Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death in the United States and in roughly half the cases its first clinical manifestations, myocardial infarction (MI) or sudden cardiac death (SCD), are fatal. There is considerable evidence that "stress" plays a significant and independent role in the occurrence of CHD and its complications. This evidence has provided the rationale for developing interventional strategies to reduce stress in susceptible individuals in order to modify the natural history of these clinical events. There are now promising data to suggest that stress management training (SMT) is one such approach, and that SMT can have beneficial effects on psychosocial and medical outcomes. However, many of the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) employing stress management approaches in CHD patients have had important methodological limitations and several of the larger RCTs have failed to demonstrate a benefit for SMT over usual care, raising questions about the value of SMT for patients with CHD. Reliance on "hard" clinical endpoints is problematic because studies require such large sample sizes that they are logistically difficult to conduct and are prohibitively expensive. The use of intermediate pathophysiologic endpoints that have been shown independently to be associated with increased risk represents a novel and exciting opportunity to examine the added value of SMT in exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) compared to CR without SMT on key biomarkers of risk in vulnerable CHD patients.