Efficacy and safety of colchicine for treatment of multiple recurrences of pericarditis (CORP-2) : a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Colchicine is effective for the treatment of acute pericarditis and first recurrences. However, conclusive data are lacking for the efficacy and safety of colchicine for treatment of multiple recurrences of pericarditis. METHODS: We did this multicentre, double-blind trial at four general hospitals in northern Italy. Adult patients with multiple recurrences of pericarditis ( 65two) were randomly assigned (1:1) to placebo or colchicine (0\ub75 mg twice daily for 6 months for patients weighing more than 70 kg or 0\ub75 mg once daily for patients weighing 70 kg or less) in addition to conventional anti-inflammatory treatment with aspirin, ibuprofen, or indometacin. Permuted block randomisation (size four) was done with a central computer-based automated sequence. Patients and all investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was recurrent pericarditis in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00235079. FINDINGS: 240 patients were enrolled and 120 were assigned to each group. The proportion of patients who had recurrent pericarditis was 26 (21\ub76%) of 120 in the colchicine group and 51 (42\ub75%) of 120 in the placebo group (relative risk 0\ub749; 95% CI 0\ub724-0\ub765; p=0\ub70009; number needed to treat 5). Adverse effects and discontinuation of study drug occurred in much the same proportions in each group. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal intolerance (nine patients in the colchicine group vs nine in the placebo group) and hepatotoxicity (three vs one). No serious adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Colchicine added to conventional anti-inflammatory treatment significantly reduced the rate of subsequent recurrences of pericarditis in patients with multiple recurrences. Taken together with results from other randomised controlled trials, these findings suggest that colchicine should be probably regarded as a first-line treatment for either acute or recurrent pericarditis in the absence of contraindications or specific indications. FUNDING: Azienda Sanitaria 3 of Torino (now ASLTO2)

A randomized trial of colchicine for acute pericarditis

BackgroundColchicine is effective for the treatment of recurrent pericarditis. However, conclusive data are lacking regarding the use of colchicine during a first attack of acute pericarditis and in the prevention of recurrent symptoms. MethodsIn a multicenter, double-blind trial, eligible adults with acute pericarditis were randomly assigned to receive either colchicine (at a dose of 0.5 mg twice daily for 3 months for patients weighing >70 kg or 0.5 mg once daily for patients weighing 70 kg) or placebo in addition to conventional antiinflammatory therapy with aspirin or ibuprofen. The primary study outcome was incessant or recurrent pericarditis. ResultsA total of 240 patients were enrolled, and 120 were randomly assigned to each of the two study groups. The primary outcome occurred in 20 patients (16.7%) in the colchicine group and 45 patients (37.5%) in the placebo group (relative risk reduction in the colchicine group, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.30 to 0.72; number needed to treat, 4; P<0.001). Colchicine reduced the rate of symptom persistence at 72 hours (19.2% vs. 40.0%, P=0.001), the number of recurrences per patient (0.21 vs. 0.52, P=0.001), and the hospitalization rate (5.0% vs. 14.2%, P=0.02). Colchicine also improved the remission rate at 1 week (85.0% vs. 58.3%, P<0.001). Overall adverse effects and rates of study-drug discontinuation were similar in the two study groups. No serious adverse events were observed. ConclusionsIn patients with acute pericarditis, colchicine, when added to conventional antiinflammatory therapy, significantly reduced the rate of incessant or recurrent pericarditis

A clinical and angiographic study of the XIENCE v everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Study design and rationale of the EXECUTIVE trial

Background: Myocardial revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DESs) is emerging as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). First-generation DESs have yielded equivalent safety results at mid-term compared with surgery, but inferior efficacy in preventing the recurrence of ischemic symptoms. The outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with a second-generation everolimus DES as compared with a paclitaxel DES in patients with MV-CAD has not been established. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of the study is the assessment of the efficacy and performance of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of de-novo coronary artery lesions in patients with MV-CAD. STUDY DESIGN: The study is composed of two parts: a prospective, double arm, randomized multicenter trial to assess the angiographic efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (EECSS) compared with the Taxus Liberté Paclitaxel Eluting Coronary Stent System (Taxus Liberté Stent) and a prospective, open-label, single arm, controlled registry to analyze the clinical efficacy and safety of XIENCE V EECSS at mid-term and long-term follow-up in patients treated for MV-CAD. ENDPOINTS: For the EXECUTIVE randomized trial, the primary endpoint is in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months. For the EXECUTIVE registry, the primary endpoint is a composite of all death, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 12 months. The study will be conducted at 30 study centers in Italy and 600 patients will be enrolled in total: 200 patients will be enrolled (1: 1) in the randomized trial and 400 patients will enter the registry. SAMPLE SIZE: It was calculated that, assuming a mean in-stent late lumen loss of 0.20 ± 0.41 mm in the XIENCE V EECSS arm and 0.30 ± 0.53 mm in the Taxus Liberté stent arm, and a noninferiority margin delta of 0.12 (according to the SPIRIT III results), the analysis of 81 lesions per arm would provide over 90% power. Therefore, 200 patients will be enrolled to account for dropouts. Conclusion: The present study is expected to provide as yet unavailable information about the performance of second-generation stents in the specific setting of patients with MV-CAD. © 2010 Italian Federation of Cardiology

A clinical and angiographic study of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Study design and rationale of the EXECUTIVE trial.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DESs) is emerging as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). First-generation DESs have yielded equivalent safety results at mid-term compared with surgery, but inferior efficacy in preventing the recurrence of ischemic symptoms. The outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with a second-generation everolimus DES as compared with a paclitaxel DES in patients with MV-CAD has not been established. AIM OF THE STUDY: The aim of the study is the assessment of the efficacy and performance of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of de-novo coronary artery lesions in patients with MV-CAD. STUDY DESIGN: The study is composed of two parts: a prospective, double arm, randomized multicenter trial to assess the angiographic efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (EECSS) compared with the Taxus Libert\ue9 Paclitaxel Eluting Coronary Stent System (Taxus Libert\ue9 Stent) and a prospective, open-label, single arm, controlled registry to analyze the clinical efficacy and safety of XIENCE V EECSS at mid-term and long-term follow-up in patients treated for MV-CAD. ENDPOINTS: For the EXECUTIVE randomized trial, the primary endpoint is in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months. For the EXECUTIVE registry, the primary endpoint is a composite of all death, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 12 months. The study will be conducted at 30 study centers in Italy and 600 patients will be enrolled in total: 200 patients will be enrolled (1: 1) in the randomized trial and 400 patients will enter the registry. SAMPLE SIZE: It was calculated that, assuming a mean in-stent late lumen loss of 0.20 +/- 0.41 mm in the XIENCE V EECSS arm and 0.30 +/- 0.53 mm in the Taxus Libert\ue9 stent arm, and a noninferiority margin delta of 0.12 (according to the SPIRIT III results), the analysis of 81 lesions per arm would provide over 90\% power. Therefore, 200 patients will be enrolled to account for dropouts. CONCLUSION: The present study is expected to provide as yet unavailable information about the performance of second-generation stents in the specific setting of patients with MV-CAD

A clinical and angiographic study of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: the EXECUTIVE trial (EXecutive RCT: evaluating XIENCE V in a multi vessel disease).

Objectives This study sought to investigate the efficacy and performance of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent (EES) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions in patients with 2- to 3-vessel multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). Background Drug-eluting stents (DES) have emerged as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with MV-CAD although first-generation DES yielded inferior efficacy and safety compared with surgery. Methods Prospective, randomized (1:1), multicenter feasibility trial was designed to assess angiographic efficacy of EES compared with the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in 200 patients, and a prospective, open-label, single-arm, controlled registry was designed to analyze the clinical outcome of EES at 1-year follow-up in 400 MV-CAD patients. For the randomized trial, the primary endpoint was in-stent late loss at 9 months. For the registry, the primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 12 months. Results The primary endpoint per single lesion was significantly lower in the EES group compared with the PES group (-0.03 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.23 ± 0.51 mm, p = 0.001). Similar results were observed when analyzing all lesions (0.05 ± 0.51 mm vs. 0.24 ± 0.50 mm, p < 0.001). Clinical outcome at 1 year yielded a composite of major adverse cardiac events of 9.2% in the single-arm registry, and 11.1% and 16.5% in the EES and PES randomized groups, respectively (p = 0.30). Conclusions The EXECUTIVE trial was a randomized pilot trial dedicated to the comparison of the efficacy of 2 different DES among patients with 2- to 3-vessel MV-CAD. The study shows lower in-stent late loss at 9 months with the EES XIENCE V compared with the PES TAXUS Libertè, and a low major adverse cardiac event rate at 1 year in patients with 2-to 3-vessel MV-CAD. (EXECUTIVE [EXecutive RCT: Evaluating XIENCE V in a Multi Vessel Disease]; NCT00531011

Clinical outcomes by angiographic type of spontaneous coronary artery dissection

Background: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an increasingly diagnosed cause of myocardial infarction. Although different SCAD angiographic classifications exist, their clinical impact remains unknown. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between an angiographic classification and the development of adverse clinical events during the follow-up of a large, unselected cohort of patients with SCAD. Methods: We conducted an observational study of consecutive SCAD patients from 26 centres across Italy and Spain. Cases were classified into five different angiotypes according to the latest classification endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology. The main composite endpoint included all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and any unplanned revascularisation. Results: In total, 302 SCAD patients (mean age 51.8±19 years) were followed up for a median of 22 months (IQR 12-48). At 28 days, the composite outcome was higher for the angiotypes with a circumscribed contained intramural haematoma (2A and 3): 20.0% vs 5.4%, p&lt;0.001 (non-fatal MI: 11.0% vs 3.5%, p=0.009; unplanned revascularisation: 11.0% vs 2.5%, p&lt;0.001). This was sustained during followup (24.5% vs 9.9%, p=0.001). There were no differences in mortality (0.3% overall). The presence of an angiotype 2A or 3 was an independent predictor of a higher incidence of the composite outcome (adjusted HR 2.44, CI: 1.24-4.80, p=0.010). Conclusions: The SCAD angiographic classification correlates with outcome. Those presenting with an angiographically circumscribed contained intramural haematoma (angiotypes 2A and 3) showed an increased risk of short-term adverse clinical events that was maintained during follow-up