Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction

Sunil V. Rao; Uwe Zeymer; Pamela S. Douglas; Hussein Al-Khalidi; Jennifer A. White; Jingyu Liu; Howard Levy; Victor Guetta; C. Michael Gibson; Jean Francois Tanguay; Paul Vermeersch; Jérôme Roncalli; Jaroslaw D. Kasprzak; Timothy D. Henry; Norbert Frey; Oscar Kracoff; Jay H. Traverse; Derek P. Chew; Jose Lopez-Sendon; Reinilde Heyrman; Mitchell W. Krucoff

doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053

Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction

Sunil V. Rao, Uwe Zeymer, Pamela S. Douglas, Hussein Al-Khalidi, Jennifer A. White, Jingyu Liu, Howard Levy, Victor Guetta, C. Michael Gibson, Jean Francois Tanguay, Paul Vermeersch, Jérôme Roncalli, Jaroslaw D. Kasprzak, Timothy D. Henry, Norbert Frey, Oscar Kracoff, Jay H. Traverse, Derek P. Chew, Jose Lopez-Sendon, Reinilde HeyrmanMitchell W. Krucoff

Medicine - Cardiology Division

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

74 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background Bioabsorbable cardiac matrix (BCM) is a novel device that attenuates adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling after large myocardial infarctions in experimental models. Objectives This study aimed to analyze whether BCM, compared with saline control, would result in less LV dilation and fewer adverse clinical events between baseline and 6 months. Methods In an international, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 303 subjects with large areas of infarction despite successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were randomized 2:1 to BCM or saline injected into the infarct-related artery 2 to 5 days after primary PCI. The primary outcome was mean change from baseline in LV end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, 6-minute walk time, and New York Heart Association functional class at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, target-vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, significant arrhythmia requiring therapy, or myocardial rupture through 6 months. Results In total, 201 subjects were assigned to BCM and 102 to saline control. There was no significant difference in change in LVEDVI from baseline to 6 months between the groups (mean change ± SD: BCM 14.1 ± 28.9 ml/m² vs. saline 11.7 ± 26.9 ml/m²; p = 0.49). There was also no significant difference in the secondary endpoints. The rates of the primary safety outcome were similar between the 2 groups (BCM 11.6% vs. saline 9.1%; p = 0.37). Conclusions Intracoronary deployment of BCM 2 to 5 days after successful reperfusion in subjects with large myocardial infarction did not reduce adverse LV remodeling or cardiac clinical events at 6 months.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	715-723
Number of pages	9
Journal	Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume	68
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053
State	Published - Aug 1 2016

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The PRESERVATION I trial was funded by Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Three former Bellerophon employees participated as coauthors (Drs. Liu, Levy, and Heyrman). Dr. Rao has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Zeymer has received honoraria for participation at steering committee meetings of PRESERVATION I. Dr. Douglas has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Levy is a contractor for and was a consultant to Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. during the conduct of this study; and owns stock options in the company. Dr. Gibson has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Tanguay’s institution received payment from the Duke Clinical Research Institute for the PRESERVATION I trial; and he has received funding as a steering committee member; and has received a research grant from Ikaria-Bellerophon. Dr. Kasprzak has received investigator fees from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Henry is a steering committee member for the PRESERVATION I study. Dr. Chew has received speaker honoraria from Medscape and AstraZeneca. Dr. Lopez-Sendon has received research grants from Daiichi-Sankyo, GSK, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, the Menarini Group, Pfizer, Merck, and AstraZeneca; and has been an advisor for or received honoraria from Amgen, the Menarini Group, Merck, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, and AstraZeneca. Dr. Heyrman was an employee of Ikaria-Bellerophon at the time of the study; and owns stock in Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Krucoff has received research grant support from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation

Keywords

alginate
congestive heart failure
deployment
echocardiography
end-diastolic volume

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access

10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

Rao, S. V., Zeymer, U., Douglas, P. S., Al-Khalidi, H., White, J. A., Liu, J., Levy, H., Guetta, V., Gibson, C. M., Tanguay, J. F., Vermeersch, P., Roncalli, J., Kasprzak, J. D., Henry, T. D., Frey, N., Kracoff, O., Traverse, J. H., Chew, D. P., Lopez-Sendon, J., ... Krucoff, M. W. (2016). Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 68(7), 715-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053

Rao, SV, Zeymer, U, Douglas, PS, Al-Khalidi, H, White, JA, Liu, J, Levy, H, Guetta, V, Gibson, CM, Tanguay, JF, Vermeersch, P, Roncalli, J, Kasprzak, JD, Henry, TD, Frey, N, Kracoff, O, Traverse, JH, Chew, DP, Lopez-Sendon, J, Heyrman, R & Krucoff, MW 2016, 'Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction', Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 715-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053

@article{6696f66c1b9b4a21b8951cd9c5c4d53d,

title = "Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction",

abstract = "Background Bioabsorbable cardiac matrix (BCM) is a novel device that attenuates adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling after large myocardial infarctions in experimental models. Objectives This study aimed to analyze whether BCM, compared with saline control, would result in less LV dilation and fewer adverse clinical events between baseline and 6 months. Methods In an international, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 303 subjects with large areas of infarction despite successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were randomized 2:1 to BCM or saline injected into the infarct-related artery 2 to 5 days after primary PCI. The primary outcome was mean change from baseline in LV end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, 6-minute walk time, and New York Heart Association functional class at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, target-vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, significant arrhythmia requiring therapy, or myocardial rupture through 6 months. Results In total, 201 subjects were assigned to BCM and 102 to saline control. There was no significant difference in change in LVEDVI from baseline to 6 months between the groups (mean change ± SD: BCM 14.1 ± 28.9 ml/m2 vs. saline 11.7 ± 26.9 ml/m2; p = 0.49). There was also no significant difference in the secondary endpoints. The rates of the primary safety outcome were similar between the 2 groups (BCM 11.6% vs. saline 9.1%; p = 0.37). Conclusions Intracoronary deployment of BCM 2 to 5 days after successful reperfusion in subjects with large myocardial infarction did not reduce adverse LV remodeling or cardiac clinical events at 6 months.",

keywords = "alginate, congestive heart failure, deployment, echocardiography, end-diastolic volume",

author = "Rao, {Sunil V.} and Uwe Zeymer and Douglas, {Pamela S.} and Hussein Al-Khalidi and White, {Jennifer A.} and Jingyu Liu and Howard Levy and Victor Guetta and Gibson, {C. Michael} and Tanguay, {Jean Francois} and Paul Vermeersch and J{\'e}r{\^o}me Roncalli and Kasprzak, {Jaroslaw D.} and Henry, {Timothy D.} and Norbert Frey and Oscar Kracoff and Traverse, {Jay H.} and Chew, {Derek P.} and Jose Lopez-Sendon and Reinilde Heyrman and Krucoff, {Mitchell W.}",

note = "Funding Information: The PRESERVATION I trial was funded by Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Three former Bellerophon employees participated as coauthors (Drs. Liu, Levy, and Heyrman). Dr. Rao has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Zeymer has received honoraria for participation at steering committee meetings of PRESERVATION I. Dr. Douglas has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Levy is a contractor for and was a consultant to Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. during the conduct of this study; and owns stock options in the company. Dr. Gibson has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Tanguay{\textquoteright}s institution received payment from the Duke Clinical Research Institute for the PRESERVATION I trial; and he has received funding as a steering committee member; and has received a research grant from Ikaria-Bellerophon. Dr. Kasprzak has received investigator fees from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Henry is a steering committee member for the PRESERVATION I study. Dr. Chew has received speaker honoraria from Medscape and AstraZeneca. Dr. Lopez-Sendon has received research grants from Daiichi-Sankyo, GSK, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, the Menarini Group, Pfizer, Merck, and AstraZeneca; and has been an advisor for or received honoraria from Amgen, the Menarini Group, Merck, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, and AstraZeneca. Dr. Heyrman was an employee of Ikaria-Bellerophon at the time of the study; and owns stock in Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Krucoff has received research grant support from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation",

year = "2016",

month = aug,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "68",

pages = "715--723",

journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",

issn = "0735-1097",

publisher = "Elsevier USA",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction

AU - Rao, Sunil V.

AU - Zeymer, Uwe

AU - Douglas, Pamela S.

AU - Al-Khalidi, Hussein

AU - White, Jennifer A.

AU - Liu, Jingyu

AU - Levy, Howard

AU - Guetta, Victor

AU - Gibson, C. Michael

AU - Tanguay, Jean Francois

AU - Vermeersch, Paul

AU - Roncalli, Jérôme

AU - Kasprzak, Jaroslaw D.

AU - Henry, Timothy D.

AU - Frey, Norbert

AU - Kracoff, Oscar

AU - Traverse, Jay H.

AU - Chew, Derek P.

