Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Most trials that have shown a benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction included patients with large myocardial infarctions and were conducted in an era before modern biomarker-based diagnosis of myocardial infarction and treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention, antithrombotic agents, high-intensity statins, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists. METHODS: In a parallel-group, open-label trial performed at 45 centers in Sweden, Estonia, and New Zealand, we randomly assigned patients with an acute myocardial infarction who had undergone coronary angiography and had a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50% to receive either long-term treatment with a beta-blocker (metoprolol or bisoprolol) or no beta-blocker treatment. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction. RESULTS: From September 2017 through May 2023, a total of 5020 patients were enrolled (95.4% of whom were from Sweden). The median follow-up was 3.5 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.7). A primary end-point event occurred in 199 of 2508 patients (7.9%) in the beta-blocker group and in 208 of 2512 patients (8.3%) in the no-beta-blocker group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.16; P = 0.64). Beta-blocker treatment did not appear to lead to a lower cumulative incidence of the secondary end points (death from any cause, 3.9% in the beta-blocker group and 4.1% in the no-beta-blocker group; death from cardiovascular causes, 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively; myocardial infarction, 4.5% and 4.7%; hospitalization for atrial fibrillation, 1.1% and 1.4%; and hospitalization for heart failure, 0.8% and 0.9%). With regard to safety end points, hospitalization for bradycardia, second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, hypotension, syncope, or implantation of a pacemaker occurred in 3.4% of the patients in the beta-blocker group and in 3.2% of those in the no-beta-blocker group; hospitalization for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 0.6% and 0.6%, respectively; and hospitalization for stroke in 1.4% and 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent early coronary angiography and had a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥50%), long-term beta-blocker treatment did not lead to a lower risk of the composite primary end point of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction than no beta-blocker use. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; REDUCE-AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03278509.).

Bivalirudin versus heparin in ST and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-Outcomes at two years.

BACKGROUND: The registry-based randomized VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial (NCT02311231) compared bivalirudin vs. heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for myocardial infarction (MI). It showed no difference in the composite primary endpoint of death, MI, or major bleeding at 180 days. Here, we report outcomes at two years. METHODS: Analysis of primary and secondary endpoints at two years of follow-up was prespecified in the study protocol. We report the study results for the extended follow-up time here. RESULTS: In total, 6006 patients were enrolled, 3005 with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) and 3001 with Non-STEMI (NSTEMI), representing 70 % of all eligible patients with these diagnoses during the study. The primary endpoint occurred in 14.0 % (421 of 3004) in the bivalirudin group compared with 14.3 % (429 of 3002) in the heparin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.11; P = 0.70) at one year and in 16.7 % (503 of 3004) compared with 17.1 % (514 of 3002), (HR 0.97; 95 % CI, 0.96-1.10; P = 0.66) at two years. The results were consistent in patients with STEMI and NSTEMI and across major subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Until the two-year follow-up, there were no differences in endpoints between patients with MI undergoing PCI and allocated to bivalirudin compared with those allocated to heparin. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02311231.

