Publications

IMPORTANCE

Women with acute myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing mechanical reperfusion remain at increased risk of adverse cardiac events and mortality compared with their male counterparts. Whether the benefits of new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are preserved in women with acute MI remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of new-generation DES vs early-generation DES in women with acute MI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Collaborative, international, individual patient-level data of women enrolled in 26 randomized clinical trials of DES were analyzed between July and December 2016. Only women presenting with an acute coronary syndrome were included. Study population was categorized according to presentation with unstable angina (UA) vs acute MI. Acute MI included non-ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI) or ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI).

INTERVENTIONS

Randomization to early- (sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents) vs new-generation (everolimus-, zotarolimus-, or biolimus-eluting stents) DES.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Composite of death, MI or target lesion revascularization, and definite or probable stent thrombosis at 3-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Overall, the mean age of participants was 66.8 years. Of 11 577 women included in the pooled data set, 4373 (37.8%) had an acute coronary syndrome as clinical presentation. Of these 4373 women, 2176 (49.8%) presented with an acute MI. In women with acute MI, new-generation DES were associated with lower risk of death, MI or target lesion revascularization (14.9% vs 18.4%; absolute risk difference, -3.5%; number needed to treat [NNT], 29; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (1.4% vs 4.0%; absolute risk difference, -2.6%; NNT, 46; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.69) without evidence of interaction for both end points compared with women without acute MI (P for interaction = .59 and P for interaction = .31, respectively). A graded absolute benefit with use of new-generation DES was observed in the transition from UA, to NSTEMI, and to STEMI (for death, MI, or target lesion revascularization: UA, -0.5% [NNT, 222]; NSTEMI, -3.1% [NNT, 33]; STEMI, -4.0% [NNT, 25] and for definite or probable ST: UA, -0.4% [NNT, 278]; NSTEMI, -2.2% [NNT, 46]; STEMI, -4.0% [NNT, 25]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

New-generation DES are associated with consistent and durable benefits over 3 years in women presenting with acute MI. The magnitude of these benefits appeared to be greater per increase in severity of acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND

Biological therapies are effective for inducing and maintaining remission in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but patients often require changes in biological agents over the course of their illness. We sought to evaluate the rate of and reasons for discontinuing biological agents and to identify risk factors for their discontinuation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study across 4 VA hospital systems (Dallas, TX; Houston, TX; Ann Arbor, MI; Richmond, VA). Patients with IBD who were started on biological therapy between 1998 and 2015 were identified, and their medical records were reviewed to confirm the diagnosis of IBD and to collect study data.

RESULTS

Of 1969 patients with IBD; 256 were treated with 346 courses of therapy. By 6 months after initiation of therapy, 82 (24%) had stopped the biological agent. Among patients starting their first biological agent, 21.5% had stopped by 6 months. Patients taking a concomitant thiopurine and those with ileocolonic disease or a nonpenetrating, nonstricturing phenotype were less likely to discontinue biological therapy, whereas those taking 5-ASA concomitantly were more likely to discontinue biological therapy. The most common reasons for discontinuation were primary nonresponse (40%) and adverse drug reactions (29%).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, in a large multicenter VA cohort, we found that 24% of patients who are prescribed a biological stop their treatment early, most commonly for primary nonresponse or for an adverse drug reaction. Consideration should be given to treating patients with a concomitant thiopurine if at all possible, as this reduces the likelihood of early discontinuation.