Correction to: FDA Approval of Angiotensin II for the Treatment of Hypotension in Adults with Distributive Shock.

The author name that previously read.

Comparative Stroke, Bleeding, and Mortality Risks in Older Medicare Patients Treated with Oral Anticoagulants for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are alternatives to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Randomized trials compared NOACs with warfarin, but none have compared individual NOACs against each other for safety and effectiveness. METHODS: We performed a retrospective new-user cohort study of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation enrolled in US Medicare who initiated warfarin (n = 183,318), or a standard dose of dabigatran (150 mg twice daily; n = 86,198), rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily; n = 106,389), or apixaban (5 mg twice daily; n = 73,039) between October 2010 and September 2015. Propensity score-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the outcomes of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, major extracranial bleeding, and all-cause mortality, comparing each NOAC with warfarin, and with each other NOAC. RESULTS: Compared with warfarin, each NOAC was associated with reduced risks of thromboembolic stroke (20%-29% reduction; P = .002 [dabigatran], P < 0.001 [rivaroxaban, apixaban]), intracranial hemorrhage (35%-62% reduction; P < 0.001 [each NOAC]), and mortality (19%-34% reduction; P < .001 [each NOAC]). The NOACs were similar for thromboembolic stroke but rivaroxaban was associated with increased risks of intracranial hemorrhage (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.35-2.17), major extracranial bleeding (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.45; vs apixaban: HR = 2.70; 95% CI, 2.38-3.05), and death (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.24; vs apixaban: HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.38). Dabigatran was associated with reduced risk of intracranial hemorrhage (HR = 0.70; 95% CI ,0.53-0.94) and increased risk of major extracranial bleeding (HR = 2.04; 95% CI, 1.78-2.32) compared with apixaban. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with standard-dose NOAC for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and warfarin users with similar baseline characteristics, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban were associated with a more favorable benefit-harm profile than warfarin. Among NOAC users, dabigatran and apixaban were associated with a more favorable benefit-harm profile than rivaroxaban.

FDA Approval of Angiotensin II for the Treatment of Hypotension in Adults with Distributive Shock.

Distributive shock is a subset of shock marked by decreased systemic vascular resistance, organ hypoperfusion and altered oxygen extraction. Despite the use of intravenous fluids and either higher dose of catecholamines or other additional exogenous vasopressors to maintain blood pressure in the target range, the rate of mortality remains higher in patients with septic shock. Therefore, there is clearly an unmet need for additional safe and effective treatments. The use of angiotensin II to raise the mean arterial pressure (MAP) could provide additional therapy and the opportunity to evaluate a catecholamine-sparing effect by decreasing the dose of concomitant catecholamines while maintaining a target MAP. ATHOS-3 (Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock phase 3; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02338843) was an adequate and well-controlled trial. The primary endpoint was the rate of MAP response at hour 3 of treatment with study drug, defined as either a 10-mmHg increase from baseline in MAP or a MAP of at least 75 mmHg. The secondary endpoints were changes from baseline in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores (total and cardiovascular). Mortality was an exploratory endpoint. The trial provided substantial evidence of the effectiveness of angiotensin II in raising blood pressure over placebo in patients with distributive shock, while keeping catecholamine levels constant. There was no change in the secondary endpoint of total SOFA scores relative to placebo when catecholamine use was reduced in lieu of angiotensin II treatment. There was a slight decrease in the secondary endpoint of cardiovascular SOFA score relative to placebo during the catecholamine-sparing phase, reflecting the catecholamine-sparing effect. There was a consistent trend in decreased mortality relative to placebo over the 28-day study period. Based on the agreements emanating from the special protocol assessment to assess blood pressure effects, the data from this single study supported approval of angiotensin II by the Food and Drug Administration for marketing in the USA.

Relationship between International Normalized Ratio and Outcomes in Modern Trials with Warfarin Controls.

