Achieving Optimal Medical Therapy: Insights From the ORBITA Trial

Percutaneous coronary revascularization versus medical therapy in chronic coronary syndromes: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a main cause of morbidity and mortality. The effectiveness of coronary revascularization in chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) is still debated. Our recent study showed the superiority of coronary revascularization over optimal medical therapy (OMT) in reducing cardiovascular (CV) mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). The recent publication of the ORBITA-2 trial suggested superiority of percutaneous coronary revascularization (PCI) in reducing angina and improving quality of life. Therefore, we aimed to provide an updated meta-analysis evaluating the impact of PCI on both clinical outcomes and angina in CCS.

METHODS

Relevant studies were screened in PubMed/Medline until 08/01/2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PCI to OMT in CCS were selected. The primary outcome was CV death. Secondary outcomes were MI, all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding and angina severity.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs involving 8616 patients were included. Median follow-up duration was 3.3 years. Revascularization significantly reduced CV death (4.2% vs. 5.5%; OR = .77; 95% CI .62-.96, p = .02). Subgroup analyses favoured revascularization in patients without chronic total occlusions (CTOs) (p = .052) and those aged <65 years (p = .02). Finally, a follow-up duration beyond 3 years showed increased benefit of coronary revascularization (p = .04). Secondary outcomes analyses showed no significant differences, except for a lower angina severity in the revascularization group according to the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (p = .04) and to the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification (p = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

PCI compared to OMT significantly reduces CV mortality and angina severity, improving quality of life in CCS patients. This benefit was larger without CTOs, in patients aged <65 years and with follow-up duration beyond 3 years.

Do Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Life Differ by the Number of Antianginals for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease? Insights from the BARI 2D Trial

Medical therapy, including antianginal treatment, is the cornerstone in the management of stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). However, it remains unclear whether combining antianginal agents provides benefits beyond monotherapy in terms of quality of life (QoL) and cardiovascular outcomes. We used data from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial, which compared cardiovascular and QoL outcomes in patients with SIHD and diabetes mellitus randomized to revascularization with intensive medical therapy or intensive medical therapy alone. We categorized patients into 3 groups: ≥2 versus 1 versus 0 antianginals. We compared patient characteristics, QoL metrics, and cardiovascular end points at baseline and at 5 years, creating a multivariable model to adjust for key clinical confounders. Of 2,368 patients, 348 patients (14.7%) were on 0 antianginals, 1,020 patients (43.1%) were on 1 antianginal, and 1,000 patients (42.2%) were on ≥2 antianginals at baseline. The most common antianginal class was β blockers. At baseline, patients on 0 antianginals had better QoL metrics (self-health score, Duke activity status index, and energy rating) than patients on ≥2 antianginals. However, at the 1-year follow-up, patients taking only 1 antianginal showed greater QoL improvement than those taking 0 antianginal, without any incremental benefit in QoL metrics seen in patients taking ≥2 antianginal agents, even after adjusting for multiple covariates such as age, heart failure, diabetes control, and myocardial jeopardy index. Lastly, at the 5-year follow-up, after adjustment, there were no differences in all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, or myocardial infarction between patients taking different numbers of antianginals. Adults on a single antianginal for SIHD and diabetes mellitus had similar or better improvements in QoL than those on 2 or more antianginal agents at 1 year of follow-up. These findings merit further research to better understand the impact of medical therapy intensity on QoL in patients with SIHD and associated co-morbidities.

The ability of contemporary cardiologists to judge the ischemic impact of a coronary lesion visually

BACKGROUND

Landmark trials showed that invasive pressure measurement (Fractional Flow Reserve, FFR) was a better guide to coronary stenting than visual assessment. However, present-day interventionists have benefited from extensive research and personal experience of mapping anatomy to hemodynamics.

AIMS

To determine if visual assessment of the angiogram performs as well as invasive measurement of coronary physiology.

