Long-term effectiveness and safety of pravastatin in 9014 patients with coronary heart disease and average cholesterol concentrations: the LIPID trial follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) study showed that pravastatin therapy over 6 years reduced mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with previous acute coronary syndromes and average cholesterol concentrations. We assessed the longer-term effects of initial treatment with pravastatin on further cardiovascular events and mortality over a total follow-up period of 8 years. METHODS: In the main trial, 9014 patients with previous myocardial infarction or unstable angina and a baseline plasma cholesterol concentration of 4.0-7.0 mmol/L were randomly assigned pravastatin 40 mg daily or placebo and followed up for 6 years. Subsequently, all patients were offered open-label pravastatin for 2 more years. Major cardiovascular events and adverse events were compared according to initial treatment assignment. FINDINGS: 7680 (97% of those still alive) had 2 years of extended follow-up. 3766 (86%) of those assigned placebo and 3914 (88%) assigned pravastatin agreed to take open-label pravastatin. During this period, patients originally assigned pravastatin had almost identical cholesterol concentrations to those assigned placebo, but a lower risk of death from all causes (219 [5.6%] vs 255 [6.8%], p=0.029), coronary heart disease (CHD) death (108 [2.8%] vs 137 [3.6%], p=0.026), and CHD death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (176 [4.5%] vs 196 [5.2%], p=0.08). Over the total 8-year period, all-cause mortality was 888 (19.7%) in the group originally assigned placebo and 717 (15.9%) in the group originally assigned pravastatin, CHD mortality was 510 (11.3%) versus 395 (8.8%), myocardial infarction was 570 (12.7%) versus 435 (9.6%; each p < 0.0001), and stroke was 272 (6.0%) versus 224 (5.0%; p=0.015). Stronger evidence of separate treatment benefits than in the main trial was seen in important prespecified subgroups (women, patients aged > or = 70 years, and those with total cholesterol < 5.5 mmol/L). Pravastatin had no significant adverse effects. INTERPRETATION: The evidence of sustained treatment benefits and safety of long-term pravastatin treatment reinforces the importance of long-term cholesterol-lowering treatment for almost all patients with previous CHD events

Rheumatoid arthritis patients receive less frequent acute reperfusion and secondary prevention therapy after myocardial infarction compared with the general population

INTRODUCTION: The 30-day case-fatality rate after acute myocardial infarction (MI) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients is twice that of the general population. This study compared the frequency and timeliness of early reperfusion therapy and treatment with secondary prevention medications after acute MI in RA patients and controls. METHODS: We performed a structured medical chart review of RA patients and matched controls who had been admitted with acute MI to one of three hospitals in Victoria, Australia, between 1995 and 2005. The administration and timing of acute reperfusion therapy and in-hospital treatment with secondary prevention medications were compared between the two groups. Acute reperfusion was defined as thrombolysis or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 12 hours of the first symptom of MI. RESULTS: The medical charts of 90 RA patients and 90 matched controls were reviewed. The RA patients were significantly less likely to receive acute reperfusion compared with the controls (16% versus 37%: odds ratio (OR), 0.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.10 to 0.64)), and this difference persisted after adjusting for type of MI, clinical setting of MI, and prior MI (OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.6). The RA patients also received less-frequent in-hospital treatment with beta blockers (71% versus 83%; OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.96) and lipid-lowering agents (40% versus 70%; OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.46). CONCLUSIONS: RA patients who experience acute MI receive acute reperfusion and secondary prevention medications less frequently than do controls. This may contribute to higher case-fatality rates after MI in RA patients

A Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER): Screening Experience and Baseline Characteristics

BACKGROUND: PROSPER was designed to investigate the benefits of treatment with pravastatin in elderly patients for whom a typical doctor might consider the prescription of statin therapy to be a realistic option. METHODS: The PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER) is a randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial to test the hypothesis that treatment with pravastatin (40 mg/day) will reduce the risk of coronary heart disease death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and fatal or non-fatal stroke in elderly men and women with pre-existing vascular disease or with significant risk of developing this condition. RESULTS: In Scotland, Ireland, and the Netherlands, 23,770 individuals were screened, and 5,804 subjects (2,804 men and 3,000 women), aged 70 to 82 years (average 75 years) and with baseline cholesterol 4.0–9.0 mmol/l, were randomised. Randomised subjects had similar distributions with respect to age, blood pressure, and body mass index when compared to the entire group of screenees, but had a higher prevalence of smoking, diabetes, hypertension, and a history of vascular disease. The average total cholesterol level at baseline was 5.4 mmol/l (men) and 6.0 mmol/l (women). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with previous prevention trials of cholesterol-lowering drugs, the PROSPER cohort is significantly older and for the first time includes a majority of women. The study, having achieved its initial goal of recruiting more than 5,500 elderly high-risk men and women, aims to complete all final subject follow-up visits in the first half of 2002 with the main results being available in the fourth quarter of 2002