Medical Device Innovation: Prospective Solutions for an Ecosystem in Crisis Adding a Professional Society Perspective

Barriers to medical device innovation compromise timelines and costs from bench to bedside. Fragmented strategies by individual competitors are no longer sustainable. Pragmatically focused pre-competitive collaboration across stakeholders approaches innovation as an ecosystem. Desiloing experience and expertise encourages high-impact infrastructure efficiencies unique to pre-competitive constructs. Alignment of processes and objectives across the regulatory, reimbursement, clinical research, and clinical practice enterprises, with particular attention to the total product life cycle and continuous accrual of safety information, promotes more predictable equipoise for speed of access relative to residual safety concerns. Professional societies are well positioned to convene pre-competitive dialogue, facilitate alignment, and add perspective to equipoise within the innovation ecosystem

Direct Stenting versus Conventional Stenting in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction—A COMPARE CRUSH Sub-Study

Background: Direct stenting (DS) compared with conventional stenting (CS) after balloon predilatation may reduce distal embolization during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), thereby improving tissue reperfusion. In contrast, DS may increase the risk of stent underexpansion and target lesion failure. Methods:In this sub-study of the randomized COMPARE CRUSH trial (NCT03296540), we reviewed the efficacy of DS versus CS in a cohort of contemporary, pretreated ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary PCI. We compared DS versus CS, assessing (1) stent diameter in the culprit lesion, (2) thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow in the infarct-related artery post-PCI and complete ST-segment resolution (STR) one-hour post-PCI, and (3) target lesion failure at one year. For proportional variables, propensity score weighting was applied to account for potential treatment selection bias. Results: This prespecified sub-study included 446 patients, of whom 189 (42%) were treated with DS. Stent diameters were comparable between groups (3.2 ± 0.5 vs. 3.2 ± 0.5 mm, p = 0.17). Post-PCI TIMI 3 flow and complete STR post-PCI rates were similar between groups (DS 93% vs. CS 90%, adjusted OR 1.16 [95% CI, 0.56–2.39], p = 0.69, and DS 72% vs. CS 58%, adjusted OR 1.29 [95% CI 0.77–2.16], p = 0.34, respectively). Moreover, target lesion failure rates at one year were comparable (DS 2% vs. 1%, adjusted OR 2.93 [95% CI 0.52–16.49], p = 0.22). Conclusion:In this contemporary pretreated STEMI cohort, we found no difference in early myocardial reperfusion outcomes between DS and CS. Moreover, DS seemed comparable to CS in terms of stent diameter and one-year vessel patency.</p

Incidence, Patterns, and Associations Between Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy Cessation and Risk for Adverse Events Among Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus Receiving Drug-Eluting Stents: Results From the PARIS Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the frequency and clinical impact of different cessation patterns of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents among patients with and those without diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND: Early DAPT suspension after percutaneous coronary intervention increases the risk for major adverse cardiac events. However, temporal variability in risk and relation to DAPT cessation patterns among patients with DM remain unclear. METHODS: Using data from the PARIS (Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimens in Stented Patients) registry, 1,430 patients with DM (34%) and 2,777 without DM (66%) treated with drug-eluting stents were identified. DAPT cessation modes were classified as temporary interruption (<14 days), disruption because of bleeding or poor compliance, and physician-recommended discontinuation. RESULTS: During 2-year follow-up, DM was associated with an increased risk for thrombotic events but a similar risk for bleeding. The cumulative incidence of DAPT cessation was significantly lower in patients with versus those without DM (50.1% vs. 55.4%; p < 0.01), driven largely by less frequent physician-guided discontinuation beyond 1 year. In contrast, 2-year rates of interruption and disruption were similar between groups. When DAPT was interrupted or discontinued under physician guidance, the risk for major adverse cardiac events was unchanged compared with patients with DM on uninterrupted DAPT. Conversely, when DAPT was disrupted, the risk for major adverse cardiac events increased compared with uninterrupted DAPT, regardless of diabetic status, with no evidence of statistical interaction. CONCLUSIONS: DAPT cessation patterns vary according to diabetic status, with less frequent physician-guided discontinuation among patients with DM. The presence of DM does not emerge as a modifier of cardiovascular risk after DAPT cessation

Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy Cessation and Cardiovascular Risk in Relation to Age: Analysis From the PARIS Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the association between dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) cessation and cardiovascular risk after percutaneous coronary intervention in relation to age. BACKGROUND: Examination of outcomes by age after percutaneous coronary intervention is relevant given the aging population. METHODS: Two-year clinical outcomes, incidence, and effect of DAPT cessation on outcomes were compared by ages ≤55, 56 to 74, and ≥75 years from the PARIS (Patterns of Non-Adherence to Antiplatelet Regimens in Stented Patients) registry. DAPT cessation included physician-recommended discontinuation, interruption for surgery, and disruption (from noncompliance or bleeding). Clinical endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (a composite of cardiac death, definite or probable stent thrombosis, spontaneous myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization), a secondary restrictive definition of MACE (MACE2) excluding target lesion revascularization, and bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 1,192 patients (24%) were ≤55 years, 2,869 (57%) were 56 to 74 years, and 957 (19%) were ≥75 years of age. Patients ≥75 years of age had higher DAPT cessation rates and increased risk for MACE2, death, cardiac death, and bleeding compared with younger patients. Discontinuation and interruption were not associated with increased cardiovascular risk across age groups, whereas disruption was associated with increased risk for MACE and MACE2 in younger patients but not in patients ≥75 years of age (p for trend <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Nonadherence and outcomes vary by age, with patients ≥75 years having the highest DAPT cessation rates. We observed no association between outcomes and DAPT cessation in patients ≥75 years, whereas discontinuation was associated with lower MACE rates and disruption with increased MACE rates in patients <75 years

Ticagrelor with or without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients after PCI.

BACKGROUND: Monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor after a minimum period of dual antiplatelet therapy is an emerging approach to reduce the risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: In a double-blind trial, we examined the effect of ticagrelor alone as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin with regard to clinically relevant bleeding among patients who were at high risk for bleeding or an ischemic event and had undergone PCI. After 3 months of treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients who had not had a major bleeding event or ischemic event continued to take ticagrelor and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. We also evaluated the composite end point of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, using a noninferiority hypothesis with an absolute margin of 1.6 percentage points. RESULTS: We enrolled 9006 patients, and 7119 underwent randomization after 3 months. Between randomization and 1 year, the incidence of the primary end point was 4.0% among patients randomly assigned to receive ticagrelor plus placebo and 7.1% among patients assigned to receive ticagrelor plus aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.68; P<0.001). The difference in risk between the groups was similar for BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (incidence, 1.0% among patients receiving ticagrelor plus placebo and 2.0% among patients receiving ticagrelor plus aspirin; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74). The incidence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was 3.9% in both groups (difference, -0.06 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.97 to 0.84; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.25; P<0.001 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk patients who underwent PCI and completed 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy, ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower incidence of clinically relevant bleeding than ticagrelor plus aspirin, with no higher risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by AstraZeneca; TWILIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02270242.)

Outcomes of Anatomical versus Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND: Many patients have symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD) and are often evaluated with the use of diagnostic testing, although there are limited data from randomized trials to guide care. METHODS: We randomly assigned 10,003 symptomatic patients to a strategy of initial anatomical testing with the use of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or to functional testing (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress testing, or stress echocardiography). The composite primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or major procedural complication. Secondary end points included invasive cardiac catheterization that did not show obstructive CAD and radiation exposure. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 60.8±8.3 years, 52.7% were women, and 87.7% had chest pain or dyspnea on exertion. The mean pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD was 53.3±21.4%. Over a median follow-up period of 25 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 164 of 4996 patients in the CTA group (3.3%) and in 151 of 5007 (3.0%) in the functional-testing group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.29; P = 0.75). CTA was associated with fewer catheterizations showing no obstructive CAD than was functional testing (3.4% vs. 4.3%, P = 0.02), although more patients in the CTA group underwent catheterization within 90 days after randomization (12.2% vs. 8.1%). The median cumulative radiation exposure per patient was lower in the CTA group than in the functional-testing group (10.0 mSv vs. 11.3 mSv), but 32.6% of the patients in the functional-testing group had no exposure, so the overall exposure was higher in the CTA group (mean, 12.0 mSv vs. 10.1 mSv; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In symptomatic patients with suspected CAD who required noninvasive testing, a strategy of initial CTA, as compared with functional testing, did not improve clinical outcomes over a median follow-up of 2 years. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; PROMISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01174550.

Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention