Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events

Randomized multicentre pilot study of sacubitril/valsartan versus irbesartan in patients with chronic kidney disease: United Kingdom Heart and Renal Protection (HARP)- III—rationale, trial design and baseline data

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk of progression to end-stage renal disease and cardiovascular disease. Data from other populations and animal experiments suggest that neprilysin inhibition (which augments the natriuretic peptide system) may reduce these risks, but clinical trials among patients with CKD are required to test this hypothesis. METHODS: UK Heart and Renal Protection III (HARP-III) is a multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg two times daily (an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor) with irbesartan 300 mg one time daily among 414 patients with CKD. Patients ≥18 years of age with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≥45 but <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and urine albumin:creatinine ratio (uACR) >20 mg/mmol or eGFR ≥20 but <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 (regardless of uACR) were invited to be screened. Following a 4- to 7-week pre-randomization single-blind placebo run-in phase (during which any current renin-angiotensin system inhibitors were stopped), willing and eligible participants were randomly assigned either sacubitril/valsartan or irbesartan and followed-up for 12 months. The primary aim was to compare the effects of sacubitril/valsartan and irbesartan on measured GFR after 12 months of therapy. Important secondary outcomes include effects on albuminuria, change in eGFR over time and the safety and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in CKD. RESULTS: Between November 2014 and January 2016, 620 patients attended a screening visit and 566 (91%) entered the pre-randomization run-in phase. Of these, 414 (73%) participants were randomized (mean age 63 years; 72% male). The mean eGFR was 34.0 mL/min/1.73 m2 and the median uACR was 58.5 mg/mmol. CONCLUSIONS: UK HARP-III will provide important information on the short-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan on renal function, tolerability and safety among patients with CKD

Randomized multicentre pilot study of sacubitril/valsartan versus irbesartan in patients with chronic kidney disease: United Kingdom Heart and Renal Protection (HARP)- III-rationale, trial design and baseline data

Background Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at risk of progression to end-stage renal disease and cardiovascular disease. Data from other populations and animal experiments suggest that neprilysin inhibition (which augments the natriuretic peptide system) may reduce these risks, but clinical trials among patients with CKD are required to test this hypothesis. Methods UK Heart and Renal Protection III (HARP-III) is a multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg two times daily (an angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor) with irbesartan 300 mg one time daily among 414 patients with CKD. Patients ≥18 years of age with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≥45 but 20 mg/mmol or eGFR ≥20 but <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 (regardless of uACR) were invited to be screened. Following a 4- to 7-week pre-randomization single-blind placebo run-in phase (during which any current renin–angiotensin system inhibitors were stopped), willing and eligible participants were randomly assigned either sacubitril/valsartan or irbesartan and followed-up for 12 months. The primary aim was to compare the effects of sacubitril/valsartan and irbesartan on measured GFR after 12 months of therapy. Important secondary outcomes include effects on albuminuria, change in eGFR over time and the safety and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in CKD. Results Between November 2014 and January 2016, 620 patients attended a screening visit and 566 (91%) entered the pre-randomization run-in phase. Of these, 414 (73%) participants were randomized (mean age 63 years; 72% male). The mean eGFR was 34.0 mL/min/1.73 m2 and the median uACR was 58.5 mg/mmol. Conclusions UK HARP-III will provide important information on the short-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan on renal function, tolerability and safety among patients with CKD

Effects of gastroprotectant drugs for the prevention and treatment of peptic ulcer disease and its complications: a meta-analysis of randomised trials

Background: Gastroprotectant drugs are used for the prevention and treatment of peptic ulcer disease and might reduce its associated complications, but reliable estimates of the effects of gastroprotectants in different clinical settings are scarce. We aimed to examine the effects of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), prostaglandin analogues, and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in different clinical circumstances by doing meta-analyses of tabular data from all relevant unconfounded randomised trials of gastroprotectant drugs. Background: Gastroprotectant drugs are used for the prevention and treatment of peptic ulcer disease and might reduce its associated complications, but reliable estimates of the effects of gastroprotectants in different clinical settings are scarce. We aimed to examine the effects of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), prostaglandin analogues, and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) in different clinical circumstances by doing meta-analyses of tabular data from all relevant unconfounded randomised trials of gastroprotectant drugs. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and Embase from Jan 1, 1950, to Dec 31, 2015, to identify unconfounded, randomised trials of a gastroprotectant drug (defined as a PPI, prostaglandin analogue, or H2RA) versus control, or versus another gastroprotectant. Two independent researchers reviewed the search results and extracted the prespecified outcomes and key characteristics for each trial. We did meta-analyses of the effects of gastroprotectant drugs on ulcer development, bleeding, and mortality overall, according to the class of gastroprotectant, and according to the individual drug within a gastroprotectant class. Findings: We identified comparisons of gastroprotectant versus control in 849 trials (142 485 participants): 580 prevention trials (110 626 participants), 233 healing trials (24 033 participants), and 36 trials for the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (7826 participants). Comparisons of one gastroprotectant drug versus another were available in 345 trials (64 905 participants), comprising 160 prevention trials (32 959 participants), 167 healing trials (28 306 participants), and 18 trials for treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (3640 participants). The median number of patients in each trial was 78 (IQR 44·0–210·5) and the median duration was 1·4 months (0·9–2·8). In prevention trials, gastroprotectant drugs reduced development of endoscopic ulcers (odds ratio [OR] 0·27, 95% CI 0·25–0·29; p&lt;0·0001), symptomatic ulcers (0·25, 0·22–0·29; p&lt;0·0001), and upper gastrointestinal bleeding (0·40, 0·32–0·50; p&lt;0·0001), but did not significantly reduce mortality (0·85, 0·69–1·04; p=0·11). Larger proportional reductions in upper gastrointestinal bleeding were observed for PPIs than for other gastroprotectant drugs (PPIs 0·21, 99% CI 0·12–0·36; prostaglandin analogues 0·63, 0·35–1·12; H2RAs 0·49, 0·30–0·80; phet=0·0005). Gastroprotectant drugs were effective in preventing bleeding irrespective of the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (phet=0·56). In healing trials, gastroprotectants increased endoscopic ulcer healing (3·49, 95% CI 3·28–3·72; p&lt;0·0001), with PPIs more effective (5·22, 99% CI 4·00–6·80) than prostaglandin analogues (2·27, 1·91–2·70) and H2RAs (3·80, 3·44–4·20; phet&lt;0·0001). In trials among patients with acute bleeding, gastroprotectants reduced further bleeding (OR 0·68, 95% CI 0·60–0·78; p&lt;0·0001), blood transfusion (0·75, 0·65–0·88; p=0·0003), further endoscopic intervention (0·56, 0·45–0·70; p&lt;0·0001), and surgery (0·72, 0·61–0·84; p&lt;0·0001), but did not significantly reduce mortality (OR 0·90, 0·72–1·11; p=0·31). PPIs had larger protective effects than did H2RAs for further bleeding (phet=0·0107) and blood transfusion (phet=0·0130). Interpretation: Gastroprotectants, in particular PPIs, reduce the risk of peptic ulcer disease and its complications and promote healing of peptic ulcers in a wide range of clinical circumstances. However, this meta-analysis might have overestimated the benefits owing to small study bias

Lack of effect of lowering LDL cholesterol on cancer: meta-analysis of individual data from 175,000 people in 27 randomised trials of statin therapy

