Total events and net clinical benefit of rivaroxaban and aspirin in patients with chronic coronary or peripheral artery disease: The COMPASS trial.

BACKGROUND: Low dose rivaroxaban with aspirin reduced major cardiovascular events (MACE) compared to aspirin alone in patients with cardiovascular disease although effects on total events are unknown. METHODS: The COMPASS clinical trial randomized 27,395 participants with chronic coronary and/or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg daily. We analyzed total (first and recurrent) MACE outcomes of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome of major bleeding. Exploratory analyses included on-treatment and net clinical benefit. Total MACE and safety events were modeled for each treatment. RESULTS: MACE events were lowest in rivaroxaban with aspirin (379 first MACE, 432 total MACE) compared with rivaroxaban (448 first, 508 total) or aspirin alone (496 first, 574 total). Rivaroxaban and aspirin reduced total MACE events compared with aspirin alone [HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.85, P < .0001, number needed to treat for 2 years (NNT2y) of 63]. Total major bleeding was higher for rivaroxaban with aspirin compared to aspirin, but severe bleeding was not increased. The net clinical benefit of rivaroxaban plus aspirin was 20% higher compared with aspirin alone [HR 0.80 (95% CI 16.3%-31.6%)]. Rivaroxaban alone had no benefit on MACE outcomes compared with aspirin alone. MACE outcomes were similar for those on and off randomized treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Low dose rivaroxaban with aspirin significantly reduces first and total cardiovascular events compared with aspirin alone with a NNT2y of 63 and a 20% net clinical benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01776424. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01776424.

The COMPASS Trial: Net Clinical Benefit of Low-Dose Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin as Compared With Aspirin in Patients With Chronic Vascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin; ASA) 100 mg reduced the risk of cardiovascular events as compared with ASA monotherapy in the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) but increased the risk of major bleedings. Analysis of net clinical benefit (NCB) is of key clinical relevance and represents an integrated measure of overall patient outcome. METHODS: The current prespecified analysis was performed to assess the NCB of adding rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily to ASA monotherapy in patients with chronic vascular disease in the COMPASS study cohort (intention-to-treat study population), with a specific focus on high-risk subgroups. The predefined NCB outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, fatal bleeding, or symptomatic bleeding into a critical organ. RESULTS: A lower number of NCB adverse outcomes was observed with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus ASA versus ASA alone (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.91], P=0.0005), which became increasingly favorable with longer treatment duration. The main drivers of NCB outcomes were "efficacy" events, in particular stroke (0.5%/y versus 0.8%/y; hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.44-0.76], P<0.0001) and cardiovascular death (0.9%/y versus 1.2%/y; hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.64-0.96], P=0.02), whereas the bleeding components of the NCB, in particular fatal bleeding (0.09%/y versus 0.06%/y; hazard ratio, 1.49 [95% CI 0.67-3.33], P=0.32), only represented a minority of NCB events. In selected high-risk subgroups, including patients with polyvascular disease (≥2 vascular beds affected with atherosclerosis), impaired renal function, heart failure, and/or diabetes mellitus, a larger absolute risk reduction for experiencing a NCB event was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ASA monotherapy, the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus ASA resulted in fewer NCB events primarily by preventing adverse efficacy events, particularly stroke and cardiovascular mortality, whereas severe bleedings were less frequent and with less clinical impact. The NCB was particularly favorable in high-risk subgroups and those with multiple risk characteristics. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

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

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

Rivaroxaban With or Without Aspirin in Patients With Heart Failure and Chronic Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and history of heart failure (HF) are at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. We explored the effects of rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in these patients. METHODS: The COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized 27 395 participants with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg alone. Patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV HF or left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) <30% were excluded. The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome comprised cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding using modified International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. Investigators recorded a history of HF and EF at baseline, if available. We examined the effects of rivaroxaban on major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding in patients with or without a history of HF and an EF <40% or ≥40% at baseline. RESULTS: Of the 5902 participants (22%) with a history of HF, 4971 (84%) had EF recorded at baseline, and 12% had EF <40%. Rivaroxaban and aspirin had similar relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events compared with aspirin in participants with HF (5.5% versus 7.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86) and those without HF (3.8% versus 4.7%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93; P for interaction 0.28) but larger absolute risk reduction in those with HF (HF absolute risk reduction 2.4%, number needed to treat=42; no HF absolute risk reduction 1.0%, number needed to treat=103). The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome was not statistically different between those with EF <40% (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55-1.42) and ≥40% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; P for interaction 0.36). The excess hazard for major bleeding was not different in participants with HF (2.5% versus 1.8%; HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.88-2.09) than in those without HF (3.3% versus 1.9%; HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45-2.21; P for interaction 0.26). There were no significant differences in the primary outcomes with rivaroxaban alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and a history of mild or moderate HF, combination rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone produces similar relative but larger absolute benefits than in those without HF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Bleeding and New Cancer Diagnosis in Patients With Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients treated with antithrombotic drugs are at risk of bleeding. Bleeding may be the first manifestation of underlying cancer. METHODS: We examined new cancers diagnosed in relation to gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding among patients enrolled in the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) and determined the hazard of new cancer diagnosis after bleeding at these sites. RESULTS: Of 27 395 patients enrolled (mean age, 68 years; women, 21%), 2678 (9.8%) experienced any (major or minor) bleeding, 713 (2.6%) experienced major bleeding, and 1084 (4.0%) were diagnosed with cancer during a mean follow-up of 23 months. Among 2678 who experienced bleeding, 257 (9.9%) were subsequently diagnosed with cancer. Gastrointestinal bleeding was associated with a 20-fold higher hazard of new gastrointestinal cancer diagnosis (7.4% versus 0.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 20.6 [95% CI, 15.2-27.8]) and 1.7-fold higher hazard of new nongastrointestinal cancer diagnosis (3.8% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.20-2.40]). Genitourinary bleeding was associated with a 32-fold higher hazard of new genitourinary cancer diagnosis (15.8% versus 0.8%; HR, 32.5 [95% CI, 24.7-42.9]), and urinary bleeding was associated with a 98-fold higher hazard of new urinary cancer diagnosis (14.2% versus 0.2%; HR, 98.5; 95% CI, 68.0-142.7). Nongastrointestinal, nongenitourinary bleeding was associated with a 3-fold higher hazard of nongastrointestinal, nongenitourinary cancers (4.4% versus 1.9%; HR, 3.02 [95% CI, 2.32-3.91]). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atherosclerosis treated with antithrombotic drugs, any gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding was associated with higher rates of new cancer diagnosis. Any gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding should prompt investigation for cancers at these sites. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Stroke Outcomes in the COMPASS Trial.

BACKGROUND: Strokes were significantly reduced by the combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin in comparison with aspirin in the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies). We present detailed analyses of stroke by type, predictors, and antithrombotic effects in key subgroups. METHODS: Participants had stable coronary artery or peripheral artery disease and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin 100 mg once daily (n=9126), rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily (n=9117), or rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin (n=9152). Patients who required anticoagulation or had a stroke within 1 month, previous lacunar stroke, or intracerebral hemorrhage were excluded. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 23 months, fewer patients had strokes in the rivaroxaban plus aspirin group than in the aspirin group (83 [0.9% per year] versus 142 [1.6% per year]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76; P<0.0001). Ischemic/uncertain strokes were reduced by nearly half (68 [0.7% per year] versus 132 [1.4% per year]; HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.68; P<0.0001) by the combination in comparison with aspirin. No significant difference was noted in the occurrence of stroke in the rivaroxaban alone group in comparison with aspirin: annualized rate of 0.7% (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.05). The occurrence of fatal and disabling stroke (modified Rankin Scale, 3-6) was decreased by the combination (32 [0.3% per year] versus 55 [0.6% per year]; HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.89; P=0.01). Independent predictors of stroke were prior stroke, hypertension, systolic blood pressure at baseline, age, diabetes mellitus, and Asian ethnicity. Prior stroke was the strongest predictor of incident stroke (HR, 3.63; 95% CI, 2.65-4.97; P<0.0001) and was associated with a 3.4% per year rate of stroke recurrence on aspirin. The effect of the combination in comparison with aspirin was consistent across subgroups with high stroke risk, including those with prior stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin is an important new antithrombotic option for primary and secondary stroke prevention in patients with clinical atherosclerosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

Rivaroxaban with or without Aspirin in Stable Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=-4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events. (Funded by Bayer; COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01776424 .).

