Evaluation of 9 biomarkers for predicting 10-year cardiovascular risk in patients undergoing coronary angiography: findings from the LUdwigshafen RIsk and Cardiovascular Health (LURIC) study.

BACKGROUND Conventional factors do not fully explain the distribution of cardiovascular outcomes. Biomarkers are known to participate in well-established pathways associated with cardiovascular disease, and may therefore provide further information over and above conventional risk factors. This study sought to determine whether individual and/or combined assessment of 9 biomarkers improved discrimination, calibration and reclassification of cardiovascular mortality. METHODS 3267 patients (2283 men), aged 18-95 years, at intermediate-to-high-risk of cardiovascular disease were followed in this prospective cohort study. Conventional risk factors and biomarkers were included based on forward and backward Cox proportional stepwise selection models. RESULTS During 10-years of follow-up, 546 fatal cardiovascular events occurred. Four biomarkers (interleukin-6, neutrophils, von Willebrand factor, and 25-hydroxyvitamin D) were retained during stepwise selection procedures for subsequent analyses. Simultaneous inclusion of these biomarkers significantly improved discrimination as measured by the C-index (0.78, P = 0.0001), and integrated discrimination improvement (0.0219, P<0.0001). Collectively, these biomarkers improved net reclassification for cardiovascular death by 10.6% (P<0.0001) when added to the conventional risk model. CONCLUSIONS In terms of adverse cardiovascular prognosis, a biomarker panel consisting of interleukin-6, neutrophils, von Willebrand factor, and 25-hydroxyvitamin D offered significant incremental value beyond that conveyed by simple conventional risk factors.

Heart rate is a prognostic risk factor for myocardial infarction: a post hoc analysis in the PERFORM (Prevention of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular Events of ischemic origin with teRutroban in patients with a history oF ischemic strOke or tRansient ischeMic attack) study population

BACKGROUND Elevated resting heart rate is known to be detrimental to morbidity and mortality in cardiovascular disease, though its effect in patients with ischemic stroke is unclear. We analyzed the effect of baseline resting heart rate on myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with a recent noncardioembolic cerebral ischemic event participating in PERFORM. METHODS We compared fatal or nonfatal MI using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models for PERFORM patients with baseline heart rate <70 bpm (n=8178) or ≥70 bpm (n=10,802). In addition, heart rate was analyzed as a continuous variable. Other cerebrovascular and cardiovascular outcomes were also explored. RESULTS Heart rate ≥70 bpm was associated with increased relative risk for fatal or nonfatal MI (HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.03-1.69, P=0.029). For every 5-bpm increase in heart rate, there was an increase in relative risk for fatal and nonfatal MI (11.3%, P=0.0002). Heart rate ≥70 bpm was also associated with increased relative risk for a composite of fatal or nonfatal ischemic stroke, fatal or nonfatal MI, or other vascular death (excluding hemorrhagic death) (P<0001); vascular death (P<0001); all-cause mortality (P<0001); and fatal or nonfatal stroke (P=0.04). For every 5-bpm increase in heart rate, there were increases in relative risk for fatal or nonfatal ischemic stroke, fatal or nonfatal MI, or other vascular death (4.7%, P<0.0001), vascular death (11.0%, P<0.0001), all-cause mortality (8.0%, P<0.0001), and fatal and nonfatal stroke (2.4%, P=0.057). CONCLUSION Elevated heart rate ≥70 bpm places patients with a noncardioembolic cerebral ischemic event at increased risk for MI.

Uric Acid and Cardiovascular Events: A Mendelian Randomization Study

Obesity and diets rich in uric acid-raising components appear to account for the increased prevalence of hyperuricemia in Westernized populations. Prevalence rates of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, CKD, and cardiovascular disease are also increasing. We used Mendelian randomization to examine whether uric acid is an independent and causal cardiovascular risk factor. Serum uric acid was measured in 3315 patients of the Ludwigshafen Risk and Cardiovascular Health Study. We calculated a weighted genetic risk score (GRS) for uric acid concentration based on eight uric acid-regulating single nucleotide polymorphisms. Causal odds ratios and causal hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using a two-stage regression estimate with the GRS as the instrumental variable to examine associations with cardiometabolic phenotypes (cross-sectional) and mortality (prospectively) by logistic regression and Cox regression, respectively. Our GRS was not consistently associated with any biochemical marker except for uric acid, arguing against pleiotropy. Uric acid was associated with a range of prevalent diseases, including coronary artery disease. Uric acid and the GRS were both associated with cardiovascular death and sudden cardiac death. In a multivariate model adjusted for factors including medication, causal HRs corresponding to each 1-mg/dl increase in genetically predicted uric acid concentration were significant for cardiovascular death (HR, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 2.81) and sudden cardiac death (HR, 2.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.16 to 5.00). These results suggest that high uric acid is causally related to adverse cardiovascular outcomes, especially sudden cardiac death.

