Jeffrey J Goldberger1, Robert O Bonow2, Michael Cuffe3, Lei Liu4, Yves Rosenberg5, Prediman K Shah6, Sidney C Smith7, Haris Subačius2. 1. Center for Cardiovascular Innovation and the Division of Cardiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. Electronic address: j-goldberger@northwestern.edu. 2. Center for Cardiovascular Innovation and the Division of Cardiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Hospital Corporation of America, Brentwood, Tennessee. 4. Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 6. Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 7. Heart and Vascular Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction (MI) improves survival. Beta-blocker doses used in clinical practice are often substantially lower than those used in the randomized trials establishing their efficacy. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the association of beta-blocker dose with survival after acute MI, hypothesizing that higher dose beta-blocker therapy will be associated with increased survival. METHODS: A multicenter registry enrolled 7,057 consecutive patients with acute MI. Discharge beta-blocker dose was indexed to the target beta-blocker doses used in randomized clinical trials, grouped as >0% to 12.5%, >12.5% to 25%, >25% to 50%, and >50% of target dose. Follow-up vital status was assessed, with the primary endpoint of time-to-death right-censored at 2 years. Multivariable and propensity score analyses were used to account for group differences. RESULTS: Of 6,682 patients with follow-up (median 2.1 years), 91.5% were discharged on a beta-blocker (mean dose 38.1% of the target dose). Lower mortality was observed with all beta-blocker doses (p < 0.0002) versus no beta-blocker therapy. After multivariable adjustment, hazard ratios for 2-year mortality compared with the >50% dose were 0.862 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.677 to 1.098), 0.799 (95% CI: 0.635 to 1.005), and 0.963 (95% CI: 0.765 to 1.213) for the >0% to 12.5%, >12.5% to 25%, and >25% to 50% of target dose groups, respectively. Multivariable analysis with an extended set of covariates and propensity score analysis also demonstrated that higher doses were not associated with better outcome. CONCLUSIONS: These data do not demonstrate increased survival in patients treated with beta-blocker doses approximating those used in previous randomized clinical trials compared with lower doses. These findings provide the rationale to re-engage in research to establish appropriate beta-blocker dosing after MI to derive optimal benefit from this therapy. (The PACE-MI Registry Study-Outcomes of Beta-blocker Therapy After Myocardial Infarction [OBTAIN]: NCT00430612).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Beta-blocker therapy after acute myocardial infarction (MI) improves survival. Beta-blocker doses used in clinical practice are often substantially lower than those used in the randomized trials establishing their efficacy. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the association of beta-blocker dose with survival after acute MI, hypothesizing that higher dose beta-blocker therapy will be associated with increased survival. METHODS: A multicenter registry enrolled 7,057 consecutive patients with acute MI. Discharge beta-blocker dose was indexed to the target beta-blocker doses used in randomized clinical trials, grouped as >0% to 12.5%, >12.5% to 25%, >25% to 50%, and >50% of target dose. Follow-up vital status was assessed, with the primary endpoint of time-to-death right-censored at 2 years. Multivariable and propensity score analyses were used to account for group differences. RESULTS: Of 6,682 patients with follow-up (median 2.1 years), 91.5% were discharged on a beta-blocker (mean dose 38.1% of the target dose). Lower mortality was observed with all beta-blocker doses (p < 0.0002) versus no beta-blocker therapy. After multivariable adjustment, hazard ratios for 2-year mortality compared with the >50% dose were 0.862 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.677 to 1.098), 0.799 (95% CI: 0.635 to 1.005), and 0.963 (95% CI: 0.765 to 1.213) for the >0% to 12.5%, >12.5% to 25%, and >25% to 50% of target dose groups, respectively. Multivariable analysis with an extended set of covariates and propensity score analysis also demonstrated that higher doses were not associated with better outcome. CONCLUSIONS: These data do not demonstrate increased survival in patients treated with beta-blocker doses approximating those used in previous randomized clinical trials compared with lower doses. These findings provide the rationale to re-engage in research to establish appropriate beta-blocker dosing after MI to derive optimal benefit from this therapy. (The PACE-MI Registry Study-Outcomes of Beta-blocker Therapy After Myocardial Infarction [OBTAIN]: NCT00430612).