Pantoprazole to Prevent Gastroduodenal Events in Patients Receiving Rivaroxaban and/or Aspirin in a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Antiplatelets and anticoagulants are associated with increased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We evaluated whether proton pump inhibitor therapy could reduce this risk. METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease. Participants were randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole 40 mg daily or placebo, as well as rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily with aspirin 100 mg once daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily, or aspirin 100 mg alone. The primary outcome was time to first upper gastrointestinal event, defined as a composite of overt bleeding, upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a gastroduodenal lesion or of unknown origin, occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcer or ≥5 erosions, upper gastrointestinal obstruction, or perforation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal events between the pantoprazole group (102 of 8791 events) and the placebo group (116 of 8807 events) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.15). Pantoprazole significantly reduced bleeding of gastroduodenal lesions (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.94; P = .03); this reduction was greater when we used a post-hoc definition of bleeding gastroduodenal lesion (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.74), although the number needed to treat still was high (n = 982; 95% confidence interval, 609-2528). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized placebo-controlled trial, we found that routine use of proton pump inhibitors in patients receiving low-dose anticoagulation and/or aspirin for stable cardiovascular disease does not reduce upper gastrointestinal events, but may reduce bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01776424.

Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors Based on a Large, Multi-Year, Randomized Trial of Patients Receiving Rivaroxaban or Aspirin.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial. METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.

Randomized trial of primary PCI with or without routine manual thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: During primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), manual thrombectomy may reduce distal embolization and thus improve microvascular perfusion. Small trials have suggested that thrombectomy improves surrogate and clinical outcomes, but a larger trial has reported conflicting results. METHODS: We randomly assigned 10,732 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI to a strategy of routine upfront manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure within 180 days. The key safety outcome was stroke within 30 days. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 347 of 5033 patients (6.9%) in the thrombectomy group versus 351 of 5030 patients (7.0%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio in the thrombectomy group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.15; P=0.86). The rates of cardiovascular death (3.1% with thrombectomy vs. 3.5% with PCI alone; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12; P=0.34) and the primary outcome plus stent thrombosis or target-vessel revascularization (9.9% vs. 9.8%; hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.14; P=0.95) were also similar. Stroke within 30 days occurred in 33 patients (0.7%) in the thrombectomy group versus 16 patients (0.3%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.75; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI who were undergoing primary PCI, routine manual thrombectomy, as compared with PCI alone, did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA class IV heart failure within 180 days but was associated with an increased rate of stroke within 30 days. (Funded by Medtronic and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; TOTAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149044.).

Efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with aspirin in the elderly: a subgroup analysis from the AVERROES trial.

BACKGROUND: increasing age is associated with a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and higher risks of stroke and bleeding. We report the effects of apixaban versus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in older patients (≥75 years and ≥85 years) compared with younger patients with AF unsuitable for vitamin K antagonists. METHODS: AVERROES (Apixaban Versus ASA to Prevent Stroke In AF Patients Who Have Failed or Are Unsuitable for Vitamin K Antagonist Treatment) trial (n = 5,599) included 1,898 patients ≥75 years and 366 patients ≥85 years. We compared the baseline characteristics and effects of apixaban compared with aspirin on clinical outcomes by age. RESULTS: compared with aspirin, apixaban was more efficacious for preventing strokes and systemic embolism in patients ≥85 years (absolute rate [AR] 1%/year on apixaban versus 7.5%/year on aspirin; hazard ratio [HR] 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02-0.48) compared with younger patients (AR 1.7%/year on apixaban versus 3.4%/year on aspirin; HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.69) (P-value for interaction = 0.05). Major haemorrhage was higher in patients ≥85 years compared with younger patients but similar with apixaban versus aspirin in both young and older individuals (4.9%/year versus 1.0%/year on aspirin and 4.7%/year versus 1.2%/year on apixaban) with no significant treatment-by-age interaction (P-value = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: older patients with AF are at particularly high risk of stroke if given aspirin and have substantially greater relative and absolute benefits from apixaban compared with younger patients with no greater risk of haemorrhage. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00496769. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00496769.

Culprit lesion thrombus burden after manual thrombectomy or percutaneous coronary intervention-alone in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the optical coherence tomography sub-study of the TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy versus PCI ALone) trial.

AIMS: Manual thrombectomy has been proposed as a strategy to reduce thrombus burden during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the effectiveness of manual thrombectomy in reducing thrombus burden is uncertain. In this substudy of the TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy versus PCI ALone) trial, we compared the thrombus burden at the culprit lesion using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients treated with thrombectomy vs. PCI-alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: The TOTAL trial (N = 10 732) was an international, multicentre, randomized trial of thrombectomy (using the Export catheter, Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) in STEMI patients treated with primary PCI. The OCT substudy prospectively enrolled 214 patients from 13 sites in 5 countries. Optical coherence tomography was performed immediately after thrombectomy or PCI-alone and then repeated after stent deployment. Thrombus quantification was performed by an independent core laboratory blinded to treatment assignment. The primary outcome of pre-stent thrombus burden as a percentage of segment analysed was 2.36% (95% CI: 1.73-3.22) in the thrombectomy group and 2.88% (95% CI: 2.12-3.90) in the PCI-alone group (P = 0.373). Absolute pre-stent thrombus volume was not different (2.99 vs. 3.74 mm(3), P = 0.329). Other secondary outcomes of pre-stent quadrants of thrombus, post-stent atherothrombotic burden, and post-stent atherothrombotic volume were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: Manual thrombectomy did not reduce pre-stent thrombus burden at the culprit lesion compared with PCI-alone. Both strategies were associated with low thrombus burden at the lesion site after the initial intervention to restore flow.

Risk of ischaemic stroke according to pattern of atrial fibrillation: analysis of 6563 aspirin-treated patients in ACTIVE-A and AVERROES.

AIMS: The pattern of atrial fibrillation (AF) occurrence-paroxysmal, persistent, or permanent-is associated with progressive stages of atrial dysfunction and structural changes and may therefore be associated with progressively higher stroke risk. However, previous studies have not consistently shown AF pattern to predict stroke but have been hampered by methodological shortcomings of low power, variable event ascertainment, and variable anticoagulant use. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the rates of stroke and systemic embolism in 6563 aspirin-treated patients with AF from the ACTIVE-A/AVERROES databases. There was thorough searching for events and adjudication. Multivariable analyses were performed with the adjustment for known risk factors for stroke. Mean age of patients with paroxysmal, persistent, and permanent AF was 69.0 ± 9.9, 68.6 ± 10.2, and 71.9 ± 9.8 years (P < 0.001). The CHA2DS2-VASc score was similar in patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF (3.1 ± 1.4), but was higher in patients with permanent AF (3.6 ± 1.5, P < 0.001). Yearly ischaemic stroke rates were 2.1, 3.0, and 4.2% for paroxysmal, persistent, and permanent AF, respectively, with adjusted hazard ratio of 1.83 (P < 0.001) for permanent vs. paroxysmal and 1.44 (P = 0.02) for persistent vs. paroxysmal. Multivariable analysis identified age ≥ 75 year, sex, history of stroke or TIA, and AF pattern as independent predictors of stroke, with AF pattern being the second strongest predictor after prior stroke or TIA. CONCLUSION: In a large population of non-anticoagulated AF patients, pattern of AF was a strong independent predictor of stroke risk and may be helpful to assess the risk/benefit for anticoagulant therapy, especially in lower risk patients.

Efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with aspirin in patients who previously tried but failed treatment with vitamin K antagonists: results from the AVERROES trial.

AIM: The AVERROES double-blinded, randomized trial demonstrated that apixaban reduces the risk of stroke or systemic embolism (SSE) by 55% compared with aspirin without an increase in major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation either who previously tried but failed vitamin K antagonists (VKA) therapy or who were expected to be unsuitable for VKA therapy. In this pre-specified analysis, we explored the consistency of the results in the subgroup of patients who tried but failed VKA therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 5599 patients, 2216 (40%) had previously failed VKA treatment [main reasons: poor international normalized ratio (INR) control 42%, refusal 37%, bleeding on VKA 8%]. Compared with those expected to be unsuitable for VKA therapy, those who had previously failed were older, more often male, had higher body mass index, more likely to have moderate renal impairment and a history of stroke and less likely to have heart failure or to be medically undertreated. The effects of apixaban compared with aspirin were consistent in those who previously failed and those who were expected to be unsuitable, for both SSE (P interaction 0.13) and major bleeding (P interaction 0.74) and were also consistent among different subgroups of patients who had previously failed VKA therapy defined by reasons for unsuitability, age, sex, renal function, CHADS2 score, aspirin dose, duration, indication, and quality of INR control of prior VKA use. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of apixaban compared with aspirin is consistent in subgroups of patients who have previously attempted but failed VKA therapy, irrespective of the reason for discontinuation.