METHODS

25 interventional cardiologists independently visually assessed the single vessel coronary disease of 200 randomized participants in The Objective Randomized Blinded Investigation with optimal medical Therapy of Angioplasty in stable angina trial (ORBITA). They gave a visual prediction of the FFR and Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio (iFR), denoted vFFR and viFR respectively. Each judged each lesion on 2 occasions, so that every lesion had 50 vFFR, and 50 viFR assessments. The group consensus visual estimates (vFFR-group and viFR-group) and individual cardiologists' visual estimates (vFFR-individual and viFR-individual) were tested alongside invasively measured FFR and iFR for their ability to predict the placebo-controlled reduction in stress echo ischemia with stenting.

RESULTS

Placebo-controlled ischemia improvement with stenting was predicted by vFFR-group (p < 0.0001) and viFR-group (p < 0.0001), vFFR-individual (p < 0.0001) and viFR-individual (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the predictive performance of the group visual estimates and their invasive counterparts: p = 0.53 for vFFR vs FFR and p = 0.56 for viFR vs iFR.

CONCLUSION

Visual assessment of the angiogram by contemporary experts, provides significant additional information on the amount of ischaemia which can be relieved by placebo-controlled stenting in single vessel coronary artery disease.

A Placebo-Controlled Trial of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Angina

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is frequently performed to reduce the symptoms of stable angina. Whether PCI relieves angina more than a placebo procedure in patients who are not receiving antianginal medication remains unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of PCI in patients with stable angina. Patients stopped all antianginal medications and underwent a 2-week symptom assessment phase before randomization. Patients were then randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to undergo PCI or a placebo procedure and were followed for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the angina symptom score, which was calculated daily on the basis of the number of angina episodes that occurred on a given day, the number of antianginal medications prescribed on that day, and clinical events, including the occurrence of unblinding owing to unacceptable angina or acute coronary syndrome or death. Scores range from 0 to 79, with higher scores indicating worse health status with respect to angina.

RESULTS

A total of 301 patients underwent randomization: 151 to the PCI group and 150 to the placebo group. The mean (±SD) age was 64±9 years, and 79% were men. Ischemia was present in one cardiac territory in 242 patients (80%), in two territories in 52 patients (17%), and in three territories in 7 patients (2%). In the target vessels, the median fractional flow reserve was 0.63 (interquartile range, 0.49 to 0.75), and the median instantaneous wave-free ratio was 0.78 (interquartile range, 0.55 to 0.87). At the 12-week follow-up, the mean angina symptom score was 2.9 in the PCI group and 5.6 in the placebo group (odds ratio, 2.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.41 to 3.47; P<0.001). One patient in the placebo group had unacceptable angina leading to unblinding. Acute coronary syndromes occurred in 4 patients in the PCI group and in 6 patients in the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with stable angina who were receiving little or no antianginal medication and had objective evidence of ischemia, PCI resulted in a lower angina symptom score than a placebo procedure, indicating a better health status with respect to angina. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre and others; ORBITA-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03742050.).

2023 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology on the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Coronary Syndrome

