Polypill Strategy in Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention.

BACKGROUND: A polypill that includes key medications associated with improved outcomes (aspirin, angiotensin-converting-enzyme [ACE] inhibitor, and statin) has been proposed as a simple approach to the secondary prevention of cardiovascular death and complications after myocardial infarction. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, controlled clinical trial, we assigned patients with myocardial infarction within the previous 6 months to a polypill-based strategy or usual care. The polypill treatment consisted of aspirin (100 mg), ramipril (2.5, 5, or 10 mg), and atorvastatin (20 or 40 mg). The primary composite outcome was cardiovascular death, nonfatal type 1 myocardial infarction, nonfatal ischemic stroke, or urgent revascularization. The key secondary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal type 1 myocardial infarction, or nonfatal ischemic stroke. RESULTS: A total of 2499 patients underwent randomization and were followed for a median of 36 months. A primary-outcome event occurred in 118 of 1237 patients (9.5%) in the polypill group and in 156 of 1229 (12.7%) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.96; P = 0.02). A key secondary-outcome event occurred in 101 patients (8.2%) in the polypill group and in 144 (11.7%) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.90; P = 0.005). The results were consistent across prespecified subgroups. Medication adherence as reported by the patients was higher in the polypill group than in the usual-care group. Adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with a polypill containing aspirin, ramipril, and atorvastatin within 6 months after myocardial infarction resulted in a significantly lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events than usual care. (Funded by the European Union Horizon 2020; SECURE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02596126; EudraCT number, 2015-002868-17.).

Lower risk of death and cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes initiating glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors: A real-world study in two Italian cohorts.

AIM: To examine the efficacy and safety of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors compared with other antihyperglycaemic agents (AHAs) in large and unselected populations of the Lombardy and Apulia regions in Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational cohort study of first-time users of GLP-1RAs, SGLT2 inhibitors or other AHAs was conducted from 2010 to 2018. Death and cardiovascular (CV) events were evaluated using conditional Cox models in propensity-score-matched populations. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each region and in a meta-analysis for pooled risks. RESULTS: After propensity-score matching, the Lombardy cohort included 18 716 and 11 683 patients and the Apulia cohort 9772 and 6046 patients for the GLP-1RA and SGLT2 inhibitor groups, respectively. Use of GLP-1RAs was associated with lower rates of death (HR 0.61, CI 0.56-0.65, Lombardy; HR 0.63, CI 0.55-0.71, Apulia), cerebrovascular disease and ischaemic stroke (HR 0.70, CI 0.63-0.79; HR 0.72, CI 0.60-0.87, Lombardy), peripheral vascular disease (HR 0.72, CI 0.64-0.82, Lombardy; HR 0.80, CI 0.67-0.98, Apulia), and lower limb complications (HR 0.67, CI 0.56-0.81, Lombardy; HR 0.69, CI 0.51-0.93, Apulia). Compared with other AHAs, SGLT2 inhibitor use decreased the risk of death (HR 0.47, CI 0.40-0.54, Lombardy; HR 0.43, CI 0.32-0.57, Apulia), cerebrovascular disease (HR 0.75, CI 0.61-0.91, Lombardy; HR 0.72, CI 0.54-0.96, Apulia), and heart failure (HR 0.56, CI 0.46-0.70, Lombardy; HR 0.57, CI 0.42-0.77, Apulia). In the pooled cohorts, a reduction in heart failure was also observed with GLP-1RAs (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97). Serious adverse events were quite low in frequency. CONCLUSION: Our findings from real-world practice confirm the favourable effect of GLP-1RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors on death and CV outcomes across both regions consistently. Thus, these drug classes should be preferentially considered in a broad type 2 diabetes population beyond those with CV disease.

Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events in women and men: a sex-specific meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

CONTEXT: Aspirin therapy reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease in adults who are at increased risk. However, it is unclear if women derive the same benefit as men. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the benefits and risks of aspirin treatment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease vary by sex. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases (1966 to March 2005), bibliographies of retrieved trials, and reports presented at major scientific meetings. Eligible studies were prospective, randomized controlled trials of aspirin therapy in participants without cardiovascular disease that reported data on myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and cardiovascular mortality. Six trials with a total of 95 456 individuals were identified; 3 trials included only men, 1 included only women, and 2 included both sexes. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were reviewed to determine the number of patients randomized, mean duration of follow-up, and end points (a composite of cardiovascular events [nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular mortality], each of these individual components separately, and major bleeding). DATA SYNTHESIS: Among 51,342 women, there were 1285 major cardiovascular events: 625 strokes, 469 MIs, and 364 cardiovascular deaths. Aspirin therapy was associated with a significant 12% reduction in cardiovascular events (odds ratio [OR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.99; P = .03) and a 17% reduction in stroke (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97; P = .02), which was a reflection of reduced rates of ischemic stroke (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63-0.93; P = .008). There was no significant effect on MI or cardiovascular mortality. Among 44,114 men, there were 2047 major cardiovascular events: 597 strokes, 1023 MIs, and 776 cardiovascular deaths. Aspirin therapy was associated with a significant 14% reduction in cardiovascular events (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78-0.94; P = .01) and a 32% reduction in MI (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.86; P = .001). There was no significant effect on stroke or cardiovascular mortality. Aspirin treatment increased the risk of bleeding in women (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.13-2.52; P = .01) and in men (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.35-2.20; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: For women and men, aspirin therapy reduced the risk of a composite of cardiovascular events due to its effect on reducing the risk of ischemic stroke in women and MI in men. Aspirin significantly increased the risk of bleeding to a similar degree among women and men.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular events with low-dose aspirin and vitamin E in type 2 diabetic patients: results of the Primary Prevention Project (PPP) trial.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated in general practice the efficacy of antiplatelets and antioxidants in primary prevention of cardiovascular events in people with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Primary Prevention Project (PPP) is a randomized, open trial with a two-by-two factorial design aimed to investigate low-dose aspirin (100 mg/day) and vitamin E (300 mg/day) in the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with one or more cardiovascular risk factors. The primary end point was a composite end point of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. A total of 1,031 people with diabetes in the PPP, aged >/=50 years, without a previous cardiovascular event were enrolled by 316 general practitioners and 14 diabetes outpatient clinics. RESULTS: The PPP trial was prematurely stopped (after a median of 3.7 years) by the independent data safety and monitoring board because of a consistent benefit of aspirin compared with the control group in a population of 4,495 patients with one or more major cardiovascular risk factors. In diabetic patients, aspirin treatment was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the main end point (relative risk [RR] = 0.90, 95% CI 0.50-1.62) and in total cardiovascular events (0.89, 0.62-1.26) and with a nonsignificant increase in cardiovascular deaths (1.23, 0.69-2.19). In nondiabetic subjects, RRs for the main end point, total cardiovascular events, and cardiovascular deaths were 0.59 (0.37-0.94), 0.69 (0.53-0.90), and 0.32 (0.14-0.72), respectively. No significant reduction in any of the end points considered could be found with vitamin E in either diabetic or nondiabetic subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest a lower effect of primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) with low-dose aspirin in diabetic patients as opposed to subjects with other cardiovascular risk factors. If confirmed, these findings might indicate that the antiplatelet effects of aspirin in diabetic patients are overwhelmed by aspirin-insensitive mechanisms of platelet activation and thrombus formation, thus making the balance between benefits and harms of aspirin treatment unfavorable. Further large-scale trials investigating the role of aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD in diabetic patients are urgently needed.