1. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(author)
-
Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention : A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
In: Circulation. - : LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 140:3, s. 240-261
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
2. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(author)
-
Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention : a consensus document from the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 40:31, s. 2632-2653
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
3. |
- Bhatt, Deepak L., et al.
(author)
-
Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the effect of ticagrelor on health outcomes in diabetes mellitus patients Intervention study
- 2019
-
In: Clinical Cardiology. - : Wiley. - 0160-9289 .- 1932-8737. ; 42:5, s. 498-505
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In the setting of prior myocardial infarction, the oral antiplatelet ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced the risk of recurrent ischemic events, especially, in those with diabetes mellitus. Patients with stable coronary disease and diabetes are also at elevated risk and might benefit from dual antiplatelet therapy. The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS, NCT01991795) is a Phase 3b randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of ticagrelor vs placebo, on top of low dose aspirin. Patients >= 50 years with type 2 diabetes receiving anti-diabetic medications for at least 6 months with stable coronary artery disease as determined by a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention, bypass grafting, or angiographic stenosis of >= 50% of at least one coronary artery were enrolled. Patients with known prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke were excluded. The primary efficacy endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety endpoint is Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major bleeding. A total of 19 220 patients worldwide have been randomized and at least 1385 adjudicated primary efficacy endpoint events are expected to be available for analysis, with an expected average follow-up of 40 months (maximum 58 months). Most of the exposure is on a 60 mg twice daily dose, as the dose was lowered from 90 mg twice daily partway into the study. The results may revise the boundaries of efficacy for dual antiplatelet therapy and whether it has a role outside acute coronary syndromes, prior myocardial infarction, or percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
4. |
- Anand, Sonia S, et al.
(author)
-
Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable peripheral or carotid artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
- 2018
-
In: Lancet (London, England). - 1474-547X. ; 391:10117, s. 219-229
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Patients with peripheral artery disease have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Antiplatelet agents are widely used to reduce these complications.This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, intermittent claudication with objective evidence of peripheral artery disease), of the carotid arteries (previous carotid artery revascularisation or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%), or coronary artery disease with an ankle-brachial index of less than 0·90. After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral rivaroxaban (2·5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban twice a day (5 mg with aspirin placebo once a day), or to aspirin once a day (100 mg and rivaroxaban placebo twice a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patient, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; the primary peripheral artery disease outcome was major adverse limb events including major amputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, we enrolled 7470 patients with peripheral artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (126 [5%] of 2492 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; hazard ratio [HR] 0·72, 95% CI 0·57-0·90, p=0·0047), and major adverse limb events including major amputation (32 [1%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·54 95% CI 0·35-0·82, p=0·0037). Rivaroxaban 5 mg twice a day compared with aspirin alone did not significantly reduce the composite endpoint (149 [6%] of 2474 vs 174 [7%] of 2504; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·69-1·08, p=0·19), but reduced major adverse limb events including major amputation (40 [2%] vs 60 [2%]; HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·45-1·00, p=0·05). The median duration of treatment was 21 months. The use of the rivaroxaban plus aspirin combination increased major bleeding compared with the aspirin alone group (77 [3%] of 2492 vs 48 [2%] of 2504; HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·12-2·31, p=0·0089), which was mainly gastrointestinal. Similarly, major bleeding occurred in 79 (3%) of 2474 patients with rivaroxaban 5 mg, and in 48 (2%) of 2504 in the aspirin alone group (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·17-2·40; p=0·0043).Low-dose rivaroxaban taken twice a day plus aspirin once a day reduced major adverse cardiovascular and limb events when compared with aspirin alone. Although major bleeding was increased, fatal or critical organ bleeding was not. This combination therapy represents an important advance in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Rivaroxaban alone did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with asprin alone, but reduced major adverse limb events and increased major bleeding.Bayer AG.
|
|
5. |
- Connolly, Stuart J, et al.
(author)
-
Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in patients with stable coronary artery disease: an international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
- 2018
-
In: Lancet (London, England). - 1474-547X. ; 391:10117, s. 205-218
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Coronary artery disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and is a consequence of acute thrombotic events involving activation of platelets and coagulation proteins. Factor Xa inhibitors and aspirin each reduce thrombotic events but have not yet been tested in combination or against each other in patients with stable coronary artery disease.In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, outpatient trial, patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community centres in 33 countries. This paper reports on patients with coronary artery disease. Eligible patients with coronary artery disease had to have had a myocardial infarction in the past 20 years, multi-vessel coronary artery disease, history of stable or unstable angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery. After a 30-day run in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive rivaroxaban (2·5 mg orally twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban alone (5 mg orally twice a day), or aspirin alone (100 mg orally once a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patients, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the COMPASS trial was the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants.Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, 27395 patients were enrolled to the COMPASS trial, of whom 24824 patients had stable coronary artery disease from 558 centres. The combination of rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced the primary outcome more than aspirin alone (347 [4%] of 8313 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74, 95% CI 0·65-0·86, p<0·0001). By comparison, treatment with rivaroxaban alone did not significantly improve the primary outcome when compared with treatment with aspirin alone (411 [5%] of 8250 vs 460 [6%] of 8261; HR 0·89, 95% CI 0·78-1·02, p=0·094). Combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin treatment resulted in more major bleeds than treatment with aspirin alone (263 [3%] of 8313 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·66, 95% CI 1·37-2·03, p<0·0001), and similarly, more bleeds were seen in the rivaroxaban alone group than in the aspirin alone group (236 [3%] of 8250 vs 158 [2%] of 8261; HR 1·51, 95% CI 1·23-1·84, p<0·0001). The most common site of major bleeding was gastrointestinal, occurring in 130 [2%] patients who received combined rivaroxaban plus aspirin, in 84 [1%] patients who received rivaroxaban alone, and in 61 [1%] patients who received aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban plus aspirin reduced mortality when compared with aspirin alone (262 [3%] of 8313 vs 339 [4%] of 8261; HR 0·77, 95% CI 0·65-0·90, p=0·0012).In patients with stable coronary artery disease, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin lowered major vascular events, but increased major bleeding. There was no significant increase in intracranial bleeding or other critical organ bleeding. There was also a significant net benefit in favour of rivaroxaban plus aspirin and deaths were reduced by 23%. Thus, addition of rivaroxaban to aspirin has the potential to substantially reduce morbidity and mortality from coronary artery disease worldwide.Bayer AG.
|
|
6. |
- Hijazi, Ziad, et al.
(author)
-
A biomarker-based risk score to predict death in patients with atrial fibrillation : the ABC (age, biomarkers, clinical history) death risk score
- 2018
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 39:6, s. 477-485
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims: In atrial fibrillation (AF), mortality remains high despite effective anticoagulation. A model predicting the risk of death in these patients is currently not available. We developed and validated a risk score for death in anticoagulated patients with AF including both clinical information and biomarkers.Methods and results: The new risk score was developed and internally validated in 14 611 patients with AF randomized to apixaban vs. warfarin for a median of 1.9 years. External validation was performed in 8548 patients with AF randomized to dabigatran vs. warfarin for 2.0 years. Biomarker samples were obtained at study entry. Variables significantly contributing to the prediction of all-cause mortality were assessed by Cox-regression. Each variable obtained a weight proportional to the model coefficients. There were 1047 all-cause deaths in the derivation and 594 in the validation cohort. The most important predictors of death were N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, troponin-T, growth differentiation factor-15, age, and heart failure, and these were included in the ABC (Age, Biomarkers, Clinical history)-death risk score. The score was well-calibrated and yielded higher c-indices than a model based on all clinical variables in both the derivation (0.74 vs. 0.68) and validation cohorts (0.74 vs. 0.67). The reduction in mortality with apixaban was most pronounced in patients with a high ABC-death score.Conclusion: A new biomarker-based score for predicting risk of death in anticoagulated AF patients was developed, internally and externally validated, and well-calibrated in two large cohorts. The ABC-death risk score performed well and may contribute to overall risk assessment in AF.
|
|
7. |
- Hijazi, Ziad, et al.
(author)
-
The novel biomarker-based ABC (age, biomarkers, clinical history)-bleeding risk score for patients with atrial fibrillation : a derivation and validation study
- 2016
-
In: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 387:10035, s. 2302-2311
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The benefit of oral anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation is based on a balance between reduction in ischaemic stroke and increase in major bleeding. We aimed to develop and validate a new biomarker-based risk score to improve the prognostication of major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation.Methods: We developed and internally validated a new biomarker-based risk score for major bleeding in 14 537 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to apixaban versus warfarin in the ARISTOTLE trial and externally validated it in 8468 patients with atrial fibrillation randomised to dabigatran versus warfarin in the RE-LY trial. Plasma samples for determination of candidate biomarker concentrations were obtained at randomisation. Major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated. The predictive values of biomarkers and clinical variables were assessed with Cox regression models. The most important variables were included in the score with weights proportional to the model coefficients. The ARISTOTLE and RE-LY trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT00412984 and NCT00262600, respectively.Findings: The most important predictors for major bleeding were the concentrations of the biomarkers growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (cTnT-hs) and haemoglobin, age, and previous bleeding. The ABC-bleeding score (age, biomarkers [GDF-15, cTnT-hs, and haemoglobin], and clinical history [previous bleeding]) score yielded a higher c-index than the conventional HAS-BLED and the newer ORBIT scores for major bleeding in both the derivation cohort (0.68 [95% CI 0.66-0.70] vs 0.61 [0.59-0.63] vs 0.65 [0.62-0.67], respectively; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p< 0.0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p= 0.0008). ABC-bleeding score also yielded a higher c-index score in the the external validation cohort (0.71 [95% CI 0.68-0.73] vs 0.62 [0.59-0.64] for HAS-BLED vs 0.68 [0.65-0.70] for ORBIT; ABC-bleeding vs HAS-BLED p< 0.0001 and ABC-bleeding vs ORBIT p= 0.0016). A modified ABC-bleeding score using alternative biomarkers (haematocrit, cTnI-hs, cystatin C, or creatinine clearance) also outperformed the HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores.Interpretation: The ABC-bleeding score, using age, history of bleeding, and three biomarkers (haemoglobin, cTn-hs, and GDF-15 or cystatin C/CKD-EPI) was internally and externally validated and calibrated in large cohorts of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulation therapy. The ABC-bleeding score performed better than HAS-BLED and ORBIT scores and should be useful as decision support on anticoagulation treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation.
|
|
8. |
- Oldgren, Jonas, et al.
(author)
-
Performance and Validation of a Novel Biomarker-Based Stroke Risk Score for Atrial Fibrillation
- 2016
-
In: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 134:22, s. 1697-1707
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: -Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased but variable risk of stroke. Our aim was to validate the recently developed biomarker-based ABC-stroke risk score and compare its performance with the CHA2DS2VASc and ATRIA risk scores.METHODS: -ABC-stroke score includes Age, Biomarkers (NT-proBNP and high-sensitivity [hs] troponin [cTn]), and Clinical history (prior stroke). This validation was based on 8,356 patients, 16,137 person-years of follow-up, and 219 adjudicated stroke or systemic embolic (SE) events in anticoagulated patients with AF in the RE-LY study. Levels of NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and hs-cTnI were determined in plasma samples obtained at study entry.RESULTS: -The ABC-stroke score was well calibrated with 0.76 stroke/SE events per 100 person-years in the predefined low (<1%/year) risk group, 1.48 in the medium (1-2%/year) risk group, and 2.60 in the high (>2%/year) risk group for the ABC-stroke score with hs-cTnT. Hazard ratios for stroke/SE were 1.95 for medium versus low risk, and 3.44 for high versus low risk groups. ABC-stroke score achieved C indices of 0.65 with both hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI, as compared with 0.60 for CHA2DS2VASc (p=0.004 for hs-cTnT and p=0.022 hs-cTnI) and 0.61 for ATRIA scores (p=0.005 hs-cTnT and p=0.034 for hs-cTnI).CONCLUSIONS: -The biomarker-based ABC-stroke score was well calibrated and consistently performed better than both the CHA2DS2VASc and ATRIA stroke scores. The ABC score should be considered an improved decision support tool in the care of patients with AF.
|
|
9. |
- Bekwelem, Wobo, et al.
