Effects of the high-density lipoprotein mimetic agent CER-001 on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized trial†

Aim High-density lipoproteins (HDLs) have several potentially protective vascular effects. Most clinical studies of therapies targeting HDL have failed to show benefits vs. placebo. Objective: To investigate the effects of an HDL-mimetic agent on atherosclerosis by intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Design and setting A prospective, double-blinded, randomized trial was conducted at 51 centres in the USA, the Netherlands, Canada, and France. Intravascular ultrasonography and QCA were performed to assess coronary atherosclerosis at baseline and 3 (2–5) weeks after the last study infusion. Patients Five hundred and seven patients were randomized; 417 and 461 had paired IVUS and QCA measurements, respectively. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive 6 weekly infusions of placebo, 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, or 12 mg/kg CER-001. Main outcome measures The primary efficacy parameter was the nominal change in the total atheroma volume. Nominal changes in per cent atheroma volume on IVUS and coronary scores on QCA were also pre-specified endpoints. Results: The nominal change in the total atheroma volume (adjusted means) was −2.71, −3.13, −1.50, and −3.05 mm3 with placebo, CER-001 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, and 12 mg/kg, respectively (primary analysis of 12 mg/kg vs. placebo: P = 0.81). There was also no difference among groups for the nominal change in per cent atheroma volume (0.02, −0.02, 0.01, and 0.19%; nominal P = 0.53 for 12 mg/kg vs. placebo). Change in the coronary artery score was −0.022, −0.036, −0.022, and −0.015 mm (nominal P = 0.25, 0.99, 0.55), and change in the cumulative coronary stenosis score was −0.51, 2.65, 0.71, and −0.77% (compared with placebo, nominal P = 0.85 for 12 mg/kg and nominal P = 0.01 for 3 mg/kg). The number of patients with major cardiovascular events was 10 (8.3%), 16 (13.3%), 17 (13.7%), and 12 (9.8%) in the four groups. Conclusion: CER-001 infusions did not reduce coronary atherosclerosis on IVUS and QCA when compared with placebo. Whether CER-001 administered in other regimens or to other populations could favourably affect atherosclerosis must await further study. Name of the trial registry: Clinicaltrials.gov; Registry's URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01201837?term=cer-001&rank=2; Trial registration number: NCT01201837

Effects of the high-density lipoprotein mimetic agent CER-001 on coronary atherosclerosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized trial†

Aim High-density lipoproteins (HDLs) have several potentially protective vascular effects. Most clinical studies of therapies targeting HDL have failed to show benefits vs. placebo. Objective To investigate the effects of an HDL-mimetic agent on atherosclerosis by intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). Design and setting A prospective, double-blinded, randomized trial was conducted at 51 centres in the USA, the Netherlands, Canada, and France. Intravascular ultrasonography and QCA were performed to assess coronary atherosclerosis at baseline and 3 (2-5) weeks after the last study infusion. Patients Five hundred and seven patients were randomized; 417 and 461 had paired IVUS and QCA measurements, respectively. Intervention Patients were randomized to receive 6 weekly infusions of placebo, 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, or 12 mg/kg CER-001. Main outcome measures The primary efficacy parameter was the nominal change in the total atheroma volume. Nominal changes in per cent atheroma volume on IVUS and coronary scores on QCA were also pre-specified endpoints. Results The nominal change in the total atheroma volume (adjusted means) was −2.71, −3.13, −1.50, and −3.05 mm3 with placebo, CER-001 3 mg/kg, 6 mg/kg, and 12 mg/kg, respectively (primary analysis of 12 mg/kg vs. placebo: P = 0.81). There was also no difference among groups for the nominal change in per cent atheroma volume (0.02, −0.02, 0.01, and 0.19%; nominal P = 0.53 for 12 mg/kg vs. placebo). Change in the coronary artery score was −0.022, −0.036, −0.022, and −0.015 mm (nominal P = 0.25, 0.99, 0.55), and change in the cumulative coronary stenosis score was −0.51, 2.65, 0.71, and −0.77% (compared with placebo, nominal P = 0.85 for 12 mg/kg and nominal P = 0.01 for 3 mg/kg). The number of patients with major cardiovascular events was 10 (8.3%), 16 (13.3%), 17 (13.7%), and 12 (9.8%) in the four groups. Conclusion CER-001 infusions did not reduce coronary atherosclerosis on IVUS and QCA when compared with placebo. Whether CER-001 administered in other regimens or to other populations could favourably affect atherosclerosis must await further study. Name of the trial registry: Clinicaltrials.gov; Registry's URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01201837?term=cer-001&rank=2; Trial registration number: NCT0120183

Long-term safety of intravascular ultrasound in nontransplant, nonintervened, atherosclerotic coronary arteries

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to demonstrate that intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) examination of native coronary arteries does not result in an acceleration of the atherosclerotic process. BACKGROUND: Intravascular ultrasound is increasingly used to assess the effects of pharmacologic agents on atherosclerosis. METHODS: Intravascular ultrasound examinations of one coronary artery and coronary angiography were performed in 525 patients at baseline. Patients then underwent a follow-up angiogram 18 to 24 months later. All end points were evaluated in IVUS-related and non-IVUS arteries using quantitative coronary analysis. The study end points were the coronary change score (per-patient mean of minimum lumen diameter changes for all lesions measured), occurrence of new coronary lesions, and progression of preexistent lesions at follow-up. Acute angiographic and clinical complications were also analyzed. RESULTS: Coronary change score was -0.06 ± 0.23 mm and -0.05 ± 0.21 mm for IVUS-related and non-IVUS arteries, respectively (p = 0.35). The increase in percent diameter stenosis from baseline to follow-up was 0.8 ± 6.7% and 1.2 ± 7.0% in the IVUS-related and non-IVUS arteries (p = 0.29). New lesions occurred in 3.6% and 3.9% of IVUS-related and non-IVUS arteries, respectively (p = 0.84). When all coronary lesions were considered, the incidence of lesion progression was not significantly different between IVUS-related (11.6%) and non-IVUS (9.8%) arteries. Coronary spasm occurred in 1.9% of IVUS procedures, and there was one case of acute occlusion with no long-term sequelae. CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular ultrasound does not significantly accelerate atherosclerosis in native coronary arteries and can be used safely to assess progression/regression in clinical trials. © 2005 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Effect on bleeding, time to revascularization, and one-year clinical outcomes of the radial approach during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.02.028American Journal of Cardiology1062148-154AJCD

Arterial effects of Canakinumab in patients with Atherosclerosis and Type 2 Diabetes or Glucose Intolerance

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that interleukin (IL)-1β is important in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and its complications and that inhibiting IL-1β may favorably affect vascular disease progression. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of IL-1β inhibition with canakinumab versus placebo on arterial structure and function, determined by magnetic resonance imaging. METHODS: Patients (N = 189) with atherosclerotic disease and either type 2 diabetes mellitus or impaired glucose tolerance were randomized to receive placebo (n = 94) or canakinumab 150 mg monthly (n = 95) for 12 months. They underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the carotid arteries and aorta. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between canakinumab compared with placebo in the primary efficacy and safety endpoints. There was no statistically significant change in mean carotid wall area and no effect on aortic distensibility, measured at 3 separate anatomic sites. The change in mean carotid artery wall area was -3.37 mm(2) after 12 months with canakinumab versus placebo. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein was significantly reduced by canakinumab compared with placebo at 3 months (geometric mean ratio [GMR]: 0.568; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.436 to 0.740; p &lt; 0.0001) and 12 months (GMR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.414 to 0.758; p = 0.0002). Lipoprotein(a) levels were reduced by canakinumab compared with placebo (-4.30 mg/dl [range: -8.5 to -0.55 mg/dl]; p = 0.025] at 12 months), but triglyceride levels increased (GMR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.046 to 1.380; p = 0.01). In these patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus or impaired glucose tolerance, canakinumab had no effect compared with placebo on any of the measures assessed by using a standard oral glucose tolerance test. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically significant effects of canakinumab on measures of vascular structure or function. Canakinumab reduced markers of inflammation (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and interleukin-6), and there were modest increases in levels of total cholesterol and triglycerides. (Safety &amp; Effectiveness on Vascular Structure and Function of ACZ885 in Atherosclerosis and Either T2DM or IGT Patients; NCT00995930).</p

Pharmacogenetics-guided dalcetrapib therapy after an acute coronary syndrome: the dal-GenE trial

Aims: In a retrospective analysis of dal-Outcomes, the effect of dalcetrapib on cardiovascular events was influenced by an adenylate cyclase type 9 (ADCY9) gene polymorphism. The dal-GenE study was conducted to test this pharmacogenetic hypothesis. Methods and results: dal-GenE was a double-blind trial in patients with an acute coronary syndrome within 1–3 months and the AA genotype at variant rs1967309 in the ADCY9 gene. A total of 6147 patients were randomly assigned to receive dalcetrapib 600 mg or placebo daily. The primary endpoint was the time from randomization to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke. After a median follow-up of 39.9 months, the primary endpoint occurred in 292 (9.5%) of 3071 patients in the dalcetrapib group and 327 (10.6%) of 3076 patients in the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75–1.03; P = 0.12]. The hazard ratios for the components of the primary endpoint were 0.79 (95% CI 0.65–0.96) for myocardial infarction, 0.92 (95% CI 0.64–1.33) for stroke, 1.21 (95% CI 0.91–1.60) for death from cardiovascular causes, and 2.33 (95% CI 0.60–9.02) for resuscitated cardiac arrest. In a pre-specified on-treatment sensitivity analysis, the primary endpoint event rate was 7.8% (236/3015) in the dalcetrapib group and 9.3% (282/3031) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.83; 95% CI 0.70–0.98). Conclusion: Dalcetrapib did not significantly reduce the risk of occurrence of the primary endpoint of ischaemic cardiovascular events at end of study. A new trial would be needed to test the pharmacogenetic hypothesis that dalcetrapib improves the prognosis of patients with the AA genotype

Pharmacogenetics-guided dalcetrapib therapy after an acute coronary syndrome: the dal-GenE trial.

AimsIn a retrospective analysis of dal-Outcomes, the effect of dalcetrapib on cardiovascular events was influenced by an adenylate cyclase type 9 (ADCY9) gene polymorphism. The dal-GenE study was conducted to test this pharmacogenetic hypothesis.Methods and resultsdal-GenE was a double-blind trial in patients with an acute coronary syndrome within 1-3 months and the AA genotype at variant rs1967309 in the ADCY9 gene. A total of 6147 patients were randomly assigned to receive dalcetrapib 600 mg or placebo daily. The primary endpoint was the time from randomization to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke. After a median follow-up of 39.9 months, the primary endpoint occurred in 292 (9.5%) of 3071 patients in the dalcetrapib group and 327 (10.6%) of 3076 patients in the placebo group [hazard ratio 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.03; P = 0.12]. The hazard ratios for the components of the primary endpoint were 0.79 (95% CI 0.65-0.96) for myocardial infarction, 0.92 (95% CI 0.64-1.33) for stroke, 1.21 (95% CI 0.91-1.60) for death from cardiovascular causes, and 2.33 (95% CI 0.60-9.02) for resuscitated cardiac arrest. In a pre-specified on-treatment sensitivity analysis, the primary endpoint event rate was 7.8% (236/3015) in the dalcetrapib group and 9.3% (282/3031) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.83; 95% CI 0.70-0.98).ConclusionDalcetrapib did not significantly reduce the risk of occurrence of the primary endpoint of ischaemic cardiovascular events at end of study. A new trial would be needed to test the pharmacogenetic hypothesis that dalcetrapib improves the prognosis of patients with the AA genotype.Clinical trial registrationTrial registration dal-GenE ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02525939