ApoA-I Infusions and Burden of Ischemic Events After Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the AEGIS-II Trial.

BACKGROUND: Following an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), patients remain at risk for subsequent cardiovascular (CV) events. In the AEGIS-II trial, CSL112, a human apolipoprotein A-I derived from plasma that enhances cholesterol efflux, did not significantly reduce the first occurrence of CV death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke through 90 days compared with placebo. However, an analysis involving only the first event may not capture the totality of the clinical impact of an intervention because patients may experience multiple events. OBJECTIVES: This prespecified exploratory analysis examines the effect of CSL112 on total burden of nonfatal ischemic events (ie, recurrent MI and stroke) and CV death. METHODS: A total of 18,219 patients with AMI, multivessel coronary artery disease, and additional CV risk factors were randomized to either 4 weekly infusions of 6 g CSL112 (n = 9,112) or matching placebo (n = 9,107). A negative binomial regression model was applied to estimate the effect of CSL112 compared with placebo on the rate ratio (RR) of ischemic events. RESULTS: For CV death, MI, and stroke, there were numerically fewer total events at 90 days (503 vs 545 events; rate ratio [RR]: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.76-1.03, P = 0.11), and nominally significantly fewer total events at 180 days (745 vs 821 events, RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.77-0.99; P = 0.04) and 365 days (1,120 vs 1,211 events; RR 0.89; 95% CI: 0.80-0.99; P = 0.04). Subsequent events constituted 13% of events at 90 days, 17% at 180 days, and 22% at 1 year. Similar findings were seen with the total occurrence of nonfatal MI and CV death. When type II MIs, unlikely to be modified by enhancing cholesterol efflux, were excluded, there were nominally significant reductions in the total occurrence of nonfatal MI (excluding type 2) and CV death at all timepoints (90 days: RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97; P = 0.02; 180 days: RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.71-0.95; P < 0.01; 365 days: RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.76-0.98; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this prespecified exploratory analysis of the AEGIS-II trial, 4 weekly infusions of CSL112 among high-risk patients after AMI significantly reduced the total burden of nonfatal ischemic events and CV death at 180 and 365 days compared with placebo. (AEGIS-II [Study to Investigate CSL112 in Subjects With Acute Coronary Syndrome]; NCT03473223).

Effect of Screening for Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation on Stroke Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) often remains undiagnosed, and it independently raises the risk of ischemic stroke, which is largely reversible by oral anticoagulation. Although randomized trials using longer term screening approaches increase identification of AF, no studies have established that AF screening lowers stroke rates. OBJECTIVES: To address this knowledge gap, the GUARD-AF (Reducing Stroke by Screening for Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Individuals) trial screened participants in primary care practices using a 14-day continuous electrocardiographic monitor to determine whether screening for AF coupled with physician/patient decision-making to use oral anticoagulation reduces stroke and provides a net clinical benefit compared with usual care. METHODS: GUARD-AF was a prospective, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial designed to test whether screening for AF in people aged ≥70 years using a 14-day single-lead continuous electrocardiographic patch monitor could identify patients with undiagnosed AF and reduce stroke. Participants were randomized 1:1 to screening or usual care. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were hospitalization due to all-cause stroke and bleeding, respectively. Analyses used the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Enrollment began on December 17, 2019, and involved 149 primary care sites across the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic led to premature termination of enrollment, with 11,905 participants in the intention-to-treat population. Median follow-up was 15.3 months (Q1-Q3: 13.8-17.6 months). Median age was 75 years (Q1-Q3: 72-79 years), and 56.6% were female. The risk of stroke in the screening group was 0.7% vs 0.6% in the usual care group (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.69-1.75). The risk of bleeding was 1.0% in the screening group vs 1.1% in the usual care group (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.60-1.26). Diagnosis of AF was 5% in the screening group and 3.3% in the usual care group, and initiation of oral anticoagulation after randomization was 4.2% and 2.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, there was no evidence that screening for AF using a 14-day continuous electrocardiographic monitor in people ≥70 years of age seen in primary care practice reduces stroke hospitalizations. Event rates were low, however, and the trial did not enroll the planned sample size.(Reducing Stroke by Screening for Undiagnosed Atrial Fibrillation in Elderly Individuals [GUARD-AF]; NCT04126486).

Asundexian versus Apixaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Stroke prevention with direct-acting oral anticoagulant agents in patients with atrial fibrillation confers a risk of bleeding and limits their use. Asundexian, an activated factor XI (XIa) inhibitor, is an oral anticoagulant that may prevent strokes with less bleeding. METHODS: In a phase 3, international, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned high-risk patients with atrial fibrillation in a 1:1 ratio to receive asundexian at a dose of 50 mg once daily or standard-dose apixaban. The primary efficacy objective was to determine whether asundexian is at least noninferior to apixaban for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. The primary safety objective was to determine whether asundexian is superior to apixaban with respect to major bleeding events. RESULTS: A total of 14,810 randomly assigned patients were included in the intention-to-treat population. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 73.9±7.7 years, 35.2% were women, 18.6% had chronic kidney disease, 18.2% had a previous stroke or transient ischemic attack, 16.8% had received oral anticoagulants for no more than 6 weeks, and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score (range, 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating a greater risk of stroke) was 4.3±1.3. The trial was stopped prematurely at the recommendation of the independent data monitoring committee. Stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 98 patients (1.3%) assigned to receive asundexian and in 26 (0.4%) assigned to receive apixaban (hazard ratio, 3.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.46 to 5.83). Major bleeding occurred in 17 patients (0.2%) who received asundexian and in 53 (0.7%) who received apixaban (hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.55). The incidence of any adverse event appeared to be similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atrial fibrillation at risk for stroke, treatment with asundexian at a dose of 50 mg once daily was associated with a higher incidence of stroke or systemic embolism than treatment with apixaban in the period before the trial was stopped prematurely. There were fewer major bleeding events with asundexian than with apixaban during this time. (Funded by Bayer; OCEANIC-AF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05643573; EudraCT number, 2022-000758-28.).

Apolipoprotein A-I Infusions and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction According to Baseline LDL-Cholesterol Levels: The AEGIS-II Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In the AEGIS-II trial (NCT03473223), CSL112, a human apolipoprotein A1 derived from plasma that increases cholesterol efflux capacity, did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary endpoint through 90 days versus placebo after acute myocardial infarction (MI). Nevertheless, given the well-established relationship between higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and plaque burden, as well as greater risk reductions seen with PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with baseline LDL-C ≥100 mg/dL on statin therapy, the efficacy of CSL112 may be influenced by baseline LDL-C. METHODS: Overall, 18,219 patients with acute MI, multivessel coronary artery disease, and additional risk factors were randomized to either four weekly infusions of 6 g CSL112 or placebo. This exploratory post-hoc analysis evaluated cardiovascular outcomes by baseline LDL-C in patients prescribed guideline-directed statin therapy at the time of randomization (n=15,731). RESULTS: As baseline LDL-C increased, risk of the primary endpoint at 90 days lowered in those treated with CSL112 compared with placebo. In patients with LDL-C ≥100 mg/dL at randomization, there was a significant risk reduction of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke in the CSL112 vs. placebo group at 90, 180, and 365 days (hazard ratio 0.69 [0.53-0.90], 0.71 [0.57-0.88], and 0.78 [0.65-0.93]). In contrast, there was no difference between treatment groups among those with LDL-C <100 mg/dL at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, treatment with CSL112 compared to placebo was associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent cardiovascular events among patients with a baseline LDL-C ≥100 mg/dL. Further studies need to confirm that CSL112 efficacy is influenced by baseline LDL-C.

Anticoagulation in device-detected atrial fibrillation with or without vascular disease: a combined analysis of the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation (DDAF) is unknown. Concomitant vascular disease can modify the benefits and risks of anticoagulation. METHODS: These pre-specified analyses of the NOAH-AFNET 6 (n=2534 patients) and ARTESiA (n=4012 patients) trials compared anticoagulation to no anticoagulation in patients with DDAF with or without vascular disease, defined as prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, coronary or peripheral artery disease. Efficacy outcomes were the primary outcomes of both trials, a composite of stroke, systemic arterial embolism (SE), myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism or cardiovascular death, and stroke or SE. Safety outcomes were major bleeding or major bleeding and death. RESULTS: In patients with vascular disease (NOAH-AFNET 6 56%, ARTESiA 46.0%), stroke, myocardial infarction, systemic or pulmonary embolism, or cardiovascular death occurred at 3.9%/patient-year with and 5.0%/patient-year without anticoagulation (NOAH-AFNET 6), and 3.2%/patient-year with and 4.4%/patient-year without anticoagulation (ARTESiA). Without vascular disease, outcomes were equal with and without anticoagulation (NOAH-AFNET 6 2.7%/patient-year, ARTESiA 2.3%/patient-year in both randomised groups). Meta-analysis found consistent results across both trials (I2heterogeneity=6%) with a trend for interaction with randomised therapy (pinteraction=0.08). Stroke/SE behaved similarly. Anticoagulation increased major bleeding in vascular disease patients (edoxaban 2.1%/patient-year, no anticoagulation 1.3%/patient-year; apixaban 1.7%/patient-year; no anticoagulation 1.1%/patient-year; incidence rate ratio 1.55 [1.10-2.20]) and without vascular disease (edoxaban 2.2%/patient-year; no anticoagulation 0.6%/patient-year; apixaban 1.4%/patient-year; no anticoagulation 1.1%/patient-year, incidence rate ratio 1.93 [0.72-5.20]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DDAF and vascular disease are at higher risk of stroke and cardiovascular events and may derive a greater benefit from anticoagulation than patients with DDAF without vascular disease.

Risk of Stroke or Systemic Embolism According to Baseline Frequency and Duration of Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation: Insights From the ARTESiA Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the ARTESiA trial (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thromboembolism in Patients With Device-Detected Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation), apixaban, compared with aspirin, reduced stroke or systemic embolism in patients with device-detected subclinical atrial fibrillation (SCAF). Clinical guidelines recommend considering SCAF episode duration when deciding whether to prescribe oral anticoagulation for this population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in ARTESiA. Using Cox regression adjusted for CHA2DS2-VASc score and treatment allocation (apixaban or aspirin), we assessed frequency of SCAF episodes and duration of the longest SCAF episode in the 6 months before randomization as predictors of stroke risk and of apixaban treatment effect. RESULTS: Among 3986 patients with complete baseline SCAF data, 703 (17.6%) had no SCAF episode ≥6 minutes in the 6 months before enrollment. Among 3283 patients (82.4%) with ≥1 episode of SCAF ≥6 minutes in the 6 months before enrollment, 2542 (77.4%) had up to 5 episodes, and 741 (22.6%) had ≥6 episodes. The longest episode lasted <1 hour in 1030 patients (31.4%), 1 to <6 hours in 1421 patients (43.3%), and >6 hours in 832 patients (25.3%). Higher baseline SCAF frequency was not associated with increased risk of stroke or systemic embolism: 1.1% for 1 to 5 episodes versus 1.2%/patient-year for ≥6 episodes (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.59-1.34]). In an exploratory analysis, patients with previous SCAF but no episode ≥6 minutes in the 6 months before enrollment had a lower risk of stroke or systemic embolism than patients with at least one episode during that period (0.5% versus 1.1%/patient-year; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.27-0.85]). The frequency of SCAF did not modify the reduction in stroke or systemic embolism with apixaban (Pinteraction=0.1). The duration of the longest SCAF episode in the 6 months before enrollment was not associated with the risk of stroke or systemic embolism during follow-up (<1 hour: 1.0%/patient-year [reference]; 1-6 hours: 1.2%/patient-year [adjusted hazard ratio, 1.27 (95% CI, 0.85-1.90)]; >6 hours: 1.0%/patient-year [adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.63-1.66)]). SCAF duration did not modify the reduction in stroke or systemic embolism with apixaban (Ptrend=0.1). CONCLUSIONS: In ARTESiA, baseline SCAF frequency and longest episode duration were not associated with risk of stroke or systemic embolism and did not modify the effect of apixaban on reduction of stroke or systemic embolism. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01938248.

