Effects of an Intervention to Improve Evidence-Based Care for People With Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Across Sex, Race, and Ethnicity Subgroups: Insights From the COORDINATE-Diabetes Trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from the COORDINATE-Diabetes trial demonstrated that a multifaceted, clinic-based intervention increased prescription of evidence-based medical therapies to participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This secondary analysis assessed whether intervention success was consistent across sex, race, and ethnicity. METHODS: COORDINATE-Diabetes, a cluster randomized trial, recruited participants from 43 US cardiology clinics (20 randomized to intervention and 23 randomized to usual care). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy (high-intensity statin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist) at last trial assessment (6 to 12 months). In this prespecified analysis, mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to assess the outcome by self-reported sex, race, and ethnicity in the intervention and usual care groups, with adjustment for baseline characteristics, medications, comorbidities, and site location. RESULTS: Among 1045 participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the median age was 70 years, 32% were female, 16% were Black, and 9% were Hispanic. At the last trial assessment, there was an absolute increase in the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy in women (36% versus 15%), Black participants (41% versus 18%), and Hispanic participants (46% versus 18%) with the intervention compared with usual care, with consistent benefit across sex (male versus female; Pinteraction=0.44), race (Black versus White; Pinteraction=0.59), and ethnicity (Hispanic versus Non-Hispanic; Pinteraction= 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The COORDINATE-Diabetes intervention successfully improved delivery of evidence-based care, regardless of sex, race, or ethnicity. Widespread dissemination of this intervention could improve equitable health care quality, particularly among women and minority communities who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03936660.

Severe obesity among patients with left ventricular assist devices.

BACKGROUND: Patients with obesity and advanced heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support are more likely to experience LVAD complications and may be disproportionately Black and/or female when compared to patients without obesity. Among these patients, obesity may represent a barrier to transplant eligibility and a marker of inequity in heart transplantation and health outcomes in advanced heart failure. METHODS: To better understand this issue at our institution, we examined our active LVAD cohort and found that almost one-third of all patients had severe obesity with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. RESULTS: Patients with LVADs and severe obesity were significantly younger and more likely to self-identify as Black, and numerically more likely to be female. CONCLUSION: Weight management in this group represents a vital area for improved equity in health outcomes and barriers to heart transplantation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NA.

Regional variation in cause of death in patients with type 2 diabetes: Insights from EXSCEL.

AIMS: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a risk factor for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality. However, global distribution of cause-specific deaths in T2D is poorly understood. We characterized cause-specific deaths by geographic region among individuals with T2D at risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: The international EXSCEL trial included 14,752 participants with T2D (73% with established CVD). We identified the proportion of deaths over 5-year follow-up attributed to cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular causes, and associated risk factors. During median 3.2-year follow-up, 1,091 (7.4%) participants died. Adjudicated causes of death were 723 cardiovascular (66.3% of deaths), including 252 unknown, and 368 non-cardiovascular (33.7%). Most deaths occurred in North America (N = 356/9.6% across region) and Eastern Europe (N = 326/8.1%), with fewest in Asia/Pacific (N = 68/4.4%). The highest proportional cause-specific deaths by region were sudden cardiac in Asia/Pacific (23/34% of regional deaths) and North America (86/24%); unknown in Eastern Europe (90/28%) and Western Europe (39/21%); and non-malignant non-cardiovascular in Latin America (48/31%). Cox proportional hazards model for adjudicated causes of death showed prognostic risk factors (hazard ratio [95% CI]) for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular deaths, respectively: heart failure 2.04 (1.72-2.42) and 1.86 (1.46-2.39); peripheral artery disease 1.83 (1.54-2.18) and 1.78 (1.40-2.26); and current smoking status 1.61 (1.29-2.01) and 1.77 (1.31-2.40). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary T2D trial population, with and without established CVD, leading causes of death varied by geographic region. Underlying mechanisms leading to variability in cause of death across geographic regions and its impact on clinical trial endpoints warrant future research.

Improving Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Review of Implementation Strategies.

Despite recent advances in the use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), achievement of target GDMT use and up-titration to goal dosages continue to be modest. In recent years, a number of interventional approaches to improve the usage of GDMT have been published, but many are limited by single-center experiences with small sample sizes. However, strategies including the use of multidisciplinary teams, dedicated GDMT titration algorithms and clinician audits with feedback have shown promise. There remains a critical need for large, rigorous trials to assess the utility of differing interventions to improve the use and titration of GDMT in HFrEF. Here, we review existing literature in GDMT implementation for those with HFrEF and discuss future directions and considerations in the field.

