Dronedarone Versus Sotalol in Antiarrhythmic Drug-Naive Veterans With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Sotalol and dronedarone are both used for maintenance of sinus rhythm for patients with atrial fibrillation. However, while sotalol requires initial monitoring for QT prolongation and proarrhythmia, dronedarone does not. These treatments can be used in comparable patients, but their safety and effectiveness have not been compared head to head. Therefore, we retrospectively evaluated the effectiveness and safety using data from a large health care system.

METHODS

Using Veterans Health Administration data, we identified 11 296 antiarrhythmic drug-naive patients with atrial fibrillation prescribed dronedarone or sotalol in 2012 or later. We excluded patients with prior conduction disease, pacemakers or implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, ventricular arrhythmia, cancer, renal failure, liver disease, or heart failure. We used natural language processing to identify and compare baseline left ventricular ejection fraction between treatment arms. We used 1:1 propensity score matching, based on patient demographics, comorbidities, and medications, and Cox regression to compare strategies. To evaluate residual confounding, we performed falsification analysis with nonplausible outcomes.

RESULTS

The matched cohort comprised 6212 patients (3106 dronedarone and 3106 sotalol; mean [±SD] age, 71±10 years; 2.5% female; mean [±SD] CHA2DS2-VASC, 2±1.3). The mean (±SD) left ventricular ejection fraction was 55±11 and 58±10 for dronedarone and sotalol users, correspondingly. Dronedarone, compared with sotalol, did not demonstrate a significant association with risk of cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.88-1.21]) or all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.68-1.16]). However, dronedarone was associated with significantly lower risk of ventricular proarrhythmic events (hazard ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.38-0.74]) and symptomatic bradycardia (hazard ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.37-0.87]). The primary findings were stable across sensitivity analyses. Falsification analyses were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Dronedarone, compared with sotalol, was associated with a lower risk of ventricular proarrhythmic events and conduction disorders while having no difference in risk of incident cardiovascular hospitalization and mortality. These observational data provide the basis for prospective efficacy and safety trials.

Effect of dronedarone vs. placebo on atrial fibrillation progression: a post hoc analysis from ATHENA trial

AIMS

This post hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785) assessed the effect of dronedarone on the estimated burden of atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL) progression to presumed permanent AF/AFL, and regression to sinus rhythm (SR), compared with placebo.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The burden of AF/AFL was estimated by a modified Rosendaal method using available electrocardiograms (ECG). Cumulative incidence of permanent AF/AFL (defined as ≥6 months of AF/AFL until end of study) or permanent SR (defined as ≥6 months of SR until end of study) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. A log-rank test was used to assess statistical significance. Hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a Cox model, adjusted for treatment group. Of the 4439 patients included in this analysis, 2208 received dronedarone, and 2231 placebo. Baseline and clinical characteristics were well balanced between groups. Overall, 304 (13.8%) dronedarone-treated patients progressed to permanent AF/AFL compared with 455 (20.4%) treated with placebo (P < 0.0001). Compared with those receiving placebo, patients receiving dronedarone had a lower cumulative incidence of permanent AF/AFL (log-rank P < 0.001; HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.56-0.75), a higher cumulative incidence of permanent SR (log-rank P < 0.001; HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.09-1.29), and a lower estimated AF/AFL burden over time (P < 0.01 from Day 14 to Month 21).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that dronedarone could be a useful antiarrhythmic drug for early rhythm control due to less AF/AFL progression and more regression to SR vs. placebo, potentially reflecting reverse remodeling.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00174785.

Novel methodology for the evaluation of symptoms reported by patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: Application of natural language processing to electronic medical records data

INTRODUCTION

Understanding symptom patterns in atrial fibrillation (AF) can help in disease management. We report on the application of natural language processing (NLP) to electronic medical records (EMRs) to capture symptom reports in patients with newly diagnosed (incident) AF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This observational retrospective study included adult patients with an index diagnosis of incident AF during January 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018, in the Optum datasets. The baseline and follow-up periods were 1 year before/after the index date, respectively. The primary objective was identification of the following predefined symptom reports: dyspnea or shortness of breath; syncope, presyncope, lightheadedness, or dizziness; chest pain; fatigue; and palpitations. In an exploratory analysis, the incidence rates of symptom reports and cardiovascular hospitalization were assessed in propensity-matched patient cohorts with incident AF receiving first-line dronedarone or sotalol. Among 30 447 patients with an index AF diagnosis, the NLP algorithm identified at least 1 predefined symptom in 9734 (31.9%) patients. The incidence rate of symptom reports was highest at 0-3 months post-diagnosis and lower at >3-6 and >6-12 months (pre-defined timepoints). Across all time periods, the most common symptoms were dyspnea or shortness of breath, followed by syncope, presyncope, lightheadedness, or dizziness. Similar temporal patterns of symptom reports were observed among patients with prescriptions for dronedarone or sotalol as first-line treatment.

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates that NLP can be applied to EMR data to characterize symptom reports in patients with incident AF, and the potential for these methods to inform comparative effectiveness.

Dronedarone as early rhythm control: post-hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial using EAST-AFNET4 criteria

Introduction

The EAST-AFNET4 study found that early, systematic rhythm control reduced cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with early atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF) of ≤12 months compared to guideline-recommended usual care.

Purpose

This post-hoc analysis aimed to assess whether antiarrhythmic drug therapy alone (i.e. dronedarone 400 mg BID) improved CV outcomes compared to placebo in patients with early AF in the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785; Ref 2) applying the EAST-AFNET4 criteria.

Methods

All patients in the randomised, placebo-controlled ATHENA trial with ≥2 CV conditions as defined in the EAST-AFNET 4 inclusion criteria and known AF duration at baseline were identified. Patients were split into early AF (≤12 months duration) and late AF (&gt;12 months duration) subgroups. Outcomes were collected over a mean follow-up of 21 months and included a composite of CV death, stroke, or hospitalisation with worsening of heart failure or acute coronary syndrome; nights spent in hospital per year; and a safety composite endpoint comprising death, stroke, or pre-specified serious adverse events. All analyses were conducted in the intention-to-treat population.

Results

Dronedarone treatment was associated with significantly (p=0.014) fewer CV events vs placebo in patients with early AF (Fig 1). There was no interaction with AF duration (p=0.64). Patients on dronedarone spent numerically fewer nights in hospital vs placebo in early (13.4 vs 14.0) and late AF (13.9 vs 16.3), with no treatment interaction between subgroups (p=NS). Dronedarone was associated with more sinus rhythm (SR) at 12 months vs placebo (early AF: 79.9% vs 70.3%; late AF: 60.6% vs 54.0%), and similar rates of SR at 24 months (early AF: 65.8% vs 65.7%; late AF: 54.7% vs 54.1%). For the safety composite endpoint, estimated events/patients were as follows for the early AF group (dronedarone: 153/135; placebo: 182/165) and the late AF group (dronedarone: 86/81; placebo: 95/89).

Conclusions

The clinical benefit of early rhythm control found in the EAST-AFNET4 trial can be replicated in this analysis of patients with early AF treated in the ATHENA trial comparing dronedarone to placebo. These data support the use of dronedarone as part of early rhythm control.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi

Effect of dronedarone versus placebo on atrial fibrillation progression: a post-hoc analysis from ATHENA trial

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) may progress over time, leading to greater AF burden. Data suggest that patients receiving rhythm control drugs are less likely to progress to more severe forms of AF vs those receiving a rate control strategy only. ATHENA (NCT00174785) demonstrated that dronedarone significantly decreased cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization and death [1], but it is unclear whether dronedarone affects progression of AF and atrial flutter (AFL).

Purpose

This post hoc analysis of ATHENA assessed (1) the effect of dronedarone on estimated AF/AFL burden, and (2) AF progression to presumed permanent AF/AFL or AF regression to sinus rhythm (SR).

Methods

AF/AFL burden was estimated using a modified Rosendaal method [2] based on status of all ECG assessments at each visit. Cumulative incidence of presumed permanent AF/AFL (defined as ≥6 months of AF/AFL until end of study) or preserved SR (≥6 months of SR until end of study) were calculated using the complement of Kaplan-Meier estimates. Log-rank test was used to assess statistical significance.

Results

Demographic characteristics in 2231 patients on placebo and 2208 on dronedarone were well balanced between groups. Overall, 304 (13.8%) dronedarone-treated patients progressed to presumed permanent AF/AFL compared with 455 (20.4%) treated with placebo. Patients progressing to presumed permanent AF/AFL tended to have larger left atrial diameters and lower left ventricular ejection fractions irrespective of treatment group. The cumulative incidence of presumed permanent AF/AFL was significantly lower in dronedarone-treated patients over time (log-rank p&lt;0.0001; Figure 1). Estimated AF/AFL burden was lower in dronedarone-treated patients over time (Figure 2). Overall, 1149 (52.0%) dronedarone-treated patients had preserved SR compared with 1021 (45.8%) placebo-treated patients, and cumulative incidence of preserved SR was significantly higher in the dronedarone arm compared with the placebo arm (log-rank p&lt;0.0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with the findings in the main ATHENA analysis.

Conclusions

Dronedarone use was associated with fewer patients progressing to presumed permanent AF/AFL, more patients with AF/AFL regressing to preserved SR, and a lower estimated AF/AFL burden, suggesting a protective benefit against AF disease progression.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi

Effect of Dronedarone in the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation in the Asian Population: Post Hoc Analysis of the ATHENA Trial

PURPOSE

Limited data are available on the impact of dronedarone treatment in Asian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL). This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of dronedarone compared with placebo in populations from Asian and non-Asian regions randomized in the ATHENA trial (A Placebo-Controlled, Double-blind, Parallel Arm Trial to Assess the Efficacy of Dronedarone 400 mg BID for the Prevention of CV Hospitalization or Death From Any Cause in Patients With AF/AFL).

METHODS

Time to first hospitalization for cardiovascular events or death from any cause (primary outcome) and time to first AF/AFL event recurrence (secondary outcome) were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression.

FINDINGS

The risk of experiencing the primary composite outcome was significantly lower in the dronedarone-treated patients in both the Asian (hazard ratio = 0.541; 95% CI, 0.320-0.914]) and non-Asian (hazard ratio = 0.768; 95% CI, 0.696-0.848) populations than in the placebo-treated patients. The median time to the first AF/AFL event recurrence was longer in the dronedarone-treated population than in the placebo-treated populations: 183 vs 92 days (P = 0.165) in the Asian population and 534 vs 196 days (P < 0.001) in the non-Asian population. Treatment-emergent adverse events in Asian (81.2% vs 78.4%) and non-Asian (71.4% vs 68.7%) populations and serious treatment-emergent adverse events in Asian (14.3% vs 15.7%) and non-Asian (20.3% vs 21.5%) patients were comparable in patients taking dronedarone compared with those taking placebo.

IMPLICATION

Efficacy and tolerability of dronedarone were consistent in the Asian population compared with the non-Asian population in the ATHENA trial. These finding may aid Asian health care professionals to select the appropriate first-line treatment for Asian patients with AF/AFL.

Early diagnosis and better rhythm management to improve outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation: the 8th AFNET/EHRA consensus conference

Despite marked progress in the management of atrial fibrillation (AF), detecting AF remains difficult and AF-related complications cause unacceptable morbidity and mortality even on optimal current therapy. This document summarizes the key outcomes of the 8th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA). Eighty-three international experts met in Hamburg for 2 days in October 2021. Results of the interdisciplinary, hybrid discussions in breakout groups and the plenary based on recently published and unpublished observations are summarized in this consensus paper to support improved care for patients with AF by guiding prevention, individualized management, and research strategies. The main outcomes are (i) new evidence supports a simple, scalable, and pragmatic population-based AF screening pathway; (ii) rhythm management is evolving from therapy aimed at improving symptoms to an integrated domain in the prevention of AF-related outcomes, especially in patients with recently diagnosed AF; (iii) improved characterization of atrial cardiomyopathy may help to identify patients in need for therapy; (iv) standardized assessment of cognitive function in patients with AF could lead to improvement in patient outcomes; and (v) artificial intelligence (AI) can support all of the above aims, but requires advanced interdisciplinary knowledge and collaboration as well as a better medico-legal framework. Implementation of new evidence-based approaches to AF screening and rhythm management can improve outcomes in patients with AF. Additional benefits are possible with further efforts to identify and target atrial cardiomyopathy and cognitive impairment, which can be facilitated by AI.

Impact of dronedarone on patients with atrial fibrillation and diabetes: A sub-analysis of the ATHENA and EURIDIS/ADONIS studies

AIM

This post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of dronedarone in atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) patients with/without diabetes.

METHODS

Patients were categorized according to baseline diabetes status. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard-ratios were assessed using Cox models.

RESULTS

945/4628 (dronedarone = 482; placebo = 463) patients in ATHENA and 215/1237 (dronedarone = 148; placebo = 67) patients in EURIDIS/ADONIS studies had diabetes. In ATHENA, there were higher rates of CV hospitalization/death in patients with diabetes (39.5%) than without diabetes (34.7%). Incidence of first CV hospitalization/death was lower in patients with diabetes treated with dronedarone (35.1%) than placebo (44.1%), and time to this event was longer in those treated with dronedarone than placebo (log-rank p = 0.005). Median AF/AFL recurrence time was longer in patients treated with dronedarone than placebo in patients with diabetes (ATHENA: 722 vs 527 days, log-rank p = 0.004; EURIDIS/ADONIS: 100 vs 23 days, log-rank p = 0.15) or without diabetes (ATHENA: 741 vs 492 days, log-rank p < 0.0001; EURIDIS/ADONIS: 120 vs 59 days, log-rank p = 0.0002). Occurrence of any treatment-related adverse events with dronedarone was similar for patients with/without diabetes and was comparable to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Dronedarone reduced incidence of CV hospitalization/death, AF/AFL recurrence and increased time to these events in AF/AFL patients with/without diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable, as it was a post hoc analysis. This article is based on previously conducted studies (ATHENA: NCT00174785, EURIDIS: NCT00259428, and ADONIS: NCT00259376).

Dronedarone vs. placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter across a range of renal function: a post hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial

Aims

Use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is challenging owing to issues with renal clearance, drug accumulation, and increased proarrhythmic risks. Because CKD is a common comorbidity in patients with atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL), it is important to establish the efficacy and safety of AAD treatment in patients with CKD.

Methods and results

Dronedarone efficacy and safety in individuals with AF/AFL and varying renal functionality [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR): ≥60, ≥45 and <60, and <45 mL/min] was investigated in a post hoc analysis of ATHENA (NCT00174785), a randomized, double-blind trial of dronedarone vs. placebo in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL plus additional cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. Log-rank testing and Cox regression were used to compare the incidence of endpoints between treatments. Overall, 4588 participants were enrolled from the trial. There was no interaction between treatment group and baseline eGFR assessed as a continuous variable (P = 0.743) for the first CV hospitalization or death from any cause (primary outcome). This outcome was lower with dronedarone vs. placebo across a wide range of renal function. First CV hospitalization and first AF/AFL recurrence were both lower in the two least renally impaired subgroups with dronedarone vs. placebo. Treatment emergent adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were more frequent with dronedarone vs. placebo and occurred more often in patients with severe renal impairment.

Conclusion

Dronedarone is an effective AAD in patients with AF/AFL and CV risk factors across a wide range of renal function.

Dronedarone for the Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation with Concomitant Heart Failure with Preserved and Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction: Post-Hoc Analysis of the ATHENA Trial

AIMS

Limited therapeutic options are available for the management of atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) with concomitant heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction. (HFpEF and HFmrEF). Dronedarone reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with AF, but sparse data are available examining its role in patients with AF complicated by HFpEF and HFmrEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

ATHENA was an international, multicenter trial that randomized 4,628 patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL and cardiovascular risk factors to dronedarone 400 mg twice daily versus placebo. We evaluated patients with 1) symptomatic HFpEF and HFmrEF (defined as LVEF>40%, evidence of structural heart disease, and New York Heart Association class II/III or diuretic use), 2) HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVEF≤40%), and 3) those without HF. We assessed effects of dronedarone vs placebo on death or cardiovascular hospitalization (primary endpoint), other key efficacy endpoints, and safety. Overall, 534 (12%) had HFpEF or HFmrEF, 422 (9%) had HFrEF or LV dysfunction, and 3,672 (79%) did not have HF. Patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF had a mean age of 73±9 years, 37% were women, and had a mean LVEF of 57±9%. Over 21±5 months mean follow-up, dronedarone consistently reduced risk of death or cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.84) without heterogeneity based on HF status (P_interaction >0.10). This risk reduction in the primary endpoint was consistent across the range of LVEF (as a continuous function) in HF without heterogeneity (P_interaction =0.71). Rates of death, cardiovascular hospitalization, and HF hospitalization each directionally favored dronedarone vs. placebo in HFpEF and HFmrEF, but these treatment effects were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Dronedarone is associated with reduced cardiovascular events in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF/AFL and HF across the spectrum of LVEF, including among those with HFpEF and HFmrEF. These data support a rationale for a future dedicated and powered clinical trial to affirm the net clinical benefit of dronedarone in this population.

Efficacy and safety of dronedarone versus placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation stratified according to renal function: Post hoc analyses of the EURIDIS-ADONIS trials

BACKGROUND

The use of antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is complex because impaired renal clearance can cause increased drug levels, and risk of intolerance or adverse events. Due to the propensity for CKD to occur alongside atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL), it is essential that AAD safety and efficacy are assessed for patients with CKD.

HYPOTHESIS

Dronedarone, an approved AAD, may present a suitable therapeutic option for patients with AF/AFL and concomitant CKD.

METHODS

EURIDIS-ADONIS (EURIDIS, NCT00259428; ADONIS, NCT00259376) were identically designed, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group trials investigating AF/AFL control with dronedarone 400 mg twice daily versus placebo (randomized 2:1). In this post hoc analysis, the primary endpoint was time to first AF/AFL. Patients were stratified according to renal function using the CKD-Epidemiology Collaboration equation and divided into estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) subgroups of 30-44, 45-59, 60-89, and ≥90 ml/min. Time-to-events between treatment groups were compared using log-rank testing and Cox regression.

