Explore the vast range of titles available.

Inflammation is associated with adverse cardiovascular events. Data from recent trials suggest that colchicine reduces the risk of cardiovascular events. In this multicenter trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned patients who had myocardial infarction to receive either colchicine or placebo and either spironolactone or placebo. The results of the colchicine trial are reported here. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned ischemia-driven coronary revascularization, evaluated in a time-to-event analysis. C-reactive protein was measured at 3 months in a subgroup of patients, and safety was also assessed. A total of 7062 patients at 104 centers in 14 countries underwent randomization; at the time of analysis, the vital status was unknown for 45 patients (0.6%), and this information was most likely missing at random. A primary-outcome event occurred in 322 of 3528 patients (9.1%) in the colchicine group and 327 of 3534 patients (9.3%) in the placebo group over a median follow-up period of 3 years (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.16; P = 0.93). The incidence of individual components of the primary outcome appeared to be similar in the two groups. The least-squares mean difference in C-reactive protein levels between the colchicine group and the placebo group at 3 months, adjusted according to the baseline values, was -1.28 mg per liter (95% CI, -1.81 to -0.75). Diarrhea occurred in a higher percentage of patients with colchicine than with placebo (10.2% vs. 6.6%; P<0.001), but the incidence of serious infections did not differ between groups. Among patients who had myocardial infarction, treatment with colchicine, when started soon after myocardial infarction and continued for a median of 3 years, did not reduce the incidence of the composite primary outcome (death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned ischemia-driven coronary revascularization). (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; CLEAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03048825.).

Whether a conservative strategy of medical therapy alone or a strategy of medical therapy plus invasive treatment is more beneficial in older adults with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains unclear. We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial involving patients 75 years of age or older with NSTEMI at 48 sites in the United Kingdom. The patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a conservative strategy of the best available medical therapy or an invasive strategy of coronary angiography and revascularization plus the best available medical therapy. Patients who were frail or had a high burden of coexisting conditions were eligible. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes (cardiovascular death) or nonfatal myocardial infarction assessed in a time-to-event analysis. A total of 1518 patients underwent randomization; 753 patients were assigned to the invasive-strategy group and 765 to the conservative-strategy group. The mean age of the patients was 82 years, 45% were women, and 32% were frail. A primary-outcome event occurred in 193 patients (25.6%) in the invasive-strategy group and 201 patients (26.3%) in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.14; P = 0.53) over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. Cardiovascular death occurred in 15.8% of the patients in the invasive-strategy group and 14.2% of the patients in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.44). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 11.7% in the invasive-strategy group and 15.0% in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.99). Procedural complications occurred in less than 1% of the patients. In older adults with NSTEMI, an invasive strategy did not result in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (the composite primary outcome) than a conservative strategy over a median follow-up of 4.1 years. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation; BHF SENIOR-RITA ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN11343602.).

BackgroundClinical trials and meta-analyses indicate a reduced reinfarction risk with invasive management in older patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). This study investigated whether similar benefits might be observed in frail patients.MethodsThe coMOrbilidades Síndrome Coronario Agudo - FRAIL (MOSCA-FRAIL) trial included 167 adults aged ≥70 years with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale ≥4 points) and NSTEMI, who were randomised to invasive (n=84) or conservative (n=83) strategy during the index hospitalisation. The primary end point of this subanalysis was reinfarction, considering all-cause mortality as a competing event, at a 3-year median follow-up. The time to first reinfarction and all reinfarctions (first and recurrent) were considered. The substudy was not prespecified.ResultsThe total number of deaths (93, 56%) exceeded that of first reinfarctions (32, 19%). Invasive treatment did not influence the reinfarction risk when accounting for death as a competing risk (subdistribution HR=0.87, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40, p=0.56). An initially increased mortality risk with invasive management (significant between days 131 and 175) shifted to a lower mortality risk over time. A total of 45 reinfarctions (first and recurrent) were observed. The longitudinal trajectories corroborated that the invasive strategy did not reduce the risk of reinfarction over time (p=0.72). However, mortality followed a biphasic pattern, with higher mortality in the invasive group during the first 6 months and a reduction between 9 months and 3 years (p=0.05 for the entire time-dependent trajectory). The win ratio for the invasive strategy versus the conservative strategy was 1.08 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.63, p=0.70).ConclusionsIn older adults with frailty and NSTEMI, routine invasive management did not reduce the reinfarction risk at a 3-year follow-up. The high all-cause mortality associated with frailty may limit the impact of invasive management. Due to the limited sample size and risk for type II error, these findings should be considered hypothesis-generating.Trial registration number NCT03208153.

