Semaglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes in People With Overweight or Obesity (SELECT) rationale and design

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Although it has been widely appreciated that obesity is a major risk factor for CVD, treatments that produce effective, durable weight loss and the impact of weight reduction in reducing cardiovascular risk have been elusive. Instead, progress in CVD risk reduction has been achieved through medications indicated for controlling lipids, hyperglycemia, blood pressure, heart failure, inflammation, and/or thrombosis. Obesity has been implicated as promoting all these issues, suggesting that sustained, effective weight loss may have independent cardiovascular benefit. GLP-1 receptor agonists (RAs) reduce weight, improve glycemia, decrease cardiovascular events in those with diabetes, and may have additional cardioprotective effects. The GLP-1 RA semaglutide is in phase 3 studies as a medication for obesity treatment at a dose of 2.4 mg subcutaneously (s.c.) once weekly. Semaglutide Effects on Heart Disease and Stroke in Patients with Overweight or Obesity (SELECT) is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial testing if semaglutide 2.4 mg subcutaneously once weekly is superior to placebo when added to standard of care for preventing major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with established CVD and overweight or obesity but without diabetes. SELECT is the first cardiovascular outcomes trial to evaluate superiority in major adverse cardiovascular events reduction for an antiobesity medication in such a population. As such, SELECT has the potential for advancing new approaches to CVD risk reduction while targeting obesity.

Canakinumab to reduce deterioration of cardiac and respiratory function in SARS-CoV-2 associated myocardial injury with heightened inflammation (canakinumab in Covid-19 cardiac injury: The three C study)

BACKGROUND

In patients with Covid-19, myocardial injury and increased inflammation are associated with morbidity and mortality. We designed a proof-of-concept randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether treatment with canakinumab prevents progressive respiratory failure and worsening cardiac dysfunction in patients with SARS-CoV2 infection, myocardial injury, and high levels of inflammation.

HYPOTHESIS

The primary hypothesis is that canakiumab will shorten time to recovery.

METHODS

The three C study (canakinumab in Covid-19 Cardiac Injury, NCT04365153) is a double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing canakinumab 300 mg IV, 600 mg IV, or placebo in a 1:1:1 ratio in hospitalized Covid-19 patients with elevations in troponin and C-reactive protein (CRP). The primary endpoint is defined as the time in days from randomization to either an improvement of two points on a seven category ordinal scale or discharge from the hospital, whichever occurs first up to 14 days postrandomization. The secondary endpoint is mortality at day 28. A total of 45 patients will be enrolled with an anticipated 5 month follow up period.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics for the first 20 randomized patients reveal a predominantly male (75%), elderly population (median 67 years) with a high prevalence of hypertension (80%) and hyperlipidemia (75%). CRPs have been markedly elevated (median 16.2 mg/dL) with modest elevations in high-sensitivity troponin T (median 21 ng/L), in keeping with the concept of enrolling patients with early myocardial injury.

CONCLUSIONS

The three C study will provide insights regarding whether IL-1β inhibition may improve outcomes in patients with SARS-CoV2 associated myocardial injury and increased inflammation.

Effect of C-Reactive Protein on Lipoprotein(a)-Associated Cardiovascular Risk in Optimally Treated Patients With High-Risk Vascular Disease: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the ACCELERATE Trial

Importance

Although lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]) is a causal genetic risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, it remains unclear which patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease stand to benefit the most from Lp(a) lowering. Whether inflammation can modulate Lp(a)-associated cardiovascular (CV) risk during secondary prevention is unknown.

Objective

To examine whether Lp(a)-associated CV risk is modulated by systemic inflammation in optimally treated patients at high risk of CV disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A prespecified secondary post hoc analysis of the double-blind, multicenter randomized clinical Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition With Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes (ACCELERATE) trial was conducted between October 1, 2012, and December 31, 2013; the study was terminated October 12, 2015. The study was conducted at 543 academic and community hospitals in 36 countries among 12 092 patients at high risk of CV disease (acute coronary syndrome, stroke, peripheral arterial disease, or type 2 diabetes with coronary artery disease) with measurable Lp(a) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels during treatment. Statistical analysis for this post hoc analysis was performed from September 26, 2018, to March 28, 2020.

