Adrian Coles

The Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium in the PROMISE Study

Background —Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is an established predictor of future major adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in asymptomatic individuals. However limited data exist as to how CAC compares to functional testing (FT) in estimating prognosis in symptomatic patients. Methods —In the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) trial, patients with stable chest pain (or dyspnea) and intermediate pre-test probability for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) were randomized to FT (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or anatomic testing. We evaluated those who underwent CAC testing as part of the anatomic evaluation (n=4,209) and compared to results of FT (n=4,602). We stratified CAC and FT results as normal or mildly, moderately or severely abnormal (for CAC: 0, 1-99 Agatston Score [AS], 100-400 AS and >400 AS, respectively; for FT: normal, mild=late positive treadmill, moderate=early positive treadmill or single-vessel ischemia and severe=large ischemic region abnormality). The primary endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction or unstable angina hospitalization over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios and C-statistic to determine predictive and discriminatory value. Results — Overall, the distribution of normal or mildly, moderately or severely abnormal test results was significantly different between FT and CAC (FT = normal 3588 [78.0%], mild 432 [9.4%], moderate 217 [4.7%], severe 365 [7.9%]; CAC = normal 1,457 [34.6%], mild 1340 [31.8%], moderate 772 [18.3%], severe 640 [15.2%], p 0) whereas less than half of events occurred in patients with mild, moderate or severely abnormal FT (n=57/132; 43%) (p Conclusion —Among stable outpatients presenting with suspected CAD, most patients experiencing clinical events have measurable CAC at baseline while less than half have any abnormalities on FT. However, an abnormal FT was more specific for cardiovascular events, leading to overall similarly modest discriminatory abilities of both tests. Clinical Trial Registration —URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT01174550Background: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is an established predictor of future major adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in asymptomatic individuals. However, limited data exist as to how CAC compares with functional testing (FT) in estimating prognosis in symptomatic patients. Methods: In the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain), patients with stable chest pain (or dyspnea) and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery disease were randomized to FT (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or anatomic testing. We evaluated those who underwent CAC testing as part of the anatomic evaluation (n=4209) and compared that with results of FT (n=4602). We stratified CAC and FT results as normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal (for CAC: 0, 1–99 Agatston score [AS], 100–400 AS, and >400 AS, respectively; for FT: normal, mild=late positive treadmill, moderate=early positive treadmill or single-vessel ischemia, and severe=large ischemic region abnormality). The primary end point was all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina hospitalization over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and C statistics to determine predictive and discriminatory values. Results: Overall, the distribution of normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal test results was significantly different between FT and CAC (FT: normal, n=3588 [78.0%]; mild, n=432 [9.4%]; moderate, n=217 [4.7%]; severe, n=365 [7.9%]; CAC: normal, n=1457 [34.6%]; mild, n=1340 [31.8%]; moderate, n=772 [18.3%]; severe, n=640 [15.2%]; P<0.0001). Moderate and severe abnormalities in both arms robustly predicted events (moderate: CAC: HR, 3.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.81–5.44; and FT: HR, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.46–4.83; severe: CAC: HR, 3.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.99–6.36; and FT: HR, 3.88; 95% confidence interval, 2.58–5.85). In the CAC arm, the majority of events (n=112 of 133, 84%) occurred in patients with any positive CAC test (score >0), whereas fewer than half of events occurred in patients with mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal FT (n=57 of 132, 43%; P<0.001). In contrast, any abnormality on FT was significantly more specific for predicting events (78.6% for FT versus 35.2% for CAC; P<0.001). Overall discriminatory ability in predicting the primary end point of mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unstable angina hospitalization was similar and fair for both CAC and FT (C statistic, 0.67 versus 0.64). Coronary computed tomographic angiography provided significantly better prognostic information compared with FT and CAC testing (C index, 0.72). Conclusions: Among stable outpatients presenting with suspected coronary artery disease, most patients experiencing clinical events have measurable CAC at baseline, and fewer than half have any abnormalities on FT. However, an abnormal FT was more specific for cardiovascular events, leading to overall similarly modest discriminatory abilities of both tests. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01174550.

