Displaying all 15 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Mente A, O'Donnell M, Rangarajan S, Dagenais G, Lear S, McQueen M, et al.
    Lancet, 2016 Jul 30;388(10043):465-75.
    PMID: 27216139 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30467-6
    BACKGROUND: Several studies reported a U-shaped association between urinary sodium excretion and cardiovascular disease events and mortality. Whether these associations vary between those individuals with and without hypertension is uncertain. We aimed to explore whether the association between sodium intake and cardiovascular disease events and all-cause mortality is modified by hypertension status.

    METHODS: In this pooled analysis, we studied 133,118 individuals (63,559 with hypertension and 69,559 without hypertension), median age of 55 years (IQR 45-63), from 49 countries in four large prospective studies and estimated 24-h urinary sodium excretion (as group-level measure of intake). We related this to the composite outcome of death and major cardiovascular disease events over a median of 4.2 years (IQR 3.0-5.0) and blood pressure.

    FINDINGS: Increased sodium intake was associated with greater increases in systolic blood pressure in individuals with hypertension (2.08 mm Hg change per g sodium increase) compared with individuals without hypertension (1.22 mm Hg change per g; pinteraction<0.0001). In those individuals with hypertension (6835 events), sodium excretion of 7 g/day or more (7060 [11%] of population with hypertension: hazard ratio [HR] 1.23 [95% CI 1.11-1.37]; p<0.0001) and less than 3 g/day (7006 [11%] of population with hypertension: 1.34 [1.23-1.47]; p<0.0001) were both associated with increased risk compared with sodium excretion of 4-5 g/day (reference 25% of the population with hypertension). In those individuals without hypertension (3021 events), compared with 4-5 g/day (18,508 [27%] of the population without hypertension), higher sodium excretion was not associated with risk of the primary composite outcome (≥ 7 g/day in 6271 [9%] of the population without hypertension; HR 0.90 [95% CI 0.76-1.08]; p=0.2547), whereas an excretion of less than 3 g/day was associated with a significantly increased risk (7547 [11%] of the population without hypertension; HR 1.26 [95% CI 1.10-1.45]; p=0.0009).

    INTERPRETATION: Compared with moderate sodium intake, high sodium intake is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and death in hypertensive populations (no association in normotensive population), while the association of low sodium intake with increased risk of cardiovascular events and death is observed in those with or without hypertension. These data suggest that lowering sodium intake is best targeted at populations with hypertension who consume high sodium diets.

    FUNDING: Full funding sources listed at end of paper (see Acknowledgments).

  2. Walli-Attaei M, Joseph P, Rosengren A, Chow CK, Rangarajan S, Lear SA, et al.
    Lancet, 2020 07 11;396(10244):97-109.
    PMID: 32445693 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30543-2
    BACKGROUND: Some studies, mainly from high-income countries (HICs), report that women receive less care (investigations and treatments) for cardiovascular disease than do men and might have a higher risk of death. However, very few studies systematically report risk factors, use of primary or secondary prevention medications, incidence of cardiovascular disease, or death in populations drawn from the community. Given that most cardiovascular disease occurs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is a need for comprehensive information comparing treatments and outcomes between women and men in HICs, middle-income countries, and low-income countries from community-based population studies.

    METHODS: In the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological study (PURE), individuals aged 35-70 years from urban and rural communities in 27 countries were considered for inclusion. We recorded information on participants' sociodemographic characteristics, risk factors, medication use, cardiac investigations, and interventions. 168 490 participants who enrolled in the first two of the three phases of PURE were followed up prospectively for incident cardiovascular disease and death.