Coronary artery disease (CAD) covers a wide spectrum from persons who are asymptomatic to those presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and sudden cardiac death. Coronary atherosclerotic disease is a chronic, progressive process that leads to atherosclerotic plaque development and progression within the epicardial coronary arteries. Being a dynamic process, CAD generally presents with a prolonged stable phase, which may then suddenly become unstable and lead to an acute coronary event. Thus, the concept of "stable CAD" may be misleading, as the risk for acute events continues to exist, despite the use of pharmacological therapies and revascularization. Many advances in coronary care have been made, and guidelines from other international societies have been updated. The 2023 guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology for CAD introduce a new concept that categorizes the disease entity according to its clinical presentation into acute or chronic coronary syndromes (ACS and CCS, respectively). Previously defined as stable CAD, CCS include a heterogeneous population with or without chest pain, with or without prior ACS, and with or without previous coronary revascularization procedures. As cardiologists, we now face the complexity of CAD, which involves not only the epicardial but also the microcirculatory domains of the coronary circulation and the myocardium. New findings about the development and progression of coronary atherosclerosis have changed the clinical landscape. After a nearly 50-year ischemia-centric paradigm of coronary stenosis, growing evidence indicates that coronary atherosclerosis and its features are both diagnostic and therapeutic targets beyond obstructive CAD. Taken together, these factors have shifted the clinicians' focus from the functional evaluation of coronary ischemia to the anatomic burden of disease. Research over the past decades has strengthened the case for prevention and optimal medical therapy as central interventions in patients with CCS. Even though functional capacity has clear prognostic implications, it does not include the evaluation of non-obstructive lesions, plaque burden or additional risk-modifying factors beyond epicardial coronary stenosis-driven ischemia. The recommended first-line diagnostic tests for CCS now include coronary computed tomographic angiography, an increasingly used anatomic imaging modality capable of detecting not only obstructive but also non-obstructive coronary plaques that may be missed with stress testing. This non-invasive anatomical modality improves risk assessment and potentially allows for the appropriate allocation of preventive therapies. Initial invasive strategies cannot improve mortality or the risk of myocardial infarction. Emphasis should be placed on optimizing the control of risk factors through preventive measures, and invasive strategies should be reserved for highly selected patients with refractory symptoms, high ischemic burden, high-risk anatomies, and hemodynamically significant lesions. These guidelines provide current evidence-based diagnosis and treatment recommendations. However, the guidelines are not mandatory, and members of the Task Force fully realize that the treatment of CCS should be individualized to address each patient's circumstances. Ultimately, the decision of healthcare professionals is most important in clinical practice.

Remote digital smart device follow-up in prospective clinical trials: early insights from ORBITA-2, ORBITA-COSMIC, and ORBITA-STAR

Smart devices are a fundamental media for acquisition, processing, storage, and transfer of digital health data. The global penetration and high frequency usage of smart devices such as smartphones and fitness monitors provide us an opportunity for incorporation into clinical trials to generate more clinically meaningful data. Reporting of angina can significantly vary between patients and also within patients at different timepoints. Furthermore, the nature of angina can lead to variation in ways patients adapt their activities of daily living and hence reporting of symptoms and quality of life. Current clinical trials investigating the effects of intervention on angina do not accurately incorporate these patient centred outcomes and considerations. Hence, methods to contemporaneously assess daily angina burden in a convenient, patient focused, and cost-effective manner are priorities for contemporary clinical trials to address. In this article, we provide our insights into the use of remote digital smart devices in clinical trials of stable coronary artery disease conducted by our research group. We discuss how our experiences from previous trials necessitated its incorporation and will provide us with important data that will inform clinical practice. We discuss the benefits and current challenges and limitations of smart device incorporation while providing our procedural workflow for how we incorporated smart devices into our clinical trials for others to consider. We hope that this approach will allow us to understand the perceptions and implications of angina on patient lives with greater granularity than previously explored.

Efficacy and Safety of Ivabradine in Combination with Beta-Blockers in Patients with Stable Angina Pectoris: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Beta-blockers are recommended by the European Society of Cardiology as first-line antianginal therapy for reducing heart rate (HR) and symptoms in patients with chronic coronary syndrome, despite a lack of data showing superiority to other antianginal agents. Most patients with angina pectoris require combination therapy to manage symptoms, with a second-line agent chosen to manage the predominant cardiovascular problem. Ivabradine, a selective sinus node If channel inhibitor shown to reduce HR and protect against anginal symptoms, has previously demonstrated noninferior anti-ischaemic and antianginal efficacy to beta-blockers.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of ivabradine in patients with stable angina pectoris who remained symptomatic despite receiving beta-blockers. Keyword searches of PubMed, The Cochrane Central Library Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and Google Scholar identified studies comparing ivabradine plus beta-blockers with placebo or other first- or second-line antianginal agents in patients with stable angina pectoris. No date limits or language restrictions were applied. Outcomes were evaluated after 1 and 4 months of treatment, including changes in HR, angina attacks, use of short-acting nitrates, quality of life and safety. Risk of bias was evaluated on the basis of recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