Worth Their Weight? An Update on New and Emerging Pharmacologic Agents for Obesity and Their Potential Role for Persons with Cardiac Conditions.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Obesity is associated with cardiovascular (CV) conditions, including but not limited to atherosclerotic disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. Despite this, the impact of intentional weight loss on CV outcomes for persons with obesity and established CV conditions remains poorly studied. New and emerging pharmacologic therapies for weight loss primarily targeting the incretin/nutrient sensing axes induce substantial and sustained weight loss. The glucagon-like-peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) liraglutide and semaglutide have US FDA approval for the treatment of obesity, and the application for an obesity indication for the dual GLP-1/glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptor agonist tirzepatide is presently under FDA review. Extensive phase II and IIIa randomized controlled trials are underway evaluating permutations of combined GLP-1 RA, GIP receptor agonist, GIP receptor antagonist, and glucagon receptor agonists. Clinical outcome trials of these therapies in persons with obesity at high risk of established CV conditions should make it possible to estimate the role of intentional weight loss in managing CV risk via these medications. RECENT FINDINGS: High-dose once weekly injectable semaglutide (2.4 mg/week) use among persons with obesity and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction was effective at both reducing weight and improving health status; exercise capacity was also improved. Ongoing CV outcome trials of oral semaglutide and once weekly injectable tirzepatide will help to establish the role of these therapies among persons with other CV conditions. In addition to these two therapies targeting a CV claim or indication, many other new therapeutics for weight loss, as reviewed, are currently in development. The impact of pharmacologic-induced weight loss on CV conditions for persons with obesity and established CV conditions is currently under investigation for multiple agents. These therapies may offer new avenues to manage CV risk in persons with obesity and with established or at high risk for CV disease.

Putting More Weight on Obesity Trials in Heart Failure.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review ongoing and planned clinical trials of weight loss among individuals with or at high risk of heart failure. RECENT FINDINGS: Intentional weight loss via semaglutide among persons with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction and obesity significantly improves weight loss and health status as assessed by the KCCQ-CSS score and is associated with improvements in 6-min walk test. Ongoing and planned trials will explore the role of intentional weight loss with treatments such as semaglutide or tirzepatide for individuals with heart failure across the entire ejection fraction spectrum.

Coordinating Cardiology clinics randomized trial of interventions to improve outcomes (COORDINATE) - Diabetes: rationale and design.

Several medications that are proven to reduce cardiovascular events exist for individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, however they are substantially underused in clinical practice. Clinician, patient, and system-level barriers all contribute to these gaps in care; yet, there is a paucity of high quality, rigorous studies evaluating the role of interventions to increase utilization. The COORDINATE-Diabetes trial randomized 42 cardiology clinics across the United States to either a multifaceted, site-specific intervention focused on evidence-based care for patients with T2DM or standard of care. The multifaceted intervention comprised the development of an interdisciplinary care pathway for each clinic, audit-and-feedback tools and educational outreach, in addition to patient-facing tools. The primary outcome is the proportion of individuals with T2DM prescribed three key classes of evidence-based medications (high-intensity statin, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, and either a sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) and will be assessed at least 6 months after participant enrollment. COORDINATE-Diabetes aims to identify strategies that improve the implementation and adoption of evidence-based therapies.

