This randomized, controlled, diagnostic, multicenter trial will compare two diagnostic imaging pathways--coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and single photon emission tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI)--to determine the incidence of major adverse coronary events (MACE), defined as myocardial infarction (MI) or cardiac-related death, and cross-over to revascularization. CCTA may be used to direct patients with symptoms of stable angina or angina equivalent to optimal medical therapy (OMT). The use of CCTA as a diagnostic tool for angina symptoms will be associated with no increase in MACE or revascularization, decreased cost, reduced risks (e.g., less radiation exposure), additional insights into alternate explanations of chest pain, and increased cost-effectiveness in comparison with use of SPECT MPI/invasive coronary angiography (ICA).
The Randomized Evaluation of Patients with Stable Angina Comparing Utilization of Diagnostic Examinations (RESCUE) is a multi-center randomized, controlled trial responding to the need for comparative analysis of these imaging technologies and the role of OMT in clinical care. A total of 4300 patients will be randomized to CCTA or SPECT MPI/ICA for diagnostic assessment of angina at up to 80 institutions internationally. This study builds on the results of the COURAGE trial by comparing CCTA and SPECT MPI/ICA integrated into a care paradigm featuring initial treatment with OMT for patients diagnosed using computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) without significant disease in the left main coronary artery. Participants will be followed for a composite endpoint of MACE and cross-over to revascularization over a follow-up period up to two years (two to six time points depending on diagnostic results and time of enrollment into the trial). The primary endpoint of the study is a combined endpoint of occurrence of MACE and revascularization. We will calculate differences in the combined MACE/revascularization endpoint between the CCTA and SPECT MPI/ICA arms. Participant outcomes will be assessed by age, gender, comorbidity, and angina classification class at presentation. Several comparative-effectiveness analyses will be performed. We hypothesize that the CCTA arm will be associated with no increase in MACE or revascularization, decreased cost, reduced risks (e.g., less radiation exposure), additional insights into or alternate explanations of chest pain, and increased cost-effectiveness in comparison with SPECT MPI/ICA. Findings are expected to result in validation of an evolving new standard of care for patients with stable angina that takes advantage of CCTA and OMT to more cost-effectively drive appropriate care while reducing the need for invasive diagnosis and increased radiation exposure with SPECT MPI/ICA.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
1,050
Complete diagnostic CCTA per protocol specifications.
Perform SPECT MPI per institutional standard practice; diagnostic ICA will be performed only as indicated per protocol.
Atlantic VA Medical Center
Decatur, Georgia, United States
Henry Ford Hospital
Detroit, Michigan, United States
Salem VA Medical Center
Salem, Virginia, United States
Time-dependent Rates of the Composite Primary Endpoint Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event (MACE: Comprising Cardiac-related Death or Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI), and Revascularization)
To compare outcomes of participants with symptoms of stable angina or angina equivalent evaluated with an anatomic imaging strategy using CCTA as initial method of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) (Group A) to a combined functional and anatomic imaging strategy of SPECT MPI/ICA (Group B) as a guide to Optimal Medical Therapy (OMT) alone. The analysis was conducted from an intent-to-treat perspective
Time frame: up to 24 Months (depends on time of trial enrollment and funding duration)
Prediction of Response (MACE/Revascularization) at 1 Year Using: Modified Duke Score or CCTA + AHA 16 Predictor/CCTA+AHA 16+Clinical Data Predictor or SPECT% Reversible Defect Size Reported as Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Area Under Curve (AUC)
AUC is a unitless measure of performance ranging form 0.5 (guessing) to 1.0 (perfect predictor) that can be thought of a the proportion of correct classifications in a 2-alternative-forced-choice experiment - and for binary outcomes, it is equivalent to the C-statistic. It will be used to evaluate and compare the ability of available prognostic indices and SPECT-MPI % reversible defect size to predict revascularization or MACE using CCTA information: A CCTA Modified Duke index A CCTA index including the 16 individual American Heart Association (AHA) segments A CCTA including the 16 individual AHA segments and clinical data and compare them to the SPECT % reversible defect size results
Time frame: 1 year
Short Form-36 Survey (SF-36v2) and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) Score
SF36+SAQ at baseline and to a subset of participants, stratified by diagnostic examination, at 12 months after enrollment to monitor angina symptoms and their impact on Quality of life. The Short Form-36 (SF36) is a 36 item overall health status/Quality of Life collected in 8 domains. Scales are standardized with scores ranging from 0-100. Higher scores= better health status. The Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) is a self-administered, 19-item, cardiac disease-related quality-of-life measure collected in 5 domains. scales are standardized with scores ranging from 0-100. Higher scores= better health status. Positive cardiac findings on diagnostic testing are defined as: 1. 50% stenosis on CCTA or un-evaluable left main, or proximal and mid segments of all other epicardial arteries (right coronary artery, left anterior descending artery, or left circumflex artery); and 2. 10% reversible defect on SPECT MPI or evidence of Transient Ischemic Dilation (TID) accompanied by ECG
Time frame: baseline and 12 months
The Effectiveness of Each Arm Will be Measured in Terms of Life Years and Quality of Life Years (QALY).
International medical records will be used to determine mortality which may not be feasible at all participating international sites. Utilities will be based on Quality of Well Being scores converted from the SF-36 assessments The analysis will be performed assuming a societal perspective and lifetime time horizon
Time frame: Baseline and 1 year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.