Three-Year Outcomes With Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided or Angiography-Guided Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In patients with multivessel disease with successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, the FLOWER-MI trial (Flow Evaluation to Guide Revascularization in Multivessel ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) showed that a fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided strategy was not superior to an angiography-guided strategy for treatment of noninfarct-related artery lesions regarding the 1-year risk of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization. The extension phase of the trial was planned using the same primary outcome to determine whether a difference in outcomes would be observed with a longer follow-up. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease with successful percutaneous coronary intervention of the infarct-related artery to receive complete revascularization guided by either FFR (n=586) or angiography (n=577). RESULTS: After 3 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 52 of 498 patients (9.40%) in the FFR-guided group and in 44 of 502 patients (8.17%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.79-1.77]; P=0.4). Death occurred in 22 patients (4.00%) in the FFR-guided group and in 23 (4.32%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.53-1.71]); nonfatal myocardial infarction in 23 (4.13%) and 14 (2.56%), respectively (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 0.84-3.16]); and unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization in 21 (3.83%) and 18 (3.36%; hazard ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.61-2.16]), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although event rates in the trial were lower than expected, in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing complete revascularization, an FFR-guided strategy did not have a significant benefit over an angiography-guided strategy with respect to the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization up to 3 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02943954.

Rationale and design of the FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation (FRENCHIE) study.

BACKGROUND: Despite major advances in prevention and treatment, cardiovascular diseases - particularly acute myocardial infarction - remain a leading cause of death worldwide and in France. Collecting contemporary data about the characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction in France is important. AIMS: The main objectives are to describe baseline characteristics, contemporary management, in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction hospitalized in tertiary care centres in France; secondary objectives are to investigate determinants of prognosis (including periodontal disease and sleep-disordered breathing), to identify gaps between evidence-based recommendations and management and to assess medical care costs for the index hospitalization and during the follow-up period. METHODS: FRENCHIE (FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation) is an ongoing prospective multicentre observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04050956) enrolling more than 19,000 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction with onset of symptoms within 48hours in 35 participating centres in France since March 2019. Main exclusion criteria are age<18 years, lack of health coverage and procedure-related myocardial infarction (types 4a and 5). Detailed information was collected prospectively, starting at admission, including demographic data, risk factors, medical history and treatments, initial management, with prehospital care pathways and medication doses, and outcomes until hospital discharge. The follow-up period (up to 20 years for each patient) is ensured by linking with the French national health database (Système national des données de santé), and includes information on death, hospital admissions, major clinical events, healthcare consumption (including drug reimbursement) and total healthcare costs. FRENCHIE is also used as a platform for cohort-nested studies - currently three randomized trials and two observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide large contemporary cohort with very long-term follow-up will improve knowledge about acute myocardial infarction management and outcomes in France, and provide a useful platform for nested studies and trials.

Safety Of The Pcsk9 Inhibitor Alirocumab: insights From 47,296 Patient-Years Of Observation.

The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial, comprising over 47 000 patient-years of placebo-controlled observation, demonstrated important reductions in the risk of recurrent ischaemic cardiovascular events with the monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 alirocumab, as well as lower all-cause death. These benefits were observed in the context of substantial and persistent lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with alirocumab compared to that achieved with placebo. The safety profile of alirocumab was indistinguishable from matching placebo except for a ∼1.7% absolute increase in local injection-site reactions. Further, the safety of alirocumab compared to placebo was evident in vulnerable groups identified before randomization, such as the elderly and those with diabetes mellitus, previous ischaemic stroke, or chronic kidney disease. The frequency of adverse events and laboratory-based abnormalities was generally similar to that in placebo-treated patients. Thus, alirocumab appears to be a safe and effective lipid-modifying treatment over a duration of at least 5 years.

Effect of Empagliflozin on Heart Failure Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the EMPACT-MI Trial.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) events in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, chronic kidney disease, or prevalent HF irrespective of ejection fraction. Whereas the EMPACT-MI trial (Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction) showed that empagliflozin does not reduce the risk of the composite of hospitalization for HF and all-cause death, the effect of empagliflozin on first and recurrent HF events after myocardial infarction is unknown. METHODS: EMPACT-MI was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial that randomized 6522 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction at risk for HF on the basis of newly developed left ventricular ejection fraction of <45% or signs or symptoms of congestion to receive empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo within 14 days of admission. In prespecified secondary analyses, treatment groups were analyzed for HF outcomes. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 17.9 months, the risk for first HF hospitalization and total HF hospitalizations was significantly lower in the empagliflozin compared with the placebo group (118 [3.6%] versus 153 [4.7%] patients with events; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60, 0.98]; P=0.031, for first HF hospitalization; 148 versus 207 events; rate ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.51, 0.89]; P=0.006, for total HF hospitalizations). Subgroup analysis showed consistency of empagliflozin benefit across clinically relevant patient subgroups for first and total HF hospitalizations. The need for new use of diuretics, renin-angiotensin modulators, or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists after discharge was less in patients randomized to empagliflozin versus placebo (all P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin reduced the risk of HF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction or congestion after acute myocardial infarction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04509674.