RESULTS

At baseline, most (86%) patients demonstrated a mild or mild-to-moderate eGFR decrease. Median time to first AF/AFL recurrence was significantly longer with dronedarone versus placebo for all eGFR subgroups except the 30 to 44 ml/min group, where the trend was similar but statistical power may have been limited by the small population. eGFR stratification had no significant effect on serious adverse events, deaths, or treatment discontinuations.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that dronedarone could be an effective therapeutic option for AF with an acceptable safety profile in patients with impaired renal function.

Risk of Major Bleeding in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Taking Dronedarone in Combination With a Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulant (From a U.S. Claims Database)

Dronedarone may increase exposure and the risk of major bleeding when prescribed with a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). This retrospective cohort study examined the risk of the first occurrence of major bleeding (hospitalization or emergency room visit for gastrointestinal [GI] bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], or bleeding at other sites) among new users of apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban in patients with AF ≥18 years (January 1, 2007 to September 30, 2017) from the United States Truven Health MarketScan claims, comparing concomitant users of dronedarone to DOAC alone users in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). No increased risk of major bleeding was associated with use of dronedarone and apixaban (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR]: 0.69 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40, 1.17], p = 0.16), a modestly increased risk of GI bleeding but not overall bleeding was associated with use of dronedarone and dabigatran (aHR bleeding: 1.18 [95% CI: 0.89, 1.56], p = 0.26; aHR GI bleeding: 1.40 [95% CI: 1.01, 1.93]; p = 0.04) and an increased risk of overall bleeding, driven by GI bleeding, was associated with use of dronedarone and rivaroxaban (aHR bleeding: 1.31 [95% CI: 1.01, 1.69]; p = 0.04; aHR GI bleeding: 1.39 [95% CI: 0.98, 1.95]; p = 0.06), compared to each DOAC respectively. There was no increased risk of ICH associated with combined use of dronedarone and any DOAC. Prospective analyses, preferably randomized controlled studies, are needed to further explore the risk of major bleeding with concomitant use of DOACs and CYP3A4/P-gp inhibitors such as dronedarone.

Dynamic risk assessment to improve quality of care in patients with atrial fibrillation: the 7th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference

AIMS

The risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and its complications continues to increase, despite good progress in preventing AF-related strokes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This article summarizes the outcomes of the 7th Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) held in Lisbon in March 2019. Sixty-five international AF specialists met to present new data and find consensus on pressing issues in AF prevention, management and future research to improve care for patients with AF and prevent AF-related complications. This article is the main outcome of an interactive, iterative discussion between breakout specialist groups and the meeting plenary. AF patients have dynamic risk profiles requiring repeated assessment and risk-based therapy stratification to optimize quality of care. Interrogation of deeply phenotyped datasets with outcomes will lead to a better understanding of the cardiac and systemic effects of AF, interacting with comorbidities and predisposing factors, enabling stratified therapy. New proposals include an algorithm for the acute management of patients with AF and heart failure, a call for a refined, data-driven assessment of stroke risk, suggestions for anticoagulation use in special populations, and a call for rhythm control therapy selection based on risk of AF recurrence.

CONCLUSION

The remaining morbidity and mortality in patients with AF needs better characterization. Likely drivers of the remaining AF-related problems are AF burden, potentially treatable by rhythm control therapy, and concomitant conditions, potentially treatable by treating these conditions. Identifying the drivers of AF-related complications holds promise for stratified therapy.

Evaluating the Risk of Digitalis Intoxication Associated With Concomitant Use of Dronedarone and Digoxin Using Real-World Data

PURPOSE

Dronedarone may increase digoxin plasma levels through inhibition of P-glycoprotein. Using real-world data, we evaluated the risk of digitalis intoxication in concomitant users of dronedarone and digoxin compared digoxin-alone users.

METHODS

We used the Clinformatics DataMart, a US claims database, to identify adult patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) who concomitantly used dronedarone and digoxin and those who used digoxin alone between July 2009 and March 2016. Digitalis intoxication during follow-up until March 2016 was ascertained using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM). Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for digitalis intoxication in concomitant users versus users of digoxin alone were estimated, controlling for age, sex, cohort entry year, number of medical encounters for AF or AFL, history of congestive heart failure, diabetes, hypertension, stroke, myocardial infarction, renal failure, use of drugs interacting with digoxin, and digoxin dose.

FINDINGS

Overall, 524 concomitant users and 32,459 users of digoxin alone were identified, among which 3 and 301 events of digitalis intoxication occurred during follow-up, respectively. Incidence rates were 17.25 and 9.17 cases per 1000 person-years, respectively. The adjusted HR for digitalis intoxication in concomitant users versus users of digoxin alone was 1.56 (95% CI, 0.50-4.88; P = 0.45). When digitalis intoxication was defined by ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes accompanied by laboratory testing for digoxin/digitoxin or hospitalization within 30 days, no events occurred in the concomitant users and 40 events occurred in the users of digoxin alone (incidence rate of 1.22 cases per 1000 person-years).

IMPLICATIONS

Concomitant use of dronedarone and digoxin was uncommon in this study, and no significant increase in the risk of digitalis intoxication with concomitant use was found.

Efficacy and safety of dronedarone vs placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter across a spectrum of renal function: post hoc analyses of the EURIDIS-ADONIS trials

Background/Introduction

The use of antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is complex because impaired renal clearance can cause increased drug levels, and risk of intolerance or adverse events. Since CKD commonly co-occurs with atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL), it is important to establish efficacy and safety for such drugs when used in AF/AFL patients with CKD.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dronedarone in patients with AF or AFL across different levels of renal function.

Methods

This post hoc analysis evaluated pooled data from two multicentre, double-blind, randomised (2:1) trials of rhythm control with dronedarone 400 mg twice daily vs placebo. Primary endpoint was time to first recurrence of AF or AFL. Renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]) was assessed with the CKD-Epidemiology Collaboration equation. Patients were grouped by eGFR strata. Log-rank testing and Cox regression were used to compare time to events between treatment groups.