Interventions

Participants received evacetrapib, 130 mg/d, or matching placebo.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The ACCELERATE trial found no significant benefit or harm of evacetrapib on 30-month major adverse cardiovascular events (CV death, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina). This secondary analysis evaluated rates of CV death, MI, and stroke across levels of Lp(a).

Results

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein and Lp(a) levels were measured in 10 503 patients (8135 men; 8561 white; 10 134 received concurrent statins; mean [SD] age, 64.6 [9.4] years). In fully adjusted analyses, in patients with hsCRP of 2 mg/L or more but not less than 2 mg/L, increasing quintiles of Lp(a) were significantly associated with greater rates of death, MI, and stroke (P = .006 for interaction). Each unit increase in log Lp(a) levels was associated with a 13% increased risk of CV death, nonfatal MI, or stroke only in those with hsCRP levels of 2 mg/L or more (P = .008 for interaction). There was also a significant stepwise relationship between increasing Lp(a) quintiles and time to first CV death, MI, or stroke (log-rank P < .001) when hsCRP levels were 2 mg/L or more but not less than 2 mg/L. Sensitivity analyses in the ACCELERATE placebo-treated group yielded similar significant associations exclusively in the group with hsCRP of 2 mg/L or more.

Conclusions and Relevance

Elevated Lp(a) levels during treatment are related to CV death, MI, and stroke when hsCRP levels are 2 mg/L or more but not less than 2mg/L. This finding suggests a potential benefit of lowering Lp(a) in patients with residual systemic inflammation despite receipt of optimal medical therapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01687998.

Association of Lowering Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol With Contemporary Lipid-Lowering Therapies and Risk of Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The relationship between lowering LDL (low‐density lipoprotein) cholesterol with contemporary lipid‐lowering therapies and incident diabetes mellitus (DM) remains uncertain.

Methods and Results

Thirty‐three randomized controlled trials (21 of statins, 12 of PCSK9 [proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9] inhibitors, and 0 of ezetimibe) were selected using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception through November 15, 2018). A total of 163 688 nondiabetic patients were randomly assigned to more intensive (83 123 patients) or less intensive (80 565 patients) lipid‐lowering therapy. More intensive lipid‐lowering therapy was defined as the more potent pharmacological strategy (PCSK9 inhibitors, higher intensity statins, or statins), whereas less intensive therapy corresponded to active control group or placebo/usual care of the trial. Metaregression and meta‐analyses were conducted using a random‐effects model. No significant association was noted between 1‐mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol and incident DM for more intensive lipid‐lowering therapy (risk ratio: 0.95; 95% CI, 0.87–1.04; P=0.30; R²=14%) or for statins or PCSK9 inhibitors. More intensive lipid‐lowering therapy was associated with a higher risk of incident DM compared with less intensive therapy (risk ratio: 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03–1.11; P<0.001; I²=0%). These results were driven by higher risk of incident DM with statins (risk ratio: 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05–1.15; P<0.001; I²=0%), whereas PCSK9 inhibitors were not associated with incident DM (risk ratio: 1.00; 95% CI, 0.93–1.07; P=0.96; I²=0%; P=0.02 for interaction).

Conclusions

Among intensive lipid‐lowering therapies, there was no independent association between reduction in LDL cholesterol and incident DM. The risk of incident DM was higher with statins, whereas PCSK9 inhibitors had no association with risk of incident DM.

Aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events

Recent trials evaluated the impact of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in patients at intermediate risk, patients with diabetes, and the elderly, and the results have been incorporated into the most recent professional guidelines. For the most part, the role of aspirin in primary prevention remains limited, albeit not adequately tested in those at higher risk.