Prognostic Value of Coronary Artery Calcium in the PROMISE Study (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain)

Background —Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is an established predictor of future major adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in asymptomatic individuals. However limited data exist as to how CAC compares to functional testing (FT) in estimating prognosis in symptomatic patients. Methods —In the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) trial, patients with stable chest pain (or dyspnea) and intermediate pre-test probability for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) were randomized to FT (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or anatomic testing. We evaluated those who underwent CAC testing as part of the anatomic evaluation (n=4,209) and compared to results of FT (n=4,602). We stratified CAC and FT results as normal or mildly, moderately or severely abnormal (for CAC: 0, 1-99 Agatston Score [AS], 100-400 AS and >400 AS, respectively; for FT: normal, mild=late positive treadmill, moderate=early positive treadmill or single-vessel ischemia and severe=large ischemic region abnormality). The primary endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction or unstable angina hospitalization over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios and C-statistic to determine predictive and discriminatory value. Results — Overall, the distribution of normal or mildly, moderately or severely abnormal test results was significantly different between FT and CAC (FT = normal 3588 [78.0%], mild 432 [9.4%], moderate 217 [4.7%], severe 365 [7.9%]; CAC = normal 1,457 [34.6%], mild 1340 [31.8%], moderate 772 [18.3%], severe 640 [15.2%], p 0) whereas less than half of events occurred in patients with mild, moderate or severely abnormal FT (n=57/132; 43%) (p Conclusion —Among stable outpatients presenting with suspected CAD, most patients experiencing clinical events have measurable CAC at baseline while less than half have any abnormalities on FT. However, an abnormal FT was more specific for cardiovascular events, leading to overall similarly modest discriminatory abilities of both tests. Clinical Trial Registration —URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT01174550Background: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is an established predictor of future major adverse atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in asymptomatic individuals. However, limited data exist as to how CAC compares with functional testing (FT) in estimating prognosis in symptomatic patients. Methods: In the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain), patients with stable chest pain (or dyspnea) and intermediate pretest probability for obstructive coronary artery disease were randomized to FT (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress, or stress echocardiography) or anatomic testing. We evaluated those who underwent CAC testing as part of the anatomic evaluation (n=4209) and compared that with results of FT (n=4602). We stratified CAC and FT results as normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal (for CAC: 0, 1–99 Agatston score [AS], 100–400 AS, and >400 AS, respectively; for FT: normal, mild=late positive treadmill, moderate=early positive treadmill or single-vessel ischemia, and severe=large ischemic region abnormality). The primary end point was all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina hospitalization over a median follow-up of 26.1 months. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and C statistics to determine predictive and discriminatory values. Results: Overall, the distribution of normal or mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal test results was significantly different between FT and CAC (FT: normal, n=3588 [78.0%]; mild, n=432 [9.4%]; moderate, n=217 [4.7%]; severe, n=365 [7.9%]; CAC: normal, n=1457 [34.6%]; mild, n=1340 [31.8%]; moderate, n=772 [18.3%]; severe, n=640 [15.2%]; P<0.0001). Moderate and severe abnormalities in both arms robustly predicted events (moderate: CAC: HR, 3.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.81–5.44; and FT: HR, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.46–4.83; severe: CAC: HR, 3.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.99–6.36; and FT: HR, 3.88; 95% confidence interval, 2.58–5.85). In the CAC arm, the majority of events (n=112 of 133, 84%) occurred in patients with any positive CAC test (score >0), whereas fewer than half of events occurred in patients with mildly, moderately, or severely abnormal FT (n=57 of 132, 43%; P<0.001). In contrast, any abnormality on FT was significantly more specific for predicting events (78.6% for FT versus 35.2% for CAC; P<0.001). Overall discriminatory ability in predicting the primary end point of mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unstable angina hospitalization was similar and fair for both CAC and FT (C statistic, 0.67 versus 0.64). Coronary computed tomographic angiography provided significantly better prognostic information compared with FT and CAC testing (C index, 0.72). Conclusions: Among stable outpatients presenting with suspected coronary artery disease, most patients experiencing clinical events have measurable CAC at baseline, and fewer than half have any abnormalities on FT. However, an abnormal FT was more specific for cardiovascular events, leading to overall similarly modest discriminatory abilities of both tests. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01174550.

Changes in Medical Therapy and Lifestyle After Anatomical or Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease.

