Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:The long-term effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute treatments on postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (PASC) is unknown. The CONTAIN-Extend study explores the long-term impact of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) therapy on postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) symptoms and general health 18 months following hospitalization. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:The CONTAIN-Extend study examined 281 participants from the original CONTAIN COVID-19 trial (CONTAIN-RCT, NCT04364737) at 18 months post-hospitalization for acute COVID-19. Symptom surveys, global health assessments, and biospecimen collection were performed from November 2021 to October 2022. Multivariable logistic and linear regression estimated associations between the randomization arms and self-reported symptoms and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores and adjusted for covariables, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, disease severity, and CONTAIN enrollment quarter and sites. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:There were no differences in symptoms or PROMIS scores between CCP and placebo (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of general symptoms, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.54-1.67). However, females (aOR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.73-5.34), those 45-64 years (aOR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.14-6.23), and April-June 2020 enrollees (aOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.10-5.19) were more likely to report general symptoms and have poorer PROMIS physical health scores than their respective reference groups. Hispanic participants (difference, -3.05; 95% CI, -5.82 to -0.27) and Black participants (-4.48; 95% CI, -7.94 to -1.02) had poorer PROMIS physical health than White participants. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:CCP demonstrated no lasting effect on PASC symptoms or overall health in comparison to the placebo. This study underscores the significance of demographic factors, including sex, age, and timing of acute infection, in influencing symptom reporting 18 months after acute hypoxic COVID-19 hospitalization.

IMPORTANCE:Biomarkers may improve prediction of cardiovascular events for patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), but their importance in addition to clinical tests of inducible ischemia and CAD severity is unknown. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the prognostic value of multiple biomarkers in stable outpatients with obstructive CAD and moderate or severe inducible ischemia. DESIGN AND SETTING:The ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA CKD trials randomized 5,956 participants with CAD to invasive or conservative management from July 2012 to January 2018; 1,064 participated in the biorepository. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. Secondary outcome was cardiovascular death or MI. Improvements in prediction were assessed by cause-specific hazard ratios (HR) and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for an interquartile increase in each biomarker, controlling for other biomarkers, in a base clinical model of risk factors, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and ischemia severity. Secondary analyses were performed among patients in whom core-lab confirmed severity of CAD was ascertained by computed cardiac tomographic angiography (CCTA). EXPOSURES:Baseline levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), high sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT), growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), lipoprotein a (Lp[a]), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), Cystatin C, soluble CD 40 ligand (sCD40L), myeloperoxidase (MPO), and matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP3). RESULTS:Among 757 biorepository participants, median (IQR) follow-up was 3 (2-5) years, age was 67 (61-72) years, and 144 (19%) were female; 508 had severity of CAD by CCTA available. In an adjusted multimarker model with hsTnT, GDF-15, NT-proBNP and sCD40L, the adjusted HR for the primary outcome per interquartile increase in each biomarker was 1.58 (95% CI 1.22, 2.205), 1.60 (95% CI 1.16, 2.20), 1.61 (95% 1.22, 2.14), and 1.46 (95% 1.12, 1.90), respectively. The adjusted multimarker model also improved prediction compared with the clinical model, increasing the AUC from 0.710 to 0.792 (P < .01) and 0.714 to 0.783 (P < .01) for the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Similar findings were observed after adjusting for core-lab confirmed atherosclerosis severity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among ISCHEMIA biorepository participants, biomarkers of myocyte injury/distension, inflammation, and platelet activity improved cardiovascular event prediction in addition to risk factors, LVEF, and assessments of ischemia and atherosclerosis severity. These biomarkers may improve risk stratification for patients with stable CAD.

BACKGROUND:Women with myocardial infarction (MI) are more likely to have elevated stress levels and depression than men with MI. OBJECTIVES:We investigated psychosocial factors in women with myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) and those with MI and obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS:Women with MI enrolled in a multicenter study and completed measures of perceived stress (Perceived Stress Scale-4) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-2) at the time of MI (baseline) and 2 months later. Stress, depression, and changes over time were compared between MI subtypes. RESULTS:We included 172 MINOCA and 314 MI-CAD patients. Women with MINOCA were younger (age 59.4 years vs 64.2 years; P < 0.001) and more diverse than those with MI-CAD. Women with MINOCA were less likely to have high stress (Perceived Stress Scale-4 ≥6) at the time of MI (51.0% vs 63.0%; P = 0.021) and at 2 months post-MI (32.5% vs 46.3%; P = 0.019) than women with MI-CAD. There was no difference in elevated depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-2 ≥2) at the time of MI (36% vs 43%; P = 0.229) or at 2 months post-MI (39% vs 40%; P = 0.999). No differences in the rate of 2-month decline in stress and depression scores were observed between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Stress and depression are common among women at the time of and 2 months after MI. MINOCA patients were less likely to report high stress compared with MI-CAD patients, but the frequency of elevated depressive symptoms did not differ between the 2 groups. Stress and depressive symptoms decreased in both MI-CAD and MINOCA patients over time.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Patients hospitalized for COVID-19 are at high risk of thrombotic complications and organ failure, and often exhibit severe inflammation, which may contribute to hypercoagulability. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:To determine whether patients hospitalized for COVID-19 experience differing frequencies of thrombotic and organ failure complications and derive variable benefits from therapeutic-dose heparin dependent on the extent of systemic inflammation and whether observed benefit from therapeutic-dose anticoagulation varies depending on the degree of systemic inflammation. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We analyzed data from 1346 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 enrolled in the ATTACC and ACTIV-4a platforms who were randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care for whom levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were reported at baseline. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Increased CRP was associated with worse patient outcomes, including a >98% posterior probability of increased organ support requirement, hospital length of stay, risk of 28-day mortality, and incidence of major thrombotic events or death (patients with CRP 40-100 mg/L or ≥100 mg/L compared to patients with CRP <40 mg/L). Patients with CRP 40 to 100 mg/L experienced the greatest degree of benefit from treatment with therapeutic doses of unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin compared with usual-care prophylactic doses. This was most significant for an increase in organ support-free days (odds ratio: 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.40; 97.9% posterior probability of beneficial effect), with trends toward benefit for other evaluated outcomes. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Moderately ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with CRP between 40 mg/L and 100 mg/L derived the greatest benefit from treatment with therapeutic-dose heparin.

BACKGROUND:Anatomic complete revascularization (ACR) and functional complete revascularization (FCR) have been associated with reduced death and myocardial infarction (MI) in some prior studies. The impact of complete revascularization (CR) in patients undergoing an invasive (INV) compared with a conservative (CON) management strategy has not been reported. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Among patients with chronic coronary disease without prior coronary artery bypass grafting randomized to INV vs CON management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial, we examined the following: 1) the outcomes of ACR and FCR compared with incomplete revascularization; and 2) the potential impact of achieving CR in all INV patients compared with CON management. METHODS:ACR and FCR in the INV group were assessed at an independent core laboratory. Multivariable-adjusted outcomes of CR were examined in INV patients. Inverse probability weighted modeling was then performed to estimate the treatment effect had CR been achieved in all INV patients compared with CON management. RESULTS:ACR and FCR were achieved in 43.4% and 58.4% of 1,824 INV patients. ACR was associated with reduced 4-year rates of cardiovascular death or MI compared with incomplete revascularization. By inverse probability weighted modeling, ACR in all 2,296 INV patients compared with 2,498 CON patients was associated with a lower 4-year rate of cardiovascular death or MI (difference -3.5; 95% CI: -7.2% to 0.0%). In comparison, the event rate difference of cardiovascular death or MI for INV minus CON in the overall ISCHEMIA trial was -2.4%. Results were similar but less pronounced with FCR. CONCLUSIONS:The outcomes of an INV strategy may be improved if CR (especially ACR) is achieved. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with COVID-19 is partly mediated by thromboinflammation. In noncritically ill patients with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival to hospital discharge with reduced use of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:We investigated whether therapeutic-dose heparin reduces the incidence of AKI or death in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We report a prespecified secondary analysis of the ACTIV4a and ATTACC open-label, multiplatform randomized trial of therapeutic-dose heparin vs usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis on the incidence of severe AKI (≥2-fold increase in serum creatinine or initiation of kidney replacement therapy (KDIGO stage 2 or 3) or all-cause mortality in noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Bayesian statistical models were adjusted for age, sex, D-dimer, enrollment period, country, site, and platform. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 1922 enrolled, 23 were excluded due to pre-existing end stage kidney disease and 205 were missing baseline or follow-up creatinine measurements. Severe AKI or death occurred in 4.4% participants assigned to therapeutic-dose heparin and 5.5% assigned to thromboprophylaxis (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 0.72; 95% credible interval (CrI): 0.47, 1.10); the posterior probability of superiority for therapeutic-dose heparin (relative risk < 1.0) was 93.6%. Therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with a 97.7% probability of superiority to reduce the composite of stage 3 AKI or death (3.1% vs 4.6%; aRR: 0.64; 95% CrI: 0.40, 0.99) compared to thromboprophylaxis. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with a high probability of superiority to reduce the incidence of in-hospital severe AKI or death in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND:COVID-19 has been associated with endothelial injury and resultant microvascular inflammation and thrombosis. Activated endothelial cells release and express P-selectin and von Willebrand Factor (VWF), both of which are elevated in severe COVID-19 and may be implicated in the disease pathophysiology. We hypothesized that crizanlizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to P-selectin, would reduce morbidity and mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS:An international, adaptive randomized-controlled platform trial, funded by the NHLBI, randomly assigned 422 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, with either moderate or severe illness, to receive either a single infusion of the P-selectin inhibitor crizanlizumab (at a dose of 5 mg/kg) plus standard-of-care, or standard-of-care alone, in an open-label 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale consisting of the number of days alive free of organ support through the first 21 days after trial entry. RESULTS:The study was stopped for futility by the data safety monitoring committee. Among 421 randomized patients with known 21-day outcome, 163 (77%) patients randomized to the crizanlizumab plus standard-of-care arm did not require any respiratory or cardiovascular organ support compared with 169 (80%) in the standard-of-care only arm. The adjusted OR for the effect of crizanlizumab on organ support-free days was 0.70 (95% CrI, 0.43 to 1.16), where OR>1 indicates treatment benefit, yielding a posterior probability of futility Pr(OR<1.2) of 98% and a posterior probability of inferiority Pr(OR<1.0) of 91%. Overall, there were 37 deaths (17.5%) in the crizanlizumab arm and 27 (12.8%) deaths in the standard-of-care arm (HR=1.42, 95% CrI 0.90-2.36, Pr(HR>1) = 0.934). CONCLUSIONS:Crizanlizumab, a P-selectin inhibitor, did not result in improvement in organ-support free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND:The impact of complete revascularization (CR) on angina-related health status (symptoms, function, quality of life) in chronic coronary disease (CCD) has not been well studied. OBJECTIVES:Among patients with CCD randomized to invasive (INV) vs conservative (CON) management in ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches), we compared the following: 1) the impact of anatomic and functional CR on health status compared with incomplete revascularization (ICR); and 2) the predicted impact of achieving CR in all INV patients compared with CON. METHODS:Multivariable regression adjusting for patient characteristics was used to compare 12-month health status after independent core laboratory-defined CR vs ICR in INV patients who underwent revascularization. Propensity-weighted modeling was then performed to estimate the treatment effect had CR or ICR been achieved in all INV patients, compared with CON. RESULTS:Anatomic and functional CR were achieved in 43.3% and 57.8% of 1,641 INV patients, respectively. Among revascularized patients, CR was associated with improved Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency compared with ICR after adjustment for baseline differences. After modeling CR and ICR in all INV patients, patients with CR and ICR each had greater improvements in health status than CON, with better health status with CR than ICR. The projected benefits of CR were most pronounced in patients with baseline daily/weekly angina and not seen in those with no angina. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with CCD in ISCHEMIA, health status improved more with CR compared with ICR or CON, particularly in those with frequent angina. Anatomic and functional CR provided comparable improvements in quality of life. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

BACKGROUND:Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS:One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS:Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).