Effect of Weekly Subcutaneous Semaglutide vs Daily Liraglutide on Body Weight in Adults With Overweight or Obesity Without Diabetes: The STEP 8 Randomized Clinical Trial.
JAMA
Importance:Phase 3 trials have not compared semaglutide and liraglutide, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues available for weight management. Objective:To compare the efficacy and adverse event profiles of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg, vs once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, 3.0 mg (both with diet and physical activity), in people with overweight or obesity. Design, Setting, and Participants:Randomized, open-label, 68-week, phase 3b trial conducted at 19 US sites from September 2019 (enrollment: September 11-November 26) to May 2021 (end of follow-up: May 11) in adults with body mass index of 30 or greater or 27 or greater with 1 or more weight-related comorbidities, without diabetes (N = 338). Interventions:Participants were randomized (3:1:3:1) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, 2.4 mg (16-week escalation; n = 126), or matching placebo, or once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, 3.0 mg (4-week escalation; n = 127), or matching placebo, plus diet and physical activity. Participants unable to tolerate 2.4 mg of semaglutide could receive 1.7 mg; participants unable to tolerate 3.0 mg of liraglutide discontinued treatment and could restart the 4-week titration. Placebo groups were pooled (n = 85). Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary end point was percentage change in body weight, and confirmatory secondary end points were achievement of 10% or more, 15% or more, and 20% or more weight loss, assessed for semaglutide vs liraglutide at week 68. Semaglutide vs liraglutide comparisons were open-label, with active treatment groups double-blinded against matched placebo groups. Comparisons of active treatments vs pooled placebo were supportive secondary end points. Results:Of 338 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 49 [13] years; 265 women [78.4%]; mean [SD] body weight, 104.5 [23.8] kg; mean [SD] body mass index, 37.5 [6.8]), 319 (94.4%) completed the trial, and 271 (80.2%) completed treatment. The mean weight change from baseline was -15.8% with semaglutide vs -6.4% with liraglutide (difference, -9.4 percentage points [95% CI, -12.0 to -6.8]; P < .001); weight change with pooled placebo was -1.9%. Participants had significantly greater odds of achieving 10% or more, 15% or more, and 20% or more weight loss with semaglutide vs liraglutide (70.9% of participants vs 25.6% [odds ratio, 6.3 {95% CI, 3.5 to 11.2}], 55.6% vs 12.0% [odds ratio, 7.9 {95% CI, 4.1 to 15.4}], and 38.5% vs 6.0% [odds ratio, 8.2 {95% CI, 3.5 to 19.1}], respectively; all P < .001). Proportions of participants discontinuing treatment for any reason were 13.5% with semaglutide and 27.6% with liraglutide. Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported by 84.1% with semaglutide and 82.7% with liraglutide. Conclusions and Relevance:Among adults with overweight or obesity without diabetes, once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide compared with once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide, added to counseling for diet and physical activity, resulted in significantly greater weight loss at 68 weeks. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04074161.
10.1001/jama.2021.23619
Effect of Alirocumab Added to High-Intensity Statin Therapy on Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: The PACMAN-AMI Randomized Clinical Trial.
