New-onset atrial fibrillation and chronic coronary syndrome in the CLARIFY registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data on new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) are scarce. This study aims to describe the incidence, predictors, and impact on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes of NOAF in CCS patients. METHODS: Data from the international (45 countries) CLARIFY registry (prospeCtive observational LongitudinAl RegIstry oF patients with stable coronary arterY disease) were used. Among 29 001 CCS outpatients without previously reported AF at baseline, patients with at least one episode of AF/flutter diagnosed during 5-year follow-up were compared with patients in sinus rhythm throughout the study. RESULTS: The incidence rate of NOAF was 1.12 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-1.18] per 100 patient-years (cumulative incidence at 5 years: 5.0%). Independent predictors of NOAF were increasing age, increasing body mass index, low estimated glomerular filtration rate, Caucasian ethnicity, alcohol intake, and low left ventricular ejection fraction, while high triglycerides were associated with lower incidence. New-onset atrial fibrillation was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of adverse outcomes, with adjusted hazard ratios of 2.01 (95% CI 1.61-2.52) for the composite of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke, 2.61 (95% CI 2.04-3.34) for CV death, 1.64 (95% CI 1.07-2.50) for non-fatal myocardial infarction, 2.27 (95% CI 1.85-2.78) for all-cause death, 8.44 (95% CI 7.05-10.10) for hospitalization for heart failure, and 4.46 (95% CI 2.85-6.99) for major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Among CCS patients, NOAF is common and is strongly associated with worse outcomes. Whether more intensive preventive measures and more systematic screening for AF would improve prognosis in this population deserves further investigation.

International Observational Analysis of Evolution and Outcomes of Chronic Stable Angina: The Multinational CLARIFY Study.

BACKGROUND: Although angina is common in patients with stable coronary artery disease, limited data are available on its prevalence, natural evolution, and outcomes in the era of effective cardiovascular drugs and widespread use of coronary revascularization. METHODS: Using data from 32 691 patients with stable coronary artery disease from the prospective observational CLARIFY registry (Prospective Observational Longitudinal Registry of Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease), anginal status was mapped each year in patients without new coronary revascularization or new myocardial infarction. The use of medical interventions in the year preceding angina resolution was explored. The effect of 1-year changes in angina status on 5-year outcomes was analyzed using multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Among 7212 (22.1%) patients who reported angina at baseline, angina disappeared (without coronary revascularization) in 39.6% at 1 year, with further annual decreases. In patients without angina at baseline, 2.0% to 4.8% developed angina each year. During 5-year follow-up, angina was controlled in 7773 patients, in whom resolution of angina was obtained with increased use of antianginal treatment in 11.1%, with coronary revascularization in 4.5%, and without any changes in medication or revascularization in 84.4%. Compared to patients without angina at baseline and 1 year, persistence of angina and occurrence of angina at 1 year with conservative management were each independently associated with higher rates of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.12-1.55] for persistence of angina; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.11-1.70] for occurrence of angina) at 5 years. Patients whose angina had resolved at 1 year with conservative management were not at higher risk of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction than those who never experienced angina (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.82-1.15]). CONCLUSIONS: Angina affects almost one-quarter of patients with stable coronary artery disease but resolves without events or coronary revascularization in most patients. Resolution of angina within 1 year with conservative management predicted outcomes similar to lack of angina, whereas persistence or occurrence was associated with worse outcomes. Because most patients with angina are likely to experience resolution of symptoms, and because there is no demonstrated outcome benefit to routine revascularization, this study emphasizes the value of conservative management of stable coronary artery disease. Registration: URL: https://www.isrctn.com; Unique identifier: ISRCTN43070564.

Balance of benefit and risk of ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease according to bleeding risk assessment with the CRUSADE score: Data from THEMIS and THEMIS PCI.