Comparison of Incidence and Prognostic Impact of Ischemic, Major Bleeding and Heart Failure Events in Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome: Insights From the CORONOR Registry.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of the residual risk in patient with chronic coronary syndrome is challenging in daily practice. Several types of events (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, bleeding, and heart failure [HF]) may occur, and their impact on subsequent mortality is unclear in the era of modern evidence-based pharmacotherapy. METHODS: CORONOR (Suivi d'une cohorte de patients Coronariens stables en région Nord-pas-de-Calais) is a prospective multicenter cohort that enrolled 4184 consecutive unselected outpatients with chronic coronary syndrome. We analyzed the incidence, correlates, and impact of ischemic events (a composite of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke), major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or higher), and hospitalization for HF on subsequent patient mortality. RESULTS: During follow-up (median, 4.9 years), 677 patients (16.5%) died. The 5-year cumulative incidences (death as competing event) of ischemic events, major bleeding, and HF hospitalization were 6.3% (5.6%-7.1%), 3.1% (2.5%-3.6%), and 8.1% (7.3%-9%), respectively. Ischemic events, major bleeding, and HF hospitalization were each associated with all-cause mortality. Major bleeding and hospitalization for HF were associated with the highest mortality rates in the postevent period (42.4%/y and 34.7%/y, respectively) compared with incident ischemic events (13.1%/y). The age- and sex-adjusted hazard ratios for all-cause mortality were 3.57 (95% CI, 2.77-4.61), 9.88 (95% CI, 7.55-12.93), and 8.60 (95% CI, 7.15-10.35) for ischemic events, major bleeding, and hospitalization for HF, respectively (all P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization for HF has become both the most frequent and one of the most ominous events among patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Although less frequent, major bleeding is strongly associated with worse patient survival. Secondary prevention should not be limited to preventing ischemic events. Minimizing bleeding and preventing HF may be at least as important.

Left Ventricular Function, Congestion, and Effect of Empagliflozin on Heart Failure Risk After Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations but not all-cause mortality when started within 14 days of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the association of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), congestion, or both, with outcomes and the impact of empagliflozin in reducing HF risk post-AMI. METHODS: In the EMPACT-MI (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial, patients were randomized within 14 days of an AMI complicated by either newly reduced LVEF<45%, congestion, or both, to empagliflozin (10 mg daily) or placebo and were followed up for a median of 17.9 months. RESULTS: Among 6,522 patients, the mean baseline LVEF was 41 ± 9%; 2,648 patients (40.6%) presented with LVEF <45% alone, 1,483 (22.7%) presented with congestion alone, and 2,181 (33.4%) presented with both. Among patients in the placebo arm of the trial, multivariable adjusted risk for each 10-point reduction in LVEF included all-cause death or HF hospitalization (HR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.31-1.69; P < 0.0001), first HF hospitalization (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.37-1.96; P < 0.0001), and total HF hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR]: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.51-2.36; P < 0.0001). The presence of congestion was also associated with a significantly higher risk for each of these outcomes (HR: 1.52, 1.94, and RR: 2.03, respectively). Empagliflozin reduced the risk for first (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.60-0.98) and total (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.89) HF hospitalizations, irrespective of LVEF or congestion, or both. The safety profile of empagliflozin was consistent across baseline LVEF and irrespective of congestion status. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AMI, the severity of left ventricular dysfunction and the presence of congestion was associated with worse outcomes. Empagliflozin reduced first and total HF hospitalizations across the range of LVEF with and without congestion. (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction [EMPACT-MI]; NCT04509674).

