Assessment of Days Alive Out of Hospital as a Possible End Point in Trials of Stroke Prevention for Atrial Fibrillation: A ROCKET AF Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Days alive out of hospital (DAOH) is an objective and patient-centered net benefit end point. There are no assessments of DAOH in clinical trials of interventions for atrial fibrillation (AF), and it is not known whether this end point is of clinical utility in these populations. METHODS AND RESULTS: ROCKET AF (Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared With Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation) was an international double-blind, double-dummy randomized clinical trial that compared rivaroxaban with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation at increased risk for stroke. We assessed DAOH using investigator-reported event data for up to 12 months after randomization in ROCKET AF. We assessed DAOH overall, by treatment group, and by subgroup, including age, sex, and comorbidities, using Poisson regression. The mean±SD number of days dead was 7.3±41.2, days hospitalized was 1.2±7.2, and mean DAOH was 350.7±56.2, with notable left skew. Patients with comorbidities had fewer DAOH overall. There were no differences in DAOH by treatment arm, with mean DAOH of 350.6±56.5 for those randomized to rivaroxaban and 350.7±55.8 for those randomized to warfarin (P=0.86). A sensitivity analysis found no difference in DAOH not disabled with rivaroxaban versus warfarin (DAOH not disabled, 349.2±59.5 days and 349.1 days±59.3 days, respectively, P=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: DAOH did not identify a treatment difference between patients randomized to rivaroxaban versus warfarin. This may be driven in part by the low overall event rates in atrial fibrillation anticoagulation trials, which leads to substantial left skew in measures of DAOH.

General Anxiety Disorder-7 Questionnaire as a marker of low socioeconomic status and inequity.

BACKGROUND: The General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) questionnaire is a standard tool used for screening and follow-up of patients with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD). Although it is generally accepted that anxiety correlates with clinical and psychosocial stressors, precise quantitative data is limited on the relations among GAD-7, traditional biomarkers, and other measures of health. Further research is needed about how GAD-7 relates to race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES) as an assembly. We determined how multiple demographic and socioeconomic data correlate with the participants' GAD-7 results when compared with laboratory, physical function, clinical, and other biological markers. METHODS: The Project Baseline Health Study (BHS) is a prospective cohort of adults representing several populations in the USA. We analyzed a deeply phenotyped group of 2502 participants from that study. Measures of interest included: clinical markers or history of medical diagnoses; physical function markers including gait, grip strength, balance time, daily steps, and echocardiographic parameters; psychometric measurements; activities of daily living; socioeconomic characteristics; and laboratory results. RESULTS: Higher GAD-7 scores were associated with female sex, younger age, and Hispanic ethnicity. Measures of low SES were also associated with higher scores, including unemployment, income ≤$25,000, and ≤12 years of education. After adjustment for 158 demographic, clinical, laboratory, and symptom characteristics, unemployment and overall higher SES risk scores were highly correlated with anxiety scores. Protective factors included Black race and older age. LIMITATIONS: Correlations identified in this cross-sectional study cannot be used to infer causal relationships; further, we were not able to account for possible use of anxiety treatments by study participants. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of understanding anxiety as a biopsychosocial entity. Clinicians and provider organizations need to consider both the physical manifestations of the disorder and their patients' social determinants of health when considering treatment pathways and designing interventions.

Fasting Substrate Concentrations Predict Cardiovascular Outcomes in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS).

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the circulating substrate mix may be related to the incidence of heart failure (HF) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality and how it is altered by canagliflozin treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We measured fasting glucose, free fatty acids (FFA), glycerol, ß-hydroxybutyrate, acetoacetate, lactate, and pyruvate concentrations in 3,581 samples from the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) trial at baseline and at 1 and 2 years after randomization. Results were analyzed by univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Patients in the lowest baseline FFA tertile were more often men with a longer duration of type 2 diabetes (T2D), higher urinary albumin excretion, lower HDL-cholesterol levels, higher history of CV disease (CVD), and higher use of statins and insulin. When all seven metabolites were used as predictors, FFA were inversely associated with incident hospitalized HF (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33 [95% CI 0.21-0.55]), while glycerol was a positive predictor (2.21 [1.45-3.35]). In a model further adjusted for 16 potential confounders, including prior HF and CVD and pharmacologic therapies, FFA remained a significant negative predictor. FFA and glycerol also predicted CV mortality (HR 0.53 [95% CI 0.35-0.81] and 1.81 [1.26-2.58], respectively) and all-cause death (0.50 [0.36-0.70] and 1.64 [1.22-2.18]). When added to these models, background insulin therapy was an independent positive predictor of risk of death. Canagliflozin treatment significantly increased plasma FFA and ß-hydroxybutyrate regardless of background antihyperglycemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A constitutive metabolic setup consisting of higher lipolysis may be beneficial in delaying or preventing hospitalized HF; a further stimulation of lipolysis by canagliflozin may reinforce this influence.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Using Cangrelor in High Angiographic Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Patients: A US Hospital Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate a US hospital's cost implications and outcomes of cangrelor use in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients with two or more angiographic high-risk features (HRFs), including avoidance of oral P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment in patients requiring cardiac surgery. Intravenous cangrelor provides direct, immediate onset and rapid-offset P2Y12 inhibition, which may reduce the necessity for oral P2Y12 pretreatment. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed, estimating the annual impact over 3 years of cangrelor availability. Ischemic and bleeding events (48 h) from randomized clinical trial data were extrapolated to 30 days. Event costs were from the CHAMPION PHOENIX Economics substudy. Rates of coronary artery disease (CAD) presentation, PCI, oral P2Y12 pretreatment, and inpatient hospitalization costs were from published literature and clinical experts. Scenario analyses evaluated the impact of cangrelor availability on potential reduced P2Y12 pretreatment rates by 50-100%. Drug costs were 2019 wholesale acquisition costs and, where necessary, all costs were adjusted to 2019 dollars. RESULTS: In a hospital treating 1000 CAD PCI inpatients annually, increasing cangrelor use from 11 to 32% resulted in a reduction in 48-h ischemic events/year by 5.7%, while bleeding events increased by 2.9%. Total costs of $1,135,472 declined 12.8%, with a 50% reduction in P2Y12 pretreatment or 30% with no pretreatment. Savings were driven by a decrease in ischemic events, decrease in glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use, and less need for and shorter oral P2Y12 inhibitor washout period for surgery patients. CONCLUSION: Use of cangrelor in patients with two or more angiographic HRFs may improve outcomes and lower hospital budgets, mainly from avoiding surgery delays necessitated by oral P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment.

Assessment of North American Clinical Research Site Performance During the Start-up of Large Cardiovascular Clinical Trials.

Importance: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are critical in advancing patient care, yet conducting such large-scale trials requires tremendous resources and coordination. Clinical site start-up performance metrics can provide insight into opportunities for improved trial efficiency but have not been well described. Objective: To measure the start-up time needed to reach prespecified milestones across sites in large cardiovascular RCTs in North America and to evaluate how these metrics vary by time and type of regulatory review process. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated cardiovascular RCTs conducted from July 13, 2004, to February 1, 2017. The RCTs were coordinated by a single academic research organization, the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Nine consecutive trials with completed enrollment and publication of results in their target journal were studied. Data were analyzed from December 4, 2019, to January 11, 2021. Exposures: Year of trial enrollment initiation (2004-2007 vs 2008-2012) and use of a central vs local institutional review board (IRB). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the median start-up time (from study protocol delivery to first participant enrollment) as compared by trial year and type of IRB used. The median start-up time for the top 10% of sites was also reported. Secondary outcomes included time to site regulatory approval, time to contract execution, and time to site activation. Results: For the 9 RCTs included, the median site start-up time shortened only slightly over time from 267 days (interquartile range [IQR], 185-358 days) for 2004-2007 trials to 237 days (IQR, 162-343 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 255 days [IQR, 177-350 days]; P < .001). For the top 10% of sites, median start-up time was 107 days (IQR, 95-121 days) for 2004-2007 trials vs 104 days (IQR, 84-118 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 106 days [IQR, 90-120 days]; P = .04). The median start-up time was shorter among sites using a central IRB (199 days [IQR, 140-292 days]) than those using a local IRB (287 days [IQR, 205-390 days]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of North American research sites in large cardiovascular RCTs found a duration of nearly 9 months from the time of study protocol delivery to the first participant enrollment; this metric was only slightly shortened during the study period but was reduced to less than 4 months for top-performing sites. These findings suggest that the use of central IRBs has the potential to improve RCT efficiency.

Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein 7 Predicts Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in the Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association between concentrations of plasma insulin-like growth factor binding protein 7 (IGFBP7) with renal and cardiac outcomes among participants with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Associations between IGFBP7 levels and clinical outcomes were assessed among participants in the Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. RESULTS: Among CANVAS participants, 3,577 and 2,898 had IGFBP7 measured at baseline and 1 year, respectively. Per log-unit higher concentration, baseline IGFBP7 was significantly associated with the composite renal end point of sustained 40% reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate, need for renal replacement therapy, or renal death (hazard ratio [HR] 3.51; P < 0.001) and the composite renal end point plus cardiovascular death (HR 4.90; P < 0.001). Other outcomes, including development or progression of albuminuria, were also predicted by baseline IGFBP7. Most outcomes were improved by canagliflozin regardless of baseline IGFBP7; however, those with baseline concentrations ≥96.5 ng/mL appeared to benefit more from canagliflozin relative to the first progression of albuminuria compared with those with lower baseline IGFBP7 (HR 0.64 vs. 0.95; P interaction = 0.003). Canagliflozin did not lower IGFBP7 concentrations by 1 year; however, at 1 year, higher IGFBP7 concentrations more strongly predicted the composite renal end point (HR 15.7; P < 0.001). Patients with rising IGFBP7 between baseline and 1 year had the highest number of composite renal events. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma IGFBP7 concentrations predicted renal and cardiac events among participants with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. More data are needed regarding circulating IGFBP7 and progression of diabetic kidney disease and its complications.

Cost-Effectiveness of Alirocumab in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cholesterol reduction with proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors reduces ischemic events; however, the cost-effectiveness in statin-treated patients with recent acute coronary syndrome remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether further cholesterol reduction with alirocumab would be cost-effective in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome on optimal statin therapy. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model leveraging patient-level data from ODYSSEY OUTCOMES (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab) was developed to estimate costs and outcomes over a lifetime horizon. Patients (n = 18,924) had a recent acute coronary syndrome and were on high-intensity or maximum-tolerated statin therapy, with a baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level ≥70 mg/dl, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥100 mg/dl, or apolipoprotein B ≥80 mg/l. Alirocumab 75 mg or placebo was administered subcutaneously every 2 weeks. Alirocumab was blindly titrated to 150 mg if LDL-C remained ≥50 mg/dl or switched to placebo if 2 consecutive LDL-C levels were <15 mg/dl. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) was determined with the addition of alirocumab versus placebo and, based on clinical efficacy findings from the trial, was stratified by baseline LDL-C levels ≥100 mg/dl and <100 mg/dl. RESULTS: Across the overall population recruited to the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial, using an annual treatment cost of US$5,850, the mean overall incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$92,200 per QALY (base case). The cost was US$41,800 per QALY in patients with baseline LDL-C ≥100 mg/dl, whereas in those with LDL-C <100 mg/dl the cost per QALY was US$299,400. Among patients with LDL-C ≥100 mg/dl, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios remained below US$100,000 per QALY across a wide variety of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome on optimal statin therapy, alirocumab improves cardiovascular outcomes at costs considered intermediate value, with good value in patients with baseline LDL-C ≥100 mg/dl but less economic value with LDL-C <100 mg/dl. (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab [ODYSSEY OUTCOMES]; NCT01663402).

Claims-based cardiovascular outcome identification for clinical research: Results from 7 large randomized cardiovascular clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Medicare insurance claims may provide an efficient means to ascertain follow-up of older participants in clinical research. We sought to determine the accuracy and completeness of claims- versus site-based follow-up with clinical event committee (+CEC) adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using linked Medicare and Duke Database of Clinical Trials data. Medicare claims were linked to clinical data from 7 randomized cardiovascular clinical trials. Of 52,476 trial participants, linking resulted in 5,839 (of 10,497 linkage-eligible) Medicare-linked trial participants with fee-for-service A and B coverage. Death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and revascularization incidences were compared using Medicare inpatient claims only, site-reported events (+CEC) only, or a combination of the 2. Randomized treatment effects were compared as a function of whether claims-based, site-based (+CEC), or a combined system was used for event detection. RESULTS: Among the 5,839 study participants, the annual event rates were similar between claims- and site-based (+CEC) follow-up: death (overall rate 5.2% vs 5.2%; adjusted κ 0.99), MI (2.2% vs 2.3%; adjusted κ 0.96), stroke (0.7% vs 0.7%; adjusted κ 0.99), and any revascularization (7.4% vs 7.9%; adjusted κ 0.95). Of events detected by claims yet not reported by CEC, a minority were reported by sites but negatively adjudicated by CEC (39% of MIs and 18% of strokes). Differences in individual case concordance led to higher event rates when claims- and site-based (+CEC) systems were combined. Randomized treatment effects were similar among the 3 approaches for each outcome of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Claims- versus site-based (+CEC) follow-up identified similar overall cardiovascular event rates despite meaningful differences in the events detected. Randomized treatment effects were similar using the 2 methods, suggesting claims data could be used to support clinical research leveraging routinely collected data. This approach may lead to more effective evidence generation, synthesis, and appraisal of medical products and inform the strategic approaches toward the National Evaluation System for Health Technology.

Large-Scale Assessment of a Smartwatch to Identify Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Optical sensors on wearable devices can detect irregular pulses. The ability of a smartwatch application (app) to identify atrial fibrillation during typical use is unknown. METHODS: Participants without atrial fibrillation (as reported by the participants themselves) used a smartphone (Apple iPhone) app to consent to monitoring. If a smartwatch-based irregular pulse notification algorithm identified possible atrial fibrillation, a telemedicine visit was initiated and an electrocardiography (ECG) patch was mailed to the participant, to be worn for up to 7 days. Surveys were administered 90 days after notification of the irregular pulse and at the end of the study. The main objectives were to estimate the proportion of notified participants with atrial fibrillation shown on an ECG patch and the positive predictive value of irregular pulse intervals with a targeted confidence interval width of 0.10. RESULTS: We recruited 419,297 participants over 8 months. Over a median of 117 days of monitoring, 2161 participants (0.52%) received notifications of irregular pulse. Among the 450 participants who returned ECG patches containing data that could be analyzed - which had been applied, on average, 13 days after notification - atrial fibrillation was present in 34% (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 39) overall and in 35% (97.5% CI, 27 to 43) of participants 65 years of age or older. Among participants who were notified of an irregular pulse, the positive predictive value was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.92) for observing atrial fibrillation on the ECG simultaneously with a subsequent irregular pulse notification and 0.71 (97.5% CI, 0.69 to 0.74) for observing atrial fibrillation on the ECG simultaneously with a subsequent irregular tachogram. Of 1376 notified participants who returned a 90-day survey, 57% contacted health care providers outside the study. There were no reports of serious app-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The probability of receiving an irregular pulse notification was low. Among participants who received notification of an irregular pulse, 34% had atrial fibrillation on subsequent ECG patch readings and 84% of notifications were concordant with atrial fibrillation. This siteless (no on-site visits were required for the participants), pragmatic study design provides a foundation for large-scale pragmatic studies in which outcomes or adherence can be reliably assessed with user-owned devices. (Funded by Apple; Apple Heart Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03335800.).

Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Secondary Events Among Acute and Chronic Stable Myocardial Infarction Patients: Findings from a Managed Care Database.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term risk for recurrent cardiovascular events among myocardial infarction (MI) patients in the acute versus chronic stable phase is not well characterized. This study was conducted to evaluate risk factors associated with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CVD) morbidity and to determine the transition period from the acute to chronic stable phase of disease. METHODS: Administrative claims data from a managed care database (2007-2012) were linked to the Social Security Death Index. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated over a 3-year period. The association between risk factors and clinical endpoints was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. Poisson models estimated the 'transition time' from acute to chronic phase of disease. RESULTS: On average, recurrent cardiovascular event rates were higher among acute MI patients in comparison to the chronic MI patients during the first 3 months of follow-up. Over the 3-year follow-up period, survival curves became parallel and for some outcomes (i.e., acute myocardial infarction and bleeding events), were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. In both the acute and chronic MI cohorts, diabetes, heart failure, and renal disease were consistently statistically significant and positively associated with greater risk of death and ischemic events. PAD was consistently associated with increased risk among the chronic cohort and composite endpoints among the acute patients. CONCLUSIONS: Greater understanding of differences in the CVD risk profiles and the transition from acute to chronic stable phase may help identify high-risk patients and inform clinical risk stratification and long-term disease management in MI patients. FUNDING: Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Association of Healthcare Plan with atrial fibrillation prescription patterns.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is treated by many types of physician specialists, including primary care physicians (PCPs). Health plans have different policies for how patients encounter these providers, and these may affect selection of AF treatment strategy. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that healthcare plans with PCP-gatekeeping to specialist access may be associated with different pharmacologic treatments for AF. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using a commercial pharmaceutical claims database. We utilized logistic regression models to compare odds of prescription of oral anticoagulant (OAC), non-vitamin K-dependent oral anticoagulant (NOAC), rate control, and rhythm control medications used to treat AF between patients with PCP-gated healthcare plans (eg, HMO, EPO, POS) and patients with non-PCP-gated healthcare plans (eg, PPO, CHDP, HDHP, comprehensive) between 2007 and 2012. We also calculated median time to receipt of therapy within 90 days of index AF diagnosis. RESULTS: We found similar odds of OAC prescription at 90 days following new AF diagnosis in patients with PCP-gated plans compared to those with non-PCP-gated plans (OR: OAC 1.01, P = 0.84; warfarin 1.05, P = 0.08). Relative odds were similar for rate control (1.17, P < 0.01) and rhythm control agents (0.93, P = 0.03). However, PCP-gated plan patients had slightly lower likelihood of being prescribed NOACs (0.82, P = 0.001) than non-gated plan patients. Elapsed time until receipt of medication was similar between PCP-gated and non-gated groups across drug classes. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmaceutical claims data do not suggest that PCP-gatekeeping by healthcare plans is a structural barrier to AF therapy, although it was associated with lower use of NOACs.

Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Acquired Thrombocytopenia After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Pooled, Patient-Level Analysis of the CHAMPION Trials (Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platelet Inhibition).

BACKGROUND: The influence of cangrelor on the incidence and outcomes of post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) thrombocytopenia is not defined. We aimed to explore the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of thrombocytopenia after PCI in cangrelor-treated patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a pooled, patient-level analysis of the CHAMPION trials (Cangrelor Versus Standard Therapy to Achieve Optimal Management of Platelet Inhibition), which compared cangrelor with clopidogrel for prevention of thrombotic complications during and after PCI. Acquired thrombocytopenia was defined as either a drop in platelet count to <100 000 after PCI or a drop of >50% between baseline and a follow-up. The main efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac events. The primary safety outcome was noncoronary artery bypass grafting-related Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries-defined severe bleeding at 48 hours. Patients (23 783) were enrolled, and 3009 (12.7%) received a GPI (glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor). Acquired thrombocytopenia occurred in 200 patients (0.8%). The adjusted rate of major adverse cardiovascular events at 48 hours was significantly higher in patients who developed thrombocytopenia compared with those who did not (odds ratio, 3.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.89-4.69; P<0.001), as was major bleeding (odds ratio, 14.71; 95% confidence interval, 5.96-36.30; P<0.001). GPI use was the strongest independent predictor of acquired thrombocytopenia (odds ratio, 2.93; 95% confidence interval, 2.15-3.97; P<0.0001). There was no difference in the rate of acquired thrombocytopenia in patients randomized to cangrelor or clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS: Acquired thrombocytopenia after PCI is strongly associated with substantial early morbidity and mortality, as well as major bleeding. GPI use is a significant predictor of thrombocytopenia. Cangrelor is not associated with acquired thrombocytopenia, and its clinical efficacy and safety is consistent irrespective of thrombocytopenia occurrence. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00305162, NCT00385138, and NCT01156571.

Canagliflozin for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events: Results From the CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study).

BACKGROUND: Canagliflozin is a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that significantly reduces the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and elevated cardiovascular risk. The comparative effects among participants with and without a history of cardiovascular disease (secondary versus primary prevention) were prespecified for evaluation. METHODS: The CANVAS Program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study) randomly assigned 10 142 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary prevention cohort comprised individuals ≥50 years of age with ≥2 risk factors for cardiovascular events but with no prior cardiovascular event, and the secondary prevention cohort comprised individuals ≥30 years of age with a prior cardiovascular event. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Secondary outcomes included heart failure hospitalization and a renal composite (40% reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate, renal replacement therapy, or renal death). RESULTS: Primary prevention participants (N=3486; 34%) were younger (63 versus 64 years of age), were more often female (45% versus 31%), and had a longer duration of diabetes mellitus (14 versus 13 years) compared with secondary prevention participants (N=6656; 66%). The primary end point event rate was higher in the secondary prevention group compared with the primary prevention group (36.9 versus 15.7/1000 patient-years, P<0.001). In the total cohort, the primary end point was reduced with canagliflozin compared with placebo (26.9 versus 31.5/1000 patient-years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority, P=0.02 for superiority) with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity (interaction P value=0.18) between the primary (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.74-1.30) and secondary prevention (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95) cohorts. Renal outcomes (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79 versus HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-1.02; interaction P value=0.73) and heart failure hospitalization (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90 versus HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35-1.15; interaction P value=0.91) were similarly reduced in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts, respectively. Lower extremity amputations were similarly increased in the secondary and primary prevention cohorts (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.43-3.00 versus HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.70-3.29; interaction P value=0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and prior cardiovascular events had higher rates of cardiovascular outcomes compared with the primary prevention patients. Canagliflozin reduced cardiovascular and renal outcomes with no statistical evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect across the primary and secondary prevention groups. Additional studies will provide further insights into the effects of canagliflozin in these patient populations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01032629 and NCT01989754.

Navigating the Future of Cardiovascular Drug Development-Leveraging Novel Approaches to Drive Innovation and Drug Discovery: Summary of Findings from the Novel Cardiovascular Therapeutics Conference.

PURPOSE: The need for novel approaches to cardiovascular drug development served as the impetus to convene an open meeting of experts from the pharmaceutical industry and academia to assess the challenges and develop solutions for drug discovery in cardiovascular disease. METHODS: The Novel Cardiovascular Therapeutics Summit first reviewed recent examples of ongoing or recently completed programs translating basic science observations to targeted drug development, highlighting successes (protein convertase sutilisin/kexin type 9 [PCSK9] and neprilysin inhibition) and targets still under evaluation (cholesteryl ester transfer protein [CETP] inhibition), with the hope of gleaning key lessons to successful drug development in the current era. Participants then reviewed the use of innovative approaches being explored to facilitate rapid and more cost-efficient evaluations of drug candidates in a short timeframe. RESULTS: We summarize observations gleaned from this summit and offer insight into future cardiovascular drug development. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid development in genetic and high-throughput drug evaluation technologies, coupled with new approaches to rapidly evaluate potential cardiovascular therapies with in vitro techniques, offer opportunities to identify new drug targets for cardiovascular disease, study new therapies with better efficiency and higher throughput in the preclinical setting, and more rapidly bring the most promising therapies to human testing. However, there must be a critical interface between industry and academia to guide the future of cardiovascular drug development. The shared interest among academic institutions and pharmaceutical companies in developing promising therapies to address unmet clinical needs for patients with cardiovascular disease underlies and guides innovation and discovery platforms that are significantly altering the landscape of cardiovascular drug development.

Data monitoring committees: Promoting best practices to address emerging challenges.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Data monitoring committees are responsible for safeguarding the interests of study participants and assuring the integrity and credibility of clinical trials. The independence of data monitoring committees from sponsors and investigators is essential in achieving this mission. Creative approaches are needed to address ongoing and emerging challenges that potentially threaten data monitoring committees' independence and effectiveness. METHODS: An expert panel of representatives from academia, industry and government sponsors, and regulatory agencies discussed these challenges and proposed best practices and operating principles for effective functioning of contemporary data monitoring committees. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Prospective data monitoring committee members need better training. Options could include didactic instruction as well as apprenticeships to provide real-world experience. Data monitoring committee members should be protected against legal liability arising from their service. While avoiding breaches in confidentiality of interim data remains a high priority, data monitoring committees should have access to unblinded efficacy and safety data throughout the trial to enable informed judgments about risks and benefits. Because overly rigid procedures can compromise their independence, data monitoring committees should have the flexibility necessary to best fulfill their responsibilities. Data monitoring committee charters should articulate principles that guide the data monitoring committee process rather than list a rigid set of requirements. Data monitoring committees should develop their recommendations by consensus rather than through voting processes. The format for the meetings of the data monitoring committee should maintain the committee's independence and clearly establish the leadership of the data monitoring committee chair. The independent statistical group at the Statistical Data Analysis Center should have sufficient depth of knowledge about the study at hand and experience with trials in general to ensure that the data monitoring committee has access to timely, reliable, and readily interpretable insights about emerging evidence in the clinical trial. Contracts engaging data monitoring committee members for industry-sponsored trials should have language customized to the unique responsibilities of data monitoring committee members rather than use language appropriate to consultants for product development. Regulatory scientists would benefit from experiencing data monitoring committee service that does not conflict with their regulatory responsibilities.

Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R): A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS: The primary aim of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R) is to determine whether the favourable effects of inhibition of the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) on blood glucose, blood pressure and body weight are accompanied by protection against adverse renal outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CANVAS-R is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes with a history or high risk of cardiovascular events. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily placebo or canagliflozin 100 mg (with optional uptitration to 300 mg) for a planned average of 2.5 years of follow-up. The primary outcome is kidney disease progression, defined by class change in albuminuria. The two secondary outcomes are the composite of hospitalized heart failure or cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular death alone. Effects on end-stage renal disease and a range of other outcomes will also be explored. RESULTS: A total of 5812 participants were recruited at 422 sites in 24 countries between January 2014 and May 2015. The mean baseline age was 64 years, mean duration of diabetes was 14 years, mean glycated haemoglobin level was 8.3% and mean body mass index was 32 kg/m2 . Of these participants, 37% were women, 71% had a history of cardiovascular disease, 22.3% had microalbuminuria and 8.7% had macroalbuminuria. The mean baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 76 mL/min/1.73 m2 . The study will have at least 90% power ( P = .05) to detect a 22% or greater reduction in the risk of progression of albuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: The trial should define the potential renoprotective effect of canagliflozin and will provide additional important new data about its effects on vascular outcomes, death and kidney failure.

How well does physician risk assessment predict stroke and bleeding in atrial fibrillation? Results from the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF).

BACKGROUND: Assessments of stroke and bleeding risks are essential to selecting oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We aimed to assess outcomes according to physician assessed risk, with comparison to empirical risk scores. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study of 9,715 outpatients with AF enrolled in ORBIT-AF, a US national registry. Stroke and bleeding risks were quantified by physician assignment, CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc stroke scores, and ATRIA and HAS-BLED bleeding scores. Outcomes were stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding during a median follow-up of 28 months. RESULTS: Physician-assigned risk was associated with thromboembolic events: low risk (0.71 per 100 patient-years [95% CI 0.56-0.91], n=3,991), intermediate risk (0.98 [95% CI 0.79-1.20], n=4,148), and high risk (1.84 [95% CI 1.43-2.37], n=1,576, P<.0001), and major bleeding: low (3.43 [95% CI 3.07-3.82], n=4,250), intermediate (4.55 [95% CI 4.03-5.15], n=2,702), and high (5.76 [95% CI 4.42-7.50], n=468; P<.0001). Discrimination of stroke risk was similar with CHADS2 (c=0.59, 95% CI 0.57-0.61) vs physician assessment (c=0.58, 95% CI 0.55-0.62). Among patients on oral anticoagulation, bleeding risk discrimination was higher with ATRIA (c=0.63, 95% CI 0.61-0.65) and HAS-BLED (c=0.60, 95% CI 0.59-0.62) than with physician assessment (0.55, 95% CI 0.53-0.57). Physician-assessed risk categories did not add significantly to empirical risk scores, in Cox models for outcomes (Padjusted>.05 for all physician assessments vs Padjusted<.05 for empirical scores). CONCLUSION: Physician-assigned risk showed a graded relationship with outcomes, and both physician-based and empirical scores yielded only moderate discrimination. Although empirical scores provided valuable risk stratification information (with or without physician judgment), physician assessment added little to existing scores. These data support the use of empirical scores for stroke and bleeding risk stratification, and the need for novel approaches to risk stratification in this population.

Lack of Concordance Between Local Investigators, Angiographic Core Laboratory, and Clinical Event Committee in the Assessment of Stent Thrombosis: Results From the TRACER Angiographic Substudy.

BACKGROUND: Stent thrombosis (ST) is an important end point in cardiovascular clinical trials. Adjudication is traditionally based on clinical event committee (CEC) review of case report forms and source documentation rather than angiograms. However, the degree to which this method of adjudication is concordant with the review of independent angiographic core laboratories (ACLs) has not been studied. This report represents the first assessment of variability between local investigators (LIs), a CEC, and an ACL. METHODS AND RESULTS: Serial angiograms of 329 patients with acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment-elevation who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention at entry in the Trial to Assess the Effects of Vorapaxar in Preventing Heart Attack and Stroke in Particpants With Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRACER) and who met criteria for possible ST subsequent to the index event were reviewed by an ACL. The ACL was blinded to the assessment by both LIs and the CEC regarding the presence or absence of ST. CEC adjudication was based on Academic Research Consortium definitions of ST, using case report form data and source documents, including catheterization laboratory reports. The ACL, CEC, and LIs agreed on the presence or absence of ST in 52.9% events (κ=0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.39). The ACL and CEC agreed on 82.7% of events (κ=0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.67); the ACL and LIs agreed on 61.1% of events (κ=0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.34); and the CEC and LIs agreed on 62% of events (κ=0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.36). CONCLUSIONS: ST reporting by an ACL, a CEC, and LIs is discordant. The assessment of ST is more often detected by direct review of angiograms by an ACL. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00527943.

Clinical Characteristics, Oral Anticoagulation Patterns, and Outcomes of Medicaid Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Insights From the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF I) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Whereas insurance status has been previously associated with care patterns, little is currently known about the association between Medicaid insurance and the clinical characteristics, treatment, or outcomes of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We used data from adults with AF enrolled in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF), a national outpatient registry conducted at 176 community, multispecialty sites. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of patients prescribed any oral anticoagulation (OAC; warfarin or novel oral anticoagulants [NOAC]). Secondary outcomes of interest included the proportion of patients prescribed NOACs (dabigatran or rivaroxaban); time in therapeutic range (TTR) for warfarin users, all-cause mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleed. Of 10 133 patients, N=470 (4.6%) had Medicaid insurance. Medicaid patients were similarly likely to receive OAC at baseline (72.8% vs 76.3%; unadjusted P=0.079), but less likely to receive NOAC at baseline or follow-up (12.1% vs 16.3%; unadjusted P=0.019). After risk adjustment, Medicaid status was associated with lower use of OAC at baseline among patients with high stroke risk (odds ratio [OR]=0.68; 95% CI=0.49, 0.94), but was not associated with OAC use overall (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.61, 1.09). Among warfarin users, median TTR was lower among Medicaid patients (60% vs 68%; P<0.0001; adjusted TTR difference, -2.9; 95% CI=-5.7, -0.2; P=0.04). Use of an NOAC over 2 years of follow-up was not statistically different by insurance. Compared with non-Medicaid patients, Medicaid patients had higher unadjusted rates of mortality, stroke/systemic embolism, and major bleeding; however, these differences were attenuated following adjustment for clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary AF cohort, use of OAC overall and use of NOACs were not significantly lower among Medicaid patients relative to others. However, among warfarin users, Medicaid patients spent less time in therapeutic range compared with those with other forms of insurance.

Triple vs Dual Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: The role of triple antithrombotic therapy vs dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with both atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease remains unclear. This study explores the differences in treatment practices and outcomes between triple antithrombotic therapy and dual antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease. METHODS: Using the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (n = 10,135), we analyzed outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (n = 1827) according to treatment with triple antithrombotic therapy (defined as concurrent therapy with an oral anticoagulant, a thienopyridine, and aspirin) or dual antithrombotic therapy (comprising either an oral anticoagulant and one antiplatelet agent [OAC plus AA] or 2 antiplatelet drugs and no anticoagulant [DAP]). RESULTS: The use of triple antithrombotic therapy, OAC plus AA, and DAP at baseline was 8.5% (n = 155), 80.4% (n = 1468), and 11.2% (n = 204), respectively. Among patients treated with OAC plus AA, aspirin was the most common antiplatelet agent used (90%), followed by clopidogrel (10%) and prasugrel (0.1%). The use of triple antithrombotic therapy was not affected by patient risk of either stroke or bleeding. Patients treated with triple antithrombotic therapy at baseline were hospitalized for all causes (including cardiovascular) more often than patients on OAC plus AA (adjusted hazard ratio 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.26; P <.0001) or DAP (hazard ratio 1.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.65; P = .0018). Rates of major bleeding or a combined cardiovascular outcome were not significantly different by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Choice of antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease was not affected by patient stroke or bleeding risks. Triple antithrombotic therapy-treated patients were more likely to be hospitalized for all causes than those on OAC plus AA or on DAP.