Randomized Comparison of a Polymer-Free Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus a Polymer-Based Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus The LIPSIA Yukon Trial

ObjectivesThe objective of the study was to assess noninferiority of the polymer-free sirolimus-eluting Yukon Choice stent (Translumina GmbH, Hechingen, Germany) compared with the polymer-based Taxus Liberté stent (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) with regard to the primary endpoint, in-stent late lumen loss, at 9 months in patients with diabetes mellitus.BackgroundThe Yukon Choice stent has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials before, albeit to date, there has been no trial that exclusively enrolled patients with diabetes mellitus.MethodsPatients with diabetes mellitus undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for clinically significant de novo coronary artery stenosis were randomized 1:1 to receive either the polymer-free sirolimus-eluting Yukon Choice stent or the polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting Taxus Liberté stent.ResultsA total of 240 patients were randomized. Quantitative coronary angiography was available for 79% of patients. Mean in-stent late lumen loss was 0.63 ± 0.62 mm for the Yukon Choice stent and 0.45 ± 0.60 mm for the Taxus Liberté stent. Based on the pre-specified margin, the Yukon Choice stent failed to show noninferiority for the primary endpoint. During follow-up, there were no significant differences between groups regarding death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, or nontarget vessel revascularization.ConclusionsCompared with the Taxus Liberté stent, the polymer-free sirolimus-eluting Yukon Choice stent failed to show noninferiority with regard to the primary endpoint, in-stent late lumen loss, in patients with diabetes mellitus after 9-month follow-up. Both stents showed comparable clinical efficacy and safety. (Yukon Choice Versus Taxus Liberté in Diabetes Mellitus; NCT00368953

Albiglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (Harmony Outcomes): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Methods: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 610 sites across 28 countries. We randomly assigned patients aged 40 years and older with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (at a 1:1 ratio) to groups that either received a subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30–50 mg, based on glycaemic response and tolerability) or of a matched volume of placebo once a week, in addition to their standard care. Investigators used an interactive voice or web response system to obtain treatment assignment, and patients and all study investigators were masked to their treatment allocation. We hypothesised that albiglutide would be non-inferior to placebo for the primary outcome of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. If non-inferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of less than 1·30, closed testing for superiority was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02465515. Findings: Patients were screened between July 1, 2015, and Nov 24, 2016. 10 793 patients were screened and 9463 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups: 4731 patients were assigned to receive albiglutide and 4732 patients to receive placebo. On Nov 8, 2017, it was determined that 611 primary endpoints and a median follow-up of at least 1·5 years had accrued, and participants returned for a final visit and discontinuation from study treatment; the last patient visit was on March 12, 2018. These 9463 patients, the intention-to-treat population, were evaluated for a median duration of 1·6 years and were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 (7%) of 4731 patients at an incidence rate of 4·6 events per 100 person-years in the albiglutide group and in 428 (9%) of 4732 patients at an incidence rate of 5·9 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·68–0·90), which indicated that albiglutide was superior to placebo (p<0·0001 for non-inferiority; p=0·0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (ten patients in the albiglutide group and seven patients in the placebo group), pancreatic cancer (six patients in the albiglutide group and five patients in the placebo group), medullary thyroid carcinoma (zero patients in both groups), and other serious adverse events did not differ between the two groups. There were three (<1%) deaths in the placebo group that were assessed by investigators, who were masked to study drug assignment, to be treatment-related and two (<1%) deaths in the albiglutide group. Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. Evidence-based glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should therefore be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline

Randomized Comparison of a Polymer-Free Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus a Polymer-Based Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus The LIPSIA Yukon Trial

ObjectivesThe objective of the study was to assess noninferiority of the polymer-free sirolimus-eluting Yukon Choice stent (Translumina GmbH, Hechingen, Germany) compared with the polymer-based Taxus Liberté stent (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) with regard to the primary endpoint, in-stent late lumen loss, at 9 months in patients with diabetes mellitus.BackgroundThe Yukon Choice stent has been evaluated in several randomized controlled trials before, albeit to date, there has been no trial that exclusively enrolled patients with diabetes mellitus.MethodsPatients with diabetes mellitus undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for clinically significant de novo coronary artery stenosis were randomized 1:1 to receive either the polymer-free sirolimus-eluting Yukon Choice stent or the polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting Taxus Liberté stent.ResultsA total of 240 patients were randomized. Quantitative coronary angiography was available for 79% of patients. Mean in-stent late lumen loss was 0.63 ± 0.62 mm for the Yukon Choice stent and 0.45 ± 0.60 mm for the Taxus Liberté stent. Based on the pre-specified margin, the Yukon Choice stent failed to show noninferiority for the primary endpoint. During follow-up, there were no significant differences between groups regarding death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, or nontarget vessel revascularization.ConclusionsCompared with the Taxus Liberté stent, the polymer-free sirolimus-eluting Yukon Choice stent failed to show noninferiority with regard to the primary endpoint, in-stent late lumen loss, in patients with diabetes mellitus after 9-month follow-up. Both stents showed comparable clinical efficacy and safety. (Yukon Choice Versus Taxus Liberté in Diabetes Mellitus; NCT00368953

Effects of once-weekly exenatide on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo

Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics in Evaluation of LIXisenatide in Acute Coronary Syndrome, a long-term cardiovascular end point trial of lixisenatide versus placebo

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Furthermore, patients with T2DM and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have a particularly high risk of CV events. The glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, lixisenatide, improves glycemia, but its effects on CV events have not been thoroughly evaluated. METHODS: ELIXA (www.clinicaltrials.gov no. NCT01147250) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study of lixisenatide in patients with T2DM and a recent ACS event. The primary aim is to evaluate the effects of lixisenatide on CV morbidity and mortality in a population at high CV risk. The primary efficacy end point is a composite of time to CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. Data are systematically collected for safety outcomes, including hypoglycemia, pancreatitis, and malignancy. RESULTS: Enrollment began in July 2010 and ended in August 2013; 6,068 patients from 49 countries were randomized. Of these, 69% are men and 75% are white; at baseline, the mean ± SD age was 60.3 ± 9.7 years, body mass index was 30.2 ± 5.7 kg/m(2), and duration of T2DM was 9.3 ± 8.2 years. The qualifying ACS was a myocardial infarction in 83% and unstable angina in 17%. The study will continue until the positive adjudication of the protocol-specified number of primary CV events. CONCLUSION: ELIXA will be the first trial to report the safety and efficacy of a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist in people with T2DM and high CV event risk