Comparative efficacy of two paclitaxel-coated balloons with different excipient coatings in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis

Comparative long-term efficacy and safety of two paclitaxel-coated balloons with different coating strategies for the treatment of drug-eluting coronary stent restenosis

BACKGROUND

We previously showed non-inferiority of a low-dose paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) with citrate excipient (Agent PCB) as compared to normal-dose iopromide excipient (SeQuent Please PCB) in terms of angiographic and clinical endpoints at 12 months. The long-term clinical efficacy and safety of Agent PCB is not defined.

METHODS

262 patients (323 DES-ISR lesions) were enrolled in this study and treated with either Agent PCB (125 patients, 151 lesions) in the ISAR-DESIRE 3a trial or with SeQuent Please PCB (137 patients, 172 lesions) in the setting of the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 trial with similar in- and exclusion criteria serving as historical control arm. The follow-up period was extended to 7 years. The efficacy and safety endpoints of this analysis were target-lesion revascularization (TLR), death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion thrombosis (TLT) at 7 years.

RESULTS

At 7 years, 206 patients (78.6%) were alive. The risks of TLR (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87-1.90; p = 0.205), death (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 0.82-2.35; p = 0.227), MI (HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.39-3.15; p = 0.852) and TLT (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 0.20-24.10; p = 0.523) were comparable between Agent PCB and SeQuent PCB. Multivariate analysis showed comparable risks of TLR, death and MI between both PCB devices.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated for DES-ISR by angioplasty with Agent PCB and SeQuent Please PCB, there was no statistically significant difference in TLR at 7 years. Randomized trials with standardized lesion preparation and long-term follow-up are warranted to further evaluate comparative efficacy of both devices. (ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT02367495).

Recurrent Revascularization at 10 Years After Percutaneous Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with recurrence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains particularly challenging, with data and guideline recommendations for repeat percutaneous coronary intervention being scant.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term incidence of recurrent revascularization events after percutaneous treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, 402 patients (500 lesions) assigned to plain balloon (PB), drug-coated balloon (DCB), or DES treatment in the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 (Efficacy Study of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon, -Stent vs. Plain Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis) trial were followed up over a median of 10.3 years. The primary endpoint was total repeat target lesion revascularization (R-TLR) including all, first and recurrent, events.

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, first R-TLR was required in 204 lesions, 82 in the PB group, 70 in the DCB group, and 52 in the DES group. The total number of R-TLRs was 373: 162 in the PB group, 124 in the DCB group, and 87 in the DES group. During the first year of follow-up, the risk for total R-TLR was reduced by DCB (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.24-0.54) and DES (HR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14-0.38) treatment compared with PB treatment. After 1 year, the risk for total R-TLR was nonsignificantly reduced by DCB treatment (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.16) and significantly reduced by DES treatment (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.95) compared with PB treatment. Risk in the DCB and DES groups was similar during (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.89-2.69) and after (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.82-1.92) 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

The total number of R-TLRs over 10 years after treatment of patients with DES ISR was high. DCBs and particularly DES were able to reduce the need for both first and recurrent revascularization compared with PB treatment.

A Randomized Comparison of 2 Different Drug-Coated Balloons for In-Stent Restenosis

BACKGROUND

Although use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) is a promising technique, little is known about the clinical efficacy of the Dissolve DCB in drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR).

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Dissolve DCB in patients with DES ISR.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing Dissolve DCB with SeQuent Please DCB in patients with DES ISR. Angiographic and clinical follow-up was planned at 9 months in all patients. The primary endpoint was 9-month in-segment late loss.

RESULTS

A total of 260 patients with ISR from 10 Chinese sites were included (Dissolve DCB, n = 128; SeQuent Please DCB, n = 132). Nine-month in-segment late loss was 0.50 ± 0.06 mm with Dissolve DCB vs 0.47 ± 0.07 mm with SeQuent Please DCB; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 0.18 mm (P for noninferiority = 0.03). Rates of target lesion failure and binary restenosis were numerical higher in the Dissolve DCB cohort compared with the SeQuent Please DCB cohort at 9 months (17.5% vs 10.7%; P = 0.12; 23.4% vs 16.4%; P = 0.19, respectively). At 9 months, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 36 patients (28.3%) vs 30 patients (22.9%) in the Dissolve DCB and SeQuent Please DCB groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this head-to-head randomized trial, the Dissolve DCB was noninferior to the SeQuent Please DCB for 9-month in-segment late loss. However, Dissolve DCB with its numerical increase in target lesion failure and binary restenosis warrants assessment in larger clinical trials (A Safety and Efficacy Study of Dissolve™ in Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis; NCT03373695).

Drug-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease - A Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have shown promising results for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and small vessel disease (SVD). However, data comparing the treatment efficacy of different DCBs are limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

AGENT Japan is a prospective randomized controlled trial that compares the Agent balloon coated with a low-dose formulation of paclitaxel (2 μg/mm2) to the SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon (3 μg/mm2) for the treatment of SVD. Patients with target lesion length ≤28 mm and reference diameter between ≥2.00 and <3.00 mm were randomized 2 : 1 for treatment with Agent (n=101) or SeQuent Please (n=49). This trial also includes a separate single-arm substudy evaluating the clinical safety and effectiveness of Agent in patients with ISR. The primary endpoint of 6-month target lesion failure (TLF) was observed in 3.0% of Agent and 0.0% of SeQuent Please patients (difference=3.0%; 97.5% upper confidence bound [UCB]=9.57%, which is less than the prespecified margin of 13.2%; Pnon-inferiority=0.0012). There were no deaths or thrombosis, and angiographic and quality-of-life outcomes were comparable between groups. The AGENT Japan ISR substudy (n=30) primary endpoint was met because the one-sided 97.5% UCB for 6-month TLF (3.3%) was significantly less than the study success criterion of 15.1% (97.5% UCB=9.8%; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Data from this study demonstrate good clinical outcomes with the Agent DCB when used to treat patients with SVD or ISR.

The factors influencing the efficiency of drug-coated balloons

The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an emerging percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device that delivers drugs to diseased vessels to decrease the rate of vascular stenosis. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that DCBs tend to have both good safety and efficacy profiles, leading to extended application indications in the clinic, including in-stent restenosis (ISR) for metal stents such as drug-eluting stents (DESs), small vascular disease, bifurcation disease, large vascular disease, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and high bleeding risk. However, some previous clinical data have suggested that DCBs performed less effectively than DESs. No studies or reviews have systematically discussed the improvement strategies for better DCB performance until now. Drug loss during the process of delivery to the target lesion and inefficient delivery of the coating drug to the diseased vascular wall are two key mechanisms that weaken the efficiency of DCBs. This review is the first to summarize the key influencing factors of DCB efficiency in terms of balloon structure and principles, and then it analyzes how these factors cause outcomes in practice based on current clinical trial studies of DCBs in the treatment of different types of lesions. We also provide some recommendations for improving DCBs to contribute to better DCB performance by improving the design of DCBs and combining other factors in clinical practice.

In-Stent Restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a potential complication after percutaneous coronary intervention, even in the era of drug-eluting stents, and its treatment remains suboptimal. Neoatherosclerosis is an important component of the pathology of ISR and is accelerated in drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents. Coronary angiography is the gold standard for evaluating the morphology of ISR, although computed tomography angiography is emerging as an alternative noninvasive modality to evaluate the presence of ISR. Drug-coated balloons and stent reimplantation are the current mainstays of treatment for ISR, and the choice of treatment should be based on clinical background and lesion morphology.

Management of in-stent restenosis

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the most common cause of stent failure after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent data suggest that ISR-PCI accounts for 5-10% of all PCI procedures performed in current clinical practice. This State-of-the-Art review will primarily focus on the management of ISR but will begin by briefly discussing diagnosis and classification. We then move on to detail the evidence base underpinning the various therapeutic strategies for ISR before finishing with a proposed ISR management algorithm based on current scientific data.

A randomized comparison of two paclitaxel-coated balloons for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: The LONGTY ISR China randomized trial (LONGTY DCB vs. SeQuent Please DCB)

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the efficacy and clinical safety of the LONGTY drug-coated balloon (DCB) with those of SeQuent Please DCB in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR).

