Diazepam versus fentanyl for premedication during percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the Myocardial Protection by Fentanyl during Coronary Intervention (PROFIT) Trial

BACKGROUND: Sedation is a cornerstone in the premedication for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Benzodiazepines and opioids are frequently used. Previous results suggest that opioids mimic the adaptation to ischemia during repeated balloon inflations and may provide direct myocardial protection in addition to their sedative effect. However, no comparative data exist. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind trial comparing diazepam and fentanyl in 276 patients undergoing elective PCI. Patients were randomized to either diazepam 5 mg sublingually or fentanyl 0.05 mg or 0.1 mg intravenously at least 5 minutes prior to the first balloon inflation. The primary end-point was the postprocedural elevation of myocardial markers of necrosis defined as an elevation of cardiac troponin T > or = 0.01 ng/ml. RESULTS: The three groups had similar baseline clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics, with no significant differences in lesion morphology, procedural complexity, or adjunctive medical treatment. No significant variation in the hemodynamic response to the study drugs was observed in the three groups. The rate of postprocedural troponin T elevation was 28% in the diazepam group, 20% in the fentanyl 0.05 mg group, and 30% in the fentanyl 0.1 mg group (P = 0.26). Rates of postprocedural myocardial infarction were 3%, 2%, and 2%, respectively (P = 0.84), with one case of in-hospital death in the diazepam group and no urgent TVR in the whole study population. CONCLUSION: Although providing a well-tolerated alternative to diazepam for sedation during PCI, fentanyl did not provide additional cardioprotection assessed through the postinterventional elevation of cardiac troponin T during elective coronary intervention.

Older patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (≥65 years) profit more from higher imatinib doses than younger patients: a subanalysis of the randomized CML-Study IV

The impact of imatinib dose on response rates and survival in older patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase has not been studied well. We analyzed data from the German CML-Study IV, a randomized five-arm treatment optimization study in newly diagnosed BCR-ABL-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase. Patients randomized to imatinib 400 mg/day (IM400) or imatinib 800 mg/day (IM800) and stratified according to age (≥65 years vs. <65 years) were compared regarding dose, response, adverse events, rates of progression, and survival. The full 800 mg dose was given after a 6-week run-in period with imatinib 400 mg/day. The dose could then be reduced according to tolerability. A total of 828 patients were randomized to IM400 or IM800. Seven hundred eighty-four patients were evaluable (IM400, 382; IM800, 402). One hundred ten patients (29 %) on IM400 and 83 (21 %) on IM800 were ≥65 years. The median dose per day was lower for patients ≥65 years on IM800, with the highest median dose in the first year (466 mg/day for patients ≥65 years vs. 630 mg/day for patients <65 years). Older patients on IM800 achieved major molecular remission and deep molecular remission as fast as younger patients, in contrast to standard dose imatinib with which older patients achieved remissions much later than younger patients. Grades 3 and 4 adverse events were similar in both age groups. Five-year relative survival for older patients was comparable to that of younger patients. We suggest that the optimal dose for older patients is higher than 400 mg/day. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00055874