(author)
-
Extracranial Systemic Embolic Events in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes
- 2015
-
In: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 132:9, s. 796-803
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is a major cause of thromboembolic events. In comparison with atrial fibrillation-related stroke, extracranial systemic embolic events (SEEs) remain poorly defined. Methods and Results All suspected SEEs reported among 37973 participants of 4 large contemporary randomized clinical trials of anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation were independently readjudicated for clinical and objective evidence of sudden loss of perfusion of a limb or organ. Over 91746 patient-years of follow-up, 221 SEEs occurred in 219 subjects. The SEE incidence was 0.24 of 100 and stroke incidence was 1.92 of 100 patient-years. In comparison with patients with stroke, those with SEE were more often female (56% versus 47%; P=0.01) and had comparable mean age (73.18.5 versus 73.5 +/- 8.8 years; P=0.57) and mean CHADS(2) scores (2.4 +/- 1.3 versus 2.5 +/- 1.2; P=0.33). SEEs more frequently involved the lower extremity (58%) than visceral-mesenteric (31%) or upper extremity (10%). SEE-related care involved clinic assessment alone in 5%, 30% were hospitalized without procedures, 60% underwent endovascular or surgical intervention, and 5% underwent amputation. Within 30 days, 54% of patients recovered fully, 20% survived with deficits, and 25% died. Thirty-day mortality was greater after visceral-mesenteric than lower- or upper-extremity SEE (55%, 17%, and 9%, respectively, P0.0001). The relative risk of death throughout follow-up was 4.33 (95% confidence interval, 3.29-5.70) after SEE versus 6.79 (95% confidence interval, 6.22-7.41) after stroke in comparison with patients without either event. Conclusions SEE constituted 11.5% of clinically recognized thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation and was associated with high morbidity and mortality. SEE mortality was comparable to that of ischemic stroke and varied by anatomic site.
|
|
10. |
- Boehm, Michael, et al.
(author)
-
Changes in Renal Function in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation An Analysis From the RE-LY Trial
- 2015
-
In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 65:23, s. 2481-2493
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND Vitamin K-dependent factors protect against vascular and renovascular calcification, and vitamin K antagonists may be associated with a decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR). OBJECTIVES This study analyzed changes in GFR during long-term treatment with warfarin or dabigatran etexilate (DE) in patients enrolled in the RE-LY (Randomized Evaluation of Long Term Anticoagulation Therapy) trial. METHODS Of the 18,113 patients in the RE-LY study randomized to receive DE (110 mg or 150 mg twice daily) or warfarin, 16,490 patients with atrial fibrillation had creatinine values measured at baseline and at least 1 follow-up visit. Changes in GFR for up to 30 months were evaluated. RESULTS GFR declined in all treatment groups. After an average of 30 months, the mean +/- SE decline in GFR was significantly greater with warfarin (-3.68 +/- 0.24 ml/min) compared with DE 110 mg (-2.57 +/- 0.24 ml/min; p = 0.0009 vs. warfarin) and DE 150 mg (-2.46 +/- 0.23 ml/min; p = 0.0002 vs. warfarin). A decrease in GFR >25% was less likely with DE 110 mg (hazard ratio: 0.81 [95% confidence interval: 0.69 to 0.96]; p = 0.017) or DE 150 mg (hazard ratio: 0.79 [95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 0.93]; p = 0.0056) than with warfarin in the observation period >18 months. Patients with poor international normalized ratio control (i.e., time in therapeutic range <65%) exhibited a faster decline in GFR. A more pronounced decline in GFR was associated with previous warfarin use and with the presence of diabetes. CONCLUSIONS Patients with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulation exhibited a decline in renal function that was greater in those taking warfarin versus DE, and it was amplified by diabetes and previous vitamin K antagonist use.
|
|