Evidence Hub

Association of Initial and Serial C-Reactive Protein Levels With Adverse Cardiovascular Events and Death After Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Secondary Analysis of the VISTA-16 Trial

P. Mani, R. Puri, Gregory G. Schwartz, Steven E. Nissen, M. Shao, J. Kastelein, V. Menon, A. Lincoff et al.

JAMA cardiology, 2019

5,145 participants · 119 citations

Abstract

Importance Higher baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes. The usefulness of serial hsCRP measurements for risk stratifying patients after ACS is not well characterized. Objective To assess whether longitudinal increases in hsCRP measurements during the 16 weeks after ACS are independently associated with a greater risk of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), all-cause death, and cardiovascular death. Design, Setting, and Participants Secondary analysis of the double-blind, multicenter, randomized clinical Vascular Inflammation Suppression to Treat Acute Coronary Syndromes for 16 Weeks (VISTA-16) trial conducted between June 1, 2010, and March 7, 2012 (study termination on March 9, 2012), which included 5145 patients from 362 academic and community hospitals in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, India, and North America assigned to receive varespladib or placebo on a background of atorvastatin treatment beginning within 96 hours of presentation with an ACS. The present study evaluated data from patients with available baseline and longitudinal hsCRP levels measured at weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 after randomization to treatment or placebo. Statistical analysis was performed from June 15, 2018, through September 15, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures Outcomes were MACE (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or unstable angina with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 5,145 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free