The PROSPECT Trial. A Natural History Study of Atherosclerosis Using Multimodality Intracoronary Imaging to Prospectively Identify Vulnerable Plaque

Similar documents
The PROSPECT Trial. A Natural History Study of Atherosclerosis Using Multimodality Intracoronary Imaging to Prospectively Identify Vulnerable Plaque

Cardiovascular Research Foundation and Columbia University Medical Center, New York.

Can IVUS Define Plaque Features that Impact Patient Care?

Assessment of Vulnerable Plaque by IVUS and VH-IVUS

Imaging Overview for Vulnerable Plaque: Data from IVUS Trial and An Introduction to VH-IVUS Imgaging

Culprit Lesion Remodeling and Long-term (> 5years) Prognosis in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Invasive Evaluation of High Risk or Vulnerable Plaque A Powerful Tool to Address Potential Pharmacological Agents? Jagat Narula, MD PhD MACC

Plaque Characteristics in Coronary Artery Disease. Chourmouzios Arampatzis MD, PhD, FESC

Optical Coherence Tomography for Intracoronary Imaging

Imaging Atheroma The quest for the Vulnerable Plaque

Between Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve

Invasive Coronary Imaging Modalities for Vulnerable Plaque Detection

Added Value of Invasive Coronary Imaging for Plaque Rupture and Erosion

OCT Findings: Lesson from Stable vs Unstable Plaques

OCT; Comparative Imaging Results with IVUS, VH and Angioscopy

A Novel Low Pressure Self Expanding Nitinol Coronary Stent (vprotect): Device Design and FIH Experience

Gary S. Mintz,, MD. IVUS Observations in Acute (vs Chronic) Coronary Artery Disease: Structure vs Function

Left main coronary artery (LMCA): The proximal segment

Cindy L. Grines MD FACC FSCAI

as a Mechanism of Stent Failure

Vulnerable Plaque Pathophysiology, Detection, and Intervention. VP: A Local Problem or Systemic Disease. Erling Falk, Denmark

eluting Stents The SPIRIT Trials

71 CONGRESSO NAZIONALE FIMMG METIS Domus de Maria, 9 ottobre 2015

Machine Learning in Precision Medicine Coronary Health Prediction - Cardiac Events (Atherosclerosis) - Heart Transplant (Vasculopathy)

대한심장학회춘계학술대회 Satellite Symposium

Adverse Cardiovascular Events Arising From Atherosclerotic Lesions With and Without Angiographic Disease Progression

Can We Identify Vulnerable Patients & Vulnerable Plaque?

1st Department of Cardiology, University of Athens, Hippokration Hospital, Athens, Greece

Pathology of Vulnerable Plaque Angioplasty Summit 2005 TCT Asia Pacific, Seoul, April 28-30, 2005

2yrs 2-6yrs >6yrs BMS 0% 22% 42% DES 29% 41% Nakazawa et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;57:

Usefulness of OCT during coronary intervention

Adults With Diagnosed Diabetes

New Insight about FFR and IVUS MLA

Coronary Artery Thermography

The Future of intravascular Is there light or sound at the end of the tunnel? Hybrid Imaging

Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound- Guided vs. Angiography-Guided Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation: the IVUS-XPL Randomized Clinical Trial

PCI for Left Anterior Descending Artery Ostial Stenosis

Quick guide. Core. precision guided therapy system

In-Ho Chae. Seoul National University College of Medicine

DESolve NX Trial Clinical and Imaging Results

Cardiac CT Angiography

Failure of positive. Recanalization and CTO formation. TCFA rupture with (fatal) thrombotic occlusion. TCFA Lipid pool

Innate Immunity in Atherosclerosis

Assessment of plaque morphology by OCT in patients with ACS

Percutaneous Intervention of Unprotected Left Main Disease

Medical sciences 1 (2017) 1 9

COURAGE to Leave Diseased Arteries Alone

Noninvasive Coronary Imaging: Plaque Imaging by MDCT

IVUS Analysis. Myeong-Ki. Hong, MD, PhD. Cardiac Center, Asan Medical Center University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Defining Plaque Composition by CTA: The Latest Tool to Monitor Therapy?

Assessment of vulnerable plaque by OCT

Can Angiographic Complete Revascularization Improve Outcomes for Patients with Decreased LV Function? NO!

Can We Safely Defer PCI. Yes, already proven

Integrating IVUS, FFR, and Noninvasive Imaging to Optimize Outcomes. Gary S. Mintz, MD Cardiovascular Research Foundation

A Large Prospective Randomized Trial of DES vs BMS in Patients with STEMI

Cottrell Memorial Lecture. Has Reversing Atherosclerosis Become the New Gold Standard in the Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease?

Causes of death in Diabetes

Side Branch Occlusion

EXCEL vs. NOBLE: How to Treat Left Main Disease in 2017 AATS International Cardiovascular Symposium December 8-9, 2017

Left Main Intervention: Where are we in 2015?

actually rupture! Challenges to the vulnerable plaque concept

CT Imaging of Atherosclerotic Plaque. William Stanford MD Professor-Emeritus Radiology University of Iowa College of Medicine Iowa City, IA

What oral antiplatelet therapy would you choose? a) ASA alone b) ASA + Clopidogrel c) ASA + Prasugrel d) ASA + Ticagrelor

Dynamic Nature of Nonculprit Coronary Artery Lesion Morphology in STEMI

Non merci! Revascularisation complète à la phase aigue de l infarctus? 8 e Cardiorun, La Réunion, 1 er octobre Gilles Rioufol, MD, PhD

CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE

The Dynamic Nature of Coronary Artery Lesion Morphology Assessed by Serial Virtual Histology Intravascular Ultrasound Tissue Characterization

Lessons learned From The National PCI Registry

Κλινική Χρήση IVUS και OCT PERIKLIS A. DAVLOUROS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF CARDIOLOGY INVASIVE CARDIOLOGY & CONGENITAL HEART DISEASE

PCI vs. CABG From BARI to Syntax, Is The Game Over?

Chest pain and troponins on the acute take. J N Townend Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham

Title for Paragraph Format Slide

Integrated Use of IVUS and FFR for LM Stenting

Quinn Capers, IV, MD

Intervention: How and to which extent is technology helping us?

What is the Optimal Triple Anti-platelet Therapy Duration in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Drug-eluting Stents Implantation?

Revived indications for thrombus aspiration during primary PCI: Unanswered questions after TAPAS

Coronary Artery Stenosis. Insight from MAIN-COMPARE Study

Le espressioni della placca che preoccupano il clinico: progressione o vulnerabilità? CardioLUCCA Marzo 2017

OCT Technology: Differences between Biodegradable and Durable Polymers: Insights from the LEADERS Trial LEADERS OCT

New Generation Drug- Eluting Stent in Korea

FESC, FACC, MAHA, MSCAI, MEAPSI, ESH

Pathology of Coronary Artery Disease

Malaysian Healthy Ageing Society

Update from the Tryton IDE study

Final Clinical and Angiographic Results From a Nationwide Registry of FIREBIRD Sirolimus- Eluting Stent: Firebird In China (FIC) Registry (PI R. Gao)

PCI for In-Stent Restenosis. CardioVascular Research Foundation

EBC London 2013 Provisional SB stenting strategy with kissing balloon with Absorb

Multimodality Imaging in Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection in the Peripartum Period

Fasting or non fasting?

PROMUS Element Experience In AMC

From the Vulnerable Atherosclerotic Plaque to CAD Management

Invasive Imaging (IVUS, VH-IVUS, and OCT): How I Implement into My

The 10 th International & 15 th National Congress on Quality Improvement in Clinical Laboratories

Three-Year Clinical Outcomes with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds: Results from the Randomized ABSORB III Trial Stephen G.