BACKGROUND: The THEMIS trial demonstrated that in high-risk patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without previous myocardial infarction or stroke, ticagrelor, in addition to aspirin, reduced the incidence of ischemic events but increased major bleeding. Identification of patients who could derive the greatest net benefit from the addition of ticagrelor appears important. We used the CRUSADE bleeding risk score to risk stratify the THEMIS population. METHODS: The population was divided into tertiles: score ≤22, 23 to 33, and ≥34. In each tertile, primary efficacy (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and safety (TIMI major bleeding) outcomes were analyzed. NACE (net adverse clinical events) was defined as the irreversible harm composite, in which all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, amputations, fatal bleeds, and intracranial hemorrhage were counted. RESULTS: Patients in the lower risk tertile experienced fewer ischemic events with ticagrelor than placebo, whereas there was no significant benefit from ticagrelor in the other tertiles (Pinteraction = .008). Bleeding rates were consistently increased with ticagrelor across all tertiles (Pinteraction = .79). Ticagrelor reduced NACE in the first tertile (HR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.61-0.90) but not in the others (HR = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.86-1.23 and HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.91-1.22, respectively; Pinteraction = .012). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes without a history of myocardial infarction or stroke, only those at the lower end of the bleeding risk spectrum according to the CRUSADE score derived net benefit from ticagrelor.

Long-term outcomes of chronic coronary syndrome worldwide: insights from the international CLARIFY registry.

AIMS: Over the last decades, the profile of chronic coronary syndrome has changed substantially. We aimed to determine characteristics and management of patients with chronic coronary syndrome in the contemporary era, as well as outcomes and their determinants. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 32 703 patients (45 countries) with chronic coronary syndrome enrolled in the prospective observational CLARIFY registry (November 2009 to June 2010) with a 5-year follow-up, were analysed. The primary outcome [cardiovascular death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI)] 5-year rate was 8.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.7-8.3] overall [male 8.1% (7.8-8.5); female 7.6% (7.0-8.3)]. A cox proportional hazards model showed that the main independent predictors of the primary outcome were prior hospitalization for heart failure, current smoking, atrial fibrillation, living in Central/South America, prior MI, prior stroke, diabetes, current angina, and peripheral artery disease. There was an interaction between angina and prior MI (P = 0.0016); among patients with prior MI, angina was associated with a higher primary event rate [11.8% (95% CI 10.9-12.9) vs. 8.2% (95% CI 7.8-8.7) in patients with no angina, P < 0.001], whereas among patients without prior MI, event rates were similar for patients with [6.3% (95% CI 5.4-7.3)] or without angina [6.4% (95% CI 5.9-7.0)], P > 0.99. Prescription rates of evidence-based secondary prevention therapies were high. CONCLUSION: This description of the spectrum of chronic coronary syndrome patients shows that, despite high rates of prescription of evidence-based therapies, patients with both angina and prior MI are an easily identifiable high-risk group who may deserve intensive treatment. CLINICAL REGISTRY: ISRCTN43070564.

ß-blockers, calcium antagonists, and mortality in stable coronary artery disease: an international cohort study.

AIMS: The effect of first-line antianginal agents, ß-blockers, and calcium antagonists on clinical outcomes in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) remains uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the use of ß-blockers or calcium antagonists (baseline and annually) and outcomes in 22 006 stable CAD patients (enrolled 2009-2010) followed annually to 5 years, in the CLARIFY registry (45 countries). Primary outcome was all-cause death. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death and the composite of cardiovascular death/non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI). After multivariable adjustment, baseline ß-blocker use was not associated with lower all-cause death [1345 (7.8%) in users vs. 407 (8.4%) in non-users; hazard ratio (HR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.06; P = 0.30]; cardiovascular death [861 (5.0%) vs. 262 (5.4%); HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79-1.05; P = 0.20]; or cardiovascular death/non-fatal MI [1272 (7.4%) vs. 340 (7.0%); HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91-1.16; P = 0.66]. Sensitivity analyses according to ß-blocker use over time and to prescribed dose produced similar results. Among prior MI patients, for those enrolled in the year following MI, baseline ß-blocker use was associated with lower all-cause death [205 (7.0%) vs. 59 (10.3%); HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.91; P = 0.01]; cardiovascular death [132 (4.5%) vs. 49 (8.5%); HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.73; P = 0.0001]; and cardiovascular death/non-fatal MI [212 (7.2%) vs. 59 (10.3%); HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.93; P = 0.01]. Calcium antagonists were not associated with any difference in mortality. CONCLUSION: In this contemporary cohort of stable CAD, ß-blocker use was associated with lower 5-year mortality only in patients enrolled in the year following MI. Use of calcium antagonists was not associated with superior mortality, regardless of history of MI.

Potential impact of the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline on high blood pressure in normotensive patients with stable coronary artery disease: insights from the CLARIFY registry.