BACKGROUND

Although DCB technologies have evolved, little is known about the clinical efficacy of the new-generation LONGTY DCB.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing LONGTY DCB with SeQuent Please DCB in patients with ISR. The primary endpoint was target lesion late lumen loss at 9 months' follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 211 patients with ISR from 13 Chinese sites were included (LONGTY DCB, n = 105; SeQuent Please DCB, n = 106). Device success was achieved in all patients. At the 9 month angiographic follow-up, target lesion late lumen loss was 0.35 ± 0.42 mm with LONGTY and 0.38 ± 0.45 mm with SeQuent Please (p for noninferiority <.001). The target lesion revascularization rates at 1 year were similar in both DCB groups (15.24 vs. 13.21%; p = .673). Over an extended follow-up of 2 years, the clinical endpoints, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and thrombus rate, were extremely low and similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicenter, head-to-head, randomized trial, the new-generation LONGTY DCB was noninferior to the SeQuent Please DCB for the primary endpoint of target lesion late lumen loss at 9 months.

Results of paclitaxel-drug-coated balloons (Pantera Lux) for coronary in-stent restenosis: Italian experience from REGistry of Paclitaxel Eluting Balloon in ISR study

AIMS

Drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is an effective treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, literature data indicate that drug-coated balloons (DCBs) may be a valid alternative, particularly for recurrent ISR. We sought to evaluate clinical results on the long-term efficacy of a new DCB for ISR treatment.

METHODS

One hundred and ninety-nine patients were treated with paclitaxel drug-coated balloons (Pantera Lux, Biotronik, Switzerland) in the Italian REGistry of Paclitaxel Eluting Balloon in ISR (REGPEB study). Clinical follow-up was scheduled at 1 and 12 months. A subgroup of patients received adjunctive 5-year follow-up. Primary end point was Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) at 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 214 ISR coronary lesions were treated (75.4% DES-ISR). Mean time between stent implantation and DCB treatment is 41 months. DCBs were successfully delivered in 99% of the cases; crossover to a DES occurred in 3% of cases. Procedural success rate was 98.5%. Clinical success rate was 98.5%. First-month follow-up compliance was 98% and freedom from MACE was 96.9%. Twelve-month follow-up compliance was 89.3% with a freedom from MACE rate of 87.3% (CI: 81.3-91.5%). Five-year long-term follow-up showed 65.2% of freedom from MACE.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirms that Pantera Lux treatment is effective and well tolerated in ISR, showing good acute and long/very long-term results in the treatment of complex lesions (DES and late ISR).

The Use of Bioactive Polymers for Intervention and Tissue Engineering: The New Frontier for Cardiovascular Therapy

Coronary heart disease remains one of the leading causes of death in most countries. Healthcare improvements have seen a shift in the presentation of disease with a reducing number of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMIs), largely due to earlier reperfusion strategies such as percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Stents have revolutionized the care of these patients, but the long-term effects of these devices have been brought to the fore. The conceptual and technologic evolution of these devices from bare-metal stents led to the creation and wide application of drug-eluting stents; further research introduced the idea of polymer-based resorbable stents. We look at the evolution of stents and the multiple advantages and disadvantages offered by each of the different polymers used to make stents in order to identify what the stent of the future may consist of whilst highlighting properties that are beneficial to the patient alongside the role of the surgeon, the cardiologist, engineers, chemists, and biophysicists in creating the ideal stent.

BIOLUX P-III Passeo-18 Lux All-Comers Registry: 24-Month Results in Below-the-Knee Arteries

PURPOSE

The BIOLUX P-III registry was initiated to further assess the safety and efficacy of the Passeo-18 Lux drug-coated balloon (DCB) in infrainguinal lesions in a real-world environment and in prespecified risk groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

BIOLUX P-III is a prospective, global, all-comers registry with patients treated under real-world conditions. We herein report 24-month results of the prespecified subgroup of 151 patients with 185 below-the-knee (BTK) lesions. The primary safety and efficacy endpoints were freedom from major adverse events (a composite of freedom from device and procedure mortality through 30 days, major target limb amputation and clinically driven target lesion revascularization) at 6 months and freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization (FfTLR) at 12 months.