&lt;p&gt;Background: Statin therapy reduces the risk of occlusive vascular events, but uncertainty remains about potential effects on cancer. We sought to provide a detailed assessment of any effects on cancer of lowering LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) with a statin using individual patient records from 175,000 patients in 27 large-scale statin trials.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Methods and Findings: Individual records of 134,537 participants in 22 randomised trials of statin versus control (median duration 4.8 years) and 39,612 participants in 5 trials of more intensive versus less intensive statin therapy (median duration 5.1 years) were obtained. Reducing LDL-C with a statin for about 5 years had no effect on newly diagnosed cancer or on death from such cancers in either the trials of statin versus control (cancer incidence: 3755 [1.4% per year [py]] versus 3738 [1.4% py], RR 1.00 [95% CI 0.96-1.05]; cancer mortality: 1365 [0.5% py] versus 1358 [0.5% py], RR 1.00 [95% CI 0.93–1.08]) or in the trials of more versus less statin (cancer incidence: 1466 [1.6% py] vs 1472 [1.6% py], RR 1.00 [95% CI 0.93–1.07]; cancer mortality: 447 [0.5% py] versus 481 [0.5% py], RR 0.93 [95% CI 0.82–1.06]). Moreover, there was no evidence of any effect of reducing LDL-C with statin therapy on cancer incidence or mortality at any of 23 individual categories of sites, with increasing years of treatment, for any individual statin, or in any given subgroup. In particular, among individuals with low baseline LDL-C (&#60;2 mmol/L), there was no evidence that further LDL-C reduction (from about 1.7 to 1.3 mmol/L) increased cancer risk (381 [1.6% py] versus 408 [1.7% py]; RR 0.92 [99% CI 0.76–1.10]).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusions: In 27 randomised trials, a median of five years of statin therapy had no effect on the incidence of, or mortality from, any type of cancer (or the aggregate of all cancer).&lt;/p&gt

Differential Effects of Aerobic Exercise, Resistance Training and Combined Exercise Modalities on Cholesterol and the Lipid Profile:Review, Synthesis and Recommendations

There is a direct relationship between chronically elevated cholesterol levels (dyslipidaemia) and coronary heart disease. A reduction in total cholesterol is considered the gold standard in preventative cardiovascular medicine. Exercise has been shown to have positive impacts on the pathogenesis, symptomatology and physical fitness of individuals with dyslipidaemia, and to reduce cholesterol levels. The optimal mode, frequency, intensity and duration of exercise for improvement of cholesterol levels are, however, yet to be identified. This review assesses the evidence from 13 published investigations and two review articles that have addressed the effects of aerobic exercise, resistance training and combined aerobic and resistance training on cholesterol levels and the lipid profile. The data included in this review confirm the beneficial effects of regular activity on cholesterol levels and describe the impacts of differing volumes and intensities of exercise upon different types of cholesterol. Evidence-based exercise recommendations are presented, aimed at facilitating the prescription and delivery of interventions in order to optimize cholesterol levels

Effect of gender difference on platelet reactivity

Background Previous studies have suggested that women do not accrue equal therapeutic benefit from antiplatelet medication as compared with men. The physiological mechanism and clinical implications behind this gender disparity have yet to be established. Methods On-treatment platelet reactivity was determined in 717 men and 234 women on dual antiplatelet therapy, undergoing elective coronary stent implantation. Platelet function testing was performed using arachidonic acid and adenosine diphosphate-induced light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) and the VerifyNow P2Y12 and Aspirin assays. Also the incidence of all-cause death, non-fatal acute myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and ischaemic stroke was evaluated. Results Women had higher baseline platelet counts than men. Women exhibited a higher magnitude of on-aspirin platelet reactivity using LTA, but not using the VerifyNow Aspirin assay. The magnitude of on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity was significantly higher in women as compared with men with both tests used. The cut-off value to identify patients at risk as well as the incidence of clinical endpoints was similar between women and men (16/234[6.8%] vs. 62/717[8.6%], p=0.38). Conclusion Although the magnitude of platelet reactivity was higher in women, the absolute difference between genders was small and both the cut-off value to identify patients at risk and the incidence of the composite endpoint were similar between genders. Thus, it is unlikely that the difference in platelet reactivity accounts for a worse prognosis in women

The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background For adults surviving stroke due to spontaneous (non-traumatic) intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) who had taken an antithrombotic (i.e. anticoagulant or antiplatelet) drug for the prevention of vaso-occlusive disease before the ICH, it is unclear whether starting antiplatelet drugs results in an increase in the risk of recurrent ICH or a beneficial net reduction of all serious vascular events compared to avoiding antiplatelet drugs. Methods/design The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) is an investigator-led, randomised, open, assessor-blind, parallel-group, randomised trial comparing starting versus avoiding antiplatelet drugs for adults surviving antithrombotic-associated ICH at 122 hospital sites in the United Kingdom. RESTART uses a central, web-based randomisation system using a minimisation algorithm, with 1:1 treatment allocation to which central research staff are masked. Central follow-up includes annual postal or telephone questionnaires to participants and their general (family) practitioners, with local provision of information about adverse events and outcome events. The primary outcome is recurrent symptomatic ICH. The secondary outcomes are: symptomatic haemorrhagic events; symptomatic vaso-occlusive events; symptomatic stroke of uncertain type; other fatal events; modified Rankin Scale score; adherence to antiplatelet drug(s). The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sub-study involves the conduct of brain MRI according to a standardised imaging protocol before randomisation to investigate heterogeneity of treatment effect according to the presence of brain microbleeds. Recruitment began on 22 May 2013. The target sample size is at least 720 participants in the main trial (at least 550 in the MRI sub-study). Discussion Final results of RESTART will be analysed and disseminated in 2019. Trial registration ISRCTN71907627 (www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN71907627). Prospectively registered on 25 April 2013

Estimated GFR reporting is not sufficient to allow detection of chronic kidney disease in an Italian regional hospital

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an emerging worldwide problem. The lack of attention paid to kidney disease is well known and has been described in previous publications. However, little is known about the magnitude of the problem in highly specialized hospitals where serum creatinine values are used to estimate GFR values.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a cross-sectional evaluation of hospitalized adult patients who were admitted to the medical or surgical department of Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital in 2007. Information regarding admissions was derived from a database. Our goal was to assess the prevalence of CKD (defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] < 60 mL/min/1.73 m²) and detection of CKD using diagnostic codes (Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM]). To reduce the impact of acute renal failure on the study, the last eGFR obtained during hospitalization was the value used for analysis, and intensive care and nephrology unit admissions were excluded. We also excluded patients who had ICD-9-CM codes for renal replacement therapy, acute renal failure, and contrast administration listed as discharge diagnoses.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 18,412 patients included in the study, 4,748 (25.8%) had reduced eGFRs, falling into the category of Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) stage 3 (or higher) CKD. However, the diagnosis of CKD was only reported in 19% of these patients (904/4,748). It is therefore evident that there was a "gray area" corresponding to stage 3 CKD (eGFR 30-59 ml/min), in which most CKD diagnoses are missed. The ICD-9 code sensitivity for detecting CKD was significantly higher in patients with diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease (26.8%, 22.2%, and 23.7%, respectively) than in subjects without diabetes, hypertension, or cardiovascular disease (p < 0.001), but these values are low when the widely described relationship between such comorbidities and CKD is considered.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although CKD was common in this patient population at a large inpatient regional hospital, the low rates of CKD detection emphasize the primary role nephrologists must play in continued medical education, and the need for ongoing efforts to train physicians (particularly primary care providers) regarding eGFR interpretation and systematic screening for CKD in high-risk patients (i.e., the elderly, diabetics, hypertensives, and patients with CV disease).</p

Role of Hepatic Lipase and Endothelial Lipase in High-Density Lipoprotein—Mediated Reverse Cholesterol Transport

Reverse cholesterol transport (RCT) constitutes a key part of the atheroprotective properties of high-density lipoproteins (HDL). Hepatic lipase (HL) and endothelial lipase (EL) are negative regulators of plasma HDL cholesterol levels. Although overexpression of EL decreases overall macrophage-to-feces RCT, knockout of both HL and EL leaves RCT essentially unaffected. With respect to important individual steps of RCT, current data on the role of EL and HL in cholesterol efflux are not conclusive. Both enzymes increase hepatic selective cholesterol uptake; however, this does not translate into altered biliary cholesterol secretion, which is regarded the final step of RCT. Also, the impact of HL and EL on atherosclerosis is not clear cut; rather it depends on respective experimental conditions and chosen models. More mechanistic insights into the diverse biological properties of these enzymes are therefore required to firmly establish EL and HL as targets for the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease