden (RR 0.77, CI 0.64-0.93, p=0.0073) and stroke deaths (RR 0.37, CI 0.19-0.71, p=0.0027) with a non-significant trend for CF death (RR 0.83, CI 0.66-1.04, p=0.07). Treatment benefit with carvedilol did not differ between modes of death, except for a greater reduction in stroke death with carvedilol (competing risk analysis, p=0.0071 vs CF death). There were no interactions between treatment allocation and baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION: Mortality reduction with carvedilol compared to metoprolol appears relatively non-specific and could be consistent with a superior effect of carvedilol on cardiac function, arrhythmias or, in view of the greater reduction in stroke deaths, on vascular events.

Tolerability, safety, and efficacy of beta-blockade in black patients with heart failure in the community setting: insights from a large prospective beta-blocker registry.

Heart failure (HF) clinical trials suggest different responses of blacks and whites to beta-blockers. Differences between clinical trial and community settings may also have an impact. The Carvedilol Heart Failure Registry (COHERE) observed experience with carvedilol in 4280 patients with HF in a community setting. This analysis compares characteristics, outcomes, and carvedilol dosing of blacks and whites in COHERE. Compared with whites (n=3433), blacks (n=523) had more severe HF symptoms despite similar systolic function. At similar carvedilol maintenance doses, symptoms improved in 33% of blacks vs 28% of whites, while worsening in 10% and 11%, respectively (both nonsignificant), and HF hospitalization rates were reduced comparably in both groups (-58% vs -56%, respectively; both P<.001). Incidence and hazard ratios of death were similar in blacks and whites (6.9% vs 7.5%, hazard ratio 1.2 vs 1.0, P=.276). Thus carvedilol was similarly effective in blacks and whites with HF in the community setting, consistent with carvedilol clinical trials.

Lowering blood pressure with beta-blockers in combination with other renin-angiotensin system blockers in patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes: results from the GEMINI Trial.

The effects of beta-blockade in addition to more specific renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockers on blood pressure (BP) in patients with diabetes are described. After washout of medications other than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, patients were titrated to a BP level <130/80 mm Hg using therapy with carvedilol 6.25 to 25 mg bid (n=498) or metoprolol tartrate 50 to 200 mg bid (n=737). At the end of the beta-blocker titration period, a BP level <130/80 mm Hg was achieved in 37% of carvedilol-treated and 36% of metoprolol-treated participants who continued to receive a renin-angiotensin system blocker. In the approximately 60% of participants in whom a BP level <130/80 mm Hg was not attained with renin-angiotensin system blockade plus beta-blockade, hydrochlorothiazide was added in 43% and 44% of carvedilol and metoprolol groups, respectively; 25% (both arms) also required a calcium channel blocker. Among those in whom goal BP was not achieved, 42% of carvedilol- and 40% of metoprolol-treated participants were not titrated to the highest dose of beta-blocker. The use of carvedilol compared with metoprolol did not effect glycemic control.

Carvedilol for children and adolescents with heart failure: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Although beta-blockers improve symptoms and survival in adults with heart failure, little is known about these medications in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate the effects of carvedilol in children and adolescents with symptomatic systemic ventricular systolic dysfunction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 161 children and adolescents with symptomatic systolic heart failure from 26 US centers. In addition to treatment with conventional heart failure medications, patients were assigned to receive placebo or carvedilol. Enrollment began in June 2000 and the last dose was given in May 2005 (each patient received medication for 8 months). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to twice-daily dosing with placebo, low-dose carvedilol (0.2 mg/kg per dose if weight <62.5 kg or 12.5 mg per dose if weight > or =62.5 kg), or high-dose carvedilol (0.4 mg/kg per dose if weight <62.5 kg or 25 mg per dose if weight > or =62.5 kg) and were stratified according to whether each patient's systemic ventricle was a left ventricle or not. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite measure of heart failure outcomes in patients receiving carvedilol (low- and high-dose combined) vs placebo. Secondary efficacy variables included individual components of this composite, echocardiographic measures, and plasma b-type natriuretic peptide levels. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between groups for the composite end point based on the percentage of patients who improved, worsened, or were unchanged. Among 54 patients assigned to placebo, 30 improved (56%), 16 worsened (30%), and 8 were unchanged (15%); among 103 patients assigned to carvedilol, 58 improved (56%), 25 worsened (24%), and 20 were unchanged (19%). The rates of worsening were lower than expected. The odds ratio for worsened outcome for patients in the combined carvedilol group vs the placebo group was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.36-1.59; P = .47). A prespecified subgroup analysis noted significant interaction between treatment and ventricular morphology (P = .02), indicating a possible differential effect of treatment between patients with a systemic left ventricle (beneficial trend) and those whose systemic ventricle was not a left ventricle (nonbeneficial trend). CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest that carvedilol does not significantly improve clinical heart failure outcomes in children and adolescents with symptomatic systolic heart failure. However, given the lower than expected event rates, the trial may have been underpowered. There may be a differential effect of carvedilol in children and adolescents based on ventricular morphology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00052026.

Interleukin-6 and the Risk of Adverse Outcomes in Patients After an Acute Coronary Syndrome: Observations From the SOLID-TIMI 52 (Stabilization of Plaque Using Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 52) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is an inflammatory cytokine implicated in plaque instability in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to evaluate the prognostic implications of IL-6 post-ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: IL-6 concentration was assessed at baseline in 4939 subjects in SOLID-TIMI 52 (Stabilization of Plaque Using Darapladib-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 52), a randomized trial of darapladib in patients ≤30 days from ACS. Patients were followed for a median of 2.5 years for major adverse cardiovascular events; cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization. Primary analyses were adjusted first for baseline characteristics, days from index ACS, ACS type, and randomized treatment arm. For every SD increase in IL-6, there was a 10% higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard ratio [adj HR] 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.19) and a 22% higher risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure (adj HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.11-1.34). Patients in the highest IL-6 quartile had a higher risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (adj HR Q4:Q1 1.57, 95% CI 1.22-2.03) and cardiovascular death or heart failure (adj HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.6-3.29). After further adjustment for biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 activity, high-sensitivity troponin I, and B-type natriuretic peptide), IL-6 remained significantly associated with the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (adj HR Q4:Q1 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.88) and cardiovascular death or heart failure (adj HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.22-2.63). CONCLUSIONS: In patients after ACS, IL-6 concentration is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes independent of established risk predictors and biomarkers. These findings lend support to the concept of IL-6 as a potential therapeutic target in patients with unstable ischemic heart disease.