Rory Collins

Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial—Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUNDnThe lowering of cholesterol concentrations in individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease improves outcome. No study, however, has assessed benefits of cholesterol lowering in the primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) in hypertensive patients who are not conventionally deemed dyslipidaemic.nnnMETHODSnOf 19342 hypertensive patients (aged 40-79 years with at least three other cardiovascular risk factors) randomised to one of two antihypertensive regimens in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial, 10305 with non-fasting total cholesterol concentrations 6.5 mmol/L or less were randomly assigned additional atorvastatin 10 mg or placebo. These patients formed the lipid-lowering arm of the study. We planned follow-up for an average of 5 years, the primary endpoint being non-fatal myocardial infarction and fatal CHD. Data were analysed by intention to treat.nnnFINDINGSnTreatment was stopped after a median follow-up of 3.3 years. By that time, 100 primary events had occurred in the atorvastatin group compared with 154 events in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.64 [95% CI 0.50-0.83], p=0.0005). This benefit emerged in the first year of follow-up. There was no significant heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Fatal and non-fatal stroke (89 atorvastatin vs 121 placebo, 0.73 [0.56-0.96], p=0.024), total cardiovascular events (389 vs 486, 0.79 [0.69-0.90], p=0.0005), and total coronary events (178 vs 247, 0.71 [0.59-0.86], p=0.0005) were also significantly lowered. There were 185 deaths in the atorvastatin group and 212 in the placebo group (0.87 [0.71-1.06], p=0.16). Atorvastatin lowered total serum cholesterol by about 1.3 mmol/L compared with placebo at 12 months, and by 1.1 mmol/L after 3 years of follow-up.nnnINTERPRETATIONnThe reductions in major cardiovascular events with atorvastatin are large, given the short follow-up time. These findings may have implications for future lipid-lowering guidelines.

Prevention of Coronary and Stroke Events with Atorvastatin in Hypertensive Patients who have Average or Lower-than-Average Cholesterol Concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial— Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): A Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

SummaryBackground The lowering of cholesterol concentrations in individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease improves outcome. No study, however, has assessed benefits of cholesterol lowering in the primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) in hypertensive patients who are not conventionally deemed dyslipidaemic.n Methods Of 19 342 hypertensive patients (aged 40–79 years with at least three other cardiovascular risk factors) randomised to one of two antihypertensive regimens in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial, 10 305 with nonfasting total cholesterol concentrations 6.5 mmol/L or less were randomly assigned additional atorvastatin 10 mg or placebo. These patients formed the lipid-lowering arm of the study. We planned follow-up for an average of 5 years, the primary endpoint being non-fatal myocardial infarction and fatal CHD. Data were analysed by intention to treat.n Findings Treatment was stopped after a median follow-up of 3.3 years. By that time, 100 primary events had occurred in the atorvastatin group compared with 154 events in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.64 [95% CI 0.50–0.83], p = 0.0005). This benefit emerged in the first year of follow-up. There was no significant heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Fatal and non-fatal stroke (89 atorvastatin vs 121 placebo, 0.73 [0.56–0.96], p = 0.024), total cardiovascular events (389 vs 486, 0.79 [0.69–0.90], p = 0.0005), and total coronary events (178 vs 247, 0.71 [0.59–0.86], p = 0.0005) were also significantly lowered. There were 185 deaths in the atorvastatin group and 212 in the placebo group (0.87 [0.71–1.06], p = 0.16). Atorvastatin lowered total serum cholesterol by about 1.3 mmol/L compared with placebo at 12 months, and by 1.1 mmol/L after 3 years of follow-up.n Interpretation The reductions in major cardiovascular events with atorvastatin are large, given the short follow-up time. These findings may have implications for future lipid-lowering guidelines.

Diabetes Mellitus, Fasting Glucose, and Risk of Cause-Specific Death

BACKGROUNDnThe extent to which diabetes mellitus or hyperglycemia is related to risk of death from cancer or other nonvascular conditions is uncertain.nnnMETHODSnWe calculated hazard ratios for cause-specific death, according to baseline diabetes status or fasting glucose level, from individual-participant data on 123,205 deaths among 820,900 people in 97 prospective studies.nnnRESULTSnAfter adjustment for age, sex, smoking status, and body-mass index, hazard ratios among persons with diabetes as compared with persons without diabetes were as follows: 1.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.71 to 1.90) for death from any cause, 1.25 (95% CI, 1.19 to 1.31) for death from cancer, 2.32 (95% CI, 2.11 to 2.56) for death from vascular causes, and 1.73 (95% CI, 1.62 to 1.85) for death from other causes. Diabetes (vs. no diabetes) was moderately associated with death from cancers of the liver, pancreas, ovary, colorectum, lung, bladder, and breast. Aside from cancer and vascular disease, diabetes (vs. no diabetes) was also associated with death from renal disease, liver disease, pneumonia and other infectious diseases, mental disorders, nonhepatic digestive diseases, external causes, intentional self-harm, nervous-system disorders, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Hazard ratios were appreciably reduced after further adjustment for glycemia measures, but not after adjustment for systolic blood pressure, lipid levels, inflammation or renal markers. Fasting glucose levels exceeding 100 mg per deciliter (5.6 mmol per liter), but not levels of 70 to 100 mg per deciliter (3.9 to 5.6 mmol per liter), were associated with death. A 50-year-old with diabetes died, on average, 6 years earlier than a counterpart without diabetes, with about 40% of the difference in survival attributable to excess nonvascular deaths.nnnCONCLUSIONSnIn addition to vascular disease, diabetes is associated with substantial premature death from several cancers, infectious diseases, external causes, intentional self-harm, and degenerative disorders, independent of several major risk factors. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation and others.).

