Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,025

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The VIVA Trial: Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor in Ischemia for Vascular Angiogenesis

Henry, Timothy D., Annex, Brian H., McKendall, George R., Azrin, Michael A., Lopez, John J., Giordano, Frank J., Shah, P.K., Willerson, James T., Benza, Raymond L., Berman, Daniel S., Gibson, C. Michael, Bajamonde, Alex, Rundle, Amy Chen, Fine, Jennifer, McCluskey, Edward R.·2003·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Recombinant human vascular endothelial growth factor protein (rhVEGF) stimulates angiogenesis in animal models and was well tolerated in Phase I clinical trials. VIVA (Vascular endothelial growth factor in Ischemia for Vascular Angiogenesis) is a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intracoronary and intravenous infusions of rhVEGF. Methods and Results— A total of 178 patients with stable exertional angina, unsuitable for standard revascularization, were randomized to receive placebo, low-dose rhVEGF (17 ng · kg −1 · min −1 ), or high-dose rhVEGF (50 ng · kg −1 · min −1 ) by intracoronary infusion on day 0, followed by intravenous infusions on days 3, 6, and 9. Exercise treadmill tests, angina class, and quality of life assessments were performed at baseline, day 60, and day 120. Myocardial perfusion imaging was performed at baseline and day 60. At day 60, the change in exercise treadmill test (ETT) time from baseline was not different between groups (placebo, +48 seconds; low dose, +30 seconds; high dose, +30 seconds). Angina class and quality of life were significantly improved within each group, with no difference between groups. By day 120, placebo-treated patients demonstrated reduced benefit in all three measures, with no significant difference compared with low-dose rhVEGF. In contrast, high-dose rhVEGF resulted in significant improvement in angina class ( P =0.05) and nonsignificant trends in ETT time ( P =0.15) and angina frequency ( P =0.09) as compared with placebo. Conclusions— rhVEGF seems to be safe and well tolerated. rhVEGF offered no improvement beyond placebo in all measurements by day 60. By day 120, high-dose rhVEGF resulted in significant improvement in angina and favorable trends in ETT time and angina frequency.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.0000061911.47710.8a

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,025

Metadata

Authors
Henry, T. D., Annex, B. H., McKendall, G. R., Azrin, M. A., Lopez, J. J., Giordano, F. J., Shah, P. K., Willerson, J. T., Benza, R. L., Berman, D. S., Gibson, C. M., Bajamonde, A., Rundle, A. C., Fine, J., & McCluskey, E. R.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2003-03-18
Volume
107
Issue
10
Pages
1359-1365
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2103227975
Cited by
1,025
References
0
FWCI
22.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The VIVA Trial: Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor in Ischemia for Vascular Angiogenesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000061911.47710.8a
The paper
Henry, T. D., Annex, B. H., McKendall, G. R., Azrin, M. A., Lopez, J. J., Giordano, F. J., Shah, P. K., Willerson, J. T., Benza, R. L., Berman, D. S., Gibson, C. M., Bajamonde, A., Rundle, A. C., Fine, J., & McCluskey, E. R. (2003). The VIVA Trial: Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor in Ischemia for Vascular Angiogenesis. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000061911.47710.8a

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.