Prognostic value of CT-derived coronary artery disease characteristics varies by ASCVD risk: insights from the PROMISE trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the prognostic value of individual CT-derived coronary artery disease (CAD) characteristics across categories of clinical cardiovascular risk. METHODS: The central core laboratory assessed coronary artery calcium (CAC), obstructive CAD (stenosis ≥ 50%), and high-risk plaque (HRP) in stable outpatients with suspected CAD enrolled in the PROMISE trial. Multivariable Cox regression models (endpoint: unstable angina, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or all-cause mortality; median follow-up: 2 years) were used to compare hazard ratios (HR) of the CT measures between low-borderline (< 7.5%) and moderate-high (≥ 7.5%) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk based on the pooled cohort equation. RESULTS: Among 4356 included patients (aged 61 ± 8 years, 52% women), 67% had ASCVD risk ≥ 7.5%. Stratified by ASCVD risk, CAD ≥ 50% had nearly threefold greater HR in individuals with ASCVD < 7.5% (aHR, 6.85; 95% CI, 2.33-20.15; p < 0.001) vs. ASCVD ≥ 7.5% (aHR: 2.66, 95% CI: 1.67-4.25, p < 0.001; interaction p = 0.041). CAC predicted events solely in ASCVD ≥ 7.5% patients (aHR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.01-3.63, p = 0.045; interaction p = 0.571), while HRP predicted events only in ASCVD < 7.5% (aHR: 3.11, 95% CI: 1.09-8.85, p = 0.034; interaction p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Prognostic values of CT-derived CAD characteristics differ by ASCVD risk categories. While CAD ≥ 50% has the highest prognostic value regardless of ASCVD risk, CAC is prognostic in high and HRP in low ASCVD risk. These findings suggest that CAD ≥ 50% and HRP detection rather than CAC scoring may better risk-stratify symptomatic low-risk patients and thus potentially improve downstream care. KEY POINTS: • Prognostic value of individual CT-derived CAD characteristics differs by categories of cardiovascular risk. • Presence of obstructive coronary artery stenosis ≥ 50% has the highest prognostic value regardless of cardiovascular risk. • Coronary artery calcium is independently prognostic in high and high-risk plaque features in low cardiovascular risk.

Evaluation of weight change and cardiometabolic risk factors in a real-world population of US adults with overweight or obesity.

Whether individuals in real-world settings are able to lose weight and improve cardiometabolic risk factors over time is unclear. We aimed to determine the management of and degree of body weight change over 2 years among individuals with overweight or obesity, and to assess associated changes in cardiometabolic risk factors and clinical outcomes. Using data from 11 large health systems within the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Network in the U.S., we collected the following data on adults with a recorded BMI ≥25 kg/m2 between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016: body-mass index (BMI), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), triglycerides and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). We found that among 882,712 individuals with BMI ≥25 kg/m2 (median age 59 years; 56% female), 52% maintained stable weight over 2 years and 1.3% utilized weight loss pharmacotherapy. Weight loss of 10% was associated with small but significant lowering of mean SBP (-2.69 mmHg [95% CI -2.88, -2.50]), DBP (-1.26 mmHg [95% CI -1.35, -1.18]), LDL-C (-2.60 mg/dL [95% CI -3.14, -2.05]), and HbA1c (-0.27% [95% CI -0.35, -0.19]) in the same 12 months. However, these changes were not sustained over the following year. In this study of adults with BMI ≥25 kg/m2, the majority had stable weight over 2 years, pharmacotherapies for weight loss were under-used, and small changes in cardiometabolic risk factors with weight loss were not sustained, possibly due to failure to maintain weight loss.

Should We "RESPECT EPA" More Now? EPA and DHA for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There has been much debate surrounding the use of omega-3 fatty acids, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), for cardiovascular (CV) risk reduction. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent trials of EPA and DHA have offered conflicting evidence. Some demonstrate reduction in CV risk using EPA alone in select populations. Others have demonstrated no benefit, with potential for side effects, such as new-onset atrial fibrillation. Both EPA and DHA have favorable impact on lipids and inflammation, suggesting some biological plausibility for CV risk reduction. However, clinical trials of these agents have produced mixed results. Based on available evidence, EPA may work better for CV risk than DHA and EPA combined. The benefit of EPA seems to be dose dependent, though higher doses may have more side effects. Further research is needed to define the role of EPA and DHA in the landscape of CV risk reduction.

