Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 418
Filtrar
1.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 74(16): 2032-2043, 2019 Oct 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31623760

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Major disparities between women and men in the diagnosis, management, and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome are well recognized. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of implementing a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay with sex-specific diagnostic thresholds for myocardial infarction in women and men with suspected acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome were enrolled in a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized controlled trial across 10 hospitals. Myocardial injury was defined as high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I concentration >99th centile of 16 ng/l in women and 34 ng/l in men. The primary outcome was recurrent myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 48,282 patients (47% women) were included. Use of the high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I assay with sex-specific thresholds increased myocardial injury in women by 42% and in men by 6%. Following implementation, women with myocardial injury remained less likely than men to undergo coronary revascularization (15% vs. 34%) and to receive dual antiplatelet (26% vs. 43%), statin (16% vs. 26%), or other preventive therapies (p < 0.001 for all). The primary outcome occurred in 18% (369 of 2,072) and 17% (488 of 2,919) of women with myocardial injury before and after implementation, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.11; 95% confidence interval: 0.92 to 1.33), compared with 18% (370 of 2,044) and 15% (513 of 3,325) of men (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.85; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 1.01). CONCLUSIONS: Use of sex-specific thresholds identified 5 times more additional women than men with myocardial injury. Despite this increase, women received approximately one-half the number of treatments for coronary artery disease as men, and outcomes were not improved. (High-Sensitivity Troponin in the Evaluation of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [High-STEACS]; NCT01852123).

2.
Circulation ; 2019 Oct 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31587565

RESUMO

Background: The introduction of more sensitive cardiac troponin assays has led to increased recognition of myocardial injury in acute illnesses other than acute coronary syndrome. The Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction recommends high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) testing and classification of patients with myocardial injury based on aetiology, but the clinical implications of implementing this guideline are not well understood. Methods: In a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial, we implemented a hs-cTn assay and the recommendations of the Universal Definition in 48,282 consecutive patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome. In a pre-specified secondary analysis, we compared the primary outcome of myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death and secondary outcome of non-cardiovascular death at one year across diagnostic categories. Results: Implementation increased the diagnosis of type 1 myocardial infarction by 11% (510/4,471), type 2 myocardial infarction by 22% (205/916), and acute and chronic myocardial injury by 36% (443/1,233) and 43% (389/898), respectively. Compared to those without myocardial injury, the rate of the primary outcome was highest in those with type 1 myocardial infarction (cause-specific hazard ratio [csHR] 5.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.12 to 6.22), but was similar across diagnostic categories, whereas non-cardiovascular deaths were highest in those with acute myocardial injury (csHR 2.65, 95%CI 2.33 to 3.01). Despite modest increases in anti-platelet therapy and coronary revascularization after implementation in patients with type 1 myocardial infarction, the primary outcome was unchanged (csHR 1.00, 95%CI 0.82 to 1.21). Increased recognition of type 2 myocardial infarction and myocardial injury did not lead to changes in investigation, treatment or outcomes. Conclusions: Implementation of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin and the recommendations of the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction identified patients at high-risk of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular events, but was not associated with consistent increases in treatment or improved outcomes. Trials of secondary prevention are urgently required to determine whether this risk is modifiable in patients without type 1 myocardial infarction. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT0185212.

3.
Circulation ; 140(18): 1451-1459, 2019 Oct 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31510769

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients treated with antithrombotic drugs are at risk of bleeding. Bleeding may be the first manifestation of underlying cancer. METHODS: We examined new cancers diagnosed in relation to gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding among patients enrolled in the COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) and determined the hazard of new cancer diagnosis after bleeding at these sites. RESULTS: Of 27 395 patients enrolled (mean age, 68 years; women, 21%), 2678 (9.8%) experienced any (major or minor) bleeding, 713 (2.6%) experienced major bleeding, and 1084 (4.0%) were diagnosed with cancer during a mean follow-up of 23 months. Among 2678 who experienced bleeding, 257 (9.9%) were subsequently diagnosed with cancer. Gastrointestinal bleeding was associated with a 20-fold higher hazard of new gastrointestinal cancer diagnosis (7.4% versus 0.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 20.6 [95% CI, 15.2-27.8]) and 1.7-fold higher hazard of new nongastrointestinal cancer diagnosis (3.8% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.20-2.40]). Genitourinary bleeding was associated with a 32-fold higher hazard of new genitourinary cancer diagnosis (15.8% versus 0.8%; HR, 32.5 [95% CI, 24.7-42.9]), and urinary bleeding was associated with a 98-fold higher hazard of new urinary cancer diagnosis (14.2% versus 0.2%; HR, 98.5; 95% CI, 68.0-142.7). Nongastrointestinal, nongenitourinary bleeding was associated with a 3-fold higher hazard of nongastrointestinal, nongenitourinary cancers (4.4% versus 1.9%; HR, 3.02 [95% CI, 2.32-3.91]). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with atherosclerosis treated with antithrombotic drugs, any gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding was associated with higher rates of new cancer diagnosis. Any gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding should prompt investigation for cancers at these sites. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