Abstract 383: Effect of Race on Risk of Recurrent Myocardial Infarction After Index Myocardial Infarction

Background: Though the prevalence of coronary artery disease is known to be highest in African Americans, it is unclear if there are any racial factors predisposing patients for a recurrent Myocardial Infarction (MI) after index MI.

Methods: We reviewed 6,626 cases of MI at a single quaternary care medical center from January 1 st , 2010 to January 1 st , 2017 (29% STEMI, 71% NSTEMI), and we identified all cases of recurrent MI within 90 days of discharge after index MI. The patients were categorized according to their corresponding races into White Americans, African Americans, and Others.

Result: Out of the 6626 initial cases of MI, 72% were white patients, 25% were African Americans and 3% belonged to other races. A total of 2051 patients were readmitted within 90 days of index admission, of which 168 patients were readmitted with an MI. Only 2.1% of White patients developed a recurrent MI whereas 4% of African Americans were readmitted with a recurrent MI (P=0.003).

Conclusion: We observed that African Americans were more likely to be readmitted with a recurrent MI than White Americans. Understanding the reasons for this increased risk in MI can translate into improved care for African Americans.

Effect of CETP inhibition with evacetrapib in patients with diabetes mellitus enrolled in the ACCELERATE trial

BACKGROUND

High-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels are inversely associated with cardiovascular risk. Cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition with evacetrapib results in a marked increase in HDL and reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels. We evaluated the impact of treatment with evacetrapib versus placebo in the subset of 8236 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) enrolled in the Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition with Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Time to first occurrence of any component of the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and hospitalization for unstable angina was compared among patients with DM randomized to treatment with evacetrapib (n=4127) or placebo (n=4109) over a median of 26 months of follow-up. The mean baseline LDL at initiation was 80 mg/dL with a mean baseline HDL of 44 mg/dL. In patients with DM, evacetrapib resulted in a 131% mean increase in HDL levels and a 32% mean decrease in LDL at 3 months that was sustained during the course of the trial. At 6 months, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels were lower with evacetrapib than placebo (7.08% vs 7.15%, p=0.023). Composite event rates were higher in patients with DM than without DM (Kaplan-Meier estimates: 15.2% vs 10.6%, HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.64, p<0.001). In the DM group, event rates for the composite endpoint (14.5% evacetrapib vs 16% placebo, HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07, p=0.38) and individual components of the composite were similar for both evacetrapib and placebo groups. No significant treatment interaction between treatment assignment and diabetes status was noted.

CONCLUSION

Despite a favorable increase in HDL, and decreases in LDL and HbA1c levels in patients with DM, we observed no benefits of treatment with evacetrapib on prespecified clinical outcomes in this high-risk population.

Association of adoption of transradial access for percutaneous coronary intervention in ST elevation myocardial infarction with door-to-balloon time

Objectives

We aimed to study adoption of transradial primary percutaneous coronary intervention (TR‐PPCI) for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (“radial first” approach) and its association with door‐to‐balloon time (D2BT).

Background

TR‐PPCI for STEMI is underutilized in the United States due to concerns about prolonging D2BT. Whether operators and hospitals adopting a radial first approach in STEMI incur prolonged D2BT is unknown.

Methods

In 1,272 consecutive cases of STEMI with PPCI at our hospital from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2016, we studied TR‐PPCI adoption and its association with D2BT including a propensity matched analysis of similar risk TR‐PPCI and trans‐femoral primary PCI (TF‐PPCI) patients.

Results

With major increases in hospital‐level TR‐PPCI (hospital TR‐PPCI rate: 2.6% in 2011 to 79.4% in 2016, p‐trend<.001) and operator‐level TR‐PPCI (mean operator TR‐PPCI rate: 2.9% in 2011 to 81.1% in 2016, p‐trend = .005), median hospital level D2BT decreased from 102 min [81, 142] in 2011 to 84 min [60, 105] in 2016 (p‐trend<.001). TF crossover (10.3%; n = 57) was not associated with unadjusted D2BT (TR‐PPCI success 91 min [72, 112] vs. TF crossover 99 min [70, 115], p = .432) or D2BT adjusted for study year and presenting location (7.2% longer D2BT with TF crossover, 95% CI: −4.0% to +18.5%, p = .208). Among 273 propensity‐matched pairs, unadjusted D2BT (TR‐PPCI 98 [78, 117] min vs. TF‐PPCI 101 [76, 132] min, p = .304), and D2BT adjusted for study year and presenting location (5.0% shorter D2BT with TR‐PPCI, 95% CI: −12.4% to +2.4%, p = .188) were similar.