RESULTS

Seven relevant studies were identified (N = 6821). Ivabradine plus a beta-blocker consistently reduced HR, anginal symptoms and short-acting nitrate consumption within 1 month of initiating therapy, with continued reductions for up to 4 months. Furthermore, ivabradine plus beta-blocker therapy was well tolerated, with bradycardia rarely reported (0.1% of patients overall). This study is limited by the inclusion of only two randomised studies, which may lead to result interpretation bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Ivabradine may be valuable for tailoring early antianginal treatment when used in combination with beta-blockers for chronic stable angina inadequately controlled by beta-blockers.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention: a substudy of the ORBITA trial

AIMS

Oxygen-pulse morphology and gas exchange analysis measured during cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) has been associated with myocardial ischaemia. The aim of this analysis was to examine the relationship between CPET parameters, myocardial ischaemia and anginal symptoms in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and to determine the ability of these parameters to predict the placebo-controlled response to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with severe single-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) were randomized 1:1 to PCI or placebo in the ORBITA trial. Subjects underwent pre-randomization treadmill CPET, dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) and symptom assessment. These assessments were repeated at the end of a 6-week blinded follow-up period.A total of 195 patients with CPET data were randomized (102 PCI, 93 placebo). Patients in whom an oxygen-pulse plateau was observed during CPET had higher (more ischaemic) DSE score [+0.82 segments; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40 to 1.25, P = 0.0068] and lower fractional flow reserve (-0.07; 95% CI: -0.12 to -0.02, P = 0.011) compared with those without. At lower (more abnormal) oxygen-pulse slopes, there was a larger improvement of the placebo-controlled effect of PCI on DSE score [oxygen-pulse plateau presence (Pinteraction = 0.026) and oxygen-pulse gradient (Pinteraction = 0.023)] and Seattle angina physical-limitation score [oxygen-pulse plateau presence (Pinteraction = 0.037)]. Impaired peak VO2, VE/VCO2 slope, peak oxygen-pulse, and oxygen uptake efficacy slope was significantly associated with higher symptom burden but did not relate to severity of ischaemia or predict response to PCI.

CONCLUSION

Although selected CPET parameters relate to severity of angina symptoms and quality of life, only an oxygen-pulse plateau detects the severity of myocardial ischaemia and predicts the placebo-controlled efficacy of PCI in patients with single-vessel CAD.

Effectiveness and Tolerability of Trimetazidine 80 Mg Once Daily in Patients with Stable Angina Uncontrolled with Bisoprolol-Based Therapy: The Modus Vivendi Observational Study

Introduction

Modus Vivendi was conducted in routine clinical practice to evaluate the effect of adding trimetazidine 80 mg once daily (TMZ 80 OD) to treat patients with persistent symptoms despite treatment with background antianginal therapies including maximally tolerated bisoprolol.

Methods

This multicenter, prospective, observational, open-label, uncontrolled study recruited adult outpatients with a confirmed diagnosis of stable angina to whom physicians had decided to prescribe TMZ 80 OD. All patients were symptomatic despite treatment, including maximally tolerated doses of bisoprolol. Data on number of angina attacks, use of short-acting nitrates, and quality of life (QoL) were collected at baseline (V1) and at 1-month (V2) and 3-month (V2) follow-up visits. Two sub-analyses assessed efficacy in patients who remained on a stable bisoprolol dose throughout the study, and in patients in whom background antianginal therapy was known.

