Aims Despite the effects of statins in reducing cardiovascular events and slowing progression of coronary atherosclerosis, significant cardiovascular (CV) risk remains. Icosapent ethyl (IPE), a highly purified eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester, added to a statin was shown to reduce initial CV events by 25% and total CV events by 32% in the REDUCE-IT trial, with the mechanisms of benefit not yet fully explained. The EVAPORATE trial sought to determine whether IPE 4 g/day, as an adjunct to diet and statin therapy, would result in a greater change from baseline in plaque volume, measured by serial multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), than placebo in statin-treated patients. Methods and results A total of 80 patients were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients had to have coronary atherosclerosis as documented by MDCT (one or more angiographic stenoses with ≥20% narrowing), be on statin therapy, and have persistently elevated triglyceride (TG) levels. Patients underwent an interim scan at 9 months and a final scan at 18 months with coronary computed tomographic angiography. The pre-specified primary endpoint was changed in low-attenuation plaque (LAP) volume at 18 months between IPE and placebo groups. Baseline demographics, vitals, and laboratory results were not significantly different between the IPE and placebo groups; the median TG level was 259.1 ± 78.1 mg/dL. There was a significant reduction in the primary endpoint as IPE reduced LAP plaque volume by 17%, while in the placebo group LAP plaque volume more than doubled (+109%) (P = 0.0061). There were significant differences in rates of progression between IPE and placebo at study end involving other plaque volumes including fibrous, and fibrofatty (FF) plaque volumes which regressed in the IPE group and progressed in the placebo group (P < 0.01 for all). When further adjusted for age, sex, diabetes status, hypertension, and baseline TG, plaque volume changes between groups remained significantly different, P < 0.01. Only dense calcium did not show a significant difference between groups in multivariable modelling (P = 0.053). Conclusions Icosapent ethyl demonstrated significant regression of LAP volume on MDCT compared with placebo over 18 months. EVAPORATE provides important mechanistic data on plaque characteristics that may have relevance to the REDUCE-IT results and clinical use of IPE.

BackgroundRecent studies have demonstrated a continuum in clinical risk related to mean pulmonary artery pressure that begins at >19 mm Hg, which is below the traditional threshold used to define pulmonary hypertension (PH) of 25 mm Hg. Because of the implications on patient diagnosis and prognosis, the generalizability and validity of these data need further confirmation.Methods and ResultsDatabases were searched from inception through January 31, 2018, to identify studies comparing all‐cause mortality between patients with mildly elevated mean pulmonary artery pressure near but <25 mm Hg versus the referent group. The meta‐analysis included 15 nonrandomized studies and 16 482 patients (7451 [45.2%] with measured or calculated mean pulmonary artery pressure of 19–24 mm Hg by right heart catheterization [n=6037] and echocardiography [n=1414] [mild PH]). The mean duration of follow‐up was 5.2 years. Compared with the referent group, mild PH was associated with an increased risk of mortality (risk ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.32–1.74; P<0.001; I2=47%). Secondary analysis using risk‐adjusted time‐to‐event estimates showed a similar result (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.09–1.31; P<0.001; I2=42%). The findings were consistent between subgroups of right heart catheterization and echocardiography studies (P interaction>0.05). There was evidence of publication bias; however, this did not influence the risk estimate (Duval and Tweedie's trim and fill adjusted risk ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–1.56).ConclusionsThe risk of mortality is increased in patients with mild PH, defined as measured or calculated mean pulmonary artery pressure >19 mm Hg. These data emphasize a need for diagnosing patients with mild PH with consideration to enrollment in PH clinical studies investigating pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions to attenuate clinical risk and improve outcomes.

Summary. Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) comprises a syndrome of diverse disorders that have in common immunemediated thrombocytopenia, but that differ with respect to pathogenesis, natural history and response to therapy. ITP may occur in the absence of an evident predisposing etiology (primary ITP) or as a sequela of a growing list of associated conditions (secondary ITP). Primary ITP remains a diagnosis of exclusion and must be differentiated from non-autoimmune etiologies of thrombocytopenia and secondary causes of ITP. The traditional objective of management is to provide a hemostatic platelet count (> 20-30 · 10 9 L )1 in most cases)while minimizing treatment-related toxicity, although treatment goals should be tailored to the individual patient and clinical setting. Corticosteroids, supplemented with either intravenous immune globulin G or anti-Rh(D) as needed, are used as upfront therapy to stop bleeding and raise the platelet count acutely in patients with newly diagnosed or newly relapsed disease. Although most adults with primary ITP respond to first-line therapy, the majority relapse after treatment is tapered and require a second-line approach to maintain a hemostatic platelet count. Standard second-line options include splenectomy, rituximab and the thrombopoietin receptor agonists, romiplostim and eltrombopag. Studies that directly compare the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of these approaches are lacking. In the absence of such data, we do not favor a single second-line approach for all patients. Rather, we consider the pros and cons of each option with our patients and engage them in the decision-making process.