Author + information
- Received February 6, 2017
- Accepted February 27, 2017
- Published online May 1, 2017.
- Alexander C. Fanaroff, MDa,b,
- Stefan K. James, MDc,
- Giora Weisz, MDd,e,f,
- Kristi Prather, MPHb,
- Kevin J. Anstrom, PhDb,
- Daniel B. Mark, MD, MPHa,b,
- Ori Ben-Yehuda, MDe,
- Karen P. Alexander, MDa,b,∗ (, )
- Gregg W. Stone, MDd,e and
- E. Magnus Ohman, MDa,b
- aDepartment of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
- bDuke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
- cDepartment of Medical Sciences and Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
- dDivision of Cardiology, Columbia University, New York, New York
- eCardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, New York
- fDepartment of Cardiology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
- ↵∗Address for correspondence:
Dr. Karen P. Alexander, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, North Carolina 27705.
Background Chronic angina is more common in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) with poor glucose control. Ranolazine both treats chronic angina and improves glucose control.
Objectives This study sought to examine ranolazine’s antianginal effect in relation to glucose control.
Methods The authors performed a secondary analysis of the RIVER-PCI (Ranolazine in Patients with Incomplete Revascularization after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, a clinical trial in which 2,604 patients with chronic angina and incomplete revascularization following percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to ranolazine versus placebo. Mixed-effects models were used to compare the effects of ranolazine versus placebo on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Interaction between baseline HbA1c and ranolazine’s effect on Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency at 6 and 12 months was tested.
Results Overall, 961 patients (36.9%) had DM at baseline. Compared with placebo, ranolazine significantly decreased HbA1c by 0.42 ± 0.08% (adjusted mean difference ± SE) and 0.44 ± 0.08% from baseline to 6 and 12 months, respectively, in DM patients, and by 0.19 ± 0.02% and 0.20 ± 0.02% at 6 and 12 months, respectively, in non-DM patients. Compared with placebo, ranolazine significantly reduced Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency at 6 months among DM patients but not at 12 months. The reductions in angina frequency were numerically greater among patients with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% than those with HbA1c <7.5% (interaction p = 0.07).
Conclusions In patients with DM and chronic angina with incomplete revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention, ranolazine’s effect on glucose control and angina at 6 months was proportionate to baseline HbA1c, but the effect on angina dissipated by 12 months.
More than 20% of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have coronary artery disease (CAD), and in patients with DM between 65 and 74 years of age, that proportion increases to 45% (1). Despite aggressive use of traditional secondary prevention medications, nearly 50% of adults with both DM and CAD have chronic angina, and those with poorer glucose control are more likely to have severe angina (2).
Ranolazine is an oral antianginal agent that acts to inhibit the late sodium ion current and, through that action, reduces calcium overload in the myocytes (3). Clinically, ranolazine has been shown to reduce angina frequency, particularly among patients with more frequent angina or DM (4–6). Unexpectedly, ranolazine has also been observed to reduce glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with and without DM (7). The hypothesized mechanism of ranolazine’s effect on HbA1c is through inhibition of sodium channels in pancreatic alpha cells (analogous to the myocardial action) but, in this case, resulting in reduced glucagon release (8). As patients with DM are particularly responsive to ranolazine’s antianginal properties, interactions between ranolazine’s effect on glucose and angina control are of particular interest (5,6).
The randomized RIVER-PCI (Ranolazine in Patients with Incomplete Revascularization after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial examined the utility of ranolazine in patients with a history of chronic angina that had incomplete revascularization following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (9). Compared with placebo, ranolazine did not reduce the rate of the trial’s primary endpoint, ischemia-driven revascularization or rehospitalization, nor did it improve measures of quality of life (QOL) or angina frequency. As part of the trial, glycometabolic parameters were prospectively collected from participants at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months to further understand the relationship between glucose control and antianginal efficacy. The results of this pre-specified substudy are reported here.
The RIVER-PCI trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 245 centers in 15 countries; the design and primary results have been published, as have the effects on angina burden and QOL (6,9,10). Briefly, patients with a history of chronic angina who had undergone PCI with resultant incomplete revascularization were randomized to receive ranolazine 1,000 mg twice daily or placebo. Chronic angina was defined as ≥2 episodes of typical angina with episodes occurring on ≥2 separate days between 30 days and 1 year prior to PCI. Qualifying PCI could be due either to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or stable angina, and patients could have additional angina within 30 days of their PCI. Incomplete revascularization was defined as the presence of at least 1 lesion with ≥50% diameter stenosis in a coronary artery ≥2.0 mm in diameter, in either a PCI-treated or nontreated vessel. In patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery, incomplete revascularization was defined as at least 1 ≥50% diameter stenosis in a nonbypassed coronary artery ≥2.0 mm in diameter or at least 1 ≥50% diameter stenosis in a bypass graft supplying an otherwise nonrevascularized territory. The primary endpoint of the RIVER-PCI trial was the cumulative rate of ischemia-driven hospitalization or revascularization.
Patient population and study procedures
The RIVER-PCI trial randomized 2,651 patients, stratified by ACS versus non-ACS, and DM versus no DM. Among those randomized, 2,604 patients who had a qualifying PCI and received at least 1 dose of study drug were included in the full efficacy analysis. For analyses of the effect of ranolazine on glycometabolic parameters, we included all patients in the full analysis set: 1,317 patients were randomized to receive ranolazine and 1,287 were randomized to receive placebo. Analyses of angina frequency were performed on patients with DM who participated in the QOL substudy; this population included 864 patients, of whom 432 were randomized to ranolazine and 422 to placebo. For all analyses, treatment group assignment was based on the intention-to-treat principle.
Patients were classified as having DM if they presented with a medical history of type 1 or type 2 DM as indicated on the study’s case report form, were taking a DM medication at the time of trial enrollment, or had a baseline HbA1c ≥6.5%. If patients met none of these criteria, then they were included in the group without DM. Patients without a prior diagnosis of DM who were not taking DM medications at the time of trial enrollment and were missing baseline HbA1c were included in the group without DM.
Due to the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between ranolazine and simvastatin, lovastatin, or metformin, patients in both the ranolazine and placebo groups were not allowed to take >1,000 mg metformin, >20 mg simvastatin, or >40 mg lovastatin daily; other statins could be used at any dose, and there were no restrictions on the use of any other DM medications. Treatment for secondary prevention of vascular events was left to the discretion of treating physicians; the protocol did not specify goals for lipid or glucose management.
Patients had study visits at baseline, as well as at 1, 6, and 12 months after randomization. At the baseline, 6-month, and 12-month visits, fasting blood samples were collected and processed at a central laboratory; HbA1c, blood glucose, and lipid profiles were measured at these time points. HbA1c was not measured at the 1-month visit because it is a marker of glucose control over the prior 6 to 8 weeks, and 1-month follow-up is not long enough to see the full effect that a medication might have on this parameter. At baseline, 57 patients (2.2%) had missing HbA1c data; 450 (17.3%) and 564 (21.7%) patients had missing HbA1c data at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Angina was assessed using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at baseline and at 1, 6, and 12 months. The SAQ angina frequency score is determined from 2 questions about angina frequency and nitroglycerin usage; scores range from 0 to 100, with 100 representing no angina and 0 representing very frequent angina (11).
Baseline characteristics for patients with and without DM were reported by treatment group, with categorical variables reported as number (percent) and continuous variables reported as median (interquartile range). Because randomization was stratified by DM status, no formal statistical comparisons were performed.
For HbA1c, descriptive statistics were generated for observed values, as well as the change from baseline at 6 and 12 months in all patients, and separately in patients with and without DM. Repeated measures mixed models with unstructured covariance matrices were used to compare least squares mean change in HbA1c from baseline between treatment groups at 6 and 12 months. The model included age, sex, race, baseline HbA1c, treatment group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction.
We determined the proportion of patients with new onset DM, defined as HbA1c ≥6.5% or a reported adverse event indicating type 2 DM, at 6 and 12 months among patients without DM at baseline and who had not died or discontinued from the study prior to the respective study month. Among patients with and without DM who had HbA1c measured at baseline and at 6 and 12 months, we determined the proportion with worsening glucose control, defined as an increase in HbA1c ≥1%. To test the association between randomized treatment strategy and the incidence of new onset DM or worsening glucose control, a logistic regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex, race, and randomized treatment, was performed for each endpoint at 6 and 12 months.
To explore the effect of ranolazine on angina frequency in patients with DM only, as well as the effect of baseline HbA1c on this effect, we generated descriptive statistics for SAQ angina frequency score at baseline and 1, 6, and 12 months, as well as change from baseline data at each time point. To place these results into clinical context, we also determined the percentage of patients with no angina (SAQ angina frequency score = 100), monthly angina (61 to 99), weekly angina (31 to 60), and daily angina (0 to 30) in the ranolazine and placebo arms at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Using a repeated measures mixed model with an unstructured covariance matrix, we tested the association between treatment group and least squares mean change from baseline SAQ angina frequency score at 1, 6, and 12 months. Terms for age, sex, race, baseline angina, treatment group, visit, and treatment-by-visit interaction were included in the model. We repeated this analysis for baseline glucose control subgroups with HbA1c ≥ and <6.5%, 7.0%, 7.5%, and 8.0%. Tests for interaction between SAQ angina frequency and HbA1c subgroup were performed. To explore the effect of sex on ranolazine’s impact on angina frequency, we repeated these analyses, testing for interaction between SAQ angina frequency and sex.
The investigators had full access to all data. Faculty and staff statisticians at the Duke Clinical Research Institute performed all analyses using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina).
Among 2,604 patients included in the full efficacy analysis, 961 (36.9%) had DM; 87.4% of patients with DM had a history of type 2 DM prior to trial enrollment, 3.4% had a history of type 1 DM, and the remainder were diagnosed at enrollment with HbA1c values ≥6.5%. For patients with and without DM, baseline characteristics were similar for patients randomized to ranolazine or placebo (Table 1). Overall, discontinuation of treatment by 12 months occurred in 25.1% of patients, and was more common among those randomized to ranolazine versus placebo at 6-month (21.0% vs. 14.6%) and 12-month (28.0% vs. 22.1%) follow-up. Among patients with DM, discontinuation of treatment occurred in 30.6%, and was more common among those randomized to ranolazine versus placebo at 6 months (26.6% vs. 17.9%) and 12 months (34.6% vs. 26.5%). Among patients randomized to ranolazine, the rate of treatment discontinuation at 12 months was greater for patients with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% than for patients with baseline HbA1c <7.5% (40.2% vs. 30.9%).
Compared with patients without DM, patients with DM were older, heavier, and more likely to be women. They had a higher prevalence of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, chronic kidney disease, and peripheral arterial disease. Patients with DM were less likely to have undergone index PCI for an ACS indication. Angina frequency at the time of enrollment was similar in patients with and without DM.
Effect of ranolazine on glycometabolic parameters
Overall, HbA1c remained stable in placebo-treated patients from baseline to 6 and 12 months (6.3 ± 1.3% at all 3 time periods), but on average decreased in ranolazine-treated patients (6.3 ± 1.4% at baseline, 6.0 ± 1.2% at 6 months, and 6.1 ± 1.2% at 12 months) (Figure 1). A statistically significant reduction in HbA1c among ranolazine-treated patients was present in those with and without DM. The least squares mean difference in HbA1c (± SE) for patients randomized to ranolazine compared with those randomized to placebo was −0.28 ± 0.03% at 6 months and −0.29 ± 0.03% at 12 months. The least squares mean reduction in HbA1c for ranolazine compared with placebo was greater in patients with DM (0.42 ± 0.08% and 0.44 ± 0.08% decrease at 6 and 12 months, respectively) when compared with patients without DM (0.19 ± 0.02% and 0.20 ± 0.02% decrease at 6 and 12 months, respectively; p < 0.001 for interaction at both time points).
Among patients without DM at baseline, patients treated with ranolazine compared with placebo had a significantly lower incidence of new DM diagnoses at 6-month follow-up, but not at 12 months (Table 2). Patients randomized to ranolazine were significantly less likely than were placebo patients to have an increase in HbA1c ≥1% at 6-month follow-up (30.2% vs. 52.9%; p < 0.001) and at 12-month follow-up (29.1% vs. 51.8%; p < 0.001) (Table 2), which was similar in patients with and without DM (interaction p = 0.220 at 6 months and interaction p = 0.248 at 12 months).
Effect of ranolazine on angina frequency in patients with DM
Patients with DM had a substantial reduction in angina frequency, regardless of randomized treatment (Online Table 1). At 6 months, 192 patients (53.3%) randomized to ranolazine had resolution of angina, compared with 179 (49.6%) randomized to placebo (Online Table 2). From baseline to 1 month, ranolazine-treated DM patients had an increase (improvement) in SAQ angina frequency score of 18.9 versus 16.8 for placebo-treated patients (least squares mean difference: 2.15; p = 0.11). SAQ angina frequency score, adjusted for baseline score, improved in patients randomized to ranolazine compared with those randomized to placebo at 6 months (88.3 vs. 85.4; least squares mean difference: 2.86; p = 0.033), but this difference did not persist at 12 months (least squares mean difference: 1.77; 88.2 vs. 86.6; p = 0.18). Outcomes among patients without DM have been previously reported and showed no significant difference in SAQ angina frequency score between patients randomized to ranolazine or placebo at any time point (6).
Among patients with DM and worse blood glucose control at baseline (HbA1c ≥7.5%), randomization to ranolazine reduced angina; treatment with ranolazine was associated with less angina and better SAQ angina frequency scores at 1 month (87.9 vs. 83.5 for ranolazine vs. placebo; p = 0.036) and 6 months (89.7 vs. 83.9; p = 0.008), but not 12 months (86.0 vs. 85.1; p = 0.68). The least squares mean difference ± SE in SAQ angina frequency score between ranolazine- and placebo-treated patients was 4.40 ± 2.08 at 1 month, 5.80 ± 2.17 at 6 months, and 0.98 ± 2.39 at 12 months in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% (Figure 2). By contrast, in patients with diabetes and HbA1c <7.5% at baseline, SAQ angina frequency score was not significantly different for patients randomized to ranolazine and placebo at all follow-up intervals. Interaction between HbA1c subgroup and treatment assignment revealed a trend toward greater effect on angina among patients with worse glucose control at baseline (p = 0.074), but this effect dissipated by 12 months. When we analyzed treatment by subgroup interactions for different HbA1c cutoffs (≥ and <6.5%, 7.0%, 7.5%, and 8.0%) at 6 months, the adjusted mean improvement in SAQ angina frequency from baseline for ranolazine compared with placebo was numerically greatest in patients with worse baseline blood glucose control; however, interaction testing between HbA1c subgroup and treatment assignment was not significant (Online Figure 1). Similar to the results for patients with HbA1c ≥7.5% and <7.5%, this benefit was not observed at 12 months.
No difference in ranolazine’s effect on SAQ angina frequency was noted by sex (p for interaction = 0.91 at 1 month, 0.98 at 6 months, and 0.85 at 12 months). Subgroup analysis within regions (North America, Israel and Western Europe, Russia and Eastern Europe) demonstrated findings consistent with the overall results.
In this pre-specified secondary analysis from the RIVER-PCI trial, treatment with ranolazine reduced HbA1c among patients with and without DM, with a greater absolute treatment effect in patients with DM. Ranolazine also reduced the incidence of worsening glucose control among all patients and new DM among patients without DM at baseline. This study confirmed the glycometabolic effects of ranolazine, now observed across several randomized clinical trials (12–15), including the RIVER-PCI trial. In addition to glycometabolic effects, ranolazine had a significant effect on angina frequency in patients with DM at 6 months as measured by the SAQ angina frequency score, with numerically greater efficacy at higher levels of baseline HbA1c, providing additional insight into the antianginal effects at 6 months seen in the main trial results; however, ranolazine’s effect on SAQ angina frequency dissipated at 12 months and was not significant (Central Illustration). These findings suggest a particular benefit of ranolazine for chronic angina among patients with DM and poor glucose control.
Ranolazine has been evaluated in 9 clinical trials, including 6 in patients with CAD (4,12–19). Six of these trials (including the RIVER-PCI trial) have reported the effects of ranolazine on HbA1c (Figure 3). Across these trials, the average absolute reduction in HbA1c with ranolazine versus placebo was approximately 0.45%, with a range from 0.11% to 0.70%. All trials found that ranolazine significantly reduced HbA1c, except for 1 study that enrolled only metformin-treated patients and reduced the dose of metformin in the ranolazine arm, but not the placebo arm. Several potential mechanisms underlying ranolazine’s effect on glucose control have been examined. Ranolazine preserves pancreatic β-cell mass in streptozocin-treated mice by unclear molecular mechanisms (20), reduces glucagon secretion via inhibition of sodium channels (8), and diminishes fatty acid oxygenation in the liver, shifting the liver’s energy source from fatty acids to glucose (21). Ranolazine also increases steady-state metformin concentrations in the serum (22) and some of ranolazine’s effect on HbA1c seen in our study may be mediated by potentiation of metformin’s effect, though this mechanism would not explain ranolazine’s effect on HbA1c in patients without DM. The results of the present analysis, combined with the emerging mechanistic data, reinforce the results of prior trials of ranolazine’s glucose-lowering efficacy in patients with CAD.
In addition to confirming the effect of ranolazine on glycometabolic parameters, we also confirm its particular antianginal efficacy in patients with DM and poor glucose control. In the MERLIN TIMI-36 (Metabolic Efficiency With Ranolazine for Less Ischemia in Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 36) trial, ranolazine reduced recurrent ischemia at 12 months by 25% in patients with DM, compared with 13% among all trial participants (13). In the TERISA (Type 2 Diabetes Evaluation in Patients with Chronic Stable Angina) trial, which only enrolled patients with type 2 DM, ranolazine significantly reduced the number of weekly angina episodes over 8 weeks of follow-up (17), with greater efficacy in patients with higher baseline HbA1c (5). In our study, patients with HbA1c ≥7.5% had a significant reduction in angina burden, which was not seen in patients with HbA1c <7.5%; however, this benefit persisted only through 6 months and was not present at 12 months. The improvements in mean SAQ angina frequency score at 6 months for all patients with DM (∼3) and those with baseline HbA1c ≥7.5% (∼6) were modest, but similar to those seen with PCI compared with medical therapy in clinical trials enrolling patients with obstructive CAD (23). The large proportion of patients who were asymptomatic or had minimal angina following index PCI also reduced the potential impact of ranolazine on angina frequency.
The exact reason for lack of a benefit at 12 months is unclear, but ranolazine was discontinued more often than placebo over time, diminishing its effect at longer duration of follow-up in analyses performed using the intention-to-treat principle. Moreover, fewer patients completed SAQ angina frequency questionnaires over time (sample size decreased from 848 patients at baseline to 656 patients), reducing statistical power to detect a significant difference. Also, if ranolazine’s effect on angina and glucose were proportionate, as might be suggested by these data, the metabolic effects of ranolazine were greatest at 6 months and are unlikely to change more with longer follow-up. Finally, angina is not a static condition, and angina in most patients resolves over time with or without changes in treatments (6), making differences most likely to be observed sooner after the angina population is identified. Dissipation of ranolazine’s reduction in angina frequency by 12 months raises questions about the benefits of long-term use.
While the specific mechanisms explaining ranolazine’s particular efficacy in patients with DM are unclear, several mechanisms can be considered. Ranolazine reduces angina frequency more effectively in patients with a greater baseline angina burden (6) and patients with worse blood glucose control have more severe CAD, impaired endothelial cell function, increased inflammation, and reduced collateralization (24–27). Cardiac myocytes from diabetic mice have increased sodium influx due to a reduction in phosphoinositide 3-kinase signaling (28), perhaps making them more susceptible to ranolazine’s action as a sodium-channel inhibitor (3). Ranolazine also increases serum concentrations of metoprolol in extensive cytochrome 2D6 metabolizers (29), which may potentiate its effect, though this would not explain differential efficacy in patients with worse baseline blood glucose control.
First, we evaluated the effect of ranolazine on multiple separate glycometabolic parameters and also evaluated the effect of ranolazine in a subgroup of patients from a clinical trial with a neutral primary outcome, which raises concerns about the interpretation of any single p value. Nonetheless, the analysis of changes in HbA1c with ranolazine was pre-specified, consistent with previous reports, and biologically plausible, lending credence to these conclusions. Second, although our study of ranolazine’s glycometabolic effects was prospectively designed, it was ancillary to the main objectives of the RIVER-PCI trial, and some patients did not have HbA1c measured at baseline and follow-up. However, the number of patients without HbA1c measurements was small and unlikely to qualitatively affect our conclusions. Moreover, glycometabolic data were collected from >75% of patients at all follow-up visits, analyses were performed at a central laboratory, reliable baseline HbA1c testing allowed patients without previously diagnosed DM to be included in the DM group for all analyses, and patients were all followed for 12 months. Finally, more than 1 in 4 patients in the ranolazine arm discontinued treatment by 12 months; treatment discontinuation obscures study drug effects as analyzed with intention to treat. Thus, our results might have underestimated the effect of ranolazine on glucose control and angina in patients with DM who are adherent to therapy at longer follow-up intervals.
Ranolazine significantly lowered HbA1c and lessened the new onset of DM in RIVER-PCI trial patients, including those with and without DM. Moreover, ranolazine was numerically more effective at reducing angina frequency at 6 months (but not 12 months) in patients with diabetes with HbA1c ≥7.5% and incomplete revascularization, suggesting a possible synergy between the drug’s effect on angina and glucose control.
COMPETENCY IN MEDICAL KNOWLEDGE: Beyond its antianginal properties, ranolazine has effects on glucose metabolism, lowering HbA1c and reducing the incidence of DM.
COMPETENCY IN PATIENT CARE AND PROCEDURAL SKILLS: Ranolazine may be particularly effective for patients with poorly controlled DM who experience angina pectoris.