De-escalation to ticagrelor monotherapy versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with and without acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and individual patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 12 months is the standard of care after coronary stenting in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The aim of this individual patient-level meta-analysis was to summarise the evidence comparing DAPT de-escalation to ticagrelor monotherapy versus continuing DAPT for 12 months after coronary drug-eluting stent implantation. METHODS: A systematic review and individual patient data (IPD)-level meta-analysis of randomised trials with centrally adjudicated endpoints was performed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy (90 mg twice a day) after short-term DAPT (from 2 weeks to 3 months) versus 12-month DAPT in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with a coronary drug-eluting stent. Randomised trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with DAPT after coronary revascularisation were searched in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and two websites (www.tctmd.com and www.escardio.org) from database inception up to May 20, 2024. Trials that included patients with an indication for long-term oral anticoagulants were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The principal investigators of the eligible trials provided IPD by means of an anonymised electronic dataset. The three ranked coprimary endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (MACCE; a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) tested for non-inferiority in the per-protocol population; and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding and all-cause death tested for superiority in the intention-to-treat population. All outcomes are reported as Kaplan-Meier estimates. The non-inferiority was tested using a one-sided α of 0·025 with the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 1·15 (hazard ratio [HR] scale), followed by the ranked superiority testing at a two-sided α of 0·05. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024506083). FINDINGS: A total of 8361 unique citations were screened, of which 610 records were considered potentially eligible during the screening of titles and abstracts. Of these, six trials that randomly assigned patients to ticagrelor monotherapy or DAPT were identified. De-escalation took place a median of 78 days (IQR 31-92) after intervention, with a median duration of treatment of 334 days (329-365). Among 23 256 patients in the per-protocol population, MACCE occurred in 297 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 2·8%) with ticagrelor monotherapy and 332 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 3·2%) with DAPT (HR 0·91 [95% CI 0·78-1·07]; p=0·0039 for non-inferiority; τ2<0·0001). Among 24 407 patients in the intention-to-treat population, the risks of BARC 3 or 5 bleeding (Kaplan-Meier estimate 0·9% vs 2·1%; HR 0·43 [95% CI 0·34-0·54]; p<0·0001 for superiority; τ2=0·079) and all-cause death (Kaplan-Meier estimate 0·9% vs 1·2%; 0·76 [0·59-0·98]; p=0·034 for superiority; τ2<0·0001) were lower with ticagrelor monotherapy. Trial sequential analysis showed strong evidence of non-inferiority for MACCE and superiority for bleeding among the overall and ACS populations (the z-curve crossed the monitoring boundaries or the required information size without crossing the futility boundaries or approaching the null). The treatment effects were heterogeneous by sex for MACCE (p interaction=0·041) and all-cause death (p interaction=0·050), indicating a possible benefit in women with ticagrelor monotherapy, and by clinical presentation for bleeding (p interaction=0·022), indicating a benefit in ACS with ticagrelor monotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Our study found robust evidence that, compared with 12 months of DAPT, de-escalation to ticagrelor monotherapy does not increase ischaemic risk and reduces the risk of major bleeding, especially in patients with ACS. Ticagrelor monotherapy might also be associated with a mortality benefit, particularly among women, which warrants further investigation. FUNDING: Cardiocentro Ticino Institute, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale.

Apixaban versus Rivaroxaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation at High or Low Bleeding Risk: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite many atrial fibrillation (AF) patients being at risk of bleeding, very limited data are available on bleeding rates of different direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) based on the spectrum of bleeding risk. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of major bleeding and thromboembolic events with apixaban versus rivaroxaban among AF patients, stratified by bleeding risk. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of all adult patients (66 years or older) with AF in Ontario, Canada, who were treated with apixaban or rivaroxaban between April 1, 2011 and March 31, 2020. Bleeding risk was estimated using the HAS-BLED score with high bleeding risk defined as a score of 3 or greater. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding and the primary efficacy outcome was thromboembolic events. Comparisons were adjusted for baseline comorbidities using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: This study included 18,156 AF patients with high bleeding risk and 55,186 AF patients with low bleeding risk. Apixaban use was more common in high bleeding risk patients; 63% of high risk patients used apixaban compared to 56% of low risk patients. Apixaban users had lower rates of major bleeding in high risk patients (2.9% vs 4.2% per year; HR 0.69 [95%CI, 0.58-0.81]) and in low risk patients (1.8% vs 2.9% per year; HR 0.63 [95%CI, 0.56-0.70]), compared with rivaroxaban. There were no differences in rates of thromboembolic events 3.1% vs 3.0% per year (HR 1.02 [95%CI, 0.86-1.22]) in high risk patients and 1.9% vs 1.9% per year (HR 1.00 [95%CI, 0.89-1.14]) in low risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among older AF patients with high or low bleeding risk, treatment with apixaban was associated with lower rates of major bleeding with no difference in risk for thromboembolic events compared with rivaroxaban.

Lipid Control and Medical Costs Among Patients With and Without Established Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Followed in a Brazilian Private Healthcare System.

Background: There is limited real-world data of lipid control and healthcare costs among patients with and without Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) in Latin America. Methods: A retrospective cohort study including patients with LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) assessment from 2015 to 2017 was performed in a health insurance database. Patient characteristics, comorbidities and laboratory data were collected, and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes were used to identify a subcohort of patients with ASCVD (secondary prevention) and assess the proportion of these patients with LDL-C controlled. Lipid control among patients without ASCVD (primary prevention) and healthcare costs in one year in the overall population were also assessed. Results: From the 17,434 patients selected, 5,208 (29.8%) had ASCVD. The mean age of these patients in secondary prevention was 68.9 (±12.3) years and 47.8% were male patients. LDL-C < 70 mg/dL was identified in 19.1% of the ASCVD population and only 4.1% had an LDL-C < 50 mg/dL. LDL control was worse in women compared to men (13.1% vs. 25.7%; P < 0.01). The average cost in one year was 3,591 American dollars (USD) per patient in primary prevention compared to 8,210 dollars per year for patients in secondary prevention (P < 0.01). While outpatient costs accounted for 59.8% of the total cost in the primary prevention group, the main cost of the secondary prevention population was related to hospital costs (54.1%). Conclusion: Despite the favorable evidence for intensive cholesterol reduction, the evaluation of large real-world database with more than 17,000 individuals showed that the targets of guideline recommendations have not yet been adequately incorporated into clinical practice. Average annual cost per patient in secondary prevention is more than twice compared to primary prevention. Hospital expenses account for most of the cost in the secondary prevention group, while outpatient costs predominate in primary prevention.

Direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: assessing net clinical benefit.

Subclinical, device-detected atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequently recorded by pacemakers and other implanted cardiac rhythm devices. Patients with device-detected AF have an elevated risk of stroke, but a lower risk of stroke than similar patients with clinical AF captured with surface electrocardiogram. Two randomized clinical trials (NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESiA) have tested a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) against aspirin or placebo. A study-level meta-analysis of the two trials found that treatment with a DOAC resulted in a 32% reduction in ischaemic stroke and a 62% increase in major bleeding; the results of the two trials were consistent. The annualized rate of stroke in the control arms was ∼1%. Several factors point towards overall net benefit from DOAC treatment for patients with device-detected AF. Strokes in ARTESiA were frequently fatal or disabling and bleeds were rarely lethal. The higher absolute rates of major bleeding compared with ischaemic stroke while on treatment with a DOAC in the two trials are consistent with the ratio of bleeds to strokes seen in the pivotal DOAC vs. warfarin trials in patients with clinical AF. Prior research has concluded that patients place a higher emphasis on stroke prevention than on bleeding. Further research is needed to identify the characteristics that will help identify patients with device-detected AF who will receive the greatest benefit from DOAC treatment.

Residual Stroke Risk Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Prescribed Oral Anticoagulants: A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis From COMBINE AF.

BACKGROUND: Despite oral anticoagulation, patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain at risk of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (SE) events. For patients whose residual risk is sufficiently high, additional therapies might be useful to mitigate stroke risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual patient data from 5 landmark trials testing oral anticoagulation in AF were pooled in A Collaboration Between Multiple Institutions to Better Investigate Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulant Use in AF (COMBINE AF). We calculated the rate of ischemic stroke/SE among oral anticoagulation-treated patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score≥2, across strata of CHA2DS2-VASc score, stroke history, and AF type, as either paroxysmal or nonparoxysmal. We included 71 794 patients with AF (median age 72 years, interquartile range, 13 years, 61.3% male) randomized to a direct oral anticoagulant or vitamin K antagonist, and followed for a mean of 2.1 (±0.8) years. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 (interquartile range, 3-5), 18.8% had a prior stroke, and 76.4% had nonparoxysmal AF. The overall rate of stroke/SE was 1.33%/y (95% CI, 1.27-1.39); 1.38%/y (95% CI, 1.31-1.45) for nonparoxysmal AF, and 1.15%/y (95% CI, 1.05-1.27) for paroxysmal AF. The rate of ischemic stroke/SE increased by a rate ratio of 1.36 (95% CI, 1.32-1.41) per 1-point increase in CHA2DS2-VASc, reaching 1.67%/y (95% CI, 1.59-1.75) ≥4 CHA2DS2-VASc points. Patients with both nonparoxysmal AF and CHA2DS2-VASc ≥4 had a stroke/SE rate of 1.75%/y (95% CI, 1.66-1.85). In patients with a prior stroke, the risk was 2.51%/y (95% CI, 2.33-2.71). CONCLUSIONS: AF type, CHA2DS2-VASc score, and stroke history can identify patients with AF, who despite oral anticoagulation have a residual stroke/SE risk of 1.5% to 2.5% per year. Evaluation of additional stroke/SE prevention strategies in high-risk patients is warranted.

Restrictive Versus Liberal Transfusion in Patients with Type 1 or Type 2 Myocardial Infarction: A Prespecified Analysis of the Myocardial Ischemia and Transfusion (MINT) Trial.

BACKGROUND: The MINT trial raised concern for harm from a restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) and anemia. Type 1 and type 2 MI are distinct pathophysiological entities that may respond differently to blood transfusion. This analysis sought to determine if the effects of transfusion varied among patients with a type 1 or a type 2 MI and anemia. We hypothesized that the liberal transfusion strategy would be of greater benefit in type 2 than in type 1 MI. METHODS: We compared rates of death or MI at 30 days in patients with type 1 (n=1460) and type 2 (n=1955) MI and anemia who were randomly allocated to a restrictive (threshold of 7 to 8 g/dL) or a liberal (threshold of 10 g/dL) transfusion strategy. RESULTS: The primary outcome of death or MI was observed in 16% of type 1 MI and 15.4% of type 2 MI patients. The rate of death or MI was higher in patients with type 1 MI randomized to a restrictive (18.2%) versus liberal (13.2%) transfusion strategy (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04 - 1.67) with no difference observed between the restrictive (15.8% ) and liberal (15.1% ) transfusion strategies in patients with type 2 MI (RR 1.05 95% CI 0.85-1.29). The test for a differential effect of transfusion strategy by MI type was not statistically significant (P-interaction = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: The concern for harm with a restrictive transfusion strategy in patients with acute MI and anemia raised in the MINT primary outcome manuscript may be more apparent in patients with type 1 than type 2 MI. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02981407.

Antithrombotic Strategies in Atrial Fibrillation After ACS and/or PCI: A 4-Way Comparison From AUGUSTUS.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is not known. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine which antithrombotic regimen best balances safety and efficacy. METHODS: AUGUSTUS, a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial design randomized trial compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and aspirin with placebo in patients with AF with recent ACS and/or PCI treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor. We conducted a 4-way analysis comparing safety and efficacy outcomes in the 4 randomized groups. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes over 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 4,614 patients were enrolled. All patients were treated with a P2Y12 inhibitor. The primary endpoint occurred in 21.9% of patients randomized to apixaban plus placebo, 27.3% randomized to apixaban plus aspirin, 28.0% randomized to VKA plus placebo, and 33.3% randomized to VKA plus aspirin. Rates of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding and hospitalization for cardiovascular causes were lower with apixaban and placebo compared with the other 3 antithrombotic strategies. There was no difference between the 4 randomized groups with respect to all-cause death. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AF and a recent ACS and/or PCI, an antithrombotic regimen that included a P2Y12 inhibitor and apixaban without aspirin resulted in a lower incidence of the composite of death, bleeding, or cardiovascular hospitalization than regimens including VKA, aspirin, or both. (An Open-label, 2 x 2 Factorial, Randomized Controlled, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs. Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs. Aspirin Placebo in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; NCT02415400).

Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril in Chronic Chagas Cardiomyopathy: Rationale and Design of the PARACHUTE-HF Trial.

Chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy (CCC) has unique pathogenic and clinical features with worse prognosis than other causes of heart failure (HF), despite the fact that patients with CCC are often younger and have fewer comorbidities. Patients with CCC were not adequately represented in any of the landmark HF studies that support current treatment guidelines. PARACHUTE-HF (Prevention And Reduction of Adverse outcomes in Chagasic Heart failUre Trial Evaluation) is an active-controlled, randomized, phase IV trial designed to evaluate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg twice daily vs enalapril 10 mg twice daily added to standard of care treatment for HF. The study aims to enroll approximately 900 patients with CCC and reduced ejection fraction at around 100 sites in Latin America. The primary outcome is a hierarchical composite of time from randomization to cardiovascular death, first HF hospitalization, or relative change from baseline to week 12 in NT-proBNP levels. PARACHUTE-HF will provide new data on the treatment of this high-risk population. (Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan Compared With Enalapril on Morbidity, Mortality, and NT-proBNP Change in Patients With CCC [PARACHUTE-HF]; NCT04023227).

Edetate Disodium-Based Chelation for Patients With a Previous Myocardial Infarction and Diabetes: TACT2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In 2013, the Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT) reported that edetate disodium (EDTA)-based chelation significantly reduced cardiovascular disease (CVD) events by 18% in 1708 patients with a prior myocardial infarction (MI). Objective: To replicate the finding of TACT in individuals with diabetes and previous MI. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 2 × 2 factorial, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial at 88 sites in the US and Canada, involving participants who were 50 years or older, had diabetes, and had experienced an MI at least 6 weeks before recruitment compared the effect of EDTA-based chelation vs placebo infusions on CVD events and compared the effect of high doses of oral multivitamins and minerals with oral placebo. This article reports on the chelation vs placebo infusion comparisons. Interventions: Eligible participants were randomly assigned to 40 weekly infusions of an EDTA-based chelation solution or matching placebo and to twice daily oral, high-dose multivitamin and mineral supplements or matching placebo for 60 months. This article addresses the chelation study. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina. Median follow-up was 48 months. Primary comparisons were made from patients who received at least 1 assigned infusion. Results: Of the 959 participants (median age, 67 years [IQR, 60-72 years]; 27% females; 78% White, 10% Black, and 20% Hispanic), 483 received at least 1 chelation infusion and 476 at least 1 placebo infusion. A primary end point event occurred in 172 participants (35.6%) in the chelation group and in 170 (35.7%) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.16; P = .53). The 5-year primary event cumulative incidence rates were 45.8% for the chelation group and 46.5% for the placebo group. CV death, MI, or stroke events occurred in 89 participants (18.4%) in the chelation group and in 94 (19.7%) in the placebo group (adjusted HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.66-1.19). Death from any cause occurred in 84 participants (17.4%) in the chelation group and in 84 (17.6%) in the placebo group (adjusted HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.30). Chelation reduced median blood lead levels from 9.03 µg/L at baseline to 3.46 µg/L at infusion 40 (P < .001). Corresponding levels in the placebo group were 9.3 µg/L and 8.7 µg/L, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite effectively reducing blood lead levels, EDTA chelation was not effective in reducing cardiovascular events in stable patients with coronary artery disease who have diabetes and a history of MI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02733185.

Rivaroxaban for Patients with Intermittent Claudication.

BACKGROUND: The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular and limb events for high-risk patients with peripheral artery disease. It is unknown whether rivaroxaban plus aspirin improves intermittent claudication for adults with lower-risk peripheral arterial disease. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, multicenter, 24-week clinical trial, we randomly assigned patients with peripheral artery disease and intermittent claudication to receive either 2.5 mg of rivaroxaban twice daily plus 100 mg of aspirin once daily or 100 mg of aspirin once daily. The primary outcome was a 24-week change in total walking distance, measured by the 6-minute walking test. The primary safety outcome was the incidence of major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were randomly assigned to either rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n=46) or aspirin alone (n=42). The mean age was 67 years, and 54% were female. The total walking distance measured by 6-minute walk test improved by 89 ± 18 m (mean±standard error) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group versus 21 ± 16 m in the aspirin-alone group. This corresponded to an absolute difference of 68 ± 24 m (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 116 m; P=0.007) and a relative improvement over the aspirin-alone group of 327% (95% CI, 94 to 560%). No major bleeding events were observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with peripheral artery disease and intermittent claudication, 2.5 mg of rivaroxaban twice daily plus 100 mg of aspirin daily improved the total walking distance by a 6-minute walking test compared with 100 mg of aspirin daily alone. (Funded by Bayer S.A.; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT04853719.).

Apixaban vs Aspirin According to CHA2DS2-VASc Score in Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation: Insights From ARTESiA.

BACKGROUND: ARTESiA (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation) demonstrated that apixaban, compared with aspirin, significantly reduced stroke and systemic embolism (SE) but increased major bleeding in patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation. OBJECTIVES: To help inform decision making, the authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of apixaban according to baseline CHA2DS2-VASc score. METHODS: We performed a subgroup analysis according to baseline CHA2DS2-VASc score and assessed both the relative and absolute differences in stroke/SE and major bleeding. RESULTS: Baseline CHA2DS2-VASc scores were <4 in 1,578 (39.4%) patients, 4 in 1,349 (33.6%), and >4 in 1,085 (27.0%). For patients with CHA2DS2-VASc >4, the rate of stroke was 0.98%/year with apixaban and 2.25%/year with aspirin; compared with aspirin, apixaban prevented 1.28 (95% CI: 0.43-2.12) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.68 (95% CI: -0.23 to 1.57) major bleeds. For CHA2DS2-VASc <4, the stroke/SE rate was 0.85%/year with apixaban and 0.97%/year with aspirin. Apixaban prevented 0.12 (95% CI: -0.38 to 0.62) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.33 (95% CI: -0.27 to 0.92) major bleeds. For patients with CHA2DS2-VASc =4, apixaban prevented 0.32 (95% CI: -0.16 to 0.79) strokes/SE per 100 patient-years and caused 0.28 (95% CI: -0.30 to 0.86) major bleeds. CONCLUSIONS: One in 4 patients in ARTESiA with subclinical atrial fibrillation had a CHA2DS2-VASc score >4 and a stroke/SE risk of 2.2% per year. For these patients, the benefits of treatment with apixaban in preventing stroke/SE are greater than the risks. The opposite is true for patients with CHA2DS2-VASc score <4. A substantial intermediate group (CHA2DS2-VASc =4) exists in which patient preferences will inform treatment decisions. (Apixaban for the Reduction of Thrombo-Embolism in Patients With Device-Detected Sub-Clinical Atrial Fibrillation; NCT01938248).

Factor XIa inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for atherothrombosis.

When selecting an anticoagulant, clinicians consider individual patient characteristic, the treatment indication, drug pharmacology, and safety and efficacy as demonstrated in randomized trials. An ideal anticoagulant prevents thrombosis with little or no increase in bleeding. Direct oral anticoagulants represent a major advance over traditional anticoagulants (e.g., unfractionated heparin, warfarin) but still cause bleeding, particularly from the gastrointestinal tract which can limit their use. Epidemiological studies indicate that patients with congenital factor XI (FXI) deficiency have a lower risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and ischemic stroke (IS) than non-deficient individuals, and do not have an increased risk of spontaneous bleeding, even with severe deficiency. These observations provide the rationale for targeting FXI as a new class of anticoagulant. Multiple FXI inhibitors have been introduced and several are being evaluated in Phase III trials. In this review, we explain why drugs that target FXI may be associated with a lower risk of bleeding than currently available anticoagulants and summarize the completed and ongoing trials.