Siqin Ye1, Jonathan A Shaffer2, Nina Rieckmann3, Joseph E Schwartz4, Ian M Kronish2, Joseph A Ladapo5, William Whang2, Matthew M Burg6, Karina W Davidson2. 1. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physician & Surgeons, New York, NY. Electronic address: sy2357@columbia.edu. 2. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physician & Surgeons, New York, NY. 3. Berlin School of Public Health, Charité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany. 4. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physician & Surgeons, New York, NY; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, SUNY-Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY. 5. Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York. 6. Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physician & Surgeons, New York, NY; Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Coronary Psychosocial Evaluation Studies trial demonstrated promising results for enhanced depression treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk of patients with acute coronary syndrome and comorbid depression, but the long-term effectiveness of this intervention is unclear. METHODS: A total of 157 participants with persistent depression after hospitalization for acute coronary syndromes were enrolled in the Coronary Psychosocial Evaluation Studies trial. A total of 80 participants were allocated to 6 months of enhanced depression treatment, and 77 participants were allocated to usual care. We report on an additional 12 months of observational follow-up for the composite outcome of death or first hospitalization for myocardial infarction or unstable angina. RESULTS: Although the intervention was previously shown to have favorable cardiovascular effects during the treatment period, we observed a significant time-by-treatment group interaction during extended follow-up (P = .008). Specifically, during the 6-month treatment period, death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction/unstable angina occurred in 3 participants (4%) in the treatment group compared with 11 participants (14%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.90; P = .03). In contrast, during 12 months of additional observational follow-up, 11 participants (14%) in the treatment group experienced the composite outcome of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction/unstable angina compared with 3 participants (4%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-10.56; P = .10). CONCLUSIONS:Enhanced depression treatment was associated with a reduced risk of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction/unstable angina during active treatment, but this effect did not persist after treatment ceased. Future research is needed to confirm our findings and to determine the optimal duration of depression treatment in patients with depression after acute coronary syndromes.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The Coronary Psychosocial Evaluation Studies trial demonstrated promising results for enhanced depression treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk of patients with acute coronary syndrome and comorbid depression, but the long-term effectiveness of this intervention is unclear. METHODS: A total of 157 participants with persistent depression after hospitalization for acute coronary syndromes were enrolled in the Coronary Psychosocial Evaluation Studies trial. A total of 80 participants were allocated to 6 months of enhanced depression treatment, and 77 participants were allocated to usual care. We report on an additional 12 months of observational follow-up for the composite outcome of death or first hospitalization for myocardial infarction or unstable angina. RESULTS: Although the intervention was previously shown to have favorable cardiovascular effects during the treatment period, we observed a significant time-by-treatment group interaction during extended follow-up (P = .008). Specifically, during the 6-month treatment period, death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction/unstable angina occurred in 3 participants (4%) in the treatment group compared with 11 participants (14%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.90; P = .03). In contrast, during 12 months of additional observational follow-up, 11 participants (14%) in the treatment group experienced the composite outcome of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction/unstable angina compared with 3 participants (4%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-10.56; P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced depression treatment was associated with a reduced risk of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction/unstable angina during active treatment, but this effect did not persist after treatment ceased. Future research is needed to confirm our findings and to determine the optimal duration of depression treatment in patients with depression after acute coronary syndromes.
Authors: Denise C Cooper; Lianne M Tomfohr; Milos S Milic; Loki Natarajan; Wayne A Bardwell; Michael G Ziegler; Joel E Dimsdale Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2011-06-02 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Karina W Davidson; Nina Rieckmann; Lynn Clemow; Joseph E Schwartz; Daichi Shimbo; Vivian Medina; Gabrielle Albanese; Ian Kronish; Mark Hegel; Matthew M Burg Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2010-04-12
Authors: Karina W Davidson; Joseph E Schwartz; Susan A Kirkland; Elizabeth Mostofsky; Daniel Fink; Duane Guernsey; Daichi Shimbo Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2009-01-24 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Kim A Eagle; Michael J Lim; Omar H Dabbous; Karen S Pieper; Robert J Goldberg; Frans Van de Werf; Shaun G Goodman; Christopher B Granger; P Gabriel Steg; Joel M Gore; Andrzej Budaj; Alvaro Avezum; Marcus D Flather; Keith A A Fox Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-06-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Lisa F Berkman; James Blumenthal; Matthew Burg; Robert M Carney; Diane Catellier; Marie J Cowan; Susan M Czajkowski; Robert DeBusk; James Hosking; Allan Jaffe; Peter G Kaufmann; Pamela Mitchell; James Norman; Lynda H Powell; James M Raczynski; Neil Schneiderman Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: James A Blumenthal; Andrew Sherwood; Michael A Babyak; Lana L Watkins; Patrick J Smith; Benson M Hoffman; C Virginia F O'Hayer; Stephanie Mabe; Julie Johnson; P Murali Doraiswamy; Wei Jiang; Douglas D Schocken; Alan L Hinderliter Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Suzanne H Richards; Lindsey Anderson; Caroline E Jenkinson; Ben Whalley; Karen Rees; Philippa Davies; Paul Bennett; Zulian Liu; Robert West; David R Thompson; Rod S Taylor Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-04-28
Authors: Phillip J Tully; Deborah A Turnbull; John D Horowitz; John F Beltrame; Terina Selkow; Bernhard T Baune; Elizabeth Markwick; Shannon Sauer-Zavala; Harald Baumeister; Suzanne Cosh; Gary A Wittert Journal: Trials Date: 2016-01-11 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Allison E Gaffey; Casey E Cavanagh; Lindsey Rosman; Kaicheng Wang; Yanhong Deng; Mario Sims; Emily C O'Brien; Alanna M Chamberlain; Robert J Mentz; LáShauntá M Glover; Matthew M Burg Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 6.106