Results

Most (85%) patients had mild or mild-to-moderate decrease in eGFR (Table 1). Median time to first AF recurrence was significantly longer in the dronedarone vs placebo group for all eGFR subgroups except the 30–44 mL/min group (Figure 1), where the trend was consistent; however, the small population size may have precluded meaningful analyses in this subgroup. Serious adverse events, deaths, and treatment discontinuations did not differ notably between each group irrespective of eGFR strata.

Conclusions

This analysis confirms the efficacy and safety of dronedarone in patients with AF across a wide spectrum of renal function.

Figure 1

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi

Dronedarone vs placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter across a range of renal function: a post hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial

Background

The use of antiarrhythmic drugs in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is challenging due to issues with renal clearance, drug accumulation and increased proarrhythmic risks. Since CKD is a common comorbidity with atrial fibrillation (AF), it is important to establish the efficacy and safety for antiarrhythmic drug treatment in patients with CKD.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dronedarone in patients with AF or atrial flutter (AFL) across different stages of renal impairment.

Methods

In this post-hoc analysis of ATHENA (NCT00174785), a randomised, double-blind trial of dronedarone 400 mg BID vs placebo in patients with AF or AFL plus additional risk factors for death and a calculated glomerular filtration rate ≥10 mL/min, the primary outcome was time to first cardiovascular (CV) hospitalisation or death. Renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]) was assessed using CKD Epidemiology Collaboration equation and patients were grouped by eGFR (10–44, 45–59, ≥60 mL/min). Log-rank testing and Cox regression were used to compare time to events between treatment groups.

Results

In ATHENA, 43.6% of placebo and 42.2% of dronedarone patients had mild-to-moderate CKD (Table). Median time to CV hospitalisation/death was longer in all strata for dronedarone vs placebo, reaching significance in the 45–59 and ≥60 mL/min groups (Figure 1). There was a trend towards more treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), deaths and discontinuations due to TEAEs in patients with eGFR 10–44 mL/min. No clear difference in safety was seen between treatment arms except for discontinuations, which were higher with dronedarone.

Conclusions

This analysis confirms the efficacy of dronedarone, demonstrated in ATHENA, across different stages of renal impairment. Further assessment of safety will require larger populations of patients with CKD.

Figure 1

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi

Efficacy and safety of dronedarone by atrial fibrillation history duration: Insights from the ATHENA study

Background

Atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) burden increases with increasing duration of AF/AFL history.

Hypothesis

Outcomes with dronedarone may also be impacted by duration of AF/AFL history.

Methods

In this post hoc analysis of ATHENA, efficacy and safety of dronedarone vs placebo were assessed in groups categorized by time from first known AF/AFL episode to randomization (ie, duration of AF/AFL history): <3 months (short), 3 to <24 months (intermediate), and ≥ 24 months (long).

Results

Of 2859 patients with data on duration of AF/AFL history, 45.3%, 29.6%, and 25.1% had short, intermediate, and long histories, respectively. Patients in the long history group had the highest prevalence of structural heart disease and were more likely to be in AF/AFL at baseline. Placebo‐treated patients in the long history group also had the highest incidence of AF/AFL recurrence and cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization during the study. The risk of first CV hospitalization/death from any cause was lower with dronedarone vs placebo in patients with short (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% confidence interval: 0.65‐0.96]) and intermediate (0.72 [0.56‐0.92]) histories; a trend favoring dronedarone was also observed in patients with long history (0.84 [0.66‐1.07]). A similar pattern was observed for first AF/AFL recurrence. No new drug‐related safety issues were identified.

Conclusions

Patients with long AF/AFL history had the highest burden of AF/AFL at baseline and during the study. Dronedarone significantly improved efficacy vs placebo in patients with short and intermediate AF/AFL histories. While exploratory, these results support the potential value in initiating rhythm control treatment early in patients with AF/AFL.

Dronedarone treatment following cardioversion in patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter: A post hoc analysis of the EURIDIS and ADONIS trials

INTRODUCTION

The phase 3 EURIDIS and ADONIS studies evaluated dronedarone for atrial fibrillation (AF)/atrial flutter (AFL) recurrence in patients with nonpermanent AF. Here we assessed whether patient characteristics and/or treatment outcomes in these studies differed based on the need for cardioversion before randomization.

METHODS

Time to adjudicated first AF/AFL recurrence, symptomatic recurrence, cardiovascular hospitalization/death, and AF hospitalization, and safety were assessed by cardioversion status.

RESULTS

Of 1237 patients randomized (2:1 dronedarone:placebo), 364 required baseline cardioversion (dronedarone 243, placebo 121). Patients requiring cardioversion had a greater prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities and shorter times to first AF/AFL recurrence compared with those not requiring cardioversion. Dronedarone was associated with longer median time to first AF/AFL recurrence vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status (cardioversion: 50 vs 15 days, hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.97; P = .02; non-cardioversion: 150 vs 77 days, HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90; P < .01). Dronedarone was similarly associated with prolonged median time to symptomatic recurrence vs placebo in the cardioversion (347 vs 87 days, HR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.87) and non-cardioversion (288 vs 120 days, HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.90) populations. Risk of cardiovascular hospitalization/death and first AF hospitalization was lower with dronedarone vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status, but differences were not statistically significant. The safety of dronedarone was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients requiring baseline cardioversion represent a distinct population, having more underlying cardiovascular disease and experiencing a shorter time to AF/AFL recurrences. Dronedarone was associated with improved efficacy vs placebo regardless of cardioversion status.

Efficacy and safety of dronedarone in patients with a prior ablation for atrial fibrillation/flutter: Insights from the ATHENA study

Background

The role of antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) after catheter ablation is not well established.

Hypothesis

We hypothesized that changing the myocardial substrate by ablation may alter the responsiveness to dronedarone.

