Long-term safety and efficacy of anacetrapib in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease.

AIMS: REVEAL was the first randomized controlled trial to demonstrate that adding cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor therapy to intensive statin therapy reduced the risk of major coronary events. We now report results from extended follow-up beyond the scheduled study treatment period. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 30 449 adults with prior atherosclerotic vascular disease were randomly allocated to anacetrapib 100 mg daily or matching placebo, in addition to open-label atorvastatin therapy. After stopping the randomly allocated treatment, 26 129 survivors entered a post-trial follow-up period, blind to their original treatment allocation. The primary outcome was first post-randomization major coronary event (i.e. coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization) during the in-trial and post-trial treatment periods, with analysis by intention-to-treat. Allocation to anacetrapib conferred a 9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3-15%; P = 0.004] proportional reduction in the incidence of major coronary events during the study treatment period (median 4.1 years). During extended follow-up (median 2.2 years), there was a further 20% (95% CI 10-29%; P < 0.001) reduction. Overall, there was a 12% (95% CI 7-17%, P < 0.001) proportional reduction in major coronary events during the overall follow-up period (median 6.3 years), corresponding to a 1.8% (95% CI 1.0-2.6%) absolute reduction. There were no significant effects on non-vascular mortality, site-specific cancer, or other serious adverse events. Morbidity follow-up was obtained for 25 784 (99%) participants. CONCLUSION: The beneficial effects of anacetrapib on major coronary events increased with longer follow-up, and no adverse effects emerged on non-vascular mortality or morbidity. These findings illustrate the importance of sufficiently long treatment and follow-up duration in randomized trials of lipid-modifying agents to assess their full benefits and potential harms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 48678192; ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT01252953; EudraCT No. 2010-023467-18.

Randomized Evaluation of the Effects of Anacetrapib through Lipid-modification (REVEAL)-A large-scale, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the clinical effects of anacetrapib among people with established vascular disease: Trial design, recruitment, and baseline characteristics.

Patients with prior vascular disease remain at high risk for cardiovascular events despite intensive statin-based treatment. Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein by anacetrapib reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol by around 25% to 40% and more than doubles high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. However, it is not known if these apparently favorable lipid changes translate into reductions in cardiovascular events. METHODS: The REVEAL study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial that is assessing the efficacy and safety of adding anacetrapib to effective LDL-lowering treatment with atorvastatin for an average of at least 4years among patients with preexisting atherosclerotic vascular disease. The primary assessment is an intention-to-treat comparison among all randomized participants of the effects of allocation to anacetrapib on major coronary events (defined as the occurrence of coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization). RESULTS: Between August 2011 and October 2013, 30,449 individuals in Europe, North America, and China were randomized to receive anacetrapib 100mg daily or matching placebo. Mean (SD) age was 67 (8) years, 84% were male, 88% had a history of coronary heart disease, 22% had cerebrovascular disease, and 37% had diabetes mellitus. At the randomization visit (after at least 8weeks on a protocol-defined atorvastatin regimen), mean plasma LDL cholesterol was 61 (15) mg/dL and HDL cholesterol was 40 (10) mg/dL. INTERPRETATION: The REVEAL trial will provide a robust evaluation of the clinical efficacy and safety of adding anacetrapib to an effective statin regimen. Results are anticipated in 2017.

Edoxaban vs. warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation on amiodarone: a subgroup analysis of the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 trial, the higher-dose edoxaban (HDE) regimen had a similar incidence of ischaemic stroke compared with warfarin, whereas a higher incidence was observed with the lower-dose regimen (LDE). Amiodarone increases edoxaban plasma levels via P-glycoprotein inhibition. The current pre-specified exploratory analysis was performed to determine the effect of amiodarone on the relative efficacy and safety profile of edoxaban. METHODS AND RESULTS: At randomization, 2492 patients (11.8%) were receiving amiodarone. The primary efficacy endpoint of stroke or systemic embolic event was significantly lower with LDE compared with warfarin in amiodarone treated patients vs. patients not on amiodarone (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 0.36-0.99 and HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.40, respectively; P interaction <0.01). In patients randomized to HDE, no such interaction for efficacy was observed (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46-1.17 vs. HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.05, P interaction = 0.446). Major bleeding was similar in patients on LDE (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.21-0.59 vs. HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.46-0.61, P interaction = 0.131) and HDE (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65-1.38 vs. HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69-0.90, P interaction = 0.392) when compared with warfarin, independent of amiodarone use. CONCLUSIONS: Patients randomized to the LDE treated with amiodarone at the time of randomization demonstrated a significant reduction in ischaemic events vs. warfarin when compared with those not on amiodarone, while preserving a favourable bleeding profile. In contrast, amiodarone had no effect on the relative efficacy and safety of HDE.

Genetic risk, coronary heart disease events, and the clinical benefit of statin therapy: an analysis of primary and secondary prevention trials.

