Faculty Bibliography

Gender-specific differences in thrombosis have been reported in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We sought to investigate the influence of age on the relation between gender and incident thrombosis or death in COVID-19. We identified consecutive adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with COVID-19 from March 1, 2020, to April 17, 2020, at a large New York health system. In-hospital thrombosis and all-cause mortality were evaluated by gender and stratified by age group. Logistic regression models were generated to estimate the odds of thrombosis or death after multivariable adjustment. In 3,334 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 61% were men. Death or thrombosis occurred in 34% of hospitalizations and was more common in men (36% vs 29% in women, p <0.001; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36 to 1.91). When stratified by age, men had a higher incidence of death or thrombosis in younger patients (aged 18 to 54 years: 21% vs 9%, aOR 3.17, 95% CI 2.06 to 5.01; aged 55 to 74 years: 39% vs 28%, aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.10), but not older patients (aged ≥75 years: 55% vs 48%; aOR 1.20, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.59) (interaction p value: 0.01). For the individual end points, men were at higher risk of thrombosis (19% vs 12%; aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.05) and mortality (26% vs 23%; aOR 1.41, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.69) than women, and gender-specific differences were attenuated with older age. Associations between thrombosis and mortality were most striking in younger patients (aged 18 to 54 years, aOR 8.25; aged 55 to 74 years, aOR 2.38; aged >75 years, aOR 1.88; p for interaction <0.001) but did not differ by gender. In conclusion, the risk of thrombosis or death in COVID-19 is higher in men compared with women and is most apparent in younger age groups.

BACKGROUND:The ISCHEMIA trial demonstrated no overall difference in the composite primary endpoint and the secondary endpoints of cardiovascular (CV) death/myocardial infarction or all-cause mortality between an initial invasive or conservative strategy among participants with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe myocardial ischemia. Detailed cause-specific death analyses have not been reported. METHODS:We compared overall and cause-specific death rates by treatment group using Cox models with adjustment for pre-specified baseline covariates. Cause of death was adjudicated by an independent Clinical Events Committee as cardiovascular (CV), non-CV, and undetermined. We evaluated the association of risk factors and treatment strategy with cause of death. RESULTS:Four-year cumulative incidence rates for CV death were similar between invasive and conservative strategies [2.6% vs. 3.0%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% CI (0.70 - 1.38)], but non-CV death rates were higher in the invasive strategy [3.3% vs. 2.1%; HR 1.45 (1.00 - 2.09)]. Overall, 13% of deaths were attributed to undetermined causes (38/289). Fewer undetermined deaths [0.6% vs. 1.3%; HR 0.48 (0.24 - 0.95)] and more malignancy deaths [2.0% vs. 0.8%; HR 2.11 (1.23 - 3.60)] occurred in the invasive strategy than in the conservative strategy. CONCLUSIONS:In ISCHEMIA, all-cause and CV death rates were similar between treatment strategies. The observation of fewer undetermined deaths and more malignancy deaths in the invasive strategy remains unexplained. These findings should be interpreted with caution in the context of prior studies and the overall trial results.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial prespecified an analysis to determine whether accounting for recurrent cardiovascular events in addition to first events modified understanding of the treatment effects. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:Patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and moderate or severe ischaemia on stress testing were randomized to either initial invasive (INV) or initial conservative (CON) management. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or cardiac arrest. The Ghosh-Lin method was used to estimate mean cumulative incidence of total events with death as a competing risk. The 5179 ISCHEMIA patients experienced 670 index events (318 INV, 352 CON) and 203 recurrent events (102 INV, 101 CON). A single primary event was observed in 9.8% of INV and 10.8% of CON patients while ≥2 primary events were observed in 2.5% and 2.8%, respectively. Patients with recurrent events were older; had more frequent hypertension, diabetes, prior MI, or cerebrovascular disease; and had more multivessel CAD. The average number of primary endpoint events per 100 patients over 4 years was 18.2 in INV [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.8-20.9] and 19.7 in CON (95% CI 17.5-22.2), difference -1.5 (95% CI -5.0 to 2.0, P = 0.398). Comparable results were obtained when all-cause death was substituted for cardiovascular death and when stroke was added as an event. CONCLUSIONS:In stable CAD patients with moderate or severe myocardial ischaemia enrolled in ISCHEMIA, an initial INV treatment strategy did not prevent either net recurrent events or net total events more effectively than an initial CON strategy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01471522.

