Milton Packer
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Milton Packer has a total of 22 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Henry Krum
From the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University (M.P.), New York, NY; Royal Brompton Hospital (A.J.S.C.), London, UK; Stanford University Medical Center (M.B.F.), Stanford, Calif; Universitaets Klinikum Luebeck (H.A.K.), Luebeck, Germany; Monash University (H.K.), Prahran Victoria, Australia; University Hospital (P.M.), Bern, Switzerland; University Health Network and Mt Sinai Hospital (J.L.R.), Toronto, Canada; Silesian School of Medicine (M.T.), Katowice, Poland; Roche...
3 shared publications- Andrew Justin Stewart Coats
Heart Research Institute, University of Sydney , 7 Eliza St, Newtown, Sydney, NSW 2042
2 shared publications Christoph Staiger
From the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University (M.P.), New York, NY; Royal Brompton Hospital (A.J.S.C.), London, UK; Stanford University Medical Center (M.B.F.), Stanford, Calif; Universitaets Klinikum Luebeck (H.A.K.), Luebeck, Germany; Monash University (H.K.), Prahran Victoria, Australia; University Hospital (P.M.), Bern, Switzerland; University Health Network and Mt Sinai Hospital (J.L.R.), Toronto, Canada; Silesian School of Medicine (M.T.), Katowice, Poland; Roche...
2 shared publicationsDavid L. DeMets
From the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University (M.P.), New York, NY; Royal Brompton Hospital (A.J.S.C.), London, UK; Stanford University Medical Center (M.B.F.), Stanford, Calif; Universitaets Klinikum Luebeck (H.A.K.), Luebeck, Germany; Monash University (H.K.), Prahran Victoria, Australia; University Hospital (P.M.), Bern, Switzerland; University Health Network and Mt Sinai Hospital (J.L.R.), Toronto, Canada; Silesian School of Medicine (M.T.), Katowice, Poland; Roche...
2 shared publicationsEllen B. Roecker
From the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University (M.P.), New York, NY; Royal Brompton Hospital (A.J.S.C.), London, UK; Stanford University Medical Center (M.B.F.), Stanford, Calif; Universitaets Klinikum Luebeck (H.A.K.), Luebeck, Germany; Monash University (H.K.), Prahran Victoria, Australia; University Hospital (P.M.), Bern, Switzerland; University Health Network and Mt Sinai Hospital (J.L.R.), Toronto, Canada; Silesian School of Medicine (M.T.), Katowice, Poland; Roche...
2 shared publicationsHugo A. Katus
From the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University (M.P.), New York, NY; Royal Brompton Hospital (A.J.S.C.), London, UK; Stanford University Medical Center (M.B.F.), Stanford, Calif; Universitaets Klinikum Luebeck (H.A.K.), Luebeck, Germany; Monash University (H.K.), Prahran Victoria, Australia; University Hospital (P.M.), Bern, Switzerland; University Health Network and Mt Sinai Hospital (J.L.R.), Toronto, Canada; Silesian School of Medicine (M.T.), Katowice, Poland; Roche...
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- 16 December 2003
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 108 (24) , 2950-2953
Should B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Be Measured Routinely to Guide the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Heart Failure?
- 16 December 2003
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 108 (24) , 2950-2953
Should B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Be Measured Routinely to Guide the Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Heart Failure?
- Top Cited Papers
- 22 October 2002
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 106 (17) , 2194-2199
Effect of Carvedilol on the Morbidity of Patients With Severe Chronic Heart Failure
Background— β-Blocking agents improve functional status and reduce morbidity in mild-to-moderate heart failure, but it is not known whether they produce such benefits in severe heart failure. Methods and Results— We randomly assigned 2289 patients with symptoms of heart failure at rest or on minimal exertion and with an ejection fraction P =0.00002) and the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure by 31% ( P =0.000004). Patients in the carvedilol group also spent 27% fewer days in the hospital for any reason ( P =0.0005) and 40% fewer days in the hospital for heart failure ( P P =0.0009). Carvedilol-treated patients were also less likely than placebo-treated patients to experience a serious adverse event ( P =0.002), especially worsening heart failure, sudden death, cardiogenic shock, or ventricular tachycardia. Conclusion— In euvolemic patients with symptoms at rest or on minimal exertion, the addition of carvedilol to conventional therapy ameliorates the severity of heart failure and reduces the risk of clinical deterioration, hospitalization, and other serious adverse clinical events.
- 22 October 2002
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 106 (17) , 2194-2199
Top Cited PapersEffect of Carvedilol on the Morbidity of Patients With Severe Chronic Heart Failure
Background— β-Blocking agents improve functional status and reduce morbidity in mild-to-moderate heart failure, but it is not known whether they produce such benefits in severe heart failure. Methods and Results— We randomly assigned 2289 patients with symptoms of heart failure at rest or on minimal exertion and with an ejection fraction P =0.00002) and the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure by 31% ( P =0.000004). Patients in the carvedilol group also spent 27% fewer days in the hospital for any reason ( P =0.0005) and 40% fewer days in the hospital for heart failure ( P P =0.0009). Carvedilol-treated patients were also less likely than placebo-treated patients to experience a serious adverse event ( P =0.002), especially worsening heart failure, sudden death, cardiogenic shock, or ventricular tachycardia. Conclusion— In euvolemic patients with symptoms at rest or on minimal exertion, the addition of carvedilol to conventional therapy ameliorates the severity of heart failure and reduces the risk of clinical deterioration, hospitalization, and other serious adverse clinical events.
- Top Cited Papers
- 20 August 2002
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 106 (8) , 920-926
Comparison of Omapatrilat and Enalapril in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure
Background— Combined inhibition of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and neutral endopeptidase (NEP) may produce greater benefits in heart failure than ACE inhibition alone. Methods and Results— We randomly assigned 5770 patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure to double-blind treatment with either the ACE inhibitor enalapril (10 mg BID, n=2884) or to the ACE-NEP inhibitor omapatrilat (40 mg once daily, n=2886) for a mean of 14.5 months. The primary end point—the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure requiring intravenous treatment—was used prospectively to test both a superiority and noninferiority hypothesis (based on the effect of enalapril in the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction [SOLVD] Treatment Trial). A primary end point was achieved in 973 patients in the enalapril group and in 914 patients in the omapatrilat group (hazard ratio 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03, P =0.187)—a result that fulfilled prespecified criteria for noninferiority but not for superiority. The omapatrilat group also had a 9% lower risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization ( P =0.024) and a 6% lower risk of death ( P =0.339). Post hoc analysis of the primary end point with the definition used in the SOLVD Treatment Trial (which included all hospitalizations for heart failure) showed an 11% lower risk in patients treated with omapatrilat (nominal P =0.012). Conclusion— Omapatrilat reduces the risk of death and hospitalization in chronic heart failure but was not more effective than ACE inhibition alone in reducing the risk of a primary clinical event. Between-group differences in favor of omapatrilat observed in secondary and post hoc analyses warrant further study.
- 20 August 2002
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Circulation
- Vol. 106 (8) , 920-926
Top Cited PapersComparison of Omapatrilat and Enalapril in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure
Background— Combined inhibition of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and neutral endopeptidase (NEP) may produce greater benefits in heart failure than ACE inhibition alone. Methods and Results— We randomly assigned 5770 patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure to double-blind treatment with either the ACE inhibitor enalapril (10 mg BID, n=2884) or to the ACE-NEP inhibitor omapatrilat (40 mg once daily, n=2886) for a mean of 14.5 months. The primary end point—the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure requiring intravenous treatment—was used prospectively to test both a superiority and noninferiority hypothesis (based on the effect of enalapril in the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction [SOLVD] Treatment Trial). A primary end point was achieved in 973 patients in the enalapril group and in 914 patients in the omapatrilat group (hazard ratio 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03, P =0.187)—a result that fulfilled prespecified criteria for noninferiority but not for superiority. The omapatrilat group also had a 9% lower risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization ( P =0.024) and a 6% lower risk of death ( P =0.339). Post hoc analysis of the primary end point with the definition used in the SOLVD Treatment Trial (which included all hospitalizations for heart failure) showed an 11% lower risk in patients treated with omapatrilat (nominal P =0.012). Conclusion— Omapatrilat reduces the risk of death and hospitalization in chronic heart failure but was not more effective than ACE inhibition alone in reducing the risk of a primary clinical event. Between-group differences in favor of omapatrilat observed in secondary and post hoc analyses warrant further study.
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 31 May 2001
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 344 (22) , 1651-1658
Effect of Carvedilol on Survival in Severe Chronic Heart Failure
Beta-blocking agents reduce the risk of hospitalization and death in patients with mild-to-moderate heart failure, but little is known about their effects in severe heart failure. We evaluated 2289 patients who had symptoms of heart failure at rest or on minimal exertion, who were clinically euvolemic, and who had an ejection fraction of less than 25 percent. In a double-blind fashion, we randomly assigned 1133 patients to placebo and 1156 patients to treatment with carvedilol for a mean period of 10.4 months, during which standard therapy for heart failure was continued. Patients who required intensive care, had marked fluid retention, or were receiving intravenous vasodilators or positive inotropic drugs were excluded. There were 190 deaths in the placebo group and 130 deaths in the carvedilol group. This difference reflected a 35 percent decrease in the risk of death with carvedilol (95 percent confidence interval, 19 to 48 percent; P=0.0014, adjusted for interim analyses). A total of 507 patients died or were hospitalized in the placebo group, as compared with 425 in the carvedilol group. This difference reflected a 24 percent decrease in the combined risk of death or hospitalization with carvedilol. The favorable effects on both end points were seen consistently in all the subgroups we examined. Fewer patients in the carvedilol group than in the placebo group withdrew because of adverse effects or for other reasons (P=0.02). The previously reported benefits of carvedilol with regard to morbidity and mortality in patients with mild-to-moderate heart failure were also found in the patients with severe heart failure who were evaluated in this trial.
- 31 May 2001
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 344 (22) , 1651-1658
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessEffect of Carvedilol on Survival in Severe Chronic Heart Failure
Beta-blocking agents reduce the risk of hospitalization and death in patients with mild-to-moderate heart failure, but little is known about their effects in severe heart failure. We evaluated 2289 patients who had symptoms of heart failure at rest or on minimal exertion, who were clinically euvolemic, and who had an ejection fraction of less than 25 percent. In a double-blind fashion, we randomly assigned 1133 patients to placebo and 1156 patients to treatment with carvedilol for a mean period of 10.4 months, during which standard therapy for heart failure was continued. Patients who required intensive care, had marked fluid retention, or were receiving intravenous vasodilators or positive inotropic drugs were excluded. There were 190 deaths in the placebo group and 130 deaths in the carvedilol group. This difference reflected a 35 percent decrease in the risk of death with carvedilol (95 percent confidence interval, 19 to 48 percent; P=0.0014, adjusted for interim analyses). A total of 507 patients died or were hospitalized in the placebo group, as compared with 425 in the carvedilol group. This difference reflected a 24 percent decrease in the combined risk of death or hospitalization with carvedilol. The favorable effects on both end points were seen consistently in all the subgroups we examined. Fewer patients in the carvedilol group than in the placebo group withdrew because of adverse effects or for other reasons (P=0.02). The previously reported benefits of carvedilol with regard to morbidity and mortality in patients with mild-to-moderate heart failure were also found in the patients with severe heart failure who were evaluated in this trial.
- 1 April 2001
- Published by Elsevier in American Heart Journal
- Vol. 141 (4) , 542-547
Terms of reference for Data and Safety Monitoring Committees
- 1 April 2001
- Published by Elsevier in American Heart Journal
- Vol. 141 (4) , 542-547
Terms of reference for Data and Safety Monitoring Committees
- Open Access
- 1 April 2000
- Published by Elsevier in American Heart Journal
- Vol. 139 (4) , S202-S206
Current perspectives on the design of phase II trials of new drugs for the treatment of heart failure
- 1 April 2000
- Published by Elsevier in American Heart Journal
- Vol. 139 (4) , S202-S206
Open AccessCurrent perspectives on the design of phase II trials of new drugs for the treatment of heart failure