Aims: The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline on high blood pressure (BP) lowered the threshold defining hypertension and BP target in high-risk patients to 130/80 mmHg. Patients with coronary artery disease and systolic BP 130-139 mmHg or diastolic BP 80-89 mmHg should now receive medication to achieve this target. We aimed to investigate the relationship between BP and cardiovascular events in 'real-life' patients with coronary artery disease considered as having normal BP until the recent guideline. Methods and results: Data from 5956 patients with stable coronary artery disease, no history of hypertension or heart failure, and average BP <140/90 mmHg, enrolled in the CLARIFY registry (November 2009 to June 2010), were analysed. In a multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, after a median follow-up of 5.0 years, diastolic BP 80-89 mmHg, but not systolic BP 130-139 mmHg, was associated with increased risk of the primary endpoint, a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (hazard ratio 2.15, 95% confidence interval 1.22-3.81 vs. 70-79 mmHg and 1.12, 0.64-1.97 vs. 120-129 mmHg). No significant increase in risk for the primary endpoint was observed for systolic BP <120 mmHg or diastolic BP <70 mmHg. Conclusion: In patients with stable coronary artery disease defined as having normal BP according to the 140/90 mmHg threshold, diastolic BP 80-89 mmHg was associated with increased cardiovascular risk, whereas systolic BP 130-139 mmHg was not, supporting the lower diastolic but not the lower systolic BP hypertension-defining threshold and treatment target in coronary artery disease. ClinicalTrials identifier: ISRCTN43070564.

Cardiovascular event rates and mortality according to achieved systolic and diastolic blood pressure in patients with stable coronary artery disease: an international cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The optimum blood pressure target in hypertension remains debated, especially in coronary artery disease, given concerns for reduced myocardial perfusion if diastolic blood pressure is too low. We aimed to study the association between achieved blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease and hypertension. METHODS: We analysed data from 22 672 patients with stable coronary artery disease enrolled (from Nov 26, 2009, to June 30, 2010) in the CLARIFY registry (including patients from 45 countries) and treated for hypertension. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures before each event were averaged and categorised into 10 mm Hg increments. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated with multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, using the 120-129 mm Hg systolic blood pressure and 70-79 mm Hg diastolic blood pressure subgroups as reference. FINDINGS: After a median follow-up of 5·0 years, increased systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or more and diastolic blood pressure of 80 mm Hg or more were each associated with increased risk of cardiovascular events. Systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg was also associated with increased risk for the primary outcome (adjusted HR 1·56, 95% CI 1·36-1·81). Likewise, diastolic blood pressure of less than 70 mm Hg was associated with an increase in the primary outcome (adjusted HR 1·41 [1·24-1·61] for diastolic blood pressure of 60-69 mm Hg and 2·01 [1·50-2·70] for diastolic blood pressure of less than 60 mm Hg). INTERPRETATION: In patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease from routine clinical practice, systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure of less than 70 mm Hg were each associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including mortality, supporting the existence of a J-curve phenomenon. This finding suggests that caution should be taken in the use of blood pressure-lowering treatment in patients with coronary artery disease. FUNDING: Servier.

The Intracranial-B2LEED3S Score and the Risk of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Ischemic Stroke Patients Under Antiplatelet Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Chronic antiplatelet therapy in the post-acute phase of non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke is limited by the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) complications. METHODS: We developed an ICH risk score based on the PERFORM trial cohort (n = 19,100), which included patients with a non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, and externally validated this score in one contemporary trial of very similar size and inclusion criteria, the PRoFESS trial (n = 20,332 patients). Outcome was ICH over 2 years. A Cox proportional-hazard regression analysis identified risk factors. Discrimination was quantified with c-statistics and calibration was assessed by comparing predicted and observed ICH risk in PERFORM and PRoFESS. RESULTS: ICH occurred within 2 years in 263 (1.4%) patients in PERFORM trial and in 246 (1.2%) patients in PRoFESS trial. A 13-point score based on 9 items (Intracranial-B2LEED3S score - low body mass index, blood pressure, lacune, elderly, Asian ethnicity, coronary artery or cerebrovascular disease history, dual antithrombotic agent or oral anticoagulant, gender) was derived from the PERFORM trial. In PERFORM, the observed 2-year ICH risk varied from 0.75% in low-risk (score ≤2) to 2.44% in high-risk patients (score ≥5) with an acceptable calibration but a low discrimination both in PERFORM (c-statistic 0.64, 95% CI 0.61-0.68) and on external validation in PRoFESS (0.58, 95% CI 0.55-0.62). CONCLUSION: The Intracranial-B2LEED3S score helps identify patients who are at a high risk of bleeding. However, other variables need to be identified to improve the score (e.g., microbleeds) (Clinical Trial Registration Information ISRCTN66157730). URL: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN66157730?totalResults=5&pageSize=10&page=1&searchType=basic-search&offset=3&q=&filters=conditionCategory%3ACirculatory+System%2CrecruitmentCountry%3ATaiwan%2CrecruitmentCountry%3AAustria&sort=.

Specificities of Ischemic Stroke Risk Factors in Arab-Speaking Countries.

BACKGROUND: Stroke is largely preventable, and therefore, a better understanding of risk factors is an essential step in reducing the population stroke rate and resulting disease burden in Arab countries. SUMMARY: We performed 2 separate analyses in 2 similar populations of patients with noncardioembolic ischemic stroke. This first involved 3,635 patients in the Outcomes in Patients with TIA and Cerebrovascular disease (OPTIC) registry (followed for 2 years), with baseline collection of the usual risk factors and 5 socioeconomic variables (unemployment status, residence in rural area, living in fully serviced accommodation, no health-insurance coverage, and low educational level). The second involved patients in the PERFORM trial (n = 19,100 followed up for 2 years), with baseline collection of the usual risk factors and 1 socioeconomic variable (low educational level). The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. Stroke risk factors were more prevalent in patients in Arab countries. The incidence of major cardiovascular events (MACE; age- and gender-adjusted) was higher in Arab countries (OPTIC, 18.5 vs. 13.3%; PERFORM, 18.4 vs. 9.7%; both p ≤ 0.0001). These results remained significant after adjustment on risk factors and were attenuated in OPTIC after further adjustment on socioeconomic variables (hazard ratio 1.24; 95% CI 0.98-1.55; p = 0.07). Key Messages: Patients with ischemic stroke living in Arab countries had a lower mean socioeconomic status, a much higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, and a higher rate of MACE compared with patients from non-Arab countries. This finding is partly explained by a higher prevalence of risk factors and also by a high prevalence of poverty and low educational level.

Paracetamol, Ibuprofen, and Recurrent Major Cardiovascular and Major Bleeding Events in 19 120 Patients With Recent Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The presumed safety of paracetamol in high-cardiovascular risk patients has been questioned. We determined whether paracetamol or ibuprofen use is associated with major cardiovascular events (MACE) or major bleeding in 19 120 patients with recent ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack of mainly atherothrombotic origin included in the Prevention of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events of ischemic origin with terutroban in patients with a history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (PERFORM) trial. METHODS: We performed 2 nested case-control analysis (2153 cases with MACE during trial follow-up and 4306 controls matched on Essen stroke risk score; 809 cases with major bleeding matched with 1616 controls) and a separate time-varying analysis. RESULTS: 12.3% were prescribed paracetamol and 2.5% ibuprofen. Median duration of treatment was 14 (interquartile range 5-145) days for paracetamol and 9 (5-30) days for ibuprofen. Paracetamol, but not ibuprofen, was associated with increased risk of MACE (odds ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.42) or a major bleeding (odds ratio 1.60, 95% CI 1.26-2.03), with no impact of daily dose and duration of paracetamol treatment. Time-varying analysis found an increased risk of MACE with both paracetamol (hazard ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.43) and ibuprofen (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.06-2.03) and of major bleeding with paracetamol (hazard ratio 1.95, 95% CI 1.45-2.62). CONCLUSIONS: There was a weak and inconsistent signal for association between paracetamol or ibuprofen and MACE or major bleeding, which may be related to either a genuine but modest effect of these drugs or to residual confounding. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.isrctn.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN66157730.

Perindopril and ß-blocker for the prevention of cardiac events and mortality in stable coronary artery disease patients: A EUropean trial on Reduction Of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease (EUROPA) subanalysis.

