Explore the vast range of titles available.

Correctable weaknesses in the design, conduct, and analysis of biomedical and public health research studies can produce misleading results and waste valuable resources. Small effects can be difficult to distinguish from bias introduced by study design and analyses. An absence of detailed written protocols and poor documentation of research is common. Information obtained might not be useful or important, and statistical precision or power is often too low or used in a misleading way. Insufficient consideration might be given to both previous and continuing studies. Arbitrary choice of analyses and an overemphasis on random extremes might affect the reported findings. Several problems relate to the research workforce, including failure to involve experienced statisticians and methodologists, failure to train clinical researchers and laboratory scientists in research methods and design, and the involvement of stakeholders with conflicts of interest. Inadequate emphasis is placed on recording of research decisions and on reproducibility of research. Finally, reward systems incentivise quantity more than quality, and novelty more than reliability. We propose potential solutions for these problems, including improvements in protocols and documentation, consideration of evidence from studies in progress, standardisation of research efforts, optimisation and training of an experienced and non-conflicted scientific workforce, and reconsideration of scientific reward systems.

Rheumatic disease and heart disease share common underpinnings involving inflammation. The high levels of inflammation that characterize rheumatic diseases provide a “natural experiment” to help elucidate the mechanisms by which inflammation accelerates heart disease. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common of the rheumatic diseases and has the best studied relationships with heart disease. A review of current literature on heart disease and RA was conducted. Patients with RA have an increased risk of developing heart disease that is not fully explained by traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Therapies used to treat RA may also affect the development of heart disease; by suppressing inflammation, they may also reduce the risk of heart disease. However, their other effects, as in the case of steroids, may increase heart disease risk. Investigations of the innate and adaptive immune responses occurring in RA may delineate novel mechanisms in the pathogenesis of heart disease and help identify novel therapeutic targets for the prevention and treatment of heart disease.

In this trial involving patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease, PCI guided by assessment of fractional flow reserve was not noninferior to CABG with respect to the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization at 1 year. The incidence of this composite end point was higher among those assigned to FFR-guided PCI than among those assigned to CABG.

Numerous randomised trials have compared coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with coronary artery disease. However, no studies have been powered to detect a difference in mortality between the revascularisation strategies. We did a systematic review up to July 19, 2017, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing CABG with PCI using stents. Eligible studies included patients with multivessel or left main coronary artery disease who did not present with acute myocardial infarction, did PCI with stents (bare-metal or drug-eluting), and had more than 1 year of follow-up for all-cause mortality. In a collaborative, pooled analysis of individual patient data from the identified trials, we estimated all-cause mortality up to 5 years using Kaplan-Meier analyses and compared PCI with CABG using a random-effects Cox proportional-hazards model stratified by trial. Consistency of treatment effect was explored in subgroup analyses, with subgroups defined according to baseline clinical and anatomical characteristics. We included 11 randomised trials involving 11 518 patients selected by heart teams who were assigned to PCI (n=5753) or to CABG (n=5765). 976 patients died over a mean follow-up of 3·8 years (SD 1·4). Mean Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score was 26·0 (SD 9·5), with 1798 (22·1%) of 8138 patients having a SYNTAX score of 33 or higher. 5 year all-cause mortality was 11·2% after PCI and 9·2% after CABG (hazard ratio [HR] 1·20, 95% CI 1·06–1·37; p=0·0038). 5 year all-cause mortality was significantly different between the interventions in patients with multivessel disease (11·5% after PCI vs 8·9% after CABG; HR 1·28, 95% CI 1·09–1·49; p=0·0019), including in those with diabetes (15·5% vs 10·0%; 1·48, 1·19–1·84; p=0·0004), but not in those without diabetes (8·7% vs 8·0%; 1·08, 0·86–1·36; p=0·49). SYNTAX score had a significant effect on the difference between the interventions in multivessel disease. 5 year all-cause mortality was similar between the interventions in patients with left main disease (10·7% after PCI vs 10·5% after CABG; 1·07, 0·87–1·33; p=0·52), regardless of diabetes status and SYNTAX score. CABG had a mortality benefit over PCI in patients with multivessel disease, particularly those with diabetes and higher coronary complexity. No benefit for CABG over PCI was seen in patients with left main disease. Longer follow-up is needed to better define mortality differences between the revascularisation strategies. None.

The response of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to statin therapy is variable, and may be affected by the presence of co-morbid conditions or the use of concomitant medications. Systematic variation in the response to statins based on these factors could affect the selection of the statin treatment regimen in population subgroups. We investigated whether common comorbidities and co-medications had clinically important effects on statin responses in individual patients. This register-based cohort study included 89,006 simvastatin or atorvastatin initiators with measurements of pre-statin and on-statin LDL-C levels, in Denmark, 2008-2018. We defined statin response as the percentage reduction in LDL-C, and used linear regression to estimate percentage reduction differences (PRD) according to 175 chronic comorbidities and 99 co-medications. We evaluated both the statistical significance (P-values corrected for multiple testing) and the clinical importance (PRD of 5 percentage points or more) of the observed associations. Concomitant use of oral blood-glucose lowering drugs, which included metformin in 96% of treated individuals, was associated with a greater response to statin therapy that was both statistically significant and clinically important, with a PRD of 5.18 (95% confidence interval: 4.79 to 5.57). No other comorbidity or co-medication reached the prespecified thresholds for a significant, clinically important effect on statin response. Overall, comorbidities and co-medications had little effect on statin response, and altogether explained only 1.7% of the total observed population variance. Most of the studied comorbidities and co-medications did not have a clinically important effect on statin response, suggesting no need to modify treatment regimens. However, use of metformin was associated with a significantly enhanced LDL-C response to statins, suggesting that lower statin doses may be effective in patients taking metformin.

In this trial involving patients with type 2 diabetes and stable ischemic cardiovascular disease, prompt revascularization was compared with medical therapy, and insulin sensitization was compared with insulin provision, with patients stratified according to whether they underwent percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary-artery bypass grafting. Revascularization did not significantly reduce the rate of death from any cause or the rate of major cardiovascular events overall. Insulin sensitization and insulin provision also had similar cardiovascular outcomes. In patients with type 2 diabetes and stable ischemic cardiovascular disease, revascularization did not significantly reduce the rate of death from any cause or the rate of major cardiovascular events overall, as compared to medical therapy. Insulin sensitization and insulin provision also had similar cardiovascular outcomes. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus have a higher risk of cardiovascular events and death than those without diabetes. 1 – 4 Few large, randomized trials have addressed the question of the optimal treatment for patients with diabetes and angiographically defined stable ischemic heart disease. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial was designed to test treatment strategies for patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes. Our goal was to address the effects of therapy on the rate of myocardial ischemia, a major cause of death in patients with diabetes, and of insulin resistance, the fundamental mechanism underlying diabetes . . .

Seventeen years ago, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute issued a clinical alert 1 that coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) had better rates of survival than percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes. The alert was based on the results of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) trial, 2 in which patients with multivessel coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo either CABG or PCI. This recommendation has been controversial ever since, largely because subsequent trials comparing CABG and PCI have enrolled only small numbers of patients with diabetes. A pooled analysis of 10 randomized trials involving 1233 patients with . . .

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are alternative treatments for multivessel coronary disease. Although the procedures have been compared in several randomised trials, their long-term effects on mortality in key clinical subgroups are uncertain. We undertook a collaborative analysis of data from randomised trials to assess whether the effects of the procedures on mortality are modified by patient characteristics. We pooled individual patient data from ten randomised trials to compare the effectiveness of CABG with PCI according to patients' baseline clinical characteristics. We used stratified, random effects Cox proportional hazards models to test the effect on all-cause mortality of randomised treatment assignment and its interaction with clinical characteristics. All analyses were by intention to treat. Ten participating trials provided data on 7812 patients. PCI was done with balloon angioplasty in six trials and with bare-metal stents in four trials. Over a median follow-up of 5·9 years (IQR 5·0–10·0), 575 (15%) of 3889 patients assigned to CABG died compared with 628 (16%) of 3923 patients assigned to PCI (hazard ratio [HR] 0·91, 95% CI 0·82–1·02; p=0·12). In patients with diabetes (CABG, n=615; PCI, n=618), mortality was substantially lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group (HR 0·70, 0·56–0·87); however, mortality was similar between groups in patients without diabetes (HR 0·98, 0·86–1·12; p=0·014 for interaction). Patient age modified the effect of treatment on mortality, with hazard ratios of 1·25 (0·94–1·66) in patients younger than 55 years, 0·90 (0·75–1·09) in patients aged 55–64 years, and 0·82 (0·70–0·97) in patients 65 years and older (p=0·002 for interaction). Treatment effect was not modified by the number of diseased vessels or other baseline characteristics. Long-term mortality is similar after CABG and PCI in most patient subgroups with multivessel coronary artery disease, so choice of treatment should depend on patient preferences for other outcomes. CABG might be a better option for patients with diabetes and patients aged 65 years or older because we found mortality to be lower in these subgroups. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

