IMPROvE-CED Trial: Intracoronary Autologous CD34+ Cell Therapy for Treatment of Coronary Endothelial Dysfunction in Patients With Angina and Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries.

BACKGROUND: Coronary endothelial dysfunction (CED) causes angina/ischemia in patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease (NOCAD). Patients with CED have decreased number and function of CD34+ cells involved in normal vascular repair with microcirculatory regenerative potential and paracrine anti-inflammatory effects. We evaluated safety and potential efficacy of intracoronary autologous CD34+ cell therapy for CED. METHODS: Twenty NOCAD patients with invasively diagnosed CED and persistent angina despite maximally tolerated medical therapy underwent baseline exercise stress test, GCSF (granulocyte colony stimulating factor)-mediated CD34+ cell mobilization, leukapheresis, and selective 1×105 CD34+ cells/kg infusion into left anterior descending. Invasive CED evaluation and exercise stress test were repeated 6 months after cell infusion. Primary end points were safety and effect of intracoronary autologous CD34+ cell therapy on CED at 6 months of follow-up. Secondary end points were change in Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class, as-needed sublingual nitroglycerin use/day, Seattle Angina Questionnaire scores, and exercise time at 6 months. Change in CED was compared with that of 51 historic control NOCAD patients treated with maximally tolerated medical therapy alone. RESULTS: Mean age was 52±13 years; 75% were women. No death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred. Intracoronary CD34+ cell infusion improved microvascular CED (%acetylcholine-mediated coronary blood flow increased from 7.2 [-18.0 to 32.4] to 57.6 [16.3-98.3]%; P=0.014), decreased Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class (3.7±0.5 to 1.7±0.9, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, P=0.00018), and sublingual nitroglycerin use/day (1 [0.4-3.5] to 0 [0-1], Wilcoxon signed-rank test, P=0.00047), and improved all Seattle Angina Questionnaire scores with no significant change in exercise time at 6 months of follow-up. Historic control patients had no significant change in CED. CONCLUSIONS: A single intracoronary autologous CD34+ cell infusion was safe and may potentially be an effective disease-modifying therapy for microvascular CED in humans. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03471611.

Risk Stratification of Patients With NonObstructive Coronary Artery Disease Using Resistive Reserve Ratio.

Background Resistive reserve ratio (RRR), or the ratio of baseline to hyperemic microvascular resistance, has prognostic implications in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. However, its value in patients with angina or ischemia with nonobstructive coronary artery disease is unknown. Methods and Results We included 1692 patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease who underwent invasive coronary vasoreactivity testing. Abnormal coronary flow reserve (CFR, the ratio of hyperemic and baseline resting flow velocities) and RRR were defined as <2.5 and <2.62, respectively. The mortality rate was marginally higher in patients with abnormal CFR (428 patients [25%]) than those with normal CFR (38 [9%] versus 81 [6%]; P=0.08), and was significantly higher in patients with abnormal RRR (716 patients [42%]) than those with normal RRR (70 [10%] versus 49 [5%], P=0.0002) over the median follow-up of 11.3 years. Patients with abnormal CFR had marginally lower survival than those with normal CFR (log-rank P=0.08). In contrast, patients with abnormal RRR had significantly lower survival than those with normal RRR (log-rank P=0.001). Abnormal RRR was associated with shorter time to death even after adjustment for other covariates (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.11-2.38; P=0.01). Conclusions In patients with no obstructive coronary artery disease, RRR was superior to CFR in predicting long-term survival. An RRR <2.62 was associated with 1.6 times increased risk of death in patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease. Indices of coronary microcirculatory resistive reserve comprising flow- and pressure-derived values may reflect underlying microvascular pathology more faithfully than flow-alone indices like CFR.

Prognostic impact and clinical outcomes of coronary flow reserve and hyperaemic microvascular resistance.

BACKGROUND: Most studies dichotomise indices of coronary microvascular function to assess their prognostic values. AIMS: We aimed to investigate whether coronary flow reserve (CFR) and hyperaemic microvascular resistance (HMR) as continua predict major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), comprising all-cause death, myocardial infarction, revascularisation, and stroke in patients with ischaemia and non-obstructive coronary artery disease. METHODS: A total of 610 patients were included and followed up over a median of 8.0 years (199 individual MACE in 174 patients). RESULTS: Both CFR and HMR as continua predicted MACE with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.70 (per 1-unit increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53, 0.92; p=0.01) and 1.63 (per 1 mmHg/cm/s, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.21; p=0.002), respectively. This relationship remained significant after adjustment for age and sex with an adjusted OR of 0.66 (per 1 unit increase, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.89; p=0.01) and 1.42 (per 1 mmHg/cm/s, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.94; p=0.03). HMR added prognostic value to CFR in predicting MACE (net reclassification index 0.17, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.31; p=0.03; integrated discrimination improvement 0.01, 95% CI: 0.0001, 0.02; p=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: Both CFR and HMR as continuous variables predict future risk of MACE.