Net Clinical Benefit of Low Dose Rivaroxaban in Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3662-3662 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Zain Farooq ◽  
Muhammad Saad Farooq ◽  
Saira Farid ◽  
Talha Aijaz ◽  
Ishaan Vohra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Net Clinical Benefit

Introduction US Food and Drug Administration has recently approved the use of rivaroxaban 2.5mg BID in patients with coronary heart disease based on Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial. However, it's unclear whether there is net clinical benefit with use of rivaroxaban in such patients. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of rivaroxaban on clinical outcomes in coronary heart disease patients. Methods: Embase, Ovid, Pubmed and Scopus were extensively searched from inception of these databases to April 2019 by two independent reviewers. Only randomized controlled trials of low dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg BID) reporting mortality and cardiovascular outcomes of interest in baseline coronary heart disease patients (≥ 18 years) with at least 1000 patients and follow-up of ≥ 1 year were included. The co-primary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality. The secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, major adverse cardiovascular events, major bleeding and cerebral nervous system (CNS) bleeding. Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used for risk of bias assessment. Statistical heterogeneity was quantified using I2 statistics whereas publication bias was assessed with Eggers regression test. We combined estimates using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. Outcomes were reported as hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Five randomized control trials including 39,979 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Trials ATLAS and Commander HF used placebo as their control while COMPASS and GEMINI ACS-1 used aspirin as control. Pioneer AF-PCI used vitamin K antagonist as the control. Mean age (SD) of the patients was 65.6 ± 3.7 years with 74.3% females. Mean follow up in years was 1.6 ±0.5. Majority of the patients in each trial had hypertension. Our pooled analysis showed reduction in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.85, 95% CI, 0.72-1.00, P=0.05), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.83, 95% CI, 0.70-1.00, P=0.05), MI (HR, 0.88, 95% CI, 0.78-1.00, P=0.05) and stroke (HR, 0.70, 95% CI, 0.53-0.94, P=0.02) with low dose rivaroxaban. No significant difference in risk of bleeding was observed (HR, 1.45, 95% CI, 0.83-2.51, P=0.19). Our pooled analysis also showed reduction in major cardiovascular events (HR, 0.91, 95% CI, 0.85-0.98, P=0.01). CNS bleeding was only reported by ATLAS and COMPASS trials and net effect showed no statistically significant bleeding risk (HR, 1.63, 95% CI, 0.70-3.79, P=0.26). Conclusion: Our data suggest that the use of rivaroxaban is associated with reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in coronary heart disease patients without significantly increasing the risk of bleeding. To further decrease the residual risk of cardiovascular events in coronary heart disease patients, low dose rivaroxaban can be considered by clinicians. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Lipid profile and prognosis in patients with coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiangmei Zhao ◽  
Dongying Wang ◽  
Lijie Qin
Keyword(s):  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Lipid Profile ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Prospective Cohort Studies ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Reduced Risk

Abstract Background This meta-analysis based on prospective cohort studies aimed to evaluate the associations of lipid profiles with the risk of major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Methods The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched for prospective cohort study published through December 2019, and the pooled results were calculated using the random-effects model. Results Twenty-one studies with a total of 76,221 patients with CHD met the inclusion criteria. The per standard deviation (SD) increase in triglyceride was associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Furthermore, the per SD increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) was associated with a reduced risk of cardiac death, whereas patients with lower HDL-C were associated with an increased risk of MACE, all-cause mortality, and cardiac death. Finally, the risk of MACE was significantly increased in patients with CHD with high lipoprotein(a) levels. Conclusions The results of this study suggested that lipid profile variables could predict major cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in patients with CHD.

Fried-food consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis of observational studies

Heart ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. heartjnl-2020-317883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pei Qin ◽  
Ming Zhang ◽  
Minghui Han ◽  
Dechen Liu ◽  
Xinping Luo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Food Consumption ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Fried Food ◽  
Major Cardiovascular Events ◽  
All Cause Mortality

ObjectiveWe performed a meta-analysis, including dose–response analysis, to quantitatively determine the association of fried-food consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in the general adult population.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for all articles before 11 April 2020. Random-effects models were used to estimate the summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs.ResultsIn comparing the highest with lowest fried-food intake, summary RRs (95% CIs) were 1.28 (1.15 to 1.43; n=17, I2=82.0%) for major cardiovascular events (prospective: 1.24 (1.12 to 1.38), n=13, I2=75.7%; case–control: 1.91 (1.15 to 3.17), n=4, I2=92.1%); 1.22 (1.07 to 1.40; n=11, I2=77.9%) for coronary heart disease (prospective: 1.16 (1.05 to 1.29), n=8, I2=44.6%; case–control: 1.91 (1.05 to 3.47), n=3, I2=93.9%); 1.37 (0.97 to 1.94; n=4, I2=80.7%) for stroke (cohort: 1.21 (0.87 to 1.69), n=3, I2=77.3%; case–control: 2.01 (1.27 to 3.19), n=1); 1.37 (1.07 to 1.75; n=4, I2=80.0%) for heart failure; 1.02 (0.93 to 1.14; n=3, I2=27.3%) for cardiovascular mortality; and 1.03 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.12; n=6, I2=38.0%) for all-cause mortality. The association was linear for major cardiovascular events, coronary heart disease and heart failure.ConclusionsFried-food consumption may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and presents a linear dose–response relation. However, the high heterogeneity and potential recall and misclassification biases for fried-food consumption from the original studies should be considered.

scholarly journals Prognostic Impact of Metabolic Syndrome in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhuo-Ming Huang ◽  
Wen-Rong Chen ◽  
Qi-Wen Su ◽  
Zhuo-Wen Huang
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Metabolic Syndrome ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
The Metabolic Syndrome ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Impact

Background: The metabolic syndrome (MS) is significantly associated with the risk of incident heart failure (HF). However, there are still great controversies about the impact of MS on the prognosis in patients with established HF. This meta-analysis aimed to ascertain the effect of MS on the prognosis in patients with HF.Methods: We searched multiple electronic databases, including PubMed, Opengrey, EMBASE, and Cochran Library, for potential studies up to February 15, 2021. Observational studies that reported the impact of MS on the prognosis in patients with established HF were included for meta-analysis.Results: Ten studies comprising 18,590 patients with HF were included for meta-analysis. The median follow-up duration of the included studies was 2.4 years. Compared with HF patients without MS, the risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality was not increased in HF with MS (HR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.88–1.23 for all-cause mortality; HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 0.56–4.88 for cardiovascular mortality, respectively). However, there was a significant increase in composited cardiovascular events in the HF patients with MS compared with those without MS (HR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.23–2.45).Conclusions: In patients with established HF, the presence of MS did not show an association on the risk of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality, while it may increase the risk of composite cardiovascular events.

scholarly journals Efficacy of statin treatment based on cardiovascular outcomes in elderly patients: a standard meta-analysis and Bayesian network analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 030006052092634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuannan Zhai ◽  
Kai Hou ◽  
Rui Li ◽  
YueCheng Hu ◽  
JingXia Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Secondary Prevention ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Statin Treatment ◽  
Comparative Effect ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Central Database

Objective Statins have been shown to be beneficial for the prevention of cardiovascular events. In elderly individuals, the efficacy of statins remains controversial and the comparative effect of statins has not been assessed. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central database were searched for randomized controlled trials that assessed statins in older patients. Results Seventeen trials were analyzed. When used for secondary prevention, statins were associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, revascularization, and stroke. When used for primary prevention, statins reduced the risk of myocardial infarction and revascularization, but did not significantly affect other outcomes. A modest difference between pharmaceutical statin products was found, and high-quality evidence indicated that intensive atorvastatin had the greatest benefits for secondary prevention. Conclusions In secondary prevention, evidence strongly suggests that statins are associated with a reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, and revascularization. However, differences in the effects of various statins do not appear to have significant effects on therapy in secondary prevention for the elderly.

A Bayesian network meta-analysis of PCSK9 inhibitors, statins and ezetimibe with or without statins for cardiovascular outcomes

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (8) ◽  
pp. 844-853 ◽  
Author(s):  
Safi U Khan ◽  
Swapna Talluri ◽  
Haris Riaz ◽  
Hammad Rahman ◽  
Fahad Nasir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Bayesian Network ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Credible Interval ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Pcsk9 Inhibitors ◽  
Adverse Cardiovascular Event ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Background The comparative effects of statins, ezetimibe with or without statins and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors remain unassessed. Design Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to compare treatment groups. Methods Thirty-nine randomized controlled trials were selected using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (inception – September 2017). Results In network meta-analysis of 189,116 patients, PCSK9 inhibitors were ranked as the best treatment for prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events (Surface Under Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA), 85%), myocardial infarction (SUCRA, 84%) and stroke (SUCRA, 80%). PCSK9 inhibitors reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with ezetimibe + statin (odds ratio (OR): 0.72; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.55–0.95; Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria: moderate), statin (OR: 0.78; 95% CrI: 0.62–0.97; GRADE: moderate) and placebo (OR: 0.63; 95% CrI: 0.49–0.79; GRADE: high). The PCSK9 inhibitors were consistently superior to groups for major adverse cardiovascular event reduction in secondary prevention trials (SUCRA, 95%). Statins had the highest probability of having lowest rates of all-cause mortality (SUCRA, 82%) and cardiovascular mortality (SUCRA, 84%). Compared with placebo, statins reduced the risk of all-cause mortality (OR: 0.88; 95% CrI: 0.83–0.94; GRADE: moderate) and cardiovascular mortality (OR: 0.84; 95% CrI: 0.77–0.90; GRADE: high). For cardiovascular mortality, PCSK9 inhibitors were ranked as the second best treatment (SUCRA, 78%) followed by ezetimibe + statin (SUCRA, 50%). Conclusion PCSK9 inhibitors were ranked as the most effective treatment for reducing major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction and stroke, without having major safety concerns. Statins were ranked as the most effective therapy for reducing mortality.

