Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36206950›Full record

ArticleAmerican heart journal2022

ISCHEMIA-EXTEND studies: Rationale and design.

Rebecca Anthopolos, David J Maron, Sripal Bangalore, Harmony R Reynolds, Yifan Xu, Sean M O'Brien, Andrea B Troxel, Stavroula Mavromichalis, Michelle Chang, Aira Contreras and 2 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in American heart journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Rebecca AnthopolosNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY. Electronic address: rebecca.anthopolos@nyulangone.org.
David J MaronStanford University Department of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Sripal BangaloreNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Harmony R ReynoldsNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Yifan XuNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Sean M O'BrienDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC.
Andrea B TroxelNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Stavroula MavromichalisNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Michelle ChangNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Aira ContrerasNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
Judith S HochmanNYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY.
ISCHEMIA-EXTEND Research Group

Funding

Project-005UL1TR001445 · NCATS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI BREDELLA, MIRIAM ANTOINETTE, HOCHMAN, JUDITH S · 2015 to 2025
$103.5M
The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial EXTENDed Follow-up (EXTEND)R01HL149888 · NHLBI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI HOCHMAN, JUDITH S · 2021 to 2025
$10.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001445NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL149888
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe ISCHEMIA and the ISCHEMIA-CKD trials found no statistical difference in the primary clinical endpoint between initial invasive management and initial conservative management of patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate to severe ischemia on stress testing without or with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). In ISCHEMIA, there was numerically lower cardiovascular mortality but higher non-cardiovascular mortality with no significant difference in all-cause death with an initial invasive strategy when compared with a conservative strategy. However, an invasive strategy increased peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI) but decreased spontaneous MI with continued separation of curves over time, which potentially may lead to reduced risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Thus, the long-term effect of invasive management strategy on mortality remains unclear. In ISCHEMIA-CKD, the treatment and cause-specific mortality rates were similar during follow-up.

methodsFunded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the ISCHEMIA-EXTEND observational study is the long-term follow-up of surviving participants (projected median of 10 years) with chronic coronary disease from the ISCHEMIA trial. In the ISCHEMIA trial, 5,179 participants with moderate or severe stress-induced ischemia were randomized to initial invasive management with angiography, revascularization when feasible, and guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), or initial conservative management with GDMT alone and angiography reserved for failure of medical therapy. ISCHEMIA-CKD EXTEND is the long-term follow-up of surviving participants (projected median of 9 years) from the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, a companion trial that included 777 patients with advanced CKD. Ascertainment of death will be conducted via direct participant contact, medical record review, and/or vital status registry search. The overarching objective of long-term follow-up is to assess whether there are between-group differences in long-term all-cause, cardiovascular, and non-cardiovascular mortality, and increase precision around the treatment effect estimates for risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, and non-cardiovascular mortality. We will conduct Bayesian survival modeling to take advantage of rich inferences using the posterior distribution of the treatment effect.

conclusionsThe long-term effect of an initial invasive versus conservative strategy on all-cause, cardiovascular, and non-cardiovascular mortality will be assessed. The findings of ISCHEMIA-EXTEND and ISCHEMIA-CKD EXTEND will inform patients, practitioners, practice guidelines, and health policy.

Indexed as

Coronary DiseaseMyocardial InfarctionRenal Insufficiency, ChronicBayes TheoremExercise TestHumansObservational Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID36206950
PMCPMC9880872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.