Secondary prevention of cardiovascular events with long-term pravastatin in patients with diabetes or impaired fasting glucose - Results from the LIPID trial

OBJECTIVE- Diabetes, a major health problem worldwide, increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and its associated mortality. Evidence of the overall benefits of lipid modification in this area is needed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS- The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) trial showed that cholesterol-lowering treatment with pravastatin reduced mortality and coronary heart disease (CHD) events in 9,014 patients aged 31-75 years with CHD and total cholesterol 4.0-7.0 mmol/l. We measured the effects of pravastatin therapy, 40 mg/day over 6.0 years, on the risk of CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular outcomes in 1,077 LIPID patients with diabetes and 940 patients with impaired fasting glucose (IFG). RESULTS- in patients allocated to placebo, the risk of a major CHD event was 61% higher in patients with diabetes and 23% higher in the IFG group than in patients with normal fasting glucose, and the risk of any cardiovascular event was 37% higher in the diabetic group and 19% higher in the IFG group. Pravastatin therapy reduced the risk of a major CHD event overall from 15.9 to 12.3% (relative risk reduction [RRR] 24%, P < 0.001) and from 23.4 to 19.6% in the diabetic group (19%, P = 0.11); in the diabetic group, the reduction was not significantly different from the reductions in the other groups. Pravastatin reduced the risk of any cardiovascular event from 52.7 to 45.2% (21%, P < 0.008) in patients With diabetes and from 45.7 to 37.1% (26%, P = 0.003) in the IFG group. Pravastatin reduced the risk of stroke from 9.9 to 6.3% in the diabetic group (RRR 39%, Cl 7-61%, P = 0.02) and from 5.4 to 3.4% in the IFG group (RRR 42%, Cl -9 to 69%, P = 0.09). Pravastatin did not reduce the incidence of diabetes. Over 6 years, pravastatin therapy prevented one major,CHD event (CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction) in 23 patients with IFG and 18 patients with diabetes. A meta-analysis of other major trials confirmed the high absolute risks of diabetes and IFG and the absolute benefits of statin therapy in these patients. CONCLUSIONS- Cholesterol-lowering treatment with pravastatin therapy prevents cardiovascular events, including stroke, in patients with diabetes or IFG and established CHD.

The relative importance of vascular structure and function in predicting cardiovascular events

OBJECTIVES We sought to assess the prognostic utility of brachial artery reactivity (BAR) in patients at risk of cardiovascular events. BACKGROUND Impaired flow-mediated vasodilation measured by BAR is a marker of endothelial dysfunction. Brachial artery reactivity is influenced by risk factors and is responsive to various pharmacological and other treatments. However, its prognostic importance is uncertain, especially relative to other predictors of outcome. METHODS A total of 444 patients were prospectively enrolled to undergo BAR and follow-up. These patients were at risk of cardiovascular events, based on the presence of risk factors or known or suspected cardiovascular disease. We took a full clinical history, performed BAR, and obtained carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) and left ventricular mass and ejection fraction. Patients were followed up for cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the independent association of investigation variables on outcomes. RESULTS The patients exhibited abnormal BAR (5.2 +/- 6.1% [mean +/- SD]) but showed normal nitrate-mediated dilation (9.9 +/- 7.2%) and normal mean IMT (0.67 +/- 0.12 mm [average]). Forty-nine deaths occurred over the median follow-up period of 24 months (interquartile range 10 to 34). Patients in the lowest tertile group of BAR (<2%) had significantly more events than those in the combined group of highest and mid-tertiles (p = 0.029, log-rank test). However, mean IMT (rather than flow-mediated dilation) was the vascular factor independently associated with mortality, even in the subgroup (n = 271) with no coronary artery disease and low risk. CONCLUSIONS Brachial artery reactivity is lower in patients with events, but is not an independent predictor of cardiovascular outcomes in this cohort of patients. (C) 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Brachial blood pressure but not carotid arterial waveforms predict cardiovascular events in elderly female hypertensives

Central arterial waveforms and related indices of large artery properties can be determined with relative ease. This would make them an attractive adjunct in the risk stratification for cardiovascular disease. Although they have been associated with some classical risk factors and the presence of coronary disease, their prospective value in predicting cardiovascular outcomes is unknown. The present study determined the relative predictive value for cardiovascular disease-free survival of large artery properties as compared with noninvasive brachial blood pressure alone in a population of elderly female hypertensive subjects. We measured systemic arterial compliance, central systolic pressure, and carotid augmentation index in a subset of female participants in the Second Australian National Blood Pressure Study ( untreated blood pressure 169/88 +/- 12/ 8 mm Hg). There were a total of 53 defined events during a median of 4.1 years of follow-up in 484 women with complete measurements. Although baseline blood pressures at the brachial artery predicted cardiovascular disease-free survival ( hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.1 for pulse pressure >= 81 versus < 81 mm Hg; P = 0.01), no such relation was found for carotid augmentation index ( HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.44; P value not significant) or systemic arterial compliance ( HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.16; P value not significant). Blood pressure, but not noninvasively measured central arterial waveforms, predict outcome in the older female hypertensive patient. Thus, blood pressure measurement alone is superior to measurement of arterial waveforms in predicting outcome in this group.

Determinants and Outcomes of Stroke Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention by Indication

© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.

Individual Proton Pump Inhibitors and Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Observational studies evaluating the possible interaction between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel have shown mixed results. We conducted a systematic review comparing the safety of individual PPIs in patients with coronary artery disease taking clopidogrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: Studies performed from January 1995 to December 2013 were screened for inclusion. Data were extracted, and study quality was graded for 34 potential studies. For those studies in which follow-up period, outcomes, and multivariable adjustment were comparable, meta-analysis was performed.The adjusted odds or hazard ratios for the composite of cardiovascular or all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke at 1 year were reported in 6 observational studies with data on individual PPIs. Random-effects meta-analyses of the 6 studies revealed an increased risk for adverse cardiovascular events for those taking pantoprazole (hazard ratio 1.38; 95% CI 1.12-1.70), lansoprazole (hazard ratio 1.29; 95% CI 1.09-1.52), or esomeprazole (hazard ratio 1.27; 95% CI 1.02-1.58) compared with patients on no PPI. This association was not significant for omeprazole (hazard ratio 1.16; 95% CI 0.93-1.44). Sensitivity analyses for the coronary artery disease population (acute coronary syndrome versus mixed) and exclusion of a single study due to heterogeneity of reported results did not have significant influence on the effect estimates for any PPIs. CONCLUSIONS: Several frequently used PPIs previously thought to be safe for concomitant use with clopidogrel were associated with greater risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Although the data are observational, they highlight the need for randomized controlled trials to evaluate the safety of concomitant PPI and clopidogrel use in patients with coronary artery disease.

Troponin I and cardiovascular risk prediction in the general population: the BiomarCaRE consortium

AIMS: Our aims were to evaluate the distribution of troponin I concentrations in population cohorts across Europe, to characterize the association with cardiovascular outcomes, to determine the predictive value beyond the variables used in the ESC SCORE, to test a potentially clinically relevant cut-off value, and to evaluate the improved eligibility for statin therapy based on elevated troponin I concentrations retrospectively.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on the Biomarkers for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Europe (BiomarCaRE) project, we analysed individual level data from 10 prospective population-based studies including 74 738 participants. We investigated the value of adding troponin I levels to conventional risk factors for prediction of cardiovascular disease by calculating measures of discrimination (C-index) and net reclassification improvement (NRI). We further tested the clinical implication of statin therapy based on troponin concentration in 12 956 individuals free of cardiovascular disease in the JUPITER study. Troponin I remained an independent predictor with a hazard ratio of 1.37 for cardiovascular mortality, 1.23 for cardiovascular disease, and 1.24 for total mortality. The addition of troponin I information to a prognostic model for cardiovascular death constructed of ESC SCORE variables increased the C-index discrimination measure by 0.007 and yielded an NRI of 0.048, whereas the addition to prognostic models for cardiovascular disease and total mortality led to lesser C-index discrimination and NRI increment. In individuals above 6 ng/L of troponin I, a concentration near the upper quintile in BiomarCaRE (5.9 ng/L) and JUPITER (5.8 ng/L), rosuvastatin therapy resulted in higher absolute risk reduction compared with individuals <6 ng/L of troponin I, whereas the relative risk reduction was similar.

CONCLUSION: In individuals free of cardiovascular disease, the addition of troponin I to variables of established risk score improves prediction of cardiovascular death and cardiovascular disease.