BACKGROUND: ß-Blockers relieve angina/ischemia in stable coronary artery disease (CAD), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors prevent CAD outcomes. In EUROPA, the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril reduced cardiovascular outcomes in low-risk stable CAD patients over 4.2 years. This post hoc analysis examined whether the addition of perindopril to ß-blocker in EUROPA had additional benefits on outcomes compared with standard therapy including ß-blocker. METHODS: EUROPA was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial in patients with documented stable CAD. Randomized EUROPA patients who received ß-blocker at baseline were identified, and the effect on cardiovascular outcomes of adding perindopril or placebo was analyzed. Endpoints were the same as those in EUROPA. RESULTS: At baseline, 62% (n = 7534 [3789 on perindopril and 3745 on placebo]) received ß-blocker. Treatment with perindopril/ß-blocker reduced the relative risk of the primary end point (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and resuscitated cardiac arrest) by 24% compared with placebo/ß-blocker (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; P = .002). Addition of perindopril also reduced fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction by 28% (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59-0.88; P = .001) and hospitalization for heart failure by 45% (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.93; P = .025). Serious adverse drug reactions were rare in both groups, and cardiovascular death and hospitalizations occurred less often with perindopril/ß-blocker. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of perindopril to ß-blocker in stable CAD patients was safe and resulted in reductions in cardiovascular outcomes and mortality compared with standard therapy including ß-blocker.

Atherogenic dyslipidemia and residual cardiovascular risk in statin-treated patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Treatment with statins reduces the rate of cardiovascular events in high-risk patients, but residual risk persists. At least part of that risk may be attributable to atherogenic dyslipidemia characterized by low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (≤40 mg/dL) and high triglycerides (triglycerides≥150 mg/dL). METHODS: We studied subjects with stroke or transient ischemic attack in the Prevention of Cerebrovascular and Cardiovascular Events of Ischemic Origin With Terutroban in Patients With a History of Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack (PERFORM; n=19,100) and Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL; n=4731) trials who were treated with a statin and who had high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides measurements 3 months after randomization (n=10,498 and 2900, respectively). The primary outcome measure for this exploratory analysis was the occurrence of major cardiovascular events (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death). We also performed a time-varying analysis to account for all available high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglyceride measurements. RESULTS: A total of 10% of subjects in PERFORM and 9% in SPARCL had atherogenic dyslipidemia after ≥3 months on start statin therapy. After a follow-up of 2.3 years (PERFORM) and 4.9 years (SPARCL), a major cardiovascular event occurred in 1123 and 485 patients in the 2 trials, respectively. The risk of major cardiovascular events was higher in subjects with versus those without atherogenic dyslipidemia in both PERFORM (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-1.63) and SPARCL (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.85). The association was attenuated after multivariable adjustment (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.48 in PERFORM and hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.65 in SPARCL). Time-varying analysis confirmed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of atherogenic dyslipidemia was associated with higher residual cardiovascular risk in PERFORM and SPARCL subjects with stroke or transient ischemic attack receiving statin therapy. Specific therapeutic interventions should now be trialed to address this residual risk.

Women and men with stable coronary artery disease have similar clinical outcomes: insights from the international prospective CLARIFY registry.

AIMS: Men and women differ in terms of presentation and management in coronary artery disease (CAD). Whether these differences translate into different clinical outcomes in stable CAD is unclear. We analysed data from the international prospective CLARIFY registry to compare cardiovascular clinical outcomes in men and women with stable CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed 1-year outcomes in 30 977 outpatients with stable CAD [23 975 (77.4%) men; 7002 (22.6%) women]. Women were older than men, more likely to have hypertension and diabetes, and less likely to exercise or smoke. They had more frequent angina, but were less likely to have undergone diagnostic non-invasive testing or coronary angiography. Women received less optimized treatment for stable CAD. One-year outcomes were similar for men and women for the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or stroke [adjusted rates 1.7 vs. 1.8%, respectively, odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.15]; all-cause death (adjusted 1.5 vs. 1.6%, OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.72-1.13); fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (adjusted 1.0 vs. 0.9%, OR: 0.81, 95 CI: 0.60-1.08); and cardiovascular death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (adjusted 1.4 vs. 1.4%, OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.12). Fewer women underwent revascularization (2.6 vs. 2.2%, OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93), although appropriateness was not analysed. CONCLUSION: The risk profiles of women and men with stable CAD differ substantially. However, 1-year outcomes were similar. Fewer women underwent revascularization. Further research is needed to better understand gender determinants of outcome and devise strategies to minimize bias in the management and treatment of women.