    FINDINGS: From Jan 6, 2005 to May 6, 2019, 202 072 individuals were recruited to the study. The mean age of women included in the study was 50·8 (SD 9·9) years compared with 51·7 (10) years for men. Participants were followed up for a median of 9·5 (IQR 8·5-10·9) years. Women had a lower cardiovascular disease risk factor burden using two different risk scores (INTERHEART and Framingham). Primary prevention strategies, such as adoption of several healthy lifestyle behaviours and use of proven medicines, were more frequent in women than men. Incidence of cardiovascular disease (4·1 [95% CI 4·0-4·2] for women vs 6·4 [6·2-6·6] for men per 1000 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·75 [95% CI 0·72-0·79]) and all-cause death (4·5 [95% CI 4·4-4·7] for women vs 7·4 [7·2-7·7] for men per 1000 person-years; aHR 0·62 [95% CI 0·60-0·65]) were also lower in women. By contrast, secondary prevention treatments, cardiac investigations, and coronary revascularisation were less frequent in women than men with coronary artery disease in all groups of countries. Despite this, women had lower risk of recurrent cardiovascular disease events (20·0 [95% CI 18·2-21·7] versus 27·7 [95% CI 25·6-29·8] per 1000 person-years in men, adjusted hazard ratio 0·73 [95% CI 0·64-0·83]) and women had lower 30-day mortality after a new cardiovascular disease event compared with men (22% in women versus 28% in men; p<0·0001). Differences between women and men in treatments and outcomes were more marked in LMICs with little differences in HICs in those with or without previous cardiovascular disease.

    INTERPRETATION: Treatments for cardiovascular disease are more common in women than men in primary prevention, but the reverse is seen in secondary prevention. However, consistently better outcomes are observed in women than in men, both in those with and without previous cardiovascular disease. Improving cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment, especially in LMICs, should be vigorously pursued in both women and men.

    FUNDING: Full funding sources are listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).

  3. Mente A, Dehghan M, Rangarajan S, McQueen M, Dagenais G, Wielgosz A, et al.
    Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol, 2017 10;5(10):774-787.
    PMID: 28864143 DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30283-8
    BACKGROUND: The relation between dietary nutrients and cardiovascular disease risk markers in many regions worldwide is unknown. In this study, we investigated the effect of dietary nutrients on blood lipids and blood pressure, two of the most important risk factors for cardiovascular disease, in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries.

    METHODS: We studied 125 287 participants from 18 countries in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, and Asia in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Habitual food intake was measured with validated food frequency questionnaires. We assessed the associations between nutrients (total fats, saturated fatty acids, monounsaturated fatty acids, polyunsaturated fatty acids, carbohydrates, protein, and dietary cholesterol) and cardiovascular disease risk markers using multilevel modelling. The effect of isocaloric replacement of saturated fatty acids with other fats and carbohydrates was determined overall and by levels of intakes by use of nutrient density models. We did simulation modelling in which we assumed that the effects of saturated fatty acids on cardiovascular disease events was solely related to their association through an individual risk marker, and then compared these simulated risk marker-based estimates with directly observed associations of saturated fatty acids with cardiovascular disease events.

    FINDINGS: Participants were enrolled into the study from Jan 1, 2003, to March 31, 2013. Intake of total fat and each type of fat was associated with higher concentrations of total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol, but also with higher HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1), and lower triglycerides, ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol, ratio of triglycerides to HDL cholesterol, and ratio of apolipoprotein B (ApoB) to ApoA1 (all ptrend<0·0001). Higher carbohydrate intake was associated with lower total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and ApoB, but also with lower HDL cholesterol and ApoA1, and higher triglycerides, ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol, ratio of triglycerides to HDL cholesterol, and ApoB-to-ApoA1 ratio (all ptrend<0·0001, apart from ApoB [ptrend=0·0014]). Higher intakes of total fat, saturated fatty acids, and carbohydrates were associated with higher blood pressure, whereas higher protein intake was associated with lower blood pressure. Replacement of saturated fatty acids with carbohydrates was associated with the most adverse effects on lipids, whereas replacement of saturated fatty acids with unsaturated fats improved some risk markers (LDL cholesterol and blood pressure), but seemed to worsen others (HDL cholesterol and triglycerides). The observed associations between saturated fatty acids and cardiovascular disease events were approximated by the simulated associations mediated through the effects on the ApoB-to-ApoA1 ratio, but not with other lipid markers including LDL cholesterol.

    INTERPRETATION: Our data are at odds with current recommendations to reduce total fat and saturated fats. Reducing saturated fatty acid intake and replacing it with carbohydrate has an adverse effect on blood lipids. Substituting saturated fatty acids with unsaturated fats might improve some risk markers, but might worsen others. Simulations suggest that ApoB-to-ApoA1 ratio probably provides the best overall indication of the effect of saturated fatty acids on cardiovascular disease risk among the markers tested. Focusing on a single lipid marker such as LDL cholesterol alone does not capture the net clinical effects of nutrients on cardiovascular risk.

    FUNDING: Full funding sources listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).