Ticagrelor with or without aspirin following percutaneous coronary intervention in high-risk patients with concomitant peripheral artery disease: A subgroup analysis of the TWILIGHT randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antiplatelet regimen after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) is still debated. This analysis aimed to compare the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients with PAD undergoing PCI. METHODS: In the TWILIGHT trial, patients at high ischemic or bleeding risk that underwent PCI were randomized after 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to aspirin or matching placebo in addition to open-label ticagrelor for 12 additional months. In this post-hoc analysis, patient cohorts were examined according to the presence or absence of PAD. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. Endpoints were assessed at 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: Among 7,119 patients, 489 (7%) had PAD and were older, more likely to have comorbidities, and multivessel disease. PAD patients had more bleeding or ischemic complications than no-PAD patients. Ticagrelor monotherapy compared to ticagrelor plus aspirin was associated with less BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding in PAD (4.6% vs 8.7%; HR 0.52; 95%CI 0.25-1.07) and no-PAD patients (4.0% vs 7.0%; HR 0.56; 95%CI 0.45-0.69; interaction P-value .830) and a similar risk of death, MI, or stroke in these 2 groups (interaction P-value .446). CONCLUSIONS: Despite their higher ischemic and bleeding risk, patients with PAD undergoing PCI derived a consistent benefit from ticagrelor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT in terms of bleeding reduction without any relevant increase in ischemic events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY INFORMATION:: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT02270242.

Prevalence of self-reported severe periodontitis: Data from the population-based CONSTANCES cohort.

AIM: To assess the prevalence of severe periodontitis based on the population-based CONSTANCES cohort using a validated self-reported questionnaire. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individuals were selected from the adult population in France using a random sampling scheme. Analyses were restricted to those invited in 2013-2014 who completed the periodontal health questionnaire at the 2017 follow-up. The risk of severe periodontitis was assessed using the periodontal screening score (PESS) and weighting coefficients were applied to provide representative results in the general French population. RESULTS: The study included 19,859 participants (9204 men, mean age: 52.8 ± 12.6 years). Based on a PESS ≥ 5, 7106 participants were at risk of severe periodontitis, corresponding to a weighted prevalence of 31.6% (95% confidence interval: 30.6%-32.7%). This prevalence was higher among participants aged 55 and over, those with lower socio-economic status as well as current smokers, e-cigarette users and heavy drinkers. Among individuals at risk of severe periodontitis, only 18.8% (17.3%-20.4%) thought they had gum disease, although 50.5% (48.6%-52.5%) reported that their last dental visit was less than 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The present survey indicates that (1) self-reported severe periodontitis is highly prevalent with marked disparities between groups in the general French adult population, and (2) periodontitis could frequently be under-diagnosed given the low awareness.

Impact of the 2021 European Society for Cardiology prevention guideline's stepwise approach for cardiovascular risk factor treatment in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the stepwise approach for cardiovascular (CV) risk factor treatment as outlined by the European Society for Cardiology 2021 guidelines on CV disease (CVD) prevention in patients with established atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: In patients with ASCVD, included in UCC-SMART (n = 8730) and European parts of the REACH registry (n = 18 364), the 10-year CV risk was estimated using SMART2. Treatment effects were derived from meta-analyses and trials. Step 1 recommendations were LDL cholesterol (LDLc) < 1.8 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 140 mmHg, using any antithrombotic medication, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibition, and smoking cessation. Step 2 recommendations were LDLc < 1.4 mmol/L, SBP < 130 mmHg, dual-pathway inhibition (DPI, aspirin plus low-dose rivaroxaban), colchicine, glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists, and eicosapentaenoic acid. Step 2 was modelled accounting for Step 1 non-attainment. With current treatment, residual CV risk was 22%, 32%, and 60% in the low, moderate, and pooled (very) high European risk regions, respectively. Step 2 could prevent up to 198, 223 and 245 events per 1000 patients treated, respectively. Intensified LDLc reduction, colchicine, and DPI could be applied to most patients, preventing up to 57, 74, and 59 events per 1000 patients treated, respectively. Following Step 2, the number of patients with a CV risk of <10% could increase from 20%, 6.4%, and 0.5%, following Step 1, to 63%, 48%, and 12%, in the respective risk regions. CONCLUSION: With current treatment, residual CV risk in patients with ASCVD remains high across all European risk regions. The intensified Step 2 treatment options result in marked further reduction of residual CV risk in patients with established ASCVD. KEY FINDINGS: Guideline-recommended intensive treatment of patients with cardiovascular disease could prevent additional 198-245 new cardiovascular events for every 1000 patients treated.