4.
Physiol Genomics ; 51(10): 506-515, 2019 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31530226

RESUMO

The genomic regulatory networks underlying the pathogenesis of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are incompletely understood. As intermediate traits, protein biomarkers report on underlying disease severity and prognosis in NSTE-ACS. We hypothesized that integration of dense microRNA (miRNA) profiling with biomarker measurements would highlight potential regulatory pathways that underlie the relationships between prognostic biomarkers, miRNAs, and cardiovascular phenotypes. We performed miRNA sequencing using whole blood from 186 patients from the TRILOGY-ACS trial. Seven circulating prognostic biomarkers were measured: NH2-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, osteopontin (OPN), myeloperoxidase, growth differentiation factor 15, monocyte chemoattractant protein, and neopterin. We tested miRNAs for association with each biomarker with generalized linear models and controlled the false discovery rate at 0.05. Ten miRNAs, including known cardiac-related miRNAs 25-3p and 423-3p, were associated with NT-proBNP levels (min. P = 7.5 × 10-4) and 48 miRNAs, including cardiac-related miRNAs 378a-3p, 20b-5p and 320a, -b, and -d, were associated with OPN levels (min. P = 1.6 × 10-6). NT-proBNP and OPN were also associated with time to cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the sample. By integrating large-scale miRNA profiling with circulating biomarkers as intermediate traits, we identified associations of known cardiac-related and novel miRNAs with two prognostic biomarkers and identified potential genomic networks regulating these biomarkers. These results, highlighting plausible biological pathways connecting miRNAs with biomarkers and outcomes, may inform future studies seeking to delineate genomic pathways underlying NSTE-ACS outcomes.

5.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 74(12): 1519-1528, 2019 Sep 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31537259

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease, the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily and aspirin 100 mg once daily compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily reduced major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality and increased bleeding. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to explore the effects of the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin on sites, timing, severity, and management of bleeding in the COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) study. METHODS: This study reports, by treatment group, the number and proportion of patients; hazard rate ratios for bleeding according to site and severity; the timing of bleeding using landmark analyses; and the number and proportion of patients who received blood products and other hemostatic treatments. RESULTS: Of 27,395 patients enrolled (mean age 68 years, 22% women), 18,278 were randomized to the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin or to aspirin alone and followed for a mean of 23 months. Compared with aspirin alone, the combination increased modified International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis major bleeding (288 of 9,152 [3.1%] vs. 170 of 9,126 [1.9%]), (HR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.40 to 2.05; p < 0.001), International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis major bleeding (206 of 9,152 [2.3%] vs. 116 of 9,126 [1.3%]), (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.41 to 2.23; p < 0.0001), and minor bleeding (838 of 9,152 [9.2%] vs. 503 of 9,126 [5.5%]), (HR: 1.70; 95% CI 1.52 to 1.90; p < 0.0001); the combination also increased the need for any red cell transfusion (87 of 9,152 [1.0%] vs. 44 of 9,126 [0.5%]), (HR: 1.97; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.83, p = 0.0002). The gastrointestinal (GI) tract was the most common site of increased major bleeding (140 of 9,152 [1.5%] vs. 65 of 9,126 [0.7%]), (HR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.60 to 2.89; p < 0.001), and the increase in bleeding was predominantly in the first year after randomization. Approximately one-third of major GI bleeding was gastric or duodenal, one-third was colonic or rectal, and one-third was from an unknown GI site. The study investigators reported that approximately three-quarters of major bleeding episodes were of mild or moderate intensity. A similar proportion of patients in each treatment group who experienced major bleeding received platelets, clotting factors, or other hemostatic agents. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone increased major bleeding, mainly from the GI tract. Most excess bleeding occurred during the first year after randomization, was of mild or moderate intensity, and was managed with conventional supportive therapy. (Rivaroxaban for the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease [COMPASS]; NCT01776424).