  4. Joseph P, Yusuf S, Lee SF, Ibrahim Q, Teo K, Rangarajan S, et al.
    Heart, 2018 04;104(7):581-587.
    PMID: 29066611 DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-311609
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the non-laboratory INTERHEART risk score (NL-IHRS) to predict incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) across seven major geographic regions of the world. The secondary objective was to evaluate the performance of the fasting cholesterol-based IHRS (FC-IHRS).

    METHODS: Using measures of discrimination and calibration, we tested the performance of the NL-IHRS (n=100 475) and FC-IHRS (n=107 863) for predicting incident CVD in a community-based, prospective study across seven geographic regions: South Asia, China, Southeast Asia, Middle East, Europe/North America, South America and Africa. CVD was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure or coronary revascularisation.

    RESULTS: Mean age of the study population was 50.53 (SD 9.79) years and mean follow-up was 4.89 (SD 2.24) years. The NL-IHRS had moderate to good discrimination for incident CVD across geographic regions (concordance statistic (C-statistic) ranging from 0.64 to 0.74), although recalibration was necessary in all regions, which improved its performance in the overall cohort (increase in C-statistic from 0.69 to 0.72, p<0.001). Regional recalibration was also necessary for the FC-IHRS, which also improved its overall discrimination (increase in C-statistic from 0.71 to 0.74, p<0.001). In 85 078 participants with complete data for both scores, discrimination was only modestly better with the FC-IHRS compared with the NL-IHRS (0.74 vs 0.73, p<0.001).

    CONCLUSIONS: External validations of the NL-IHRS and FC-IHRS suggest that regionally recalibrated versions of both can be useful for estimating CVD risk across a diverse range of community-based populations. CVD prediction using a non-laboratory score can provide similar accuracy to laboratory-based methods.

  5. Connolly SJ, Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, Dagenais G, Dyal L, Lanas F, et al.
    Lancet, 2018 01 20;391(10117):205-218.
    PMID: 29132879 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32458-3
    BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and is a consequence of acute thrombotic events involving activation of platelets and coagulation proteins. Factor Xa inhibitors and aspirin each reduce thrombotic events but have not yet been tested in combination or against each other in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

    METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, outpatient trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community centres in 33 countries. This paper reports on patients with coronary artery disease. Eligible patients with coronary artery disease had to have had a myocardial infarction in the past 20 years, multi-vessel coronary artery disease, history of stable or unstable angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery. After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive rivaroxaban (2·5 mg orally twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg orally twice a day), or aspirin alone (100 mg orally once a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patients, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the COMPASS trial was the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.

    FINDINGS: Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, 27 395 patients were enrolled to the COMPASS trial, of whom 24 824 patients had stable coronary artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced the primary outcome more than aspirin alone (347 [4%] of 8313 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·65-0·86, p<0·0001). By comparison, treatment with rivaroxaban alone did not significantly improve the primary outcome when compared with treatment with aspirin alone (411 [5%] of 8250 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·02, p=0·094). Combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin treatment resulted in more major bleeds than treatment with aspirin alone (263 [3%] of 8313 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·66, 95% CI 1·37-2·03, p<0·0001), and similarly, more bleeds were seen in the rivaroxaban alone group than in the aspirin alone group (236 [3%] of 8250 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·51, 95% CI 1·23-1·84, p<0·0001). The most common site of major bleeding was gastrointestinal, occurring in 130 [2%] patients who received combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin, in 84 [1%] patients who received rivaroxaban alone, and in 61 [1%] patients who received aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced mortality when compared with aspirin alone (262 [3%] of 8313 vs 339 [4%] of 8261; HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·65-0·90, p=0·0012).

    INTERPRETATION: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin lowered major vascular events, but increased major bleeding. There was no significant increase in intracranial bleeding or other critical organ bleeding. There was also a significant net benefit in favour of rivaroxaban plus aspirin and deaths were reduced by 23%. Thus, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity and mortality from coronary artery disease worldwide.

    FUNDING: Bayer AG.
  6. Dehghan M, Mente A, Rangarajan S, Mohan V, Lear S, Swaminathan S, et al.
    Am J Clin Nutr, 2020 04 01;111(4):795-803.
    PMID: 31965140 DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqz348
    BACKGROUND: Eggs are a rich source of essential nutrients, but they are also a source of dietary cholesterol. Therefore, some guidelines recommend limiting egg consumption. However, there is contradictory evidence on the impact of eggs on diseases, largely based on studies conducted in high-income countries.

    OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess the association of egg consumption with blood lipids, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and mortality in large global studies involving populations from low-, middle-, and high-income countries.

    METHODS: We studied 146,011 individuals from 21 countries in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Egg consumption was recorded using country-specific validated FFQs. We also studied 31,544 patients with vascular disease in 2 multinational prospective studies: ONTARGET (Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global End Point Trial) and TRANSCEND (Telmisartan Randomized Assessment Study in ACEI Intolerant Subjects with Cardiovascular Disease). We calculated HRs using multivariable Cox frailty models with random intercepts to account for clustering by study center separately within each study.

    RESULTS: In the PURE study, we recorded 14,700 composite events (8932 deaths and 8477 CVD events). In the PURE study, after excluding those with history of CVD, higher intake of egg (≥7 egg/wk compared with <1 egg/wk intake) was not significantly associated with blood lipids, composite outcome (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.89, 1.04; P-trend = 0.74), total mortality (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.15; P-trend = 0.38), or major CVD (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.83, 1.01; P-trend = 0.20). Similar results were observed in ONTARGET/TRANSCEND studies for composite outcome (HR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.76, 1.25; P-trend = 0.09), total mortality (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.62, 1.24; P-trend = 0.55), and major CVD (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.73, 1.29; P-trend = 0.12).

    CONCLUSIONS: In 3 large international prospective studies including ∼177,000 individuals, 12,701 deaths, and 13,658 CVD events from 50 countries in 6 continents, we did not find significant associations between egg intake and blood lipids, mortality, or major CVD events. The ONTARGET and TRANSCEND trials were registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00153101. The PURE trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03225586.

  7. de Souza RJ, Dehghan M, Mente A, Bangdiwala SI, Ahmed SH, Alhabib KF, et al.
    Am J Clin Nutr, 2020 07 01;112(1):208-219.
    PMID: 32433740 DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/nqaa108
    BACKGROUND: The association of nuts with cardiovascular disease and deaths has been investigated mostly in Europe, the USA, and East Asia, with few data available from other regions of the world or from low- and middle-income countries.

    OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of nuts with mortality and cardiovascular disease (CVD).

    METHODS: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology study is a large multinational prospective cohort study of adults aged 35-70 y from 16 low-, middle-, and high-income countries on 5 continents. Nut intake (tree nuts and ground nuts) was measured at the baseline visit, using country-specific validated FFQs. The primary outcome was a composite of mortality or major cardiovascular event [nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or heart failure].

    RESULTS: We followed 124,329 participants (age = 50.7 y, SD = 10.2; 41.5% male) for a median of 9.5 y. We recorded 10,928 composite events [deaths (n = 8,662) or major cardiovascular events (n = 5,979)]. Higher nut intake (>120 g per wk compared with <30 g per mo) was associated with a lower risk of the primary composite outcome of mortality or major cardiovascular event [multivariate HR (mvHR): 0.88; 95% CI: 0.80, 0.96; P-trend = 0.0048]. Significant reductions in total (mvHR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.69, 0.87; P-trend <0.0001), cardiovascular (mvHR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.56, 0.92; P-trend = 0.048), and noncardiovascular mortality (mvHR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70, 0.96; P-trend = 0.0046) with a trend to reduced cancer mortality (mvHR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.65, 1.00; P-trend = 0.081) were observed. No significant associations of nuts were seen with major CVD (mvHR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.81, 1.02; P-trend = 0.14), stroke (mvHR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.84, 1.14; P-trend = 0.76), or MI (mvHR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.04; P-trend = 0.29).

    CONCLUSIONS: Higher nut intake was associated with lower mortality risk from both cardiovascular and noncardiovascular causes in low-, middle-, and high-income countries.

  8. Bhavadharini B, Dehghan M, Mente A, Rangarajan S, Sheridan P, Mohan V, et al.
    PMID: 32423962 DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-000826
    OBJECTIVE: Our aims were to assess the association of dairy intake with prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) (cross-sectionally) and with incident hypertension and incident diabetes (prospectively) in a large multinational cohort study.