Conclusions

TR‐PPCI can be successfully implemented without compromising D2BT performance.

Association of Initial and Serial C-Reactive Protein Levels With Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Death After Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Secondary Analysis of the VISTA-16 Trial

Importance

Higher baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. The usefulness of serial hsCRP measurements for risk stratifying patients after ACS is not well characterized.

Objective

To assess whether longitudinal increases in hsCRP measurements during the 16 weeks after ACS are independently associated with a greater risk of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), all-cause death, and cardiovascular death.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Secondary analysis of the double-blind, multicenter, randomized clinical Vascular Inflammation Suppression to Treat Acute Coronary Syndromes for 16 Weeks (VISTA-16) trial conducted between June 1, 2010, and March 7, 2012 (study termination on March 9, 2012), which included 5145 patients from 362 academic and community hospitals in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, India, and North America assigned to receive varespladib or placebo on a background of atorvastatin treatment beginning within 96 hours of presentation with an ACS. The present study evaluated data from patients with available baseline and longitudinal hsCRP levels measured at weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 after randomization to treatment or placebo. Statistical analysis was performed from June 15, 2018, through September 15, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes were MACE (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or unstable angina with documented ischemia requiring hospitalization), cardiovascular death, and all-cause death after adjustment for baseline clinical, treatment, and laboratory characteristics, including baseline hsCRP levels.

Results

Among 4257 patients in this study, 3141 (73.8%) were men and the mean age was 60.3 years (interquartile range [IQR], 53.5-67.8 years). The median 16-week low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 64.9 mg/dL (IQR, 50.3-82.3 mg/dL), and the median hsCRP level was 2.4 mg/L (IQR, 1.1-5.2 mg/L). On multivariable analysis, higher baseline hsCRP level (hazard ratio [HR], 1.36 [95% CI, 1.13-1.63]; P = .001) and higher longitudinal hsCRP level (HR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.09-1.21]; P < .001) were independently associated with MACE. Similar significant and independent associations were shown between baseline and longitudinal hsCRP levels and cardiovascular death (baseline: HR, 1.61 per SD [95% CI, 1.07-2.41], P = .02; longitudinal: HR, 1.26 per SD [95% CI, 1.19-1.34], P < .001) and between baseline and longitudinal hsCRP levels and all-cause death (baseline: HR, 1.58 per SD [95% CI, 1.07-2.35], P = .02; longitudinal: HR, 1.25 per SD [95% CI, 1.18-1.32], P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Initial and subsequent increases in hsCRP levels during 16 weeks after ACS were associated with a greater risk of the combined MACE end point, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death despite established background therapies. Serial measurements of hsCRP during clinical follow-up after ACS may help to identify patients at higher risk for mortality and morbidity.

Impact of Baseline Glycemic Control on Residual Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and High-Risk Vascular Disease Treated With Statin Therapy

Background

The contemporary impact of glycemic control on patients with diabetes mellitus at high cardiovascular risk remains unclear. We evaluated the utility of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) as a marker of risk on the composite end point of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, and coronary revascularization in an optimally treated population with diabetes mellitus and established coronary artery disease enrolled in the ACCELERATE (Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition With Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes) trial.

