Clinical Outcomes According to Diabetic Status in Patients Treated With Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Trial.

BACKGROUND Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) proved noninferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) for a composite clinical end point in a population with minimal exclusion criteria. We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE) trial to compare the performance of BP-SES and DP-EES in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS AND RESULTS BIOSCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES. The primary end point, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Among a total of 2119 patients enrolled between February 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) had diabetes mellitus. Overall diabetic patients experienced a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure compared with patients without diabetes mellitus (10.1% versus 5.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-2.56; P=0.001). At 1 year, there were no differences between BP-SES versus DP-EES in terms of the primary end point in both diabetic (10.9% versus 9.3%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67-2.10; P=0.56) and nondiabetic patients (5.3% versus 6.0%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-1.33; P=0.55). Similarly, no significant differences in the risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis were recorded according to treatment arm in both study groups (4.0% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.49-3.41; P=0.60 for diabetic patients and 2.4% versus 3.4%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39-1.25; P=0.23, in nondiabetics). CONCLUSIONS In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, clinical outcomes among diabetic patients treated with BP-SES or DP-EES were comparable at 1 year. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.

Cosmogenic 180W variations in meteorites and re-assessment of a possible 184Os–180W decay system

We measured tungsten (W) isotopes in 23 iron meteorites and the metal phase of the CB chondrite Gujba in order to ascertain if there is evidence for a large-scale nucleosynthetic heterogeneity in the p-process isotope 180W in the solar nebula as recently suggested by Schulz et al. (2013). We observed large excesses in 180W (up to ≈ 6 ε) in some irons. However, significant within-group variations in magmatic IIAB and IVB irons are not consistent with a nucleosynthetic origin, and the collateral effects on 180W from an s-deficit in IVB irons cannot explain the total variation. We present a new model for the combined effects of spallation and neutron capture reactions on 180W in iron meteorites and show that at least some of the observed within-group variability is explained by cosmic ray effects. Neutron capture causes burnout of 180W, whereas spallation reactions lead to positive shifts in 180W. These effects depend on the target composition and cosmic-ray exposure duration; spallation effects increase with Re/W and Os/W ratios in the target and with exposure age. The correlation of 180W/184W with Os/W ratios in iron meteorites results in part from spallogenic production of 180W rather than from 184Os decay, contrary to a recent study by Peters et al. (2014). Residual ε180W excesses after correction for an s-deficit and for cosmic ray effects may be due to ingrowth of 180W from 184Os decay, but the magnitude of this ingrowth is at least a factor of ≈2 smaller than previously suggested. These much smaller effects strongly limit the applicability of the putative 184Os-180W system to investigate geological problems.