ZEUS Trial ezetimibe Ultrasound Study

PCI for Long Coronary Lesion

IVUS vs FFR Debate: IVUS-Guided PCI

Pathology of percutaneous interventions (PCI) in coronary arteries. Allard van der Wal, MD.PhD; Pathologie AMC, Amsterdam, NL

Jose Mª de la Torre Hernandez, MD, PhD, FESC. Cardiologia Valdecilla Hospital Universitario Marques de Valdecilla Santander. SPAIN

Transcription:

The PROSPECT Trial Providing Regional Observations to Study Predictors of Events in the Coronary Tree A Natural History Study of Atherosclerosis Using Multimodality Intracoronary Imaging to Prospectively Identify Vulnerable Plaque Gregg W. Stone, MD PROSPECT Investigators

The PROSPECT Trial Background Most cases of sudden cardiac death and MI are believed to arise from plaque rupture with subsequent thrombotic coronary occlusion of angiographically mild lesions ( vulnerable ( plaques ), the prospective detection of which has not been achieved The event rate attributable to progression of vulnerable plaque has never been prospectively assessed

Death, MI, UA requiring hosp, revasc >30d, or stroke (%) 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 ACS median 7d PCI 69% PROVE-IT TIMI-22 4,162 Randomized Pts with ACS 16% RR P = 0.005 Pravastatin 40 mg/d 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 Months of Follow-up Atorvastatin 80 mg/d Cannon CP et al. NEJM 2004;350:1495-1504 1504 26.3% 22.4% How many events were attributable to: 1) Restenosis, stent thrombosis, etc. vs. 2) Significant disease left behind, vs. 3) VP with rapid lesion progression?

The PROSPECT Trial 700 pts with ACS UA (with ECGΔ) or NSTEMI or STEMI >24º undergoing PCI of 1 or 2 major coronary arteries at up to 40 sites in the U.S. and Europe Metabolic S. Waist circum Fast lipids Fast glu HgbA1C Fast insulin Creatinine PCI of culprit lesion(s) Successful and uncomplicated Formally enrolled PI: Gregg W. Stone Sponsor: Abbott Vascular; Partner: Volcano Biomarkers Hs CRP IL-6 scd40l MPO TNFα MMP9 Lp-PLA2 others

PROSPECT: Methodology Virtual histology lesion classification Lesions are classified into 5 main types 1. Fibrotic 2. Fibrocalcific 3. Pathological intimal thickening (PIT) 4. Thick cap fibroatheroma (ThCFA) 5. VH-thin cap fibroatheroma (VH-TCFA) (presumed high risk)

PROSPECT: Imaging Summary Virtual histology (N=2689 lesions in 615 pts) - Mean plaque composition- 21.1% Dense calcium Fibrofatty 13.0% 6.5% Fibrotic Necrotic core 59.4% Plaque subtype N=2689 Fibrotic 2.5% Fibrocalcific 1.1% PIT 35.9% Fibroatheroma 59.9% - Thick cap 37.8% - VH-TCFA 22.1% - Single, - Ca 5.4% - Single, + Ca 0.5% - Multiple, - Ca 9.8% - Multiple, + Ca 6.4% Unclassified 0.7%

PROSPECT: Imaging Summary Per patient incidence of VH-TCFAs 100% N lesions/patient: 0 1 2 3 4 % Patients 75% 50% 25% 48.8% 51.2% of pts have 1 1 VH-TCFA 0.97 ±1.30 VH-TCFAs per pt (range 0 7 per pt) Total of 594 VH-TCFA lesions in 615 pts 27.3% 12.0% 6.2% 5.7% 0%

PROSPECT: MACE 25 20 All Culprit lesion (CL) related Non culprit lesion (NCL) related Indeterminate 18.1% 20.4% MACE (%) 15 10 13.2% 7.9% 11.4% 9.4% 12.9% 11.6% 5 0 6.4% 0.9% 1.9% 2.7% 0 1 2 3 Time in Years Number at risk ALL 697 557 506 480 CL related 697 590 543 518 NCL related 697 595 553 521 Indeterminate 697 634 604 583

PROSPECT: NCL MACE 12 Non-culprit lesion (NCL) related, all 11.6% - Without rapid lesion progression (RLP) - With rapid lesion progression (RLP) 10 9.4% MACE (%) 8 6 4 6.4% 4.1% 5.5% 4.9% 6.7% 6.4% 2 0 2.9% Median time to event No RLP: 223 [85, 663] days RLP: 401 [229, 666] days 0 1 2 3 Time in Years Number at risk NCL related, all 697 595 553 521 - without RLP 697 610 577 551 - with RLP 697 620 579 550

PROSPECT: Correlates of Non Culprit Related Events Baseline variables examined (n=152) Demographic, history and PE (n=19) Labs (n=7; including CrCl, lipids, hgba1c, CRP) Angio non core lab (n=1; visible lesions >30% DS) QCA measures (n=12) IVUS area and volumetric measures (n=22) Virtual histology measures (n=74) Treatment related (n=1; # vessels stented) Medications in-hosp. and at discharge (n=16)

PROSPECT: Correlates of Non Culprit Lesion Related Events Patient level events at median 3.4 yrs (76 events in 689 pts*) Baseline Demographic and Angiographic Variables Variable KM Rate (n) HR [95% CI] HR [95% CI] P Insulin DM (n=21) 41.4% (6) 4.07 [1.75, 9.46] 0.001 Non insulin DM (n=96) 16.3% (14) 1.55 [0.86, 2.79] 0.14 Non diabetic (n=569) 10.7% (56) Hypertension (n=314) 14.7% (42) 1.64 [1.03, 2.60] 0.04 No hypertension (n=369) 9.1% (31) Prior PCI (n=75) 23.1% (15) 2.20 [1.25, 3.86] 0.006 No prior PCI (n=613) 10.8% (61) 1 1 visible angio lsn* (n=582) 13.7% (73) 4.72 [1.49, 14.98] 0.008 No visible angio lsn (n=107) 3.2% (3) 01 5 10 15 *Visually assessed DS >30% Univariate, unadjusted. * 8 patients with indeterminate events were w excluded.

PROSPECT: Correlates of Non Culprit Lesion Related Events Lesion level events (51 events from 2673 lesions in 609 pts at median 3.4 yrs) IVUS Characteristics (area data) Variable Rate (n) HR [95% CI] HR [95% CI] P MLA < median 5.9 mm 2 (n=1336) 3.4% (45) 7.53 [3.21, 17.65] <0.0001 MLA median 5.9 mm 2 (n=1337) 0.4% (6) MLA 4.0 mm 2 (n=496) 5.4% (27) 5.01 [2.89, 8.68] <0.0001 MLA > 4.0 mm 2 (n=2177) 1.1% (24) PB MLA PB MLA PB MLA median 0.55 (n=1337) 3.3% (44) 6.37 [2.87, 14.15] <0.0001 PB MLA < median 0.55 (n=1336) 0.5% (7) PB MLA PB MLA PB MLA 0.70 (n=242) 9.1% (22) 7.94 [4.56, 13.81] <0.0001 PB MLA < 0.70 (n=2431) 1.2% (29) EEM MLA EEM MLA EEM MLA med 14.3 mm 2 (n=1337) 1.4% (19) 0.60 [0.34, 1.06] 0.08 EEM MLA < med 14.3 mm 2 (n=1336) 2.4% (32) Lsn length < med 11.6 mm (n=1336) 0.7% (10) 4.01 [2.01, 8.02] <0.0001 Lsn length med 11.6 mm (n=1337) 3.1% (41) 01 5 10 15 MLA = minimal luminal area; PB MLA = plaque burden at the MLA; EEM MLA = external elastic membrane at the MLA. Data represent univariate associations, unadjusted. Note: All NC MACE events occurred at IVUS lesions.

Variable PROSPECT: Correlates of Non Culprit Lesion Related Events Lesion level events (51 events from 2655 lesions in 609 pts at median 3.4 yrs) Virtual Histology Plaque Type Rate (n) HR [95% CI] HR [95% CI] VH-TCFA (n=590) 4.4% (26) 3.84 [2.22, 6.65] <0.0001 Not VH-TCFA (n=2065) 1.2% (25) ThCFA (n=1005) 1.8% (18) 0.89 [0.50, 1.58] 0.69 Not ThCFA (n=1650) 2.0% (33) PIT (n=964) 0.6% (6) 0.23 [0.10, 0.53] 0.001 Not PIT (n=1691) 2.7% (45) Fibrotic (n=67) 0% (0) - 0.99 Not Fibrotic (n=2588) 2.0% (51) Fibrocalcific (n=29) 3.4% (1) 1.75 [0.24, 12.63] 0.58 Not fibrocalcific (n=2626) 1.9% (50) 01 5 10 15 TCFA = thin cap fibroatheroma; ThCFA = thick cap fibroatheroma; PIT = pathologic intimal thickening. Univariate, unadjusted. P

PROSPECT: Multivariable Correlates of Non Culprit Lesion Related Events Independent predictors of lesion level events by logistic regression analysis Variable OR [95% CI] P value PB MLA 70% 4.99 [2.54, 9.79] <0.0001 VH-TCFA 3.00 [1.68, 5.37] 0.0002 MLA 4.0 mm 2 2.77 [1.32, 5.81] 0.007 Lesion length 11.6 mm 1.97 [0.94, 4.16] 0.07 EEM MLA <14.3 mm 2 1.30 [0.62, 2.75] 0.49 Variables entered into the model: Minimal luminal area (MLA); plaque burden at the MLA (PB MLA ); external elastic membrane at the MLA (EEM MLA ) <median; lesion length median (mm); VH-TCFA.

PROSPECT: VH-TCFA and Non Culprit Lesion Related Events Lesion HR 3.84 (2.22, 6.65) 6.41 (3.35, 12.24) 10.77 (5.53, 21.00) 10.81 (4.30, 27.22) P value <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 Prevalence* 51.2% 17.4% 11.0% 4.6% *Likelihood of one or more such lesions being present per patient. t. PB = plaque burden at the MLA

PROSPECT: PIT and Non Culprit Lesion Related Events Lesion HR 0.24 (0.10, 0.56) 1.15 (0.36 3.70) 1.36 (0.19, 9.86) 2.85 (0.39, 20.67) P value 0.001 0.81 0.76 0.30 Prevalence* 68.6% 17.2% 5.7% 2.6% *Likelihood of one or more such lesions being present per patient. t. PB = plaque burden at the MLA

PROSPECT: Conclusions From this trial, the first prospective, natural history study of atherosclerosis using multimodality imaging to characterize the coronary tree, we can conclude that: Approximately 20% of pts with ACS successfully treated with stents and contemporary medical Rx develop MACE within 3 years, with adverse events equally attributable to recurrence at originally treated culprit lesions (treatment failure) and to previously untreated non culprit coronary segments Approximately 12% of pts develop MACE from non culprit lesions during 3 years of follow-up Patients treated with contemporary medical therapy who develop non culprit lesion events present most commonly with progressive or unstable angina, and rarely with cardiac death, cardiac arrest or MI

PROSPECT: Conclusions While plaques which are responsible for unanticipated future MACE are frequently angiographically mild, most untreated plaques which become symptomatic have a large plaque burden and a small lumen area (which are detectable by IVUS but not by angiography) Only about half of new events due to non culprit lesions exemplify the classic notion of vulnerable plaque (rapid lesion progression of mild angiographically lesions), while half are attributable to unrecognized and untreated severe disease with minimal change over time The prospective identification of non culprit lesions prone to develop MACE within 3 years can be enhanced by characterization of underlying plaque morphology with virtual histology, with VH-TCFAs representing the highest risk lesion type The combination of large plaque burden (IVUS) and a large necrotic core without a visible cap (VH-TCFA) identifies lesions which are at especially high risk for future adverse cardiovascular events