RESUMO
Importance: Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States. Objective: To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants: AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure-defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death-was tested for superiority. Results: Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253.
Assuntos
Reestenose Coronária , Infarto do Miocárdio , Feminino , Humanos , Idoso , Paclitaxel , Reestenose Coronária/etiologia , Reestenose Coronária/terapia , Stents , Resultado do Tratamento , MorteRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess in-hospital and long-term outcomes of retrograde compared with antegrade-only percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion (CTO PCI). BACKGROUND: Procedural and clinical outcomes following retrograde compared with antegrade-only CTO PCI remain unknown. METHODS: Using the core-lab adjudicated OPEN-CTO registry, we compared the outcomes of retrograde to antegrade-only CTO PCI. Primary endpoints included were in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], emergency cardiac surgery, or clinically significant perforation) and MACCE at 1-year (all-cause death, MI, stroke, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel reocclusion). RESULTS: Among 885 single CTO procedures from the OPEN-CTO registry, 454 were retrograde and 431 were antegrade-only. Lesion complexity was higher (J-CTO score: 2.7 vs. 1.9; p < .001) and technical success lower (82.4 vs. 94.2%; p < .001) in retrograde compared with antegrade-only procedures. All-cause death was higher in the retrograde group in-hospital (2 vs. 0%; p = .003), but not at 1-year (4.9 vs. 3.3%; p = .29). Compared with antegrade-only procedures, in-hospital MACCE rates (composite of all-cause death, stroke, MI, emergency cardiac surgery, and clinically significant perforation) were higher in the retrograde group (10.8 vs. 3.3%; p < .001) and at 1-year (19.5 vs. 13.9%; p = .03). In sensitivity analyses landmarked at discharge, there was no difference in MACCE rates at 1 year following retrograde versus antegrade-only CTO PCI. Improvements in Seattle Angina Questionnaire Quality of Life scores at 1-year were similar between the retrograde and antegrade-only groups (29.9 vs 30.4; p = .58). CONCLUSIONS: In the OPEN-CTO registry, retrograde CTO procedures were associated with higher rates of in-hospital MACCE compared with antegrade-only; however, post-discharge outcomes, including quality of life improvements, were similar between technical modalities.
Assuntos
Oclusão Coronária , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Assistência ao Convalescente , Oclusão Coronária/diagnóstico por imagem , Oclusão Coronária/cirurgia , Humanos , Alta do Paciente , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Qualidade de Vida , Sistema de Registros , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In a randomized, controlled trial that compared liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk who were receiving usual care, we found that liraglutide resulted in lower risks of the primary end point (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) and death. However, the long-term effects of liraglutide on renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We report the prespecified secondary renal outcomes of that randomized, controlled trial in which patients were assigned to receive liraglutide or placebo. The secondary renal outcome was a composite of new-onset persistent macroalbuminuria, persistent doubling of the serum creatinine level, end-stage renal disease, or death due to renal disease. The risk of renal outcomes was determined with the use of time-to-event analyses with an intention-to-treat approach. Changes in the estimated glomerular filtration rate and albuminuria were also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 9340 patients underwent randomization, and the median follow-up of the patients was 3.84 years. The renal outcome occurred in fewer participants in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group (268 of 4668 patients vs. 337 of 4672; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67 to 0.92; P=0.003). This result was driven primarily by the new onset of persistent macroalbuminuria, which occurred in fewer participants in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group (161 vs. 215 patients; hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.91; P=0.004). The rates of renal adverse events were similar in the liraglutide group and the placebo group (15.1 events and 16.5 events per 1000 patient-years), including the rate of acute kidney injury (7.1 and 6.2 events per 1000 patient-years, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This prespecified secondary analysis shows that, when added to usual care, liraglutide resulted in lower rates of the development and progression of diabetic kidney disease than placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and the National Institutes of Health; LEADER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01179048 .).