INTRODUCTION: A target international normalized ratio (INR) of 2-3 has been recommended for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and risk factors for thromboembolism. This recommendation is largely based on evidence from observational studies a decade ago. This study utilized collective data from modern trials with warfarin controls to examine the relationship of warfarin anticoagulation, as assessed by INR, on the clinical outcome events of interest. METHODS: Data on warfarin-treated patients from three clinical studies supporting the approval of dabigatran (Pradaxa), apixaban (Eliquis), and edoxaban (Savaysa) were pooled. Ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and all-cause death were selected as the outcome events of interest. Multivariate Cox regression modeling was performed to examine the association between time-dependent INR and each outcome event. Benefit-risk assessment was evaluated by summing the estimated annual event rate for ischemic stroke and ICH. RESULTS: A total of 21,883 patients representing 322 ischemic strokes, 288 ICHs, and 657 all-cause deaths were included in the analysis. The models used suggest that the risk of ischemic stroke is greatly reduced when INR exceeds 2; in contrast, the risk of ICH increases monotonically as INR increases. When combining ischemic stroke and ICH events, the lowest estimated annual event rate was observed between INR of 2 and 2.5; the risk only slightly increased between INR of 1.8 and 3.0. Similarly, a U-shaped relationship between INR and the risk of all-cause death was found. CONCLUSIONS: This study using collective warfarin data from recent large prospective trials indicates that INR between 2 and 2.5 provides the best balance between ischemic stroke and ICH, as well as optimal protection against death in patients with AF.

Participation of Women in Clinical Trials Supporting FDA Approval of Cardiovascular Drugs.

BACKGROUND: Concerns exist that women are underrepresented in trials of cardiovascular medications. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to examine women's participation and the reported safety and efficacy by gender for pivotal cardiovascular disease (CVD) trials submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supporting marketing applications. METHODS: On the basis of publicly available FDA reviews, the authors assessed enrollment of women in trials supporting 36 drug approvals from 2005 to 2015. Prevalence-corrected estimates for the participation of women were calculated as the percentage of women among trial participants divided by the percentage of women in the disease population (participation to prevalence ratio [PPR]), with a range between 0.8 and 1.2 reflecting similar representation of women in the trial and disease population. Sex differences in efficacy and safety were assessed. RESULTS: The proportion of women enrolled ranged from 22% to 81% (mean 46%). The calculated PPR by disease area was within or above the desirable range for atrial fibrillation (0.8 to 1.1), hypertension (0.9), and pulmonary arterial hypertension (1.4); PPR was <0.8 for heart failure (0.5 to 0.6), coronary artery disease (0.6), and acute coronary syndrome/myocardial infarction (0.6). The authors found little indication of clinically meaningful gender differences in efficacy or safety. Gender differences in efficacy or safety were described in labeling for 4 drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Women were well represented in trials of drugs for hypertension and atrial fibrillation, and overrepresented for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Representation of women fell below a PPR of 0.8 for trials in heart failure, coronary artery disease, and acute coronary syndrome. Minimal gender differences in drug efficacy and safety profiles were observed.

Prospective surveillance pilot of rivaroxaban safety within the US Food and Drug Administration Sentinel System.

PURPOSE: The US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel system developed tools for sequential surveillance. METHODS: In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, we sequentially compared outcomes for new users of rivaroxaban versus warfarin, employing propensity score matching and Cox regression. A total of 36 173 rivaroxaban and 79 520 warfarin initiators were variable-ratio matched within 2 monitoring periods. RESULTS: Statistically significant signals were observed for ischemic stroke (IS) (first period) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) (second period) favoring rivaroxaban, and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) (second period) favoring warfarin. In follow-up analyses using primary position diagnoses from inpatient encounters for increased definition specificity, the hazard ratios (HR) for rivaroxaban vs warfarin new users were 0.61 (0.47, 0.79) for IS, 1.47 (1.29, 1.67) for GIB, and 0.71 (0.50, 1.01) for ICH. For GIB, the HR varied by age: <66 HR = 0.88 (0.60, 1.30) and 66+ HR = 1.49 (1.30, 1.71). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the capability of Sentinel to conduct prospective safety monitoring and raises no new concerns about rivaroxaban safety.