6.
Eur Heart J ; 2019 Sep 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31504399

RESUMO

AIMS: Adding rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease reduces the recurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) but increases the risk of major bleeding. The aim of this study was to estimate the individual lifetime treatment benefit and harm of adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable cardiovascular disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with established CVD from the COMPASS trial (n = 27 390) and SMART prospective cohort study (n = 8139) were used. Using the pre-existing lifetime SMART-REACH model for recurrent CVD, and a newly developed Fine and Gray competing risk-adjusted lifetime model for major bleeding, individual treatment effects from adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in patients with stable CVD were estimated, expressed in terms of (i) life-years free of stroke or myocardial infarction (MI) gained; and (ii) life-years free from major bleeding lost. Calibration of the SMART-REACH model for prediction of recurrent CVD events in the COMPASS study was good. The major bleeding risk model as derived in the COMPASS trial showed good external calibration in the SMART cohort. Predicted individual gain in life expectancy free of stroke or MI from added low-dose rivaroxaban had a median of 16 months (range 1-48 months), while predicted individualized lifetime lost in terms of major bleeding had a median of 2 months (range 0-20 months). CONCLUSION: There is a wide distribution in lifetime gain and harm from adding low-dose rivaroxaban to aspirin in individual patients with stable CVD. Using these lifetime models, benefits and bleeding risk can be weighed for each individual patient, which could facilitate treatment decisions in clinical practice.

7.
Eur Heart J ; 40(27): 2184-2186, 2019 Jul 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31505614
8.
Gastroenterology ; 157(3): 682-691, ago., 30 2019. ilus, tab
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1015771

RESUMO

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial. METHODS: We performed a 3 x 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. (AU)


Assuntos
Bactérias , Doenças Cardiovasculares , Aspirina
9.
Circulation ; 140(7): 529-537, Aug. 13, 2019. ilus, tab
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1015340

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and history of heart failure (HF) are at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. We explored the effects of rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in these patients. METHODS: The COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized 27 395 participants with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg alone. Patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV HF or left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) <30% were excluded. The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome comprised cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding using modified International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. Investigators recorded a history of HF and EF at baseline, if available. We examined the effects of rivaroxaban on major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding in patients with or without a history of HF and an EF <40% or >/=40% at baseline. RESULTS: Of the 5902 participants (22%) with a history of HF, 4971 (84%) had EF recorded at baseline, and 12% had EF <40%. Rivaroxaban and aspirin had similar relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events compared with aspirin in participants with HF (5.5% versus 7.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86) and those without HF (3.8% versus 4.7%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93; P for interaction 0.28) but larger absolute risk reduction in those with HF (HF absolute risk reduction 2.4%, number needed to treat=42; no HF absolute risk reduction 1.0%, number needed to treat=103). The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome was not statistically different between those with EF <40% (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55-1.42) and >/=40% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; P for interaction 0.36). The excesso hazard for major bleeding was not different in participants with HF (2.5% versus 1.8%; HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.88-2.09) than in those without HF (3.3% versus 1.9%; HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45-2.21; P for interaction 0.26). There were no significant differences in the primary outcomes with rivaroxaban alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and a history of mild or moderate HF, combination rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone produces similar relative but larger absolute benefits than in those without HF.(AU)


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Aspirina , Doença das Coronárias , Doença Arterial Periférica , Rivaroxabana , Insuficiência Cardíaca
10.
Cardiol Ther ; 2019 Aug 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31376090

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction endpoints are increasingly important in clinical trials and may be associated with treatment adherence. In this post hoc substudy from ROCKET AF, we examined whether patient-reported satisfaction was associated with study drug discontinuation. METHODS: ROCKET AF (n = 14,264) compared rivaroxaban with warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. We analyzed treatment satisfaction scores: the Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version II (TSQM II). We compared satisfaction with study drug between the two treatment arms, and examined the association between satisfaction and patient-driven study drug discontinuation (stopping study drug due to withdrawal of consent, noncompliance, or loss to follow-up). RESULTS: A total of 1577 (11%) patients participated in the Patient Satisfaction substudy; 1181 (8.3%) completed both the ACTS and TSQM II 4 weeks after starting study drug. Patients receiving rivaroxaban did not experience significant differences in satisfaction compared with those receiving warfarin. During a median follow-up of 1.6 years, 448 premature study drug discontinuations occurred (213 rivaroxaban group; 235 warfarin group), of which 116 (26%) were patient-driven (52 [24%] rivaroxaban group; 64 [27%] warfarin group). No significant differences were observed between satisfaction level and rates of patient-driven study drug discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Study drug satisfaction did not predict rate of study drug discontinuation. No significant difference was observed between satisfaction with warfarin and rivaroxaban, as expected given the double-blind trial design. Although these results are negative, the importance of PRO data will only increase, and these analyses may inform future studies that explore the relationship between drug-satisfaction PROs, adherence, and clinical outcomes. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00403767. FUNDING: The ROCKET AF trial was funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bayer.

11.
Ther Adv Cardiovasc Dis ; 13: 1753944719863641, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31364490

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of rivaroxaban exposure and patient characteristics on efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to determine whether therapeutic drug monitoring might provide additional information regarding rivaroxaban dose, beyond what patient characteristics provide. METHODS: A post hoc exposure-response analysis was conducted using data from the phase III ATLAS ACS 2 Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 51 study, in which 15,526 randomized ACS patients received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg or 5 mg twice daily) or placebo for a mean of 13 months (maximum follow up: 31 months). A multivariate Cox model was used to correlate individual predicted rivaroxaban exposures and patient characteristics with time-to-event clinical outcomes. RESULTS: For the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), ischemic stroke, or nonhemorrhagic cardiovascular death, hazard ratios (HRs) for steady-state maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) in the 5th and 95th percentiles versus the median were statistically significant but close to 1 for both rivaroxaban doses. For TIMI major bleeding events, a statistically significant association was observed with Cmax [HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06-1.11 (95th percentile versus median, 2.5 mg twice daily)], sex [HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38-0.84 (female versus male)], and previous revascularization [HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44-0.87 (no versus yes)]. CONCLUSIONS: The shallow slopes of the exposure-response relationships and the lack of a clear therapeutic window render it unlikely that therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with ACS would provide additional information regarding rivaroxaban dose beyond that provided by patient characteristics.


Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores do Fator Xa/administração & dosagem , Modelos Biológicos , Rivaroxabana/administração & dosagem , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/sangue , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/diagnóstico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/mortalidade , Idoso , Isquemia Encefálica/mortalidade , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Cálculos da Dosagem de Medicamento , Monitoramento de Medicamentos , Inibidores do Fator Xa/efeitos adversos , Inibidores do Fator Xa/farmacocinética , Feminino , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/mortalidade , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Rivaroxabana/efeitos adversos , Rivaroxabana/farmacocinética , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/mortalidade , Resultado do Tratamento
12.
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol ; 73(25): 3271-3280, Jul. 2019. gráfico, tabela
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: biblio-1024371

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that the combination of low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin reduced major vascular events in patients with stable vascular disease. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify subsets of patients at higher risk of recurrent vascular events, which may help focus the use of rivaroxaban and aspirin therapy. METHODS: COMPASS patients with vascular disease were risk stratified using 2 methods: the REACH (reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) atherothrombosis risk score and CART (Classification and Regression Tree) analysis. The absolute risk differences for rivaroxaban with aspirin were compared to aspirin alone over 30 months for the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, or vascular amputation; for severe bleeding; and for the net clinical benefit. RESULTS: High-risk patients using the REACH score were those with 2 or more vascular beds affected, history of heart failure (HF), or renal insufficiency, and by CART analysis were those with ≥2 vascular beds affected, history of HF, or diabetes. Rivaroxaban and aspirin combination reduced the serious vascular event incidence by 25% (4.48% vs. 5.95%, hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.85), equivalent to 23 events prevented per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months, at the cost of a nonsignificant 34% increase in severe bleeding (1.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.95 to 1.88), or 2 events caused per 1,000 patients treated. Among patients with ≥1 high-risk feature identified from the CART analysis, rivaroxaban and aspirin prevented 33 serious vascular events, whereas in lower-risk patients, rivaroxaban and aspirin treatment led to the avoidance of 10 events per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with vascular disease, further risk stratification can identify higher-risk patients (≥2 vascular beds affected, HF, renal insufficiency, or diabetes). The net clinical benefit remains favorable for most patients treated with rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin. (AU)