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Nefropatias Diabéticas/tratamento farmacológico , Peptídeo 1 Semelhante ao Glucagon/agonistas , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Liraglutida/uso terapêutico , Injúria Renal Aguda/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Albuminúria/prevenção & controle , Creatinina/sangue , Nefropatias Diabéticas/mortalidade , Nefropatias Diabéticas/prevenção & controle , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Seguimentos , Taxa de Filtração Glomerular , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Análise de Intenção de Tratamento , Falência Renal Crônica/prevenção & controle , Liraglutida/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Degludec is an ultralong-acting, once-daily basal insulin that is approved for use in adults, adolescents, and children with diabetes. Previous open-label studies have shown lower day-to-day variability in the glucose-lowering effect and lower rates of hypoglycemia among patients who received degludec than among those who received basal insulin glargine. However, data are lacking on the cardiovascular safety of degludec. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7637 patients with type 2 diabetes to receive either insulin degludec (3818 patients) or insulin glargine U100 (3819 patients) once daily between dinner and bedtime in a double-blind, treat-to-target, event-driven cardiovascular outcomes trial. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major cardiovascular event (death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) with a prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.3. Adjudicated severe hypoglycemia, as defined by the American Diabetes Association, was the prespecified, multiplicity-adjusted secondary outcome. RESULTS: Of the patients who underwent randomization, 6509 (85.2%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. At baseline, the mean age was 65.0 years, the mean duration of diabetes was 16.4 years, and the mean (±SD) glycated hemoglobin level was 8.4±1.7%; 83.9% of the patients were receiving insulin. The primary outcome occurred in 325 patients (8.5%) in the degludec group and in 356 (9.3%) in the glargine group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.06; P<0.001 for noninferiority). At 24 months, the mean glycated hemoglobin level was 7.5±1.2% in each group, whereas the mean fasting plasma glucose level was significantly lower in the degludec group than in the glargine group (128±56 vs. 136±57 mg per deciliter, P<0.001). Prespecified adjudicated severe hypoglycemia occurred in 187 patients (4.9%) in the degludec group and in 252 (6.6%) in the glargine group, for an absolute difference of 1.7 percentage points (rate ratio, 0.60; P<0.001 for superiority; odds ratio, 0.73; P<0.001 for superiority). Rates of adverse events did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, degludec was noninferior to glargine with respect to the incidence of major cardiovascular events. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and others; DEVOTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01959529 .).
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/induzido quimicamente , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina/efeitos adversos , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Glicemia/análise , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangue , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Incidência , Insulina Glargina/uso terapêutico , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/uso terapêutico , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo. (Funded by Amylin Pharmaceuticals; EXSCEL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01144338 .).
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Peptídeos/administração & dosagem , Peçonhas/administração & dosagem , Idoso , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangue , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Exenatida , Feminino , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Incidência , Injeções Subcutâneas , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Análise dos Mínimos Quadrados , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Peptídeos/efeitos adversos , Peçonhas/efeitos adversosRESUMO
AIMS: The ability to differentiate patient populations with type 2 diabetes at high risk of severe hypoglycaemia could impact clinical decision making. The aim of this study was to develop a risk score, using patient characteristics, that could differentiate between populations with higher and lower 2-year risk of severe hypoglycaemia among individuals at increased risk of cardiovascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two models were developed for the risk score based on data from the DEVOTE cardiovascular outcomes trials. The first, a data-driven machine-learning model, used stepwise regression with bidirectional elimination to identify risk factors for severe hypoglycaemia. The second, a risk score based on known clinical risk factors accessible in clinical practice identified from the data-driven model, included: insulin treatment regimen; diabetes duration; sex; age; and glycated haemoglobin, all at baseline. Both the data-driven model and simple risk score were evaluated for discrimination, calibration and generalizability using data from DEVOTE, and were validated against the external LEADER cardiovascular outcomes trial dataset. RESULTS: Both the data-driven model and the simple risk score discriminated between patients at higher and lower hypoglycaemia risk, and performed similarly well based on the time-dependent area under the curve index (0.63 and 0.66, respectively) over a 2-year time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: Both the data-driven model and the simple hypoglycaemia risk score were able to discriminate between patients at higher and lower risk of severe hypoglycaemia, the latter doing so using easily accessible clinical data. The implementation of such a tool (http://www.hyporiskscore.com/) may facilitate improved recognition of, and education about, severe hypoglycaemia risk, potentially improving patient care.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hipoglicemia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/análise , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemia/epidemiologia , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
