Pexelizumab

Despite significant advances in the treatment of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), there remains a significant short-term and long-term increased mortality risk. Risk stratification to target those who may benefit from more intensive therapy postrevascularisation therefore remains an important goal. Risk stratification models in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have been researched for many years, but few risk scores have been developed and validated specifically for the STEMI population. Only 27% of the cohort for the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score was derived from those undergoing percutaneous intervention (PCI), and the GRACE score performs less accurately in those undergoing PCI compared with medical therapy. Nevertheless European1 (but not American2) guidelines recommend its use for clinical risk stratification in the STEMI cohort. Risk scores derived specifically for STEMI include the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue plasminogen activator to treat Occluded arteries (GUSTO) risk score, which was developed in the era of thrombolysis, while risk scores assessing mortality in primary PCI patients include the Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction (PAMI) risk score, Controlled Abciximab and Device Investigation to Lower Late Angioplasty Complications (CADILLAC) risk score, Assessment of Pexelizumab in Acute Myocardial Infarction (APEX-AMI) score, Soroka Acute Myocardial Infarction (SAMI) score, and the Zwolle risk score. Coelho-Lima and colleagues3 examine the prognostic value of troponin specifically in the STEMI population, a group where troponin is not used to guide initial treatment. Their major findings are that admission troponin, but not troponin measured 12 hours post-reperfusion, was a significant independent predictor of both inpatient or overall mortality, with a median follow-up time of over 4 years. The authors are to be commended for this large retrospective study—in particular, the clinical …

Introduction and Hypothesis. The role of inflammation is widely recognized in the pathogenesis of coronary artery disease. Research on animal models had shown the potential benefits of targeting specific inflammatory pathways. However, studies on human subjects are limited with small number of patients and no head-to-head comparisons. Methods. We conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that studied the effects of anti-inflammatory medications on cardiovascular outcomes of coronary artery disease patients. We searched the electronic database until March 2020 for relevant studies. Results. Nineteen trials examining the efficacy of eight anti-inflammatory medications (pexelizumab, anakinra, colchicine, darapladib, varespladib, canakinumab, inclacumab, and losmapimod) were selected for analysis. Overall, there is no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, revascularization, and major cardio and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) with the use of anti-inflammatory drugs. However, we found the use of colchicine significantly reduces the odds of developing stroke by approximately 75% (OR 0.26, CI 0.10-0.63). Colchicine use was also associated with a lower risk of revascularization and MACCE compared to the other agents. Our subgroup analyses comparing the timing of medication initiation (within 7 days vs. >7 days) and clinical presentation (ACS vs. non-ACS) revealed a significant reduction in the risk of recurrent MI in the group that received medication after seven days (OR 0.92, CI 0.86-0.99) and the non-ACS group (OR 0.88, CI 0.80-0.98). Conclusion. Although many anti-inflammatory medications have failed to reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes in the CAD population, selected medications show promise among subgroups of patients without ACS or after the first week following an acute ischemic event. Future studies examining the proper timing and targetable anti-inflammatory pathways are warranted.