Patients with established cardiovascular disease are at high risk for new cardiovascular events. The European Society of Cardiology guideline for the prevention of cardiovascular disease introduced a stepwise treatment approach. Step 1 in this approach are treatments that apply to all patients, and Step 2 are intensive treatments that can be prescribed to patients who are still at high risk of new events even with Step 1 treatments. The current study investigates the effect of Steps 1 and 2 on the risk of cardiovascular disease in 27 094 patients all across Europe. With the conventional treatments of Step 1 the risk of cardiovascular disease remains high, with a 10-year risk of new events higher than 10% in 80­99% of patients. The intensive treatment options from Step 2 could prevent additional 198­245 new cardiovascular events for every 1000 patients that are treated. With intensive treatment, up to 63% of patients could achieve a 10-year risk of new cardiovascular disease below 10%.

Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusions for Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anaemia by Heart Failure Status: An RCT Subgroup Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell transfusion can cause fluid overload. We evaluated the interaction between heart failure (HF) at baseline and transfusion strategy on outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We used data from the randomized REALITY trial (https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT02648113), comparing restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in patients with AMI and anaemia. HF was defined as history of HF or Killip class > 1 at randomization. Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: composite of all-cause death, non-recurrent AMI, stroke, or emergency revascularization prompted by ischaemia) at 30 days. RESULTS: Among 658 randomized patients, 311 (47.3%) had HF. HF patients had higher rates of MACE at 30 days and 1 year, and higher rates of non-fatal new-onset HF. There was no interaction between HF and effect of randomized assignment on the primary outcome or non-fatal new-onset HF. A liberal transfusion strategy was associated with increased all-cause death at 30 days and at 1 year in HF patients (Pinteraction = 0.009 and P = 0.049, respectively). The main numerical difference in cause of death between restrictive and liberal strategies was death by HF at 30 days (4 vs 11). CONCLUSIONS: HF is frequent in AMI patients with anaemia and is associated with higher risk of MACE (including all-cause death) and non-fatal new-onset HF. While there was no interaction of HF with effect of transfusion strategy on MACE, a liberal transfusion strategy was associated with higher all-cause death that appears driven by a higher risk of early death due to HF.

Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibition in Patients With STEMI vs NSTEMI.

BACKGROUND: Patients who sustain an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), remain at high risk for heart failure (HF), coronary events, and death. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have been shown to significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular events in both STEMI and NSTEMI patients. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to determine whether angiotensin-receptor blockade and neprilysin inhibition with sacubitril/valsartan, compared with ramipril, has impact on reducing cardiovascular events according to the type of AMI. METHODS: The PARADISE-MI (Prospective ARNI versus ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction) trial enrolled patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and/or pulmonary congestion and at least 1 risk-enhancing factor. Patients were randomized to either sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. The primary endpoint was death from cardiovascular causes or incident HF. In this prespecified analysis, we stratified patients according to AMI type. RESULTS: Of 5,661 enrolled patients, 4,291 (75.8%) had STEMI. These patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities and cardiovascular risk factors than NSTEMI patients. After adjustment for potential confounders, the risk for the primary outcome was marginally higher in NSTEMI vs STEMI patients (adjusted HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.00-1.41), with borderline statistical significance (P = 0.05). The primary composite outcome occurred at similar rates in patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs ramipril in STEMI (10% vs 12%; HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.73-1.04; P = 0.13) and NSTEMI patients (17% vs 17%; HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.75-1.25; P = 0.80; P interaction = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ramipril, sacubitril/valsartan did not significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular death and HF in patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction, irrespective of the type of AMI. (Prospective ARNI vs ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI; NCT02924727).

New-onset atrial fibrillation and chronic coronary syndrome in the CLARIFY registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data on new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) are scarce. This study aims to describe the incidence, predictors, and impact on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes of NOAF in CCS patients. METHODS: Data from the international (45 countries) CLARIFY registry (prospeCtive observational LongitudinAl RegIstry oF patients with stable coronary arterY disease) were used. Among 29 001 CCS outpatients without previously reported AF at baseline, patients with at least one episode of AF/flutter diagnosed during 5-year follow-up were compared with patients in sinus rhythm throughout the study. RESULTS: The incidence rate of NOAF was 1.12 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-1.18] per 100 patient-years (cumulative incidence at 5 years: 5.0%). Independent predictors of NOAF were increasing age, increasing body mass index, low estimated glomerular filtration rate, Caucasian ethnicity, alcohol intake, and low left ventricular ejection fraction, while high triglycerides were associated with lower incidence. New-onset atrial fibrillation was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of adverse outcomes, with adjusted hazard ratios of 2.01 (95% CI 1.61-2.52) for the composite of CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke, 2.61 (95% CI 2.04-3.34) for CV death, 1.64 (95% CI 1.07-2.50) for non-fatal myocardial infarction, 2.27 (95% CI 1.85-2.78) for all-cause death, 8.44 (95% CI 7.05-10.10) for hospitalization for heart failure, and 4.46 (95% CI 2.85-6.99) for major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Among CCS patients, NOAF is common and is strongly associated with worse outcomes. Whether more intensive preventive measures and more systematic screening for AF would improve prognosis in this population deserves further investigation.

Sacubitril/valsartan compared to ramipril in high-risk post-myocardial infarction patients stratified according to use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: Insight from the PARADISE MI trial.

AIM: It is unknown whether safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan (an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI]) are affected by mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in high-risk myocardial infarction (MI) patients. The aim of this study was to examine whether MRA modifies safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with a MI and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and/or pulmonary congestion. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 5661) included in the PARADISE MI trial (Prospective ARNI vs. ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI) were stratified according to MRA. Primary outcomes in this substudy were worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. Safety was defined as symptomatic hypotension, hyperkalaemia >5.5 mmol/L, or permanent drug discontinuation. A total of 2338 patients (41%) were treated with MRA. Safety of ARNI compared to ramipril was not altered significantly by ± MRA, and both groups had similar increase in symptomatic hypotension with ARNI. In patients taking MRA, the risk of hyperkalaemia or permanent drug discontinuation was not significantly altered by ARNI (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). The effect of ARNI compared with ramipril was similar in those who were and were not taking MRA (hazard ratio [HR]MRA 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.19 and HRMRA- 0.87, 95% CI 0.71-1.05, for the primary endpoint; p = 0.51 for interaction [Clinical Endpoint Committee adjudicated]); similar findings were observed if investigator-reported endpoints were evaluated (p = 0.61 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a MRA did not modify safety or clinical endpoints related to initiation of ARNI compared to ramipril in the post-MI setting in patients with LVSD and/or congestion.

Pharmacologic and Genetic Downregulation of Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 and Survival From Sepsis.

OBJECTIVES: Treatments that prevent sepsis complications are needed. Circulating lipid and protein assemblies-lipoproteins play critical roles in clearing pathogens from the bloodstream. We investigated whether early inhibition of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) may accelerate bloodstream clearance of immunogenic bacterial lipids and improve sepsis outcomes. DESIGN: Genetic and clinical epidemiology, and experimental models. SETTING: Human genetics cohorts, secondary analysis of a phase 3 randomized clinical trial enrolling patients with cardiovascular disease (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab [ODYSSEY OUTCOMES]; NCT01663402), and experimental murine models of sepsis. PATIENTS OR SUBJECTS: Nine human cohorts with sepsis (total n = 12,514) were assessed for an association between sepsis mortality and PCSK9 loss-of-function (LOF) variants. Incident or fatal sepsis rates were evaluated among 18,884 participants in a post hoc analysis of ODYSSEY OUTCOMES. C57BI/6J mice were used in Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia sepsis models, and in lipopolysaccharide-induced animal models. INTERVENTIONS: Observational human cohort studies used genetic PCSK9 LOF variants as instrumental variables. ODYSSEY OUTCOMES participants were randomized to alirocumab or placebo. Mice were administered alirocumab, a PCSK9 inhibitor, at 5 mg/kg or 25 mg/kg subcutaneously, or isotype-matched control, 48 hours prior to the induction of bacterial sepsis. Mice did not receive other treatments for sepsis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Across human cohort studies, the effect estimate for 28-day mortality after sepsis diagnosis associated with genetic PCSK9 LOF was odds ratio = 0.86 (95% CI, 0.67-1.10; p = 0.24). A significant association was present in antibiotic-treated patients. In ODYSSEY OUTCOMES, sepsis frequency and mortality were infrequent and did not significantly differ by group, although both were numerically lower with alirocumab vs. placebo (relative risk of death from sepsis for alirocumab vs. placebo, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.32-1.20; p = 0.15). Mice treated with alirocumab had lower endotoxin levels and improved survival. CONCLUSIONS: PCSK9 inhibition may improve clinical outcomes in sepsis in preventive, pretreatment settings.

Efficacy of Sotagliflozin in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes in Relation to Baseline Hemoglobin A1c.

