4.5 Article

Rationale and design of the dal-OUTCOMES trial: Efficacy and safety of dalcetrapib in patients with recent acute coronary syndrome

期刊

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 158, 期 6, 页码 896-U34

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2009.09.017

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [T32 GM007185] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Despite contemporary therapies for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), morbidity and mortality remain high. Low levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol are common among patients with ACS and may contribute to ongoing risk. Strategies that raise levels of HDL cholesterol, such as inhibition of cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP), might reduce risk after ACS. Dal-OUTCOMES is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to test the hypothesis that CETP inhibition with dalcetrapib reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with recent ACS. Design The study will randomize approximately 15,600 patients to receive daily doses of dalcetrapib 600 mg or matching placebo, beginning 4 to 12 weeks after an index ACS event. There are no prespecified boundaries for HDL cholesterol levels at entry. Other elements of care, including management of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, are to follow best evidence-based practice. The primary efficacy measure is time to first occurrence of coronary heart disease death, nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring hospital admission, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or atherothrombotic stroke. The trial will continue until 1,600 primary end point events have occurred, all evaluable subjects have been followed for at least 2 years, and 80% of evaluable subjects have been followed for at least 2.5 years. Summary Dal-OUTCOMES will determine whether CETP inhibition with dalcetrapib, added to current evidence-based care, reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality after ACS. (Am Heart J 2009; 158: 896-901. e3.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据