AU - Lopez-Sendon, Jose

AU - Heyrman, Reinilde

AU - Krucoff, Mitchell W.

N1 - Funding Information: The PRESERVATION I trial was funded by Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Three former Bellerophon employees participated as coauthors (Drs. Liu, Levy, and Heyrman). Dr. Rao has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Zeymer has received honoraria for participation at steering committee meetings of PRESERVATION I. Dr. Douglas has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Levy is a contractor for and was a consultant to Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. during the conduct of this study; and owns stock options in the company. Dr. Gibson has received research funding from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Tanguay’s institution received payment from the Duke Clinical Research Institute for the PRESERVATION I trial; and he has received funding as a steering committee member; and has received a research grant from Ikaria-Bellerophon. Dr. Kasprzak has received investigator fees from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Henry is a steering committee member for the PRESERVATION I study. Dr. Chew has received speaker honoraria from Medscape and AstraZeneca. Dr. Lopez-Sendon has received research grants from Daiichi-Sankyo, GSK, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, the Menarini Group, Pfizer, Merck, and AstraZeneca; and has been an advisor for or received honoraria from Amgen, the Menarini Group, Merck, Servier, Sanofi, Novartis, and AstraZeneca. Dr. Heyrman was an employee of Ikaria-Bellerophon at the time of the study; and owns stock in Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. Dr. Krucoff has received research grant support from Bellerophon Therapeutics Inc. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Publisher Copyright: © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Background Bioabsorbable cardiac matrix (BCM) is a novel device that attenuates adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling after large myocardial infarctions in experimental models. Objectives This study aimed to analyze whether BCM, compared with saline control, would result in less LV dilation and fewer adverse clinical events between baseline and 6 months. Methods In an international, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 303 subjects with large areas of infarction despite successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were randomized 2:1 to BCM or saline injected into the infarct-related artery 2 to 5 days after primary PCI. The primary outcome was mean change from baseline in LV end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, 6-minute walk time, and New York Heart Association functional class at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, target-vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, significant arrhythmia requiring therapy, or myocardial rupture through 6 months. Results In total, 201 subjects were assigned to BCM and 102 to saline control. There was no significant difference in change in LVEDVI from baseline to 6 months between the groups (mean change ± SD: BCM 14.1 ± 28.9 ml/m2 vs. saline 11.7 ± 26.9 ml/m2; p = 0.49). There was also no significant difference in the secondary endpoints. The rates of the primary safety outcome were similar between the 2 groups (BCM 11.6% vs. saline 9.1%; p = 0.37). Conclusions Intracoronary deployment of BCM 2 to 5 days after successful reperfusion in subjects with large myocardial infarction did not reduce adverse LV remodeling or cardiac clinical events at 6 months.

AB - Background Bioabsorbable cardiac matrix (BCM) is a novel device that attenuates adverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling after large myocardial infarctions in experimental models. Objectives This study aimed to analyze whether BCM, compared with saline control, would result in less LV dilation and fewer adverse clinical events between baseline and 6 months. Methods In an international, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, 303 subjects with large areas of infarction despite successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were randomized 2:1 to BCM or saline injected into the infarct-related artery 2 to 5 days after primary PCI. The primary outcome was mean change from baseline in LV end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, 6-minute walk time, and New York Heart Association functional class at 6 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, target-vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, significant arrhythmia requiring therapy, or myocardial rupture through 6 months. Results In total, 201 subjects were assigned to BCM and 102 to saline control. There was no significant difference in change in LVEDVI from baseline to 6 months between the groups (mean change ± SD: BCM 14.1 ± 28.9 ml/m2 vs. saline 11.7 ± 26.9 ml/m2; p = 0.49). There was also no significant difference in the secondary endpoints. The rates of the primary safety outcome were similar between the 2 groups (BCM 11.6% vs. saline 9.1%; p = 0.37). Conclusions Intracoronary deployment of BCM 2 to 5 days after successful reperfusion in subjects with large myocardial infarction did not reduce adverse LV remodeling or cardiac clinical events at 6 months.

KW - alginate

KW - congestive heart failure

KW - deployment

KW - echocardiography

KW - end-diastolic volume

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994753631&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994753631&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053

DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.053

M3 - Article

C2 - 27515331

AN - SCOPUS:84994753631

SN - 0735-1097

VL - 68

SP - 715

EP - 723

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

IS - 7

ER -

Bioabsorbable Intracoronary Matrix for Prevention of Ventricular Remodeling After Myocardial Infarction

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this