    METHODS: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study is a prospective epidemiological study of individuals aged 35 and 70 years from 21 countries on five continents, with a median follow-up of 9.1 years. In the cross-sectional analyses, we assessed the association of dairy intake with prevalent MetS and its components among individuals with information on the five MetS components (n=112 922). For the prospective analyses, we examined the association of dairy with incident hypertension (in 57 547 individuals free of hypertension) and diabetes (in 131 481 individuals free of diabetes).

    RESULTS: In cross-sectional analysis, higher intake of total dairy (at least two servings/day compared with zero intake; OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.80, p-trend<0.0001) was associated with a lower prevalence of MetS after multivariable adjustment. Higher intakes of whole fat dairy consumed alone (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.78, p-trend<0.0001), or consumed jointly with low fat dairy (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98, p-trend=0.0005), were associated with a lower MetS prevalence. Low fat dairy consumed alone was not associated with MetS (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.38, p-trend=0.13). In prospective analysis, 13 640 people with incident hypertension and 5351 people with incident diabetes were recorded. Higher intake of total dairy (at least two servings/day vs zero serving/day) was associated with a lower incidence of hypertension (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97, p-trend=0.02) and diabetes (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.02, p-trend=0.01). Directionally similar associations were found for whole fat dairy versus each outcome.

    CONCLUSIONS: Higher intake of whole fat (but not low fat) dairy was associated with a lower prevalence of MetS and most of its component factors, and with a lower incidence of hypertension and diabetes. Our findings should be evaluated in large randomized trials of the effects of whole fat dairy on the risks of MetS, hypertension, and diabetes.

  9. Dehghan M, Mente A, Rangarajan S, Sheridan P, Mohan V, Iqbal R, et al.
    Lancet, 2018 11 24;392(10161):2288-2297.
    PMID: 30217460 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31812-9
    BACKGROUND: Dietary guidelines recommend minimising consumption of whole-fat dairy products, as they are a source of saturated fats and presumed to adversely affect blood lipids and increase cardiovascular disease and mortality. Evidence for this contention is sparse and few data for the effects of dairy consumption on health are available from low-income and middle-income countries. Therefore, we aimed to assess the associations between total dairy and specific types of dairy products with mortality and major cardiovascular disease.

    METHODS: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study is a large multinational cohort study of individuals aged 35-70 years enrolled from 21 countries in five continents. Dietary intakes of dairy products for 136 384 individuals were recorded using country-specific validated food frequency questionnaires. Dairy products comprised milk, yoghurt, and cheese. We further grouped these foods into whole-fat and low-fat dairy. The primary outcome was the composite of mortality or major cardiovascular events (defined as death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, or heart failure). Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using multivariable Cox frailty models with random intercepts to account for clustering of participants by centre.

    FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2003, and July 14, 2018, we recorded 10 567 composite events (deaths [n=6796] or major cardiovascular events [n=5855]) during the 9·1 years of follow-up. Higher intake of total dairy (>2 servings per day compared with no intake) was associated with a lower risk of the composite outcome (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·75-0·94; ptrend=0·0004), total mortality (0·83, 0·72-0·96; ptrend=0·0052), non-cardiovascular mortality (0·86, 0·72-1·02; ptrend=0·046), cardiovascular mortality (0·77, 0·58-1·01; ptrend=0·029), major cardiovascular disease (0·78, 0·67-0·90; ptrend=0·0001), and stroke (0·66, 0·53-0·82; ptrend=0·0003). No significant association with myocardial infarction was observed (HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·71-1·11; ptrend=0·163). Higher intake (>1 serving vs no intake) of milk (HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·82-0·99; ptrend=0·0529) and yogurt (0·86, 0·75-0·99; ptrend=0·0051) was associated with lower risk of the composite outcome, whereas cheese intake was not significantly associated with the composite outcome (0·88, 0·76-1·02; ptrend=0·1399). Butter intake was low and was not significantly associated with clinical outcomes (HR 1·09, 95% CI 0·90-1·33; ptrend=0·4113).

    INTERPRETATION: Dairy consumption was associated with lower risk of mortality and major cardiovascular disease events in a diverse multinational cohort.

    FUNDING: Full funding sources are listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).

  10. Dehghan M, Mente A, Zhang X, Swaminathan S, Li W, Mohan V, et al.
    Lancet, 2017 Nov 04;390(10107):2050-2062.
    PMID: 28864332 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32252-3
    BACKGROUND: The relationship between macronutrients and cardiovascular disease and mortality is controversial. Most available data are from European and North American populations where nutrition excess is more likely, so their applicability to other populations is unclear.