BACKGROUND: Genetic variants have been associated with the risk of coronary heart disease. In this study, we tested whether or not a composite of these variants could ascertain the risk of both incident and recurrent coronary heart disease events and identify those individuals who derive greater clinical benefit from statin therapy. METHODS: A community-based cohort study (the Malmo Diet and Cancer Study) and four randomised controlled trials of both primary prevention (JUPITER and ASCOT) and secondary prevention (CARE and PROVE IT-TIMI 22) with statin therapy, comprising a total of 48,421 individuals and 3477 events, were included in these analyses. We studied the association of a genetic risk score based on 27 genetic variants with incident or recurrent coronary heart disease, adjusting for traditional clinical risk factors. We then investigated the relative and absolute risk reductions in coronary heart disease events with statin therapy stratified by genetic risk. We combined data from the different studies using a meta-analysis. FINDINGS: When individuals were divided into low (quintile 1), intermediate (quintiles 2-4), and high (quintile 5) genetic risk categories, a significant gradient in risk for incident or recurrent coronary heart disease was shown. Compared with the low genetic risk category, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio for coronary heart disease for the intermediate genetic risk category was 1·34 (95% CI 1·22-1·47, p<0·0001) and that for the high genetic risk category was 1·72 (1·55-1·92, p<0·0001). In terms of the benefit of statin therapy in the four randomised trials, we noted a significant gradient (p=0·0277) of increasing relative risk reductions across the low (13%), intermediate (29%), and high (48%) genetic risk categories. Similarly, we noted greater absolute risk reductions in those individuals in higher genetic risk categories (p=0·0101), resulting in a roughly threefold decrease in the number needed to treat to prevent one coronary heart disease event in the primary prevention trials. Specifically, in the primary prevention trials, the number needed to treat to prevent one such event in 10 years was 66 in people at low genetic risk, 42 in those at intermediate genetic risk, and 25 in those at high genetic risk in JUPITER, and 57, 47, and 20, respectively, in ASCOT. INTERPRETATION: A genetic risk score identified individuals at increased risk for both incident and recurrent coronary heart disease events. People with the highest burden of genetic risk derived the largest relative and absolute clinical benefit from statin therapy. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

Impact of treatment with saxagliptin on glycaemic stability and ß-cell function in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 study.

AIMS: To study the effects of saxagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, on glycaemic stability and ß-cell function in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial. METHODS: We randomized 16,492 patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) to saxagliptin or placebo, added to current antidiabetic medications, and followed them for a median of 2.1 years. Glycaemic instability was defined by: (i) a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) increase of ≥ 0.5% post-randomization; (ii) the initiation of new antidiabetic medications for ≥ 3 months; or (iii) an increase in dose of oral antidiabetic medication or ≥ 25% increase in insulin dose for ≥ 3 months. ß-cell function was assessed according to fasting homeostatic model 2 assessment of ß-cell function (HOMA-2ß) values at baseline and at year 2 in patients not treated with insulin. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, participants treated with saxagliptin had a reduction in the development of glycaemic instability (hazard ratio 0.71; 95% confidence interval 0.68-0.74; p < 0.0001). In participants treated with saxagliptin compared with placebo, the occurrence of an HbA1c increase of ≥ 0.5% was reduced by 35.2%; initiation of insulin was decreased by 31.7% and the increases in doses of an oral antidiabetic drug or insulin were reduced by 19.5 and 23.5%, respectively (all p < 0.0001). At 2 years, HOMA-2ß values decreased by 4.9% in participants treated with placebo, compared with an increase of 1.1% in those treated with saxagliptin (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Saxagliptin improved glycaemia and prevented the reduction in HOMA-2ß values. Saxagliptin may reduce the usual decline in ß-cell function in T2D, thereby slowing diabetes progression.

Baseline characteristics of the patient population in the Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in patients with diabetes mellitus (SAVOR)-TIMI 53 trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: SAVOR-TIMI 53 was designed to study the effects of the DPP-4 inhibitor saxagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in high risk type 2 diabetes patients with diverse levels of diabetes control and background anti-diabetic drugs. The goal of this article is to describe the baseline characteristics of this hypothesis driven study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 16 496 diabetic patients from North America (31.9%), Western Europe (26.0%), Eastern Europe (17.3%), Latin America (16.4%) and Asia (8.3%), with either established cardiovascular disease (78.3%) or with ≥two additional cardiovascular risk factors (21.7%) were randomised to saxagliptin or placebo. Biomarkers of inflammation and insulin resistance were taken at baseline and 2 years later in order to correlate saxagliptin effect on cardiovascular outcome to its effect on inflammation and insulin resistance. RESULTS: Mean [+/-standard deviation (SD)] age was 65.0 (+/-8.6) years, 66.9% were male, body mass index was 31.2 kg/m² (+/-5.6), mean diabetes duration was 11.9 years (+/-8.9) and the mean HbA1c 8.0% (+/-1.4%). HbA1c < 7% was most prevalent among North Americans (30.8%) and least among Asians (15.1%), whereas HbA1c > 9% was 30.7% in Latin America 27.0% in Asia and 15.1% in North America. Diabetic retinopathy was reported in 12.3% of patients, nephropathy in 17.7% and amputation in 2.5%. Diabetic treatments categories were as follows: no medication (5.4%), 1 oral anti-diabetic drug (OAD) (25.0%), ≥2 OAD (27.7%) and/or insulin (40.9%). The prevalence of micro-albuminuria was twice as high among insulin users compared with users of ≥2 OAD. Baseline statin use (78.3% overall) varied by region. CONCLUSION: The SAVOR-TIMI 53 patient population, with differing background diabetes control and anti-diabetic treatment, provides global representation of diabetic patients with established cardiovascular disease or at high risk for cardiovascular disease and is well-positioned to determine the effect of saxagliptin on cardiovascular events.