Assuntos
Doenças Vasculares/tratamento farmacológico , Aspirina , Anticoagulantes
13.
Nat Rev Cardiol ; 2019 Jul 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31358978

RESUMO

Patients with known cardiovascular disease who have not had a recent acute event are often referred to as having stable coronary artery disease (CAD). The concept of 'stable' CAD is misleading for two important reasons: the continuing risks of cardiovascular events over the longer term and the diverse spectrum of powerful risk characteristics. The risks of cardiovascular events are frequently underestimated and continue to exist, despite current standards of care for secondary prevention, including lifestyle changes, optimal medical therapy, myocardial revascularization and the use of antiplatelet agents to limit thrombosis. In dispelling the myth of 'stable' CAD, we explore the pathophysiology of the disease and the relative contribution of plaque and systemic factors to cardiovascular events. A broader concept of the vulnerable patient, not just the vulnerable plaque, takes into account the diversity and future risks of atherothrombotic events. We also evaluate new and ongoing research into medical therapies aimed at further reducing the risks of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic - but not stable - atherothrombotic disease.

14.
Gastroenterology ; 157(3): 682-691.e2, 2019 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31152740

RESUMO

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial. METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.


Assuntos
Aspirina/administração & dosagem , Doenças Cardiovasculares/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores do Fator Xa/administração & dosagem , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/prevenção & controle , Pantoprazol/administração & dosagem , Doença Arterial Periférica/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores da Agregação de Plaquetas/administração & dosagem , Inibidores da Bomba de Prótons/administração & dosagem , Rivaroxabana/administração & dosagem , Idoso , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Enterocolite Pseudomembranosa/induzido quimicamente , Enterocolite Pseudomembranosa/microbiologia , Inibidores do Fator Xa/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pantoprazol/efeitos adversos , Doença Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico , Inibidores da Agregação de Plaquetas/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Inibidores da Bomba de Prótons/efeitos adversos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Rivaroxabana/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
15.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 73(25): 3271-3280, 2019 Jul 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31248548

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial showed that the combination of low-dose rivaroxaban and aspirin reduced major vascular events in patients with stable vascular disease. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify subsets of patients at higher risk of recurrent vascular events, which may help focus the use of rivaroxaban and aspirin therapy. METHODS: COMPASS patients with vascular disease were risk stratified using 2 methods: the REACH (REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health) atherothrombosis risk score and CART (Classification and Regression Tree) analysis. The absolute risk differences for rivaroxaban with aspirin were compared to aspirin alone over 30 months for the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, or vascular amputation; for severe bleeding; and for the net clinical benefit. RESULTS: High-risk patients using the REACH score were those with 2 or more vascular beds affected, history of heart failure (HF), or renal insufficiency, and by CART analysis were those with ≥2 vascular beds affected, history of HF, or diabetes. Rivaroxaban and aspirin combination reduced the serious vascular event incidence by 25% (4.48% vs. 5.95%, hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.85), equivalent to 23 events prevented per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months, at the cost of a nonsignificant 34% increase in severe bleeding (1.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.95 to 1.88), or 2 events caused per 1,000 patients treated. Among patients with ≥1 high-risk feature identified from the CART analysis, rivaroxaban and aspirin prevented 33 serious vascular events, whereas in lower-risk patients, rivaroxaban and aspirin treatment led to the avoidance of 10 events per 1,000 patients treated for 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with vascular disease, further risk stratification can identify higher-risk patients (≥2 vascular beds affected, HF, renal insufficiency, or diabetes). The net clinical benefit remains favorable for most patients treated with rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin.

