<< U.S. 'race gap' in the commission of violent crime has narrowed, yet persists in many cities: Study | APCER Pharma to manage pharmacovigilance strategies for six global pharmaceutical companies >>
Read in | English | 한국어

CYPHER Sirolimus-eluting Coronary Stent demonstrates efficacy advantages over Medtronic's Endeavor

Published on March 18, 2010 at 7:50 AM · No Comments

- SORT OUT III Data Presented at American College of Cardiology Meeting in Atlanta and Published in the Lancet

Investigators reported the long-term follow-up of the largest randomized comparison between the CYPHER(R) Sirolimus-eluting Coronary Stent and Medtronic's Endeavor(R) Stent highlighting significant and sustained clinical differences. These important findings were presented at the American College of Cardiology annual meeting, (ACC 2010) in Atlanta and published on-line in the prestigious journal The Lancet. The CYPHER(R) Stent was associated with significantly lower rates of death, myocardial infarction (heart attack), and repeat revascularization (the need for another procedure) than the Endeavor(R) Stent out to 18 months. This study adds to the unmatched body of safety and efficacy data on the CYPHER(R) Stent with this comparison to the more recently approved Endeavor(R) Stent in a contemporary setting.

The large randomized trial SORT OUT III included more than 2,300 patients across a wide range of lesion and patient complexity. The investigators reported that the mortality rate (4.4% for Endeavor(R) vs. 2.7% for CYPHER(R): p<0.035), incidence of heart attacks (2.1% for Endeavor(R) vs. 0.9 % for CYPHER(R): p<0.029), and composite endpoint of MACE (9.7 % for Endeavor(R) vs. 4.5 % for CYPHER(R): p<0.0001) was significantly lower in patients receiving CYPHER(R) compared to those receiving Endeavor(R). The incidence of "definite" late stent thrombosis was higher for Endeavor(R) than for CYPHER(R), but this difference was not statistically significant (1.1% for Endeavor(R) vs. 0.5% for CYPHER(R): p<0.13). Coupled with the safety advantage observed with CYPHER(R), there was an efficacy advantage as well: CYPHER(R) had significantly less frequent ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization through 18 months compared to Endeavor(R) (1.7% for CYPHER(R) vs. 6.1% Endeavor(R): p<0.0001).

Comments
The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News-Medical.Net.



  Country flag

biuquote
  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading