Mohammed Qintar1, Karin H Humphries2, Julie E Park2, Suzanne V Arnold3, Yuanyuan Tang3, Phillip Jones3, Adam C Salisbury3, Faraz Kureshi4, Michael E Farkouh5, Valentin Fuster6, David J Cohen3, John A Spertus3. 1. Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute and the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri. Electronic address: qintarm@umkc.edu. 2. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute and the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri. 4. Austin Heart, St. David's Heart and Vascular, Austin, Texas; National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. 5. Peter Munk Cardiac Centre and the Heart and Stroke Richard Lewar Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. Zena and Michael Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), the FREEDOM (Future Revascularization Evaluation in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease) trial demonstrated that, on average, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for major acute cardiovascular events (MACE) and angina reduction. Nonetheless, multivessel PCI remains a common revascularization strategy in the real world. OBJECTIVES: To translate the results of FREEDOM to individual patients in clinical practice, risk models of the heterogeneity of treatment benefit were built. METHODS: Using patient-level data from 1,900 FREEDOM patients, the authors developed models to predict 5-year MACE (all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke) and 1-year angina after CABG and PCI using baseline covariates and treatment interactions. Parsimonious models were created to support clinical use. The models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling, and the MACE model was externally validated in a large real-world registry. RESULTS: The 5-year MACE occurred in 346 (18.2%) patients, and 310 (16.3%) had angina at 1 year. The MACE model included 8 variables and treatment interactions with smoking status (c = 0.67). External validation in stable CAD (c = 0.65) and ACS (c = 0.68) demonstrated comparable performance. The 6-variable angina model included a treatment interaction with SYNTAX score (c = 0.67). PCI was never superior to CABG, and CABG was superior to PCI for MACE in 54.5% of patients and in 100% of patients with history of smoking. CONCLUSIONS: To help disseminate the results of FREEDOM, the authors created a personalized risk prediction tool for patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD that could be used in shared decision-making for CABG versus PCI by estimating each patient's personal outcomes with both treatments.
BACKGROUND: In patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), the FREEDOM (Future Revascularization Evaluation in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease) trial demonstrated that, on average, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for major acute cardiovascular events (MACE) and angina reduction. Nonetheless, multivessel PCI remains a common revascularization strategy in the real world. OBJECTIVES: To translate the results of FREEDOM to individual patients in clinical practice, risk models of the heterogeneity of treatment benefit were built. METHODS: Using patient-level data from 1,900 FREEDOM patients, the authors developed models to predict 5-year MACE (all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke) and 1-year angina after CABG and PCI using baseline covariates and treatment interactions. Parsimonious models were created to support clinical use. The models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling, and the MACE model was externally validated in a large real-world registry. RESULTS: The 5-year MACE occurred in 346 (18.2%) patients, and 310 (16.3%) had angina at 1 year. The MACE model included 8 variables and treatment interactions with smoking status (c = 0.67). External validation in stable CAD (c = 0.65) and ACS (c = 0.68) demonstrated comparable performance. The 6-variable angina model included a treatment interaction with SYNTAX score (c = 0.67). PCI was never superior to CABG, and CABG was superior to PCI for MACE in 54.5% of patients and in 100% of patients with history of smoking. CONCLUSIONS: To help disseminate the results of FREEDOM, the authors created a personalized risk prediction tool for patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD that could be used in shared decision-making for CABG versus PCI by estimating each patient's personal outcomes with both treatments.
Authors: Mouin S Abdallah; Kaijun Wang; Elizabeth A Magnuson; John A Spertus; Michael E Farkouh; Valentin Fuster; David J Cohen Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-10-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Stephan D Fihn; James C Blankenship; Karen P Alexander; John A Bittl; John G Byrne; Barbara J Fletcher; Gregg C Fonarow; Richard A Lange; Glenn N Levine; Thomas M Maddox; Srihari S Naidu; E Magnus Ohman; Peter K Smith; Jeffrey L Anderson; Jonathan L Halperin; Nancy M Albert; Biykem Bozkurt; Ralph G Brindis; Lesley H Curtis; David DeMets; Robert A Guyton; Judith S Hochman; Richard J Kovacs; E Magnus Ohman; Susan J Pressler; Frank W Sellke; Win-Kuang Shen Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Manesh R Patel; John H Calhoon; Gregory J Dehmer; James Aaron Grantham; Thomas M Maddox; David J Maron; Peter K Smith Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-03-10 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: P W Serruys; F Unger; J E Sousa; A Jatene; H J Bonnier; J P Schönberger; N Buller; R Bonser; M J van den Brand; L A van Herwerden; M A Morel; B A van Hout Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-04-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael E Farkouh; Michael Domanski; Lynn A Sleeper; Flora S Siami; George Dangas; Michael Mack; May Yang; David J Cohen; Yves Rosenberg; Scott D Solomon; Akshay S Desai; Bernard J Gersh; Elizabeth A Magnuson; Alexandra Lansky; Robin Boineau; Jesse Weinberger; Krishnan Ramanathan; J Eduardo Sousa; Jamie Rankin; Balram Bhargava; John Buse; Whady Hueb; Craig R Smith; Victoria Muratov; Sameer Bansilal; Spencer King; Michel Bertrand; Valentin Fuster Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-11-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J A Spertus; J A Winder; T A Dewhurst; R A Deyo; J Prodzinski; M McDonell; S D Fihn Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Krishnan Ramanathan; James G Abel; Julie E Park; Anthony Fung; Verghese Mathew; Carolyn M Taylor; G B John Mancini; Min Gao; Lillian Ding; Subodh Verma; Karin H Humphries; Michael E Farkouh Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Sameer K Mehta; Andrew D Frutkin; Jason B Lindsey; John A House; John A Spertus; Sunil V Rao; Fang-Shu Ou; Matthew T Roe; Eric D Peterson; Steven P Marso Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2009-05-08 Impact factor: 6.546