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 Sarilumab for the Treatment of Posterior Segment Noninfectious Uveitis (SARIL-NIU):: The Phase 2 SATURN Study.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of sarilumab, a human anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody, for treatment of posterior segment noninfectious uveitis (NIU). DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-eight patients (eyes) with noninfectious intermediate, posterior, or panuveitis. METHODS: Eyes received treatment every 2 weeks for 16 weeks with subcutaneous sarilumab 200 mg or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was the proportion of patients with ≥2-step reduction in vitreous haze (VH) on the Miami scale or with a reduction of systemic corticosteroids (prednisolone or equivalent) to a dose of <10 mg/day at week 16. Primary end point was based on VH evaluation by a central reading center. Investigator evaluation of VH was a prespecified, planned secondary analysis. RESULTS: At week 16, proportion of patients taking sarilumab or placebo with ≥2-step reduction in VH or corticosteroid dose <10 mg/day was 46.1% vs. 30.0% (P = 0.2354) based on central reading center assessment of VH and 64.0% vs. 35.0% (P = 0.0372) based on investigator assessment of VH, respectively. In the subgroup of eyes with VH grade ≥2 at baseline, the mean VH reduction from baseline to week 16 was significantly greater with sarilumab vs. placebo regardless of assessment by the central reading center (-2.1 [n = 11] vs. -1.7 [n = 3], respectively; P = 0.0255) or investigator (-2.5 [n = 19] vs. -1.2 [n = 11], respectively; P = 0.0170). The mean best-corrected visual acuity gain from baseline to week 16 was greater with sarilumab vs. placebo in the overall population (8.9 vs. 3.6 letters, respectively; P = 0.0333) and in the subgroup of eyes with central subfield thickness (CST) ≥300 µm at baseline (12.2 [n = 13] vs. 2.1 [n = 7] letters, respectively; P = 0.0517). Corresponding changes in CST were -46.8 vs. +2.6 µm (P = 0.0683) in the overall population and -112.5 [n = 13] vs. -1.8 [n = 6] µm (P = 0.1317) in the subgroup of eyes with CST ≥300 µm at baseline, respectively. The most common ocular adverse events were worsening of uveitis (0 [placebo] and 3 [sarilumab] patients) and retinal infiltrates (1 [placebo] and 2 [sarilumab] patients). CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous sarilumab may provide clinical benefits in the management of NIU of the posterior segment, especially in eyes with uveitic macular edema.

Prospective evaluation of lipid management following acute coronary syndrome in non-Western countries.

BACKGROUND: Half the global burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is concentrated in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. HYPOTHESIS: Suboptimal control of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) may play a large role in the burden of CVD in APAC and non-Western countries. METHODS: The Acute Coronary Syndrome Management (ACOSYM) registry is a multinational, multicenter, prospective observational registry designed to evaluate LDL-C control in patients within 6 months after hospitalization following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event across nine countries. RESULTS: Overall, 1581 patients were enrolled, of whom 1567 patients met the eligibility criteria; 80.3% of the eligible patients were men, 46.1% had ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and 39.5% had non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Most (1245; 79.5%) patients were discharged on a high-intensity statin. During the follow-up, only 992 (63.3%) patients had at least one LDL-C measurement; of these, 52.9% had persistently elevated LDL-C (>70 mg/dl). The patients not discharged on a high-dose statin were more likely (OR 3.2; 95% CI 2.1-4.8) to have an LDL-C above the 70 mg/dl LDL-C target compared with those who were discharged on a high-dose statin. CONCLUSION: Our real-world registry found that a third or more of post-ACS patients did not have a repeat LDL-C follow-up measurement. In those with an LDL-C follow-up measurement, more than half (52.9%) were not achieving a <70 mg/dl LDL-C goal, despite a greater uptake of high-intensity statin therapy than has been observed in recent evidence. This demonstrates the opportunity to improve post-ACS lipid management in global community practice.

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.

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.