RESULTS

At baseline, 76.0% of patients had critical limb ischemia and 48.9% of lesions were TASC C or D lesions. Technical success was achieved in 97.8%, and bailout stenting was required in 1.1%. Freedom from major adverse events was 86.2% [95% CI 79.4; 90.8] at 6 months, and FfTLR was 90.9% [95% CI 85.2; 94.4] at 12 months. At 24 months, FfTLR was 90.9% [95% CI 85.2; 94.4], freedom from major amputation was 90.1% [95% CI 83.9, 94.0], and overall survival was 79.2% [70.7, 85.5]. There was a significant clinical improvement (mean Rutherford class improvement of - 2.9 ± 1.9, p < 0.0001) and an improvement in pain (mean improvement on Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scale of - 2.7 ± 2.9, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world DCB registry, 24-month outcomes of Passeo-18 Lux demonstrated safety and efficacy in BTK lesions with high patency rates and sustained clinical improvements at 24 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02276313.

A multicentre, randomised controlled clinical study of drug-coated balloons for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis

AIMS

Treatment of in-stent restenosis of coronary stents is challenging. The use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) is a promising technique to treat in-stent restenosis without adding another metal layer. The aim of the AGENT ISR randomised trial is to evaluate angiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with ISR of a previously treated lesion who were treated with either a DCB with a new coating formulation (Agent) or a standard DCB (SeQuent Please).

METHODS AND RESULTS

AGENT ISR is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority study comparing the Agent and SeQuent Please DCB. A total of 125 patients (mean age ~68 years, 18% female) with in-stent restenosis of a previously treated lesion <28 mm in length were randomised at 11 sites in Europe to Agent (n=65) or SeQuent Please (n=60). The primary endpoint, six-month in-stent late lumen loss, in the Agent group (0.397±0.43 mm [n=51]) was non-inferior to that of the SeQuent Please group (0.393±0.536 mm [n=49]), as the two-sided upper 95% confidence boundary for the difference between groups was less than the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 0.20 (difference 0.004, 95% CI [-0.189, 0.196]; pnon-inferiority=0.046). At one year, mortality was 3.1% in Agent and 1.7% in SeQuent Please patients (p>0.99), target lesion revascularisation 7.7% versus 10.0% (p=0.89), and stent thrombosis 0% versus 3.3% (p=0.44). Similar improvements in quality of life were seen in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this head-to-head comparison of two DCB, Agent proved to be non-inferior to SeQuent Please for in-stent late lumen loss at six months.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02151812 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/).

Clinical Outcomes of Drug-Eluting versus Bare-Metal In-Stent Restenosis after the Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent or Drug-Eluting Balloon: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have reduced the rates of in-stent restenosis (ISR) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), DES related ISR (DES-ISR) still occurs and outcomes of DES-ISR remain unclear. The objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with DES-ISR compared with patients with BMS related ISR (BMS-ISR) after the treatment of DES or drug-eluting balloon (DEB). Methods and results. We searched the literature in the main electronic databases including PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary endpoints were target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The secondary endpoints included all cause death (ACD), cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis or re-in-stent restenosis (ST/RE-ISR), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). A total of 19 studies with 6256 participants were finally included in this meta-analysis. Results showed that the rates of TLR (P < 0.00001), TVR (P < 0.00001), CD (P=0.02), ST/RE-ISR (P < 0.00001), and MACEs (P < 0.00001) were significantly higher in the DES-ISR group than in the BMS-ISR group. No significant differences were found between the two groups in the rates of MI (P=0.05) and ACD (P=0.21).

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that patients with DES-ISR had worse clinical outcomes at the long-term follow-up than patients with BMS-ISR after the treatment of DES or DEB, suggesting that DES and DEB may be more effective for BMS-ISR than that for DES-ISR. Positive prevention of DES-ISR is indispensable and further studies concentrating on detecting the predictors of outcomes of DES-ISR are required.

Long-term clinical outcomes after treatment of stent restenosis with two drug-coated balloons

BACKGROUND

Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is still a clinical challenge in interventional cardiology. Paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) are an attractive therapeutic option for ISR. There are several different types of PCBs available for percutaneous coronary intervention, but to date, comparative data between different types of PCBs for the treatment of ISR are scarce.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This single centre, nonrandomized, retrospective study under real-world condition included 194 patients with 194 ISR treated by repeat percutaneous coronary intervention with PCBs. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction and need for target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1 year. Secondary end points were MACE and TLR at long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

Baseline clinical and angiographic parameters were comparable between the two groups. Patients in the iopromide-based PCB and butyryl-tri-hexyl citrate (BTHC)-PCB groups were followed up for 32.2±20.5 and 24.2±13.3 months, respectively (P=0.001). MACEs at 1-year follow-up were 15.0 and 15.8% (P=0.879) for the BTHC-PCB and iopromide-based PCB groups, respectively. TLR, myocardial infarction and cardiac death for BTHC-PCB versus iopromide-based PCB at 1-year follow-up were 9.6 versus 11.8%, P=0.622; 5.3 versus 3.9%, P=0.640; and 5.3 versus 3.9%, P=0.640, respectively. If complete follow-up periods were included in the analysis, BTHC-PCB and iopromide-based PCB had comparable rates of MACE (P=0.835) and TLR (P=0.792).

CONCLUSION

BTHC-PCB and iopromide-based PCB had comparable rates of MACE and TLR for the treatment of ISR at 1-year and long-term follow-up.

The effect of the debulking by excimer laser coronary angioplasty on long-term outcome compared with drug-coating balloon: insights from optical frequency domain imaging analysis

This study evaluated the 1-year efficacy of excimer laser coronary angioplasty (ELCA) before drug-coated balloon (DCB) dilatation for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). Forty consecutive patients with ISR were treated by DCB with or without the use of ELCA (ELCA plus DCB, N = 20; DCB alone, N = 20). Debulking efficiency (DE) value was defined as the neointima area on optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) debulked by ELCA. The patients in the ELCA plus DCB group were divided into two groups (greater DE (GDE), N = 10; smaller DE (SDE), N = 10) based on the median value of DE. Thereafter, the ISR segment was prepared with a scoring balloon, followed by DCB. At follow-up, binary restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were evaluated. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics such as age, comorbidity, and ISR type. Overall, the incidence of neoatherosclerosis in the ISR segment was 17.5%. Post-PCI, acute gain of minimum lumen diameter on quantitative coronary angiography and of minimum lumen area on OFDI was numerically higher in the GDE than in the SDE and the DCB alone group. At follow-up, the occurrences of binary restenosis and TLR in the ELCA plus DCB group were 20.0% and 10.0%; these values in the DCB alone group were 20.0% and 20.0%, respectively. Two patients from the SDE and none from the GDE developed TLR. DCB alone treatment was inferior to ELCA plus DCB treatment. However, greater ELCA debulking might be required to obtain optimal outcomes.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of two different types of paclitaxel-coated balloons for treatment of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis

Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty has been shown to be a promising option for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). We compared the clinical outcomes of patients with ISR who were treated with two commonly used paclitaxel-containing DCBs, the Pantera Lux (PL) and SeQuent Please (SP). A total of 491 patients with 507 ISR lesions [PL-DCB in 127 (26%) patients and SP-DCB in 364 (74%) patients] underwent DCB angioplasty for ISR lesions. The major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiac death, target lesion-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization, were assessed. There were no significant differences in each occurrence of MACE and cardiac death: 16 MACEs (61 per 1000 person-years) in the PL-DCB group and 55 (60 per 1000 person-years) MACEs in the SP-DCB group, log-rank p = 0.895, and three cardiac deaths (11 per 1000 person-years) in the PL-DCB group and ten cardiac deaths (11 per 1000 person-years) in the SP-DCB group, log-rank p = 0.849. Diabetes mellitus under insulin treatment [hazard ratio (HR) 2.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-5.60; p = 0.007], chronic kidney disease (HR 1.99; 95% CI 1.01-3.92; p = 0.045), early-onset ISR (HR 1.99; 95% CI 1.18-3.36; p = 0.010), and recurrent ISR (HR 1.89; 95% CI 1.08-3.32; p = 0.026) were associated with the occurrence of MACE after DCB angioplasty. There was no significant difference of MACE between PL-DCB and SP-DCB treatment in patients with ISR. Patients with insulin-treated diabetes, chronic kidney disease, early-onset ISR, and recurrent ISR were at a higher risk of MACE after DCB angioplasty.