Lazar, Ronald M.

Background: Data from the CDC show that approximately one-quarter of adults have elevated triglyceride (TG) levels. Recent trials have demonstrated that pharmacologic treatment of high TG levels, in patients already on statin therapy, reduces the rate of major vascular events such as myocardial infarction and stroke (REDUCE-IT trial). We sought to assess how often patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (CS) have elevated TG levels and factors associated with high TG values. Methods: Patients enrolled in the Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial (CREST 2) were analyzed. Baseline lipid profiles were evaluated to determine high TG treatment eligibility as per the REDUCE-IT trial. We also evaluated baseline use of pharmacologic treatment for high TG levels. Demographic factors and baseline medical conditions were studied in relation to high (>150 mg/dl) TG values. Chi square and t tests were used to assess baseline factors and abnormal TG values. Results: As of August 10, 2020, 1655 of 1689 randomized patients (mean age 69.7 years, 61% men) had baseline lipid profiles suitable for analysis. Treatment eligibility according to REDUCE-IT (LDL 41-100 mg/dl, TG>150 mg/dl) was present in 21% (345) of subjects. In these patients, the median TG value was 205 (IQR 93) mg/dl. Fibrate medications were used at baseline in 4.5% of patients. Analysis of demographic and medical history factors and TG values greater than 150 mg/dl is found in the Table. There was significant positive correlation between baseline hemoglobin A1C and triglyceride values (p<0.0001) Conclusions: One in five patients in CREST 2 has TG values that potentially justify pharmacologic treatment. Elevated TG levels are most correlated with diabetes, hypertension, obesity, decreased physical activity, and heart disease. Clinicians should investigate treatment of elevated TG levels as a component of intensive medical therapy for stroke prevention.

Background: The importance of physical activity in preventing major vascular events has received increased attention in the past decade. Due to the inclusion of the INTERVENT lifestyle modification program, the CREST2 trial provides a unique opportunity to study physical activity profiles in patients with severe asymptomatic extracranial carotid stenosis. Hypothesis: Based on data from a trial of intracranial stenosis patients, we aimed to evaluate the hypothesis that <40% of carotid stenosis subjects will have optimal physical activity levels. We also assessed key subgroups to determine patterns of physical activity. Methods: We analyzed 1087 CREST2 participants with baseline data on physical activity. The Physician-based Assessment and Counseling for Exercise (PACE) score is recorded for each patient and dichotomized as “in target” (4-8 points) or “out of target” (<4 points). A PACE score of <4 indicates a subject who does not engage in regular exercise. Results are analyzed for the entire trial. Chi square testing and t-tests were performed for evaluation of subgroup differences. Results: The mean age of the study population is 69.5±7.8 years (60% male). The median PACE score at baseline is 4.0 (mean 3.8±2.1; IQR 2 to 6). The Table shows baseline characteristics of patients by mean PACE score. Being male, not having diabetes mellitus, having a body mass index <30kg/m2, being a non-smoker, and not having a history of peripheral arterial disease were associated with significantly higher mean PACE scores (P<0.01). Conclusions: We have defined several patient groups with asymptomatic carotid stenosis that have suboptimal physical activity. These results provide opportunities for targeted efforts to improve primary stroke prevention. These baseline data will also allow investigators to determine if trial involvement and the INTERVENT program leads to improvement in the level of physical activity.

Background: In CREST2, intensive medical management of subjects’ vascular risk factors is overseen by the site Principal Investigator (PI) and implemented by a designated Medical Management Physician (MMP) and coordinator. These physicians have different specialties and experience with risk factor management. We sought to determine the relationship between risk factor control and PI and MMP specialty. Methods: Data on 613 patients with at least 1 follow-up visit from 105 CREST2 sites were used for these analyses. CREST2 sites were categorized based on both PI specialty and MMP specialty. Specialty of the site-designated primary MMP was used for sites with more than one MMP. We compared the percentage of patients in target at last follow-up visit for the primary risk factors, LDL < 70 mg/dL and SBP <140 mm Hg, among PI specialties and MMP specialties, using the chi-square test. Results: The table shows the number of patients by PI and MMP specialty, as well as their control of SBP and LDL. There were no significant differences in control of SBP or LDL by PI specialty. There was a trend toward an association between LDL control and MMP specialty, with higher rates of LDL control at sites with Internal Medicine MMP specialists and lower rates of control with Vascular Surgery MMPs. SBP control rates were not significantly different across MMP specialties. Conclusions: In this early analysis of risk factor control in the CREST2 study, site PI and MMP specialty did not have a significant effect on LDL and SBP during follow-up. This suggests that protocol care pathways are generalizable to diverse physicians.

Rationale For patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis, clinical investigations have focused on preventing cerebral infarction, yet stenosis that reduces cerebral blood flow may independently impair cognition. Whether revascularization of a hemodynamically significant carotid stenosis can alter the course of cognitive decline has never been investigated in the context of a randomized clinical trial. Hypothesis Among patients randomized in the Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis (CREST-2) trials, the magnitude of treatment differences (revascularization versus medical management alone) with regard to cognition will differ between those with flow impairment compared to those without flow impairment. Sample size We will enroll approximately 500 patients from CREST-2, of which we anticipate 100 will have hemodynamic impairment. We estimate 93% power to detect a clinically meaningful treatment difference of 0.5 SD. Methods and design We will use perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging to stratify by hemodynamic status. Linear regression will compare treatment differences, controlling for baseline cognitive status, age, depression, prior cerebral infarcts, silent infarction, white matter hyperintensity volume, and cerebral microbleeds. Study outcomes The primary outcome is change in cognition at one year. Secondary outcomes include silent infarction, change in white matter hyperintensity volume, number of cerebral microbleeds, and cortical thickness over one year. Discussion If cognitive impairment can be shown to be reversible by revascularization, then we can redefine “symptomatic carotid stenosis” to include cognitive impairment and identify a new population of patients likely to benefit from revascularization. Trial Registration US National Institutes of Health (NIH) clinicaltrials.gov NCT03121209

Rationale Trials conducted decades ago demonstrated that carotid endarterectomy by skilled surgeons reduced stroke risk in asymptomatic patients. Developments in carotid stenting and improvements in medical prevention of stroke caused by atherothrombotic disease challenge understanding of the benefits of revascularization. Aim Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial (CREST-2) will test whether carotid endarterectomy or carotid stenting plus contemporary intensive medical therapy is superior to intensive medical therapy alone in the primary prevention of stroke in patients with high-grade asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods and design CREST-2 is two multicenter randomized trials of revascularization plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone. One trial randomizes patients to carotid endarterectomy plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone; the other, to carotid stenting plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone. The risk factor targets of centrally directed intensive medical therapy are LDL cholesterol <70 mg/dl and systolic blood pressure <140 mmHg. Study outcomes The primary outcome is the composite of stroke and death within 44 days following randomization and stroke ipsilateral to the target vessel thereafter, up to four years. Change in cognition and differences in major and minor stroke are secondary outcomes. Sample size Enrollment of 1240 patients in each trial provides 85% power to detect a treatment difference if the event rate in the intensive medical therapy alone arm is 4.8% higher or 2.8% lower than an anticipated 3.6% rate in the revascularization arm. Discussion Management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis requires contemporary randomized trials to address whether carotid endarterectomy or carotid stenting plus intensive medical therapy is superior in preventing stroke beyond intensive medical therapy alone. Whether carotid endarterectomy or carotid stenting has favorable effects on cognition will also be tested. Trial registration United States National Institutes of Health Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02089217