Results

A total of 1939 patients were recruited (57.2% women). The mean age was 65.6 ± 8.8 years; 73.8% had class II and 26.2% class III angina. At V1, the mean number of angina attacks per week was 6.2 ± 6.5 despite antianginal therapy including maximally tolerated bisoprolol dosage. Following the addition of TMZ 80 OD, this decreased to 3.4 ± 4.2 attacks per week at V2, and 1.6 ± 2.6 at V3 (P < 0.05 at V2 and V3), with concomitant reductions in short-acting nitrate use (P < 0.05). Significant improvements in QoL were observed throughout the study. Subgroup analyses showed that the addition of TMZ 80 OD to guideline-recommended antianginal therapy was associated with significant reductions in the mean number of weekly angina attacks and consumption of short-acting nitrates and improvements in QoL whether patients were treated with maximally tolerated bisoprolol and TMZ 80 OD alone, or maximally tolerated bisoprolol and TMZ 80 OD on top of other antianginal therapies. Treatment was well tolerated.

Conclusion

The study findings support the addition of TMZ 80 OD to bisoprolol with or without other antianginal therapies for patients with persistent angina.

Trial Registration

This study was retrospectively registered under the number ISRCTN29992579.

What Is the Role of Assessing Ischemia to Optimize Therapy and Outcomes for Patients with Stable Angina and Non-obstructed Coronary Arteries?

Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is a leading global cause of ill-health and premature death. Clinical research into IHD is providing new insights into the pathophysiology, epidemiology and treatment of this condition. The major endotypes of IHD include coronary heart disease (CHD) and vasomotor disorders, including microvascular angina and vasospastic angina. Considering unselected patients presenting with stable chest pain, the pre-test probability of CHD is higher in men whereas the pre-test probability of a vasomotor disorder is higher in women. The diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic tests designed to assess coronary anatomy and disease and/or coronary vascular function (functional tests) differ for coronary endotypes. Clinical management should therefore be personalized and take account of sex-related factors. In this review, we consider the definitions of angina and myocardial ischemia. We then appraise the mechanistic links between myocardial ischemia and anginal symptoms and the relative merits of non-invasive and invasive diagnostic tests and related clinical management. Finally, we describe the rationale and importance of stratified medicine of IHD.

Achieving Optimal Medical Therapy: Insights From the ORBITA Trial

Background

In stable coronary artery disease, medications are used for 2 purposes: cardiovascular risk reduction and symptom improvement. In clinical trials and clinical practice, medication use is often not optimal. The ORBITA (Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation With Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina) trial was the first placebo‐controlled trial of percutaneous coronary intervention. A key component of the ORBITA trial design was the inclusion of a medical optimization phase, aimed at ensuring that all patients were treated with guideline‐directed truly optimal medical therapy. In this study, we report the medical therapy that was achieved.

Methods and Results

After enrollment into the ORBITA trial, all 200 patients entered a 6‐week period of intensive medical therapy optimization, with initiation and uptitration of risk reduction and antianginal therapy. At the prerandomization stage, the median number of antianginals established was 3 (interquartile range, 2–4). A total of 195 patients (97.5%) reached the prespecified target of ≥2 antianginals; 136 (68.0%) did not stop any antianginals because of adverse effects, and the median number of antianginals stopped for adverse effects per patient was 0 (interquartile range, 0–1). Amlodipine and bisoprolol were well tolerated (stopped for adverse effects in 4/175 [2.3%] and 9/167 [5.4%], respectively). Ranolazine and ivabradine were also well tolerated (stopped for adverse effects in 1/20 [5.0%] and 1/18 [5.6%], respectively). Isosorbide mononitrate and nicorandil were stopped for adverse effects in 36 of 172 (20.9%) and 32 of 141 (22.7%) of patients, respectively. Statins were well tolerated and taken by 191 of 200 (95.5%) patients.

Conclusions

In the 12‐week ORBITA trial period, medical therapy was successfully optimized and well tolerated, with few drug adverse effects leading to therapy cessation. Truly optimal medical therapy can be achieved in clinical trials, and translating this into longer‐term clinical practice should be a focus of future study.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02062593.