•Randomized evidence regarding the optimal revascularization strategey in NSTEMI patients with multivessel coronary artery disease is limited.•The COMPLETE-NSTEMI trail aims to investigate whether complete revascularization is superior over culprit-lesion only PCI in these patients.•This trial will enroll 3390 NSTEMI patients at 65 to 70 in Germany and Austria. Multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is present in 30% to 70% of patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) depending on varying age and risk profiles. In contrast to the STEMI cohort, there is only limited scientific evidence derived from randomized controlled trials directing the general decision for or against complete revascularization in the NSTEMI population. The COMPLETE-NSTEMI trial aims to investigate whether multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is superior over culprit-lesion only PCI in patients with NSTEMI and multivessel CAD. COMPLETE-NSTEMI is a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter, parallel group, open-label trial. It will enroll 3390 NSTEMI patients with multivessel CAD at 65 to 70 sites in Germany and Austria. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to either complete revascularization with PCI or culprit lesion-only PCI. The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for nonfatal myocardial infarction during follow-up. The trial is event-driven and will be stopped as soon as 578 primary endpoint events and a minimal follow-up duration of 12 months for each patient are reached. The first patient was enrolled at October 27, 2023. By April 2025, 51 sites have been activated and >500 patients have been randomized. Completion of recruitment is expected for the first half of 2027. The final results of the primary endpoint are expected in 2028. COMPLETE NSTEMI will be the first dedicated trial to answer the question about the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with NSTEMI and multivessel CAD. NCT05786131

In intermediate- and high-risk non-ST elevated acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, a routine invasive approach is recommended. The timing of coronary angiography remains controversial. To assess whether an immediate (<3 hours) invasive treatment strategy would reduce infarct size and is safe, compared with an early strategy (12-24 hours), for patients admitted with NSTE-ACS while preferably treated with ticagrelor. In this single-center, prospective, randomized trial an immediate or early invasive strategy was randomly assigned to patients with NSTE-ACS. At admission, the patients were preferably treated with a combination of aspirin, ticagrelor and fondaparinux. The primary endpoint was the infarct size as measured by area under the curve (AUC) of CK-MB in 48 hours. Secondary endpoints were bleeding outcomes and major adverse cardiac events (MACE): composite of all-cause death, MI and unplanned revascularization. Interim analysis showed futility regarding the primary endpoint and trial inclusion was terminated. In total 249 patients (71% of planned) were included. The primary endpoint of in-hospital infarct size was a median AUC of CK-MB 186.2 ng/mL in the immediate group (IQR 112-618) and 201.3 ng/mL in the early group (IQR 119-479). Clinical follow-up was 1-year. The MACE-rate was 10% in the immediate and 10% in the early group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13, 95% CI: 0.52-2.49). In NSTE-ACS patients randomized to either an immediate or an early-invasive strategy the observed median difference in the primary endpoint was about half the magnitude of the expected difference. The trial was terminated early for futility after 71% of the projected enrollment had been randomized into the trial.