JAMA
Importance:Coronary plaques that are prone to rupture and cause adverse cardiac events are characterized by large plaque burden, large lipid content, and thin fibrous caps. Statins can halt the progression of coronary atherosclerosis; however, the effect of the proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 inhibitor alirocumab added to statin therapy on plaque burden and composition remains largely unknown. Objective:To determine the effects of alirocumab on coronary atherosclerosis using serial multimodality intracoronary imaging in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Design, Setting, and Participants:The PACMAN-AMI double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial (enrollment: May 9, 2017, through October 7, 2020; final follow-up: October 13, 2021) enrolled 300 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction at 9 academic European hospitals. Interventions:Patients were randomized to receive biweekly subcutaneous alirocumab (150 mg; n = 148) or placebo (n = 152), initiated less than 24 hours after urgent percutaneous coronary intervention of the culprit lesion, for 52 weeks in addition to high-intensity statin therapy (rosuvastatin, 20 mg). Main Outcomes and Measures:Intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS), near-infrared spectroscopy, and optical coherence tomography were serially performed in the 2 non-infarct-related coronary arteries at baseline and after 52 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the change in IVUS-derived percent atheroma volume from baseline to week 52. Two powered secondary end points were changes in near-infrared spectroscopy-derived maximum lipid core burden index within 4 mm (higher values indicating greater lipid content) and optical coherence tomography-derived minimal fibrous cap thickness (smaller values indicating thin-capped, vulnerable plaques) from baseline to week 52. Results:Among 300 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [9.7] years; 56 [18.7%] women; mean [SD] low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, 152.4 [33.8] mg/dL), 265 (88.3%) underwent serial IVUS imaging in 537 arteries. At 52 weeks, mean change in percent atheroma volume was -2.13% with alirocumab vs -0.92% with placebo (difference, -1.21% [95% CI, -1.78% to -0.65%], P < .001). Mean change in maximum lipid core burden index within 4 mm was -79.42 with alirocumab vs -37.60 with placebo (difference, -41.24 [95% CI, -70.71 to -11.77]; P = .006). Mean change in minimal fibrous cap thickness was 62.67 μm with alirocumab vs 33.19 μm with placebo (difference, 29.65 μm [95% CI, 11.75-47.55]; P = .001). Adverse events occurred in 70.7% of patients treated with alirocumab vs 72.8% of patients receiving placebo. Conclusions and Relevance:Among patients with acute myocardial infarction, the addition of subcutaneous biweekly alirocumab, compared with placebo, to high-intensity statin therapy resulted in significantly greater coronary plaque regression in non-infarct-related arteries after 52 weeks. Further research is needed to understand whether alirocumab improves clinical outcomes in this population. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03067844.
10.1001/jama.2022.5218
Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Review.
JAMA
IMPORTANCE:Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are characterized by a sudden reduction in blood supply to the heart and include ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI (NSTEMI), and unstable angina. Each year, an estimated more than 7 million people in the world are diagnosed with ACS, including more than 1 million patients hospitalized in the US. OBSERVATIONS:Chest discomfort at rest is the most common presenting symptom of ACS and affects approximately 79% of men and 74% of women presenting with ACS, although approximately 40% of men and 48% of women present with nonspecific symptoms, such as dyspnea, either in isolation or, more commonly, in combination with chest pain. For patients presenting with possible ACS, electrocardiography should be performed immediately (within 10 minutes of presentation) and can distinguish between STEMI and non-ST-segment elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). STEMI is caused by complete coronary artery occlusion and accounts for approximately 30% of ACS. ACS without significant ST-segment elevation on electrocardiography, termed NSTE-ACS, account for approximately 70% of ACS, are caused by partial or intermittent occlusion of the artery and are associated with ST-segment depressions (approximately 31%), T-wave inversions (approximately 12%), ST-segment depressions combined with T-wave inversions (16%), or neither (approximately 41%). When electrocardiography suggests STEMI, rapid reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 120 minutes reduces mortality from 9% to 7%. If PCI within 120 minutes is not possible, fibrinolytic therapy with alteplase, reteplase, or tenecteplase at full dose should be administered for patients younger than 75 years without contraindications and at half dose for patients 75 years or older (or streptokinase at full dose if cost is a consideration), followed by transfer to a facility with the goal of PCI within the next 24 hours. High-sensitivity troponin measurements are the preferred test to evaluate for NSTEMI. In high-risk patients with NSTE-ACS and no contraindications, prompt invasive coronary angiography and percutaneous or surgical revascularization within 24 to 48 hours are associated with a reduction in death from 6.5% to 4.9%. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Each year, an estimated more than 7 million people are diagnosed with ACS worldwide. For patients with STEMI, coronary catheterization and PCI within 2 hours of presentation reduces mortality, with fibrinolytic therapy reserved for patients without access to immediate PCI. For high-risk patients with NSTE-ACS without contraindications, prompt invasive coronary angiography followed by percutaneous or surgical revascularization is associated with lower rates of death.
10.1001/jama.2022.0358
Diagnosis and Management of Hyponatremia: A Review.