    METHODS: The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study is a large, epidemiological cohort study of individuals aged 35-70 years (enrolled between Jan 1, 2003, and March 31, 2013) in 18 countries with a median follow-up of 7·4 years (IQR 5·3-9·3). Dietary intake of 135 335 individuals was recorded using validated food frequency questionnaires. The primary outcomes were total mortality and major cardiovascular events (fatal cardiovascular disease, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure). Secondary outcomes were all myocardial infarctions, stroke, cardiovascular disease mortality, and non-cardiovascular disease mortality. Participants were categorised into quintiles of nutrient intake (carbohydrate, fats, and protein) based on percentage of energy provided by nutrients. We assessed the associations between consumption of carbohydrate, total fat, and each type of fat with cardiovascular disease and total mortality. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) using a multivariable Cox frailty model with random intercepts to account for centre clustering.

    FINDINGS: During follow-up, we documented 5796 deaths and 4784 major cardiovascular disease events. Higher carbohydrate intake was associated with an increased risk of total mortality (highest [quintile 5] vs lowest quintile [quintile 1] category, HR 1·28 [95% CI 1·12-1·46], ptrend=0·0001) but not with the risk of cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular disease mortality. Intake of total fat and each type of fat was associated with lower risk of total mortality (quintile 5 vs quintile 1, total fat: HR 0·77 [95% CI 0·67-0·87], ptrend<0·0001; saturated fat, HR 0·86 [0·76-0·99], ptrend=0·0088; monounsaturated fat: HR 0·81 [0·71-0·92], ptrend<0·0001; and polyunsaturated fat: HR 0·80 [0·71-0·89], ptrend<0·0001). Higher saturated fat intake was associated with lower risk of stroke (quintile 5 vs quintile 1, HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·64-0·98], ptrend=0·0498). Total fat and saturated and unsaturated fats were not significantly associated with risk of myocardial infarction or cardiovascular disease mortality.

    INTERPRETATION: High carbohydrate intake was associated with higher risk of total mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to lower total mortality. Total fat and types of fat were not associated with cardiovascular disease, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular disease mortality, whereas saturated fat had an inverse association with stroke. Global dietary guidelines should be reconsidered in light of these findings.

    FUNDING: Full funding sources listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).

  11. Moayyedi P, Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, Connolly SJ, Dyal L, Shestakovska O, et al.
    Gastroenterology, 2019 08;157(2):403-412.e5.
    PMID: 31054846 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.04.041
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Antiplatelets and anticoagulants are associated with increased upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We evaluated whether proton pump inhibitor therapy could reduce this risk.

    METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease. Participants were randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole 40 mg daily or placebo, as well as rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily with aspirin 100 mg once daily, rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily, or aspirin 100 mg alone. The primary outcome was time to first upper gastrointestinal event, defined as a composite of overt bleeding, upper gastrointestinal bleeding from a gastroduodenal lesion or of unknown origin, occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcer or ≥5 erosions, upper gastrointestinal obstruction, or perforation.

    RESULTS: There was no significant difference in upper gastrointestinal events between the pantoprazole group (102 of 8791 events) and the placebo group (116 of 8807 events) (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.15). Pantoprazole significantly reduced bleeding of gastroduodenal lesions (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.94; P = .03); this reduction was greater when we used a post-hoc definition of bleeding gastroduodenal lesion (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.74), although the number needed to treat still was high (n = 982; 95% confidence interval, 609-2528).

    CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized placebo-controlled trial, we found that routine use of proton pump inhibitors in patients receiving low-dose anticoagulation and/or aspirin for stable cardiovascular disease does not reduce upper gastrointestinal events, but may reduce bleeding from gastroduodenal lesions. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01776424.

  12. Moayyedi P, Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, Connolly SJ, Dyal L, Shestakovska O, et al.
    Gastroenterology, 2019 09;157(3):682-691.e2.
    PMID: 31152740 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.05.056
    BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective at treating acid-related disorders. These drugs are well tolerated in the short term, but long-term treatment was associated with adverse events in observational studies. We aimed to confirm these findings in an adequately powered randomized trial.

    METHODS: We performed a 3 × 2 partial factorial double-blind trial of 17,598 participants with stable cardiovascular disease and peripheral artery disease randomly assigned to groups given pantoprazole (40 mg daily, n = 8791) or placebo (n = 8807). Participants were also randomly assigned to groups that received rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) with aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg) alone. We collected data on development of pneumonia, Clostridium difficile infection, other enteric infections, fractures, gastric atrophy, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive lung disease, dementia, cardiovascular disease, cancer, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality every 6 months. Patients were followed up for a median of 3.01 years, with 53,152 patient-years of follow-up.

    RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the pantoprazole and placebo groups in safety events except for enteric infections (1.4% vs 1.0% in the placebo group; odds ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.75). For all other safety outcomes, proportions were similar between groups except for C difficile infection, which was approximately twice as common in the pantoprazole vs the placebo group, although there were only 13 events, so this difference was not statistically significant.

    CONCLUSIONS: In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. ClinicalTrials.gov Number: NCT01776424.

  13. Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Bosch J, Dagenais GR, Hart RG, Shestakovska O, et al.
    N Engl J Med, 2017 10 05;377(14):1319-1330.
    PMID: 28844192 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709118
    BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention.

    METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months.

    RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=-4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group.

    CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events. (Funded by Bayer; COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01776424 .).

  14. Bosch J, Eikelboom JW, Connolly SJ, Bruns NC, Lanius V, Yuan F, et al.
    Can J Cardiol, 2017 08;33(8):1027-1035.
    PMID: 28754388 DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2017.06.001
    BACKGROUND: Long-term aspirin prevents vascular events but is only modestly effective. Rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin might be more effective than aspirin alone for vascular prevention in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD). Rivaroxaban as well as aspirin increase upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and this might be prevented by proton pump inhibitor therapy.

    METHODS: Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) is a double-blind superiority trial comparing rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily combined with aspirin 100 mg once daily or rivaroxaban 5 mg twice daily vs aspirin 100 mg once daily for prevention of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death in patients with stable CAD or PAD. Patients not taking a proton pump inhibitor were also randomized, using a partial factorial design, to pantoprazole 40 mg once daily or placebo. The trial was designed to have at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in each of the rivaroxaban treatment arms compared with aspirin and to detect a 50% reduction in upper GI complications with pantoprazole compared with placebo.

    RESULTS: Between February 2013 and May 2016, we recruited 27,395 participants from 602 centres in 33 countries; 17,598 participants were included in the pantoprazole vs placebo comparison. At baseline, the mean age was 68.2 years, 22.0% were female, 90.6% had CAD, and 27.3% had PAD.

    CONCLUSIONS: COMPASS will provide information on the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban, alone or in combination with aspirin, in the long-term management of patients with stable CAD or PAD, and on the efficacy and safety of pantoprazole in preventing upper GI complications in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.

  15. Eikelboom JW, Bosch J, Connolly SJ, Tyrwitt J, Fox KAA, Muehlhofer E, et al.
    Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother, 2022 Dec 02;8(8):786-795.
    PMID: 35383832 DOI: 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvac023
    AIMS: To describe outcomes of patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD) enrolled in the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) randomized trial who were treated with the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily and aspirin 100 mg once daily during long-term open-label extension (LTOLE).

    METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 27 395 patients enrolled in COMPASS, 12 964 (mean age at baseline 67.2 years) from 455 sites in 32 countries were enrolled in LTOLE and treated with the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin for a median of 374 additional days (range 1-1191 days). During LTOLE, the incident events per 100 patient years were as follows: for the primary outcome [cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI)] 2.35 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.11-2.61], mortality 1.87 (1.65-2.10), stroke 0.62 (0.50-0.76), and MI 1.02 (0.86-1.19), with CIs that overlapped those seen during the randomized treatment phase with the combination of rivaroxaban and aspirin. The incidence rates for major and minor bleeding were 1.01 (0.86-1.19) and 2.49 (2.24-2.75), compared with 1.67 (1.48-1.87) and 5.11 (95% CI 4.77-5.47), respectively, during the randomized treatment phase with the combination.

    CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic CAD and/or PAD, extended combination treatment for a median of 1 year and a maximum of 3 years was associated with incidence rates for efficacy and bleeding that were similar to or lower than those seen during the randomized treatment phase, without any new safety signals.

Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links