16.
Circulation ; 140(7): 529-537, 2019 Aug 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31163978

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and history of heart failure (HF) are at high risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. We explored the effects of rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in these patients. METHODS: The COMPASS trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized 27 395 participants with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin 100 mg daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily alone, or aspirin 100 mg alone. Patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV HF or left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) <30% were excluded. The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome comprised cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding using modified International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis criteria. Investigators recorded a history of HF and EF at baseline, if available. We examined the effects of rivaroxaban on major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding in patients with or without a history of HF and an EF <40% or ≥40% at baseline. RESULTS: Of the 5902 participants (22%) with a history of HF, 4971 (84%) had EF recorded at baseline, and 12% had EF <40%. Rivaroxaban and aspirin had similar relative reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events compared with aspirin in participants with HF (5.5% versus 7.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.86) and those without HF (3.8% versus 4.7%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93; P for interaction 0.28) but larger absolute risk reduction in those with HF (HF absolute risk reduction 2.4%, number needed to treat=42; no HF absolute risk reduction 1.0%, number needed to treat=103). The primary major adverse cardiovascular events outcome was not statistically different between those with EF <40% (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.55-1.42) and ≥40% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; P for interaction 0.36). The excess hazard for major bleeding was not different in participants with HF (2.5% versus 1.8%; HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.88-2.09) than in those without HF (3.3% versus 1.9%; HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.45-2.21; P for interaction 0.26). There were no significant differences in the primary outcomes with rivaroxaban alone. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease and a history of mild or moderate HF, combination rivaroxaban and aspirin compared with aspirin alone produces similar relative but larger absolute benefits than in those without HF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01776424.

17.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 73(18): 2243-2250, 2019 May 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31072566

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease is associated with an increased risk of both bleeding and ischemic cardiovascular events. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the balance of risks and benefits from the dual pathway antithrombotic regimen (rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily [bd] plus aspirin, compared with aspirin) in vascular patients with or without moderate renal dysfunction. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the COMPASS (Cardiovascular OutcoMes for People using Anticoagulation StrategieS) trial involving 27,395 patients with chronic coronary or peripheral artery disease. RESULTS: In COMPASS, 21,111 patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at baseline of ≥60 ml/min, 6,276 had a GRF of <60 ml/min. Both the primary efficacy outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and major bleeding were more frequent in those with renal dysfunction, and the frequency of these outcome events was inversely related to GFR. However, the primary outcome was consistently reduced with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bd plus aspirin, irrespective of GFR category (GFR ≥60 ml/min, 3.5% rivaroxaban plus aspirin, 4.5% aspirin alone, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64 to 0.90; GFR <60 ml/min, 6.4% rivaroxaban plus aspirin, 8.4% aspirin alone, HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.94). Major bleeding was more frequent with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg plus aspirin versus aspirin alone in those with GFR ≥60 ml/min (2.9% rivaroxaban plus aspirin, 1.6% aspirin alone, HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.44 to 2.28) and similarly in those with GFR <60 ml/min (3.9% rivaroxaban plus aspirin, 2.7% aspirin alone, HR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.07). CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of the dual pathway COMPASS regimen (rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bd plus aspirin), versus aspirin alone, are preserved in patients with moderate renal dysfunction without evidence of an excess hazard of bleeding.

18.
JAMA Cardiol ; 4(6): 526-548, 2019 Jun 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31066873

RESUMO

Importance: Congestive heart failure (CHF) is commonly associated with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF), and their combination may affect treatment strategies and outcomes. Objective: To assess the treatment strategies and 1-year clinical outcomes of antithrombotic and CHF therapies for patients with newly diagnosed AF with concomitant CHF stratified by etiology (ischemic cardiomyopathy [ICM] vs nonischemic cardiomyopathy [NICM]). Design, Setting, and Participants: The GARFIELD-AF registry is a prospective, noninterventional registry. A total of 52 014 patients with AF were enrolled between March 2010 and August 2016. A total of 11 738 patients 18 years and older with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks' duration) and at least 1 investigator-determined stroke risk factor were included. Data were analyzed from December 2017 to September 2018. Exposures: One-year follow-up rates of death, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding were assessed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Event rates per 100 person-years were estimated from the Poisson model and Cox hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals. Results: The median age of the population was 71.0 years, 22 987 of 52 013 were women (44.2%) and 31 958 of 52 014 were white (61.4%). Of 11 738 patients with CHF, 4717 (40.2%) had ICM and 7021 (59.8%) had NICM. Prescription of oral anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs was not balanced between groups. Oral anticoagulants with or without antiplatelet drugs were used in 2753 patients with ICM (60.1%) and 5082 patients with NICM (73.7%). Antiplatelets were prescribed alone in 1576 patients with ICM (34.4%) and 1071 patients with NICM (15.5%). Compared with patients with NICM, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (72.6% [3439] vs 60.3% [4236]) and of ß blockers (63.3% [2988] vs 53.2% [3737]) was higher in patients with ICM. Rates of all-cause and cardiovascular death per 100 patient-years were significantly higher in the ICM group (all-cause death: ICM, 10.2; 95% CI, 9.2-11.1; NICM, 7.0; 95% CI, 6.4-7.6; cardiovascular death: ICM, 5.1; 95% CI, 4.5-5.9; NICM, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.5-3.4). Stroke/systemic embolism rates tended to be higher in ICM groups compared with NICM groups (ICM, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5; NICM, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9). Major bleeding rates were significantly higher in the ICM group (1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.4) compared with the NICM group (0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with ICM received oral anticoagulants with or without antiplatelet drugs less frequently and antiplatelets alone more frequently than patients with NICM, but they received angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers more often than patients with NICM. All-cause and cardiovascular death rates were higher in patients with ICM than patients with NICM. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01090362.