Background Diagnostic testing in the care of patients newly presenting with symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease may influence risk factor management, independent of test type or test results. However, little is known about changes in medications and lifestyle after anatomical or functional testing. Methods and Results We examined what factors influenced preventive medical therapy and lifestyle practices at 60 days among 10 003 symptomatic patients (53% women; mean age 61 years) randomly assigned to anatomical testing with coronary computed tomographic angiography or functional testing (NCT01174550). We also assessed the association of preventive changes with major cardiovascular events. There were no differences in medications/lifestyle at baseline. At 60 days, relative to baseline, the computed tomographic angiography strategy was associated with a higher proportion of patients newly initiating aspirin (11.8% versus 7.8%), statins (12.7% versus 6.2%), and β‐blockers (8.1% versus 5.3%), compared to functional testing (P<0.0001 for each). No significant differences between computed tomographic angiography and functional testing strategies were observed for initiation of exercise, quitting smoking, or weight loss in overweight/obese patients, though overall prevalence of healthy eating was higher after computed tomographic angiography (P=0.002) while obese/overweight status was lower (P=0.040). Positive initial test results and revascularization demonstrated stronger associations with preventive medications and lifestyle than test type. Medication initiation was not associated with fewer cardiovascular events. Conclusions Positive initial test results and revascularization are primary drivers of changes in preventive medical and lifestyle practices, with test type making secondary contributions. However, substantial opportunities exist to further reduce cardiovascular risk. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01174550.

Aetiology, timing and clinical predictors of early vs. late readmission following index hospitalization for acute heart failure: insights from ASCEND‐HF

Patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) are at high risk for 30‐day readmission. This study sought to examine the timings and causes of readmission within 30 days of an HF hospitalization.

An age- and sex-specific gene expression score is associated with revascularization and coronary artery disease: Insights from the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) trial

Background Identifying predictors of coronary artery disease (CAD)‐related procedures and events remains a priority. Methods We measured an age‐ and sex‐specific gene expression score (ASGES) previously validated to detect obstructive CAD (oCAD) in symptomatic nondiabetic patients in the PROMISE trial. The outcomes were oCAD (≥70% stenosis in ≥1 vessel or ≥50% left main stenosis on CT angiography [CTA]) and a composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, or unstable angina. Results The ASGES was determined in 2370 nondiabetic participants (47.5% male, median age 59.5 years, median follow‐up 25 months), including 1137 with CTA data. An ASGES >15 was associated with oCAD (odds ratio 2.5 [95% CI 1.6‐3.8], P < .001) and the composite endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] 2.6 [95% CI 1.8‐3.9], P < .001) in unadjusted analyses. After adjustment for Framingham risk, an ASGES >15 remained associated with the composite endpoint (P = .02); the only component that was associated was revascularization (adjusted HR 2.69 [95% CI 1.52‐4.79], P < .001). Compared to noninvasive testing, the ASGES improved prediction for the composite (increase in c‐statistic = 0.036; continuous net reclassification index = 43.2%). Patients with an ASGES ≤15 had a composite endpoint rate no different from those with negative noninvasive test results (3.2% vs. 2.6%, P = .29). Conclusions A blood‐based genomic test for detecting oCAD significantly predicts near‐term revascularization procedures, but not non‐revascularization events. Larger studies will be needed to clarify the risk with non‐revascularization events.

Comparison of International Guidelines for Assessment of Suspected Stable Angina: Insights From the PROMISE and SCOT-HEART

Objectives This study sought to compare the performance of major guidelines for the assessment of stable chest pain including risk-based (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology) and symptom-focused (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) strategies. Background Although noninvasive testing is not recommended in low-risk individuals with stable chest pain, guidelines recommend differing approaches to defining low-risk patients. Methods Patient-level data were obtained from the PROMISE (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) and SCOT-HEART (Scottish Computed Tomography of the Heart) trials. Pre-test probability was determined and patients dichotomized into low-risk and intermediate-high–risk groups according to each guideline’s definitions. The primary endpoint was obstructive coronary artery disease on coronary computed tomography angiography. Secondary endpoints were coronary revascularization at 90 days and cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction up to 3 years. Results In total, 13,773 patients were included of whom 6,160 had coronary computed tomography angiography. The proportions of patients identified as low risk by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology, and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, respectively, were 2.5%, 2.5%, and 10.0% within PROMISE, and 14.0%, 19.8%, and 38.4% within SCOT-HEART. All guidelines identified lower rates of obstructive coronary artery disease in low- versus intermediate-high–risk patients with a negative predictive value of ≥0.90. Compared with low-risk groups, all intermediate-high–risk groups had greater risks of coronary revascularization (odds ratio [OR]: 2.2 to 24.1) and clinical outcomes (OR: 1.84 to 5.8). Conclusions Compared with risk-based guidelines, symptom-focused assessment identifies a larger group of low-risk chest pain patients potentially deriving limited benefit from noninvasive testing. (Scottish Computed Tomography of the Heart Trial [SCOT-HEART]; NCT01149590; Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain [PROMISE]; NCT01174550)