Optimal or standard control of systolic and diastolic blood pressure across risk factor categories in patients with chronic coronary syndromes.

AIMS: Guidelines have lowered blood pressure (BP) targets to <130/80 mmHg. We examined the benefit of intensive control for each BP component, vs. the burden of other modifiable risk factors, in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: The CLARIFY registry (ISRCTN43070564) enrolled 32 703 patients with CCS, from 2009 to 2010, with a 5-year follow-up. Patients with either BP component below European guideline safety boundaries (120/70 mmHg) were excluded, leaving 19 167 patients (mean age: 63.8 ± 10.1 years, 78% men) in the present analysis. A multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model showed a gradual increase in cardiovascular risk (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) when the number of uncontrolled risk factors (active smoking, no physical activity, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥100 mg/dL, and diabetes with glycated haemoglobin ≥7%) increased [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.34; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-1.52, 1.65 (1.40-1.94), and 2.47 (1.90-3.21) for 1, 2, and 3 or 4 uncontrolled risk factors, respectively, vs. 0], without significant interaction with BP. Although uncontrolled systolic (≥140 mmHg) and diastolic (≥90 mmHg) BP were both associated with higher risk than standard BP, standard BP was associated with higher risk than optimal control for only the diastolic component (adjusted HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.94-1.25 for systolic BP 130-139 vs. 120-129 mmHg and 1.43; 95% CI: 1.27-1.62 for diastolic BP 80-89 vs. 70-79 mmHg). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the optimal BP target in CCS may be ≤139/79 mmHg and that optimizing the burden of other risk factors should be prioritized over the further reduction of systolic BP.

We aimed to compare the benefit associated with strict vs. standard control of blood pressure with the potential benefit of controlling other modifiable risk factors in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS).Our analysis conducted in nearly 20 000 patients from the CLARIFY registry (a prospective international cohort of patients with CCS) showed that the benefit associated with strict blood pressure (BP) control (BP < 130/80 mmHg) was marginal and only driven by the diastolic component of blood pressure, whereas having one or more uncontrolled other risk factors was associated with a gradually increasing risk, for all underlying BP levels.Patients with CCS should be treated to achieve BP <140/80 mmHg. However, our results suggest that optimizing the burden of other risk factors (lipid-lowering therapy, exercise, smoking cessation, diabetes control) may need to be prioritized before considering further reduction of systolic BP.

Association between coffee or tea consumption and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease: Analysis from the CLARIFY registry.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting data exist on the association between consumption of coffee or tea and cardiovascular outcomes, and few focus on patients with established coronary artery disease. AIM: To describe the association between coffee or tea consumption and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable coronary artery disease, using an extensive contemporary international registry, allowing the identification of multiple potential confounders. METHODS: The Prospective Observational Longitudinal Registry of Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease (CLARIFY) registry enrolled in 2009 and 2010 in 45 countries, with a 5-year follow-up. Patients were categorized according to daily consumption of coffee or tea, and were compared with those declaring neither. The primary composite outcome of myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death was analysed at 5years, as well as all-cause mortality. Sensitivity analyses were performed with a multivariable model. RESULTS: A total of 15,459 and 10,029 patients declared coffee or tea consumption, respectively. At 5years, after full adjustment, no association was found between coffee consumption and the primary outcome: hazard ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.89-1.21) for 1 cup; 0.94 (0.82-1.08) for 2-3 cups; and 1.04 (0.86-1.27) for ≥4 cups (P=0.51). Drinking tea was not associated with a different incidence of the primary outcome before or after adjustment, with fully adjusted hazard ratios of 1.08 (95% confidence interval 0.84-1.38) for 1 cup, 1.12 (0.96-1.31) for 2-3 cups and 0.95 (0.79-1.14) for ≥4 cups (P=0.30). After full adjustment, neither coffee nor tea drinking was associated with all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In outpatients with stable coronary artery disease, there was no association between coffee or tea consumption and ischaemic outcomes or all-cause mortality.