Serum cholesterol concentration and coronary heart disease in population with low cholesterol concentrations.

OBJECTIVE--To examine the relation between serum cholesterol concentration and mortality (from coronary heart disease and from other causes) below the range of cholesterol values generally seen in Western populations. DESIGN--Prospective observational study based on 8-13 years of follow up of subjects in a population with low cholesterol concentrations. SETTING--Urban Shanghai, China. SUBJECTS--9021 Chinese men and women aged 35-64 at baseline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE--Death from coronary heart disease and other causes. RESULTS--The average serum cholesterol concentration was 4.2 mmol/l at baseline examination, and only 43 (7%) of the deaths that occurred during 8-13 years of follow up were attributed to coronary heart disease. There was a strongly positive, and apparently independent, relation between serum cholesterol concentration and death from coronary heart disease (z = 3.47, p less than 0.001), and within the range of usual serum cholesterol concentration studied (3.8-4.7 mmol/l) there was no evidence of any threshold. After appropriate adjustment for the regression dilution bias, a 4 (SD 1)% difference in usual cholesterol concentration was associated with a 21 (SD 6)% (95% confidence interval 9% to 35%) difference in mortality from coronary heart disease. There was no significant relation between serum cholesterol concentration and death from stroke or all types of cancer. The 79 deaths due to liver cancer or other chronic liver disease were inversely related to cholesterol concentration at baseline. CONCLUSION--Blood cholesterol concentration was directly related to mortality from coronary heart disease even in those with what was, by Western standards, a low cholesterol concentration. There was no good evidence of an adverse effect of cholesterol on other causes of death.

Large-scale test of hypothesised associations between the angiotensin-converting-enzyme insertion/deletion polymorphism and myocardial infarction in about 5000 cases and 6000 controls

BACKGROUNDnThe original report of a possible association between myocardial infarction and the insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism of the gene for the angiotensin-1-converting enzyme (ACE) indicated a risk ratio for myocardial infarction with the DD genotype of 1.34 (95% CI 1.05-1.70), and the association was claimed to be particularly strong in a retrospectively defined low-risk subgroup (3.2 [95% CI 1.7-5.9). Subsequent investigations reached varying conclusions, but all were small, and much larger studies were needed.nnnMETHODSn4629 myocardial infarction cases and 5934 controls were compared. Cases were UK men aged 30-54 years and women aged 30-64 years recruited on presentation to hospital with confirmed myocardial infarction. Controls were aged 30-64 years with no history of cardiovascular disease, but were siblings or children of myocardial infarction survivors, or spouses of such relatives. All risk-ratio calculations allow for this relatedness of some of the controls. An updated meta-analysis of previous studies was also conducted.nnnFINDINGSnThe ACE DD genotype was found in 1359 (29.4%) of the myocardial infarction cases and in 1637 (27.6%) of the controls (risk ratio 1.10 [95% CI 1.00-1.21]). The association between myocardial infarction and the DD genotype did not seem to be stronger in the subgroup defined as low risk by previously used criteria (234 [28%] of 836 cases and 911 [28%] of 3253 controls: risk ratio 1.04 [95% CI 0.87-1.24]), or in any other subgroup. Nor was the ACE I/D genotype predictive of subsequent survival.nnnINTERPRETATIONnThis study involved many more cases than any previously reported study of this question, but did not confirm the existence of any substantial association. In an updated meta-analysis of these results with those of previously published studies, the risk ratio for myocardial infarction with the DD genotype seems to lie in the range 1.0 to about 1.1. Although an increase in risk of up to about 10-15% cannot be ruled out, substantially more extreme risks can be. Moreover, there are not especially strong associations in the subgroups previously selected for emphasis. These findings illustrate the need for some studies of candidate genes to involve much larger populations than is customary, without undue emphasis on retrospectively defined subgroups.

Effect of intravenous nitrates on mortality in acute myocardial infarction: an overview of the randomised trials

About 2000 patients have been randomised in ten trials of intravenous nitroglycerin or nitroprusside in acute myocardial infarction. Taken separately, the individual trials have all been too small to provide a reliable estimate of the effects of treatment on mortality, but collectively they provide strong evidence of benefit. In total there have been 136 nitrate and 193 control deaths, and an appropriate overview of the separate trial results indicated a typical reduction of 35% (SD 10) in the odds of death (2p less than 0.001, with 95% confidence limits of about one-sixth to one-half). Both nitroglycerin and nitroprusside reduced mortality, the reduction being non-significantly greater with nitroglycerin than with nitroprusside. The greatest reduction in mortality occurred during the first week or so of follow-up, with a non-significant further reduction after this early period. This suggests that the early benefit is not rapidly lost.

