NYU Langone Health has announced an extensive cardiovascular research programme for the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions 2026, taking place in Chicago from 6 to 9 November. Researchers from NYU Langone Heart will contribute to more than 75 presentations, discussions and poster sessions, including four featured studies examining long-term coronary artery disease outcomes, advanced kidney disease, environmental interventions and digital support for heart failure treatment.
The programme places particular emphasis on questions that remain clinically consequential despite years of cardiovascular research. Two extended follow-up studies will revisit whether an initial invasive strategy involving coronary angiography and potential revascularisation produces better long-term outcomes than a medication-first approach in selected patients with stable coronary disease.
Other investigations examine whether relatively inexpensive interventions, including bedroom air filtration and electronic prescribing alerts, can improve measurable health outcomes or clinical decision-making. Together, the presentations reflect an evolving cardiovascular research agenda that increasingly evaluates not only medicines and procedures but also the systems, environments and diagnostic pathways influencing patient care.
The most important distinction is that several principal results have yet to be presented. As of 6 November, NYU Langone’s announcement provides details of trial designs, research objectives and presentation schedules, while the full findings from major sessions on 7 and 8 November remain forthcoming.
Why could ISCHEMIA-EXTEND change the long-term debate over coronary stents and bypass surgery?
One of the conference’s most closely watched presentations will be the extended follow-up from the international ISCHEMIA trial, led by study chair Judith Hochman. The original randomised trial enrolled more than 5,000 patients with stable coronary artery disease and moderate or severe ischaemia across 320 hospitals in 37 countries. Investigators compared an initial invasive strategy with a conservative approach emphasising guideline-directed medical treatment.
The invasive strategy involved coronary angiography and revascularisation through percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting where appropriate. Patients assigned to conservative management received medical therapy, with invasive procedures reserved for defined circumstances such as persistent symptoms or clinical deterioration. The trial did not address the emergency management of acute myocardial infarction, where different clinical considerations apply.
The original trial challenged the assumption that detecting substantial ischaemia necessarily means an invasive strategy will improve major cardiovascular outcomes. During its initial follow-up, investigators did not establish a significant overall reduction in the primary composite cardiovascular endpoint with routine early invasive management. However, the findings did not mean that coronary procedures lack value, particularly when symptom relief or specific high-risk anatomical conditions are important.
Earlier extended follow-up added further complexity. At a median follow-up of approximately 5.7 years, investigators reported similar all-cause mortality between the initial invasive and conservative strategies, with estimated seven-year mortality rates of 12.7% and 13.4%, respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 1.00, indicating no demonstrated overall survival difference.
The analysis also identified a lower rate of cardiovascular mortality in the initially invasive group alongside a higher rate of non-cardiovascular mortality. Because causes of death were not formally adjudicated in that extended follow-up, the differences required cautious interpretation. They could not be treated as definitive evidence that invasive procedures prevented cardiovascular deaths while directly causing unrelated deaths.
The forthcoming ISCHEMIA-EXTEND presentation will provide additional long-term survival evidence. Its significance will depend on the maturity of follow-up, the precision of mortality estimates and the extent to which outcome patterns remain consistent with previous analyses.
The clinical implications may be substantial because decisions concerning elective coronary procedures involve a balance between expected symptom improvement, procedural risks and long-term cardiovascular outcomes. Additional survival evidence could help refine discussions about treatment strategies, but it should not be interpreted as a blanket recommendation for or against revascularisation in all patients with stable coronary artery disease.
What will eight years of ISCHEMIA-CKD EXTEND data reveal about patients with advanced kidney disease?
The second major long-term coronary study addresses a particularly difficult population: patients with stable coronary artery disease and advanced chronic kidney disease, including individuals receiving dialysis. These patients face elevated cardiovascular risks and may also experience complications associated with invasive procedures. Their complex clinical characteristics have historically limited representation in major cardiovascular trials.
ISCHEMIA-CKD randomly assigned 777 participants to an initial invasive strategy or conservative medical management. Its original findings, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, did not establish a reduction in death or nonfatal myocardial infarction with routine early invasive treatment. At a median follow-up of approximately 2.2 years, estimated three-year event rates were 36.4% with the invasive strategy and 36.7% with conservative management.
The corresponding hazard ratio was 1.01, with a reported p-value of 0.95, providing no evidence of superiority for either strategy on the primary composite endpoint. The study also identified higher rates of stroke and a composite outcome involving death or initiation of dialysis in the invasive group. These findings supported careful evaluation of the risks associated with routine invasive management in this population.