The role of heart rate as a risk marker for predicting adverse outcomes

Cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of death around the world. Resting heart rate has been shown to be a strong and independent risk marker for adverse cardiovascular events and mortality, and yet its role as a predictor of risk is somewhat overlooked in clinical practice. With the aim of highlighting its prognostic value, the role of resting heart rate as a risk marker for death and other adverse outcomes was further examined in a number of different patient populations. A systematic review of studies that previously assessed the prognostic value of resting heart rate for mortality and other adverse cardiovascular outcomes was presented. New analyses of nine clinical trials were carried out. Both the original and extended Cox model that allows for analysis of time-dependent covariates were used to evaluate and compare the predictive value of baseline and time-updated heart rate measurements for adverse outcomes in the CAPRICORN, EUROPA, PROSPER, PERFORM, BEAUTIFUL and SHIFT populations. Pooled individual patient meta-analyses of the CAPRICORN, EPHESUS, OPTIMAAL and VALIANT trials, and the BEAUTIFUL and SHIFT trials, were also performed. The discrimination and calibration of the models applied were evaluated using Harrell’s C-statistic and likelihood ratio tests, respectively. Finally, following on from the systematic review, meta-analyses of the relation between baseline and time-updated heart rate, and the risk of death from any cause and from cardiovascular causes, were conducted. Both elevated baseline and time-updated resting heart rates were found to be associated with an increase in the risk of mortality and other adverse cardiovascular events in all of the populations analysed. In some cases, elevated time-updated heart rate was associated with risk of events where baseline heart rate was not. Time-updated heart rate also contributed additional information about the risk of certain events despite knowledge of baseline heart rate or previous heart rate measurements. The addition of resting heart rate to the models where resting heart rate was found to be associated with risk of outcome improved both discrimination and calibration, and in general, the models including time-updated heart rate along with baseline or the previous heart rate measurement had the highest and similar C-statistics, and thus the greatest discriminative ability. The meta-analyses demonstrated that a 5bpm higher baseline heart rate was associated with a 7.9% and an 8.0% increase in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death, respectively (both p less than 0.001). Additionally, a 5bpm higher time-updated heart rate (adjusted for baseline heart rate in eight of the ten studies included in the analyses) was associated with a 12.8% (p less than 0.001) and a 10.9% (p less than 0.001) increase in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death, respectively. These findings may motivate health care professionals to routinely assess resting heart rate in order to identify individuals at a higher risk of adverse events. The fact that the addition of time-updated resting heart rate improved the discrimination and calibration of models for certain outcomes, even if only modestly, strengthens the case that it be added to traditional risk models. The findings, however, are of particular importance, and have greater implications for the clinical management of patients with pre-existing disease. An elevated, or increasing heart rate over time could be used as a tool, potentially alongside other established risk scores, to help doctors identify patient deterioration or those at higher risk, who might benefit from more intensive monitoring or treatment re-evaluation. Further exploration of the role of continuous recording of resting heart rate, say, when patients are at home, would be informative. In addition, investigation into the cost-effectiveness and optimal frequency of resting heart rate measurement is required. One of the most vital areas for future research is the definition of an objective cut-off value for the definition of a high resting heart rate.

After 10 years of clinical trials with liraglutide, do we know whether it is beneficial in diabetes?

Type 2 diabetes remains an escalating world-wide problem, despite a range of treatments. The revelation that insulin secretion is under the control of a gut hormone, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), led to a new paradigm in the management of type 2 diabetes. Liraglutide is a long acting GLP-1 receptor agonist used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The review considers the clinical trials with liraglutide. There are many comparator trials between liraglutide and other medicines for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, and these trials have shown that liraglutide lowers HbA1c and body weight, and is well tolerated. A large cardiovascular safety trial with liraglutide is presently being undertaken. After 10 years of clinical trials with liraglutide, we do not know whether liraglutide has cardiovascular safety in subjects with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. Although this is not a requirement for registration by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in my opinion, they should reconsider this. We also do not presently know whether liraglutide has any beneficial effects on clinical cardiovascular outcomes.

Sitagliptin and other ‘gliptins’ - why prescribe them?

Introduction In 2008, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) required all new glucose-lowering therapies to show cardiovascular safety, and this applies to the dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors (‘gliptins’). At present, there is contradictory evidence on whether the gliptins increase hospitalizations for heart failure. Areas covered This is an evaluation of the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS) in high risk cardiovascular subjects with type 2 diabetes [1]. TECOS demonstrated non-inferiority for sitagliptin over placebo for the primary outcome, which was cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. There was no difference in the rate of hospitalization for heart failure between sitagliptin and placebo. Expert Opinion Despite the results of TECOS, debate over the effects of sitagliptin on the rates of hospitalizations for heart failure continues with some recent studies suggesting increased rates. Recently, empagliflozin (an inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2) has been shown to reduce cardiovascular outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes, including the rates of hospitalization for heart failure. In our opinion, these positive findings with empagliflozin suggest that it should be prescribed in preference to the gliptins, including sitagliptin, unless any positive cardiovascular outcomes are reported for the gliptins.

