Elliott M. Antman

Bio: Elliott M. Antman is an academic researcher from Brigham and Women's Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Myocardial infarction & TIMI. The author has an hindex of 161, co-authored 716 publications receiving 179462 citations. Previous affiliations of Elliott M. Antman include Duke University & Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

Serum Levels of the Interleukin-1 Receptor Family Member ST2 Predict Mortality and Clinical Outcome in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Abstract: Background— Mechanically overloaded cardiomyocytes secrete a soluble interleukin-1 receptor family member called ST2. Serum levels of ST2 are associated with prognosis in nonischemic heart failure, but the predictive value of ST2 in patients with acute myocardial infarction is unknown. Methods and Results— ST2 levels were measured in serum from 810 patients with acute myocardial infarction in the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 14 (362 patients) and Enoxaparin and TNK-tPA With or Without GPIIb/IIIa Inhibitor as Reperfusion Strategy in STEMI (ENTIRE)-TIMI 23 (448 patients) clinical trials. Baseline levels of ST2 were significantly higher in those patients who died (0.379 versus 0.233 ng/mL, P=0.0001) or developed new congestive heart failure (0.287 versus 0.233 ng/mL, P=0.009) by 30 days. In an analysis of outcomes at 30 days by ST2 quartiles, both death (P=0.001) and the combined death/heart failure end point (P=0.001) showed a significant graded association with levels of ST2; furthermore, i...

Sodium, Blood Pressure, and Cardiovascular Disease Further Evidence Supporting the American Heart Association Sodium Reduction Recommendations

Abstract: Recent reports of selected observational studies and a meta-analysis have stirred controversy and have become the impetus for calls to abandon recommendations for reduced sodium intake by the US general population. A detailed review of these studies documents substantial methodological concerns that limit the usefulness of these studies in setting, much less reversing, dietary recommendations. Indeed, the evidence base supporting recommendations for reduced sodium intake in the general population remains robust and persuasive. The American Heart Association is committed to improving the health of all Americans through implementation of national goals for health promotion and disease prevention, including its recommendation to reduce dietary sodium intake to <1500 mg/d.

Knowledge and practices of generalist and specialist physicians regarding drug therapy for acute myocardial infarction

Abstract: Background The respective roles of generalist and specialist physicians in the care of patients are currently a matter of debate. Information is limited about the knowledge and practices of generalist and specialist physicians regarding conditions that both groups treat, such as myocardial infarction. Methods We therefore surveyed 1211 cardiologists, internists, and family practitioners in the states of New York and Texas about four treatments demonstrated by randomized clinical trials to be associated with improved survival after myocardial infarction (thrombolytic therapy, immediate and long-term use of aspirin, and long-term use of beta-blockers) and two treatments for which such evidence is lacking (diltiazem for patients with pulmonary congestion and prophylactic lidocaine). We asked physicians about the effect of each treatment on survival and the likelihood that they would prescribe each class of drugs. Results For the four beneficial treatments, the cardiologists believed more strongly than the in...

Randomized Comparison of Prasugrel (CS-747, LY640315), a Novel Thienopyridine P2Y12 Antagonist, With Clopidogrel in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Results of the Joint Utilization of Medications to Block Platelets Optimally (JUMBO)–TIMI 26 Trial

Abstract: Background— Despite the current standard antiplatelet regimen of aspirin and clopidogrel (with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors) in percutaneous coronary intervention patients, periprocedural and postprocedural ischemic events continue to occur. Prasugrel (CS-747, LY640315), a novel potent thienopyridine P2Y12 receptor antagonist, has the potential to achieve higher levels of inhibition of ADP-induced platelet aggregation than currently approved doses of clopidogrel. Methods and Results— Joint Utilization of Medications to Block Platelets Optimally–Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 26 (JUMBO-TIMI 26) was a phase 2, randomized, dose-ranging, double-blind safety trial of prasugrel versus clopidogrel in 904 patients undergoing elective or urgent percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomized to either standard dosing with clopidogrel or 1 of 3 prasugrel regimens. Subjects were monitored for 30 days for bleeding and clinical events. The primary end point of the trial was clinicall...

ACCF/ACG/AHA 2010 expert consensus document on the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors and thienopyridines: A focused update of the ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 expert consensus document on reducing the gastrointestinal risks of antiplatelet therapy and NSAID use: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents

Abstract: This expert consensus document was developed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF), the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), and the American Heart Association (AHA). Expert consensus documents inform practitioners, payers, and other interested parties of the opinion of ACCF and document cosponsors concerning evolving areas of clinical practice or medical technologies. Expert consensus documents cover topics for which the evidence base, experience with technology, or clinical practice is not considered sufficiently well developed to be evaluated by the formal ACCF/AHA Practice Guidelines process. Often, the topic is the subject of considerable ongoing investigation. Thus, the reader should view the expert consensus document as the best attempt of the ACCF and document cosponsors to inform clinical practice in areas where rigorous evidence may not yet be available. To avoid actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of industry relationships or personal interests among the writing committee, all members of the writing committee, as well as peer reviewers of the document, are asked to disclose all current healthcare-related relationships and those existing 12 months before initiation of the writing effort. The ACCF Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents (CECD) reviews these disclosures to determine which companies make products (on market or in development) that pertain to the document under development. Based on this information, a writing committee is formed to include a majority of members with no relevant relationships with industry (RWI), led by a chair with no relevant RWI. Authors with relevant RWI are not permitted to draft or vote on text or recommendations pertaining to their RWI. RWI are reviewed on all conference calls and updated as changes occur. Author and peer reviewer RWI pertinent to this document are disclosed in Appendixes 1 and 2, respectively. Additionally, to ensure complete transparency, …

Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

Abstract: Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice? Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis. Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4 Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted? A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …

The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration

Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report.

Abstract: "The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure" provides a new guideline for hypertension prevention and management. The following are the key messages(1) In persons older than 50 years, systolic blood pressure (BP) of more than 140 mm Hg is a much more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; (2) The risk of CVD, beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, doubles with each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; individuals who are normotensive at 55 years of age have a 90% lifetime risk for developing hypertension; (3) Individuals with a systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg or a diastolic BP of 80 to 89 mm Hg should be considered as prehypertensive and require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent CVD; (4) Thiazide-type diuretics should be used in drug treatment for most patients with uncomplicated hypertension, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes. Certain high-risk conditions are compelling indications for the initial use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers); (5) Most patients with hypertension will require 2 or more antihypertensive medications to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease); (6) If BP is more than 20/10 mm Hg above goal BP, consideration should be given to initiating therapy with 2 agents, 1 of which usually should be a thiazide-type diuretic; and (7) The most effective therapy prescribed by the most careful clinician will control hypertension only if patients are motivated. Motivation improves when patients have positive experiences with and trust in the clinician. Empathy builds trust and is a potent motivator. Finally, in presenting these guidelines, the committee recognizes that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

Abstract: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.