Hussein R. Al-Khalidi

Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND Vitamin K antagonists are highly effective in preventing stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation but have several limitations. Apixaban is a novel oral direct factor Xa inhibitor that has been shown to reduce the risk of stroke in a similar population in comparison with aspirin. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared apixaban (at a dose of 5 mg twice daily) with warfarin (target international normalized ratio, 2.0 to 3.0) in 18,201 patients with atrial fibrillation and at least one additional risk factor for stroke. The primary outcome was ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. The trial was designed to test for noninferiority, with key secondary objectives of testing for superiority with respect to the primary outcome and to the rates of major bleeding and death from any cause. RESULTS The median duration of follow-up was 1.8 years. The rate of the primary outcome was 1.27% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 1.60% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio with apixaban, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.01 for superiority). The rate of major bleeding was 2.13% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 3.09% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.80; P<0.001), and the rates of death from any cause were 3.52% and 3.94%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.99; P=0.047). The rate of hemorrhagic stroke was 0.24% per year in the apixaban group, as compared with 0.47% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.75; P<0.001), and the rate of ischemic or uncertain type of stroke was 0.97% per year in the apixaban group and 1.05% per year in the warfarin group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.13; P=0.42). CONCLUSIONS In patients with atrial fibrillation, apixaban was superior to warfarin in preventing stroke or systemic embolism, caused less bleeding, and resulted in lower mortality. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ARISTOTLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00412984.).

Drotrecogin Alfa (Activated) in Adults with Septic Shock

BACKGROUND There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 μg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization. RESULTS At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81). CONCLUSIONS DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.).

Outcomes of Anatomical versus Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND Many patients have symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD) and are often evaluated with the use of diagnostic testing, although there are limited data from randomized trials to guide care. METHODS We randomly assigned 10,003 symptomatic patients to a strategy of initial anatomical testing with the use of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or to functional testing (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress testing, or stress echocardiography). The composite primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or major procedural complication. Secondary end points included invasive cardiac catheterization that did not show obstructive CAD and radiation exposure. RESULTS The mean age of the patients was 60.8±8.3 years, 52.7% were women, and 87.7% had chest pain or dyspnea on exertion. The mean pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD was 53.3±21.4%. Over a median follow-up period of 25 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 164 of 4996 patients in the CTA group (3.3%) and in 151 of 5007 (3.0%) in the functional-testing group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.29; P=0.75). CTA was associated with fewer catheterizations showing no obstructive CAD than was functional testing (3.4% vs. 4.3%, P=0.02), although more patients in the CTA group underwent catheterization within 90 days after randomization (12.2% vs. 8.1%). The median cumulative radiation exposure per patient was lower in the CTA group than in the functional-testing group (10.0 mSv vs. 11.3 mSv), but 32.6% of the patients in the functional-testing group had no exposure, so the overall exposure was higher in the CTA group (mean, 12.0 mSv vs. 10.1 mSv; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In symptomatic patients with suspected CAD who required noninvasive testing, a strategy of initial CTA, as compared with functional testing, did not improve clinical outcomes over a median follow-up of 2 years. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; PROMISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01174550.).

Comparison of magnetic resonance feature tracking for strain calculation with harmonic phase imaging analysis.

OBJECTIVES To compare a steady-state free precession cine sequence-based technique (feature tracking [FT]) to tagged harmonic phase (HARP) analysis for peak average circumferential myocardial strain (epsilon(cc)) analysis in a large and heterogeneous population of boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). BACKGROUND Current epsilon(cc) assessment techniques require cardiac magnetic resonance-tagged imaging sequences, and their analysis is complex. The FT method can readily be performed on standard cine (steady-state free precession) sequences. METHODS We compared mid-left ventricular whole-slice epsilon(cc) by the 2 techniques in 191 DMD patients grouped according to age and severity of cardiac dysfunction: group B: DMD patients 10 years and younger with normal ejection fraction (EF); group C: DMD patients older than 10 years with normal EF; group D: DMD patients older than 10 years with reduced EF but negative myocardial delayed enhancement (MDE); group E: DMD patients older than 10 years with reduced EF and positive MDE; and group A: 42 control subjects. Retrospective, offline analysis was performed on matched tagged and steady-state free precession slices. RESULTS For the entire study population (N = 233), mean FT epsilon(cc) values (-13.3 +/- 3.8%) were highly correlated with HARP epsilon(cc) values (-13.6 +/- 3.4%), with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.899. The mean epsilon(cc) of DMD patients determined by HARP (-12.52 +/- 2.69%) and FT (-12.16 +/- 3.12%) was not significantly different (p = NS). Similarly, the mean epsilon(cc) of the control subjects by determined HARP (-18.85 +/- 1.86) and FT (-18.81 +/- 1.83) was not significantly different (p = NS). Excellent correlation between the 2 methods was found among subgroups A through E, except there was no significant difference in strain between groups B and C with FT analysis. CONCLUSIONS FT-based assessment of epsilon(cc) correlates highly with epsilon(cc) derived from tagged images in a large DMD patient population with a wide range of cardiac dysfunction and can be performed without additional imaging.

Mortality in Patients After a Recent Myocardial Infarction A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Azimilide Using Heart Rate Variability for Risk Stratification

Background—Depressed left ventricular function (LVF) and low heart rate variability (HRV) identify patients at risk of increased mortality after myocardial infarction (MI). Azimilide, a novel class III antiarrhythmic drug, was investigated for its effects on mortality in patients with depressed LVF after recent MI and in a subpopulation of patients with low HRV. Methods and Results—A total of 3717 post-MI patients with depressed LVF were enrolled in this randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of azimilide 100 mg on all-cause mortality. Placebo patients with low HRV had a significantly higher 1-year mortality than those with high HRV (>20 U; 15% versus 9.5%, P <0.0005) despite nearly identical ejection fractions. No significant differences were observed between the 100-mg azimilide and placebo groups for all-cause mortality in either the “at-risk” patients identified by depressed LVF (12% versus 12%) or the subpopulation of “high-risk” patients identified by low HRV (14% versus 15%) or for total cardiac or arrhythmic mortality. Significantly fewer patients receiving azimilide developed atrial fibrillation than did patients receiving placebo (0.5% versus 1.2%, P <0.04). The incidences of torsade de pointes and severe neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count ≤500 cells/&mgr;L) were slightly higher in the azimilide group than in the placebo group (0.3% versus 0.1% for torsade de pointes and 0.9% versus 0.2% for severe neutropenia). Conclusions—Azimilide did not improve or worsen the mortality of patients after MI. Low HRV independently identified a subpopulation at high risk of mortality.

Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND The survival benefit of a strategy of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) added to guideline-directed medical therapy, as compared with medical therapy alone, in patients with coronary artery disease, heart failure, and severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction remains unclear. METHODS From July 2002 to May 2007, a total of 1212 patients with an ejection fraction of 35% or less and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomly assigned to undergo CABG plus medical therapy (CABG group, 610 patients) or medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group, 602 patients). The primary outcome was death from any cause. Major secondary outcomes included death from cardiovascular causes and death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. The median duration of follow-up, including the current extended-follow-up study, was 9.8 years. RESULTS A primary outcome event occurred in 359 patients (58.9%) in the CABG group and in 398 patients (66.1%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio with CABG vs. medical therapy, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.97; P=0.02 by log-rank test). A total of 247 patients (40.5%) in the CABG group and 297 patients (49.3%) in the medical-therapy group died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.006 by log-rank test). Death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 467 patients (76.6%) in the CABG group and in 524 patients (87.0%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.82; P<0.001 by log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS In a cohort of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, the rates of death from any cause, death from cardiovascular causes, and death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes were significantly lower over 10 years among patients who underwent CABG in addition to receiving medical therapy than among those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; STICH [and STICHES] ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.).

Placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial of azimilide for prevention of ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

Background—Although implanted cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) effectively treat sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias, up to 50% of ICD recipients eventually require concomitant antiarrhythmic drug therapy to prevent symptomatic arrhythmia recurrences and hence reduce the number of device therapies. Methods and Results—A total of 633 ICD recipients were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of daily doses of 75 or 125 mg of azimilide on recurrent symptomatic ventricular tachyarrhythmias and ICD therapies. Total all-cause shocks plus symptomatic ventricular tachycardia (VT) terminated by antitachycardia pacing (ATP) were significantly reduced by azimilide, with relative risk reductions of 57% (hazard ratio [HR]=0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.69, P=0.0006) and 47% (HR=0.53, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.83, P=0.0053) at 75- and 125-mg doses, respectively. The reductions in all-cause shocks with both doses of azimilide did not achieve statistical significance. The incidence of all appropriate ICD therapies (shocks or ATP-terminated VT) was reduced significantly among patients taking 75 mg of azimilide (HR=0.52, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.89, P=0.017) and those taking 125 mg of azimilide (HR=0.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.65, P=0.0004). Five patients in the azimilide groups and 1 patient in the placebo group had torsade de pointes; all were successfully treated by the device. One patient taking 75 mg of azimilide had severe but reversible neutropenia. Conclusions—Azimilide significantly reduced the recurrence of VT or ventricular fibrillation terminated by shocks or ATP in ICD patients, thereby reducing the burden of symptomatic ventricular tachyarrhythmia.

Trends in Use of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy Among Patients Hospitalized for Heart Failure Have the Previously Observed Sex and Racial Disparities Changed Over Time?

Background— Prior studies have demonstrated low use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) as primary prevention, particularly among women and blacks. The degree to which the overall use of ICD therapy and disparities in use have changed is unclear. Methods and Results— We examined 11 880 unique patients with a history of heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction ⩽35% who were ≥65 years old and enrolled in the Get With the Guidelines–Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) program from January 2005 through December 2009. We determined the rate of ICD use by year for the overall population and for sex and race groups. From 2005 to 2007, overall ICD use increased from 30.2% to 42.4% and then remained unchanged in 2008 to 2009. After adjustment for potential confounders, ICD use increased significantly in the overall study population during 2005 to 2007 (odds ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.11–1.48 per year; P=0.0008) and in black women (odds ratio, 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–2.58 per year; P=0.0008), white women (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.59 per year; P=0.010), black men (odds ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.19–1.99 per year; P=0.0009), and white men (odds ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–1.48 per year; P=0.0072). The increase in ICD use was greatest among blacks. Conclusions— In the GWTG-HF quality improvement program, a significant increase in ICD therapy use was observed over time in all sex and race groups. The previously described racial disparities in ICD use were no longer present by the end of the study period; however, sex differences persisted.

Survival of Patients Receiving a Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Clinical Practice vs Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE Randomized clinical trials have shown that implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy saves lives. Whether the survival of patients who received an ICD in primary prevention clinical trials differs from that of trial-eligible patients receiving a primary prevention ICD in clinical practice is unknown. OBJECTIVE To determine whether trial-eligible patients who received a primary prevention ICD as documented in a large national registry have a survival rate that differs from the survival rate of similar patients who received an ICD in the 2 largest primary prevention clinical trials, MADIT-II (n = 742) and SCD-HeFT (n = 829). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Retrospective analysis of data for patients enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2007, meeting the MADIT-II criteria (2464 propensity score-matched patients) or the SCD-HeFT criteria (3352 propensity score-matched patients). Mortality data for the registry patients were collected through December 31, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare mortality from any cause. RESULTS The median follow-up time in MADIT-II, SCD-HeFT, and the ICD Registry was 19.5, 46.1, and 35.2 months, respectively. Compared with patients enrolled in the clinical trials, patients in the ICD Registry were significantly older and had a higher burden of comorbidities. In the matched cohorts, there was no significant difference in survival between MADIT-II-like patients in the registry and MADIT-II patients randomized to receive an ICD (2-year mortality rates: 13.9% and 15.6%, respectively; adjusted ICD Registry vs trial hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.31; P = .62). Likewise, the survival among SCD-HeFT-like patients in the registry was not significantly different from survival among patients randomized to receive ICD therapy in SCD-HeFT (3-year mortality rates: 17.3% and 17.4%, respectively; adjusted registry vs trial hazard ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.97-1.38; P = .11). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE There was no significant difference in survival between clinical trial patients randomized to receive an ICD and a similar group of clinical registry patients who received a primary prevention ICD. Our findings support the continued use of primary prevention ICDs in similar patients seen in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000609.

Clinical outcomes and management associated with major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with apixaban or warfarin: insights from the ARISTOTLE trial

AIM In the Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial, apixaban compared with warfarin reduced the risk of stroke, major bleed, and death in patients with atrial fibrillation. In this ancillary study, we evaluated clinical consequences of major bleeds, as well as management and treatment effects of warfarin vs. apixaban. METHODS AND RESULTS Major International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding was defined as overt bleeding accompanied by a decrease in haemoglobin (Hb) of ≥2 g/dL or transfusion of ≥2 units of packed red cells, occurring at a critical site or resulting in death. Time to event [death, ischaemic stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI)] was evaluated by Cox regression models. The excess risk associated with bleeding was evaluated by separate time-dependent indicators for intracranial (ICH) and non-intracranial haemorrhage. Major bleeding occurred in 848 individuals (4.7%), of whom 126 (14.9%) died within 30 days. Of 176 patients with an ICH, 76 (43.2%) died, and of the 695 patients with major non-ICH, 64 (9.2%) died within 30 days of the bleeding. The risk of death, ischaemic stroke, or MI was increased roughly 12-fold after a major non-ICH bleeding event within 30 days. Corresponding risk of death following an ICH was markedly increased, with HR 121.5 (95% CI 91.3-161.8) as was stroke or MI with HR 21.95 (95% CI 9.88-48.81), respectively. Among patients with major bleeds, 20.8% received vitamin K and/or related medications (fresh frozen plasma, coagulation factors, factor VIIa) to stop bleeding within 3 days, and 37% received blood transfusion. There was no interaction between apixaban and warfarin and major bleeding on the risk of death, stroke, or MI. CONCLUSION Major bleeding was associated with substantially increased risk of death, ischaemic stroke, or MI, especially following ICH, and this risk was similarly elevated regardless of treatment with apixaban or warfarin. These results underscore the importance of preventing bleeding in anti-coagulated patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00412984.