Limb Outcomes With Ticagrelor Plus Aspirin in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and increased bleeding in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and coronary artery disease. Limb events including revascularization, acute limb ischemia (ALI), and amputation are major morbidities in patients with T2DM and atherosclerosis. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the effect of ticagrelor on limb events. METHODS: Patients were randomized to ticagrelor or placebo on top of aspirin and followed for a median of 3 years. MACE (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), limb events (ALI, amputation, revascularization), and bleeding were adjudicated by an independent and blinded clinical events committee. The presence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) was reported at baseline. RESULTS: Of 19,220 patients randomized, 1,687 (8.8%) had PAD at baseline. In patients receiving placebo, PAD was associated with higher MACE (10.7% vs 7.3%; HR: 1.48; P < 0.001) and limb (9.5% vs 0.8%; HR: 10.67; P < 0.001) risk. Ticagrelor reduced limb events (1.6% vs 1.3%; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.61-0.96; P = 0.022) with significant reductions for revascularization (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.62-0.99; P = 0.044) and ALI (HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.70; P = 0.009). The benefit was consistent with or without PAD (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.58-1.11; and HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.55-1.05, respectively; Pinteraction = 0.81). There was no effect modification of ticagrelor vs placebo based on PAD for MACE (Pinteraction = 0.40) or TIMI major bleeding (Pinteraction = 0.3239). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T2DM and atherosclerosis are at high risk of limb events. Ticagrelor decreased this risk, but increased bleeding. Future trials evaluating the combination of ticagrelor and aspirin would further elucidate the benefit/risk of such therapy in patients with PAD, including those without coronary artery disease. (A Study Comparing Cardiovascular Effects of Ticagrelor Versus Placebo in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus [THEMIS]: NCT01991795).

FFR-Guided Complete or Culprit-Only PCI in Patients with Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease remains unclear. METHODS: In this multinational, registry-based, randomized trial, we assigned patients with STEMI or very-high-risk non-STEMI (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease who were undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion to receive either FFR-guided complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions or no further revascularization. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The two key secondary outcomes were a composite of death from any cause or myocardial infarction and unplanned revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 1542 patients underwent randomization, with 764 assigned to receive FFR-guided complete revascularization and 778 assigned to receive culprit-lesion-only PCI. At a median follow-up of 4.8 years (interquartile range, 4.3 to 5.2), a primary-outcome event had occurred in 145 patients (19.0%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 159 patients (20.4%) in the culprit-lesion-only group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.17; P = 0.53). With respect to the secondary outcomes, no apparent between-group differences were observed in the composite of death from any cause or myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.44) or unplanned revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.04). There were no apparent between-group differences in safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with STEMI or very-high-risk NSTEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided complete revascularization was not shown to result in a lower risk of a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization than culprit-lesion-only PCI at 4.8 years. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; FULL REVASC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02862119.).

Association of Anxiety and Recurrent Cardiovascular Events: Investigating Different Aspects of Anxiety.

AIMS: While elevated levels of anxiety are associated with worse prognosis of cardiovascular disease (CVD), this association may vary between different aspects of anxiety. The aim of this study was to analyse self-reported behavioural, physiological, affective, and cognitive aspects of anxiety and their relation to the risk of recurrent CV events. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective cohort study utilized data from the U-CARE Heart trial. Participants (N = 935, post myocardial infarction) answered the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS: Anxiety subscale) and the Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire (CAQ: Fear, Avoidance & Attention subscales). HADS Anxiety reflected physiological aspects, CAQ Fear reflected cognitive and affective aspects, CAQ Avoidance reflected behavioural aspects, and CAQ Attention reflected cognitive aspects of anxiety. Cox Regression was used to estimate the risk between anxiety and recurrent major adverse cardiac event (MACE). During the follow-up period (mean 2.9 years), 124 individuals (13%) experienced a specified MACE endpoint. HADS Anxiety and CAQ Total were both associated with increased risk of MACE (HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.15-2.02 and HR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.04-1.64, respectively). Among the CAQ subscales, there was support for an association between Avoidance and risk of MACE (HR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.15-1.64), but not for Attention and Fear. CONCLUSION: The results support that anxiety is associated with an increased risk of recurrent MACE in post-MI patients. The association between anxiety and risk was strong for the aspects of anxiety relating to behaviour and physiology, while the support for an association with cognitive and affective aspects was lacking.