Subclinical hyperthyroidism and the risk of coronary heart disease and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Data from prospective cohort studies regarding the association between subclinical hyperthyroidism and cardiovascular outcomes are conflicting.We aimed to assess the risks of total and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality, CHD events, and atrial fibrillation (AF) associated with endogenous subclinical hyperthyroidism among all available large prospective cohorts. METHODS: Individual data on 52 674 participants were pooled from 10 cohorts. Coronary heart disease events were analyzed in 22 437 participants from 6 cohorts with available data, and incident AF was analyzed in 8711 participants from 5 cohorts. Euthyroidism was defined as thyrotropin level between 0.45 and 4.49 mIU/L and endogenous subclinical hyperthyroidism as thyrotropin level lower than 0.45 mIU/L with normal free thyroxine levels, after excluding those receiving thyroid-altering medications. RESULTS: Of 52 674 participants, 2188 (4.2%) had subclinical hyperthyroidism. During follow-up, 8527 participants died (including 1896 from CHD), 3653 of 22 437 had CHD events, and 785 of 8711 developed AF. In age- and sex-adjusted analyses, subclinical hyperthyroidism was associated with increased total mortality (hazard ratio[HR], 1.24, 95% CI, 1.06-1.46), CHD mortality (HR,1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.62), CHD events (HR, 1.21; 95%CI, 0.99-1.46), and AF (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.16-2.43).Risks did not differ significantly by age, sex, or preexisting cardiovascular disease and were similar after further adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors, with attributable risk of 14.5% for total mortality to 41.5% forAF in those with subclinical hyperthyroidism. Risks for CHD mortality and AF (but not other outcomes) were higher for thyrotropin level lower than 0.10 mIU/L compared with thyrotropin level between 0.10 and 0.44 mIU/L(for both, P value for trend, .03). CONCLUSION: Endogenous subclinical hyperthyroidism is associated with increased risks of total, CHD mortality, and incident AF, with highest risks of CHD mortality and AF when thyrotropin level is lower than 0.10 mIU/L.

Blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol targets for prevention of recurrent strokes and cognitive decline in the hypertensive patient: design of the European Society of Hypertension-Chinese Hypertension League Stroke in Hypertension Optimal Treatment randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The SBP values to be achieved by antihypertensive therapy in order to maximize reduction of cardiovascular outcomes are unknown; neither is it clear whether in patients with a previous cardiovascular event, the optimal values are lower than in the low-to-moderate risk hypertensive patients, or a more cautious blood pressure (BP) reduction should be obtained. Because of the uncertainty whether 'the lower the better' or the 'J-curve' hypothesis is correct, the European Society of Hypertension and the Chinese Hypertension League have promoted a randomized trial comparing antihypertensive treatment strategies aiming at three different SBP targets in hypertensive patients with a recent stroke or transient ischaemic attack. As the optimal level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level is also unknown in these patients, LDL-C-lowering has been included in the design. PROTOCOL DESIGN: The European Society of Hypertension-Chinese Hypertension League Stroke in Hypertension Optimal Treatment trial is a prospective multinational, randomized trial with a 3 × 2 factorial design comparing: three different SBP targets (1, <145-135; 2, <135-125; 3, <125 mmHg); two different LDL-C targets (target A, 2.8-1.8; target B, <1.8 mmol/l). The trial is to be conducted on 7500 patients aged at least 65 years (2500 in Europe, 5000 in China) with hypertension and a stroke or transient ischaemic attack 1-6 months before randomization. Antihypertensive and statin treatments will be initiated or modified using suitable registered agents chosen by the investigators, in order to maintain patients within the randomized SBP and LDL-C windows. All patients will be followed up every 3 months for BP and every 6 months for LDL-C. Ambulatory BP will be measured yearly. OUTCOMES: Primary outcome is time to stroke (fatal and non-fatal). Important secondary outcomes are: time to first major cardiovascular event; cognitive decline (Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and dementia. All major outcomes will be adjudicated by committees blind to randomized allocation. A Data and Safety Monitoring Board has open access to data and can recommend trial interruption for safety. SAMPLE SIZE CALCULATION: It has been calculated that 925 patients would reach the primary outcome after a mean 4-year follow-up, and this should provide at least 80% power to detect a 25% stroke difference between SBP targets and a 20% difference between LDL-C targets.