A clinical and angiographic study of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Study design and rationale of the EXECUTIVE trial

Background Myocardial revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DESs) is emerging as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). First-generation DESs have yielded equivalent safety results at mid-term compared with surgery, but inferior efficacy in preventing the recurrence of ischemic symptoms. The outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with a second-generation everolimus DES as compared with a paclitaxel DES in patients with MV-CAD has not been established. Aim of the study The aim of the study is the assessment of the efficacy and performance of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of de-novo coronary artery lesions in patients with MV-CAD. Study design The study is composed of two parts: a prospective, double arm, randomized multicenter trial to assess the angiographic efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (EECSS) compared with the Taxus Liberté Paclitaxel Eluting Coronary Stent System (Taxus Liberté Stent) and a prospective, open-label, single arm, controlled registry to analyze the clinical efficacy and safety of XIENCE V EECSS at mid-term and long-term follow-up in patients treated for MV-CAD. Endpoints For the EXECUTIVE randomized trial, the primary endpoint is in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months. For the EXECUTIVE registry, the primary endpoint is a composite of all death, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 12 months. The study will be conducted at 30 study centers in Italy and 600 patients will be enrolled in total: 200 patients will be enrolled (1: 1) in the randomized trial and 400 patients will enter the registry. Sample size It was calculated that, assuming a mean in-stent late lumen loss of 0.20 ± 0.41 mm in the XIENCE V EECSS arm and 0.30 ± 0.53 mm in the Taxus Liberté stent arm, and a noninferiority margin delta of 0.12 (according to the SPIRIT III results), the analysis of 81 lesions per arm would provide over 90% power. Therefore, 200 patients will be enrolled to account for dropouts. Conclusion The present study is expected to provide as yet unavailable information about the performance of second-generation stents in the specific setting of patients with MV-CAD.

[1]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  S. Pocock,et al.  Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials , 2009, The Lancet.

[3]  G. Stone,et al.  Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents: Two-Year Clinical Follow-Up From the Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (SPIRIT) III Trial , 2009, Circulation.

[4]  R. Virmani,et al.  Drug-eluting stent safety: findings from preclinical studies , 2008, Expert review of cardiovascular therapy.

[5]  P. Serruys,et al.  Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stenting and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis With 5-Year Patient-Level Data From the ARTS, ERACI-II, MASS-II, and SoS Trials , 2008, Circulation.

[6]  J. Pepper,et al.  Randomized, Controlled Trial of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Six-Year Follow-Up From the Stent or Surgery Trial (SoS) , 2008, Circulation.

[7]  P. Fitzgerald,et al.  Comparison of an everolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized trial. , 2008, JAMA.

[8]  V. Fuster,et al.  Design of the Future REvascularization Evaluation in patients with Diabetes mellitus: Optimal management of Multivessel disease (FREEDOM) Trial. , 2008, American heart journal.

[9]  B. Gersh Angiographic Surrogate End Points in Drug-Eluting Stent Trials: A Systematic Evaluation Based on Individual Patient Data From 11 Randomized, Controlled Trials , 2008 .

[10]  S. Pocock,et al.  Angiographic surrogate end points in drug-eluting stent trials: a systematic evaluation based on individual patient data from 11 randomized, controlled trials. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  P. Serruys,et al.  One year clinical follow-up of the XIENCE V Everolimus-eluting stent system in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions: the SPIRIT II study. , 2007, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[12]  P. Serruys,et al.  Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions , 2007, Circulation.

[13]  P. Serruys,et al.  A randomised comparison of an everolimus-eluting coronary stent with a paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent:the SPIRIT II trial. , 2006, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[14]  Patrick W Serruys,et al.  The SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) study: design, rationale, and run-in phase. , 2006, American heart journal.

[15]  P. Serruys,et al.  Sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions: the REALITY trial: a randomized controlled trial. , 2006, JAMA.

[16]  J. Popma,et al.  Clinical Efficacy of Polymer-Based Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in the Treatment of Complex, Long Coronary Artery Lesions From a Multicenter, Randomized Trial: Support for the Use of Drug-Eluting Stents in Contemporary Clinical Practice , 2005, Circulation.

[17]  F. Eberli,et al.  Sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  I. Palacios,et al.  Five-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease (ERACI II). , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  P. Serruys,et al.  The SYNTAX Score: an angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. , 2005, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[20]  E. Orav,et al.  Late Loss in Lumen Diameter and Binary Restenosis for Drug-Eluting Stent Comparison , 2005, Circulation.

[21]  G. Stone,et al.  Relationship between angiographic late loss and target lesion revascularization after coronary stent implantation: analysis from the TAXUS-IV trial. , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2005, European heart journal.

[23]  R. Hall,et al.  The Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes (CARDia) trial: background, aims, and design. , 2005, American heart journal.

[24]  P. Serruys,et al.  Sirolimus eluting stent implantation for patients with multivessel disease: rationale for the arterial revascularisation therapies study part II (ARTS II) , 2004, Heart.

[25]  G. Stone,et al.  A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  William Wijns,et al.  Sirolimus-eluting stents for treatment of patients with long atherosclerotic lesions in small coronary arteries: double-blind, randomised controlled trial (E-SIRIUS) , 2003, The Lancet.

[27]  Jeffrey W Moses,et al.  Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  P. Serruys,et al.  The effect of completeness of revascularization on event-free survival at one year in the ARTS trial. , 2002, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[29]  Ousa,et al.  A RANDOMIZED COMPARISON OF A SIROLIMUS-ELUTING STENT WITH A STANDARD STENT FOR CORONARY REVASCULARIZATION , 2002 .

[30]  Mitchell W. Krucoff,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, th , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[31]  F Unger,et al.  Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  F. Welt,et al.  Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, th , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[33]  S. Lemeshow,et al.  European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). , 1999, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[34]  S. Nashef,et al.  Eurp-pean system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (Euro SCORE) , 1999 .

[35]  B. Gersh,et al.  Effect of Completeness of Revascularization on Long‐term Outcome of Patients With Three‐Vessel Disease Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: A Report From the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Registry , 1992, Circulation.