BACKGROUND:Detection of ≥50% diameter stenosis left main coronary artery disease (LMD) has prognostic and therapeutic implications. Noninvasive stress imaging or an exercise tolerance test (ETT) are the most common methods to detect obstructive coronary artery disease, though stress test markers of LMD remain ill-defined. OBJECTIVES:The authors sought to identify markers of LMD as detected on coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA), using clinical and stress testing parameters. METHODS:This was a post hoc analysis of ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches), including randomized and nonrandomized participants who had locally determined moderate or severe ischemia on nonimaging ETT, stress nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging, or stress echocardiography followed by CTA to exclude LMD. Stress tests were read by core laboratories. Prior coronary artery bypass grafting was an exclusion. In a stepped multivariate model, the authors identified predictors of LMD, first without and then with stress testing parameters. RESULTS:Among 5,146 participants (mean age 63 years, 74% male), 414 (8%) had LMD. Predictors of LMD were older age (P < 0.001), male sex (P < 0.01), absence of prior myocardial infarction (P < 0.009), transient ischemic dilation of the left ventricle on stress echocardiography (P = 0.05), magnitude of ST-segment depression on ETT (P = 0.004), and peak metabolic equivalents achieved on ETT (P = 0.001). The models were weakly predictive of LMD (C-index 0.643 and 0.684). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with moderate or severe ischemia, clinical and stress testing parameters were weakly predictive of LMD on CTA. For most patients with moderate or severe ischemia, anatomical imaging is needed to rule out LMD. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to describe the rationale and design of the Zoster Eye Disease Study (ZEDS). METHODS:ZEDS is a National Eye Institute-supported randomized clinical trial designed to determine whether 1 year of suppressive valacyclovir in patients with herpes zoster ophthalmicus (HZO) reduces complications because there is currently no high-quality evidence to support its use. Eligible patients are 18 years and older, immunocompetent, have a history of a typical rash at disease onset, and have had a record of active epithelial or stromal keratitis or iritis within 1 year before enrollment. Exclusion criteria include estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 45 or pregnancy. The primary endpoint is the time to first occurrence of new or worsening dendriform epithelial keratitis, stromal keratitis without or with ulceration, endothelial keratitis, or iritis due to HZO during 12 months of study treatment requiring prespecified treatment changes. The study has 80% power to detect a 30% difference between treatment groups, with a 30% rate of endpoints by 1 year assumed among controls. Secondary and exploratory questions include whether there is a persistent treatment benefit during the 6 months after treatment, whether development of postherpetic neuralgia varies by treatment group, and whether vaccinations against herpes zoster affect study outcomes and coronavirus disease 19 status. RESULTS:Over approximately 4 years, over 400 study participants have been enrolled. CONCLUSIONS:ZEDS aims to provide scientific evidence on whether suppressive valacyclovir treatment improves outcomes in HZO and should become the standard of care.

Importance:COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) is a potentially beneficial treatment for COVID-19 that requires rigorous testing. Objective:To compile individual patient data from randomized clinical trials of CCP and to monitor the data until completion or until accumulated evidence enables reliable conclusions regarding the clinical outcomes associated with CCP. Data Sources:From May to August 2020, a systematic search was performed for trials of CCP in the literature, clinical trial registry sites, and medRxiv. Domain experts at local, national, and international organizations were consulted regularly. Study Selection:Eligible trials enrolled hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19, not receiving mechanical ventilation, and randomized them to CCP or control. The administered CCP was required to have measurable antibodies assessed locally. Data Extraction and Synthesis:A minimal data set was submitted regularly via a secure portal, analyzed using a prespecified bayesian statistical plan, and reviewed frequently by a collective data and safety monitoring board. Main Outcomes and Measures:Prespecified coprimary end points-the World Health Organization (WHO) 11-point ordinal scale analyzed using a proportional odds model and a binary indicator of WHO score of 7 or higher capturing the most severe outcomes including mechanical ventilation through death and analyzed using a logistic model-were assessed clinically at 14 days after randomization. Results:Eight international trials collectively enrolled 2369 participants (1138 randomized to control and 1231 randomized to CCP). A total of 2341 participants (median [IQR] age, 60 [50-72] years; 845 women [35.7%]) had primary outcome data as of April 2021. The median (IQR) of the ordinal WHO scale was 3 (3-6); the cumulative OR was 0.94 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.74-1.19; posterior probability of OR <1 of 71%). A total of 352 patients (15%) had WHO score greater than or equal to 7; the OR was 0.94 (95% CrI, 0.69-1.30; posterior probability of OR <1 of 65%). Adjusted for baseline covariates, the ORs for mortality were 0.88 at day 14 (95% CrI, 0.61-1.26; posterior probability of OR <1 of 77%) and 0.85 at day 28 (95% CrI, 0.62-1.18; posterior probability of OR <1 of 84%). Heterogeneity of treatment effect sizes was observed across an array of baseline characteristics. Conclusions and Relevance:This meta-analysis found no association of CCP with better clinical outcomes for the typical patient. These findings suggest that real-time individual patient data pooling and meta-analysis during a pandemic are feasible, offering a model for future research and providing a rich data resource.