Terutroban versus aspirin in patients with cerebral ischaemic events (PERFORM): a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) are at high risk of recurrent stroke or other cardiovascular events. We compared the selective thromboxane-prostaglandin receptor antagonist terutroban with aspirin in the prevention of cerebral and cardiovascular ischaemic events in patients with a recent non-cardioembolic cerebral ischaemic event. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial was undertaken in 802 centres in 46 countries. Patients who had an ischaemic stroke in the previous 3 months or a TIA in the previous 8 days were randomly allocated with a central interactive response system to 30 mg per day terutroban or 100 mg per day aspirin. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of fatal or non-fatal ischaemic stroke, fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, or other vascular death (excluding haemorrhagic death). We planned a sequential statistical analysis of non-inferiority (margin 1·05) followed by analysis of superiority. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study was stopped prematurely for futility on the basis of the recommendation of the Data Monitoring Committee. This study is registered, number ISRCTN66157730. FINDINGS: 9562 patients were assigned to terutroban (9556 analysed) and 9558 to aspirin (9544 analysed); mean follow-up was 28·3 months (SD 7·7). The primary endpoint occurred in 1091 (11%) patients receiving terutroban and 1062 (11%) receiving aspirin (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 95% CI 0·94-1·12). There was no evidence of a difference between terutroban and aspirin for the secondary or tertiary endpoints. We recorded some increase in minor bleedings with terutroban compared with aspirin (1147 [12%] vs 1045 [11%]; HR 1·11, 95% CI 1·02-1·21), but no significant differences in other safety endpoints. INTERPRETATION: The trial did not meet the predefined criteria for non-inferiority, but showed similar rates of the primary endpoint with terutroban and aspirin, without safety advantages for terutroban. In a worldwide perspective, aspirin remains the gold standard antiplatelet drug for secondary stroke prevention in view of its efficacy, tolerance, and cost. FUNDING: Servier, France.

Prevalence of diabetes and impact on cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with chronic coronary syndromes, across multiple geographical regions and ethnicities.

BACKGROUND: In contrast with the setting of acute myocardial infarction, there are limited data regarding the impact of diabetes mellitus on clinical outcomes in contemporary cohorts of patients with chronic coronary syndromes. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and prognostic impact of diabetes according to geographical regions and ethnicity. METHODS AND RESULTS: CLARIFY is an observational registry of patients with chronic coronary syndromes, enrolled across 45 countries in Europe, Asia, America, Middle East, Australia, and Africa in 2009-2010, and followed up yearly for 5 years. Chronic coronary syndromes were defined by ≥1 of the following criteria: prior myocardial infarction, evidence of coronary stenosis >50%, proven symptomatic myocardial ischaemia, or prior revascularization procedure.Among 32 694 patients, 9502 (29%) had diabetes, with a regional prevalence ranging from below 20% in Northern Europe to ∼60% in the Gulf countries. In a multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, diabetes was associated with increased risks for the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.28 (95% confidence interval 1.18, 1.39) and for all secondary outcomes (all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and coronary revascularization). Differences on outcomes according to geography and ethnicity were modest. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic coronary syndromes, diabetes is independently associated with mortality and cardiovascular events, including heart failure, which is not accounted by demographics, prior medical history, left ventricular ejection fraction, or use of secondary prevention medication. This is observed across multiple geographic regions and ethnicities, despite marked disparities in the prevalence of diabetes. CLINICALTRIALS IDENTIFIER: ISRCTN43070564.

Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease: a European economic evaluation of the THEMIS trial.

AIMS: To conduct a health economic evaluation of ticagrelor in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) from a multinational payer perspective. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of ticagrelor were evaluated in the overall effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in Diabetes Mellitus Patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) trial population and in the predefined patient group with prior percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: A Markov model was developed to extrapolate patient outcomes over a lifetime horizon. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), which were compared with conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds [€47 000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in Sweden and €30 000/QALY in other countries].Treatment with ticagrelor resulted in QALY gains of up to 0.045 in the overall population and 0.099 in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Increased costs and benefits translated to ICERs ranged between €27 894 and €42 252/QALY across Sweden, Germany, Italy, and Spain in the overall population. In patients with prior PCI, estimated ICERs improved to €18 449, €20 632, €20 233, and €13 228/QALY in Sweden, Germany, Italy, and Spain, respectively, driven by higher event rates and treatment benefit. CONCLUSION: Based on THEMIS results, ticagrelor plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone may be cost-effective in some European countries in patients with T2DM and CAD and no prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. Additionally, ticagrelor is likely to be cost-effective across European countries in patients with a history of PCI.