Authors: David E Lanfear; Philip G Jones; Sharon Marsh; Sharon Cresci; Howard L McLeod; John A Spertus Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-09-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Marco Metra; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Karl Swedberg; John G F Cleland; Andrea Di Lenarda; Michel Komajda; Willem J Remme; Beatrix Lutiger; Armin Scherhag; Mary Ann Lukas; Andrew Charlesworth; Philip A Poole-Wilson Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2005-07-21 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: R Koytchev; R G Alken; V Vlahov; V Kirkov; R Kaneva; U Thyroff-Friesinger; E Rehak Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Hui Yang; Wanqing Sun; Nanhu Quan; Lin Wang; Dongyang Chu; Courtney Cates; Quan Liu; Yang Zheng; Ji Li Journal: Biochem Pharmacol Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 5.858
Authors: José Carlos Nicolau; Gilson Soares Feitosa Filho; João Luiz Petriz; Remo Holanda de Mendonça Furtado; Dalton Bertolim Précoma; Walmor Lemke; Renato Delascio Lopes; Ari Timerman; José A Marin Neto; Luiz Bezerra Neto; Bruno Ferraz de Oliveira Gomes; Eduardo Cavalcanti Lapa Santos; Leopoldo Soares Piegas; Alexandre de Matos Soeiro; Alexandre Jorge de Andrade Negri; Andre Franci; Brivaldo Markman Filho; Bruno Mendonça Baccaro; Carlos Eduardo Lucena Montenegro; Carlos Eduardo Rochitte; Carlos José Dornas Gonçalves Barbosa; Cláudio Marcelo Bittencourt das Virgens; Edson Stefanini; Euler Roberto Fernandes Manenti; Felipe Gallego Lima; Francisco das Chagas Monteiro Júnior; Harry Correa Filho; Henrique Patrus Mundim Pena; Ibraim Masciarelli Francisco Pinto; João Luiz de Alencar Araripe Falcão; Joberto Pinheiro Sena; José Maria Peixoto; Juliana Ascenção de Souza; Leonardo Sara da Silva; Lilia Nigro Maia; Louis Nakayama Ohe; Luciano Moreira Baracioli; Luís Alberto de Oliveira Dallan; Luis Augusto Palma Dallan; Luiz Alberto Piva E Mattos; Luiz Carlos Bodanese; Luiz Eduardo Fonteles Ritt; Manoel Fernandes Canesin; Marcelo Bueno da Silva Rivas; Marcelo Franken; Marcos José Gomes Magalhães; Múcio Tavares de Oliveira Júnior; Nivaldo Menezes Filgueiras Filho; Oscar Pereira Dutra; Otávio Rizzi Coelho; Paulo Ernesto Leães; Paulo Roberto Ferreira Rossi; Paulo Rogério Soares; Pedro Alves Lemos Neto; Pedro Silvio Farsky; Rafael Rebêlo C Cavalcanti; Renato Jorge Alves; Renato Abdala Karam Kalil; Roberto Esporcatte; Roberto Luiz Marino; Roberto Rocha Corrêa Veiga Giraldez; Romeu Sérgio Meneghelo; Ronaldo de Souza Leão Lima; Rui Fernando Ramos; Sandra Nivea Dos Reis Saraiva Falcão; Talia Falcão Dalçóquio; Viviana de Mello Guzzo Lemke; William Azem Chalela; Wilson Mathias Júnior Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2021-07 Impact factor: 2.667
Authors: Sophia Humphries; John Wallert; Katarina Mars; Claes Held; Robin Hofmann; Erik M G Olsson Journal: Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care Date: 2022-06-22
Authors: Ghaith Zaatari; Dan J Fintel; Haris Subacius; Joseph J Germano; Jacob Shani; Jeffrey J Goldberger Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2021-02-20 Impact factor: 2.778