Rekha Garg

Niacin treatment increases plasma homocyst(e)ine levels

BACKGROUND Studies have reported high levels of plasma homocyst(e)ine as an independent risk factor for arterial occlusive disease. The Cholesterol Lowering Atherosclerosis Study reported an increase in plasma homocyst(e)ine levels in patients receiving both colestipol and niacin compared with placebo. Thus the objective of this study was to examine the effect of niacin treatment on plasma homocyst(e)ine levels. METHODS The Arterial Disease Multiple Intervention Trial, a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled trial, examined the effect of niacin compared with placebo on homocyst(e)ine in a subset of 52 participants with peripheral arterial disease. RESULTS During the screening phase, titration of niacin dose from 100 mg to 1000 mg daily resulted in a 17% increase in mean plasma homocyst(e)ine level from 13.1 +/- 4.4 micromol/L to 15.3 +/- 5.6 micromol/L (P <.0001). At 18 weeks after randomization, there was an absolute 55% increase from baseline in mean plasma homocyst(e)ine levels in the niacin group and a 7% decrease in the placebo group (P =.0001). This difference remained statistically significant at the end of follow-up at 48 weeks. CONCLUSIONS Niacin substantially increased plasma homocyst(e)ine levels, which could potentially reduce the expected benefits of niacin associated with lipoprotein modification. However, plasma homocyst(e)ine levels can be decreased by folic acid supplementation. Thus further studies are needed to determine whether B vitamin supplementation to patients undergoing long-term niacin treatment would be beneficial.

Use of an integrated clinical trial database to evaluate the effect of timing of drotrecogin alfa (activated) treatment in severe sepsis

IntroductionSeveral studies have indicated that early identification and treatment of patients with severe sepsis using standard supportive care improves outcomes. Earlier treatment with drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) may also improve outcomes in severe sepsis. Using a recently constructed integrated severe sepsis database, our objectives in this study were to describe the influence of baseline clinical characteristics on timing of DrotAA treatment in patients with severe sepsis, to evaluate the efficacy of DrotAA with respect to timing of administration, and to examine the association between early intervention with DrotAA and patient outcomes, using adjustments for imbalances.MethodsThe database comprises data from 4,459 patients with severe sepsis (DrotAA, n = 3,228; placebo, n = 1,231) included in five clinical trials conducted in tertiary care institutions in 28 countries. Placebo data came only from randomized trials, whereas data for the DrotAA group came from randomized (PROWESS) and open-label/observational (ENHANCE) trials.ResultsIncreased time-to-treatment with DrotAA was significantly associated with more organ dysfunction, greater need of mechanical ventilation, vasopressor use, or recent surgery. Earlier treatment was associated with higher baseline Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) scores. Adjusted and unadjusted survival analyses suggested that compared with placebo, DrotAA treatment provided a potential survival benefit, regardless of time to treatment. Survival curves of DrotAA patients treated early compared with those treated late began to separate at 14 days. By 28 days, patients treated earlier had higher survival than those treated later (76.4% versus 73.5%, p = 0.03). Sepsis-induced multiorgan dysfunction was the most common cause of death followed by refractory shock and respiratory failure. Modeling of the treatment effect, as a function of time to treatment, suggested increased benefit with earlier treatment.ConclusionUsing an integrated database of five severe sepsis trials and appropriate statistical adjustments to reduce sources of potential bias, earlier treatment with DrotAA seemed to be associated with a lower risk-adjusted mortality than later treatment. These data suggest that earlier treatment with DrotAA may provide most benefit for appropriate patients.

Etiology and characteristics of congestive heart failure in blacks

In this study of 301 black patients with congestive heart failure (CHF), systemic hypertension is the most common cause of CHF and is the primary etiology of CHF in 61%. Left ventricular hypertrophy is highly prevalent and is seen in 63% of the patients who had an echocardiogram.

Prognosis in Congestive Heart Failure

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is a common affliction that is increasing in both incidence and prevalence. In this chapter the prognosis of CHF is examined. The epidemiology will be discussed first. Etiology is then considered with special reference to changes that have occurred. Modes of death and predictors of outcome also are considered. This is followed by an examination of the effect of treatment on prognosis.

Rationale and design of the arterial disease multiple intervention trial (ADMIT) pilot study