19.
Gastroenterology ; 157(2): 403-412.e5, 2019 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31054846

RESUMO

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Antiplatelets and anticoagulants are associated with increased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We evaluated whether proton pump inhibitor therapy could reduce this risk. METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease. Participants were randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole 40 mg daily or placebo, as well as rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily with aspirin 100 mg once daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily, or aspirin 100 mg alone. The primary outcome was time to first upper gastrointestinal event, defined as a composite of overt bleeding, upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a gastroduodenal lesion or of unknown origin, occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcer or ≥5 erosions, upper gastrointestinal obstruction, or perforation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal events between the pantoprazole group (102 of 8791 events) and the placebo group (116 of 8807 events) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.15). Pantoprazole significantly reduced bleeding of gastroduodenal lesions (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.94; P = .03); this reduction was greater when we used a post-hoc definition of bleeding gastroduodenal lesion (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.74), although the number needed to treat still was high (n = 982; 95% confidence interval, 609-2528). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized placebo-controlled trial, we found that routine use of proton pump inhibitors in patients receiving low-dose anticoagulation and/or aspirin for stable cardiovascular disease does not reduce upper gastrointestinal events, but may reduce bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01776424.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/prevenção & controle , Pantoprazol/administração & dosagem , Úlcera Péptica/prevenção & controle , Inibidores da Bomba de Prótons/administração & dosagem , Administração Oral , Idoso , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Aspirina/administração & dosagem , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Quimioterapia Combinada/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Feminino , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Úlcera Péptica/induzido quimicamente , Úlcera Péptica/epidemiologia , Rivaroxabana/administração & dosagem , Rivaroxabana/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
20.
Circulation ; 139(18): 2170-2185, 2019 Apr 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31034291

RESUMO

Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay for the treatment of acute and chronic arterial disease involving the coronary and peripheral beds. However, questions remain about optimal antithrombotic therapy for long-term treatment of chronic vascular disease. The observation that dual antiplatelet therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel was associated with lower thrombotic event rates than acetylsalicylic acid monotherapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention changed the treatment paradigm. Moreover, the demonstration that more pharmacodynamically potent P2Y12 inhibitors than clopidogrel were associated with fewer thrombotic event occurrences further solidified the dual antiplatelet therapy approach. However, recurrent thrombotic events occur in ≈1 in 10 patients in the first year following an acute coronary syndrome event, despite treatment with the most potent P2Y12 inhibitors, a limitation that has stimulated interest in exploring the efficacy and safety of approaches using anticoagulants on top of antiplatelet therapy. These investigations have included treatment with very-low-dose oral anticoagulation, and even its replacement of acetylsalicylic acid in the presence of a P2Y12 inhibitor, in patients stabilized after an acute coronary syndrome event. Recent basic and translational studies have suggested noncanonical effects of coagulation factor inhibition that may further modulate clinical benefits. This in-depth review will discuss developments in our understanding of the roles that platelets and coagulation factors play in atherothrombosis and review the rationale and clinical evidence for combining antiplatelet and oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with coronary and peripheral artery disease.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA