Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease.

BACKGROUND: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, it remains unclear whether an initial management strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with intensive pharmacologic therapy and lifestyle intervention (optimal medical therapy) is superior to optimal medical therapy alone in reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial involving 2287 patients who had objective evidence of myocardial ischemia and significant coronary artery disease at 50 U.S. and Canadian centers. Between 1999 and 2004, we assigned 1149 patients to undergo PCI with optimal medical therapy (PCI group) and 1138 to receive optimal medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). The primary outcome was death from any cause and nonfatal myocardial infarction during a follow-up period of 2.5 to 7.0 years (median, 4.6). RESULTS: There were 211 primary events in the PCI group and 202 events in the medical-therapy group. The 4.6-year cumulative primary-event rates were 19.0% in the PCI group and 18.5% in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio for the PCI group, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.62). There were no significant differences between the PCI group and the medical-therapy group in the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (20.0% vs. 19.5%; hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.62); hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (12.4% vs. 11.8%; hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.37; P=0.56); or myocardial infarction (13.2% vs. 12.3%; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.43; P=0.33). CONCLUSIONS: As an initial management strategy in patients with stable coronary artery disease, PCI did not reduce the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or other major cardiovascular events when added to optimal medical therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00007657 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

The evolving pattern of symptomatic coronary artery disease in the United States and Canada: baseline characteristics of the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial.

Major improvements in medical therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery disease (CAD) have emerged during the previous 2 decades, but no randomized trial in patients with stable CAD has been powered to compare these 2 strategies for the hard clinical end points of death or myocardial infarction (MI), and previous studies have not evaluated the effect of coronary stents and intensive medical therapy on cardiac events during long-term follow-up. Between 1999 and 2004, 2,287 patients with documented myocardial ischemia and angiographically confirmed CAD were randomized to the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial, with a principal hypothesis that a strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention plus intensive, guideline-driven medical therapy would be superior to a strategy of intensive medical therapy alone. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality or acute MI (time to first event) during a 2.5- to 7-year (median 5) follow-up. Baseline characteristics were a mean age of 62 +/- 5 years, 85% men, and 86% Caucasian. Mean duration of angina before randomization was 26 months (average 10 episodes/week), and 29% of patients were smokers, 67% had hypertension, 38% had previous MI, 71% had dyslipidemia, 34% had diabetes, 27% had previous revascularization, and 69% had multivessel CAD. Approximately 55% of patients met established criteria for the metabolic syndrome. In conclusion, baseline characteristics of the COURAGE trial study population indicate a highly symptomatic group of patients with CAD who have a significant duration and frequency of antecedent angina pectoris and a high prevalence of cardiac risk factors.

Gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in the clinical outcomes utilizing revascularization and aggressive drug evaluation (COURAGE) trial, Veterans Administration Cooperative study no. 424.

BACKGROUND: Stress gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (gSPECT) is increasingly used before and after intercurrent therapeutic intervention and is the basis for ongoing evaluation in the Department of Veterans Affairs clinical outcomes utilizing revascularization and aggressive drug evaluation (COURAGE) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The COURAGE trial is a North American multicenter randomized clinical trial that enrolled 2287 patients to aggressive medical therapy vs percutaneous coronary intervention plus aggressive medical therapy. Three COURAGE nuclear substudies have been designed. The goals of substudy 0 are to examine the diagnostic accuracy of the extent and severity of inducible ischemia at baseline in COURAGE patients compared with patient symptoms and quantitative coronary angiography and to explore the relationship between inducible ischemia and the benefit from revascularization when added to medical therapy. Substudy 1 will correlate the extent and severity of provocative ischemia with the frequency, quality, and instability of recurrent symptoms in postcatheterization patients. Substudy 2 (n = 300) will examine the usefulness of sequential gSPECT monitoring 6 to 18 months after therapeutic intervention. Together, these nuclear substudies will evaluate the role of gSPECT to determine the effectiveness of aggressive risk-factor modifications, lifestyle interventions, and anti-ischemic medical therapies with or without revascularization in reducing patients' ischemic burdens. CONCLUSIONS: The unfolding of evidence on the application of gSPECT in trials such as COURAGE defines a new era for nuclear cardiology. We hope the evidence that emerges from the COURAGE trial will further establish the role of nuclear imaging in the evidence-based management of patients with stable coronary disease.

Design and rationale of the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program no. 424.

BACKGROUND: Major improvements in medical therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary heart disease have occurred during the past decade, but no randomized trial has compared these 2 strategies for the "hard" clinical end points of death or myocardial infarction nor have earlier studies incorporated the use of coronary stents and aggressive multifaceted medical therapy during long-term follow-up. METHODS: The COURAGE trial is a multicenter study of patients with documented myocardial ischemia and angiographically confirmed single or multivessel coronary artery disease who are randomized to a strategy of PCI plus intensive medical therapy or intensive medical therapy alone. Medical therapy in both groups is guideline-driven and includes: aspirin, clopidogrel, simvastatin (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol target 60-85 mg/dL), long-acting metoprolol and/or amlodipine, lisinopril or losartan, and long-acting nitrates, as well as lifestyle interventions. The primary end point is a composite of all-cause mortality or acute myocardial infarction, and there will be 85% power to detect an absolute 4.6% (relative 22%) difference between strategies. The principal hypothesis is that PCI plus aggressive medical therapy (projected event rate 16.4%) will be superior to aggressive medical therapy alone (projected event rate 21%) during a 2.5- to 7-year (median of 5 years) follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: COURAGE is the largest prospective randomized trial of PCI versus intensive medical therapy to date and will define the incremental benefits of PCI in the setting of contemporary optimal medical therapy for chronic coronary heart disease. A total of 2287 patients have been enrolled, and follow-up will conclude in June 2006.

Economics methods in the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing percutaneous coronary Revascularization and Aggressive Guideline-driven drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains a major therapeutic option for the treatment of chronic coronary artery disease. In the COURAGE trial, 2287 patients with chronic coronary disease were randomized between PCI with medical management and medical management alone. Embedded within the COURAGE trial is a detailed economic analysis being conducted in three health care systems: the US Veterans Administration (VA), Canada, and the US non-VA. Resource use and costs are being collected for each system and overall. Survival is assessed internally in the trial with mean follow-up of 4.5 years. Long-term mean survival will be estimated by projecting survival beyond the trial period by extrapolating the in-trial hazard rates. Utility is being assessed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months and annually thereafter, using a computer-administered standard gamble. Quality-adjusted life years are calculated by multiplying survival by utility. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of PCI will be defined as the additional cost of PCI divided by the gain in life years and quality-adjusted life years. The 95% confidence regions of efficacy and costs will be determined by bootstrap over a range of acceptability thresholds, which will then be displayed in the cost-effectiveness plane and as a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. A multilevel regression model will assess cost-effectiveness from a net benefit perspective. These approaches should provide the most detailed assessment available of the cost-effectiveness of PCI for coronary artery disease.