scholarly journals Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis with a particular focus on subgroups

BMC Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Gelbenegger ◽  
Marek Postula ◽  
Ladislav Pecen ◽  
Sigrun Halvorsen ◽  
Maciej Lesiak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Prevention ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statin Treatment ◽  
Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Net Clinical Benefit ◽  
Prevention Of Cardiovascular Disease

Abstract Background The role of aspirin in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the benefit-risk ratio of aspirin for primary prevention of CVD with a particular focus on subgroups. Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of aspirin for primary prevention of CVD versus control and including at least 1000 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and net clinical benefit. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Subgroup analyses involving sex, concomitant statin treatment, diabetes, and smoking were performed. Results Thirteen randomized controlled trials comprising 164,225 patients were included. The risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality was similar for aspirin and control groups (RR 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93–1.02; RR 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90–1.08; respectively). Aspirin reduced the relative risk (RRR) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) by 9% (RR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86–0.95), myocardial infarction by 14% (RR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77–0.95), and ischemic stroke by 10% (RR 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82–0.99), but was associated with a 46% relative risk increase of major bleeding events (RR 1.46; 95% CI, 1.30–1.64) compared with controls. Aspirin use did not translate into a net clinical benefit adjusted for event-associated mortality risk (mean 0.034%; 95% CI, − 0.18 to 0.25%). There was an interaction for aspirin effect in three patient subgroups: (i) in patients under statin treatment, aspirin was associated with a 12% RRR of MACE (RR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80–0.96), and this effect was lacking in the no-statin group; (ii) in non-smokers, aspirin was associated with a 10% RRR of MACE (RR 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82–0.99), and this effect was not present in smokers; and (iii) in males, aspirin use resulted in a 11% RRR of MACE (RR 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83–0.95), with a non-significant effect in females. Conclusions Aspirin use does not reduce all-cause or cardiovascular mortality and results in an insufficient benefit-risk ratio for CVD primary prevention. Non-smokers, patients treated with statins, and males had the greatest risk reduction of MACE across subgroups. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019118474.

scholarly journals Randomized Trial Evaluation of Benefits and Risks of Menopausal Hormone Therapy Among Women Aged 50-59

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross L Prentice ◽  
Aaron K Aragaki ◽  
Rowan T Chlebowski ◽  
Jacques E Rossouw ◽  
Garnet L Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Global Index ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Conjugated Equine Estrogens ◽  
Equine Estrogens

Abstract The health benefits and risks of menopausal hormone therapy among women aged 50-59 years are examined in the Women’s Health Initiative randomized, placebo-controlled trials using long-term follow-up data and a parsimonious statistical model that leverages data from older participants to increase precision. These trials enrolled 27,347 healthy post-menopausal women aged 50-79 at 40 U.S. clinical centers during 1993-1998, including 10,739 post-hysterectomy participants in a trial of conjugated equine estrogens, and 16,608 participants with uterus in the trial of these estrogens plus medroxyprogesterone acetate. Over an 18-year (median) follow-up period (1993-2016) risk for a global index, defined as the earliest of coronary heart disease, invasive breast cancer, stroke, pulmonary embolism, colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, hip fracture, and all-cause mortality, is reduced with conjugated equine estrogens with hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) of 0.82 (0.71, 0.95), and with nominally significant reductions for coronary heart disease, breast cancer, hip fracture and all-cause mortality. Corresponding global index hazard ratio estimates of 1.06 (0.95, 1.19) were non-significant for combined estrogens plus progestin, but increased breast cancer risk and reduced endometrial cancer risk were observed. These results, among women 50-59, substantially agree with the worldwide observational literature, with the exception of breast cancer for estrogens alone.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document