Background Cardiovascular disease in particular acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is remained one of the most cause of morbidity and mortality, annually. Considering inflammatory pathway of atherosclerosis, colchicine as an anti-inflammatory drug is introduced to be effective in pathogenesis, prognosis and mortality rate of these patients. So in order to find out the effects of this drug we conducted this trial to know whether it reduces major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in ACS patients or not. Methods In a prospective randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled ACS patients (40–70 years) with recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or NSTE-ACS diagnosed by coronary angiography and managed with either medical therapy or percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were assigned to two groups either receiving colchicine 0.5 mg daily or placebo for 6 months. Both groups simultaneously received standard medical therapy as accessible guidelines. MACE occurrence consists of decompensated heart failure, ACS, stroke and survival rate compared between two groups. Results A total of 249 patients were recruited between October 2019-March 2020 with mean age of 56.89 ± 7.54, 69.5% males; 120 assigned to the colchicine group and 129 assigned to the placebo group. Over the 6 months’ period, 36 MACE occurred that were 8 events in the colchicine group compared with 28 events in the placebo group experiencing the event ( P  = 0.001). All of four deaths in the colchicine group and two in the placebo group were due to cardiovascular events. Evaluating adverse effects, gastrointestinal symptom was the most with the rate of 15 (12.5%) in the colchicine group and 3 (2.5%) in the controls. ( P  = 0.002). Conclusion The addition of colchicine to standard medical therapy in ACS patients significantly reduces MACE occurrence and improves survival rate over the time.

ObjectiveInterleukin-6 (IL-6) is a driver of inflammation and associated endothelial cell activation in acute coronary syndromes. We evaluated the effect of the IL-6 receptor antagonist tocilizumab on coronary microvascular function and endothelial dysfunction measured by coronary flow reserve (CFR) and markers of endothelial cell activation in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).MethodsThis substudy was part of a two-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the effect of a single dose of tocilizumab in NSTEMI. Markers of endothelial cell activation (vascular cell adhesion molecule (VCAM)-1, intercellular adhesion molecule-1 and von Willebrand factor) were assessed in 117 patients. In 42 of these patients, 20 assigned to placebo and 22 to tocilizumab, we measured CFR. Blood samples were obtained at seven consecutive time points between day 1 and 3. CFR was measured by transthoracic echocardiography during hospitalisation and after 6 months.ResultsTocilizumab did not affect CFR during hospitalisation (tocilizumab: 3.4±0.8 vs placebo: 3.3±1.2, p=0.80). CFR improved significantly in both groups at 6 months. Patients in the tocilizumab group had significantly higher area under the curve for VCAM-1 (median 622 vs 609 ng/mL/hour, tocilizumab and placebo respectively, p=0.003). There were inverse correlations between VCAM-1 and CFR in the placebo (hospitalisation: r=−0.74, p<0.01, 6 months: r=−0.59, p<0.01), but not in the tocilizumab group (hospitalisation: r=0.20, p=0.37, 6 months r=−0.28, p=0.20).ConclusionsTocilizumab did not affect CFR during hospitalisation or after 6 months. Tocilizumab increased VCAM-1 levels during hospitalisation, but this was not associated with reduced CFR in these patients.

In patients with non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), total occlusion of the culprit coronary artery (OCA) is not uncommon. We sought to determine the frequency and clinical impact of OCA at presentation in a large population of patients presenting with NSTEMI and who underwent systematic early invasive management. We performed a post hoc analysis of the TAO (Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome with Otamixaban) randomized trial, which included patients with NSTEMI with systematic coronary angiography within 72 hours. We compared the baseline characteristics and outcomes of patients according to whether the culprit vessel was occluded (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade [TFG] 0 to 1) or patent (TFG 2 to 3) at presentation. A total of 7,473 patients with NSTEMI with only 1 culprit lesion identified were enrolled, of whom 1,702 patients had OCA (22.8%). In the OCA group, coronary angiography was performed earlier (18 ± 15 vs 20 ± 16 hours, p <0.01), the culprit lesion was less likely to be the left anterior descending artery (26.5% vs 41.4%, p <0.001) but with more frequent angiographic thrombus (49.9% vs 22.7%, p <0.01). Culprit artery percutaneous coronary intervention during the index procedure was also more frequent (88.5% vs 78.1%, p <0.001) but with a lower rate of TFG grade 3 after the procedure and higher subsequent peak troponin I levels (8.3 ± 13.6 µg/L vs 5.6 ± 11.9 µg/L, p <0.001). At day 7, patients with OCA had higher mortality, and this persisted after adjustment on gender, Grace risk score, cardiovascular risk factors, and culprit vessel location (0.9% vs 0.4%, p = 0.02; adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23 to 5.29, p = 0.01). The absolute difference of mortality was maintained through 30 days: 1.2% versus 0.8%, p = 0.13; OR: 1.72, 95% CI 0.97 to 3.05, but mortality rates were similar by 180 days: 1.5% versus 1.6%, p = 0.8, adjusted OR = 1.11, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.80, p = 0.66. In conclusion, a significant proportion of patients with NSTEMI have a totally occluded culprit vessel at presentation. These patients are at higher risk of early mortality but not at 6 months.

