Cargando…

Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial

BACKGROUND: The Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial evaluated a multifactor intervention on coronary heart disease (CHD) in 12 866 men. A priori defined endpoints (CHD death, CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiovascular disease [CVD] death, and all-cause death) did not differ sign...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stamler, Jeremiah, Neaton, James D., Cohen, Jerome D., Cutler, Jeffrey, Eberly, Lynn, Grandits, Gregory, Kuller, Lewis H., Ockene, Judith, Prineas, Ronald
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3541632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23316301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.112.003640
_version_ 1782255394816524288
author Stamler, Jeremiah
Neaton, James D.
Cohen, Jerome D.
Cutler, Jeffrey
Eberly, Lynn
Grandits, Gregory
Kuller, Lewis H.
Ockene, Judith
Prineas, Ronald
author_facet Stamler, Jeremiah
Neaton, James D.
Cohen, Jerome D.
Cutler, Jeffrey
Eberly, Lynn
Grandits, Gregory
Kuller, Lewis H.
Ockene, Judith
Prineas, Ronald
author_sort Stamler, Jeremiah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial evaluated a multifactor intervention on coronary heart disease (CHD) in 12 866 men. A priori defined endpoints (CHD death, CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiovascular disease [CVD] death, and all-cause death) did not differ significantly between the special intervention (SI) and usual care (UC) groups over an average follow-up period of 7 years. Event rates were lower than anticipated, reducing power. Other nonfatal CVD outcomes were prespecified but not considered in composite outcomes comparing SI with UC. METHODS AND RESULTS: Post-trial CVD mortality risks associated with nonfatal CVD events occurring during the trial were determined with Cox regression. Nonfatal outcomes associated with >2-fold risk of CVD death over the subsequent 20 years were combined with during-trial deaths to create 2 new composite outcomes. SI/UC hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for each composite outcome. Of 10 during-trial nonfatal events, 6 were associated (P<0.001) with >2-fold risk of CVD death. A CHD composite outcome (CHD death, myocardial infarction [clinical or serial ECG change], CHF, or coronary artery surgery) was experienced by 520 SI and 602 UC men (SI/UC hazard ratio = 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.97; P=0.01). A CVD composite outcome (CHD [as above], other CVD deaths, stroke, or renal impairment) was experienced by 581 SI and 652 UC men (hazard ratio = 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.79–0.99; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In post hoc analyses, composite fatal/nonfatal CHD and CVD rates over 7 years were significantly lower for SI than for UC. These findings reinforce recommendations for improved dietary/lifestyle practices, with pharmacological therapy as needed, to prevent and control major CVD risk factors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3541632
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35416322013-01-11 Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial Stamler, Jeremiah Neaton, James D. Cohen, Jerome D. Cutler, Jeffrey Eberly, Lynn Grandits, Gregory Kuller, Lewis H. Ockene, Judith Prineas, Ronald J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: The Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial evaluated a multifactor intervention on coronary heart disease (CHD) in 12 866 men. A priori defined endpoints (CHD death, CHD death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiovascular disease [CVD] death, and all-cause death) did not differ significantly between the special intervention (SI) and usual care (UC) groups over an average follow-up period of 7 years. Event rates were lower than anticipated, reducing power. Other nonfatal CVD outcomes were prespecified but not considered in composite outcomes comparing SI with UC. METHODS AND RESULTS: Post-trial CVD mortality risks associated with nonfatal CVD events occurring during the trial were determined with Cox regression. Nonfatal outcomes associated with >2-fold risk of CVD death over the subsequent 20 years were combined with during-trial deaths to create 2 new composite outcomes. SI/UC hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for each composite outcome. Of 10 during-trial nonfatal events, 6 were associated (P<0.001) with >2-fold risk of CVD death. A CHD composite outcome (CHD death, myocardial infarction [clinical or serial ECG change], CHF, or coronary artery surgery) was experienced by 520 SI and 602 UC men (SI/UC hazard ratio = 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76–0.97; P=0.01). A CVD composite outcome (CHD [as above], other CVD deaths, stroke, or renal impairment) was experienced by 581 SI and 652 UC men (hazard ratio = 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.79–0.99; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In post hoc analyses, composite fatal/nonfatal CHD and CVD rates over 7 years were significantly lower for SI than for UC. These findings reinforce recommendations for improved dietary/lifestyle practices, with pharmacological therapy as needed, to prevent and control major CVD risk factors. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3541632/ /pubmed/23316301 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.112.003640 Text en © 2012 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley-Blackwell. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an Open Access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Research
Stamler, Jeremiah
Neaton, James D.
Cohen, Jerome D.
Cutler, Jeffrey
Eberly, Lynn
Grandits, Gregory
Kuller, Lewis H.
Ockene, Judith
Prineas, Ronald
Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial
title Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial
title_full Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial
title_fullStr Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial
title_full_unstemmed Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial
title_short Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Revisited: A New Perspective Based on Nonfatal and Fatal Composite Endpoints, Coronary and Cardiovascular, During the Trial
title_sort multiple risk factor intervention trial revisited: a new perspective based on nonfatal and fatal composite endpoints, coronary and cardiovascular, during the trial
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3541632/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23316301
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.112.003640
work_keys_str_mv AT stamlerjeremiah multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT neatonjamesd multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT cohenjeromed multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT cutlerjeffrey multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT eberlylynn multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT granditsgregory multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT kullerlewish multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT ockenejudith multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT prineasronald multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial
AT multipleriskfactorinterventiontrialrevisitedanewperspectivebasedonnonfatalandfatalcompositeendpointscoronaryandcardiovascularduringthetrial