JAMA
Importance:Hyponatremia is the most common electrolyte disorder and it affects approximately 5% of adults and 35% of hospitalized patients. Hyponatremia is defined by a serum sodium level of less than 135 mEq/L and most commonly results from water retention. Even mild hyponatremia is associated with increased hospital stay and mortality. Observations:Symptoms and signs of hyponatremia range from mild and nonspecific (such as weakness or nausea) to severe and life-threatening (such as seizures or coma). Symptom severity depends on the rapidity of development, duration, and severity of hyponatremia. Mild chronic hyponatremia is associated with cognitive impairment, gait disturbances, and increased rates of falls and fractures. In a prospective study, patients with hyponatremia more frequently reported a history of falling compared with people with normal serum sodium levels (23.8% vs 16.4%, respectively; P < .01) and had a higher rate of new fractures over a mean follow-up of 7.4 years (23.3% vs 17.3%; P < .004). Hyponatremia is a secondary cause of osteoporosis. When evaluating patients, clinicians should categorize them according to their fluid volume status (hypovolemic hyponatremia, euvolemic hyponatremia, or hypervolemic hyponatremia). For most patients, the approach to managing hyponatremia should consist of treating the underlying cause. Urea and vaptans can be effective treatments for the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuresis and hyponatremia in patients with heart failure, but have adverse effects (eg, poor palatability and gastric intolerance with urea; and overly rapid correction of hyponatremia and increased thirst with vaptans). Severely symptomatic hyponatremia (with signs of somnolence, obtundation, coma, seizures, or cardiorespiratory distress) is a medical emergency. US and European guidelines recommend treating severely symptomatic hyponatremia with bolus hypertonic saline to reverse hyponatremic encephalopathy by increasing the serum sodium level by 4 mEq/L to 6 mEq/L within 1 to 2 hours but by no more than 10 mEq/L (correction limit) within the first 24 hours. This treatment approach exceeds the correction limit in about 4.5% to 28% of people. Overly rapid correction of chronic hyponatremia may cause osmotic demyelination, a rare but severe neurological condition, which can result in parkinsonism, quadriparesis, or even death. Conclusions and Relevance:Hyponatremia affects approximately 5% of adults and 35% of patients who are hospitalized. Most patients should be managed by treating their underlying disease and according to whether they have hypovolemic, euvolemic, or hypervolemic hyponatremia. Urea and vaptans can be effective in managing the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuresis and hyponatremia in patients with heart failure; hypertonic saline is reserved for patients with severely symptomatic hyponatremia.
10.1001/jama.2022.11176
Association of Younger vs Older Ages With Changes in Incidence of Stroke and Other Vascular Events, 2002-2018.
JAMA
Importance:Some studies have reported increasing stroke incidence at younger ages (<55 years) but have often relied only on administrative data, and more population-based studies of adjudicated stroke are required. An understanding of the drivers of any increase in incidence of young stroke also requires comparisons with stroke trends at older ages and with trends in incidence of other vascular events at younger ages. Objective:To determine temporal changes in incidence of stroke and other major vascular events at younger vs older ages. Design, Setting, and Participants:Prospective population-based incidence study conducted from April 2002 to March 2018 with a mean catchment population of 94 567 in Oxfordshire, England. Exposures:Calendar time, premorbid vascular risk factors, and occupation. Main Outcomes and Measures:Changes in incidence of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and other major vascular events (myocardial infarction, sudden cardiac death, and peripheral vascular events) stratified by age, sex, diagnostic workup, etiology, and severity. Results:A total of 2429 incident strokes were ascertained (mean age, 73.6 [SD, 14.4] years; 51.3% female). From 2002-2010 to 2010-2018, stroke incidence increased significantly among participants younger than 55 years (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.67; 95% CI, 1.31-2.14) but fell significantly among participants aged 55 years or older (IRR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.92; P < .001 for difference). The significant increase in incidence at younger than 55 years was independent of sex, stroke severity, pathological subtype, and changes in investigation and was also seen for TIA (IRR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.36-2.57) but not for myocardial infarction and other major vascular events (IRR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.93). Although TIA and stroke at younger than 55 years were significantly associated with diabetes (risk ratio [RR], 3.47; 95% CI, 2.54-4.74), hypertension (RR, 2.52; 95% CI, 2.04-3.12), current smoking (RR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.92-2.94), and obesity (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.07-1.72), the significant increase in incidence from 2002-2010 to 2010-2018 was still seen in individuals without these risk factors. The increase was greatest in professional/managerial occupations (IRR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.75-3.62) and least in partially skilled/unskilled occupations (IRR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.79-1.74). The proportion of TIAs and strokes among those younger than 55 years without known vascular risk factors increased significantly over time (45 [30.4%] vs 115 [42.4%]; absolute difference, 12.0%; 95% CI, 2.6-21.5), especially in patients with cryptogenic events (10 [18.5%] vs 63 [49.2%]; absolute difference, 30.7%; 95% CI, 17.2-44.2; P < .001; P = .002 for heterogeneity). Conclusions and Relevance:Comparing persons living in Oxfordshire, England, in 2002-2010 vs 2010-2018, there was a significant increase in stroke incidence in those younger than 55 years, but a decrease in those aged 55 years or older. Given the absence of this divergence for other vascular events, further research is needed to understand the causes of this difference.
10.1001/jama.2022.12759
Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
JAMA
Importance:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and death in the US and is the cause of more than 1 of every 4 deaths. Coronary heart disease is the single leading cause of death and accounts for 43% of deaths attributable to CVD in the US. In 2019, an estimated 558 000 deaths were caused by coronary heart disease and 109 000 deaths were caused by ischemic stroke. Objective:To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of statins for reducing CVD-related morbidity or mortality or all-cause mortality. Population:Adults 40 years or older without a history of known CVD and who do not have signs and symptoms of CVD. Evidence Assessment:The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that statin use for the prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD and who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (ie, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and an estimated 10-year CVD event risk of 10% or greater has at least a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that statin use for the prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD and who have 1 or more of these CVD risk factors and an estimated 10-year CVD event risk of 7.5% to less than 10% has at least a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of statin use for the primary prevention of CVD events and mortality in adults 76 years or older with no history of CVD. Recommendation:The USPSTF recommends that clinicians prescribe a statin for the primary prevention of CVD for adults aged 40 to 75 years who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (ie, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 10% or greater. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer a statin for the primary prevention of CVD for adults aged 40 to 75 years who have 1 or more of these CVD risk factors and an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% to less than 10%. The likelihood of benefit is smaller in this group than in persons with a 10-year risk of 10% or greater. (C recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of initiating a statin for the primary prevention of CVD events and mortality in adults 76 years or older. (I statement).
10.1001/jama.2022.13044
Vitamin, Mineral, and Multivitamin Supplementation to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
JAMA
Importance:According to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, 52% of surveyed US adults reported using at least 1 dietary supplement in the prior 30 days and 31% reported using a multivitamin-mineral supplement. The most commonly cited reason for using supplements is for overall health and wellness and to fill nutrient gaps in the diet. Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the 2 leading causes of death and combined account for approximately half of all deaths in the US annually. Inflammation and oxidative stress have been shown to have a role in both cardiovascular disease and cancer, and dietary supplements may have anti-inflammatory and antioxidative effects. Objective:To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the efficacy of supplementation with single nutrients, functionally related nutrient pairs, or multivitamins for reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality in the general adult population, as well as the harms of supplementation. Population:Community-dwelling, nonpregnant adults. Evidence Assessment:The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of beta carotene supplementation outweigh the benefits for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF also concludes with moderate certainty that there is no net benefit of supplementation with vitamin E for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with multivitamins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with single or paired nutrients (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation:The USPSTF recommends against the use of beta carotene or vitamin E supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of multivitamin supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of single- or paired-nutrient supplements (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement).
10.1001/jama.2022.8970
Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.
JAMA
Importance:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in the US, accounting for more than 1 in 4 deaths. Each year, an estimated 605 000 people in the US have a first myocardial infarction and an estimated 610 000 experience a first stroke. Objective:To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the effectiveness of aspirin to reduce the risk of CVD events (myocardial infarction and stroke), cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality in persons without a history of CVD. The systematic review also investigated the effect of aspirin use on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality in primary CVD prevention populations, as well as the harms (particularly bleeding) associated with aspirin use. The USPSTF also commissioned a microsimulation modeling study to assess the net balance of benefits and harms from aspirin use for primary prevention of CVD and CRC, stratified by age, sex, and CVD risk level. Population:Adults 40 years or older without signs or symptoms of CVD or known CVD (including history of myocardial infarction or stroke) who are not at increased risk for bleeding (eg, no history of gastrointestinal ulcers, recent bleeding, other medical conditions, or use of medications that increase bleeding risk). Evidence Assessment:The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk has a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that initiating aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults 60 years or older has no net benefit. Recommendation:The decision to initiate low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk should be an individual one. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of aspirin use in this group is small. Persons who are not at increased risk for bleeding and are willing to take low-dose aspirin daily are more likely to benefit. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults 60 years or older. (D recommendation).
10.1001/jama.2022.4983