Coordinated Care to Optimize Cardiovascular Preventive Therapies in Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence-based therapies to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults with type 2 diabetes are underused in clinical practice. Objective: To assess the effect of a coordinated, multifaceted intervention of assessment, education, and feedback vs usual care on the proportion of adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prescribed all 3 groups of recommended, evidence-based therapies (high-intensity statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs] or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 [SGLT2] inhibitors and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists [GLP-1RAs]). Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized clinical trial with 43 US cardiology clinics recruiting participants from July 2019 through May 2022 and follow-up through December 2022. The participants were adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease not already taking all 3 groups of evidence-based therapies. Interventions: Assessing local barriers, developing care pathways, coordinating care, educating clinicians, reporting data back to the clinics, and providing tools for participants (n = 459) vs usual care per practice guidelines (n = 590). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of recommended therapies at 6 to 12 months after enrollment. The secondary outcomes included changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors and a composite outcome of all-cause death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, stroke, decompensated heart failure, or urgent revascularization (the trial was not powered to show these differences). Results: Of 1049 participants enrolled (459 at 20 intervention clinics and 590 at 23 usual care clinics), the median age was 70 years and there were 338 women (32.2%), 173 Black participants (16.5%), and 90 Hispanic participants (8.6%). At the last follow-up visit (12 months for 97.3% of participants), those in the intervention group were more likely to be prescribed all 3 therapies (173/457 [37.9%]) vs the usual care group (85/588 [14.5%]), which is a difference of 23.4% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.38 [95% CI, 2.49 to 7.71]; P < .001) and were more likely to be prescribed each of the 3 therapies (change from baseline in high-intensity statins from 66.5% to 70.7% for intervention vs from 58.2% to 56.8% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.06-2.83]; ACEIs or ARBs: from 75.1% to 81.4% for intervention vs from 69.6% to 68.4% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.14-2.91]; SGLT2 inhibitors and/or GLP-1RAs: from 12.3% to 60.4% for intervention vs from 14.5% to 35.5% for usual care [adjusted OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.08-4.64]). The intervention was not associated with changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors. The composite secondary outcome occurred in 23 of 457 participants (5%) in the intervention group vs 40 of 588 participants (6.8%) in the usual care group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.46 to 1.33]). Conclusions and Relevance: A coordinated, multifaceted intervention increased prescription of 3 groups of evidence-based therapies in adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03936660.

Incorporating SGLT2i and GLP-1RA for Cardiovascular and Kidney Disease Risk Reduction: Call for Action to the Cardiology Community.

Multiple sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have been shown to impart significant cardiovascular and kidney benefits, but are underused in clinical practice. Both SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA were first studied as glucose-lowering drugs, which may have impeded uptake by cardiologists in the wake of proven cardiovascular efficacy. Their significant effect on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, which are largely independent of glucose-lowering effects, must drive a broader use of these drugs. Cardiologists are 3 times more likely than endocrinologists to see patients with both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, thus they are ideally positioned to share responsibility for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA treatment with primary care providers. In order to increase adoption, SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA must be reframed as primarily cardiovascular and kidney disease risk-reducing agents with a side effect of glucose-lowering. Coordinated and multifaceted interventions engaging clinicians, patients, payers, professional societies, and health systems must be implemented to incentivize the adoption of these medications as part of routine cardiovascular and kidney care. Greater use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA will improve outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular and kidney disease.

Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy and Heart Failure Risk.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the data on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and heart failure (HF) risk. RECENT FINDINGS: Hypertensive disorders are the most common medical condition affecting women during pregnancy and are associated with future HF risk, including peripartum cardiomyopathy, pregnancy-associated HF with preserved ejection fraction, and new-onset HF later in life. HF related to HDP can occur during pregnancy and persist long term, as can be the case with peri-partum cardiomyopathy, or can develop years after delivery through mechanisms that have yet to be clearly defined. Unfortunately, the optimal ways to prevent HDP and its associated HF risks are unclear. Guidelines outlining appropriate risk stratification, coordination of postpartum medical care, and prevention of future cardiovascular disease among with HDP are urgently needed in order to decrease the risk of HF.

Eradicating Atherosclerosis: Should We Start Statins at Younger Ages and at Lower LDL-Cs.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Given the increasing burden of cardiovascular disease, we review the literature for earlier initiation of statin therapy at younger ages and lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, with the goal of preventing the development of atherosclerosis prior to clinical events. RECENT FINDINGS: There is a rising prevalence of dyslipidemia among younger adults. Although guidelines offer recommendations for adults over 40, there is little guidance for the management of younger adults with moderately elevated LDL-C levels. Earlier and more aggressive statin use may slow progression, or even halt atherosclerosis, and may likewise be beneficial and cost-effective on a population level. Further research is needed to define the exact age and LDL-C level at which to start statin therapy. Until then, more detailed risk stratification with lab testing and imaging should be used to identify younger adults at the highest risk.

