Publications
Department of Medicine faculty members published more than 3,600 peer-reviewed articles in 2024.
2019
2019
2019
2019
2019
2019
BACKGROUND
Dobutamine stress echocardiography is widely used to test for ischemia in patients with stable coronary artery disease. In this analysis, we studied the ability of the prerandomization stress echocardiography score to predict the placebo-controlled efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within the ORBITA trial (Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation With Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina).
METHODS
One hundred eighty-three patients underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography before randomization. The stress echocardiography score is broadly the number of segments abnormal at peak stress, with akinetic segments counting double and dyskinetic segments counting triple. The ability of prerandomization stress echocardiography to predict the placebo-controlled effect of PCI on response variables was tested by using regression modeling.
RESULTS
At prerandomization, the stress echocardiography score was 1.56±1.77 in the PCI arm (n=98) and 1.61±1.73 in the placebo arm (n=85). There was a detectable interaction between prerandomization stress echocardiography score and the effect of PCI on angina frequency score with a larger placebo-controlled effect in patients with the highest stress echocardiography score (=0.031). With our sample size, we were unable to detect an interaction between stress echocardiography score and any other patient-reported response variables: freedom from angina (=0.116), physical limitation (=0.461), quality of life (=0.689), EuroQOL 5 quality-of-life score (=0.789), or between stress echocardiography score and physician-assessed Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class (=0.693), and treadmill exercise time (=0.426).
CONCLUSIONS
The degree of ischemia assessed by dobutamine stress echocardiography predicts the placebo-controlled efficacy of PCI on patient-reported angina frequency. The greater the downstream stress echocardiography abnormality caused by a stenosis, the greater the reduction in symptoms from PCI.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02062593.
View on PubMed2019
BACKGROUND
Mononuclear cells (MNCs) have been tested in clinical trials across multiple cardiovascular pathologies with mixed results. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and markers of cardiovascular capacity have been particularly challenging to interpret because of small size. This meta-analysis is aimed to assess the efficacy of MNC therapy in randomized clinical trials to identify the markers of efficiency that could influence future trial design.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception through November 8, 2018. Changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and infarct size from baseline to follow-up were selected as primary outcomes. Changes in the left ventricular end-systolic volume, left ventricular end-diastolic volume, brain natriuretic peptide/N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, 6-minute walk test, New York Heart Association class, and MACE incidences were considered secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
In short-term follow-up, patients treated with MNCs demonstrated a significant increase in absolute LVEF of 2.21% (95% CI 1.59-2.83; P < .001; I = 32%) and 6.01% (95% CI 4.45-7.57; P < .001; I = 0%) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and ischemic cardiomyopathy studies, respectively. This effect was sustained in long-term follow-up. MNC therapy significantly reduced left ventricular end-systolic volume; however, infarct size, 6-minute walk test, New York Heart Association class, and MACE rates were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS
MNC therapy may convey a modest but sustained increase in LVEF in ischemic cardiomyopathy patients, supporting further investigation. AMI trials, however, demonstrated minimal improvement in LVEF of unclear clinical significance, suggesting a limited role for MNC therapy in AMI.
View on PubMed2019
Background
In human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) treatment, tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is associated with greater increases in all fasting cholesterol subgroups compared with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). Because lipid abnormalities may contribute to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, cardiovascular risk assessment is integral to routine HIV care. This post hoc study evaluates the impact of lipid changes on predicted atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk and statin eligibility in treatment-naive adults living with HIV treated with TAF or TDF.
Methods
Participants (N = 1744) were randomized (1:1) to initiate TAF or TDF, each coformulated with elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine (studies GS-US-292-0104 and GS-US-292-0111). Eligibility for statin therapy and estimated 10-year ASCVD risk among adults aged 40-79 years treated with TAF or TDF for 96 weeks (W96) were analyzed based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Pooled Cohort Equations. Categorical shifts in 10-year ASCVD risk from <7.5% to ≥7.5% by W96 on TAF versus TDF were calculated.
Results
Participants initiating TAF versus TDF in the overall study population showed small but significant increases in median fasting lipid parameters at W96, including total cholesterol (191 vs 177 mg/dL; < .001), low-density lipoprotein ([LDL] 119 vs 112 mg/dL; < .001), and high-density lipoprotein ([HDL] 51 vs 48 mg/dL; < .001), respectively. At baseline, 18% and 23% on TAF versus TDF had a 10-year ASCVD risk score ≥7.5%, with mean risk scores low overall for TAF versus TDF at baseline (4.9% vs 5.4%; = .35) and W96 (6.1% vs 6.2%; = .04). Increases in ASCVD risk from baseline to W96 were driven by both increasing age and changes in total cholesterol (TC) and HDL cholesterol. At W96, TC/HDL ratios (median) were 3.7 for both groups ( = .69). There was no difference between shifts in categorical risk for TAF versus TDF (9% vs 5%; = .19). Eligibility for high-intensity statin therapy were similar for TAF versus TDF groups (19% vs 21%; = .47).
Conclusions
Lipid changes with TAF as part of coformulated regimens do not substantively affect CVD risk profiles compared with TDF.
View on PubMed