We aimed to compare differences in risk and timing of recurrent ischemic events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD), non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We performed an individual data pooled analysis of 5 randomized controlled all-comer trials including a total of 8,859 patients and investigated the risk and timing of recurrent ischemic events among patients with SIHD (n = 3,543), NSTE-ACS (n = 3,364), and STEMI (n = 1,952) throughout 2 years of follow-up. At 2 years, all-cause mortality was higher among patients with STEMI (6.4%) and NSTE-ACS (6.1%) compared with those with SIHD (4.2%) (STEMI vs SIHD: hazard ratio [HR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.09-1.78, P = .007; NSTE-ACS vs SIHD: 1.40, 95% CI 1.13-1.73, P = .002). In a landmark analysis, the risk of mortality among patients with STEMI compared with those with SIHD was confined to the first 30 days after PCI (HR 6.19, 95% CI 3.15-12.16, P < .001) but was similar between 30 days and 2 years (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.76-1.33, P = .974) (Pinteraction < .001). Conversely, patients with NSTE-ACS had a higher risk of mortality compared with those with SIHD both within the first 30 days (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.08-4.47, P = .031) and beyond (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.07-1.67, P = .012) (Pinteraction < .001). A similar pattern in the differential timing of events was observed for cardiac death. Beyond 30 days, the risk of myocardial infarction was comparable in patients with STEMI and SIHD, whereas the risk in patients with NSTE-ACS was increased (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.23-2.21, P = .001). Whereas patients with NSTE-ACS are at increased risk for death at any time after PCI, the mortality of STEMI patients is higher during the first 30 days after PCI but not thereafter compared with patients with SIHD.

BackgroundThe effectiveness of risk stratification using the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) Risk Score (GRS) for patients presenting to hospital with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) according to troponin elevation is unknown.MethodsPost hoc analysis of a phase 3 parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial (UK GRACE Risk Score, UKGRIS) of adult patients presenting with suspected NSTEACS to 42 hospitals in England between 9 March 2017 and 30 December 2019, with hospitals randomised (1:1) to standard care or according to the GRS and associated guidelines. Coprimary outcome measures were use of guideline-recommended management and time to the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, new-onset heart failure hospitalisation or readmission for cardiovascular event at a minimum of 24 months follow-up.ResultsA total of 3050 patients were randomised in UKGRIS, of whom 2602 had troponin elevation. The relative effect of GRS compared with standard care on the uptake of guideline-recommended care was greater for participants with troponin elevation compared with those without (relative OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.00, p<0.01). The time to the first composite event was not improved by the GRS among participants with (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.14) or without troponin elevation (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.64), with no interaction (relative HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.08, p=0.14 for interaction).ConclusionsFor suspected NSTEACS, the effect of the GRS compared with standard care on uptake of recommended processes in those with elevated troponin was higher than in those without. However, this did not translate into a reduction in the composite primary or secondary outcomes at 24 months.Trial registration numberISRCTN29731761.