Methods and Results

We included all patients with established diabetes mellitus and measured HbA1c (N=8145) and estimated Kaplan‐Meier (KM) events rates, stratified by increasing baseline HbA1c levels censored at 30 months. We then performed a multivariable regression for the primary end point. Increasing baseline HbA1c was strongly associated with the occurrence of the primary end point (KM estimate, 12.6–18.2; P<0.001). Increasing baseline HbA1c was also associated with the triple end point of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and stroke (KM estimate, 7.8–11.3; P=0.003) as well as the individual end points of nonfatal myocardial infarction (KM estimate, 3.1–7.0; P<0.001), hospitalization for unstable angina (KM estimate, 1.8–5.0; P=0.003), and revascularization (KM estimate, 7.3–11.1; P=0.001), although not stroke (KM estimate, 1.4–2.4; P=0.45). The rates of cardiovascular mortality (KM estimate, 2.6–4.3; P=0.21) and all‐cause mortality (KM estimate, 4.8–5.9; P=0.21) were similar regardless of baseline HbA1c levels. When adjusting for relevant baseline characteristics, baseline HbA1c was an independent predictor for the primary end point (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02–1.11; P=0.003).

Conclusions

Glycemic control, as measured by HbA1c, remains strongly and independently associated with cardiovascular outcomes in high‐risk patients with diabetes mellitus on statin therapy.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01687998.

Exposure and response analysis of aleglitazar on cardiovascular risk markers and safety outcomes: An analysis of the AleCardio trial

AIMS

The AleCardio trial aimed to characterize the efficacy and safety of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-αγ agonist aleglitazar in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome. The trial terminated early because of futility and safety signals. We evaluated whether the safety signals could be attributed to increased exposure to aleglitazar.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The AleCardio trial enrolled 7226 patients to receive aleglitazar 150 μg or matching placebo on top of standard care. A population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted in a pharmacokinetic substudy to identify covariates that explained interindividual variability in exposure. Subsequently, the effect of these covariates on surrogate and clinical outcomes was assessed in the full patient population.

RESULTS

Concomitant administration of clopidogrel was identified as a covariate that influenced the apparent clearance of aleglitazar. Patients using clopidogrel had a mean predicted area under the plasma-concentration-time curve (AUC_0-24 ) of 174.7 ng h/mL (SD: ±112.9 ng h/mL) versus 142.2 ng h/mL (SD: ±92.6 ng h/mL) in patients without clopidogrel. The effect of aleglitazar compared with placebo on HbA1c, haemoglobin, serum creatinine and adiponectin was modified by concomitant clopidogrel use (P for interaction 0.007, 0.002, <0.001 and < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant use of clopidogrel was identified as a covariate that explained interindividual variability in exposure to aleglitazar. Patients using clopidogrel showed an additional lowering of HbA1c, at the expense of an additional decrease in haemoglobin, and an increase in serum creatinine and adiponectin. Clopidogrel is a moderate inhibitor of CYP2C8. Because aleglitazar is metabolized by CYP2C8, a pharmacokinetic interaction could explain differences in exposure and response to aleglitazar.

Plasma Aldosterone Levels Are Not Associated With Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With High-Risk Vascular Disease: Insights From the ACCELERATE Trial

Background

The failure of cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor torcetrapib was associated with an off‐target increase in plasma aldosterone. We sought to evaluate the impact of evacetrapib on plasma aldosterone level and determine the association between plasma aldosterone level and major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with stable high‐risk vascular disease enrolled in the ACCELERATE (Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition With Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes) trial.

Methods and Results

We included all patients with a plasma aldosterone level (N=1624) and determined the impact of evacetrapib exposure compared with placebo on plasma aldosterone levels after 12 months of treatment. Using baseline and postexposure aldosterone levels, hazard ratios for major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, hospitalization for unstable angina, and revascularization) with increasing quartile of baseline and percentage change in plasma aldosterone level at follow‐up were calculated. The average age was 65.2 years, 75.7% were men, 93.7% were hypertensive, 73.3% were diabetic, and 57.6% had a prior myocardial infarction. Baseline plasma aldosterone level (85.2 [43, 150] versus 86.8 [43, 155] pmol/L; P=0.81) and follow‐up percentage change (13.6% [−29, 88] versus 17.9% [−24, 87]; P=0.23) were similar between those who received evacetrapib and placebo. During median follow‐up of 28 months, major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 263 patients (16.2%). The hazard ratios for increasing quartile of baseline or percentage change in plasma aldosterone level at follow‐up were not significant for major adverse cardiovascular events. These findings remained consistent when adjusting for significant characteristics.

Conclusions

Exposure to evacetrapib did not result in significant change in plasma aldosterone levels compared with placebo. Among patients with stable high‐risk vascular disease, plasma aldosterone levels were not a predictor for future cardiovascular events.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01687998.

Effect of Left Ventricular Conduction Delay on All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality (from the PRECISION Trial)

The prognosis associated with prolonged intraventricular conduction on electrocardiogram (ECG) remains uncertain. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of narrow versus prolonged intraventricular conduction on ECG stratified by QRS morphology and cardiovascular disease (CVD) status. A post-hoc analysis was performed of the randomized-control PRECISION trial. Patients with centrally adjudicated, nonpaced baseline ECGs were included. QRS duration was classified narrow (≤100 ms) versus prolonged (>100 ms) with additional categorization into left (LBBB) or right (RBBB) bundle branch block or nonspecific intraventricular conduction delay (IVCD). IVCD was subclassified if left ventricular conduction delay (LVCD) was present (L-IVCD) or absent (O-IVCD). The primary outcome was adjudicated all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Of 24,081 patients randomized, 22,067 (92%) were included with follow-up 34 ± 13 months. Study patients were 63 ± 9 years, 64% female, 75% Caucasian, 23% with established CVD. The prevalence of QRS prolongation was 5.6% (1,240): 760 right bundle branch block (3.4%), 313 LBBB (1.4%), and 161 IVCD (0.7%), 95 subclassified L-IVCD (0.4%). After adjustment, LBBB and L-IVCD were similarly associated with increased all-cause (LBBB: 2.3 [1.4 to 3.8], p = 0.001; L-IVCD: 4.0 [2.1 to 7.9], p <0.001) and CV (LBBB: 3.6 [2.0 to 6.5], p <0.001; L-IVCD 3.6 [1.3 to 9.7], p = 0.001) mortality. The presence of LVCD (LBBB or L-IVCD) was associated with all-cause (2.8 [1.8 to 4.2], p <0.001) and CV (3.6 [2.2 to 6.1], p <0.001) mortality exceeding the observed risks of coronary artery disease, left ventricular hypertrophy, or diabetes. The LVCD hazard persisted across QRS durations (100 to 120 vs >120 ms) and CVD status. In conclusion, LVCD, whether LBBB or L-IVCD, was strongly associated with increased mortality in patients with and at-risk for CVD.

ADCY9 Genetic Variants and Cardiovascular Outcomes With Evacetrapib in Patients With High-Risk Vascular Disease: A Nested Case-Control Study

Importance

A pharmacogenetic analysis of dalcetrapib, a cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor, reported an association between a single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in the ADCY9 gene (rs1967309) and reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events despite a neutral result for the overall trial.

Objective

To determine whether the association between the SNP in the ADCY9 gene and a reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events could be replicated for another cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor, evacetrapib, in patients with high-risk vascular disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A nested case-control study examining the rs1967309 SNP in 1427 cases and 1532 matched controls selected from the 12 092-patient Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition with Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes (ACCELERATE) trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial conducted in patients with high-risk vascular disease randomized from October 2012 through December 2013. The genotyping was conducted from January 2017 to March 2017, and the data analyses were conducted from July 2017 to November 2017.

Exposures

Evacetrapib, 130 mg, or matching placebo.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary analyses used a conditional logistic regression model to assess the odds ratio (OR) for major adverse cardiovascular events for evacetrapib compared with placebo for each genotype. The basic model included adjustment for age, sex, and the top 5 principal components. An additional model included cardiovascular risk factors to adjust for potential bias in selecting control patients. The primary major adverse cardiovascular event end point was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina.

Results

For patients with the AA genotype reported to demonstrate a beneficial effect from dalcetrapib, the OR for evacetrapib compared with placebo was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.69-1.12). For patients with the AG genotype, the OR was 1.04 (95% CI, 0.90-1.21). For patients with the GG genotype reported to show evidence for a harmful effect from dalcetrapib, the OR for evacetrapib was 1.18 (95% CI, 0.98-1.41). The interaction P value among the 3 genotypes was P = .17 and the trend P value was P = .06. When adjusted for cardiovascular risk factors, the OR for evacetrapib was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.73-1.19) for the AA genotype, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.91-1.22) for the AG genotype, and 1.02 (95% CI 0.85-1.24) for the GG genotype; interaction P = .71 and trend P = .59.

Conclusions and Relevance

Pharmacogenetic analysis did not show a significant association between the ADCY9 SNP (rs1967309) and cardiovascular benefit or harm for the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib.

Baseline fasting plasma insulin levels predict risk for major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with diabetes and high-risk vascular disease: Insights from the ACCELERATE trial

BACKGROUND

Despite optimal treatment, type II diabetes mellitus remains associated with an increased risk for future cardiovascular events. We sought to determine the association between baseline fasting plasma insulin levels and major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type II diabetes mellitus and high-risk vascular disease enrolled in the ACCELERATE (Assessment of Clinical Effects of Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibition with Evacetrapib in Patients at a High Risk for Vascular Outcomes) trial.

METHODS

We included all patients with type II diabetes mellitus who had a central laboratory measured fasting plasma insulin level drawn at baseline as part of the study protocol. Hazard ratios were generated for the risk of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina and coronary revascularization) with increasing quartile of baseline fasting plasma insulin level. We then performed a multivariable regression adjusting for significant baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 12,092 patients in ACCELERATE, 2042 patients with type II diabetes mellitus had a baseline fasting plasma insulin level drawn. Median follow-up was 28 months. The study population had a mean age of 66.6 years, 79.2% male and 96.2% had established coronary artery disease. During follow-up, major adverse cardiovascular outcomes occurred in 238 patients (11.6%); of these events, 177 were coronary revascularization (8.7%). We observed a statistically significant relationship between rates of revascularization and rising quartile of baseline fasting plasma insulin level which was not noted for the other individual components of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Patients with type II diabetes mellitus who underwent revascularization were noted to have significantly higher baseline fasting plasma insulin levels (27.7 vs 21.4 mU/L, p-value = 0.009) although baseline haemoglobin A1c (6.63% vs 6.55%), body mass index (31.5 vs 31.1 kg/m2) and medical therapy were otherwise similar to the group not undergoing revascularization. Following multivariable regression adjusting for significant characteristics including exposure to evacetrapib, the log of baseline fasting plasma insulin level was found to be an independent predictor for major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (hazard ratio = 1.36, 95% confidence interval = 1.09-1.69, p-value = 0.007); this was driven by need for future revascularization (hazard ratio = 1.56, 95% confidence interval = 1.21-2.00, p-value = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In a contemporary population of patients with type II diabetes mellitus and high-risk vascular disease on optimum medical therapy, baseline hyperinsulinaemia was an independent predictor for major adverse cardiovascular outcomes and need of future coronary revascularization. These results suggest a pathophysiological link between hyperinsulinaemia and progression of atherosclerotic vascular disease among diabetics.

Effects of high-density lipoprotein targeting treatments on cardiovascular outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effects of increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol on cardiovascular outcomes remain uncertain.

DESIGN

We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the effects of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol modifiers (niacin, fibrates and cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors) on cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

Thirty-one randomized controlled trials (154,601 patients) with a follow-up of 6 months or more and a sample size of 100 or more patients were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL database (inception January 2018).

RESULTS

High-density lipoprotein cholesterol modifiers had no statistically significant effect on cardiovascular mortality in terms of relative risk (RR) (RR 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.00, P = 0.05, I² = 13%) or absolute risk (risk difference -0.0001, 95% CI -0.0014, 0.0011, P = 0.84, I² = 28%). High-density lipoprotein cholesterol modifiers reduced the RR of myocardial infarction (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.82-0.93, P < 0.001, I² = 37%). This significant effect was derived by the use of fibrates (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.87, P < 0.001, I² = 22%) and meta-regression analysis showed that this benefit was consistent with an absolute reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol modifiers had no effect on stroke (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.09, P = 0.94, I² = 25%) or all-cause mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97-1.08, P = 0.48, I² = 49%). Meta-regression analyses failed to demonstrate a significant association of pharmacologically increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol with key endpoints. In studies with background statin therapy, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol modifiers had no statistically significant impact on cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke or all-cause mortality ( P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The use of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol modifying treatments had no significant effect on cardiovascular mortality, stroke or all-cause mortality. The beneficial effect on myocardial infarction was lost when drugs were used with statin therapy.

Fasiglifam-Induced Liver Injury in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Randomized Controlled Cardiovascular Outcomes Safety Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cardiovascular (CV) safety of fasiglifam, a first-in-man G-protein-coupled receptor 40 (GPR40) agonist, in patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A phase 3 multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled two-arm trial was intended to randomize 5,000 participants with type 2 diabetes at high CV risk to fasiglifam or placebo. The primary objective of the trial was to rule out an upper noninferiority bound >1.3 for a one-sided 97.5% confidence limit of the hazard ratio (HR) for CV composite events during treatment with fasiglifam compared with placebo. The primary outcome was the time to first occurrence of any component of the major adverse CV event composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and hospitalization for unstable angina.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 3,207 participants but was terminated because of liver safety concerns. Increased rates of liver enzyme elevation (AST/ALT ≥3-5 × upper limit of normal [ULN]) with fasiglifam were observed. The incidence of ALT or AST ≥3 × ULN with fasiglifam compared with placebo was 2.1% vs. 0.5%, P < 0.001, and the incidence for ≥10 × ULN was 0.31% vs. 0.06%, P < 0.001. A primary CV composite outcome occurred in 40 participants, 2.5% each in the fasiglifam and placebo arms at 12 months (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.67, 1.63).

CONCLUSIONS

Development of fasiglifam was terminated due to concerns of drug-induced liver injury. Performance of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-mandated CV outcomes trial supported the termination of the fasiglifam clinical program.

Assessment of omega-3 carboxylic acids in statin-treated patients with high levels of triglycerides and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol: Rationale and design of the STRENGTH trial

It is uncertain whether omega-3 fatty acids are beneficial in statin-treated patients. Epanova is a mix of omega-3 free fatty acids, not requiring co-ingestion with food, which can lower triglycerides by up to 31%. STRENGTH will examine whether Epanova 4 g daily reduces the rate of cardiovascular events in statin-treated patients with hypertriglyceridemia and low levels of HDL-C at high risk for developing cardiovascular events. STRENGTH is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients had a triglyceride level ≥ 180 to <500 mg/dL and HDL-C < 42 mg/dL (men) or < 47 mg/dL (women) in the presence of either (1) established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, (2) diabetes with one additional risk factor, or (3) were other high-risk primary prevention patients, based on age and risk factor assessment. Patients should be treated with a statin, for >4 weeks, and have LDL-C < 100 mg/dL, but were also eligible if LDL-C was ≥100 mg/dL while on maximum tolerated statin therapy. The study will extend from October 30, 2014 to October 30, 2019. 13 086 patients were randomized to Epanova 4 g or placebo daily in addition to standard medical therapy. The primary efficacy outcome is time to first event of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization or hospitalization for unstable angina. The trial will continue until 1600 patients reach the primary endpoint, with a median duration of therapy of 3 years. STRENGTH will determine whether Epanova 4 g daily will reduce cardiovascular events in statin-treated high-risk patients with hypertriglyceridemia and low HDL-C levels.