The new ISCHEMIA-CKD EXTEND analysis will present follow-up extending to approximately eight years, examining overall survival alongside cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality. Sripal Bangalore will present the findings on 7 November during the conference’s session addressing long-term outcomes in stable ischaemic heart disease.
Longer follow-up may help determine whether differences in treatment strategy become more apparent over time. It may also clarify whether the balance between procedural risk and potential cardiovascular benefit changes as the initial treatment period becomes more distant.
However, mortality analysis alone cannot capture every relevant clinical outcome. Symptom burden, quality of life, hospitalisation, subsequent revascularisation and changes in kidney function can influence the value of competing treatment strategies. The interpretation of extended survival findings should therefore consider the broader clinical evidence generated by the original trial.
For hospitals and clinicians, the study addresses a decision involving both interventional cardiology and nephrology. It also has implications for healthcare resource allocation because coronary procedures in patients with advanced kidney disease require careful management of procedural complications, vascular access and treatment coordination.
Can bedroom HEPA air filtration produce measurable improvements in cardiometabolic health?
NYU Langone researchers will also present findings from a randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled study examining whether improved bedroom air quality affects blood glucose patterns in adults with prediabetes. The investigation enrolled more than 150 adults in New York City who used either an active high-efficiency particulate air cleaner or a visually similar inactive device.
Participants used the devices in their bedrooms for approximately one month. Investigators measured indoor fine-particle pollution and used continuous glucose monitors to examine blood sugar patterns during the study. Sharine Wittkopp is scheduled to present the findings on 8 November.
The research examines a potential connection between environmental exposures and metabolic health. Fine particulate matter has been investigated as a contributor to cardiovascular and metabolic risk, including through pathways involving inflammation, oxidative stress and vascular dysfunction. However, associations between pollution exposure and disease do not automatically establish that air filtration produces clinically meaningful improvements.
The study’s randomised, sham-controlled design is particularly relevant because it helps distinguish effects attributable to the intervention from changes associated with participant behaviour or expectations. Continuous glucose monitoring provides repeated measurements rather than relying exclusively on isolated laboratory assessments.
The clinical value of the results will depend on the magnitude and consistency of any differences between the groups. Investigators will need to establish whether active filtration meaningfully reduced indoor pollution exposure and whether changes in glucose measurements exceeded those observed with the sham intervention.
A relatively short study can detect changes in physiological measurements but cannot independently establish reduced rates of diabetes, myocardial infarction or other long-term clinical outcomes. Such conclusions would require additional evidence connecting the observed changes to durable health benefits.
The trial also introduces an important implementation question. Portable air cleaners are relatively accessible technologies compared with many medical interventions, but their effectiveness depends on equipment performance, room conditions, maintenance, usage patterns and the level of environmental pollution. Positive results could support further investigation into practical preventive strategies, while negative or inconclusive findings would help define the limits of this particular approach.
Could the BETTER CARE-HF trial establish whether electronic alerts improve prescribing across hospitals?
Digital health research is another central element of NYU Langone’s conference programme. The multicentre BETTER CARE-HF study evaluates an electronic health record alert designed to help clinicians identify patients with heart failure who may benefit from evidence-based medical treatment. The system brings together relevant clinical information, including heart function, blood pressure, laboratory measurements and existing prescriptions.
The research builds on an earlier cluster-randomised BETTER CARE-HF trial conducted at NYU Langone. That study evaluated electronic decision support for prescribing mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in eligible patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. It enrolled 2,211 patients treated by 180 cardiologists.
The earlier results demonstrated a substantial improvement in prescribing behaviour. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist prescriptions were initiated in 29.6% of eligible patients whose clinicians received a tailored electronic alert, compared with 11.7% under usual care. The relative risk was 2.53, with the difference statistically significant.
Those findings provided evidence that carefully designed clinical alerts can influence prescribing decisions. However, they did not independently establish that the intervention reduced mortality or hospitalisation, because the measured outcome concerned prescribing rather than long-term patient events.
The multicentre follow-up study extends the approach beyond the original institution. Registered as NCT06457152, it involved 1,136 participants and evaluated implementation across additional healthcare systems. Amrita Mukhopadhyay will present the findings on 8 November.
External validation is particularly important for clinical decision support because hospital information systems, prescribing practices and clinician workflows vary considerably. A tool that performs well within one institution may encounter different challenges elsewhere, including inconsistent data availability, software integration requirements and variations in treatment eligibility assessment.
The study will help determine whether the prescribing improvement observed at NYU Langone can be reproduced across other organisations. It may also offer practical insight into how decision support can be incorporated without creating unnecessary alerts or disrupting clinical workflow.
Commercially, the technology illustrates a growing opportunity for healthcare software developers to embed evidence-based recommendations within existing information systems. Nevertheless, hospitals will require evidence of reliable implementation, appropriate clinician oversight and measurable value before adopting similar interventions at scale.
Why could dental appointments become an unexpected opportunity for detecting hypertension in young adults?
NYU Langone researchers will present additional findings examining blood pressure screening among more than 45,000 adults aged 18 to 39 who attended NYU College of Dentistry clinics between 2023 and 2025. The research explores whether routine dental visits can help identify elevated blood pressure among younger adults who may not regularly attend primary care appointments.
The investigators reported identifying individuals with previously undiagnosed hypertension through blood pressure measurements conducted before dental care. The full presentation will provide additional context concerning screening patterns and the characteristics of patients who may benefit from further assessment.
Dental clinics represent an interesting setting for opportunistic screening because they often encounter patients who are not actively seeking cardiovascular care. A routine measurement may identify a potential risk factor before symptoms develop, providing an opportunity for follow-up through appropriate medical services.
However, a single elevated blood pressure reading does not independently establish a diagnosis of chronic hypertension. Measurement technique, anxiety, recent activity and other factors can influence results. Screening programmes therefore need clear referral pathways and confirmatory assessment rather than relying on isolated values.
The operational implications are important. Wider screening may require staff training, appropriate equipment, reliable documentation and coordination between dental and primary care providers. Its value would depend not simply on identifying elevated readings but on whether patients receive appropriate follow-up and subsequent risk management.
How could NYU Langone’s MINOCA research improve diagnosis when coronary arteries are not obstructed?
Another research theme concerns myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries, commonly known as MINOCA. This describes patients presenting with evidence of myocardial infarction despite the absence of a major obstructive coronary lesion. The diagnosis requires careful evaluation because several different mechanisms can produce similar clinical presentations.
NYU Langone researchers will examine whether cardiac troponin measurements, electrocardiography and advanced imaging can help distinguish underlying causes. The presentations build on work from the Heart Attack Research Program, which has investigated the relationship between coronary imaging and cardiac magnetic resonance findings.
Earlier research involving women presenting with suspected MINOCA found that combining coronary optical coherence tomography with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging identified a potential mechanism in 84.5% of participants who underwent both examinations. The analysis demonstrated how different imaging modalities can provide complementary information about coronary plaque abnormalities and myocardial injury.
However, identifying a possible mechanism is not equivalent to demonstrating that a particular diagnostic pathway improves long-term patient outcomes. Wider adoption would require consideration of test availability, interpretation expertise, procedural risks and whether the findings lead to clinically meaningful changes in treatment.
The new conference abstracts will examine relationships involving age, troponin levels, electrocardiographic findings and multimodality imaging. Their significance will depend on whether they improve diagnostic classification and support more targeted management without introducing unnecessary testing.
What do platelet inflammation studies add to the future of cardiovascular drug development?
NYU Langone’s conference participation also includes research and scientific discussion concerning platelets, inflammation and atherosclerosis. Jeffrey Berger will examine platelet transcriptomics and the interaction between inflammatory and thrombotic pathways that contribute to cardiovascular disease.
Platelets are essential for blood clot formation, but they also participate in inflammatory signalling and interactions with vascular cells. Their biological activity may therefore contribute to cardiovascular risk through mechanisms extending beyond conventional clot formation.
Transcriptomic research investigates patterns of gene expression that may provide information about platelet biology and disease-associated pathways. Such research could help refine understanding of residual cardiovascular risk among patients whose cholesterol and other established risk factors are being managed.
Nevertheless, identifying molecular associations does not establish a validated clinical biomarker or therapeutic target. Any diagnostic or treatment application would require further research demonstrating reproducibility, clinical relevance and potential benefit.
The broader programme illustrates how cardiovascular science is expanding beyond isolated treatment interventions towards a more integrated understanding of disease biology, risk identification and healthcare delivery.
For NYU Langone Heart, the decisive immediate milestones are the full presentations of ISCHEMIA-EXTEND and ISCHEMIA-CKD EXTEND on 7 November, followed by the air filtration and BETTER CARE-HF findings on 8 November. These studies address different clinical questions, but share a common objective of determining whether established or relatively accessible interventions produce benefits that are meaningful, reproducible and practical. Their eventual influence will depend on the strength of the reported evidence rather than the prominence of the conference programme itself.