Relationship between changing patient-reported outcomes and subsequent clinical events in patients with chronic heart failure: insights from HF-ACTION

A 5‐point change in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) is commonly considered to be a clinically significant difference in health status in patients with heart failure. We evaluated how the magnitude of change relates to subsequent clinical outcomes.

CO-MORBIDITIES AND ETHNICITY/RACE PREDICT MORBIDITY AND MORTALITY IN HIGH RISK HEART FAILURE PATIENTS WITH SYSTOLIC DYSFUNCTION: THE GUIDE-IT PREDICTIVE RISK MODEL

We aimed to develop a multivariable statistical model for risk stratification of high risk heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients using patient data routinely collected in clinical practice. The GUIDE-IT (Guiding Evidence-Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment)

Renal Function and Exercise Training in Ambulatory Heart Failure Patients with a Reduced Ejection Fraction

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and/or end-stage renal disease are less active and experience significant functional limitations. The impact of a structured aerobic exercise intervention on outcomes in ambulatory heart failure (HF) patients with comorbid CKD is unknown. HF-ACTION enrolled 2,331 outpatients with HF and a reduced ejection fraction (i.e., ≤35%) from April 2003 to February 2007 and randomized them to aerobic exercise training versus usual care. Patients were grouped according to the presence of CKD, defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m2. A total of 2,091 patients (90%) had serum creatinine measured and were included in the final analytical cohort. The prevalence of CKD was 41% at baseline. In patients with and without CKD, respectively, the incidence of all-cause death and hospitalization was 75% and 63% over a median follow-up of 30 months. After adjusting for potential confounders, CKD was associated with increased risk of the composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalization (hazard ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.33; p value ≤0.01). With the exception of a marginally greater improvement in exercise duration in response to aerobic exercise training (estimate ± standard error: 0.9 ± 0.2 minutes vs 1.4 ± 0.1 minutes; p value = 0.01), there was no interaction between treatment arm and CKD on functional status, health-related quality of life, or clinical outcomes (p value ≥0.05 for all interactions). In conclusion, the prevalence of CKD was high in ambulatory reduced ejection fraction patients and was associated with a poorer overall prognosis but not a differential response to aerobic exercise training.

Worsening renal function during decongestion among patients hospitalized for heart failure: Findings from the Evaluation Study of Congestive Heart Failure and Pulmonary Artery Catheterization Effectiveness (ESCAPE) trial

Introduction Worsening renal function (WRF) can occur throughout a hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF). However, decongestion can be measured in different ways and the prognostic implications of WRF in the setting of different measures of decongestion are unclear. Methods Patients (N = 433) from the ESCAPE were classified by measures of decongestion during hospitalization: hemodynamic (right atrial pressure ≤8 mmHg and/or wedge pressure ≤15 mmHg at discharge), clinical (≤1 sign of congestion at discharge), hemoconcentration (any increase in hemoglobin) and estimated plasma volume using the Hakim formula (5% reduction in plasma volume). WRF was defined as creatinine increase ≥0.3 mg/dl during hospitalization. The association between WRF and 180‐day all‐cause death was assessed. Results Successful decongestion was observed in 124 (60%) patients by hemodynamics, 204 (49%) by clinical exam, 173 (47%) by hemoconcentration, and 165 (45%) by plasma volume. There was no agreement between the hemodynamic assessment and other decongestion measures in up to 43% of cases. Persistent congestion with concomitant WRF at discharge was associated with worse outcomes compared to patients without congestion and WRF. Among patients decongested at discharge, in‐hospital WRF was not significantly associated with 180‐day all‐cause death, when using hemodynamic, clinical or estimated plasma volume as measures of decongestion (P > .05 for all markers). Conclusions In patients hospitalized for HF, although there was disagreement across common measures of decongestion, in‐hospital WRF was not associated with increased hazard of all‐cause mortality among patients successfully decongested at discharge.