TRANSLATIONAL OUTLOOK: Future studies are needed to confirm the interaction between the antianginal effects of ranolazine and glucose control and elucidate potential mechanisms.
The authors thank Erin Campbell, MS, for expert editorial assistance. Ms. Campbell did not receive payment for her assistance, apart from her employment at the institution where this study was conducted.
For supplemental tables and a figure, please see the online version of the article.
The RIVER-PCI trial was sponsored by Gilead Sciences, Inc., and is cofunded by the Menarini Group. Dr. Fanaroff has received research funding from Gilead Sciences through the Duke Clinical Research Institute (outside of this work) and grant support from National Institutes of Health grant no. 5T32HL069749. Drs. James, Weisz, and Alexander received grants from Gilead Sciences during the conduct of the study. Dr. Anstrom received grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences during the course of the study. Dr. Mark received grants from Gilead Sciences during the course of the study; has received grant support from Eli Lilly & Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Oxygen Therapeutics, Merck & Company, and Bayer; and has received personal fees from Medtronic and CardioDx. Dr. Ben-Yehuda received grants from the Cardiovascular Research Foundation during the conduct of the study; and from 2011 to 2013 he was an employee of Gilead Sciences (the sponsor of the study). Dr. Stone received grants from Cardiovascular Research Foundation during the conduct of the study; has received personal fees from Velomedix, Toray, Matrizyme, Miracor, TherOx, Reva, V-wave, Vascular Dynamics, Ablative Solutions, Neovasc, Medical Development Technologies; has received other funding from the MedFocus family of funds, Guided Delivery Systems, Micardia, Vascular Nonotransfer Technologies, Cagent, Qool Therapeutics, Caliber, Aria, and Biostar family of funds outside the submitted work; and has served as a consultant to prasugrel patent litigation paid for by Lupin Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Ohman received grants from Gilead Sciences during the conduct of the study; has received personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Biotie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Faculty Connection; has received grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceuticals; and has received personal fees from Merck, St. Jude Medical, Stealth Peptides, The Medicines Company, and Medscape outside the submitted work. Dr. Prather has reported that she has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, MPH, served as Guest Editor-in-Chief for this paper. Bernard R. Chaitman, MD, served as Guest Editor for this paper.
- Abbreviations and Acronyms
- acute coronary syndrome
- coronary artery disease
- diabetes mellitus
- glycosylated hemoglobin
- percutaneous coronary intervention
- quality of life
- Seattle Angina Questionnaire
- Received February 6, 2017.
- Accepted February 27, 2017.
- 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation
- ↵Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report: Estimates of Diabetes and its Burden in the United States, 2014. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/statsreport14/national-diabetes-report-web.pdf. Accessed November 18, 2016.
- Hui G.,
- Koch B.,
- Calara F.,
- Wong N.D.
- Chaitman B.R.
- Arnold S.V.,
- McGuire D.K.,
- Spertus J.A.,
- et al.
- Alexander K.P.,
- Weisz G.,
- Prather K.,
- et al.
- Dhalla A.K.,
- Yang M.,
- Ning Y.,
- et al.
- Weisz G.,
- Farzaneh-Far R.,
- Ben-Yehuda O.,
- et al.
- Arnold S.V.,
- Kosiborod M.,
- Li Y.,
- et al.
- Eckel R.H.,
- Henry R.R.,
- Yue P.,
- et al.
- Morrow D.A.,
- Scirica B.M.,
- Chaitman B.R.,
- et al.
- Pettus J.,
- McNabb B.,
- Eckel R.H.,
- et al.
- Timmis A.D.,
- Chaitman B.R.,
- Crager M.
- Kosiborod M.,
- Arnold S.V.,
- Spertus J.A.,
- et al.
- Chaitman B.R.,
- Skettino S.L.,
- Parker J.O.,
- et al.
- Stone P.H.,
- Gratsiansky N.A.,
- Blokhin A.,
- Huang I.-Z.,
- Meng L.,
- ERICA Investigators
- Ning Y.,
- Zhen W.,
- Fu Z.,
- et al.
- Zack J.,
- Berg A.,
- Juan A.,
- et al.
- Moura F.A.,
- Figueiredo V.N.,
- Teles B.S.,
- et al.
- Lu Z.,
- Jiang Y.P.,
- Wu C.Y.,
- et al.
- ↵(2015) Ranexa [package insert] (Gilead Sciences, Inc. Foster City, CA).