Methods

We assessed the efficacy and safety of dronedarone in the treatment of paroxysmal/persistent atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL) post‐ablation, based on a post hoc analysis of the ATHENA study. A total of 196 patients (dronedarone 90, placebo 106) had an ablation for AF/AFL before study entry. In these patients, the effect of treatment on the first hospitalization because of cardiovascular (CV) events/all‐cause death was assessed, as was AF/AFL recurrence in individuals with sinus rhythm at baseline. The safety of dronedarone vs placebo was also determined.

Results

In patients with prior ablation, dronedarone reduced the risk of AF/AFL recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.65 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42, 1.00]; P < .05) as well as the median time to first AF/AFL recurrence (561 vs 180 days) compared with placebo. The HR for first CV hospitalization/all‐cause death with dronedarone vs placebo was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.62, 1.53; P = .91). Rates of treatment‐emergent adverse events were 83.1% vs 75.5% and rates of serious TEAEs were 27.0% vs 18.9% in the dronedarone and placebo groups, respectively. One death occurred with dronedarone (not treatment‐emergent) and five occurred with placebo.

Conclusion

In patients with prior ablation for AF/AFL, dronedarone reduced the risk of AF/AFL recurrence compared with placebo, but not the risk of first CV hospitalization/all‐cause death. Safety outcomes were consistent with those of the overall ATHENA study.

P4784Efficacy and safety of dronedarone by duration of atrial fibrillation history: a post-hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is known to progress over time and the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic therapy may vary based on the duration of a patient's AF history. Outcomes with dronedarone (DRO) based on duration of AF/atrial flutter (AFL) history have not been previously characterized.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of DRO by time since first known AF/AFL episode in patients studied in the ATHENA trial.

Methods

2859 (61.8%) patients from ATHENA with documented first known AF/AFL episode (of 4628 total patients randomized) were included in the analysis. Among these patients, first AF/AFL episode was reported at <3 months (shorter history), 3 to <24 months (intermediate), and ≥24 months (longer) in 1296 (45.3%), 845 (29.6%) and 718 (25.1%) patients, respectively. AF/AFL recurrence was evaluated in patients in sinus rhythm at baseline by ECG during study visits or symptom recurrence.

Results

Demographics (age, sex) were similar across all groups. Patients with longer AF/AFL history tended to have higher prevalence of coronary heart disease and structural heart disease; and were more likely to have AF/AFL (by 12-lead ECG) at baseline (30%) compared to 26% and 16% for intermediate and shorter history groups. Patients with a longer AF history likely had a prior ablation for AF/AFL (7%) vs patients with an intermediate (2%) or shorter AF/AFL history (1%), and more likely required cardioversion during the study (24%) vs intermediate (17%) and shorter history groups (11%). Outcomes and efficacy are reported in Table 1. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, permanent drug discontinuations, and deaths were similar across all AF/AFL groups.

Table 1. Outcomes and efficacy summary Relative Risk, dronedarone (DRO) vs placebo (PBO)1 (95% CI)1,2 AF/AFL <3 months AF/AFL 3 to <24 months AF/AFL ≥24 months PBO (n=626) DRO (n=670) PBO (n=429) DRO (n=416) PBO (n=363) DRO (n=355) First CV hospitalization3 or death (any cause) 0.79 (0.65, 0.96) 0.72 (0.56, 0.92) 0.84 (0.66, 1.07) First CV hospitalization 0.78 (0.64, 0.96) 0.70 (0.55, 0.91) 0.82 (0.63, 1.05) Death (any cause) 0.82 (0.54, 1.24) 0.85 (0.43, 1.68) 1.13 (0.61, 2.10) First AF/AFL recurrence4 0.80 (0.65, 0.97) 0.67 (0.53, 0.84) 0.81 (0.65, 1.02) 1Cox regression model. 2On study period, all randomized patients. 3Main reason was AF/other supraventricular rhythm disorders. 4On selected patients in sinus rhythm at baseline (AF/AFL <3 months: PBO n=514, DRO n=529; 3 to <24 months: PBO n=288, DRO n=312; ≥24 months: PBO n=252, DRO n=250). CV = Cardiovascular.

Conclusions

Nearly half the patients in ATHENA had a shorter history (<3 months) of AF/AFL prior to randomization. Patients with a longer history of AF/AFL had a greater burden of AF/AFL based on baseline rhythm status, ablation history, and cardioversions required post randomization. Despite these differences, clinical outcomes, efficacy, and safety of DRO appeared to be generally consistent irrespective of duration of AF/AFL history.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Sanofi, New York, New York, United States of America

P1034Impact of ablation status on the efficacy and safety of dronedarone in patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter: a post-hoc analysis of the ATHENA trial

Background

Despite increasing use of ablation for atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL), few systematic data exist on the use of dronedarone and other antiarrhythmic drugs after ablation.

Purpose

To assess efficacy and safety of dronedarone after ablation in patients with paroxysmal/persistent AF/AFL randomized to dronedarone or placebo in the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785).

Methods

In ATHENA, 196 patients (dronedarone 90, placebo 106) had an ablation for AF/AFL prior to study entry. AF/AFL recurrence was evaluated in patients in sinus rhythm at baseline (dronedarone 63, placebo 65) by ECG during study visits or symptom recurrence.

Results

Ablated vs non-ablated patients were more likely to be male, have an implantable cardioverter defibrillator or pacemaker implanted, or be receiving an oral anticoagulant. Fewer ablated patients had an AF/AFL recurrence with dronedarone (36 [57%]) than with placebo (46 [71%]). Median time to first AF/AFL recurrence was significantly longer with dronedarone versus placebo (561 versus 180 days; hazard ratio 0.65 [95% CI 0.42–1.00], p<0.05; Fig 1). Time to first cardiovascular hospitalization or death was similar with dronedarone versus placebo (hazard ratio 0.98 [0.62–1.53]). On-treatment rates of treatment-emergent adverse events with dronedarone versus placebo were 83.1 versus 75.5%, serious treatment-emergent adverse events were 27.0 versus 18.9%, permanent drug discontinuations were 10.1 versus 15.1%, and deaths were 0 versus 1.9%.