Major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with apixaban versus warfarin in combination with amiodarone: nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Amiodarone is an established treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) but might interfere with the metabolism of apixaban or warfarin. Therefore, the aim was to investigate the occurrence of major bleeding among patients with AF treated with amiodarone in combination with apixaban or warfarin. METHODS: Retrospective observational study using Swedish health registers. All patients with AF in the National Patient Register and the National Dispensed Drug Register with concomitant use of amiodarone and warfarin or apixaban between 1 June 2013 and 31 December 2018 were included. Propensity score matching was performed, and matched cohorts were compared using Cox proportional HRs. The primary outcome was major bleeding resulting in hospitalisation based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes. Secondary outcomes included intracranial bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding and other bleeding. Exploratory outcomes included ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and all-cause/cardiovascular (CV) mortality. RESULTS: A total of 12 103 patients met the inclusion criteria and 8686 patients were included after propensity score matching. Rates of major bleeding were similar in the apixaban (4.3/100 patient-years) and warfarin cohort (4.5/100 patient-years) (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.39) during median follow-up of 4.4 months. Similar findings were observed for secondary outcomes including gastrointestinal bleeding and other bleeding, and exploratory outcomes including ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and all-cause/CV mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with amiodarone in combination with apixaban or warfarin, major bleeding and thromboembolic events were rare and with no significant difference between the treatment groups. EUPAS REGISTRY NUMBER: EUPAS43681.

Sex Differences in Revascularization, Treatment Goals, and Outcomes of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: Insights From the ISCHEMIA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Women with chronic coronary disease are generally older than men and have more comorbidities but less atherosclerosis. We explored sex differences in revascularization, guideline-directed medical therapy, and outcomes among patients with chronic coronary disease with ischemia on stress testing, with and without invasive management. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial randomized patients with moderate or severe ischemia to invasive management with angiography, revascularization, and guideline-directed medical therapy, or initial conservative management with guideline-directed medical therapy alone. We evaluated the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest) and other end points, by sex, in 1168 (22.6%) women and 4011 (77.4%) men. Invasive group catheterization rates were similar, with less revascularization among women (73.4% of invasive-assigned women revascularized versus 81.2% of invasive-assigned men; P<0.001). Women had less coronary artery disease: multivessel in 60.0% of invasive-assigned women and 74.8% of invasive-assigned men, and no ≥50% stenosis in 12.3% versus 4.5% (P<0.001). In the conservative group, 4-year catheterization rates were 26.3% of women versus 25.6% of men (P=0.72). Guideline-directed medical therapy use was lower among women with fewer risk factor goals attained. There were no sex differences in the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for women versus men, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77-1.13]; P=0.47) or the major secondary outcome of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction (adjusted HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.76-1.14]; P=0.49), with no significant sex-by-treatment-group interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Women had less extensive coronary artery disease and, therefore, lower revascularization rates in the invasive group. Despite lower risk factor goal attainment, women with chronic coronary disease experienced similar risk-adjusted outcomes to men in the ISCHEMIA trial. REGISTRATION: URL: http://wwwclinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

Thromboembolic and bleeding events after valvular intervention in patients with atrial fibrillation.

AIM: To assess outcomes after cardiac surgery with biological valve replacement, valve repair or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in accordance with oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment. METHODS: All patients in Sweden undergoing valvular intervention with AF were included. Associations between OAC exposure and cardiovascular (CV) events (composite of CV death, ischaemic stroke or systemic embolism) and major bleeding were investigated using Cox regression analysis. The analysis was separated in time periods of 0-3 and 3-12 months after discharge. RESULTS: 4730 patients were included in the first time period, 54.0% had received a surgical biological valve prosthesis, 23.8% valve repair and 22.2% TAVI. Exposure to warfarin (comparator) was 62.3%, to non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) 10.0% and to no OAC 27.7%. NOAC exposure was associated with similar risk of the composite CV outcome and major bleeding from 0 to 3 months. No OAC was associated with increased risk of the composite CV outcome (HR 1.71; 95% CI 1.26 to 2.32) and similar risk of major bleeding. Further analysis of the bioprosthetic valve replacement subgroup indicated increased risk of CV death when exposed to NOAC (HR 2.58; 95% CI 1.15 to 5.78) and no OAC (HR 2.82; 95% CI 1.65 to 4.82) compared with warfarin from 0 to 3 months. No differences were seen between 3 and 12 months. CONCLUSION: In this registry-based cohort study of patients with AF with severe valvular heart disease undergoing various valvular interventions, NOAC appears to be comparable with warfarin regarding efficacy and safety. Patients not receiving OAC had higher risk of CV events. NOAC was associated with increased CV death compared with warfarin in the surgical bioprosthetic valve replacement subgroup, illustrating the importance of being cautious when extrapolating data from one patient group to another. Further studies comparing NOAC and warfarin in the early postoperative phase are warranted, especially following surgical bioprosthetic valve replacement.

Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Treated With Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants Across Varying Body Mass Index.

Background There are conflicting data on outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants across varying body mass index (BMI). We investigated cardiovascular and bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation with varying BMI. Methods and Results Observational cohort study from the Swedish oral anticoagulation registry between August 2, 2011, and December 31, 2018. Primary outcomes were mortality, ischemic stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding. Baseline BMI (kg/m2) was analyzed continuously and categorized: underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), normal weight (18.5 to <25 kg/m2), preobesity (25 to <30 kg/m2), and obesity class I to III (30 to <35, 35 to <40, and ≥40 kg/m2). Adjusted Cox models and nonlinear relationships of BMI were modeled using restricted cubic splines. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant-treated patients with atrial fibrillation were included (n=26 047). At baseline, 602 (2.3%) were underweight, 9101 (34.9%) were normal weight, 9970 (38.3%) were preobese, 4280 (16.4%) were obese class I, 1486 (5.7%) were obese class II, and 608 (2.3%) were obese class III. Underweight and obesity class III were in adjusted continuous analysis associated with increased mortality and major bleeding, with lowest risk observed among preobese patients with BMI 28.2 and 26.2 kg/m2, respectively. In adjusted categorical analysis, underweight was associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.77 [95% CI, 1.57-1.99]) and nonsignificant higher risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.95-1.58]). Similarly, obesity class III was associated with increased mortality (HR, 1.67 [95% CI, 1.40-1.99]) and major bleeding (HR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.29-2.17]). No significant association was observed between higher BMI and ischemic stroke/systemic embolism. Conclusions In non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant-treated patients with atrial fibrillation, there appears to be a U-shaped relationship between BMI and mortality and major bleeding.

Development and validation of a quantitative Proximity Extension Assay instrument with 21 proteins associated with cardiovascular risk (CVD-21).

BACKGROUND: Treatment of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) is a substantial burden to healthcare systems worldwide. New tools are needed to improve precision of treatment by optimizing the balance between efficacy, safety, and cost. We developed a high-throughput multi-marker decision support instrument which simultaneously quantifies proteins associated with CVD. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Candidate proteins independently associated with different clinical outcomes were selected from clinical studies by the screening of 368 circulating biomarkers. We then custom-designed a quantitative PEA-panel with 21 proteins (CVD-21) by including recombinant antigens as calibrator samples for normalization and absolute quantification of the proteins. The utility of the CVD-21 tool was evaluated in plasma samples from a case-control cohort of 4224 patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) using multivariable Cox regression analyses and machine learning techniques. The assays in the CVD-21 tool gave good precision and high sensitivity with lower level of determination (LOD) between 0.03-0.7 pg/ml for five of the biomarkers. The dynamic range for the assays was sufficient to accurately quantify the biomarkers in the validation study except for troponin I, which in the modeling was replaced by high-sensitive cardiac troponin T (hs-TnT). We created seven different multimarker models, including a reference model with NT-proBNP, hs-TnT, GDF-15, IL-6, and cystatin C and one model with only clinical variables, for the comparison of the discriminative value of the CVD-21 tool. All models with biomarkers including hs-TnT provided similar discrimination for all outcomes, e.g. c-index between 0.68-0.86 and outperformed models using only clinical variables. Most important prognostic biomarkers were MMP-12, U-PAR, REN, VEGF-D, FGF-23, TFF3, ADM, and SCF. CONCLUSIONS: The CVD-21 tool is the very first instrument which with PEA simultaneously quantifies 21 proteins with associations to different CVD. Novel pathophysiologic and prognostic information beyond that of established biomarkers were identified by a number of proteins.

Biomarkers and cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary disease in the ISCHEMIA Trials.

IMPORTANCE: Biomarkers may improve prediction of cardiovascular events for patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), but their importance in addition to clinical tests of inducible ischemia and CAD severity is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prognostic value of multiple biomarkers in stable outpatients with obstructive CAD and moderate or severe inducible ischemia. DESIGN AND SETTING: The ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA CKD trials randomized 5,956 participants with CAD to invasive or conservative management from July 2012 to January 2018; 1,064 participated in the biorepository. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. Secondary outcome was cardiovascular death or MI. Improvements in prediction were assessed by cause-specific hazard ratios (HR) and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for an interquartile increase in each biomarker, controlling for other biomarkers, in a base clinical model of risk factors, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and ischemia severity. Secondary analyses were performed among patients in whom core-lab confirmed severity of CAD was ascertained by computed cardiac tomographic angiography (CCTA). EXPOSURES: Baseline levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), high sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT), growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), lipoprotein a (Lp[a]), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), Cystatin C, soluble CD 40 ligand (sCD40L), myeloperoxidase (MPO), and matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP3). RESULTS: Among 757 biorepository participants, median (IQR) follow-up was 3 (2-5) years, age was 67 (61-72) years, and 144 (19%) were female; 508 had severity of CAD by CCTA available. In an adjusted multimarker model with hsTnT, GDF-15, NT-proBNP and sCD40L, the adjusted HR for the primary outcome per interquartile increase in each biomarker was 1.58 (95% CI 1.22, 2.205), 1.60 (95% CI 1.16, 2.20), 1.61 (95% 1.22, 2.14), and 1.46 (95% 1.12, 1.90), respectively. The adjusted multimarker model also improved prediction compared with the clinical model, increasing the AUC from 0.710 to 0.792 (P < .01) and 0.714 to 0.783 (P < .01) for the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Similar findings were observed after adjusting for core-lab confirmed atherosclerosis severity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among ISCHEMIA biorepository participants, biomarkers of myocyte injury/distension, inflammation, and platelet activity improved cardiovascular event prediction in addition to risk factors, LVEF, and assessments of ischemia and atherosclerosis severity. These biomarkers may improve risk stratification for patients with stable CAD.

Randomized evaluation of routine beta-blocker therapy after myocardial infarction quality of life (RQoL): design and rationale of a multicentre, prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint study.

Aims: Most cases of acute myocardial infarction (MI) in Sweden are treated with long-term ß-blocker therapy as secondary prevention. Case studies and patient reports have indicated negative effects of ß-blockers including symptoms of depression, fatigue, sexual dysfunction, and general low mood, all related to reduced quality of life (QoL). To date, no recent large-scale, randomized trial has explored the effects of ß-blockers on these factors. Methods and results: The ongoing Randomized Evaluation of Decreased Usage of beta-bloCkErs after myocardial infarction (REDUCE): quality of life (RQoL) study is a multicentre, prospective, randomized pre-specified substudy aiming to evaluate the effects of ß-blockers on self-reported measures of QoL. Following randomized allocation to long-term ß-blocker or no ß-blocker treatment, patients complete a total of six baseline measures pertaining to QoL, sexual functioning, and perceived side effects. Data collection is optionally carried out online through a unique and secure portal and repeated again at two follow-up time points. Recruitment began in July 2018. Data from the first 100 patients showed that at the first follow-up, 93% had completed the questionnaires, which decreased to 81% at the second follow-up. The method of digital data collection was utilized by over half of the patients recruited so far. Conclusion: Data from the first 100 patients indicate success in terms of study design and recruitment. The RQoL substudy investigates the effects of ß-blockers on self-reported measures of QoL in MI patients and will potentially contribute to the limited knowledge of QoL-related side effects reported in conjunction with ß-blocker use. Clinical trial registration: Eudra CT number, 2017-002336-17; Clinical trial.gov identifier, NCT03278509.

Association of beta-blockers beyond 1 year after myocardial infarction and cardiovascular outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Beta-blockers (BB) are an established treatment following myocardial infarction (MI). However, there is uncertainty as to whether BB beyond the first year of MI have a role in patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). METHODS: A nationwide cohort study was conducted including 43 618 patients with MI between 2005 and 2016 in the Swedish register for coronary heart disease. Follow-up started 1 year after hospitalisation (index date). Patients with heart failure or LVSD up until the index date were excluded. Patients were allocated into two groups according to BB treatment. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, unscheduled revascularisation and hospitalisation for heart failure. Outcomes were analysed using Cox and Fine-Grey regression models after inverse propensity score weighting. RESULTS: Overall, 34 253 (78.5%) patients received BB and 9365 (21.5%) did not at the index date 1 year following MI. The median age was 64 years and 25.5% were female. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the unadjusted rate of primary outcome was lower among patients who received versus not received BB (3.8 vs 4.9 events/100 person-years) (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04). Following inverse propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, the risk of the primary outcome was not different according to BB treatment (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04). Similar findings were observed when censoring for BB discontinuation or treatment switch during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this nationwide cohort study suggests that BB treatment beyond 1 year of MI for patients without heart failure or LVSD was not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes.

Health status and clinical outcomes in older adults with chronic coronary disease: the ISCHEMIA trial

BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

Heterogeneity in Blood Pressure Response to 4 Antihypertensive Drugs: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Hypertension is the leading risk factor for premature death worldwide. Multiple blood pressure-lowering therapies are available but the potential for maximizing benefit by personalized targeting of drug classes is unknown. Objective: To investigate and quantify the potential for targeting specific drugs to specific individuals to maximize blood pressure effects. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, double-blind, repeated crossover trial in men and women with grade 1 hypertension at low risk for cardiovascular events at an outpatient research clinic in Sweden. Mixed-effects models were used to assess the extent to which individuals responded better to one treatment than another and to estimate the additional blood pressure lowering achievable by personalized treatment. Interventions: Each participant was scheduled for treatment in random order with 4 different classes of blood pressure-lowering drugs (lisinopril [angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor], candesartan [angiotensin-receptor blocker], hydrochlorothiazide [thiazide], and amlodipine [calcium channel blocker]), with repeated treatments for 2 classes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ambulatory daytime systolic blood pressure, measured at the end of each treatment period. Results: There were 1468 completed treatment periods (median length, 56 days) recorded in 270 of the 280 randomized participants (54% men; mean age, 64 years). The blood pressure response to different treatments varied considerably between individuals (P < .001), specifically for the choices of lisinopril vs hydrochlorothiazide, lisinopril vs amlodipine, candesartan vs hydrochlorothiazide, and candesartan vs amlodipine. Large differences were excluded for the choices of lisinopril vs candesartan and hydrochlorothiazide vs amlodipine. On average, personalized treatment had the potential to provide an additional 4.4 mm Hg-lower systolic blood pressure. Conclusions and Relevance: These data reveal substantial heterogeneity in blood pressure response to drug therapy for hypertension, findings that may have implications for personalized therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02774460.

Health Status and Clinical Outcomes in Older Adults With Chronic Coronary Disease: The ISCHEMIA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

Vascular endothelial growth factor-D plasma levels and VEGFD genetic variants are independently associated with outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease.

