Prediction of individualized lifetime benefit from cholesterol lowering, blood pressure lowering, antithrombotic therapy, and smoking cessation in apparently healthy people.

AIMS: The benefit an individual can expect from preventive therapy varies based on risk-factor burden, competing risks, and treatment duration. We developed and validated the LIFEtime-perspective CardioVascular Disease (LIFE-CVD) model for the estimation of individual-level 10 years and lifetime treatment-effects of cholesterol lowering, blood pressure lowering, antithrombotic therapy, and smoking cessation in apparently healthy people. METHODS AND RESULTS: Model development was conducted in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (n = 6715) using clinical predictors. The model consists of two complementary Fine and Gray competing-risk adjusted left-truncated subdistribution hazard functions: one for hard cardiovascular disease (CVD)-events, and one for non-CVD mortality. Therapy-effects were estimated by combining the functions with hazard ratios from preventive therapy trials. External validation was performed in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (n = 9250), Heinz Nixdorf Recall (n = 4177), and the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (n = 25 833), and Norfolk (n = 23 548) studies. Calibration of the LIFE-CVD model was good and c-statistics were 0.67-0.76. The output enables the comparison of short-term vs. long-term therapy-benefit. In two people aged 45 and 70 with otherwise identical risk-factors, the older patient has a greater 10-year absolute risk reduction (11.3% vs. 1.0%) but a smaller gain in life-years free of CVD (3.4 vs. 4.5 years) from the same therapy. The model was developed into an interactive online calculator available via www.U-Prevent.com. CONCLUSION: The model can accurately estimate individual-level prognosis and treatment-effects in terms of improved 10-year risk, lifetime risk, and life-expectancy free of CVD. The model is easily accessible and can be used to facilitate personalized-medicine and doctor-patient communication

Radiotherapy Suppresses Angiogenesis in Mice through TGF-βRI/ALK5-Dependent Inhibition of Endothelial Cell Sprouting

BACKGROUND: Radiotherapy is widely used to treat cancer. While rapidly dividing cancer cells are naturally considered the main target of radiotherapy, emerging evidence indicates that radiotherapy also affects endothelial cell functions, and possibly also their angiogenic capacity. In spite of its clinical relevance, such putative anti-angiogenic effect of radiotherapy has not been thoroughly characterized. We have investigated the effect of ionizing radiation on angiogenesis using in vivo, ex vivo and in vitro experimental models in combination with genetic and pharmacological interventions. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here we show that high doses ionizing radiation locally suppressed VEGF- and FGF-2-induced Matrigel plug angiogenesis in mice in vivo and prevented endothelial cell sprouting from mouse aortic rings following in vivo or ex vivo irradiation. Quiescent human endothelial cells exposed to ionizing radiation in vitro resisted apoptosis, demonstrated reduced sprouting, migration and proliferation capacities, showed enhanced adhesion to matrix proteins, and underwent premature senescence. Irradiation induced the expression of P53 and P21 proteins in endothelial cells, but p53 or p21 deficiency and P21 silencing did not prevent radiation-induced inhibition of sprouting or proliferation. Radiation induced Smad-2 phosphorylation in skin in vivo and in endothelial cells in vitro. Inhibition of the TGF-beta type I receptor ALK5 rescued deficient endothelial cell sprouting and migration but not proliferation in vitro and restored defective Matrigel plug angiogenesis in irradiated mice in vivo. ALK5 inhibition, however, did not rescue deficient proliferation. Notch signaling, known to hinder angiogenesis, was activated by radiation but its inhibition, alone or in combination with ALK5 inhibition, did not rescue suppressed proliferation. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that irradiation of quiescent endothelial cells suppresses subsequent angiogenesis and that ALK5 is a critical mediator of this suppression. These results extend our understanding of radiotherapy-induced endothelial dysfunctions, relevant to both therapeutic and unwanted effects of radiotherapy

Randomized controlled trial of a coordinated care intervention to improve risk factor control after stroke or transient ischemic attack in the safety net: Secondary stroke prevention by Uniting Community and Chronic care model teams Early to End Disparities (SUCCEED)

BACKGROUND: Recurrent strokes are preventable through awareness and control of risk factors such as hypertension, and through lifestyle changes such as healthier diets, greater physical activity, and smoking cessation. However, vascular risk factor control is frequently poor among stroke survivors, particularly among socio-economically disadvantaged blacks, Latinos and other people of color. The Chronic Care Model (CCM) is an effective framework for multi-component interventions aimed at improving care processes and outcomes for individuals with chronic disease. In addition, community health workers (CHWs) have played an integral role in reducing health disparities; however, their effectiveness in reducing vascular risk among stroke survivors remains unknown. Our objectives are to develop, test, and assess the economic value of a CCM-based intervention using an Advanced Practice Clinician (APC)-CHW team to improve risk factor control after stroke in an under-resourced, racially/ethnically diverse population. METHODS/DESIGN: In this single-blind randomized controlled trial, 516 adults (≥40 years) with an ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack or intracerebral hemorrhage within the prior 90 days are being enrolled at five sites within the Los Angeles County safety-net setting and randomized 1:1 to intervention vs usual care. Participants are excluded if they do not speak English, Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, or Korean or if they are unable to consent. The intervention includes a minimum of three clinic visits in the healthcare setting, three home visits, and Chronic Disease Self-Management Program group workshops in community venues. The primary outcome is blood pressure (BP) control (systolic BP <130 mmHg) at 1 year. Secondary outcomes include: (1) mean change in systolic BP; (2) control of other vascular risk factors including lipids and hemoglobin A1c, (3) inflammation (C reactive protein [CRP]), (4) medication adherence, (5) lifestyle factors (smoking, diet, and physical activity), (6) estimated relative reduction in risk for recurrent stroke or myocardial infarction (MI), and (7) cost-effectiveness of the intervention versus usual care. DISCUSSION: If this multi-component interdisciplinary intervention is shown to be effective in improving risk factor control after stroke, it may serve as a model that can be used internationally to reduce race/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in stroke in resource-constrained settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01763203

SPRINT trial : It's not just the blood pressure!

Background The SPRINT trial showed a beneficial effect of systolic blood pressure treatment targets of 120 mmHg on cardiovascular risk compared to targets of 140 mmHg. However, differences in medication use, most importantly diuretics, are suggested as an alternative explanation. This post-hoc analysis aimed to determine whether the reduced event rate can be attributed to changes in systolic blood pressure (ΔSBP) . Methods Analyses were based on all 9361 participants of the SPRINT trial. ΔSBP was defined as the change between baseline and 6-month follow-up systolic blood pressure. Major cardiovascular events were myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death. Cox regression was used to describe the relation between ΔSBP and major cardiovascular events. Analyses were performed separately for patients in the lowest tertile of baseline systolic blood pressure, as the SPRINT trial reported the highest treatment effect in this subgroup. Results The relation between ΔSBP and major cardiovascular events was a hazard ratio per 10 mmHg decrease of 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.89-0.98). Similar results were found within the lowest tertile of baseline systolic blood pressure: hazard ratio per 10 mmHg decrease 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.82-1.01). Conclusion Our results show that lowering blood pressure prevents cardiovascular disease. However, not all the positive effects in the SPRINT trial could be explained by ΔSBP. Alternative explanations, such as differences in medication use, should be considered for the positive findings of the SPRINT trial

SPRINT trial : It's not just the blood pressure!

Background The SPRINT trial showed a beneficial effect of systolic blood pressure treatment targets of 120 mmHg on cardiovascular risk compared to targets of 140 mmHg. However, differences in medication use, most importantly diuretics, are suggested as an alternative explanation. This post-hoc analysis aimed to determine whether the reduced event rate can be attributed to changes in systolic blood pressure (ΔSBP) . Methods Analyses were based on all 9361 participants of the SPRINT trial. ΔSBP was defined as the change between baseline and 6-month follow-up systolic blood pressure. Major cardiovascular events were myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death. Cox regression was used to describe the relation between ΔSBP and major cardiovascular events. Analyses were performed separately for patients in the lowest tertile of baseline systolic blood pressure, as the SPRINT trial reported the highest treatment effect in this subgroup. Results The relation between ΔSBP and major cardiovascular events was a hazard ratio per 10 mmHg decrease of 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.89-0.98). Similar results were found within the lowest tertile of baseline systolic blood pressure: hazard ratio per 10 mmHg decrease 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.82-1.01). Conclusion Our results show that lowering blood pressure prevents cardiovascular disease. However, not all the positive effects in the SPRINT trial could be explained by ΔSBP. Alternative explanations, such as differences in medication use, should be considered for the positive findings of the SPRINT trial

Prediction of individualized lifetime benefit from cholesterol lowering, blood pressure lowering, antithrombotic therapy, and smoking cessation in apparently healthy people.

AIMS: The benefit an individual can expect from preventive therapy varies based on risk-factor burden, competing risks, and treatment duration. We developed and validated the LIFEtime-perspective CardioVascular Disease (LIFE-CVD) model for the estimation of individual-level 10 years and lifetime treatment-effects of cholesterol lowering, blood pressure lowering, antithrombotic therapy, and smoking cessation in apparently healthy people. METHODS AND RESULTS: Model development was conducted in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (n = 6715) using clinical predictors. The model consists of two complementary Fine and Gray competing-risk adjusted left-truncated subdistribution hazard functions: one for hard cardiovascular disease (CVD)-events, and one for non-CVD mortality. Therapy-effects were estimated by combining the functions with hazard ratios from preventive therapy trials. External validation was performed in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (n = 9250), Heinz Nixdorf Recall (n = 4177), and the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (n = 25 833), and Norfolk (n = 23 548) studies. Calibration of the LIFE-CVD model was good and c-statistics were 0.67-0.76. The output enables the comparison of short-term vs. long-term therapy-benefit. In two people aged 45 and 70 with otherwise identical risk-factors, the older patient has a greater 10-year absolute risk reduction (11.3% vs. 1.0%) but a smaller gain in life-years free of CVD (3.4 vs. 4.5 years) from the same therapy. The model was developed into an interactive online calculator available via www.U-Prevent.com. CONCLUSION: The model can accurately estimate individual-level prognosis and treatment-effects in terms of improved 10-year risk, lifetime risk, and life-expectancy free of CVD. The model is easily accessible and can be used to facilitate personalized-medicine and doctor-patient communication