Conclusions

Dronedarone delayed AF/AFL recurrence in patients with a prior AF/AFL ablation. Safety outcomes were consistent with the overall ATHENA trial. Adequately sized prospective studies are needed to confirm these observations. Given the sparsity of data for antiarrhythmic drugs after ablation, this retrospective analysis has merit and is useful for hypothesis generation.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Sanofi, New York, New York, Unites States of America

P1903Efficacy and safety of dronedarone after recent cardioversion in patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter: a post-hoc analysis of the EURIDIS/ADONIS trials

Background

Cardioversion is commonly performed prior to antiarrhythmic drug initiation for atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF). There are limited data describing baseline differences in patients requiring cardioversion to maintain sinus rhythm compared to those who do not. Likewise, response to antiarrhythmic drugs, including dronedarone, specifically in patients requiring cardioversion has not been well defined.

Purpose

To evaluate efficacy and safety of dronedarone versus placebo in patients with non-permanent AF who had cardioversion within 5 days prior to randomization in EURIDIS/ADONIS.

Methods

To qualify for enrolment in EURIDIS/ADONIS patients were required to be in sinus rhythm for at least 1 hour preceding randomization. Of 1237 patients randomized (2:1 dronedarone to placebo), 364 needed cardioversion for study entry (dronedarone 243, placebo 121). AF recurrence was evaluated by ECG obtained during study visits, scheduled transtelephonic monitoring, or at symptom recurrence.

Results

Cardioversion patients were more likely to have rheumatic heart disease, valvular heart disease, any structural heart disease, and heart failure. Nonetheless, the median time to 1st AF recurrence was longer for dronedarone versus placebo both in cardioversion patients (50 versus 15 days, hazard ratio 0.76, 95% CI 0.59, 0.97) and no cardioversion patients (150 versus 77 days, hazard ratio 0.76, 95% CI 0.64, 0.90), as was time to 1st symptomatic recurrence (cardioversion: 347 versus 87 days, hazard ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.49, 0.87; no cardioversion: 288 versus 120 days, hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.62, 0.90) (Figure 1). There was a trend towards fewer 1st AF hospitalizations within 12 months for dronedarone versus placebo (7.8 versus 12.4%, hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.31, 1.18 in cardioversion patients; 8.4 versus 10.4%, hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.47, 1.17 in no cardioversion patients). In cardioversion patients, rates of treatment-emergent adverse events with dronedarone versus placebo were 64 versus 66%, serious treatment-emergent adverse events were 19 versus 26%, permanent discontinuations were 9 versus 6%, and deaths were 0 versus 1%.

Conclusions

1) Cardioversion-requiring patients have more baseline structural heart disease and overall shorter time to AF recurrence. 2) Dronedarone effectively delayed 1st AF recurrence versus placebo in patients with or without recent cardioversion. 3) Safety of dronedarone in cardioversion patients was similar to placebo and overall observations from EURIDIS/ADONIS despite baseline differences in comorbidities.

Acknowledgement/Funding

Sanofi, New York, New York, United States of America

Inflammatory biomarkers predicting prognosis in patients with acute dyspnea

Objective/Purpose

The objective was to identify inflammatory biomarkers that predict risk of 90-day mortality in patients with acute dyspnea.

Method

We analyzed 25 inflammatory biomarkers, in plasma, in 407 adult patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) with acute dyspnea and related them to risk of 90-day mortality using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age, sex, oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, C-reactive protein, and Medical Emergency Triage and Treatment System–Adult score.

Results

Fifty patients (12%) died within 90 day from admission. Two strong and independent biomarker signals were detected: The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for 90-day mortality per 1-SD increment of interleukin-8 (IL-8) was 2.20 (1.67-2.90) (P = 2.5 × 10^− 8) and for growth differentiation factor–15 (GDF-15) was 3.45 (2.18-5.45) (P = 1.3 × 10^− 7) A Biomarker Mortality Risk Score (BMRS) summing standardized and weighted values of IL-8 and GDF-15 revealed that of patients belonging to quartile 1 (Q1) of the BMRS, only 1 patient died, whereas 32 patients died among those belonging to quartile 4. Each 1-SD increment of the BMRS was associated with a hazard ratio of 3.79 (2.50-5.73) (P = 2 × 10^− 10) for 90-day mortality, and the point estimate was 13 times higher in Q4 as compared with Q1 of the BMRS (P_trend over quartiles = 2 × 10^− 6).

Conclusion

Interleukin-8 and GDF-15 are strongly and independently related to risk of 90-day mortality in unselected patients admitted to the ED because of acute dyspnea, suggesting that they may guide first-line physicians at the ED in risk assessment which in turn could lead to more accurate level of care and treatment intensity.

Skåne Emergency Department Assessment of Patient Load (SEAL)-A Model to Estimate Crowding Based on Workload in Swedish Emergency Departments

Objectives

Emergency department (ED) crowding is an increasing problem in many countries. The purpose of this study was to develop a quantitative model that estimates the degree of crowding based on workload in Swedish EDs.

Methods

At five different EDs, the head nurse and physician assessed the workload on a scale from 1 to 6 at randomized time points during a three week period in 2013. Based on these assessments, a regression model was created using data from the computerized patient log system to estimate the level of crowding based on workload. The final model was prospectively validated at the two EDs with the largest census.

Results

Workload assessments and data on 14 variables in the patient log system were collected at 233 time points. The variables Patient hours, Occupancy, Time waiting for the physician and Fraction of high priority (acuity) patients all correlated significantly with the workload assessments. A regression model based on these four variables correlated well with the assessed workload in the initial dataset (r2 = 0.509, p < 0.001) and with the assessments in both EDs during validation (r2 = 0.641; p < 0.001 and r2 = 0.624; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

It is possible to estimate the level of crowding based on workload in Swedish EDs using data from the patient log system. Our model may be applicable to EDs with different sizes and characteristics, and may be used for continuous monitoring of ED workload. Before widespread use, additional validation of the model is needed.

Concomitant use of dronedarone with dabigatran in patients with atrial fibrillation in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Dronedarone is a strong P-glycoprotein inhibitor with a potential to increase bioavailability of dabigatran. We sought to measure and report plasma concentrations of dabigatran in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) on concomitant dronedarone treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of 33 patients (mean age 64 years, 16 men) concomitantly treated with dabigatran at a dose of 110 mg twice a day (bid) and dronedarone at a dose of 400mg bid at the discretion of the patient's cardiologist were followed prospectively.

RESULTS

Median trough plasma concentration of dabigatran at one week and one month after the concomitant treatment start was 102.0 (range 8-251) ng/ml and 84 (range 27-302) ng/ml respectively. Median treatment length was 13 (range 1-21) months. There was one major bleeding event (2,8% per patient-year) and no thrombotic events during a total of 35.5 patient-years.

CONCLUSIONS

Median trough plasma concentration of dabigatran in our study was observed to be similar to median trough plasma concentration of dabigatran at a dose of 150 mg bid without concomitant dronedarone in earlier studies with low reported rate of bleeding and thrombosis. Since concomitant treatment offers potential benefits to patients with AF, larger future trials that might refute the current contraindication are warranted.

Thromboembolism, major bleeding and mortality in patients with mechanical heart valves- a population-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Low incidences of thromboembolism (TE) and bleeding in patients with mechanical heart valves (MHV) have previously been reported. This study assesses the incidence of and clinical risk factors predicting TE, major bleeding and mortality in a clinical setting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All 546 patients undergoing anticoagulation treatment due to MHV replacement at hospitals in Malmö and Sundsvall in Sweden were monitored during 2008-2011 and the incidence of TE, major bleeding and mortality was prospectively followed. There were 398, 122 and 26 patients in the aortic group (AVR), mitral (MVR) group and the combined aortic/mitral valve group respectively. The incidence of TE was 1.8 and 2.2 per 100 patient-years in the AVR group MVR group respectively. The corresponding incidences of bleeding were 4.4 and 4.6, respectively. Independent predictor of thromboembolism was vascular disease (Odds ratio {OR}: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.0-17.4). Predictor of bleeding was previous bleeding (OR: 2.7; 95% CI: 1.4-5.3). Independent predictors of mortality was age (Hazard ratio {HR}: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00-1.05), hypertension (HR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.3-4.5), diabetes (HR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.3-4.3) and alcohol overconsumption (HR: 5.2; 95% CI: 1.7-15.9). Standardized mortality/morbidity ratio for mortality and AMI was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.8-1.2) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.5-1.2) respectively.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of TE and major bleeding in this unselected clinical population exceeds that of previously reported retrospective and randomized trials. Despite this, mortality is equal to that of the general population.

Referring physicians underestimate the extent of abnormalities in final reports from myocardial perfusion imaging

Background

It is important that referring physicians and other treating clinicians properly understand the final reports from diagnostic tests. The aim of the study was to investigate whether referring physicians interpret a final report for a myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) test in the same way that the reading nuclear medicine physician intended.

Methods

After viewing final reports containing only typical clinical verbiage and images, physicians in nuclear medicine and referring physicians (physicians in cardiology, internal medicine, and general practitioners) independently classified 60 MPS tests for the presence versus absence of ischemia/infarction according to objective grades of 1–5 (1 = No ischemia/infarction, 2 = Probably no ischemia/infarction 3 = Equivocal, 4 = Probable ischemia/infarction, and 5 = Certain ischemia/infarction). When ischemia and/or infarction were thought to be present in the left ventricle, all physicians were also asked to mark the involved segments based on the 17-segment model.

Results

There was good diagnostic agreement between physicians in nuclear medicine and referring physicians when assessing the general presence versus absence of both ischemia and infarction (median squared kappa coefficient of 0.92 for both). However, when using the 17-segment model, compared to the physicians in nuclear medicine, 12 of 23 referring physicians underestimated the extent of ischemic area while 6 underestimated and 1 overestimated the extent of infarcted area.

Conclusions

Whereas referring physicians gain a good understanding of the general presence versus absence of ischemia and infarction from MPS test reports, they often underestimate the extent of any ischemic or infarcted areas. This may have adverse clinical consequences and thus the language in final reports from MPS tests might be further improved and standardized.

The tumor suppressor p53 and its response gene p21WAF1/Cip1 are not markers of neuronal death following transient global cerebral ischemia

The tumor suppressor protein p53 is implicated in cell cycle arrest and DNA repair as well as in apoptosis. In the CNS, p53 has been associated with neuronal cell death following various insults, including cerebral ischemia. We investigated the expression of p53 messenger RNA and protein, and the messenger RNA expression of the p53-responsive gene p21(WAF1/CiP1, in specific hippocampal regions following 15 min of normothermic and neuroprotective hypothermic (33 degrees C) global forebrain ischemia in the rat. Both p53 and p21WAF1/Cip1 messenger RNAs were transiently induced in ischemia resistant regions following normo- and hypothermic ischemia. In the ischemia sensitive CA1 region, p53 and p21WAF1/Cip1 messenger RNAs were up-regulated throughout reperfusion following the normothermic insult. The p53 protein levels increased following the insult, most markedly in ischemia-resistant CA3 neurons after normothermic ischemia, and in the CA1 neurons following hypothermic ischemia. Concomitantly, the protein was translocated to nuclei. These findings indicate that p53 and p21WAF1/Cip1 are not markers of neuronal death following global cerebral ischemia. Their rapid and transient induction correlates with cell survival, and suggests a possible role in DNA repair.

[Current state of the Würzburg database for radiotherapy]

Initially the data bank, which serves for the follow-up organization and for scientific studies, is briefly introduced. Then the possible analyses are described. Two types of possible evaluations can be distinguished. For the first type of evaluation, a subprogram has to be developed for every topic. A great number of questions can be answered by assembling the subprograms. These evaluations mostly dispose of a direct access to the data bank, so that the information desired is immediately available. For the second type of evaluation, the features of a group of patients have been determined with the aid of the data bank and have been stored then. A simple questioning language allows the establishment of any condition limiting the patient groups and its transmission to a statistical program package. Some examples are given to describe the possibilities of the statistical program developed especially for medical studies which makes it possible to perform analyses according to the life table method, too.