Outcomes of Dabigatran and Warfarin for Atrial Fibrillation in Contemporary Practice: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Dabigatran (150 mg twice daily) has been associated with lower rates of stroke than warfarin in trials of atrial fibrillation, but large-scale evaluations in clinical practice are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare incidence of stroke, bleeding, and myocardial infarction in patients receiving dabigatran versus warfarin in practice. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: National U.S. Food and Drug Administration Sentinel network. PATIENTS: Adults with atrial fibrillation initiating dabigatran or warfarin therapy between November 2010 and May 2014. MEASUREMENTS: Ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, extracranial bleeding, and myocardial infarction identified from hospital claims among propensity score-matched patients starting treatment with dabigatran or warfarin. RESULTS: Among 25 289 patients starting dabigatran therapy and 25 289 propensity score-matched patients starting warfarin therapy, those receiving dabigatran did not have significantly different rates of ischemic stroke (0.80 vs. 0.94 events per 100 person-years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.28]) or extracranial hemorrhage (2.12 vs. 2.63 events per 100 person-years; HR, 0.89 [CI, 0.72 to 1.09]) but were less likely to have intracranial bleeding (0.39 vs. 0.77 events per 100 person-years; HR, 0.51 [CI, 0.33 to 0.79]) and more likely to have myocardial infarction (0.77 vs. 0.43 events per 100 person-years; HR, 1.88 [CI, 1.22 to 2.90]). However, the strength and significance of the association between dabigatran use and myocardial infarction varied in sensitivity analyses and by exposure definition (HR range, 1.13 [CI, 0.78 to 1.64] to 1.43 [CI, 0.99 to 2.08]). Older patients and those with kidney disease had higher gastrointestinal bleeding rates with dabigatran. LIMITATION: Inability to examine outcomes by dabigatran dose (unacceptable covariate balance between matched patients) or quality of warfarin anticoagulation (few patients receiving warfarin had available international normalized ratio values). CONCLUSION: In matched adults with atrial fibrillation treated in practice, the incidences of stroke and bleeding with dabigatran versus warfarin were consistent with those seen in trials. The possible relationship between dabigatran and myocardial infarction warrants further investigation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Antihypertensive drug associated angioedema: effect modification by race/ethnicity.

PURPOSE: Assess angioedema risk with exposure to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) compared with beta-blockers, by race/ethnicity. METHODS: New-user cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older initiating ACEI, ARB, or beta-blocker treatment from March 2007 to March 2014 were constructed. Angioedema incidence rates by drug and race/ethnicity were computed for 1-30 and 31-365 days of treatment. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine angioedema risk between cohorts. RESULTS: Angioedema incidence rates (per 1000 person years) in beta-blocker users were 1.80 (whites), 4.11 (blacks), 1.89 (Asians), and 2.10 (Hispanics); in ACEI users, 4.03, 23.77, 2.94, and 4.27; and in ARB users, 1.73, 3.11, 1.10, and 1.90, respectively. Incidence rates were significantly higher in the first 30 days of exposure for all drug × race/ethnic groups. Overall, angioedema risk increased among ACEI users (hazard ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 2.75-3.07) but not ARB users (0.93, 0.85-1.02) versus beta-blocker users. Angioedema risk with ACEIs versus beta-blockers increased more in blacks (6.28, 5.44-7.24) than whites (2.33, 2.19-2.48), Hispanics (2.04, 1.36-3.07), and Asians (1.48, 0.94-2.35). Compared with white beta-blocker users, angioedema risk was increased 2.9-fold in whites, 20.2-fold in blacks, and 2.3-fold in other race/ethnic groups combined during the first 30 days of ACEI exposure. CONCLUSIONS: There was significant effect modification of angioedema risk by race and ACEI use for blacks, but not for other race/ethnicity groups. Angioedema risk was significantly greater in the first 30 days of exposure for all, and highest among blacks.

Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research.

Electronic health records (EHRs) provide opportunities to enhance patient care, embed performance measures in clinical practice, and facilitate clinical research. Concerns have been raised about the increasing recruitment challenges in trials, burdensome and obtrusive data collection, and uncertain generalizability of the results. Leveraging electronic health records to counterbalance these trends is an area of intense interest. The initial applications of electronic health records, as the primary data source is envisioned for observational studies, embedded pragmatic or post-marketing registry-based randomized studies, or comparative effectiveness studies. Advancing this approach to randomized clinical trials, electronic health records may potentially be used to assess study feasibility, to facilitate patient recruitment, and streamline data collection at baseline and follow-up. Ensuring data security and privacy, overcoming the challenges associated with linking diverse systems and maintaining infrastructure for repeat use of high quality data, are some of the challenges associated with using electronic health records in clinical research. Collaboration between academia, industry, regulatory bodies, policy makers, patients, and electronic health record vendors is critical for the greater use of electronic health records in clinical research. This manuscript identifies the key steps required to advance the role of electronic health records in cardiovascular clinical research.

Stroke, Bleeding, and Mortality Risks in Elderly Medicare Beneficiaries Treated With Dabigatran or Rivaroxaban for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.

Importance: Dabigatran and rivaroxaban are non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants approved for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF). There are no randomized head-to-head comparisons of these drugs for stroke, bleeding, or mortality outcomes. Objective: To compare risks of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), major extracranial bleeding including major gastrointestinal bleeding, and mortality in patients with nonvalvular AF who initiated dabigatran or rivaroxaban treatment for stroke prevention. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective new-user cohort study of 118 891 patients with nonvalvular AF who were 65 years or older, enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, and who initiated treatment with dabigatran or rivaroxaban from November 4, 2011, through June 30, 2014. Differences in baseline characteristics were adjusted using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weights based on propensity scores. The data analysis was performed from May 7, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Exposures: Dabigatran, 150 mg, twice daily; rivaroxaban, 20 mg, once daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the primary outcomes of thromboembolic stroke, ICH, major extracranial bleeding including major gastrointestinal bleeding, and mortality, with dabigatran as reference. Adjusted incidence rate differences (AIRDs) were also estimated. Results: A total of 52 240 dabigatran-treated and 66 651 rivaroxaban-treated patients (47% female) contributed 15 524 and 20 199 person-years of on-treatment follow-up, respectively, during which 2537 primary outcome events occurred. Rivaroxaban use was associated with a statistically nonsignificant reduction in thromboembolic stroke (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65-1.01; P = .07; AIRD = 1.8 fewer cases/1000 person-years), statistically significant increases in ICH (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.20-2.26; P = .002; AIRD = 2.3 excess cases/1000 person-years) and major extracranial bleeding (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.32-1.67; P < .001; AIRD = 13.0 excess cases/1000 person-years), including major gastrointestinal bleeding (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.23-1.59; P < .001; AIRD = 9.4 excess cases/1000 person-years), and with a statistically nonsignificant increase in mortality (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00-1.32; P = .051; AIRD = 3.1 excess cases/1000 person-years). In patients 75 years or older or with CHADS2 score greater than 2, rivaroxaban use was associated with significantly increased mortality compared with dabigatran use. The excess rate of ICH with rivaroxaban use exceeded its reduced rate of thromboembolic stroke. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily was associated with statistically significant increases in ICH and major extracranial bleeding, including major gastrointestinal bleeding, compared with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily.

Cardiovascular, bleeding, and mortality risks in elderly Medicare patients treated with dabigatran or warfarin for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: The comparative safety of dabigatran versus warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in general practice settings has not been established. METHODS AND RESULTS: We formed new-user cohorts of propensity score-matched elderly patients enrolled in Medicare who initiated dabigatran or warfarin for treatment of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation between October 2010 and December 2012. Among 134 414 patients with 37 587 person-years of follow-up, there were 2715 primary outcome events. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing dabigatran with warfarin (reference) were as follows: ischemic stroke, 0.80 (0.67-0.96); intracranial hemorrhage, 0.34 (0.26-0.46); major gastrointestinal bleeding, 1.28 (1.14-1.44); acute myocardial infarction, 0.92 (0.78-1.08); and death, 0.86 (0.77-0.96). In the subgroup treated with dabigatran 75 mg twice daily, there was no difference in risk compared with warfarin for any outcome except intracranial hemorrhage, in which case dabigatran risk was reduced. Most patients treated with dabigatran 75 mg twice daily appeared not to have severe renal impairment, the intended population for this dose. In the dabigatran 150-mg twice daily subgroup, the magnitude of effect for each outcome was greater than in the combined-dose analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In general practice settings, dabigatran was associated with reduced risk of ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, and death and increased risk of major gastrointestinal hemorrhage compared with warfarin in elderly patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. These associations were most pronounced in patients treated with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily, whereas the association of 75 mg twice daily with study outcomes was indistinguishable from warfarin except for a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage with dabigatran.

New treatment option for heart failure patients: eplerenone.

Aldosterone plays an important role in the harmful cardiac remodeling process and pathophysiology of heart failure after a myocardial infarction. Until recently, spironolactone (Aldactone) was the only pharmacologic agent available to directly block the deleterious effects of aldosterone. The use of spironolactone is complicated by its antiprogesterone and antiandrogen side effects, such as gynecomastia and menstrual irregularities. Eplerenone (Inspra), a member of a new class of drugs called selective aldosterone receptor antagonists, was recently approved for the treatment of both hypertension and post-myocardial infarction heart failure and appears to be devoid of the antiprogesterone and antiandrogen effects. In a trial in patients with heart failure following a myocardial infarction, eplerenone treatment significantly reduced mortality and morbidity compared to placebo. Eplerenone may be considered as part of the therapeutic plan in patients who have suffered a myocardial infarction and demonstrate evidence of heart failure.

Guidelines for acute decompensated heart failure treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of guidelines for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) in the emergency department/observation unit (ED-OU) setting for hospitals that are part of a group purchasing organization (GPO). DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search (1966-March 2003) using the following search terms: cardiotonic agents; diuretic; dobutamine; heart failure, congestive; milrinone; natriuretic peptide, brain; nesiritide; nitroglycerin; vasodilator agents, was conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant articles in the English language were identified. All randomized studies and meta-analyses for each category of drugs were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: A group consensus method was used to develop guidelines. An expert panel reviewed and revised the guidelines. The final guidelines were approved June 1, 2003, and are described here. They are organized based upon a patient's symptomatology at the time the diagnosis of ADHF is made. Patients with evidence of volume overload require intravenous diuretics and/or intravenous vasodilators to alleviate the symptoms of ADHF. Patients with signs and symptoms of low cardiac output require inotropic support to manage their ADHF. A timeline for diagnosis, treatment, reassessment, and disposition is provided and encourages an early, aggressive approach to treating patients with ADHF. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization for ADHF is common and costly. Consensus guidelines for the treatment of ADHF did not previously exist, resulting in inconsistent and inefficient treatment. Consequently, hospitals struggling with the treatment of ADHF may find these guidelines and the process by which they were developed useful.

Treatment options for acute decompensated heart failure.

The benefits of nesiritide for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) are discussed. In order to understand the goals of ADHF therapy, it is important to recognize the complex interplay between hemodynamic and neurohormonal abnormalities in patients suffering from heart failure. Goals of therapy include improvement in hemodynamic parameters, relief of symptoms, and minimization of adverse effects. Until recently, therapy with diuretics, positive inotropes, and intravenous vasodilators was the standard of care for treating ADHF. Nesiritide is the newest agent available for treating ADHF and may offer several benefits over standard of care therapy. It is important to remember that therapy for ADHF should not replace chronic oral heart failure therapy, nor should focus on prevention of ADHF episodes be lost.