As the prevalence of hypercholesterolemia is increasing in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), detailed evidence is urgently needed to guide the response of health systems to this epidemic. This study sought to quantify unmet need for hypercholesterolemia care among adults in 35 LMICs. We pooled individual-level data from 129,040 respondents aged 15 years and older from 35 nationally representative surveys conducted between 2009 and 2018. Hypercholesterolemia care was quantified using cascade of care analyses in the pooled sample and by region, country income group, and country. Hypercholesterolemia was defined as (i) total cholesterol (TC) ≥240 mg/dL or self-reported lipid-lowering medication use and, alternatively, as (ii) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥160 mg/dL or self-reported lipid-lowering medication use. Stages of the care cascade for hypercholesterolemia were defined as follows: screened (prior to the survey), aware of diagnosis, treated (lifestyle advice and/or medication), and controlled (TC <200 mg/dL or LDL-C <130 mg/dL). We further estimated how age, sex, education, body mass index (BMI), current smoking, having diabetes, and having hypertension are associated with cascade progression using modified Poisson regression models with survey fixed effects. High TC prevalence was 7.1% (95% CI: 6.8% to 7.4%), and high LDL-C prevalence was 7.5% (95% CI: 7.1% to 7.9%). The cascade analysis showed that 43% (95% CI: 40% to 45%) of study participants with high TC and 47% (95% CI: 44% to 50%) with high LDL-C ever had their cholesterol measured prior to the survey. About 31% (95% CI: 29% to 33%) and 36% (95% CI: 33% to 38%) were aware of their diagnosis; 29% (95% CI: 28% to 31%) and 33% (95% CI: 31% to 36%) were treated; 7% (95% CI: 6% to 9%) and 19% (95% CI: 18% to 21%) were controlled. We found substantial heterogeneity in cascade performance across countries and higher performances in upper-middle-income countries and the Eastern Mediterranean, Europe, and Americas. Lipid screening was significantly associated with older age, female sex, higher education, higher BMI, comorbid diagnosis of diabetes, and comorbid diagnosis of hypertension. Awareness of diagnosis was significantly associated with older age, higher BMI, comorbid diagnosis of diabetes, and comorbid diagnosis of hypertension. Lastly, treatment of hypercholesterolemia was significantly associated with comorbid hypertension and diabetes, and control of lipid measures with comorbid diabetes. The main limitations of this study are a potential recall bias in self-reported information on received health services as well as diminished comparability due to varying survey years and varying lipid guideline application across country and clinical settings. Cascade performance was poor across all stages, indicating large unmet need for hypercholesterolemia care in this sample of LMICs-calling for greater policy and research attention toward this cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor and highlighting opportunities for improved prevention of CVD.

Eight clinical trials have evaluated the benefit of the implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) in patients with left ventricular dysfunction but no previous life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia. The cost-effectiveness of the ICD in this setting was investigated with the use of a Markov model that incorporated data from these trials. Prophylactic implantation of an ICD was estimated to have a cost-effectiveness ratio below $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The cost-effectiveness of the ICD in preventing sudden death was investigated with the use of a Markov model that incorporated data from eight clinical trials. The implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) can convert episodes of ventricular fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia to sinus rhythm, thus potentially averting sudden death from cardiac causes. Randomized trials clearly demonstrate that the implantation of an ICD reduces the subsequent risk of death among patients who have been resuscitated from a cardiac arrest. 1 – 3 However, because very few patients in the United States survive an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, a strategy of implanting an ICD in patients at high risk for sudden death from cardiac causes has been proposed. Eight clinical trials have randomly assigned patients at risk for sudden death due to left . . .