Reliable assessment of the effects of treatment on mortality and major morbidity, I: clinical trials.

This two-part review is intended principally for practising clinicians who want to know why some types of evidence about the effects of treatment on survival, and on other major aspects of chronic disease outcome, are much more reliable than others. Although there are a few striking examples of treatments for serious disease which really do work extremely well, most claims for big improvements turn out to be evanescent. Unrealistic expectations about the chances of discovering large treatment effects could misleadingly suggest that evidence from small randomised trials or from non-randomised studies will suffice. By contrast, the reliable assessment of any more moderate effects of treatment on major outcomes--which are usually all that can realistically be expected from most treatments for most common serious conditions--requires studies that guarantee both strict control of bias (which, in general, requires proper randomisation and appropriate analysis, with no unduly data-dependent emphasis on specific parts of the overall evidence) and strict control of random error (which, in general, requires large numbers of deaths or of some other relevant outcome). Past failures to produce such evidence, and to interpret it appropriately, have already led to many premature deaths and much unnecessary suffering.

Overview of randomised trials of diuretics in pregnancy.

Over the past 20 years at least 11 randomised trials of the prevention with diuretics of pre-eclampsia and its sequelae have been undertaken. Nine of these were reviewed. Reliable data from the remaining two were not available. The nine reviewed had investigated a total of nearly 7000 people. Significant evidence of prevention of pre-eclampsia was overwhelming, even when oedema was not included as a diagnostic criterion. But as the definitions of pre-eclampsia that had been used depended heavily on increases in blood pressure this evidence may simply have reflected the well known ability of diuretics to reduce blood pressure. When the data on perinatal death were reviewed a little difference was seen in postnatal survival. The incidence of stillbirths was reduced by about one third with treatment, but, perhaps owing to small numbers (only 37 stillbirths), the difference was not significant. Thus these randomised trials failed to provide reliable evidence of either the presence or the absence of any worthwhile effects of treatment with diuretics on perinatal mortality. The implications of this for current and future trials of beta blockers and other agents in the prevention of pre-eclampsia and its sequelae are that extremely large, ultra simple randomised trials are needed, of a size sufficient to permit direct assessment of the effects of treatment not on pre-eclampsia but on perinatal mortality itself. This may require the study of tens of thousands of pregnancies.

Effects of long-term treatment with angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors in the presence or absence of aspirin: a systematic review

BACKGROUNDnResults from a retrospective analysis of the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) study suggest that angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors may be less effective in patients receiving aspirin. We aimed to confirm or refute this theory.nnnMETHODSnWe used the Peto-Yusuf method to undertake a systematic overview of data for 22060 patients from six long-term randomised trials of ACE inhibitors to assess whether aspirin altered the effects of ACE inhibitor therapy on major clinical outcomes (composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospital admission for congestive heart failure, or revascularisation).nnnFINDINGSnBaseline characteristics, and prognosis in patients allocated placebo, differed strikingly between those who were and were not taking aspirin at baseline. Results from analyses of all trials, except SOLVD, did not suggest any significant differences between the proportional reductions in risk with ACE inhibitor therapy in the presence or absence of aspirin for the major clinical outcomes (p=0.15), or in any of its individual components, except myocardial infarction (interaction p=0.01). Overall, ACE inhibitor therapy significantly reduced the risk of the major clinical outcomes by 22% (p<0.0001), with clear reductions in risk both among those receiving aspirin at baseline (odds ratio 0.80, [99% CI 0.73-0.88]) and those who were not (0.71 [99% CI 0.62-0.81], interaction p=0.07).nnnINTERPRETATIONnConsidering the totality of evidence on all major vascular outcomes in these trials, there is only weak evidence of any reduction in the benefit of ACE-inhibitor therapy when added to aspirin. However, there is definite evidence of clinically important benefits with respect to these major clinical outcomes with ACE-inhibitor therapy, irrespective of whether concomitant aspirin is used.

Statin cost-effectiveness in the United States for people at different vascular risk levels

Background—Statins reduce the rates of heart attacks, strokes, and revascularization procedures (ie, major vascular events) in a wide range of circumstances. Randomized controlled trial data from 20 536 adults have been used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of prescribing statin therapy in the United States for people at different levels of vascular disease risk and to explore whether wider use of generic statins beyond the populations currently recommended for treatment in clinical guidelines is indicated. Methods and Results—Randomized controlled trial data, an internally validated vascular disease model, and US costs of statin therapy and other medical care were used to project lifetime risks of vascular events and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 40 mg simvastatin daily. For an average of 5 years, allocation to simvastatin reduced the estimated US costs of hospitalizations for vascular events by ≈20% (95% CI, 15 to 24) in the different subcategories of participants studied. At a daily cost of