Modification of outcomes with aspirin or apixaban in relation to female and male sex in patients with atrial fibrillation: a secondary analysis of the AVERROES study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The main objective of the present analysis was to assess the effect of treatment with aspirin compared with apixaban on ischemic stroke and major bleeding in women compared with men. Female patients with atrial fibrillation are at increased stroke risk compared with male patients, and the underlying reasons for higher risk are uncertain. METHODS: Ancillary analysis of the Apixaban Versus Acetylsalicylic Acid [ASA] to Prevent Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Who Have Failed or Are Unsuitable for Vitamin K Antagonist Treatment (AVERROES) trial, comparing aspirin and apixaban, focused on sex differences. Mean follow-up was 1.1 years. RESULTS: Women compared with men tended to be older (aspirin, 71.8 versus 68.8 years; apixaban, 71.4 versus 68.6 years), with a higher proportion of those aged≥75 years. Also, women had less peripheral artery disease (aspirin, 2.4% versus 3.7%; apixaban, 1.4% versus 3.0%), more heart failure, and higher mean CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age of 75 years or older, diabetes [1 point each], stroke or transient ischemic attack [2 points]) scores (aspirin, 2.2 versus 2.0; apixaban, 2.1 versus 2.0). Women compared with men had higher ischemic stroke rates (aspirin, 3.99% versus 2.28%; apixaban, 1.55% versus 0.82%) but similar bleeding rates (aspirin, 1.29% versus 1.22%; apixaban, 1.15% versus 1.36%). The relative effect of apixaban compared with aspirin was similar in men and women for both ischemic stroke (women, 3.99% versus 1.55%; hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.64; men, 2.28% versus 0.82%; hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.63; Pint=0.84) and major bleeding (women, 1.29% versus 1.15%; hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-2.23; men, 1.36% versus 1.22%; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-2.02; Pint=0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Female patients with atrial fibrillation had higher ischemic stroke rates compared with male patients, but the relative effects of apixaban compared with aspirin on both ischemic stroke and bleeding were similar in men and women.

Design and rationale of the TOTAL trial: a randomized trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus PCI ALone in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI.

BACKGROUND: A major limitation of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for the treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is impaired microvascular perfusion due to embolization and obstruction of microcirculation with thrombus. Manual thrombectomy has the potential to reduce distal embolization and improve microvascular perfusion. Clinical trials have shown mixed results regarding thrombectomy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of routine upfront manual aspiration thrombectomy during PPCI compared with percutaneous coronary intervention alone in patients with STEMI. DESIGN: This is a multicenter, prospective, open, international, randomized trial with blinded assessment of outcomes. Patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI are randomized to upfront routine manual aspiration thrombectomy with the Export catheter (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, CA) or to percutaneous coronary intervention alone. The primary outcome is the composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or new or worsening New York Heart Association class IV heart failure up to 180 days. The trial uses an event-driven design and will recruit 10,700 patients. SUMMARY: The TOTAL trial will determine the effect of routine manual aspiration thrombectomy during PPCI on clinically important outcomes.

The CHA2DS2-VASc score identifies those patients with atrial fibrillation and a CHADS2 score of 1 who are unlikely to benefit from oral anticoagulant therapy.

AIMS: The CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score is a modification of the CHADS(2) score that aims to improve stroke risk prediction in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) by adding three risk factors: age 65-74, female sex, and history of vascular disease. Whereas previous evaluations of the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score included all AF patients, the aim of this analysis was to evaluate its discriminative ability only in those patients for whom recommendations on antithrombotic treatment are uncertain (i.e. CHADS(2) score of 1). METHODS AND RESULTS: We selected all patients with a CHADS(2) score of 1 from the AVERROES and ACTIVE trials who were treated with acetylsalicylic acid with or without clopidogrel and calculated the incidences of ischaemic or unspecified stroke or systemic embolus (SSE) according to their CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score. Of 4670 patients with a baseline CHADS(2) score of 1, 26% had a CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score of 1 and 74% had a score of ≥ 2. After 11 414 patient-years of follow-up, the annual incidence of SSE was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.6-1.3) and 2.1% (95% CI: 1.8-2.5) for patients with a CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score of 1 and ≥ 2, respectively. The c-statistic of the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score was 0.587 (95% CI: 0.550-0.624). Age 65 to <75 years was the strongest of the three new risk factors in the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score. CONCLUSION: The CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score reclassifies 26% of patients with a CHADS(2) score of 1 to a low annual risk of SSE of 1%. This risk seems low enough to consider withholding anticoagulant treatment.

The effects of apixaban on hospitalizations in patients with different types of atrial fibrillation: insights from the AVERROES trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of apixaban, a novel oral factor Xa inhibitor, on the need for cardiovascular hospitalization. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our analysis is based on data from AVERROES, a randomized double-blind trial testing the efficacy and safety of apixaban against aspirin for the prevention of thrombo-embolism in 5599 atrial fibrillation (AF) patients unsuitable for vitamin K antagonist therapy. Hospitalizations were captured by dedicated case report forms and the outcome variable was time from randomization to the first hospitalization. Effects of treatment with apixaban on the rates of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular hospitalizations were assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression models. During a mean follow-up of 1.1 years, 800 patients were hospitalized at least once for cardiovascular reasons, 442 (15.4%/year) in the aspirin group, 358 (12.3%) in the apixaban group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-0.92; P = 0.002]. The reduction in cardiovascular hospitalization in the apixaban arm was predominantly due to a reduction in hospitalization for strokes, but there were also fewer hospitalizations for other cardiovascular causes. Patients with paroxysmal AF were significantly more likely to be hospitalized for AF treatment, whereas more heart failure admissions occurred in patients with permanent AF. Assignment to apixaban was the only independent predictor for a reduction in hospitalization. Cardiovascular hospitalization was the strongest independent predictor of subsequent mortality (HR: 3.95, 95% CI: 3.06-5.09; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In AVERROES, patients on apixaban therapy were less likely to be hospitalized. This may have important consequences for patients' well-being and for healthcare resources. This trial is registered underClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00496769.

Bleeding during treatment with aspirin versus apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation unsuitable for warfarin: the apixaban versus acetylsalicylic acid to prevent stroke in atrial fibrillation patients who have failed or are unsuitable for vitamin K antagonist treatment (AVERROES) trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Apixaban reduces stroke with comparable bleeding risks when compared with aspirin in patients with atrial fibrillation who are unsuitable for vitamin k antagonist therapy. This analysis explores patterns of bleeding and defines bleeding risks based on stroke risk with apixaban and aspirin. METHODS: The Apixaban versus Acetylsalicylic Acid to Prevent Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Who Have Failed or Are Unsuitable for Vitamin k Antagonist Treatment (AVERROES) trial randomized 5599 patients with atrial fibrillation and risk factors to receive either apixaban or aspirin. Bleeding events were defined as the first occurrence of either major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: The rate of a bleeding event was 3.8%/year with aspirin and 4.5%/year with apixaban (hazard ratio with apixaban, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.92-1.51; P=0.19). The anatomic site of bleeding did not differ between therapies. Risk factors for bleeding common to apixaban and aspirin were use of nonstudy aspirin>50% of the time and a history of daily/occasional nosebleeds. The rates of both stroke and bleeding increased with higher CHADS2 scores but apixaban compared with aspirin was associated with a similar relative risk of bleeding (P interaction 0.21) and a reduced relative risk of stroke (P interaction 0.37) irrespective of CHADS2 category. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic sites and predictors of bleeding are similar for apixaban and aspirin in these patients. Higher CHADS2 scores are associated with increasing rates of bleeding and stroke, but the balance between risks and benefits of apixaban compared with aspirin is favorable irrespective of baseline stroke risk. Clinical Trial Registration Information- www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 00496769.