Lipid-Lowering Therapy in Women of Childbearing Age: a Review and Stepwise Clinical Approach.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Women are less often recognized to have cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and are underrepresented in randomized trials of lipid-lowering therapy. Here, we summarize non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic strategies for lipid-lowering in women of childbearing age, lipid changes during pregnancy and lactation, discuss sex-specific outcomes in currently available literature, and discuss future areas of research. RECENT FINDINGS: While lifestyle interventions form the backbone of CVD prevention, some women of reproductive age have an indication for pharmacologic lipid-lowering. Sex-based evidence is limited but suggests that both statin and non-statin lipid-lowering agents are beneficial regardless of sex, especially at high cardiovascular risk. Pharmacologic lipid-lowering therapies, both during the pregnancy period and during lactation, have historically been and continue to be limited by safety concerns. This oftentimes limits lipid-lowering options in women of childbearing age. In this review, we summarize lipid-lowering strategies in women of childbearing age and the impact of therapies during pregnancy and lactation. The limited sex-specific data regarding efficacy, adverse events, and cardiovascular outcomes underscore the need for a greater representation of women in randomized controlled trials. More data on lipid-lowering teratogenicity are needed, and through increased clinician awareness and reporting to incidental exposure registries, more data can be harvested.

Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors: Impact on Atherosclerosis and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Events.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) improve the risk for heart and kidney failure. However, their effects on major atherosclerotic cardiovascular events (MACE) are less clear. Although outcomes trials of drugs for diabetes were not powered to prove superiority, the totality of trial data yields an estimate of ∼11% relative reduction for MACE (HR 0.89, 95%CI 0.82-0.96) and neutral on stroke (HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.79-1.08). In animal models, SGLT-2i favorably affects plaque size, composition, and inflammatory pathways; human data in this regard are lacking. Ongoing trials are evaluating SGLT-2i efficacy in heart failure, kidney disease, and postmyocardial infarction populations, independent of diabetes status.

Impact of Regulatory Guidance on Evaluating Cardiovascular Risk of New Glucose-Lowering Therapies to Treat Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Lessons Learned and Future Directions.

Responding to concerns about the potential for increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, specifically myocardial infarction, associated with certain glucose-lowering therapies, the US Food and Drug Administration and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use of the European Medicines Agency issued guidance to the pharmaceutical industry in 2008. Glucose-lowering therapies were granted regulatory approval primarily from smaller studies that have demonstrated reductions in glycated hemoglobin concentration. Such studies were overall underpowered and of insufficient duration to show any effect on cardiovascular outcomes. The 2008 guidance aimed to ensure the cardiovascular safety of new glucose-lowering therapies to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This resulted in a plethora of new cardiovascular outcome trials, most designed primarily as placebo-controlled noninferiority trials, but with many also powered for superiority. Several of these outcome trials demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of the newer agents, resulting in the first-ever cardiovascular protection indications for glucose-lowering therapies. Determining whether the guidance continues to have value in its current form is critically important as we move forward after the first decade of implementation. In February 2018, a think tank comprising representatives from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies convened to consider the guidance in light of the findings of the completed cardiovascular outcome trials. The group made several recommendations for future regulatory guidance and for cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering therapies. These recommendations include requiring only the 1.3 noninferiority margin for regulatory approval, conducting trials for longer durations, considering studying glucose-lowering therapies as first-line management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, considering heart failure or kidney outcomes within the primary outcome, considering head-to-head active comparator trials, increasing the diversity of patients enrolled, evaluating strategies to streamline registries and the study of unselected populations, and identifying ways to improve translation of trial results to general practice.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patterns of outpatient cardiovascular care.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic brought about abrupt changes in the way health care is delivered, and the impact of transitioning outpatient clinic visits to telehealth visits on processes of care and outcomes is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated ordering patterns during cardiovascular telehealth clinic visits in the Duke University Health System between March 15 and June 30, 2020 and 30-day outcomes compared with in-person visits in the same time frame in 2020 and in 2019. RESULTS: Within the Duke University Health System, there was a 33.1% decrease in the number of outpatient cardiovascular visits conducted in the first 15 weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, compared with the same time period in 2019. As a proportion of total visits initially booked, 53% of visits were cancelled in 2020 compared to 35% in 2019. However, patients with cancelled visits had similar demographics and comorbidities in 2019 and 2020. Telehealth visits comprised 9.3% of total visits initially booked in 2020, with younger and healthier patients utilizing telehealth compared with those utilizing in-person visits. Compared with in-person visits in 2020, telehealth visits were associated with fewer new (31.6% for telehealth vs 44.6% for in person) or refill (12.9% vs 15.6%, respectively) medication prescriptions, electrocardiograms (4.3% vs 31.4%), laboratory orders (5.9% vs 21.8%), echocardiograms (7.3% vs 98%), and stress tests (4.4% vs 6.6%). When adjusted for age, race, and insurance status, those who had a telehealth visit or cancelled their visit were less likely to have an emergency department or hospital encounter within 30 days compared with those who had in-person visits (adjusted rate ratios (aRR) 0.76 [95% 0.65, 0.89] and aRR 0.71 [95% 0.65, 0.78], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In response to the perceived risks of routine medical care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, different phenotypes of patients chose different types of outpatient cardiology care. A better understanding of these differences could help define necessary and appropriate mode of care for cardiology patients.

Predicting major adverse limb events in individuals with type 2 diabetes: Insights from the EXSCEL trial.

AIMS: Although models exist to predict amputation among people with type 2 diabetes with foot ulceration or infection, we aimed to develop a prediction model for a broader range of major adverse limb events (MALE)-including gangrene, revascularization and amputation-among individuals with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In a post-hoc analysis of data from the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial, we compared participants who experienced MALE with those who did not. A multivariable model was constructed and translated into a risk score. RESULTS: Among the 14,752 participants with type 2 diabetes in EXSCEL, 3.6% experienced MALE. Characteristics associated with increased risk of MALE were peripheral artery disease (PAD) (HRadj 4.83, 95% CI: 3.94-5.92), prior foot ulcer (HRadj 2.16, 95% CI: 1.63-2.87), prior amputation (HRadj 2.00, 95% CI: 1.53-2.64), current smoking (HRadj 2.00, 95% CI: 1.54-2.61), insulin use (HRadj 1.86, 95% CI: 1.52-2.27), coronary artery disease (HRadj 1.67, 95% CI: 1.38-2.03) and male sex (HRadj 1.64, 95% CI: 1.31-2.06). Cerebrovascular disease, former smoking, age, glycated haemoglobin, race and neuropathy were also associated significantly with MALE after adjustment. A risk score ranging from 6 to 96 points was constructed, with a C-statistic of 0.822 (95% CI: 0.803-0.841). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of MALE occurred among participants with PAD, but participants without a history of PAD also experienced MALE. A risk score with good performance was generated. Although it requires validation in an external dataset, this risk score may be valuable in identifying patients requiring more intensive care and closer follow-up.

Effect of Once-Weekly Exenatide in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus With and Without Heart Failure and Heart Failure-Related Outcomes: Insights From the EXSCEL Trial.

BACKGROUND: Once-weekly exenatide (EQW) had a neutral effect on hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in the EXSCEL study (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering), with no differential treatment effect on major adverse cardiac events by baseline heart failure (HF) status. EQW's effects on secondary end points based on HHF status have not been reported. The objective was to explore the effects of EQW on secondary end points in patients with and without baseline HF and test the effects of EQW on recurrent HHF events. METHODS: The prespecified analysis of the randomized controlled EXSCEL trial, which enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with and without additional cardiovascular disease, analyzed EQW effects on all-cause death, each major adverse cardiac event component, first HHF, and repeat HHF, by baseline HF status (regardless of ejection fraction). A subgroup analysis of the population stratified by preserved or reduced baseline ejection fraction was performed. RESULTS: Of 14 752 EXSCEL participants, 2389 (16.2%) had HF at baseline. Compared with those without HF at baseline, patients with preexisting HF were older, and more likely to be male and white, with a higher burden of other cardiovascular diseases. Overall, those assigned to EQW had a lower incidence of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.77-0.97]) and the composite outcome of all-cause death or HHF (HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.80-0.99]). When stratified by presence or absence of baseline HF, there was no observed reduction in all-cause death with EQW with baseline HF (HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.85-1.29]), while the risk of mortality was reduced with EQW in the no-HF group (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.68-0.92]) with an interaction P value of 0.031. The reduction in all-cause death or HHF seen with EQW in patients without baseline HF (HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.71-0.93]) was not seen in patients with baseline HF (HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.89-1.29]; interaction P=0.015). First, plus recurrent, HHF was reduced in the exenatide group versus placebo (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68-0.99]; P=0.038). CONCLUSIONS: In EXSCEL, the use of EQW in patients with or without HF was well tolerated, but benefits of EQW on reduction in all-cause death and first hospitalization for HF were attenuated in patients with baseline HF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01144338.