BACKGROUND: The SCORED (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Moderate Renal Impairment Who Are at Cardiovascular Risk) and SOLOIST-WHF (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure) trials demonstrated that sotagliflozin, an SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor, improves outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes who have heart failure (HF) or kidney disease. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the efficacy of sotagliflozin on HF clinical outcomes in individuals with differing baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. METHODS: We included all adults from SCORED and SOLOIST-WHF. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, hospitalizations for HF, and urgent visits for HF. The efficacy of sotagliflozin compared with placebo was evaluated by baseline HbA1c using competing-risk marginal proportional hazards models. RESULTS: We identified 11,744 adults. Individuals with HbA1c ≤7.5% experienced the primary outcome at a lower rate in the sotagliflozin group (11.2 per 100 person-years) than the placebo group (15.5 per 100 person-years) (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.57-0.93). Similarly, individuals with HbA1c of 7.6% to 9.0% experienced the primary outcome at a lower rate in the sotagliflozin group (7.3 per 100 person-years) than the placebo group (9.4 per 100 person-years) (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.96). These findings were also consistent among individuals with HbA1c >9.0%, with a primary outcome rate in the sotagliflozin group (7.8 per 100 person-years) that was lower than the placebo group (11.6 per 100 person-years) (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.50-0.84). The efficacy of sotagliflozin was consistent by baseline HbA1c level (P for interaction = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with type 2 diabetes and either HF or kidney disease, sotagliflozin reduced HF outcomes irrespective of baseline HbA1c.

Effectiveness of icosapent ethyl on first and total cardiovascular events in patients with metabolic syndrome, but without diabetes: REDUCE-IT MetSyn.

Aims: Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is associated with high risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, irrespective of statin therapy. In the overall REDUCE-IT study of statin-treated patients, icosapent ethyl (IPE) reduced the risk of the primary composite endpoint (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization) and the key secondary composite endpoint (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). Methods and results: REDUCE-IT was an international, double-blind trial that randomized 8179 high CV risk statin-treated patients with controlled LDL cholesterol and elevated triglycerides, to IPE 4 g/day or placebo. The current study evaluated the pre-specified patient subgroup with a history of MetSyn, but without diabetes at baseline. Among patients with MetSyn but without diabetes at baseline (n = 2866), the majority (99.8%) of this subgroup was secondary prevention patients. Icosapent ethyl use was associated with a 29% relative risk reduction for the first occurrence of the primary composite endpoint [hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.84; P < 0.0001, absolute risk reduction (ARR) = 5.9%; number needed to treat = 17] and a 41% reduction in total (first plus subsequent) events [rate ratio: 0.59; (95% CI: 0.48-0.72); P < 0.0001] compared with placebo. The risk for the key secondary composite endpoint was reduced by 20% (P = 0.05) and a 27% reduction in fatal/non-fatal MI (P = 0.03), 47% reduction in urgent/emergent revascularization (P < 0.0001), and 58% reduction in hospitalization for unstable angina (P < 0.0001). Non-statistically significant reductions were observed in cardiac arrest (44%) and sudden cardiac death (34%). Conclusion: In statin-treated patients with a history of MetSyn, IPE significantly reduced the risk of first and total CV events in REDUCE-IT. The large relative and ARRs observed supports IPE as a potential therapeutic consideration for patients with MetSyn at high CV risk. Registration REDUCE-IT ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01492361.

Clinically Driven Revascularization in High-Risk Patients Treated With Ticagrelor Monotherapy After PCI: Insights from the Randomized TWILIGHT Trial.

Repeat coronary revascularization is a common adverse event after successful percutaneous coronary intervention. This analysis aimed to assess the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy on repeat clinically driven revascularization (CDR). In the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, after 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, high-risk patients were maintained on ticagrelor and randomly allocated to aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary end point of this analysis was CDR within 12 months after randomization. The key secondary end points were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or CDR, and net adverse clinical events (NACEs), including the individual components of MACCEs and clinically relevant bleeding. The analysis was performed in the per-protocol population. CDR occurred in 473 of 7,039 patients and was associated with a significantly higher risk of subsequent all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (adjusted hazard ratios [HRs] 2.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82 to 4.67). Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a similar 12-month risk of CDR (7.1% vs 6.6%; HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.30, p = 0.363) and MACCEs (8.9% vs 8.6%; HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.22, p = 0.619), and a lower risk of NACEs (12.2% vs 14.6%; HR 0.83 95% CI 0.73 to 0.94, p = 0.004) than ticagrelor plus aspirin. In conclusion, among high-risk patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor monotherapy after 3 months of ticagrelor-based dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with a similar risk of CDR and MACCEs and a decrease of NACEs (TWILIGHT: NCT02270242).