AIMS: The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) family is involved in pathophysiological mechanisms underlying cardiovascular (CV) diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between circulating VEGF ligands and/or soluble receptors and CV outcome in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Levels of VEGF biomarkers, including bFGF, Flt-1, KDR (VEGFR2), PlGF, Tie-2, VEGF-A, VEGF-C, and VEGF-D, were measured in the PLATO ACS cohort (n = 2091, discovery cohort). Subsequently, VEGF-D was also measured in the STABILITY CCS cohort (n = 4015, confirmation cohort) to verify associations with CV outcomes. Associations between plasma VEGF-D and outcomes were analysed by multiple Cox regression models with hazard ratios (HR [95% CI]) comparing the upper vs. the lower quartile of VEGF-D. Genome-wide association study (GWAS) of VEGF-D in PLATO identified SNPs that were used as genetic instruments in Mendelian randomization (MR) meta-analyses vs. clinical endpoints. GWAS and MR were performed in patients with ACS from PLATO (n = 10 013) and FRISC-II (n = 2952), and with CCS from the STABILITY trial (n = 10 786). VEGF-D, KDR, Flt-1, and PlGF showed significant association with CV outcomes. VEGF-D was most strongly associated with CV death (P = 3.73e-05, HR 1.892 [1.419, 2.522]). Genome-wide significant associations with VEGF-D levels were identified at the VEGFD locus on chromosome Xp22. MR analyses of the combined top ranked SNPs (GWAS P-values; rs192812042, P = 5.82e-20; rs234500, P = 1.97e-14) demonstrated a significant effect on CV mortality [P = 0.0257, HR 1.81 (1.07, 3.04) per increase of one unit in log VEGF-D]. CONCLUSION: This is the first large-scale cohort study to demonstrate that both VEGF-D plasma levels and VEGFD genetic variants are independently associated with CV outcomes in patients with ACS and CCS. Measurements of VEGF-D levels and/or VEGFD genetic variants may provide incremental prognostic information in patients with ACS and CCS.

Organizational and patient-level predictors for attaining key risk factor targets in cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction: The Perfect-CR study.

BACKGROUND: Benefits of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programme components on attaining risk factor targets post-myocardial infarction (MI) and their predictive strength relative to patient characteristics remain unclear. We aimed to identify organizational and patient-level predictors of risk factor target attainment at one-year post-MI. METHODS: In this observational study data on CR organization at 78 Swedish CR centres was collected and merged with patient-level registry data (n = 7549). Orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis identified predictors (Variables of Importance for the Projection (VIP) values >0.8) of attaining low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) <1.8 mmol/L, blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mmHg and smoking abstinence. RESULTS: The strongest predictors (VIP [95% CI]) for attaining LDL-C and BP targets were offering psychosocial management (2.14 [1.78-2.50]; 2.45 [1.91-2.99]), having a psychologist in the CR team (1.62 [1.36-1.87]; 2.05 [1.67-2.44]), extended opening hours (2.13 [2.00-2.27]; 1.50 [0.91-2.10]), adequate facilities (1.54 [0.91-2.18]; 1.89 [1.38-2.40]), and having a medical director (1.70 [0.91-2.48]; 1.46 [1.04-1.88]). The strongest patient-level predictors of attaining LDL-C and/or BP targets were low baseline LDL-C (3.95 [3.39-4.51]) and having no history of hypertension (2.93 [2.60-3.26]), respectively, followed by exercise-based CR participation (1.38 [0.66-2.10]; 1.46 [1.14-1.78]). For smoking abstinence, the strongest organizational predictor was varenicline being prescribed by CR physicians (1.88 [0.95-2.80]) and patient-level predictors were participation in exercise-based CR (2.47 [2.07-2.88]) and group education (1.92 [1.43-2-42]), and no cardiovascular disease history (2.13 [1.78-2.48]). CONCLUSIONS: We identified multiple CR organizational and patient-level predictors of attaining risk factor targets post-MI. These results may influence the future design of comprehensive CR programmes.