The primary objectives of the pilot study were to: (1) evaluate the feasibility of recruiting patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD); (2) measure the efficacy and safety of high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-raising treatment, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-lowering therapy, antioxidant therapy, antithrombotic therapy, and their combinations; and (3) assess adherence to a complex multiple drug regimen. Secondary objectives included measurement of the effect of the interventions on prespecified biochemical markers, maintenance of therapy masking (in particular with niacin), and measurement of the interventions impact on functional status and on quality of life. To date, no secondary prevention trial has been conducted specifically among patients with PAD. Intermittent claudication affects about 0.5% to 1.0% of persons aged >35 years. There is a striking increase in incidence of PAD with age, particularly among those aged >50 years in both sexes, although men are twice as likely as women to develop PAD. The Arterial Disease Multiple Intervention Trial was a double-blind randomized pilot trial of 468 participants with documented PAD. A 2 x 2 x 2 factorial design was used to evaluate the effect of 3 interventions. The pilot incorporated several major novel design features: first, the use of a simple noninvasive method (measurement of ankle brachial index) to identify a population with either symptomatic or asymptomatic PAD; and second, a lipid modifying strategy to increase HDL with nicotinic acid in the intervention group while lowering LDL levels equally with an hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitor as needed in the intervention and control group. Two other arms, the antioxidant arm (consisting of beta-carotene and vitamins E and C) and the antithrombotic arm (using warfarin) were also added. Adherence to therapy was measured by pill count, and success in treatment was measured by the proportion of values in target range for HDL, LDL, and the international normalized ratio.

The use of regional coordinating centers in large clinical trials: the DIG trial

The Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) trial was a large simple clinical trial that involved 302 participating centers in the United States and Canada. In order to encourage participation by Canadian investigators, to provide additional help to what were expected to be largely research-inexperienced investigators in Canada, and to provide the studys data coordinating center with resources in Canada to deal with potentially different rules, regulations, and cultural differences, regional coordinating centers were established in four regions of Canada: the maritime provinces, Quebec, Ontario, and western Canada. Canadian centers recruited significantly better than their U.S. counterparts and had slightly better retention and follow-up. While it is not possible to declare that the regional coordinating centers were responsible for this improvement, it is believed that these regional centers did play a role. This role included being able to identify investigators who could be expected to do well, providing one-on-one training and instruction to investigators, and being able to solve problems and implement change in the relatively fewer centers in their regions. The regional coordinating center also reduced the intensity of the workload on the data coordinating center by serving as the primary point of contact for Canadian investigators. The use of regional coordinating centers in studies with a large number of participating centers is highly recommended.

COMPLIANCE TO MULTIPLE INTERVENTIONS IN A HIGH RISK POPULATION

PURPOSE Assess compliance with study medications and examine reasons for noncompliance. Individuals with peripheral arterial disease present the clinician with a unique combination of symptoms and therapeutic needs; the treatment of this population has not been adequately studied. METHODS The Arterial Disease Multiple Intervention Trial was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial that randomized 468 participants to a combination of antioxidants, niacin and warfarin or matching placebos. Men and women (mean age 65 yrs) with peripheral arterial disease and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) < 190 mg/dl were enrolled and followed for one year. Compliance to the study medications was measured by pill count for each medication. An overall measure of compliance was determined by combining pill counts from all study visits. RESULTS Mean overall pill counts ranged from 88 to 94% in the eight treatment groups. No statistically significant differences were found in mean pill counts over time or between active and placebo groups. History of coronary artery disease and number of follow-up visits were associated with higher overall pill counts while low compliance during screening was associated with lower counts during follow-up. Participants with an overall mean pill count < 80% had more adverse events compared to those with a higher count. Side effects were reported as the reason for missing pills significantly more often in the active versus placebo niacin group. CONCLUSIONS Individuals with peripheral arterial disease were able to comply with the complex drug regimen. The ability of this drug combination to reduce cardiovascular events and improve quality of life warrants study.

Overview of the DIG trial.

Congestive heart failure is a major public health problem in the United States, Canada, and other Western countries. The Digitalis Investigation Group (DIG) trial was a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial that evaluated the effects of digoxin on all-cause mortality and on hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction < or =0.45 with normal sinus rhythm. It was designed as a large simple trial. There were 6800 patients entered into the main study over a 31.5-month recruitment period at 302 participating centers in the United States and Canada. All patients were followed for a minimum of 28 months. In order for this study to succeed, many groups had to work together successfully. In this supplement, we present practical aspects of organizing and conducting a large simple trial such as DIG.

Usefulness of clinical information to distinguish patients with normal from those with low ejection fractions in heart failure

In this study we used the DIG trial database to determine whether clinical variables used in combination could accurately predict left ventricular EF for individual patients with HF. The prediction model was able to identify within 0.05 (± 5 EF U) the correct numerical EF only 45% of the time. Although categorical analysis showed that nearly all of the 38% of patients who had the lowest predicted EF actually had EF ≤0.45, this method was unreliable for the remaining 62% of patients.

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in left ventricular dysfunction: results of the studies of left ventricular dysfunction in the context of other similar trials.

Over 13,000 patients have been randomized in 35 long-term trials of the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in patients with heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction. Overall, there is a clear reduction in mortality and hospitalizations for heart failure and myocardial infarction with a trend toward fewer sudden deaths. Furthermore, there is a significant reduction in myocardial infarction in three of the larger trials. These benefits have been demonstrated with several different agents and are consistently seen in various subgroups of patients defined by symptomatic status, etiology of left ventricular dysfunction, age, and gender. However, benefits were greatest among patients with the lowest ejection fraction. In conclusion, ACE inhibitors are of established value in patients with heart failure and/or left ventricular dysfunction.