AIMS: To undertake a post-hoc analysis, utilizing a hypoglycaemia risk score based on DEVOTE trial data, to investigate if a high risk of severe hypoglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, and whether reduced rates of severe hypoglycaemia in patients identified as having the highest risk affected the risk of cardiovascular outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The DEVOTE population was divided into quartiles according to patients' individual hypoglycaemia risk scores. For each quartile, the observed incidence and rate of severe hypoglycaemia, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) and all-cause mortality were determined to investigate whether those with the highest risk of hypoglycaemia were also at the greatest risk of MACE and all-cause mortality. In addition, treatment differences within each risk quartile [insulin degludec (degludec) vs. insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100)] in terms of severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality were investigated. RESULTS: Patients with the highest risk scores had the highest rates of severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality. Treatment ratios between degludec and glargine U100 in the highest risk quartile were 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 (0.39; 0.80) (severe hypoglycaemia), 95% CI 0.76 (0.58; 0.99) (MACE) and 95% CI 0.77 (0.55; 1.07) (all-cause mortality). CONCLUSIONS: The risk score demonstrated that a high risk of severe hypoglycaemia was associated with a high incidence of MACE and all-cause mortality and that, in this high-risk group, those treated with degludec had a lower incidence of MACE. These observations support the hypothesis that hypoglycaemia is a risk factor for cardiovascular events.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hipoglicemia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemia/epidemiologia , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina/efeitos adversos , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The glucagon-like peptide-1 analog liraglutide reduced cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the LEADER trial (Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes). In a post hoc analysis, we evaluated the efficacy of liraglutide in those with and without a history of myocardial infarction (MI) and/or stroke. METHODS: LEADER was a randomized trial of liraglutide (1.8 mg or maximum tolerated dose) versus placebo in 9340 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk, with a median follow-up of 3.8 years. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events). Risk groups in this post hoc analysis were defined by history of MI/stroke, established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke, or cardiovascular risk factors alone. RESULTS: Of the 9340 patients, 3692 (39.5%) had a history of MI/stroke, 3083 (33.0%) had established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke, and 2565 (27.5%) had risk factors alone. Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 18.8% of patients with a history of MI/stroke (incidence rate, 5.0 per 100 patient-years), 11.6% of patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke (incidence rate, 3.0 per 100 patient-years), and 9.8% of patients with cardiovascular risk factors alone (incidence rate, 2.6 per 100 patient-years). Liraglutide reduced major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with a history of MI/stroke (322 of 1865 [17.3%] versus 372 of 1827 patients [20.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.99) and in those with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke (158 of 1538 [10.3%] versus 199 of 1545 patients [12.9%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94) compared with placebo. In patients with risk factors alone, the hazard ratio for liraglutide versus placebo was 1.08 (95% CI, 0.84-1.38, Pinteraction=0.11). Similar results were seen for secondary outcomes across risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and high cardiovascular risk, liraglutide reduced cardiovascular outcomes both in patients with a history of MI/stroke and in those with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease without MI/stroke. The cardiovascular effect appeared neutral in patients with cardiovascular risk factors alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01179048.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Liraglutida/uso terapêutico , Infarto do Miocárdio/tratamento farmacológico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/tratamento farmacológico , Idoso , Canadá/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Dose Máxima Tolerável , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/epidemiologia , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Risco , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Regulatory guidance specifies the need to establish cardiovascular safety of new diabetes therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to rule out excess cardiovascular risk. The cardiovascular effects of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue with an extended half-life of approximately 1 week, in type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3297 patients with type 2 diabetes who were on a standard-care regimen to receive once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 mg or 1.0 mg) or placebo for 104 weeks. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. We hypothesized that semaglutide would be noninferior to placebo for the primary outcome. The noninferiority margin was 1.8 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. RESULTS: At baseline, 2735 of the patients (83.0%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. The primary outcome occurred in 108 of 1648 patients (6.6%) in the semaglutide group and in 146 of 1649 patients (8.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 2.9% of the patients receiving semaglutide and in 3.9% of those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P=0.12); nonfatal stroke occurred in 1.6% and 2.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.99; P=0.04). Rates of death from cardiovascular causes were similar in the two groups. Rates of new or worsening nephropathy were lower in the semaglutide group, but rates of retinopathy complications (vitreous hemorrhage, blindness, or conditions requiring treatment with an intravitreal agent or photocoagulation) were significantly higher (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.78; P=0.02). Fewer serious adverse events occurred in the semaglutide group, although more patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes who were at high cardiovascular risk, the rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was significantly lower among patients receiving semaglutide than among those receiving placebo, an outcome that confirmed the noninferiority of semaglutide. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; SUSTAIN-6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01720446 .).
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Peptídeo 1 Semelhante ao Glucagon/análogos & derivados , Peptídeos Semelhantes ao Glucagon/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangue , Nefropatias Diabéticas/epidemiologia , Nefropatias Diabéticas/prevenção & controle , Retinopatia Diabética/epidemiologia , Feminino , Gastroenteropatias/induzido quimicamente , Peptídeos Semelhantes ao Glucagon/efeitos adversos , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/análise , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effect of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue, when added to standard care in patients with type 2 diabetes, remains unknown. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk to receive liraglutide or placebo. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The primary hypothesis was that liraglutide would be noninferior to placebo with regard to the primary outcome, with a margin of 1.30 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. No adjustments for multiplicity were performed for the prespecified exploratory outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 9340 patients underwent randomization. The median follow-up was 3.8 years. The primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the liraglutide group (608 of 4668 patients [13.0%]) than in the placebo group (694 of 4672 [14.9%]) (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). Fewer patients died from cardiovascular causes in the liraglutide group (219 patients [4.7%]) than in the placebo group (278 [6.0%]) (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.007). The rate of death from any cause was lower in the liraglutide group (381 patients [8.2%]) than in the placebo group (447 [9.6%]) (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.97; P=0.02). The rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure were nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group. The most common adverse events leading to the discontinuation of liraglutide were gastrointestinal events. The incidence of pancreatitis was nonsignificantly lower in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In the time-to-event analysis, the rate of the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was lower with liraglutide than with placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and the National Institutes of Health; LEADER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01179048.).
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Liraglutida/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/mortalidade , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Gastroenteropatias/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Liraglutida/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
AIMS: The aim of this study was to describe the risks of cardiovascular (CV) events and severe hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec (degludec) vs insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) aged 65 years or older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 7637 patients in the DEVOTE trial, a treat-to-target, randomized, double-blind trial evaluating the CV safety of degludec vs glargine U100, were divided into three age groups (50-64 years, n = 3682; 65-74 years, n = 3136; ≥75 years, n = 819). Outcomes by overall age group and randomized treatment differences were analysed for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause mortality, severe hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events (SAEs). RESULTS: Patients with increasing age had higher risks of CV death, all-cause mortality and SAEs, and there were non-significant trends towards higher risks of MACE and severe hypoglycaemia. Treatment effects on the risk of MACE, all-cause mortality, severe hypoglycaemia and SAEs were consistent across age groups, based on the non-significant interactions between treatment and age with regard to these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There were higher risks of CV death, all-cause mortality and SAEs, and trends towards higher risks of MACE and severe hypoglycaemia with increasing age after adjusting for baseline differences. The effects across age groups of degludec vs glargine U100 on MACE, all-cause mortality and severe hypoglycaemia were comparable, suggesting that the risk of MACE, as well as all-cause mortality, is similar and the risk of severe hypoglycaemia is lower with degludec regardless of age. Evidence is conclusive only until 74 years of age.
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hipoglicemia , Hipoglicemiantes , Insulina Glargina , Idoso , Doenças Cardiovasculares/complicações , Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Feminino , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemia/epidemiologia , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina Glargina/administração & dosagem , Insulina Glargina/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina/uso terapêutico , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/administração & dosagem , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/efeitos adversos , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The double-blind Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec vs Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events (DEVOTE) assessed the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec. The incidence and rates of adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia, and all-cause mortality were also determined. This paper reports a secondary analysis investigating associations of severe hypoglycaemia with cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. METHODS: In DEVOTE, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomised to receive either insulin degludec or insulin glargine U100 (100 units/ml) once daily (between dinner and bedtime) in an event-driven, double-blind, treat-to-target cardiovascular outcomes trial. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke). Adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia was the pre-specified secondary outcome. In the present analysis, the associations of severe hypoglycaemia with both MACE and all-cause mortality was evaluated in the pooled trial population using time-to-event analyses, with severe hypoglycaemia as a time-dependent variable and randomised treatment as a fixed factor. An investigation with interaction terms indicated that the effect of severe hypoglycaemia on the risk of MACE and all-cause mortality were the same for both treatment arms, and so the temporal association for severe hypoglycaemia with subsequent MACE and all-cause mortality is reported for the pooled population. RESULTS: There was a non-significant difference in the risk of MACE for individuals who had vs those who had not experienced severe hypoglycaemia during the trial (HR 1.38, 95% CI 0.96, 1.96; p = 0.080) and therefore there was no temporal relationship between severe hypoglycaemia and MACE. There was a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality for patients who had vs those who had not experienced severe hypoglycaemia during the trial (HR 2.51, 95% CI 1.79, 3.50; p < 0.001). There was a higher risk of all-cause mortality 15, 30, 60, 90, 180 and 365 days after experiencing severe hypoglycaemia compared with not experiencing severe hypoglycaemia in the same time interval. The association between severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality was maintained after adjustment for the following baseline characteristics: age, sex, HbA1c, BMI, diabetes duration, insulin regimen, hepatic impairment, renal status and cardiovascular risk group. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The results from these analyses demonstrate an association between severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality. Furthermore, they indicate that patients who experienced severe hypoglycaemia were particularly at greater risk of death in the short term after the hypoglycaemic episode. These findings indicate that severe hypoglycaemia is associated with higher subsequent mortality; however, they cannot answer the question as to whether severe hypoglycaemia serves as a risk marker for adverse outcomes or whether there is a direct causal effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01959529.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemia/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/metabolismo , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/mortalidade , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/metabolismo , Hipoglicemia/mortalidade , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina Glargina/uso terapêutico , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/uso terapêutico , MasculinoRESUMO
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec vs Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events (DEVOTE) was a double-blind, randomised, event-driven, treat-to-target prospective trial comparing the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec with that of insulin glargine U100 (100 units/ml) in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of cardiovascular events. This paper reports a secondary analysis investigating associations of day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability (pre-breakfast self-measured blood glucose [SMBG]) with severe hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: In DEVOTE, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomised to receive insulin degludec or insulin glargine U100 once daily. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia was the pre-specified secondary outcome. In this article, day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability was based on the standard deviation of the pre-breakfast SMBG measurements. The variability measure was calculated as follows. Each month, only the three pre-breakfast SMBG measurements recorded before contact with the site were used to determine a day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability measure for each patient. For each patient, the variance of the three log-transformed pre-breakfast SMBG measurements each month was determined. The standard deviation was determined as the square root of the mean of these monthly variances and was defined as day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability. The associations between day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability and severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality were analysed for the pooled trial population with Cox proportional hazards models. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted, including adjustments for baseline characteristics and most recent HbA1c. RESULTS: Day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability was significantly associated with severe hypoglycaemia (HR 4.11, 95% CI 3.15, 5.35), MACE (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.12, 1.65) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.23, 2.03) before adjustments. The increased risks of severe hypoglycaemia, MACE and all-cause mortality translate into 2.7-, 1.2- and 1.4-fold risk, respectively, when a patient's day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability measure is doubled. The significant relationships of day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability with severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality were maintained after adjustments. However, the significant association with MACE was not maintained following adjustment for baseline characteristics with either baseline HbA1c (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.96, 1.47) or the most recent HbA1c measurement throughout the trial (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.98, 1.49). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Higher day-to-day fasting glycaemic variability is associated with increased risks of severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01959529.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangue , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemia/sangue , Hipoglicemia/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Glicemia/efeitos dos fármacos , Método Duplo-Cego , Jejum/sangue , Feminino , Humanos , Insulina/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the impact of subintimal plaque modification (SPM) on early health status following unsuccessful chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI. BACKGROUND: Intentionally dilating the subintimal space during unsuccessful CTO PCI to facilitate flow through dissection planes and improve success of repeat PCI attempts is a technique used by some hybrid operators, and may improve health status by restoring distal vessel flow despite unsuccessful CTO PCI. METHODS: We studied 138 patients who underwent unsuccessful CTO PCI in a 12-center CTO PCI registry. Safety was assessed by comparing in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing unsuccessful CTO PCI with and without SPM. The association between SPM and health status was quantified using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary Score (SAQ SS), and the association between SPM and SAQ SS was determined using multivariable regression. RESULTS: SPM was performed in 59 patients (42.8%). Complication rates were similar comparing those with and without SPM. At 1-month, patients treated with SPM had larger increases in SAQ SS compared to patients who were not (28.3 ± 21.7 vs. 16.8 ±20.2, P = 0.012), and SPM was associated with an adjusted mean 10.5 point (95% CI 1.4-19.7, P = 0.02) greater SAQ SS improvement through 30 days. CONCLUSION: SPM was performed in almost half of unsuccessful CTO PCIs and was not associated with increased procedural complications. SPM was independently associated with better patient-reported health status at 30 days. Further studies are needed to assess the necessity of subsequent PCI in patients with significant health status improvements after SPM.
Assuntos
Angioplastia Coronária com Balão/efeitos adversos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Oclusão Coronária/cirurgia , Vasos Coronários/cirurgia , Nível de Saúde , Placa Aterosclerótica , Idoso , Doença Crônica , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/patologia , Oclusão Coronária/diagnóstico por imagem , Oclusão Coronária/patologia , Vasos Coronários/diagnóstico por imagem , Vasos Coronários/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Falha de Tratamento , Estados UnidosRESUMO
DEVOTE was designed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) vs insulin glargine U100 (IGlar) in patients with T2D at high risk of cardiovascular events. DEVOTE is a phase 3b, multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled trial, designed as an event-driven trial that would continue until 633 positively adjudicated primary events were accrued. The primary end point was the time from randomization to a composite outcome consisting of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Patients with T2D at high risk of cardiovascular complications were randomized 1:1 to receive either IDeg or IGlar, each added to background therapies. This trial was designed to demonstrate statistical noninferiority of IDeg vs IGlar for the primary end point. DEVOTE enrolled 7,637 patients between October 2013 and November 2014 at 436 sites in 20 countries. Of these, 6,506 patients had prior cardiovascular disease or chronic kidney disease, and the remainder had multiple cardiovascular risk factors. DEVOTE was designed to provide conclusive evidence regarding the cardiovascular safety of IDeg relative to IGlar in a high-risk population of patients with T2D.
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina Glargina/uso terapêutico , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Angina Instável/epidemiologia , Comorbidade , Doença das Coronárias/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/metabolismo , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Insuficiência Cardíaca/epidemiologia , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/epidemiologia , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Insuficiência Renal Crônica/epidemiologia , Fatores de Risco , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Exenatide once-weekly is an extended release formulation of exenatide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, which can improve glycemic control, body weight, blood pressure, and lipid levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The EXenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) will compare the impact of adding exenatide once-weekly to usual care with usual care alone on major cardiovascular outcomes. EXSCEL is an academically led, phase III/IV, double-blind, pragmatic placebo-controlled, global trial conducted in 35 countries aiming to enrol 14,000 patients with T2DM and a broad range of cardiovascular risk over approximately 5 years. Participants will be randomized (1:1) to receive exenatide once-weekly 2 mg or matching placebo by subcutaneous injections. The trial will continue until 1,360 confirmed primary composite cardiovascular end points, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, have occurred. The primary efficacy hypothesis is that exenatide once-weekly is superior to usual care with respect to the primary composite cardiovascular end point. EXSCEL is powered to detect a 15% relative risk reduction in the exenatide once-weekly group, with 85% power and a 2-sided 5% alpha. The primary safety hypothesis is that exenatide once-weekly is noninferior to usual care with respect to the primary cardiovascular composite end point. Noninferiority will be concluded if the upper limit of the CI is <1.30. EXSCEL will assess whether exenatide once-weekly can reduce cardiovascular events in patients with T2DM with a broad range of cardiovascular risk. It will also provide long-term safety information on exenatide once-weekly in people with T2DM. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01144338.
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Peptídeos/administração & dosagem , Medição de Risco/métodos , Peçonhas/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Idoso , Glicemia/metabolismo , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , China/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangue , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Esquema de Medicação , Exenatida , Feminino , Seguimentos , Peptídeo 1 Semelhante ao Glucagon , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Incidência , Injeções Subcutâneas , Itália/epidemiologia , Masculino , Microesferas , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ontário/epidemiologia , Prognóstico , Fatores de Risco , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Fatores de Tempo , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To explore the association of health status change and long-term survival among patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD). BACKGROUND: Early gains in health status after successful endovascular therapy (EVT) for symptomatic PAD can be maintained up to 1 year. Whether such health status improvements are associated with long-term survival benefits is unknown. METHODS: Between February 2001 and August 2004, 258 patients with symptomatic PAD treated with EVT participated in a prospective study evaluating baseline and 1 year health status using the Peripheral Artery Questionnaire (range 0-100, higher scores = better). All-cause mortality was assessed for all patients at a median of 9.4 years following EVT. RESULTS: The mean age at enrollment was 68 ± 11 years; 61% were male, 97% were Caucasian, and 38% had diabetes. Patients with a clinically meaningful health status improvement (≥8 points) 1 year after their index procedure (79%) were identified as responders. Responders had a significantly better 10 year survival compared with nonresponders (60% vs 38%, p = 0.025). Responder status was associated with a survival advantage that persisted in risk-adjusted analysis (adjusted hazard ratio for long-term mortality, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.45-0.97]; p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with symptomatic PAD undergoing EVT, improvement of PAD-specific health status at 1 year follow-up was associated with improved long-term survival. Whether additional treatment for patients with poor response to EVT could improve long-term survival warrants further investigation. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Endovasculares/métodos , Nível de Saúde , Doença Arterial Periférica/cirurgia , Idoso , Causas de Morte/tendências , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Doença Arterial Periférica/mortalidade , Período Pós-Operatório , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Fatores de Tempo , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Technical advances and the development of the Hybrid algorithm have been associated with higher success rates in chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention (CTO-PCI). Nevertheless, there are still intraprocedural obstacles that result in failure or prolonged procedure time. The Excimer coronary laser (EL) has been repurposed in CTO-PCI to overcome such obstacles. This case series illustrates the use of the EL in four technically complex scenarios including the balloon resistant lesion, the impenetrable proximal cap, device resistance in stent restenosis, and difficulty with device tracking in the subintima.