Design and rationale of randomized evaluation of decreased usage of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (REDUCE-AMI).

AIMS: Most trials showing benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction (MI) included patients with large MIs and are from an era before modern biomarker-based MI diagnosis and reperfusion treatment. The aim of the randomized evaluation of decreased usage of beta-blockers after acute myocardial infarction (REDUCE-AMI) trial is to determine whether long-term oral beta-blockade in patients with an acute MI and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) reduces the composite endpoint of death of any cause or recurrent MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: It is a registry-based, randomized, parallel, open-label, multicentre trial performed at 38 centres in Sweden, 1 centre in Estonia, and 6 centres in New Zealand. About 5000 patients with an acute MI who have undergone coronary angiography and with EF ≥ 50% will be randomized to long-term treatment with beta-blockade or not. The primary endpoint is the composite endpoint of death of any cause or new non-fatal MI. There are several secondary endpoints, including all-cause death, cardiovascular death, new MI, readmission because of heart failure and atrial fibrillation, symptoms, functional status, and health-related quality of life after 6-10 weeks and after 1 year of treatment. Safety endpoints are bradycardia, AV-block II-III, hypotension, syncope or need for pacemaker, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke. CONCLUSION: The results from REDUCE-AMI will add important evidence regarding the effect of beta-blockers in patients with MI and preserved EF and may change guidelines and clinical practice.

Coronary Artery Lesion Lipid Content and Plaque Burden in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients: PROSPECT II.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes have increased rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). We hypothesized that this is explained by diabetes-associated differences in coronary plaque morphology and lipid content. METHODS: In PROSPECT II (Providing Regional Observations to Study Predictors of Events in the Coronary Tree), 898 patients with acute myocardial infarction with or without ST-segment elevation underwent 3-vessel quantitative coronary angiography and coregistered near-infrared spectroscopy and intravascular ultrasound imaging after successful percutaneous coronary intervention. Subsequent MACEs were adjudicated to either treated culprit lesions or untreated nonculprit lesions. This substudy stratified patients by diabetes status and assessed baseline culprit and nonculprit prevalence of high-risk plaque characteristics defined as maximum plaque burden ≥70% and maximum lipid core burden index ≥324.7. Separate covariate-adjusted multivariable models were performed to identify whether diabetes was associated with nonculprit lesion-related MACEs and high-risk plaque characteristics. RESULTS: Diabetes was present in 109 of 898 patients (12.1%). During a median 3.7-year follow-up, MACEs occurred more frequently in patients with versus without diabetes (20.1% versus 13.5% [odds ratio (OR), 1.94 (95% CI, 1.14-3.30)]), primarily attributable to increased risk of myocardial infarction related to culprit lesion restenosis (4.3% versus 1.1% [OR, 3.78 (95% CI, 1.12-12.77)]) and nonculprit lesion-related spontaneous myocardial infarction (9.3% versus 3.8% [OR, 2.74 (95% CI, 1.25-6.04)]). However, baseline prevalence of high-risk plaque characteristics was similar for patients with versus without diabetes concerning culprit (maximum plaque burden ≥70%: 90% versus 93%, P=0.34; maximum lipid core burden index ≥324.7: 66% versus 70%, P=0.49) and nonculprit lesions (maximum plaque burden ≥70%: 23% versus 22%, P=0.37; maximum lipid core burden index ≥324.7: 26% versus 24%, P=0.47). In multivariable models, diabetes was associated with MACEs in nonculprit lesions (adjusted OR, 2.47 [95% CI, 1.21-5.04]) but not with prevalence of high-risk plaque characteristics (adjusted OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.86-1.69]). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with recent myocardial infarction, both treated and untreated lesions contributed to the diabetes-associated ≈2-fold increased MACE rate during the 3.7-year follow-up. Diabetes-related plaque characteristics that might underlie this increased risk were not identified by multimodality imaging. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02171065.