BACKGROUND:The ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease) trial found no advantage to an invasive strategy compared to conservative management in reducing all-cause death or myocardial infarction (D/MI). However, the prognostic influence of angiographic coronary artery disease (CAD) burden and ischemia severity remains unknown in this population. We compared the relative impact of CAD extent and severity of myocardial ischemia on D/MI in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS:Participants randomized to invasive management with available data on coronary angiography and stress testing were included. Extent of CAD was defined by the number of major epicardial vessels with ≥50% diameter stenosis by quantitative coronary angiography. Ischemia severity was assessed by site investigators as moderate or severe using trial definitions. The primary endpoint was D/MI. RESULTS:Of the 388 participants, 307 (79.1%) had complete coronary angiography and stress testing data. D/MI occurred in 104/307 participants (33.9%). Extent of CAD was associated with an increased risk of D/MI (P < .001), while ischemia severity was not (P = .249). These relationships persisted following multivariable adjustment. Using 0-vessel disease (VD) as reference, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for 1VD was 1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 3.68, P = .073; 2VD: HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.10 to 4.12, P = .025; 3VD: HR 4.00, 95% CI 2.06 to 7.76, P < .001. Using moderate ischemia as the reference, the HR for severe ischemia was 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.30, P = .427. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Among ISCHEMIA-CKD participants randomized to the invasive strategy, extent of CAD predicted D/MI whereas severity of ischemia did not.

Importance:Platelets represent a potential therapeutic target for improved clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective:To evaluate the benefits and risks of adding a P2Y12 inhibitor to anticoagulant therapy among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants:An open-label, bayesian, adaptive randomized clinical trial including 562 non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 was conducted between February 2021 and June 2021 at 60 hospitals in Brazil, Italy, Spain, and the US. The date of final 90-day follow-up was September 15, 2021. Interventions:Patients were randomized to a therapeutic dose of heparin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor (n = 293) or a therapeutic dose of heparin only (usual care) (n = 269) in a 1:1 ratio for 14 days or until hospital discharge, whichever was sooner. Ticagrelor was the preferred P2Y12 inhibitor. Main Outcomes and Measures:The composite primary outcome was organ support-free days evaluated on an ordinal scale that combined in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and, for those who survived to hospital discharge, the number of days free of respiratory or cardiovascular organ support up to day 21 of the index hospitalization (range, -1 to 21 days; higher scores indicate less organ support and better outcomes). The primary safety outcome was major bleeding by 28 days as defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis. Results:Enrollment of non-critically ill patients was discontinued when the prespecified criterion for futility was met. All 562 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52.7 [SD, 13.5] years; 41.5% women) completed the trial and 87% received a therapeutic dose of heparin by the end of study day 1. In the P2Y12 inhibitor group, ticagrelor was used in 63% of patients and clopidogrel in 37%. The median number of organ support-free days was 21 days (IQR, 20-21 days) among patients in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and was 21 days (IQR, 21-21 days) in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio, 0.83 [95% credible interval, 0.55-1.25]; posterior probability of futility [defined as an odds ratio <1.2], 96%). Major bleeding occurred in 6 patients (2.0%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor group and in 2 patients (0.7%) in the usual care group (adjusted odds ratio, 3.31 [95% CI, 0.64-17.2]; P = .15). Conclusions and Relevance:Among non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the use of a P2Y12 inhibitor in addition to a therapeutic dose of heparin, compared with a therapeutic dose of heparin only, did not result in an increased odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days during hospitalization. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04505774.

BACKGROUND The obesity paradox states that patients with higher body mass index (BMI) and cardiovascular disease may experience better prognosis. However, this is less clear in patients with coronary heart disease. METHODS AND RESULTS The prospective STABILITY (Stabilization of Atherosclerotic Plaque by Initiation of Darapladib Therapy) trial included 15 828 patients with stable coronary heart disease with 3 to 5 years' follow-up on optimal secondary preventive treatment. BMI was measured at baseline (n=15 785). Associations between BMI and cardiovascular outcomes were evaluated by Cox regression analyses with multivariable adjustments. Mean age was 64±9 years and 19% women. Most risk markers (diabetes, hypertension, inflammatory biomarkers, triglycerides) showed a graded association with higher BMI. The frequency of smoking, levels of high-density lipoprotein, growth differentiation factor 15, and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) were higher at lower BMI. Low BMI (<20 kg/m²; n=244 [1.5%]) was associated with doubled risk of total death (hazard ratio [HR], 2.27; 95% CI, 1.60-3.22), cardiovascular death (HR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.46-3.49), and heart failure (HR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.35-4.68) compared with BMI of 25 to <30 kg/m² (n=6752 [42.8%]) as reference. Similarly, high BMI of ≥35 kg/m² (n=1768 [11.2%]) was associated with increased risk of the same outcomes. A BMI between 20 and <25 kg/m² was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.54) and total death (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.42). CONCLUSIONS Patients with stable coronary heart disease showed a graded increase in cardiometabolic and inflammatory risk factors with increasing BMI category >25 kg/m². All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were lowest at BMI of 25 to 35 kg/m². Underweight with BMI of <20 kg/m² and very high BMI of ≥35 kg/m² were strong risk markers for poor prognosis. REGISTRATION URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier NCT00799903.